2012 Arizona Youth Survey City of Tucson, AZ Acknowledgements The Arizona Criminal Justice Commission’s Statistical Analysis Center thanks Bach Harrison, L.L.C. for their professionalism and contributions during the administration of the 2012 Arizona Youth Survey. In addition we thank the Arizona Department of Gaming, Office of Problem Gambling for their continued financial support of the Arizona Youth Survey. We also benefited from the expertise, guidance, and assistance provided by our colleagues at the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission and from input received from many individuals working for agencies throughout the state including: Leslie Bloom, The Partnership for Drug Free America, AZ Affiliate Jennifer Chambers, Arizona State University Katherine Grzybowski, Arizona State University Elise Mickkelsen, Office of Problem Gambling Richard Porter, Arizona Department of Health Services Rick Pyper, Office of Problem Gambling Mary Sands, Arizona State University Lisa Shumaker, Arizona Department of Health Services Additionally, the success of the 2012 Arizona Youth Survey could not have been achieved without the support and participation of school superintendents, principals, prevention coordinators, and teachers throughout the state. Finally, we extend our thanks to the students who responded to the survey. Their thoughtful participation resulted in a wealth of information that can be used to improve the circumstances in which they live and learn. Table of Contents Introduction The Risk and Protective Factor Model of Prevention The Charts and Tables in this Report The Community Data Project The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership School and Community Improvement Using Survey Data Data Charts: Lifetime and 30 Day ATOD Use Problem Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior Gambling Risk and Protective Factor Profiles Where Youth Obtained Alcohol, Marijuana, and Prescription Drugs School Safety and Cyber-Bullying Risk and Protective Factor Scale Definitions Data Tables Appendix Contacts for Prevention 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 14 18 22 30 38 42 44 56 57 Introduction 2012 Arizona Youth Survey City of Tucson, AZ Summary Report This report summarizes findings from the 2012 Arizona Youth Survey (AYS) administered to 8th, 10th, and 12th grade students during spring 2012. The results for your city are presented along with comparisons to the results for the state of Arizona. The survey was designed to assess school safety, adolescent substance use, antisocial behavior and the risk and protective factors that predict these adolescent problem behaviors. All schools in Arizona are eligible to participate in the survey, Table 1. Characteristics of Participants City 2008 Number City 2010 Percent Number City 2012 Percent Number State 2012 Percent Number Percent Students by Grade 8 1,515 35.0 845 24.0 1,496 33.3 28,932 46.1 10 1,486 34.3 1,479 42.0 1,464 32.6 18,766 29.9 12 1,333 30.8 1,199 34.0 1,537 34.2 15,119 24.1 4,334 100.0 3,523 100.0 4,497 100.0 62,817 100.0 Male 2,055 48.5 1,642 47.6 2,188 49.7 30,383 49.5 Female 2,185 51.5 1,807 52.4 2,215 50.3 30,938 50.5 All Students Surveyed* Students by Gender Table 2. Race/Ethnicity of Participants Hispanic Student marked 'Yes' to Are you Hispanic or Latino? and marked their race as: City 2008 Number City 2010 Percent Number City 2012 Percent Number State 2012 Percent Number Percent Native American 107 4.7 117 5.5 91 5.3 1,121 4.9 African American 74 3.2 67 3.2 60 3.5 658 2.9 Asian 15 0.7 19 0.9 14 0.8 222 1.0 Pacific Islander 18 0.8 24 1.1 24 1.4 225 1.0 409 18.0 418 19.8 523 30.2 6,774 29.7 White Multi-Racial Race Unmarked 79 3.5 83 3.9 84 4.8 1,099 4.8 1,576 69.2 1,381 65.5 936 54.0 12,732 55.8 Non-Hispanic Student marked 'No' to Are you Hispanic or Latino? and marked their race as: Native American African American Asian Pacific Islander White Multi-Racial Race Unmarked City 2008 Number City 2010 Percent Number City 2012 Percent Number State 2012 Percent Number Percent 119 6.4 74 5.5 67 2.6 1,909 5.2 138 7.4 89 6.6 104 4.1 1,979 5.4 71 3.8 45 3.4 122 4.8 1,641 4.5 21 1.1 9 0.7 23 0.9 324 0.9 1,331 71.4 986 73.6 1,914 75.3 26,247 72.1 169 9.1 101 7.5 188 7.4 2,561 7.0 14 0.8 36 2.7 124 4.9 1,759 4.8 Totals City 2008 Number City 2010 Percent Number City 2012 Percent Number State 2012 Percent Number Percent Hispanic Students 2,278 52.6 2,109 59.9 1,732 38.5 22,831 Non-Hispanic Students Total Students** 1,863 43.0 1,340 38.0 2,542 56.5 36,420 58.0 4,334 100.0 3,523 100.0 4,497 100.0 62,817 100.0 36.3 * Grades with fewer than 20 students participating are not included in this report. However, students from grades not making the cutoff are included in All Students Surveyed. This means the number of students reported in All Students Surveyed may exceed the sum of individual grades. (All Students Surveyed will match the grade total in reports with data drawn from a single grade.) **As a small percentage of students skipped the question Are you Hispanic or Latino? (at the state level, 1,803 students, or 2.8% of the total), the sum of Hispanic and Non-Hispanic students is less than Total Students . 4 and recruitment efforts were successful in obtaining participation by schools in all of Arizona's 15 counties. Careful planning and uniform administration of the survey have resulted in survey data that are valid and representative of the students in 8th, 10th, and 12th grades in Arizona. Table 1 contains the characteristics of the students who completed the survey from your municipality and the state of Arizona. Because not every student answered all of the questions, the number of students in the gender and ethnicity/race categories often will be less than the total number of students. To better understand the diversity of Arizona’s youth population, respondents were asked separate questions about their ethnicity (Hispanic vs. Non-Hispanic) and their race (Caucasian, African-American, Native American, etc.). This method for obtaining ethnicity and race information provides more comprehensive data on youth cultural and racial selfidentification, and a more nuanced understanding of Arizona’s diverse youth population. Whenever data are obtained from a sample of students instead of the entire population, it is important to recognize the strengths and weaknesses of the data. One easy way to investigate the quality of the sample is to look at the basic demographic characteristics of the students who participated in the survey and compare them to what is known about the entire population of students. This will give the user of these data a basic understanding of the degree to which the sample data can be generalized to the entire population. It is important to note that even when the characteristics of the sample do not match well to the characteristics of the population this does not mean the data lose their usefulness. The data included in this report describes the level of risk and protective factors, substance use, antisocial behavior, and delinquency of those youth who participated in the survey, which can be used to inform the development of school and community-based prevention and intervention activities that may benefit both the youth who participate in the survey and those who did not. The Risk and Protective Factor Model of Prevention Prevention is a science. The Risk and Protective Factor Model of Prevention is a proven way of reducing substance abuse and its related consequences. This model is based on the simple premise that to prevent a problem from happening, we need to identify the factors that increase the risk of that problem developing and then find ways to reduce the risks. Just as medical researchers have found risk factors for heart disease such as diets high in fat, lack of exercise, and smoking, a team of researchers at the University of Washington have defined a set of risk factors for youth problem behaviors. Protective factors exert a positive influence and buffer against the negative influence of risk, thus reducing the likelihood that adolescents will engage in problem behaviors. Protective factors identified through research include strong bonding to family, school, community and peers, and healthy beliefs and clear standards for behavior. Research on risk and protective factors also has important implications for children’s academic success, positive youth development, and prevention of health and behavior problems. In order to promote academic success and positive youth development and to prevent problem behaviors, it is necessary to address the factors that predict these outcomes. By measuring risk and protective factors in a population, specific risk factors that are elevated and widespread can be identified and targeted by policies, programs, and actions shown to reduce those risk factors and to promote protective factors. Risk factors are characteristics of school, community and family environments, and of students and their peer groups known to predict increased likelihood of drug use, delinquency, school dropout, and violent behaviors among youth. For example, children who live in families with high levels of conflict are more likely to become involved in delinquency and drug use than children who live in families characterized by low levels of family conflict. Many risk and protective factors can be linked to specific types of interventions that have been shown to be effective in either reducing risk(s) or enhancing protection(s). The steps outlined here will help your municipality make key decisions regarding allocation of resources, how and when to address specific needs, and which strategies are most effective and known to produce results. The chart below shows the links between 19 risk factors and five problem behaviors. The check marks indicate where at least two well designed, published research studies have shown a link between the risk factor and the problem behavior. Community Disorganization Extreme Economic & Social Deprivation Family History of the Problem Behavior Family Conflict Family Management Problems Favorable Parent Attitudes & Involvement in the Problem Behavior Academic Failure Lack of Commitment to School Early Initiation of Drug Use & Other Problem Behaviors Early & Persistent Antisocial Behavior Alienation & Rebelliousness Friends Who Use Drugs & Engage in Problem Behaviors Favorable Attitudes Toward Drug Use & Other Problem Behaviors Gang Involvement Constitutional Factors Peer / Individual Low Neighborhood Attachment School Transitions & Mobility Family Availability of Drugs & Firearms Community Community Laws & Norms Favorable Toward Drug Use, Firearms & Crime Risk Factors Substance Abuse T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T Delinquency T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T Teen Pregnancy School Drop-Out Violence T T T T T T T T Source: Communities That Care (CTC) prevention model, Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP), Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMSHA) 5 Charts and Tables in this Report There are seven types of charts presented in this report: 1. Lifetime and 30-day ATOD use 2. Binge drinking and antisocial behavior 3. Gambling 4. Risk profiles 5. Protective profiles 6. Where youth acquired alcohol, marijuana, and prescription drugs 7. School safety and cyber-bullying Data from the charts are also presented in Tables 4 through 14 that appear at the end of this report. The additional data found in Tables 15 through 17 are explained at the end of this section. Understanding the Format of the Charts There are several graphical elements common to all the charts. Understanding the format of the charts and what these elements represent is essential in interpreting the results of the 2012 AYS. • The Bars on substance use and antisocial behavior charts represent the percentage of students who reported a given behavior. For the risk and protective charts, research has determined cutoff scores for each scale where the likelihood of youth problem behaviors were increased (youth at risk) or reduced (youth having protection). The bars on the risk and protective factor charts represent the percentage of students scoring above the cutoff, reflecting elevated risk or protection in that category. zzz zzz zzzzzzzzz z Each set of differently colored bars represents one of the last three administrations of the AYS: 2008, 2010, and 2012. By looking at the percentages over time, it is possible to identify trends in substance use and antisocial behavior. By studying the percentage of youth at risk and with protection over time, it is possible to determine whether the percentage of students at risk or with protection is increasing, decreasing, or staying the same. This information is important when deciding which risk and protective factors warrant attention. • Dots and Diamonds. The dots on the charts represent the percentage of all of the youth surveyed across Arizona who reported substance use, problem behavior, elevated risk, or elevated protection. The diamonds represent national data from either the Monitoring the Future (MTF) Survey or the Bach Harrison Norm. