Evaluation of Campus-Based Impaired Driving Efforts

1
Evaluation of Campus-Based Impaired Driving
Efforts

• David S. Anderson, Ph.D.Associate Professor
• George Mason UniversityCenter for the
  Advancement of Public HealthSchool of
  Recreation, Health and Tourism
• College of Education and Human Development

2
Workshop Objectives

• To become acquainted with a logic chain useful
  for planning campus-based efforts
• To learn needs assessment and evaluation
  strategies
• To identify strategies to address impaired
  driving on college campuses
• To identify insights suitable for application on
  campus

3
Workshop Outline

• Campus Needs with Impaired Driving
• Planning a Logic Chain
• Designing the Program
• Evaluation Strategies
• Resources and Next Steps

4
Campus Needs with Impaired Driving
5
Campus Needs with Impaired Driving
6
Campus Needs with Impaired Driving
7
Planning a Logic Chain

• Focus on Varying Roles
• As a driver
• As a passenger
• As a pedestrian
• Attend to a Range of Outcomes
• Knowledge
• Attitudes
• Perceptions
• Intended behavior
• Actions

8
Designing the Program

• Typical approaches include
• Education
• Enforcement
• Engineering

9
Designing the Program

• Organized by BACCHUS/GAMMA Peer Education Network
• Funded by the National Highway Traffic Safety
  Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation
• Evaluation by George Mason Universitys Center
  for the Advancement of Public Health

10
Designing the Program

• Focus on campus implementation
• Policy emphasis
• Peer education strategies
• Enforcement
• Training of campus police/security
• Collaboration with community

11
Evaluation Strategies

• Environmental Scan
• Student Survey
• Leader Interviews
• Campus
• Community

12
Evaluation Strategies Environmental Scan

• Policy/Law/Ordinances
• Enforcement Efforts
• Education
• Environment
• Evaluation
• Funding

13
Evaluation Strategies Environmental Scan

•  1 Policy/Laws/Ordinances (21 Questions)
• Reviews campus policies on alcohol, drugs, and
  impaired driving.
• Assesses local laws and ordinances related to
  impaired driving.
• Includes subsections on Campus Policies for
  Students, Campus Policies on Alcohol Sales,
  Sponsorship, and Advertising, and Community Laws
  and Ordinances.
•  

14
Evaluation Strategies Environmental Scan

• 1.  Campus Alcohol and Other Drug (AOD) policies
  are clearly disseminated to students on campus.
• Yes
• No
• Not Applicable
• 2. Campus AOD policies include language about
  driving after the use of alcohol.
• Yes
• No
• Not Applicable
• 3. Campus AOD policies include language about
  driving after the use of illicit or illegal drugs
  (other than alcohol).
• Yes
• No
• Not Applicable
•  

15
Evaluation Strategies
16
Evaluation Strategies Environmental Scan

•  Section 2 Enforcement Efforts (15 Questions)
• Assesses the involvement of on- and off-campus
  enforcement agencies and the authority of the
  campus judicial process.
• Includes subsections on Campus and Community
  Enforcement Efforts and Campus Judicial Process.

17
Evaluation Strategies
18
Evaluation Strategies Environmental Scan

•   Section 3 Education (13 Questions)
• Assesses campus and community services and
  organizations involvement in impaired driving
  education programming.
• Includes subsections on Campus Education Efforts
  and Campus and Community Collaborative Education
  Efforts.

19
Evaluation Strategies
20
Evaluation Strategies Environmental Scan

•   Section 4 Environment (5 Questions)
• Assesses efforts to reduce impaired driving in
  both the general campus environment and the
  community immediately surrounding campus.

21
Evaluation Strategies
22
Evaluation Strategies Environmental Scan

•  Section 5 Evaluation (5 Questions)
• Reviews current methods used to evaluate the
  impaired driving rates and impaired driving
  prevention efforts.  

23
Evaluation Strategies
24
Evaluation Strategies Environmental Scan

• Section 6 Funding (5 Questions)
• Examines sources and stability of funding for
  impaired driving prevention initiatives.  