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz The Bach Harrison Norm was developed by Bach Harrison L.L.C. to provide states and communities 6 with the ability to compare their results on risk, protection, and antisocial measures with more national measures. Survey participants from eight statewide surveys and five large regional surveys across the nation were combined into a database of approximately 460,000 students. The results were weighted to make the contribution of each state and region proportional to its share of the national population. Bach Harrison analysts then calculated rates for antisocial behavior and for students at risk and with protection. The results appear on the charts as BH Norm. In order to keep the Bach Harrison Norm relevant, it is updated approximately every two years as new data become available. zzzzz zzzzzzzzz A comparison to state-wide and national results provides additional information for your community in determining the relative importance of levels of alcohol, tobacco and other drug (ATOD) use, antisocial behavior, risk, and protection. Information about other students in the state and the nation can be helpful in determining the seriousness of a given level of problem behavior. Scanning across the charts, it is important to observe the factors that differ the most from the Bach Harrison Norm. This is the first step in identifying the levels of risk and protection that are higher or lower than those in other communities. The risk factors that are higher than the Bach Harrison Norm and the protective factors that are lower than the Bach Harrison Norm are probably the factors that your community should consider addressing when planning prevention programs. Lifetime and 30-Day ATOD Use • Lifetime use is a measure of the percentage of students who tried the particular substance at least once in their lifetime and is used to show the percentage of students who have had experience with a particular substance. • 30-day use is a measure of the percentage of students who used the substance at least once in the 30 days prior to taking the survey and is a more sensitive indicator of the level of current use of the substance. Binge Drinking and Antisocial Behavior • Binge Drinking is measured as having five or more drinks in a row during the two weeks prior to the survey. • Drinking and Driving is measured by youth drinking alcohol and driving, or riding with a driver who had been drinking alcohol in the past 30 days. How Charts to Readand theTables Chartsininthis thisReport Report(cont’d) (cont’d) • Antisocial behavior (ASB) is a measure of the percentage of students who report any involvement during the past year with the eight antisocial behaviors listed in the charts. Gambling Gambling behavior charts show the percentage of students who engaged in each of the 10 types of gambling “for money, possessions, or anything of value” during the past year: played gambling machines, played the lottery, bet on sports, played cards, bought a raffle ticket, played bingo, gambled on the Internet, bet on a dice game, bet on a game of personal skill and bet on horse or other animal races. The chart also shows the percentage of students who engaged in any gambling behavior during the past year. Risk and Protective Factor Profiles Risk and protective factor scales measure specific aspects of a youth’s life experience that can be used to predict whether he/she will engage in problem behaviors. The scales, defined in Table 3, are grouped into four domains: community, family, school, and peer/individual. The risk and protective factor charts show the percentage of students at risk and with protection for each of the scales. Where Youth Obtained Alcohol, Marijuana and Prescription Drugs These charts display data regarding the ways that students obtained alcohol, marijuana and prescription drugs in the past 30 days. Each chart focuses on a subgroup of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol, marijuana, or prescription drugs. (Students reporting no use of the relevant substance are not represented in these data.) The smaller the size of the subgroup (known as the sample size), the more dramatic the influence of a student's responses (e.g., if only one student in a particular grade reported where he/she obtained alcohol, each category would show up as either 0% or 100%). The chart legends indicate the sample size for each grade surveyed to help clarify the value of the data. School Safety and Cyber-Bullying The school safety and cyber-bullying profile charts contain the percentages of students who felt unsafe at school or on the way to school, were threatened or injured with a weapon at school, were in a physical fight at school, carried a weapon to school, were picked on or bullied at school, or were harassed or mistreated while on-line or using an electronic device. The complete questions and values for each response option can be seen in Table 14. Additional Data in this Report In addition to data presented in the charts and Tables 4 through 14, Tables 15 through 17 contain information useful for prevention planning and grant monitoring. Table 15 contains the information that is required by communities with Drug Free Communities Grants, such as the perception of the risk of ATOD use, perception of parent and peer disapproval of ATOD use, past 30-day use, and average age of first use. The Community Data Project Supported by a grant from the Arizona Governor's Office for Children, Youth and Families, the Community Data Project is a multi-agency effort to create a central repository for Arizona's substance abuse and crime data. Through a user-friendly web site, individuals have access to a one-stop portal where they can select the type of data they need, specific demographic characteristics, and their geographic level of interest. Various output options are offered, including data tables, graphs, and maps to cover a variety of reporting and visualization needs. The web site is a useful tool for practitioners and policymakers who are addressing substance abuse, juvenile delinquency, and crime and 7 the criminal justice system by providing them with a picture of the characteristics and needs of Arizona’s communities. Having data that are specific to the user’s geographic area of interest not only leads to an enhanced understanding of the community issues related to drugs and crime, but also maximizes datafor-decision-making capabilities for things such as the appropriate program content, identification of at-risk target areas and populations, grant writing and reporting, monitoring progress of prevention and intervention initiatives over time, and determining resource allocation. Please visit the Community Data Project at: www.azcjc.gov/ACJC.Web/sac/CommunDataPrj.aspx The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP) was established by Executive Order 2007-12 in June 2007. Currently chaired by the Director of the Governor’s Office for Children, Youth and Families, who also acts as the Governor’s Policy Advisor for Human Services, the ASAP serves as the single statewide council on substance abuse treatment, prevention, intervention/enforcement, and recovery issues. The ASAP brings together stakeholders at the federal, state, tribal, and local levels to improve coordination of efforts; and address identified gaps in prevention, treatment, enforcement, and recovery efforts. The ASAP utilizes data and practical expertise to develop effective methods for integrating and expanding services across Arizona, thereby maximizing available resources. It is ASAP’s mission to ensure community-driven, agency-supported outcomes to prevent and reduce the negative impacts of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs by building and sustaining partnerships between professionals in the substance abuse field. Through coordination and collaboration among its members and their respective agencies and organizations, the ASAP strives to ensure that substance abuse is addressed in a comprehensive manner and that funding is spent efficaciously and efficiently. Recognizing that prescription drug abuse is a serious threat to the health and well-being of families and communities in Arizona, the ASAP is devoted to reducing prescription drug abuse. There are currently two work groups that assist the ASAP in meeting its goals: • Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group (Epi Work Group) – The Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group’s mission is to provide communities, policymakers and local, state and tribal officials with data on the use, consequences and context of alcohol and illicit, over-the-counter, and prescription drugs to inform their substance abuse prevention and intervention strategies. The Epi Work Group produces The Impact of Substance Abuse: A Snapshot of Arizona and behavioral health epidemiology profiles for use by community coalitions, agencies, and individuals in relevant fields. Additionally, the Epi Work Group conducts analyses of individual substance abuse issues, responds to ad hoc data requests and brings data to bear on ASAP’s policy decisions around its strategic plan and focus areas. Further, the Epi Work Group assists the ASAP to develop effective methods for integrating and expanding services across Arizona while maximizing available resources and supporting a data-driven decision-making process. • Communities Preventing Substance Abuse Work Group (CPSAWG) – The Communities Preventing Substance Abuse Work Group is a merging of two former subcommittees of the ASAP, the Underage Drinking Prevention Committee and the Community Advisory Board. This group brings together representatives from community coalitions around the state and state agency representatives to provide an essential link between community and state-level efforts. The CPSAWG brings the community voice to the ASAP table; reports on important community issues that inform ASAP’s work; helps communities improve their capacity to identify emerging trends, as well as take action and report on them to the proper institutions/authorities; takes the data available through the Epi Work Group and the ASAP back to coalitions and communities to effectively target prevention, treatment, recovery, and enforcement activities; serves as a resource for communities and the state to identify the most effective ways to reduce substance abuse through collaborative efforts and by targeting limited resources where they are most needed; and elevates and recognizes the important work being carried out at the community level to ensure that statelevel responses are cognizant of the impact of policies on individual communities. This work group assesses statewide epidemiological data, resources, strategies and policies, and builds relationships with tribes, youth, law enforcement, government agencies, and community coalitions. By combining resources, practice, and research, the work group collaborates to reduce substance abuse. 8 School and Community Improvement Using Survey Data What are the numbers telling you? Review the charts and data tables presented in this report. Note your findings as you discuss the following questions. • Which 3-5 risk factors appear to be higher than you would want when compared to the state/Bach Harrison Norm? • Which 3-5 protective factors appear to be lower than you would want when compared to the state/Bach Harrison Norm? • Which levels of 30-day drug use are increasing and/or unacceptably high? o Which substances are your students using the most? o At which grades do you see unacceptable usage levels? • Which levels of antisocial behaviors are increasing and/or unacceptably high? o Which behaviors are your students exhibiting the most? o At which grades do you see unacceptable behavior levels? How to identify high priority problem areas. • Look across the charts – which items stand out as either much higher or much lower than the others? • Compare your data with statewide, and/or national data – differences of 5% between local and other data are probably significant. • Prioritize problems for your area – Make an assessment of the rates you’ve identified. Which problem(s) can be realistically addressed with the funding available to your community? Which problem(s) fit best with the prevention resources at hand? • Determine the standards and values held within your community – For example: Is it acceptable in your community for a percentage of high school students to drink alcohol regularly as long as that percentage is lower than the overall state rate? Use these data for planning. • Substance use and antisocial behavior data – raise awareness about the problems and promote dialogue. • Risk and protective factor data – identify exactly where the community needs to take action. Promising approaches – access resources listed on the last page of this report for ideas about programs that have been proven effective in addressing the risk factors that are high in your community, and improving the protective factors that are low. Sample Risk Factors Protective Factors 30-day Substance Abuse Antisocial Behavior 9 8th grd Fav. Attitude to Drugs (Peer/Indiv. Scale) @ 15% (8% > national av.) 10th grd - Rewards for prosocial involvm. (School Domain) 40% (down 5% from 2 yrs ago & 16% below state av.) 8th grd Binge Drinking@13% (5% above state av.) 12th grd - Drunk/High at School @ 21% ( about same as state, but remains a priority.) Priority Rate 1 Priority Rate 2 Priority Rate 3 Substance Use LIFETIME & 30-DAY ATOD USE 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 8 Lifetime Use 100 30-Day Use 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Synthetic Drugs*† Over-the-Counter Drugs† MTF 2011 **(Substance categories that were not measured and reported in survey administrations prior to 2012. **(Denotes a change in the question between administrations. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation. *†(No equivalent category for these substances in the Monitoring the Future survey. In the case of Prescription Pain Relievers, MTF does not have reliable data for grades 8 and 10. 10 Prescription Drugs† Prescription Sedatives† Prescription Stimulants Prescription Pain Relievers† Steroids Other Club Drugs* State 2012 Ecstasy Heroin** Methamphetamines Inhalants Cocaine Hallucinogens Marijuana City 2012 Chewing Tobacco Cigarettes Alcohol Synthetic Drugs*† Over-the-Counter Drugs† Prescription Drugs† Prescription Sedatives† City 2010 Prescription Stimulants Prescription Pain Relievers† Steroids Other Club Drugs* Ecstasy Heroin** Methamphetamines Inhalants Cocaine Hallucinogens Marijuana Chewing Tobacco Cigarettes Alcohol City 2008 Substance Use LIFETIME & 30-DAY ATOD USE 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 10 Lifetime Use 100 30-Day Use 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Synthetic Drugs*† Over-the-Counter Drugs† MTF 2011 **(Substance categories that were not measured and reported in survey administrations prior to 2012. **(Denotes a change in the question between administrations. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation. *†(No equivalent category for these substances in the Monitoring the Future survey. In the case of Prescription Pain Relievers, MTF does not have reliable data for grades 8 and 10. 11 Prescription Drugs† Prescription Sedatives† Prescription Stimulants Prescription Pain Relievers† Steroids Other Club Drugs* State 2012 Ecstasy Heroin** Methamphetamines Inhalants Cocaine Hallucinogens Marijuana City 2012 Chewing Tobacco Cigarettes Alcohol Synthetic Drugs*† Over-the-Counter Drugs† Prescription Drugs† Prescription Sedatives† City 2010 Prescription Stimulants Prescription Pain Relievers† Steroids Other Club Drugs* Ecstasy Heroin** Methamphetamines Inhalants Cocaine Hallucinogens Marijuana Chewing Tobacco Cigarettes Alcohol City 2008 Substance Use LIFETIME & 30-DAY ATOD USE 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 12 Lifetime Use 100 30-Day Use 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Synthetic Drugs*† Over-the-Counter Drugs† MTF 2011 **(Substance categories that were not measured and reported in survey administrations prior to 2012. **(Denotes a change in the question between administrations. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation. *†(No equivalent category for these substances in the Monitoring the Future survey. In the case of Prescription Pain Relievers, MTF does not have reliable data for grades 8 and 10. 12 Prescription Drugs† Prescription Sedatives† Prescription Stimulants Prescription Pain Relievers† Steroids Other Club Drugs* State 2012 Ecstasy Heroin** Methamphetamines Inhalants Cocaine Hallucinogens Marijuana City 2012 Chewing Tobacco Cigarettes Alcohol Synthetic Drugs*† Over-the-Counter Drugs† Prescription Drugs† Prescription Sedatives† City 2010 Prescription Stimulants Prescription Pain Relievers† Steroids Other Club Drugs* Ecstasy Heroin** Methamphetamines Inhalants Cocaine Hallucinogens Marijuana Chewing Tobacco Cigarettes Alcohol City 2008 Substance Use LIFETIME & 30-DAY ATOD USE 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, All Students Surveyed Lifetime Use 100 30-Day Use 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Synthetic Drugs*† Over-the-Counter Drugs† MTF 2011 **(Substance categories that were not measured and reported in survey administrations prior to 2012. **(Denotes a change in the question between administrations. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation. *†(No equivalent category for these substances in the Monitoring the Future survey. In the case of Prescription Pain Relievers, MTF does not have reliable data for grades 8 and 10. 13 Prescription Drugs† Prescription Sedatives† Prescription Stimulants Prescription Pain Relievers† Steroids Other Club Drugs* State 2012 Ecstasy Heroin** Methamphetamines Inhalants Cocaine Hallucinogens Marijuana City 2012 Chewing Tobacco Cigarettes Alcohol Synthetic Drugs*† Over-the-Counter Drugs† Prescription Drugs† Prescription Sedatives† City 2010 Prescription Stimulants Prescription Pain Relievers† Steroids Other Club Drugs* Ecstasy Heroin** Methamphetamines Inhalants Cocaine Hallucinogens Marijuana Chewing Tobacco Cigarettes Alcohol City 2008 Heavy Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior BINGE DRINKING, DRINKING & DRIVING, & ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 8 100 Binge Drinking* Drinking & Driving** Antisocial Behavior Past Year** 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Carried a Handgun to School Carried a Handgun 14 Attacked Someone w/ Idea of Seriously Hurting Them **(National Comparison data for Binge Drinking category are Monitoring the Future values. **(National Comparison data for Drinking & Driving and Antisocial Behavior category are Bach Harrison Norm values. State 2012 Been Arrested City 2012 Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle Sold Illegal Drugs City 2010 Suspended from School Drunk or High at School RIDE in a car driven by someone drinking alcohol? DRIVE a car when you had been drinking alcohol? 5 or more alcoholic drinks in a row in the past 2 weeks? City 2008 MTF 2011*/BH Norm 2012** Heavy Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior BINGE DRINKING, DRINKING & DRIVING, & ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 10 100 Binge Drinking* Drinking & Driving** Antisocial Behavior Past Year** 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Carried a Handgun to School Carried a Handgun 15 Attacked Someone w/ Idea of Seriously Hurting Them **(National Comparison data for Binge Drinking category are Monitoring the Future values. **(National Comparison data for Drinking & Driving and Antisocial Behavior category are Bach Harrison Norm values. State 2012 Been Arrested City 2012 Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle Sold Illegal Drugs City 2010 Suspended from School Drunk or High at School RIDE in a car driven by someone drinking alcohol? DRIVE a car when you had been drinking alcohol? 5 or more alcoholic drinks in a row in the past 2 weeks? City 2008 MTF 2011*/BH Norm 2012** Heavy Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior BINGE DRINKING, DRINKING & DRIVING, & ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 12 100 Binge Drinking* Drinking & Driving** Antisocial Behavior Past Year** 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Carried a Handgun to School Carried a Handgun 16 Attacked Someone w/ Idea of Seriously Hurting Them **(National Comparison data for Binge Drinking category are Monitoring the Future values. **(National Comparison data for Drinking & Driving and Antisocial Behavior category are Bach Harrison Norm values. State 2012 Been Arrested City 2012 Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle Sold Illegal Drugs City 2010 Suspended from School Drunk or High at School RIDE in a car driven by someone drinking alcohol? DRIVE a car when you had been drinking alcohol? 5 or more alcoholic drinks in a row in the past 2 weeks? City 2008 MTF 2011*/BH Norm 2012** Heavy Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior BINGE DRINKING, DRINKING & DRIVING, & ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, All Students Surveyed 100 Binge Drinking* Drinking & Driving** Antisocial Behavior Past Year** 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Carried a Handgun to School Carried a Handgun 17 Attacked Someone w/ Idea of Seriously Hurting Them **(National Comparison data for Binge Drinking category are Monitoring the Future values. **(National Comparison data for Drinking & Driving and Antisocial Behavior category are Bach Harrison Norm values. State 2012 Been Arrested City 2012 Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle Sold Illegal Drugs City 2010 Suspended from School Drunk or High at School RIDE in a car driven by someone drinking alcohol? DRIVE a car when you had been drinking alcohol? 5 or more alcoholic drinks in a row in the past 2 weeks? City 2008 MTF 2011*/BH Norm 2012** Gambling GAMBLING 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 8 Gambling Behavior Past Year 100 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Any Gambling Past Year Bet on a horse/ other race? State 2012 Bet on Games of Skill Bet on Dice 18 City 2012 Gambled on the lnternet **(National Comparison data for Bought a raffle ticket are not available. Played Bingo City 2010 Bought Raffle Ticket* Bet on Cards Bet on Sports Played the Lottery Played Slots/ Video Poker City 2008 BH Norm 2012 Gambling GAMBLING 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 10 Gambling Behavior Past Year 100 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Any Gambling Past Year Bet on a horse/ other race? State 2012 Bet on Games of Skill Bet on Dice 19 City 2012 Gambled on the lnternet **(National Comparison data for Bought a raffle ticket are not available. Played Bingo City 2010 Bought Raffle Ticket* Bet on Cards Bet on Sports Played the Lottery Played Slots/ Video Poker City 2008 BH Norm 2012 Gambling GAMBLING 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 12 Gambling Behavior Past Year 100 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Any Gambling Past Year Bet on a horse/ other race? State 2012 Bet on Games of Skill Bet on Dice 20 City 2012 Gambled on the lnternet **(National Comparison data for Bought a raffle ticket are not available. Played Bingo City 2010 Bought Raffle Ticket* Bet on Cards Bet on Sports Played the Lottery Played Slots/ Video Poker City 2008 BH Norm 2012 Gambling GAMBLING 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, All Students Surveyed Gambling Behavior Past Year 100 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Any Gambling Past Year Bet on a horse/ other race? State 2012 Bet on Games of Skill Bet on Dice 21 City 2012 Gambled on the lnternet **(National Comparison data for Bought a raffle ticket are not available. Played Bingo City 2010 Bought Raffle Ticket* Bet on Cards Bet on Sports Played the Lottery Played Slots/ Video Poker City 2008 BH Norm 2012 Risk and Protective Factor Profiles RISK PROFILE 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 8 Students at High Risk* th th Gang Involvement Rewards for Antisocial Behavior Friend's Use of Drugs Interaction with Antisocial Peers Perceived Risk of Drug Use Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use Attitudes Favorable to Antisocial Behavior Early Initiation of Drug Use Early Initiation of Antisocial Behavior Rebelliousness Low Commitment to School Academic Failure Parental Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use Parental Attitudes Favorable to Antisocial Behavior Family History of Antisocial Behavior Family Conflict Poor Family Management Perceived Availability of Handguns Perceived Availability of Drugs Laws & Norms Favorable to Drug Use Low Neighborhood Attachment 22 70 60 50 40 30 Percentage (%) of youth at risk **(High Risk youth are defined as the percentage of students who have more than a specified number of risk factors operating in their lives (8 grade: 8 or more risk factors, 10 &12 grades: 9 or more risk factors). th BH Norm 2012 State 2012 City 2012 City 2010 City 2008 Total Peer/Individual School Family Community 100 90 80 20 10 0 Risk and Protective Factor Profiles PROTECTIVE PROFILE 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 8 100 Family Community School Total Peer/Individual 90 Percentage (%) of youth with protection 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Students with High Protection* Rewards for Prosocial Involvement State 2012 Prosocial Involvement Interaction with Prosocial Peers City 2012 Belief in the Moral Order Rewards for Prosocial Involvement City 2010 Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement Rewards for Prosocial Involvement Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement Family Attachment Rewards for Prosocial Involvement City 2008 BH Norm 2012 **(High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have four or more protective factors operating in their lives. **(NOTE: Prior to the 2010 administration, this value was defined as the percentage of students who had five or more protective factors operating in their lives. In order to provide the best comparability **(across years, 2008 data were recalculated using the new definition. 23 Risk and Protective Factor Profiles RISK PROFILE 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 10 Students at High Risk* th th Gang Involvement Rewards for Antisocial Behavior Friend's Use of Drugs Interaction with Antisocial Peers Perceived Risk of Drug Use Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use Attitudes Favorable to Antisocial Behavior Early Initiation of Drug Use Early Initiation of Antisocial Behavior Rebelliousness Low Commitment to School Academic Failure Parental Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use Parental Attitudes Favorable to Antisocial Behavior Family History of Antisocial Behavior Family Conflict Poor Family Management Perceived Availability of Handguns Perceived Availability of Drugs Laws & Norms Favorable to Drug Use Low Neighborhood Attachment 24 70 60 50 40 30 Percentage (%) of youth at risk **(High Risk youth are defined as the percentage of students who have more than a specified number of risk factors operating in their lives (8 grade: 8 or more risk factors, 10 &12 grades: 9 or more risk factors). th BH Norm 2012 State 2012 City 2012 City 2010 City 2008 Total Peer/Individual School Family Community 100 90 80 20 10 0 Risk and Protective Factor Profiles PROTECTIVE PROFILE 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 10 100 Family Community School Total Peer/Individual 90 Percentage (%) of youth with protection 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Students with High Protection* Rewards for Prosocial Involvement State 2012 Prosocial Involvement Interaction with Prosocial Peers City 2012 Belief in the Moral Order Rewards for Prosocial Involvement City 2010 Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement Rewards for Prosocial Involvement Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement Family Attachment Rewards for Prosocial Involvement City 2008 BH Norm 2012 **(High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have four or more protective factors operating in their lives. **(NOTE: Prior to the 2010 administration, this value was defined as the percentage of students who had five or more protective factors operating in their lives. In order to provide the best comparability **(across years, 2008 data were recalculated using the new definition. 