25
Evaluation Strategies
26
Evaluation Strategies Environmental Scan

• Education and enforcement efforts are strongest
• Education and campus/community collaboration
  efforts were quite strong
• Policy strategies are only moderately implemented
• Environmental and funding approaches are not well
  implemented
• Evaluation approaches are particularly low

27
Evaluation Strategies Environmental Scan

• Process of Gathering Information
• Comparative Data
• Use of Campus-Based Data
• Comparisons Over Time

28
Evaluation StrategiesStudent Survey

• Demographics
• Personal Behaviors
• Social Norms
• Attitudes about Impaired Driving
• Awareness of Campus Programs

29
Evaluation StrategiesStudent Survey

• Respondent Demographics
• 2 campuses reported results
• Total responses 875
• 35 males, 65 females
• Average age was 20.5 years old

30
Evaluation StrategiesStudent Survey

• Drinking Behaviors
• 66 report drinking any amount at least once in
  past 14 days
• 44 report drinking until they felt drunk at
  least once in the past 14 days
• 39 report having 5 or more drinks in one sitting
  at least once in the past 2 weeks 14 report
  doing so three or more times in the past 2 weeks.

31
Evaluation StrategiesStudent Survey

• Impaired Driving Behaviors
• 22 report driving after drinking any amount at
  least once in past 14 days
• 39 report riding in a vehicle with a driver who
  had been drinking any amount at least once in the
  past 14 days

32
Evaluation StrategiesStudent Survey

• Impaired Driving Behaviors
• Among students who report going out to drink, 82
  identify who will drive home before they go out
  9 identify this person during the night, and 9
  identify the driver at the end of the night

33
Evaluation StrategiesStudent Survey

• Impaired Driving Behaviors
• 73 of students report having tried to stop
  someone from driving after drinking since
  starting college
• 51 of students report having tried to stop
  someone from riding with a driver who had been
  drinking or using drugs

34
Evaluation StrategiesStudent Survey

• Social Norms
• Respondents believe that 45 of students on their
  campus drove after drinking in the past 2 weeks
  (compared to 22 who report engaging in this
  behavior)
• Respondents believe that 46 of students on their
  campus rode with someone who had been drinking in
  the past 2 weeks (compared to 39)
• Respondents believe that 42 of students on their
  campus had intervened to stop someone from
  driving after they had been drinking (compared to
  73)

35
Evaluation StrategiesStudent Survey

• Programming (on campus)
• 36-51 saw posters
• 29-31 saw TV advertisements
• 33-51 saw newspaper ads/articles
• 33-47 saw information displays
• 16-20 saw websites or emails
• Enforcement
• 7.4-17 saw DWI-related enforcement efforts
• 2.5-5.1 saw other enforcement efforts

36
Evaluation StrategiesLeader Interviews

• Target Audiences
• Campus coordinator
• Chief student affairs officer
• Campus police/security
• Local police
• Student leaders

37
Evaluation StrategiesLeader Interviews

• Key Issues and Questions
• Implementation efforts
• Impact of efforts
• Buy-in
• Areas of need / resources

38
Resources
39
Resources
40
Resources
41
Resources
Impaired Driving Prevention Toolkit

• Partnerships
• Prevention and Public Education
• Legislation
• Law Enforcement
• Prosecution, Adjudication, and Treatment of
  Impaired Drivers

42
Resources
43
Resources
44
Resources
http//b4udrink.org
45
Resources
46
Tools Understanding Negotiating Effort Us Present
ation
47
(No Transcript)
48
(No Transcript)
49
(No Transcript)
50
(No Transcript)
51
(No Transcript)
52
Workshop Objectives

• To become acquainted with a logic chain useful
  for planning campus-based efforts
• To learn needs assessment and evaluation
  strategies
• To identify strategies to address impaired
  driving on college campuses
• To identify insights suitable for application on
  campus

53

www.caph.gmu.edu
George Mason University Center for the
Advancement of Public Health School of
Recreation, Health and Tourism College of
Education and Human Development 4400 University
Dr. MS 1F5 Fairfax, VA 22030-4444
Phone [phone] Fax
703-993-3763 E-mail caph_at_gmu.edu