25 Risk and Protective Factor Profiles RISK PROFILE 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 12 Students at High Risk* th th Gang Involvement Rewards for Antisocial Behavior Friend's Use of Drugs Interaction with Antisocial Peers Perceived Risk of Drug Use Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use Attitudes Favorable to Antisocial Behavior Early Initiation of Drug Use Early Initiation of Antisocial Behavior Rebelliousness Low Commitment to School Academic Failure Parental Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use Parental Attitudes Favorable to Antisocial Behavior Family History of Antisocial Behavior Family Conflict Poor Family Management Perceived Availability of Handguns Perceived Availability of Drugs Laws & Norms Favorable to Drug Use Low Neighborhood Attachment 26 70 60 50 40 30 Percentage (%) of youth at risk **(High Risk youth are defined as the percentage of students who have more than a specified number of risk factors operating in their lives (8 grade: 8 or more risk factors, 10 &12 grades: 9 or more risk factors). th BH Norm 2012 State 2012 City 2012 City 2010 City 2008 Total Peer/Individual School Family Community 100 90 80 20 10 0 Risk and Protective Factor Profiles PROTECTIVE PROFILE 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 12 100 Family Community School Total Peer/Individual 90 Percentage (%) of youth with protection 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Students with High Protection* Rewards for Prosocial Involvement State 2012 Prosocial Involvement Interaction with Prosocial Peers City 2012 Belief in the Moral Order Rewards for Prosocial Involvement City 2010 Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement Rewards for Prosocial Involvement Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement Family Attachment Rewards for Prosocial Involvement City 2008 BH Norm 2012 **(High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have four or more protective factors operating in their lives. **(NOTE: Prior to the 2010 administration, this value was defined as the percentage of students who had five or more protective factors operating in their lives. In order to provide the best comparability **(across years, 2008 data were recalculated using the new definition. 27 Sources Risk and of Protective Alcohol Factor Profiles RISK PROFILE 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, All Students Surveyed Students at High Risk* th th Gang Involvement Rewards for Antisocial Behavior Friend's Use of Drugs Interaction with Antisocial Peers Perceived Risk of Drug Use Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use Attitudes Favorable to Antisocial Behavior Early Initiation of Drug Use Early Initiation of Antisocial Behavior Rebelliousness Low Commitment to School Academic Failure Parental Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use Parental Attitudes Favorable to Antisocial Behavior Family History of Antisocial Behavior Family Conflict Poor Family Management Perceived Availability of Handguns Perceived Availability of Drugs Laws & Norms Favorable to Drug Use Low Neighborhood Attachment 28 70 60 50 40 30 Percentage (%) of youth at risk **(High Risk youth are defined as the percentage of students who have more than a specified number of risk factors operating in their lives (8 grade: 8 or more risk factors, 10 &12 grades: 9 or more risk factors). th BH Norm 2012 State 2012 City 2012 City 2010 City 2008 Total Peer/Individual School Family Community 100 90 80 20 10 0 Risk and Protective Factor Profiles PROTECTIVE PROFILE 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, All Students Surveyed 100 Family Community School Total Peer/Individual 90 Percentage (%) of youth with protection 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Students with High Protection* Rewards for Prosocial Involvement State 2012 Prosocial Involvement Interaction with Prosocial Peers City 2012 Belief in the Moral Order Rewards for Prosocial Involvement City 2010 Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement Rewards for Prosocial Involvement Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement Family Attachment Rewards for Prosocial Involvement City 2008 BH Norm 2012 **(High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have four or more protective factors operating in their lives. **(NOTE: Prior to the 2010 administration, this value was defined as the percentage of students who had five or more protective factors operating in their lives. In order to provide the best comparability **(across years, 2008 data were recalculated using the new definition. 29 Sources of Alcohol WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL* 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 8 Sources of Obtaining Alcohol in the Past Year 100 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Got it some other way Store or someone else's home City 2012 Sample: 160 Students** Took it from home Got at a party Someone under 21 years City 2010 Sample: 144 Students** Someone not related, 21+ Another family member, 21+ Parent or guardian Gave someone else money to buy it Bought it at a public event Bought it at a restaurant, bar or club Bought it in a store City 2008 Sample: 220 Students** State 2012 Sample: 3,700 Students** **(Because not all surveys ask where youth obtained alcohol, no BH Norm value is reported. **(Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. Students indicating they did not drink alcohol in the past 30 days are not included in the sample. **(In the case of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community. 30 Sources of Alcohol WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL* 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 10 Sources of Obtaining Alcohol in the Past Year 100 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Got it some other way Store or someone else's home City 2012 Sample: 387 Students** Took it from home Got at a party Someone under 21 years City 2010 Sample: 410 Students** Someone not related, 21+ Another family member, 21+ Parent or guardian Gave someone else money to buy it Bought it at a public event Bought it at a restaurant, bar or club Bought it in a store City 2008 Sample: 456 Students** State 2012 Sample: 5,007 Students** **(Because not all surveys ask where youth obtained alcohol, no BH Norm value is reported. **(Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. Students indicating they did not drink alcohol in the past 30 days are not included in the sample. **(In the case of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community. 31 Sources of Alcohol WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL* 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 12 Sources of Obtaining Alcohol in the Past Year 100 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Got it some other way Store or someone else's home City 2012 Sample: 482 Students** Took it from home Got at a party Someone under 21 years City 2010 Sample: 449 Students** Someone not related, 21+ Another family member, 21+ Parent or guardian Gave someone else money to buy it Bought it at a public event Bought it at a restaurant, bar or club Bought it in a store City 2008 Sample: 498 Students** State 2012 Sample: 5,656 Students** **(Because not all surveys ask where youth obtained alcohol, no BH Norm value is reported. **(Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. Students indicating they did not drink alcohol in the past 30 days are not included in the sample. **(In the case of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community. 32 Sources of Alcohol WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL* 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, All Students Surveyed Sources of Obtaining Alcohol in the Past Year 100 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Got it some other way Store or someone else's home City 2012 Sample: 1,029 Students** Took it from home Got at a party Someone under 21 years City 2010 Sample: 1,003 Students** Someone not related, 21+ Another family member, 21+ Parent or guardian Gave someone else money to buy it Bought it at a public event Bought it at a restaurant, bar or club Bought it in a store City 2008 Sample: 1,174 Students** State 2012 Sample: 14,363 Students** **(Because not all surveys ask where youth obtained alcohol, no BH Norm value is reported. **(Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. Students indicating they did not drink alcohol in the past 30 days are not included in the sample. **(In the case of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community. 33 Sources of Marijuana and Prescription Drugs WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED MARIJUANA & PRESCRIPTION DRUGS* 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 8 100 Sources of Obtaining Prescription Drugs Sources of Obtaining Marijuana in the Past 30 Days 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Outside the U.S. (e.g., Mexico, Canada) Over the Internet Other School Doctor/ Pharmacy Home (e.g., Medicine Cabinet) Parties Family/ Relatives Friends Other School Home Parties Family/ Relatives Friends From someone with a Medical Marijuana Card City 2012 Sample size (Marijuana): 155 Students Sample size (Rx): 85 Students** State 2012 Sample size (Marijuana): 3,000 Students Sample size (Rx): 1,637 Students** **(Prior to 2012, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained marijuana. Prior to 2010, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained prescription drugs. Also, because not all surveys ask where youth obtained these substances, no BH Norm value is reported. **(Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining marijuana/prescription drugs. Students indicating they did not use marijuana in the past 30 days or have not used prescription drugs to get high are not included in their respective sample sizes. In the case of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community. 34 Sources of Marijuana and Prescription Drugs WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED MARIJUANA & PRESCRIPTION DRUGS* 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 10 100 Sources of Obtaining Prescription Drugs Sources of Obtaining Marijuana in the Past 30 Days 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Outside the U.S. (e.g., Mexico, Canada) Over the Internet Other School Doctor/ Pharmacy Home (e.g., Medicine Cabinet) Parties Family/ Relatives Friends Other School Home Parties Family/ Relatives Friends From someone with a Medical Marijuana Card City 2012 Sample size (Marijuana): 285 Students Sample size (Rx): 157 Students** State 2012 Sample size (Marijuana): 3,911 Students Sample size (Rx): 2,321 Students** **(Prior to 2012, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained marijuana. Prior to 2010, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained prescription drugs. Also, because not all surveys ask where youth obtained these substances, no BH Norm value is reported. **(Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining marijuana/prescription drugs. Students indicating they did not use marijuana in the past 30 days or have not used prescription drugs to get high are not included in their respective sample sizes. In the case of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community. 35 Sources of Marijuana and Prescription Drugs WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED MARIJUANA & PRESCRIPTION DRUGS* 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 12 100 Sources of Obtaining Prescription Drugs Sources of Obtaining Marijuana in the Past 30 Days 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Outside the U.S. (e.g., Mexico, Canada) Over the Internet Other School Doctor/ Pharmacy Home (e.g., Medicine Cabinet) Parties Family/ Relatives Friends Other School Home Parties Family/ Relatives Friends From someone with a Medical Marijuana Card City 2012 Sample size (Marijuana): 314 Students Sample size (Rx): 219 Students** State 2012 Sample size (Marijuana): 3,747 Students Sample size (Rx): 2,478 Students** **(Prior to 2012, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained marijuana. Prior to 2010, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained prescription drugs. Also, because not all surveys ask where youth obtained these substances, no BH Norm value is reported. **(Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining marijuana/prescription drugs. Students indicating they did not use marijuana in the past 30 days or have not used prescription drugs to get high are not included in their respective sample sizes. In the case of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community. 36 Sources of Marijuana and Prescription Drugs WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED MARIJUANA & PRESCRIPTION DRUGS* 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, All Students Surveyed 100 Sources of Obtaining Prescription Drugs Sources of Obtaining Marijuana in the Past 30 Days 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Outside the U.S. (e.g., Mexico, Canada) Over the Internet Other School Doctor/ Pharmacy Home (e.g., Medicine Cabinet) Parties Family/ Relatives Friends Other School Home Parties Family/ Relatives Friends From someone with a Medical Marijuana Card City 2012 Sample size (Marijuana): 754 Students Sample size (Rx): 461 Students** State 2012 Sample size (Marijuana): 10,658 Students Sample size (Rx): 6,436 Students** **(Prior to 2012, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained marijuana. Prior to 2010, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained prescription drugs. Also, because not all surveys ask where youth obtained these substances, no BH Norm value is reported. **(Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining marijuana/prescription drugs. Students indicating they did not use marijuana in the past 30 days or have not used prescription drugs to get high are not included in their respective sample sizes. In the case of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community. 37 School Safety SCHOOL SAFETY & CYBER-BULLYING 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 8 Percentage of Students Reporting Any Experience with the Indicated Safety Issue in the Past Year 100 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Harassed or Mistreated On-Line or Electronically* City 2012 Picked On or Bullied on School Property 38 City 2010 In a Physical Fight on School Property **(Prior to 2012, the AYS did not survey online and electronic harassment. Threatened or Injured on School Property Carried a Weapon on School Property Felt Unsafe at School City 2008 State 2012 School Safety SCHOOL SAFETY & CYBER-BULLYING 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 10 Percentage of Students Reporting Any Experience with the Indicated Safety Issue in the Past Year 100 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Harassed or Mistreated On-Line or Electronically* City 2012 Picked On or Bullied on School Property 39 City 2010 In a Physical Fight on School Property **(Prior to 2012, the AYS did not survey online and electronic harassment. Threatened or Injured on School Property Carried a Weapon on School Property Felt Unsafe at School City 2008 State 2012 School Safety SCHOOL SAFETY & CYBER-BULLYING 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, Grade 12 Percentage of Students Reporting Any Experience with the Indicated Safety Issue in the Past Year 100 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Harassed or Mistreated On-Line or Electronically* City 2012 Picked On or Bullied on School Property 40 City 2010 In a Physical Fight on School Property **(Prior to 2012, the AYS did not survey online and electronic harassment. Threatened or Injured on School Property Carried a Weapon on School Property Felt Unsafe at School City 2008 State 2012 School Safety SCHOOL SAFETY & CYBER-BULLYING 2012 City of Tucson, AZ, All Students Surveyed Percentage of Students Reporting Any Experience with the Indicated Safety Issue in the Past Year 100 90 80 70 Percentage (%) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Harassed or Mistreated On-Line or Electronically* City 2012 Picked On or Bullied on School Property 41 City 2010 In a Physical Fight on School Property **(Prior to 2012, the AYS did not survey online and electronic harassment. Threatened or Injured on School Property Carried a Weapon on School Property Felt Unsafe at School City 2008 State 2012 Risk and Protective Scale Definitions Table 3. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles Community Domain Risk Factors 1 Low Neighborhood Attachment Research has shown that youth who don't like the neighborhoods in which they live are more likely to become involved in juvenile crime and drug selling. Laws and Norms Favorable Toward Drug Use Research has shown that legal restrictions on alcohol and tobacco use, such as raising the legal drinking age, restricting smoking in public places, and increased taxation have been followed by decreases in consumption. Moreover, national surveys of high school seniors have shown that shifts in normative attitudes toward drug use have preceded changes in prevalence of use. Perceived Availability of Drugs and Handguns The availability of cigarettes, alcohol, marijuana, and other illegal drugs has been related to the use of these substances by adolescents. The availability of handguns is also related to a higher risk of crime and substance use by adolescents. 1 1 1 1 Community Domain Protective Factors 1 Rewards for Prosocial Involvement Rewards for positive participation in activities helps youth bond to the community, thus lowering their risk for substance use. Family Domain Risk Factors 1 Poor Family Management Parents’ use of inconsistent and/or unusually harsh or severe punishment with their children places them at higher risk for substance use and other problem behaviors. Also, parents’ failure to provide clear expectations and to monitor their children’s behavior makes it more likely that they will engage in drug abuse whether or not there are family drug problems. 1 Family Conflict Children raised in families high in conflict, whether or not the child is directly involved in the conflict, appear at risk for both delinquency and drug use. 1 Family History of Antisocial Behavior When children are raised in a family with a history of problem behaviors (e.g., violence or ATOD use), the children are more likely to engage in these behaviors. 1 Parental Attitudes Favorable Toward Antisocial Behavior & Drugs In families where parents use illegal drugs, are heavy users of alcohol, or are tolerant of children’s use, children are more likely to become drug abusers during adolescence. The risk is further increased if parents involve children in their own drug (or alcohol) using behavior, for example, asking the child to light the parent’s cigarette or get the parent a beer from the refrigerator. Family Domain Protective Factors 1 Family Attachment Young people who feel that they are a valued part of their family are less likely to engage in substance use and other problem behaviors. 1 Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement Young people who are exposed to more opportunities to participate meaningfully in the responsibilities and activities of the family are less likely to engage in drug use and other problem behaviors. 1 Rewards for Prosocial Involvement When parents, siblings, and other family members praise, encourage, and attend to things done well by their child, children are less likely to engage in substance use and problem behaviors. School Domain Risk Factors 1 Academic Failure Beginning in the late elementary grades (grades 4-6) academic failure increases the risk of both drug abuse and delinquency. It appears that the experience of failure itself, for whatever reasons, increases the risk of problem behaviors. 1 Low Commitment to School Surveys of high school seniors have shown that the use of drugs is significantly lower among students who expect to attend college than among those who do not. Factors such as liking school, spending time on homework, and perceiving the coursework as relevant are also negatively related to drug use. 42 Risk and Protective Scale Definitions Table 3. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles School Domain Protective Factors 1 Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement When young people are given more opportunities to participate meaningfully in important activities at school, they are less likely to engage in drug use and other problem behaviors. 1 Rewards for Prosocial Involvement When young people are recognized and rewarded for their contributions at school, they are less likely to be involved in substance use and other problem behaviors. Peer-Individual Risk Factors 1 Rebelliousness Young people who do not feel part of society, are not bound by rules, don’t believe in trying to be successful or responsible, or who take an active rebellious stance toward society, are at higher risk of abusing drugs. In addition, high tolerance for deviance, a strong need for independence and normlessness have all been linked with drug use. 1 Early Initiation of Antisocial Behavior and Drug Use Early onset of drug use predicts misuse of drugs. The earlier the onset of any drug use, the greater the involvement in other drug use and the greater frequency of use. Onset of drug use prior to the age of 15 is a consistent predictor of drug abuse, and a later age of onset of drug use has been shown to predict lower drug involvement and a greater probability of discontinuation of use. 1 Attitudes Favorable Toward During the elementary school years, most children express anti-drug, anti-crime, and pro-social attitudes and have Antisocial Behavior and Drug Use difficulty imagining why people use drugs or engage in antisocial behaviors. However, in middle school, as more youth are exposed to others who use drugs and engage in antisocial behavior, their attitudes often shift toward greater acceptance of these behaviors. Youth who express positive attitudes toward drug use and antisocial behavior are more likely to engage in a variety of problem behaviors, including drug use. 1 Perceived Risk of Drug Use Young people who do not perceive drug use to be risky are far more likely to engage in drug use. 1 Interaction with Antisocial Peers Young people who associate with peers who engage in problem behaviors are at higher risk for engaging in antisocial behavior themselves. 1 Friends' Use of Drugs Young people who associate with peers who engage in alcohol or substance abuse are much more likely to engage in the same behavior. Peer drug use has consistently been found to be among the strongest predictors of substance use among youth. Even when young people come from well-managed families and do not experience other risk factors, spending time with friends who use drugs greatly increases the risk of that problem developing. 1 Rewards for Antisocial Behavior Young people who receive rewards for their antisocial behavior are at higher risk for engaging further in antisocial behavior and substance use. Gang Involvement Youth who belong to gangs are more at risk for antisocial behavior and drug use. 1 1 1 1 Peer-Individual Protective Factors 1 Belief in the Moral Order Young people who have a belief in what is “right” or “wrong” are less likely to use drugs. 1 Interaction with Prosocial Peers Young people who associate with peers who engage in prosocial behavior are more protected from engaging in antisocial behavior and substance use. 1 Prosocial Involvement Participation in positive school and community activities helps provide protection for youth. 1 Rewards for Prosocial Involvement Young people who are rewarded for working hard in school and the community are less likely to engage in problem behavior. 43 Data Tables Table 4. Percentage of Students Who Used ATODs During Their Lifetime In your lifetime, on how many occasions (if any) have you… (One or more occasions) Grade 8 Grade 10 Grade 12 All Students Surveyed†† City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 MTF 2011 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 MTF 2011 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 MTF 2011 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 MTF 2011 Alcohol had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to drink - more than just a few sips? 43.6 52.8 38.2 37.3 33.1 68.2 67.2 56.0 59.1 56.0 75.5 78.6 59.9 69.2 70.0 62.1 67.8 51.8 51.7 51.5 Cigarettes smoked cigarettes? 24.1 32.0 20.6 19.7 18.4 41.9 40.9 28.5 31.7 30.4 50.5 53.1 34.5 42.1 40.0 38.6 43.1 28.2 28.8 28.7 Chewing Tobacco used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping tobacco, chewing tobacco)? 6.7 6.2 3.7 4.5 9.7 10.2 9.0 7.5 9.3 15.6 13.9 17.0 10.4 14.7 16.9 10.2 11.1 7.4 8.4 13.8 Marijuana used marijuana? 17.4 27.7 18.3 16.2 16.4 36.8 41.5 31.9 34.7 34.5 41.5 49.7 38.8 44.8 45.5 31.6 41.1 30.1 28.7 31.0 Hallucinogens used LSD or other hallucinogens? 2.3 3.6 2.4 1.7 3.3 6.6 7.7 4.7 5.2 6.0 7.9 9.9 9.0 8.4 8.3 5.6 7.5 5.5 4.4 5.7 Cocaine used cocaine or crack? 2.8 3.6 1.4 1.5 2.2 9.8 8.1 4.1 3.9 3.3 12.0 13.7 8.4 7.4 5.2 8.1 9.0 4.8 3.7 3.4 Inhalants sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get high? 13.5 17.9 13.4 11.4 13.1 13.2 11.6 9.7 9.4 10.1 9.0 11.1 5.6 7.4 8.1 12.0 12.9 9.4 9.8 10.6 Methamphetamines used methamphetamines (meth, crystal meth)? 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.6 1.3 2.4 1.2 0.9 1.5 2.1 2.7 2.3 1.4 1.8 2.1 2.1 1.6 1.0 1.2 1.8 Heroin* used heroin? 1.1 1.1 1.0 0.7 1.2 2.8 3.8 1.1 1.4 1.2 2.5 4.4 1.9 1.8 1.4 2.1 3.3 1.4 1.2 1.2 Ecstasy used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)? 3.2 6.5 3.3 2.8 2.6 7.3 12.6 6.8 7.4 6.6 7.7 15.1 10.7 10.4 8.0 6.0 12.1 7.1 6.1 5.5 Other Club Drugs** used other "club" drugs (such as Special K, Roofies, GHB, or Rohypnol)? n/a n/a 2.5 1.9 n/a n/a n/a 3.0 2.5 n/a n/a n/a 3.4 3.1 n/a n/a n/a 3.0 2.4 n/a Steroids used steroids or anabolic steroids (such as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin, Equipoise or Depotesterone)? 0.8 1.5 1.3 1.5 1.2 2.0 1.3 2.1 1.8 1.4 1.9 1.5 1.7 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.7 1.7 1.5 Prescription Pain Relievers† used prescription pain relievers (such as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a doctor telling you to take them? 10.6 14.3 8.8 8.8 n/a 21.6 21.5 13.3 15.6 n/a 23.0 26.4 18.5 20.7 13.0 18.3 21.5 13.8 13.8 n/a Prescription Stimulants used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them? 3.2 3.9 2.0 2.0 5.2 8.4 6.6 5.8 6.6 9.0 7.4 8.6 8.5 9.9 12.2 6.3 6.7 5.6 5.3 8.6 Prescription Sedatives† used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)? 7.0 10.1 4.2 4.4 n/a 11.1 12.8 6.4 8.0 n/a 10.7 13.4 8.5 10.0 n/a 9.6 12.4 6.5 6.9 n/a Prescription Drugs† combined results of prescription stimulant, sedative and pain reliever questions (see appendix for details) 15.6 18.4 11.3 11.1 n/a 26.3 26.2 16.8 18.8 n/a 27.3 30.3 21.6 23.9 n/a 23.0 25.8 16.8 16.6 n/a Over-the-Counter Drugs† used over-the-counter drugs (such as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet pills) for the purposes of getting high? 9.1 10.2 7.2 7.0 n/a 14.3 13.0 9.6 10.6 n/a 13.1 14.7 10.8 12.2 n/a 12.2 12.9 9.3 9.3 n/a Synthetic Drugs**† used synthetic drugs (such as Bath Salts like Ivory Wave or White Lighting or herbal incense products like K2, Spice, or Gold)? n/a n/a 9.9 6.9 n/a n/a n/a 12.4 11.1 n/a n/a n/a 15.8 13.9 n/a n/a n/a 12.8 9.9 n/a * Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2012 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation. ** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2012 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column). † No equivalent category for these substances in the Monitoring the Future survey. In the case of Prescription Pain Relievers , MTF does not have reliable data for grades 8 and 10. †† State and national data for All Students Surveyed are drawn from grades 8, 10 and 12. Depending on which grades were surveyed in a particular report, (e.g., 8 and 10 only), caution should be exercised when comparing rates. 44 Data Tables Table 5. Percentage of Students Who Used ATODs During the Past 30 Days In the past 30 days, on how many occasions (if any) have you… (One or more occasions) Grade 8 Grade 10 Grade 12 All Students Surveyed†† City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 MTF 2011 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 MTF 2011 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 MTF 2011 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 MTF 2011 20.2 29.0 16.5 17.1 12.7 39.9 37.1 30.2 32.1 27.2 46.1 47.7 35.7 43.5 40.0 35.1 38.9 27.9 28.1 25.5 Alcohol had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to drink - more than just a few sips? Cigarettes smoked cigarettes? 8.0 12.0 7.6 7.8 6.1 16.3 17.1 13.0 14.0 11.8 22.2 28.1 16.7 21.0 18.7 15.3 19.8 12.6 12.9 11.7 Chewing Tobacco used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping tobacco, chewing tobacco)? 2.3 2.7 2.0 2.1 3.5 2.8 4.0 3.6 3.9 6.6 4.4 7.5 5.7 6.6 8.3 3.1 4.9 3.8 3.8 5.9 Marijuana used marijuana? 7.2 13.4 8.4 7.7 7.2 17.0 18.8 17.4 17.7 17.6 16.5 22.9 19.0 22.5 22.6 13.5 19.0 15.2 14.3 15.2 Hallucinogens used LSD or other hallucinogens? 0.9 1.5 1.0 0.7 1.0 2.4 2.6 1.7 1.7 1.4 2.4 2.9 2.8 2.3 1.6 1.9 2.4 1.9 1.4 1.3 Cocaine used cocaine or crack? 1.0 0.8 0.4 0.6 0.8 3.1 1.9 1.4 1.2 0.7 3.5 4.8 2.8 2.1 1.1 2.5 2.6 1.6 1.1 0.8 Inhalants sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get high? 5.4 8.1 4.9 4.2 3.2 3.2 2.4 2.1 2.0 1.7 2.1 2.0 1.0 1.3 1.0 3.6 3.6 2.6 2.8 2.1 Methamphetamines used methamphetamines (meth, crystal meth)? 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.5 Heroin* used heroin? 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.4 1.0 1.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.0 1.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.8 1.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 Ecstasy used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)? 1.3 2.5 1.2 0.9 0.6 2.0 3.3 1.6 1.7 1.6 2.1 3.7 2.0 2.0 2.3 1.8 3.3 1.6 1.4 1.4 Other Club Drugs** used other "club" drugs (such as Special K, Roofies, GHB, or Rohypnol)? n/a n/a 0.8 0.6 n/a n/a n/a 1.0 0.7 n/a n/a n/a 0.7 0.6 n/a n/a n/a 0.8 0.6 n/a Steroids used steroids or anabolic steroids (such as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin, Equipoise or Depotesterone)? 0.4 0.8 0.2 0.5 0.4 0.9 0.6 1.0 0.7 0.5 1.1 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 Prescription Pain Relievers† used prescription pain relievers (such as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a doctor telling you to take them? 5.2 7.2 4.1 4.5 n/a 10.0 9.6 6.2 7.3 n/a 8.4 10.7 6.7 7.9 3.6 7.9 9.4 5.8 6.2 n/a Prescription Stimulants used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them? 1.6 1.8 0.9 0.9 1.8 3.3 2.6 1.9 2.7 3.1 1.7 2.4 2.4 3.0 3.7 2.2 2.3 1.8 2.0 2.8 Prescription Sedatives† used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)? 3.0 4.8 2.0 1.9 n/a 4.6 5.3 2.1 3.3 n/a 4.1 4.0 2.6 3.2 n/a 3.9 4.7 2.3 2.7 n/a Prescription Drugs† combined results of prescription stimulant, sedative and pain reliever questions (see appendix for details) 7.6 9.2 5.7 5.7 n/a 12.3 12.9 7.5 9.3 n/a 10.8 13.1 9.0 10.0 n/a 10.2 12.1 7.5 7.9 n/a Over-the-Counter Drugs† used over-the-counter drugs (such as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet pills) for the purposes of getting high? 5.9 6.5 4.3 4.0 n/a 7.3 6.7 4.5 4.9 n/a 5.2 5.9 4.4 4.3 n/a 6.1 6.3 4.4 4.4 n/a Synthetic Drugs**† used synthetic drugs (such as Bath Salts like Ivory Wave or White Lighting or herbal incense products like K2, Spice, or Gold)? n/a n/a 5.8 3.8 n/a n/a n/a 5.8 5.0 n/a n/a n/a 5.2 5.2 n/a n/a n/a 5.6 4.5 n/a * Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2012 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation. ** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2012 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column). † No equivalent category for these substances in the Monitoring the Future survey. In the case of Prescription Pain Relievers , MTF does not have reliable data for grades 8 and 10. †† State and national data for All Students Surveyed are drawn from grades 8, 10 and 12. Depending on which grades were surveyed in a particular report, (e.g., 8 and 10 only), caution should be exercised when comparing rates. 45 Data Tables Table 6. Percentage of Students With Heavy ATOD Use Drinking and Driving During the past 30 days, how many times did you: (One or more times) DRIVE a car or other vehicle when you had been drinking alcohol? RIDE in a car or other vehicle driven by someone who had been drinking alcohol? Grade 8 Grade 10 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State BH Norm 2012 2012 5.5 8.0 4.2 3.9 27.6 36.9 25.4 City 2008 City 2010 10.7 17.5 Grade 12 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State BH Norm 2012 2012 4.2 9.5 9.9 5.2 6.1 24.1 24.9 33.0 34.3 22.4 City 2012 State 2012 MTF 2011 City 2008 City 2010 8.1 8.7 6.4 23.1 24.8 All Students Surveyed* City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State BH Norm 2012 2012 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 7.4 15.3 16.6 11.1 12.5 24.5 26.3 32.3 36.2 22.9 City 2012 State 2012 MTF 2011 City 2008 City 2010 14.5 17.5 14.7 28.8 32.7 State BH Norm 2012 2012 16.6 10.0 11.8 7.0 6.7 7.7 26.0 27.5 30.9 35.6 23.5 24.7 25.0 City 2012 State 2012 MTF 2011 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 MTF 2011 22.7 26.5 21.6 20.7 25.8 15.4 15.7 13.6 Binge Drinking Grade 8 How many times have you had 5 or more alcoholic drinks in a row in the past 2 weeks? (One or more times) Grade 10 Grade 12 All Students Surveyed* Table 7. Percentage of Students With Antisocial Behavior How many times in the past year (12 months) have you: (One or more times) Grade 8 Grade 10 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State BH Norm 2012 2012 Been Drunk or High at School 11.5 21.8 11.7 10.4 Been Suspended from School Grade 12 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State BH Norm 2012 2012 7.5 21.7 26.2 19.0 19.8 All Students Surveyed* City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State BH Norm 2012 2012 15.0 18.5 25.6 18.9 21.6 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State BH Norm 2012 2012 17.7 17.2 24.9 16.6 15.9 13.3 17.5 26.2 18.2 17.0 15.1 17.1 18.7 12.4 12.1 12.6 10.7 13.9 7.8 8.9 9.2 15.3 18.9 12.7 13.6 12.4 Sold Illegal Drugs 4.9 9.0 6.1 4.5 2.5 12.4 13.7 9.7 9.8 6.5 9.7 12.5 9.7 10.8 7.8 9.0 12.2 8.5 7.6 5.5 Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle 3.8 5.3 3.0 2.1 2.3 4.7 7.0 3.0 2.6 2.6 2.0 5.4 1.4 2.0 1.9 3.6 6.1 2.4 2.2 2.3 Been Arrested 10.1 13.6 7.6 5.5 5.2 12.6 14.8 7.9 7.0 6.7 9.8 12.9 7.5 7.0 6.1 10.9 13.9 7.7 6.3 6.0 Attacked Someone with the Idea of Seriously Hurting Them 19.8 20.9 14.8 11.2 16.0 20.3 18.5 9.4 9.7 15.1 13.7 16.2 6.7 7.7 11.9 18.1 18.3 10.2 9.9 14.4 Carried a Handgun 7.6 9.6 7.8 5.7 4.8 8.8 9.2 5.0 5.2 5.2 8.2 10.0 5.7 5.9 5.2 8.2 9.6 6.2 5.6 5.1 Carried a Handgun to School 2.2 2.2 1.2 1.0 0.8 1.9 2.7 1.3 1.2 0.9 1.2 2.3 0.9 1.3 1.0 1.8 2.5 1.1 1.2 0.9 * State and national data for All Students Surveyed are drawn from grades 8, 10 and 12. Depending on which grades were surveyed in a particular report, (e.g., 8 and 10 only), caution should be exercised when comparing rates. 46 Data Tables Table 8. Percentage of Students Gambling in the Past Year How often have you done the following for money, possessions, or anything of value: (At least once in the past 12 months) Grade 8 Grade 10 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 65.3 59.6 60.1 59.0 55.0 61.5 59.9 56.6 57.2 5.3 4.6 5.2 4.6 5.7 4.8 5.1 3.9 Played the lottery or scratch-off tickets? 23.0 16.8 21.9 23.1 24.0 20.7 22.8 Bet on sports? 27.6 30.1 28.2 26.1 22.8 28.2 Played cards? 42.2 34.7 33.4 31.7 25.8 Bought a raffle ticket?* 19.4 14.8 18.9 16.8 Played bingo? 26.3 27.2 22.5 Any Gambling Played a slot machine, poker machine or other gambling machine? Gambled on the Internet? State BH Norm 2012 2012 All Students Surveyed† Grade 12 State BH Norm 2012 2012 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State BH Norm 2012 2012 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 53.8 57.4 55.4 51.9 53.7 52.6 61.5 58.3 56.1 57.2 53.0 4.2 5.3 4.8 5.6 3.8 5.1 5.4 4.9 5.2 4.3 4.6 5.3 19.2 22.4 23.5 17.1 17.2 17.9 21.5 23.9 20.4 19.4 19.6 22.5 22.7 27.1 24.2 24.5 22.5 23.4 25.8 20.6 21.5 20.5 26.5 27.4 24.2 24.5 21.4 38.2 35.1 31.9 31.1 27.0 37.5 29.9 29.1 30.3 26.7 39.4 33.2 31.4 31.2 25.3 n/a 18.6 16.8 15.9 16.6 n/a 18.8 15.5 14.3 16.0 n/a 18.9 15.9 16.3 16.5 n/a 25.7 22.7 19.3 20.9 17.3 19.6 17.7 11.6 13.0 11.3 13.2 14.0 19.3 19.7 16.9 20.8 19.5 BH Norm 2012 5.8 5.2 5.3 4.9 4.5 5.3 4.5 3.2 4.1 4.0 4.2 4.8 2.6 3.6 3.7 5.1 4.8 3.7 4.3 4.2 Played a dice game? 24.9 23.1 24.2 24.4 12.1 20.7 20.3 18.7 20.5 11.2 17.7 14.7 14.8 16.1 10.0 21.2 19.0 19.1 21.2 11.4 Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or a video game? 31.8 31.5 27.6 25.6 20.1 30.0 28.0 23.9 24.3 20.5 24.9 24.7 20.7 22.1 18.8 29.1 27.7 24.0 24.4 19.4 8.9 10.6 6.0 4.8 4.6 8.5 7.9 4.6 4.5 4.7 6.3 6.9 4.0 4.0 4.6 7.9 8.2 4.8 4.5 4.7 Bet on a horse or other animal race? * National Comparison data for Bought a raffle ticket are not available. † State and national data for All Students Surveyed are drawn from grades 8, 10 and 12. Depending on which grades were surveyed in a particular report, (e.g., 8 and 10 only), caution should be exercised when comparing rates. 47 Data Tables Table 9. Percentage of Students Reporting Risk Grade 8 Risk Factor City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 Grade 10 State 2012 BH Norm 2012 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 All Students Surveyed** Grade 12 State 2012 BH Norm 2012 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 BH Norm 2012 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 BH Norm 2012 Community Domain Low Neighborhood Attachment 38.5 45.4 40.9 36.8 36.6 51.0 46.7 42.0 42.8 42.8 54.0 53.6 42.2 48.1 47.0 47.8 48.9 41.7 41.6 42.0 Laws & Norms Favorable to Drug Use 37.7 50.5 37.1 32.1 32.8 45.3 45.5 36.6 39.3 39.6 38.6 39.1 31.9 37.1 32.8 40.7 44.3 35.0 35.6 35.2 Perceived Availability of Drugs 36.0 39.8 39.9 34.3 29.4 50.2 43.0 35.8 42.3 40.5 51.9 45.5 41.0 43.5 42.7 46.1 43.1 38.9 39.2 37.5 Perceived Availability of Handguns 39.8 35.9 37.1 34.6 39.8 26.1 20.0 22.6 22.8 29.9 31.5 29.7 28.1 29.1 34.8 32.4 27.2 28.8 29.5 34.8 Poor Family Management 46.9 54.6 46.4 42.5 41.9 46.2 45.4 34.3 37.2 40.3 45.1 46.1 33.5 39.4 39.8 46.1 47.7 37.2 40.0 40.7 Family Conflict 51.7 53.8 53.4 51.2 51.5 40.2 40.0 38.8 41.6 41.6 38.8 39.4 33.9 39.5 38.8 43.5 42.9 40.8 45.1 44.1 Family History of Antisocial Behavior 39.2 50.3 39.6 38.5 36.4 47.0 47.1 37.2 40.4 39.0 39.5 43.0 34.2 38.6 37.3 42.0 46.3 36.7 39.1 37.6 Parental Attitudes Favorable to ASB 44.6 46.5 48.5 46.1 46.9 53.9 49.6 49.0 49.9 52.3 52.0 50.3 43.1 48.7 50.3 50.2 49.1 46.6 48.0 49.9 Parental Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use 24.9 27.3 26.7 23.7 26.0 41.1 39.2 39.4 39.7 40.8 41.1 40.3 36.6 43.0 38.6 35.8 36.8 34.9 33.8 35.2 Academic Failure 49.7 53.2 48.7 44.0 46.6 54.3 51.3 47.3 45.8 47.9 46.8 44.0 37.0 40.3 41.8 50.4 49.2 44.1 43.6 45.6 Low Commitment to School 42.4 42.4 46.2 40.2 38.0 41.4 37.8 43.0 45.9 41.7 41.8 38.5 36.7 46.4 42.9 41.9 39.2 41.9 43.4 40.8 Rebelliousness 43.6 50.3 38.2 37.1 39.0 47.8 48.0 37.3 40.6 45.5 44.6 47.4 31.0 36.8 43.6 45.4 48.3 35.4 38.1 42.7 Early Initiation of ASB 37.9 47.2 39.2 34.2 33.7 48.5 43.1 36.0 35.7 37.0 44.2 47.2 31.9 35.5 35.4 43.5 45.5 35.6 35.0 35.4 Early Initiation of Drug Use 29.7 42.5 25.5 24.0 24.0 35.5 33.1 25.0 27.5 27.3 33.5 33.4 22.6 27.8 28.8 32.9 35.5 24.3 26.0 26.6 Attitudes Favorable to ASB 43.9 47.7 41.6 36.8 36.2 52.3 44.1 39.5 41.4 44.9 43.5 40.1 34.8 37.8 41.9 46.6 43.6 38.5 38.4 41.0 Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use 30.2 39.1 30.1 26.1 22.6 38.9 37.9 33.3 36.1 33.6 32.3 36.0 31.9 35.8 32.7 33.8 37.6 31.8 31.4 29.6 Perceived Risk of Drug Use 48.3 59.6 57.0 50.2 37.1 46.5 51.2 49.0 51.4 35.7 45.9 52.0 48.4 56.3 40.3 46.9 53.5 51.2 52.1 37.6 Interaction with Antisocial Peers 58.6 68.8 53.4 50.2 50.3 60.7 60.5 44.6 47.2 52.0 52.6 57.7 41.3 45.6 49.0 57.4 61.6 46.2 48.2 50.5 Friend's Use of Drugs 40.7 51.9 39.8 35.7 30.8 44.8 48.7 35.4 39.0 36.2 36.5 42.4 27.4 34.8 32.3 40.8 47.3 34.0 36.5 33.2 Rewards for ASB 45.6 55.4 54.0 44.9 36.7 42.6 47.7 48.4 50.6 42.7 53.1 57.6 52.8 60.4 55.1 46.9 52.9 51.8 50.4 44.4 Gang Involvement 26.5 33.2 14.2 14.9 17.8 27.4 21.8 12.0 13.4 15.7 18.3 20.8 10.2 12.5 13.1 24.2 24.1 11.9 13.9 15.6 36.9 44.1 32.1 30.4 29.7 40.7 33.0 27.3 31.2 30.4 35.7 33.5 25.1 31.6 29.0 37.9 35.8 28.1 30.9 29.7 Family Domain School Domain Peer-Individual Domain Total Risk Students at High Risk* * High Risk youth are defined as the percentage of students who have more than a specified number of risk factors operating in their lives. (8th grade: 8 or more risk factors, 10th &12th grades: 9 or more risk factors.) ** State and national data for All Students Surveyed are drawn from grades 8, 10 and 12. Depending on which grades were surveyed in a particular report, (e.g., 8 and 10 only), caution should be exercised when comparing rates. 48 Data Tables Table 10. Percentage of Students Reporting Protection Grade 10 Grade 8 Protective Factor City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 29.8 29.8 24.6 33.2 Family Attachment 53.5 44.5 50.6 Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement 61.4 54.9 59.7 Rewards for Prosocial Involvement 62.8 55.8 Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement 58.4 Rewards for Prosocial Involvement 51.9 Belief in the Moral Order Grade 12 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 38.3 30.9 35.7 40.3 37.9 51.7 51.9 44.1 45.0 50.4 60.6 60.7 52.5 55.5 59.5 55.2 59.0 61.5 52.7 58.6 56.6 58.5 61.6 68.9 61.6 50.0 49.2 53.2 57.5 63.8 61.4 53.8 62.5 65.1 64.6 Interaction with Prosocial Peers 50.1 47.5 46.2 50.1 Prosocial Involvement 40.2 36.9 44.8 43.0 Rewards for Prosocial Involvement 58.3 57.3 53.1 50.2 43.2 42.2 All Students Surveyed† City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 44.2 29.5 31.7 46.8 37.7 46.9 44.7 56.2 53.5 60.1 56.0 53.1 57.5 52.6 62.5 55.9 53.0 53.0 55.2 54.0 67.6 71.6 65.0 71.6 64.2 67.8 73.8 62.8 58.9 50.2 67.1 72.5 74.2 71.5 68.0 58.8 53.0 57.2 59.3 55.2 40.8 35.6 46.4 53.3 50.3 59.3 62.5 61.3 64.6 68.8 51.3 52.8 54.6 55.9 65.1 BH Norm 2012 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 44.1 30.1 32.9 38.4 35.8 42.2 55.7 55.6 51.1 48.1 54.2 51.2 50.4 56.8 53.8 57.0 54.3 60.7 58.1 55.8 58.4 53.3 52.4 56.7 56.3 56.7 55.6 55.6 67.9 75.0 66.6 72.8 61.3 65.1 68.5 63.8 71.0 53.8 63.4 49.5 51.6 55.5 58.8 62.1 55.2 56.2 55.6 56.3 64.3 58.5 53.8 61.5 62.4 67.0 65.4 62.5 60.7 54.8 57.4 64.5 54.9 59.3 52.6 54.9 57.0 52.8 59.6 46.1 37.1 39.4 51.7 45.1 42.6 37.7 41.7 50.0 45.7 43.2 61.8 59.9 55.1 59.7 66.1 55.2 51.8 58.3 61.1 62.7 59.0 58.3 59.5 52.5 55.0 52.2 68.1 56.7 50.5 53.2 51.6 58.5 55.0 52.0 BH Norm 2012 BH Norm 2012 BH Norm 2012 Community Domain Rewards for Prosocial Involvement Family Domain School Domain Peer-Individual Domain Total Protection Students with High Protection* * High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have four or more protective factors operating in their lives. NOTE: Prior to the 2010 administration, this value was defined as the percentage of students who had five or more protective factors operating in their lives. In order to provide the best comparability across years, 2008 data were recalculated using the new definition. † State and national data for All Students Surveyed are drawn from grades 8, 10 and 12. Depending on which grades were surveyed in a particular report, (e.g., 8 and 10 only), caution should be exercised when comparing rates. 49 Data Tables Table 11. Where Youth Obtained Alcohol If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it? (Mark all that apply) Sample size** Grade 8 City 2008 City 2010 Grade 10 City 2012 State 2012 City 2008 City 2010 Grade 12 City 2012 State 2012 City 2008 City 2010 All Students Surveyed† City 2012 State 2012 City 2008 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 220 144 160 3,700 456 410 387 5,007 498 449 482 5,656 1,174 1,003 1,029 14,363 I bought it in a store such as a liquor store, convenience store, supermarket, discount store, or gas station 7.3 9.7 4.4 5.6 6.8 7.1 7.0 6.2 13.1 16.0 10.4 10.4 9.5 11.5 8.2 7.7 I bought it at a restaurant, bar, or club 2.3 4.9 3.8 3.4 2.2 1.7 3.6 2.7 6.4 3.8 4.6 4.7 4.0 3.1 4.1 3.7 I bought it at a public event such as a concert or sporting event 1.4 4.2 2.5 3.7 2.9 3.2 4.1 2.9 2.6 3.1 2.9 2.7 2.5 3.3 3.3 3.0 I gave someone else money to buy it for me 17.7 22.2 18.1 17.3 33.1 35.1 23.5 29.8 40.8 41.6 39.8 39.3 33.5 36.2 30.3 30.3 My parent or guardian gave it to me 18.6 16.7 17.5 19.5 13.8 12.2 18.6 16.0 10.4 10.9 15.1 15.3 13.3 12.3 16.8 16.6 Another family member who is 21 or older gave it to me 18.2 23.6 17.5 19.2 25.9 15.9 17.3 17.1 19.7 17.8 18.0 16.3 21.8 17.8 17.7 17.3 Someone not related to me who is 21 or older gave it to me 18.6 16.0 14.4 17.2 28.1 25.1 21.7 24.5 39.0 31.6 31.3 31.1 30.9 26.7 25.1 25.2 Someone under the age of 21 gave it to me 20.5 15.3 23.8 22.9 21.1 21.7 25.6 25.8 18.9 20.5 23.4 22.7 20.0 20.2 24.3 23.8 I got it at a party 42.7 34.7 33.8 37.2 55.3 51.7 48.3 49.4 57.8 55.7 52.7 53.5 54.0 51.0 48.1 47.9 I took it from home 28.6 26.4 26.9 26.8 17.5 18.5 20.2 22.2 13.5 12.9 13.3 14.0 17.9 17.1 18.0 20.2 I took it from a store or someone else's home I got it some other way 8.6 6.9 14.4 8.8 6.6 10.2 9.3 9.2 6.4 5.8 5.4 5.6 6.9 7.8 8.3 7.7 26.8 23.6 26.2 25.4 19.3 19.8 17.6 17.8 16.5 15.8 12.4 13.2 19.5 18.5 16.5 17.9 * Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. Students indicating they did not drink alcohol in the past 30 days are not included in the sample. In the case of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community. † State and national data for All Students Surveyed are drawn from grades 8, 10 and 12. Depending on which grades were surveyed in a particular report, (e.g., 8 and 10 only), caution should be exercised when comparing rates. 50 Data Tables Table 12. Where Youth Obtained Marijuana* If during the past 30 days you used marijuana, how did you get it? (Mark all that apply.) Grade 8 City 2012 Sample size** Grade 10 State 2012 City 2012 Grade 12 State 2012 City 2012 All Students Surveyed† State 2012 City 2012 State 2012 155 3,000 285 3,911 314 3,747 754 10,658 8.4 8.5 10.5 10.9 11.5 14.9 10.5 11.6 Friends 77.4 72.7 84.9 80.8 85.0 80.9 83.4 78.6 Family/Relatives 18.1 17.4 18.6 14.7 9.6 12.7 14.7 14.8 Parties 24.5 25.9 31.9 28.9 30.3 30.4 29.7 28.6 Home 7.7 6.1 7.7 6.3 5.1 6.0 6.6 6.1 School 20.6 15.8 17.2 14.9 10.5 10.1 15.1 13.4 Other 31.0 28.8 16.8 22.3 25.5 21.0 23.3 23.7 I got it from someone with a Medical Marijuana Card * Prior to 2012, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained marijuana. ** Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining marijuana. Students indicating they did not use marijuana in the past 30 days are not included in the sample. In the case of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community. † State and national data for All Students Surveyed are drawn from grades 8, 10 and 12. Depending on which grades were surveyed in a particular report, (e.g., 8 and 10 only), caution should be exercised when comparing rates. Table 13. Where Youth Obtained Prescription Drugs* If you have ever used prescription drugs in order to get high, not for a medical reason, how did you get them? (Mark all that apply.) Grade 8 City 2010 City 2012 Grade 10 State 2012 City 2010 City 2012 Grade 12 State 2012 City 2010 City 2012 All Students Surveyed† State 2012 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 Sample size** n/a 85 1,637 n/a 157 2,321 n/a 219 2,478 n/a 461 6,436 Friends n/a 43.5 48.7 n/a 56.7 59.8 n/a 60.3 62.8 n/a 56.0 58.2 Family/Relatives n/a 12.9 16.8 n/a 15.3 16.6 n/a 16.4 16.3 n/a 15.4 16.5 Parties n/a 14.1 21.4 n/a 18.5 19.6 n/a 17.8 19.5 n/a 17.4 20.0 Home (e.g., Medicine Cabinet) n/a 21.2 28.2 n/a 39.5 31.3 n/a 26.5 24.7 n/a 29.9 28.0 Doctor/Pharmacy n/a 17.6 13.5 n/a 14.0 14.3 n/a 21.5 19.5 n/a 18.2 16.1 School n/a 23.6 15.6 n/a 15.5 12.7 n/a 17.8 13.8 n/a 12.9 12.9 Other n/a 14.1 17.8 n/a 13.4 13.2 n/a 16.9 12.3 n/a 15.2 14.0 Over the Internet n/a 4.7 2.4 n/a 2.5 1.4 n/a 0.0 0.9 n/a 1.7 1.5 Outside the United States (e.g., Mexico, Canada) n/a 9.4 5.1 n/a 6.4 4.2 n/a 5.0 3.6 n/a 6.3 4.2 * Prior to 2010, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained prescription drugs. ** Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining prescription drugs. Students indicating they have never used prescription drugs to get high are not included in the sample. In the case of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community. † State and national data for All Students Surveyed are drawn from grades 8, 10 and 12. Depending on which grades were surveyed in a particular report, (e.g., 8 and 10 only), caution should be exercised when comparing rates. 51 Data Tables Table 14. Percentage of Students Reporting School Safety and Cyber-Bullying Issues Grade 8 Question 0 times 1 time During the past 12 months, how many times has someone threatened or injured you with a weapon such as a gun, knife, or club ON SCHOOL PROPERTY? 2-3 times 4-5 times 6-7 times 8-9 times 10-11 times Grade 10 Grade 12 All Students Surveyed* City 2008 87.2 6.8 City 2010 91.3 4.5 City 2012 85.4 7.3 State 2012 88.9 5.0 City 2008 87.5 6.0 City 2010 92.5 3.8 City 2012 93.6 2.5 State 2012 91.5 3.5 City 2008 92.7 3.5 City 2010 94.3 2.7 City 2012 95.1 2.2 State 2012 93.9 2.4 3.8 0.9 0.4 2.7 0.5 0.1 3.1 1.0 0.5 3.0 0.9 0.5 3.4 1.0 0.6 1.8 0.7 0.4 1.5 0.5 0.5 2.1 0.7 0.5 1.6 0.8 0.3 1.3 0.7 0.1 1.3 0.5 0.2 1.4 0.6 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.8 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.8 0.8 1.7 1.2 1.1 0.7 1.2 1.3 0.9 0.5 0.6 1.0 0 times 79.3 74.4 79.2 82.7 83.1 86.0 90.1 89.7 91.9 90.5 94.2 93.0 1 time 10.3 6.2 13.5 6.7 10.7 5.6 9.1 5.1 9.8 5.2 7.8 3.6 5.8 2.4 5.6 2.5 4.8 2.1 5.5 2.2 3.2 1.4 3.5 1.7 1.8 0.7 2.7 0.8 1.9 0.7 1.2 0.6 0.8 0.6 1.3 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.4 1.1 0.8 0.1 1.0 0.1 0.3 1.3 0.3 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.9 0.2 0.0 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.7 60.5 13.3 65.9 11.5 56.6 11.2 60.1 9.9 71.2 8.9 74.0 8.8 74.3 7.0 72.6 6.9 80.5 7.2 83.6 5.1 85.6 4.5 82.9 4.5 11.6 2.6 8.0 4.6 10.4 5.9 12.0 4.9 9.7 3.0 8.4 2.6 7.4 4.1 8.4 3.5 5.5 1.6 5.4 1.9 4.9 1.6 1.3 1.2 0.5 1.2 2.1 2.0 2.3 1.6 1.3 1.2 1.3 0.6 1.9 1.0 1.8 1.2 1.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.8 8.9 1.2 7.1 0.6 11.2 0.6 8.5 0.9 3.9 0.4 4.0 0.4 3.9 0.5 5.1 0.2 3.7 0 days 88.8 84.2 88.9 92.1 90.8 92.3 95.7 94.6 1 day 5.7 3.1 8.2 4.7 5.7 3.1 3.8 2.4 5.1 2.3 4.3 2.2 1.6 1.5 2.7 1.5 0.7 1.7 1.2 1.8 1.3 1.0 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.4 0.7 0.4 0.8 93.8 2.7 1.2 93.2 3.7 1.4 93.3 2.8 1.6 94.8 2.3 1.1 92.9 2.2 1.9 95.0 1.4 1.3 0.6 1.7 0.4 1.3 0.4 2.0 0.4 1.4 0.5 2.5 0.3 2.0 City 2008 89.0 5.5 3.0 0.9 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.9 City 2010 92.8 3.6 City 2012 91.5 3.9 State 2012 90.9 3.9 1.8 0.7 0.2 2.0 0.6 0.4 2.4 0.8 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.7 1.1 1.2 84.8 88.0 87.3 8.4 3.9 6.5 3.1 6.7 3.5 1.5 0.3 0.9 0.5 0.8 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.2 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.8 70.4 9.8 75.4 8.1 72.4 7.5 69.3 7.7 5.2 2.1 9.0 2.4 7.3 2.8 7.5 3.8 9.3 3.8 1.0 0.6 1.2 0.7 1.2 0.9 0.7 0.7 1.7 1.2 1.9 1.3 0.3 3.1 0.3 1.6 0.3 3.1 0.6 5.5 0.6 4.4 0.4 5.5 0.5 6.2 93.8 94.2 97.9 95.8 91.0 91.1 94.2 93.8 3.7 1.7 3.0 1.8 0.9 0.9 1.9 1.3 4.8 2.4 4.7 2.7 2.7 1.8 3.0 1.9 0.4 0.7 0.2 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.6 1.1 0.7 0.9 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.8 95.0 1.8 1.1 94.5 1.5 1.1 94.5 1.9 0.9 93.9 2.0 1.1 95.9 0.9 0.7 94.5 1.3 1.1 93.7 2.3 1.4 94.2 2.1 1.3 94.7 1.8 1.1 94.7 1.8 1.1 0.3 1.8 0.5 2.4 0.2 2.5 0.7 2.4 0.7 1.8 0.5 2.6 0.4 2.2 0.5 2.0 0.4 1.9 0.5 2.0 n/a n/a 69.5 71.1 n/a n/a 74.6 73.8 n/a n/a 81.7 78.7 0 times n/a n/a 9.3 9.0 n/a n/a 6.8 7.1 n/a n/a 5.1 5.7 1 time n/a n/a 8.9 8.6 n/a n/a 7.8 8.4 n/a n/a 6.2 7.0 2-3 times n/a n/a 3.4 3.7 n/a n/a 3.2 3.2 n/a n/a 2.2 2.7 4-5 times n/a n/a 1.3 1.6 n/a n/a 1.7 1.6 n/a n/a 0.9 1.2 6-7 times n/a n/a 1.1 1.2 n/a n/a 1.0 1.1 n/a n/a 0.7 0.8 8-9 times n/a n/a 0.9 0.6 n/a n/a 0.3 0.5 n/a n/a 0.1 0.5 10-11 times n/a n/a 5.7 4.3 n/a n/a 4.4 4.3 n/a n/a 3.1 3.4 12 or more times * State and national data for All Students Surveyed are drawn from grades 8, 10 and 12. Depending on which grades were surveyed in a particular report, (e.g., 8 and 10 only), caution should be exercised when comparing rates. n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 75.4 7.0 7.6 2.9 1.3 1.0 0.4 4.4 73.7 7.6 8.1 3.3 1.5 1.1 0.5 4.1 12 or more times During the past 12 months, how many times were you in a physical fight ON SCHOOL PROPERTY? 2-3 times 4-5 times 6-7 times 8-9 times 10-11 times 12 or more times 0 times 1 time During the past 12 months, how often have you been picked on or bullied by a student ON SCHOOL PROPERTY? 2-3 times 4-5 times 6-7 times 8-9 times 10-11 times 12 or more times During the past 30 days, on how many days did you not go to school because you felt you would be unsafe at school or on your way to or from school? 2-3 days 4-5 days 6 or more days 0 days During the past 30 days, on how many days did you carry a weapon such as a gun, knife, or club ON SCHOOL PROPERTY? 1 day 2-3 days 4-5 days 6 or more days During the past 12 months, how many times have you been harassed, mistreated, or made fun of by another person while on-line or through a cell phone or other electronic device?** ** Prior to 2012, the AYS did not survey online and electronic harassment. 52 84.5 8.5 4.6 1.0 0.5 0.2 0.2 Data Tables Table 15. Drug Free Communities Report - National Outcome Measures (NOMs) Outcome Definition Substance Grade 8 Percent Grade 10 Sample Percent Grade 12 Sample Percent All Students Surveyed† Sample Percent Sample Male †† Percent Female †† Sample Percent Sample drink 1 or two drinks nearly every day Alcohol 62.4 1,191 68.0 1,370 69.3 1,468 66.8 4,029 62.8 1,925 71.1 2,025 smoke 1 or more packs of cigarettes per day Cigarettes 81.4 1,202 89.5 1,380 90.5 1,469 87.5 4,051 86.1 1,937 88.9 2,036 smoke marijuana regularly Marijuana 71.6 1,173 63.5 1,354 61.6 1,454 65.2 3,981 59.8 1,905 70.4 2,000 Perception of Parent Disapproval* (Parents feel it would be Wrong or Very Wrong to... ) drink beer, wine, or hard liquor regularly Alcohol 94.0 997 87.1 1,306 80.1 1,423 86.3 3,726 85.2 1,767 87.5 1,887 smoke cigarettes Cigarettes 98.0 990 95.3 1,305 90.1 1,425 94.0 3,720 93.3 1,768 94.7 1,881 smoke marijuana Marijuana 95.8 987 91.9 1,289 88.2 1,419 91.5 3,695 90.9 1,757 92.2 1,866 Perception of Peer Disapproval* (I think it is Wrong or Very Wrong for someone my age to...) drink beer, wine, or hard liquor regularly Alcohol 82.7 1,431 71.5 1,435 67.3 1,519 73.7 4,385 71.5 2,123 75.9 2,173 Past 30-Day Use* at least one use in the past 30 days Perception of Risk* (People are at Moderate or Great Risk of harming themselves if they...) smoke cigarettes Cigarettes 89.6 1,424 82.2 1,435 74.1 1,519 81.8 4,378 80.3 2,116 83.4 2,175 smoke marijuana Marijuana 80.6 1,416 70.3 1,433 65.0 1,515 71.8 4,364 68.2 2,107 75.3 2,168 Alcohol 2,106 16.5 1,317 30.2 1,411 35.7 1,492 27.9 4,220 27.9 2,029 27.6 Cigarettes 7.6 1,311 13.0 1,416 16.7 1,495 12.6 4,222 14.1 2,020 11.2 2,118 Marijuana 8.4 1,303 17.4 1,406 19.0 1,477 15.2 4,186 16.7 2,007 14.0 2,096 Average Age of Onset** Percent (How old were you when you first…) Sample had more than a sip or two of beer, wine or hard liquor? Alcohol 44.8 Average age: 11.2 years smoked a cigarette, even just a puff? Cigarettes 21.2 Average age: 11.1 years Marijuana 20.5 Average age: 12.1 years smoked marijuana? 1,423 Percent Sample 58.4 1,439 13.1 years 1,427 29.6 33.2 13.3 years Sample 61.4 1,512 14.3 years 1,431 36.8 1,438 40.5 14.6 years Percent Sample 55.0 4,374 13.0 years 1,512 14.2 years 12.6 years 1,432 Percent 29.3 31.6 Sample 55.0 2,122 12.8 years 4,370 13.0 years 1,517 Percent 31.9 4,387 34.0 13.5 years Sample 55.1 2,166 13.3 years 2,117 26.7 2,165 13.1 years 12.8 years 13.6 years Percent 2,126 29.4 2,173 13.9 years * For Past 30-Day Use, Perception of Risk, and Perception of Parental/Peer Disapproval, the “Sample” column represents the sample size - the number of people who answered the question and whose responses were used to determine the percentage. The "Percent" column represents the percentage of youth in the sample answering the question as specified in the definition. ** For Average Age of Onset, the “Sample” column represents the overall sample size: the total number of people that responded to the questions about Age of Onset. This includes responses that are not used to calculate the average age of onset (i.e., youth that have never used alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana). The "Percent" column represents the percentage of youth in the sample reporting any age of first use for the specified substance. "Average age" is calculated by averaging the ages of first use of students reporting any use. † †† State and national data for All Students Surveyed are drawn from grades 8, 10 and 12. Depending on which grades were surveyed in a particular report, (e.g., 8 and 10 only), caution should be exercised when comparing rates. The male and female values allow a gender comparison for youth who completed the survey. However, unless the percentage of students who participated from each grade is similar, the gender results are not necessarily representative of males and females in the community. 53 Data Tables Table 16. Additional Data for Prevention Planning In the last 30 days, about how many times were you offered: City 2012 State 2012 57.5 53.1 38.0 50.6 41.6 48.6 60.0 59.4 12.9 15.8 13.7 17.0 14.1 22.1 11.9 16.7 12.9 20.1 15.5 18.1 12.2 13.7 12.8 13.9 3.9 0.7 3.1 2.8 1.5 2.7 3.1 1.1 2.3 8.2 2.5 6.0 6.7 2.0 5.1 7.3 3.2 5.7 10.9 6.1 8.7 10.0 3.6 7.2 11.5 4.7 9.2 8.2 3.3 6.3 6.6 2.4 5.1 6.4 2.6 5.0 79.1 10.1 81.3 7.8 82.8 8.2 67.4 10.1 76.9 8.2 73.3 10.1 58.7 11.2 71.2 9.6 65.7 10.1 67.1 10.5 76.3 8.6 75.7 9.2 5.2 2.7 5.6 1.7 4.6 1.7 9.9 3.8 5.9 2.6 6.8 3.2 10.4 5.0 6.9 3.7 8.9 4.4 9.0 3.9 6.1 2.7 6.3 2.8 0.4 2.5 1.2 2.4 0.8 1.9 1.7 7.1 1.9 4.5 1.8 4.8 3.6 11.1 1.7 6.9 2.2 8.7 2.0 7.4 1.6 4.7 1.4 4.4 62.2 12.6 69.9 9.9 74.3 8.4 52.3 13.7 60.7 8.7 57.4 10.8 56.6 10.7 60.9 9.3 53.8 10.9 56.1 12.4 63.7 9.3 64.3 9.7 9.5 3.9 3.3 7.2 3.9 2.4 6.5 3.5 2.1 12.3 6.3 3.8 11.4 6.5 3.3 11.1 6.7 3.8 10.7 5.7 3.4 8.5 6.3 2.6 11.4 6.8 3.8 11.1 5.6 3.6 9.0 5.6 2.8 9.1 5.3 3.0 8.5 86.3 6.7 88.4 5.2 88.4 11.5 78.7 9.5 83.5 10.4 82.9 12.9 81.1 12.5 84.2 13.3 82.1 11.3 81.4 9.7 85.3 8.7 85.2 6.0 2.5 5.1 2.8 5.3 2.6 8.4 5.5 7.8 3.6 7.3 4.2 7.0 4.8 5.8 4.1 6.6 4.8 7.4 4.6 6.2 3.5 6.2 3.6 1.7 1.2 1.2 0.7 1.2 0.7 2.8 1.1 2.0 1.1 1.9 1.0 2.5 1.1 1.8 0.9 2.2 1.1 2.4 1.1 1.7 0.9 1.7 0.9 2-3 times 4-6 times 2-3 times 4-6 times 7-10 times More than 10 times Never Once 2-3 times 4-6 times 7-10 times 2.2 1.8 1.7 3.3 2.1 2.8 3.5 3.1 3.2 3.2 2.4 2.4 Never 62.2 56.0 57.4 60.7 56.6 59.0 66.5 60.1 61.4 63.1 57.6 58.9 Once 13.8 9.8 16.1 11.9 15.1 12.5 13.2 12.9 14.1 15.3 13.7 13.2 12.3 9.9 13.0 13.0 12.1 12.7 13.0 11.1 14.3 13.4 13.9 12.8 7-10 times 3.5 2.9 4.8 2.3 4.8 2.1 5.3 2.1 6.4 1.8 5.1 2.2 4.4 2.0 5.3 2.2 5.4 2.3 4.6 2.2 5.5 2.1 5.0 2.2 More than 10 times 7.7 8.9 8.1 5.9 6.0 6.8 4.9 6.4 6.2 6.0 7.0 7.2 More than 10 times 2-3 times 4-6 times In the last 30 days, how often did you respond in the following ways when alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana or other drugs were offered to you? Never Once Twice Three times Four or more times I never got offers Never Once Twice Three times Four or more times I never got offers Never Once Twice Three times Four or more times I never got offers Never Once use some other way to not accept the alcohol or drugs? City 2010 16.9 18.1 Once decide to leave the situation without accepting the offer? State 2012 48.3 Never give an explanation or excuse to turn down the offer? City 2012 12.1 8.5 More than 10 times say "No" without giving a reason why? City 2010 72.9 7-10 times 0 State 2012 11.9 8.1 Once In the last 30 days, how often have you avoided people or places because you might be offered alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana, or other drugs? City 2012 73.1 Never 0 City 2010 15.0 12.3 More than 10 times other drugs? State 2012 65.0 7-10 times marijuana? City 2012 All Students Surveyed* Grade 12 Once 4-6 times cigarettes? City 2010 Grade 10 Never 2-3 times alcohol? Grade 8 Twice Three times Four or more times I never got offers Grade 8 City 2010 Grade 12 Grade 10 City 2012 State 2012 33.1 17.0 27.4 14.3 28.2 12.4 8.0 4.1 9.3 4.3 2.9 6.5 28.5 39.4 City 2010 All Students Surveyed* City 2012 State 2012 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 33.5 21.2 30.3 16.1 32.1 15.2 35.1 18.3 31.7 14.3 34.1 15.5 34.0 19.2 30.0 14.9 30.8 14.0 4.6 2.6 5.5 9.2 4.6 9.9 6.5 3.5 6.7 7.1 3.7 8.1 10.2 6.4 11.7 7.4 3.8 7.6 8.9 4.4 9.1 9.3 5.1 10.4 6.2 3.4 6.9 6.4 3.4 7.2 44.7 32.2 46.8 31.7 21.7 39.8 37.0 32.3 33.8 34.9 18.2 43.2 35.1 32.6 28.0 37.2 22.0 40.9 38.6 32.4 38.2 34.0 14.0 7.0 9.7 5.0 9.7 4.7 16.4 9.7 14.0 7.7 13.2 7.5 15.4 10.2 12.5 9.1 14.5 8.6 15.5 9.3 12.2 7.4 12.0 6.5 3.6 8.0 4.2 5.2 2.6 4.4 4.6 7.8 3.4 6.3 4.3 6.5 5.7 7.2 4.2 6.3 4.8 7.1 4.8 7.6 3.9 6.0 3.7 5.7 28.1 42.5 43.8 35.0 47.0 34.0 21.7 49.0 36.2 42.4 33.6 43.7 18.2 54.0 35.4 45.5 27.8 50.0 22.0 49.2 38.2 41.3 38.1 40.9 12.1 4.5 3.3 9.3 2.8 2.0 8.8 3.1 2.2 13.6 4.8 3.4 10.1 3.1 2.5 10.2 4.0 2.5 12.2 5.2 3.9 9.7 3.3 1.9 10.1 4.3 2.3 12.7 4.8 3.6 9.7 3.1 2.1 9.5 3.7 2.3 8.9 28.6 5.4 45.5 4.5 47.5 6.6 22.7 4.8 37.0 5.1 34.6 6.1 18.7 3.8 35.8 4.8 28.6 7.0 22.7 4.7 39.1 4.8 38.9 46.7 9.5 37.2 8.9 36.8 7.1 51.2 11.9 45.3 8.3 47.6 8.0 55.2 11.2 48.9 7.1 53.8 7.6 51.6 11.1 44.1 8.1 44.3 7.5 5.0 3.2 2.4 1.6 2.7 1.8 5.1 3.2 3.2 2.1 3.3 2.3 5.8 3.1 3.1 1.8 3.7 2.1 5.3 3.2 2.9 1.8 3.1 2.0 6.3 29.2 4.3 45.6 3.7 47.9 5.9 22.7 3.7 37.4 4.1 34.8 5.5 19.1 2.7 36.4 3.9 29.0 5.9 23.0 3.5 39.5 3.9 39.2 * State and national data for All Students Surveyed are drawn from grades 8, 10 and 12. Depending on which grades were surveyed in a particular report, (e.g., 8 and 10 only), caution should be exercised when comparing rates. 54 Data Tables Table 17. Additional Data for Prevention Planning (Cont'd) Grade 8 How many times in the past year (12 months) have you: City 2010 seen someone punched with a fist, kicked, choked or beaten up? seen someone attacked with a weapon other than a gun, such as a knife, bat, bottle, or chain? seen someone shot or shot at? 0 City 2012 State 2012 City 2010 Grade 12 All Students Surveyed* City 2012 State 2012 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 81.8 84.8 85.4 79.7 88.2 86.9 81.1 90.5 87.7 80.7 87.9 86.4 1 or 2 times 9.3 7.3 7.2 8.4 6.0 5.9 8.7 5.1 5.3 8.7 6.1 6.3 3 to 5 times 2.9 3.1 3.2 3.6 2.1 2.8 3.6 1.6 2.7 3.4 2.2 2.9 6 to 9 times 1.2 1.5 1.5 2.4 0.8 1.3 1.8 0.7 1.3 1.9 1.0 1.4 10 to 19 times 2.1 0.9 0.9 3.5 0.6 0.8 1.6 0.5 0.8 2.5 0.7 0.8 20 to 29 times 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.4 0.4 30 to 39 times 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 40+ times 1.8 1.8 1.3 1.5 1.4 1.5 2.4 1.4 1.5 1.9 1.5 1.4 Never 27.9 38.2 39.2 32.9 52.2 43.7 40.9 60.0 55.3 34.5 50.4 44.4 1 or 2 times 24.7 24.4 27.7 25.9 23.3 24.2 26.3 21.8 21.5 25.8 23.1 25.2 3 to 5 times 19.6 15.7 16.3 18.7 13.4 17.1 15.4 10.7 12.8 17.8 13.2 15.6 6 to 9 times 10.2 9.2 7.7 9.4 5.9 7.2 6.3 3.6 5.1 8.5 6.2 6.9 10 to 19 times 7.1 4.5 3.8 7.4 2.4 3.5 5.3 1.7 2.5 6.6 2.8 3.4 20 to 29 times 3.3 3.2 1.7 1.9 1.1 1.4 1.8 1.0 1.1 2.2 1.8 1.5 30 to 39 times 1.3 0.6 0.6 0.9 0.1 0.5 0.8 0.4 0.4 1.0 0.4 0.5 40+ times 5.9 4.2 3.0 3.0 1.5 2.3 3.2 0.8 1.5 3.8 2.1 2.4 Never 75.6 85.1 87.6 78.4 91.7 90.2 80.0 93.6 91.9 78.3 90.2 89.4 1 or 2 times 12.6 7.3 7.1 9.9 4.9 5.5 11.7 3.8 4.6 11.2 5.3 6.0 3 to 5 times 4.9 2.5 2.3 4.0 1.6 1.9 3.1 1.1 1.6 3.9 1.7 2.0 6 to 9 times 2.2 1.7 1.1 1.9 0.6 0.9 1.9 0.5 0.7 2.0 0.9 0.9 10 to 19 times 2.3 1.2 0.6 4.0 0.4 0.5 1.7 0.3 0.4 2.8 0.6 0.5 20 to 29 times 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.3 0.3 30 to 39 times 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 40+ times 1.5 1.3 0.7 1.3 0.5 0.7 1.1 0.4 0.5 1.3 0.7 0.6 Never 79.3 87.3 90.4 82.8 92.4 92.1 83.7 93.7 93.5 82.3 91.2 91.7 1 or 2 times 11.8 7.3 6.0 10.4 4.8 4.8 9.8 4.0 3.8 10.6 5.4 5.1 3 to 5 times 3.2 1.9 1.5 2.8 1.3 1.2 3.2 0.7 1.1 3.0 1.3 1.3 6 to 9 times 1.8 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.2 0.5 1.1 0.6 0.5 1.2 0.6 0.6 10 to 19 times 1.2 0.6 0.4 1.8 0.4 0.4 1.2 0.5 0.4 1.4 0.5 0.4 20 to 29 times 0.7 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.2 30 to 39 times 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 40+ times 1.5 1.1 0.7 0.8 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.3 0.6 0.9 0.6 0.6 Never been hit, slapped, pushed, shoved, kicked, or any other way physically assaulted by your boyfriend or girlfriend? Grade 10 If you have ever used prescription drugs in order to get high, not for a medical reason, how did you get them? (Mark all that apply) I've never used prescription drugs to get high Friends Family/Relatives Parties Home (e.g., Medicine Cabinet) Doctor/Pharmacy School Other Over the Internet Outside the United States (e.g., Mexico, Canada) Grade 8 City 2010 Grade 10 City 2012 State 2012 80.2 84.0 87.6 9.8 2.9 3.0 3.7 0.9 3.6 City 2010 All Students Surveyed* Grade 12 City 2012 State 2012 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 City 2010 City 2012 State 2012 78.3 85.4 83.7 75.6 83.3 80.3 77.8 84.2 84.6 12.6 6.4 7.8 16.5 8.9 10.8 13.3 6.2 6.4 1.0 5.1 1.7 2.2 5.1 2.4 2.8 4.8 1.7 1.8 0.9 1.3 4.8 2.1 2.6 6.2 2.6 3.4 5.0 1.9 2.2 3.8 1.4 1.8 4.6 4.4 4.1 5.3 3.9 4.2 4.7 3.3 3.1 1.8 1.2 0.8 2.7 1.6 1.9 4.6 3.2 3.3 3.2 2.0 1.8 3.0 0.9 0.8 3.2 2.6 2.0 5.7 2.3 2.2 4.0 2.0 1.5 2.9 0.9 1.1 4.1 1.5 1.7 3.2 2.5 2.1 3.5 1.7 1.5 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.2 1.4 0.6 0.3 1.1 0.7 0.5 1.7 0.7 0.6 1.4 0.7 0.5 * State and national data for All Students Surveyed are drawn from grades 8, 10 and 12. Depending on which grades were surveyed in a particular report, (e.g., 8 and 10 only), caution should be exercised when comparing rates. 55 Appendix Appendix - Comparability of survey administrations and additional notes 2008/2010 AYS Issue Drug Category On how many occasions (if any) have you: 2012 AYS Notes regarding changes On how many occasions (if any) have you: Heroin used heroin or other opiates? used heroin? Cautiously comparable across years. Other Club Drugs n/a used other "club" drugs (such as Special K, Roofies, GHB, or Rohypnol)? Added in 2012 to track potential emerging usage trends. Synthetic Drugs n/a used synthetic drugs (such as Bath Salts like Ivory Wave or White Lighting or herbal incense products like K2, Spice, or Gold)? Added in 2012 to track potential emerging usage trends. Combined results of On how many occasions have you: Prescription drugs used prescription pain relievers (Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a doctor telling you to take them? used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)? used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them? 56 In 2006 there was a prescription drugs question with several examples (some of which overlapped examples from the standalone stimulant and sedative questions). Starting in 2008, the single prescription drug question was dropped in favor of more specific questions. Rather than discontinuing reporting Prescription Drugs, the prescription sedative, stimulant and pain reliever questions were combined to create a single measure. Contacts for Prevention Regional Prevention Contacts Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai Counties Jacque Gencarelle Northern Arizona Regional Behavioral Health Authority (NARBHA) 928-226-6396 Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Gila, La Paz, Pinal, Yuma and Santa Cruz Counties Linda Weinberg Cenpatico of Arizona 866-495-6738 Arizona Department of Health Services Division of Behavioral Health Services Lisa Shumaker 602-364-4594 www.azdhs.gov/bhs/index.htm Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety Charles Katz 602-496-1471 cvpcs.asu.edu/ Governor’s Office of Children, Youth, and Families 602-542-4043 www.gocyf.az.gov Maricopa County Juan Aristizabal Magellan Health Services of Arizona 602-797-8256 Partnership for a Drug Free America, Arizona Affiliate Shelly Mowrey 602-264-5700 www.drugfreeaz.org Pima County Michael Pensak Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA) 520-618-8813 The Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence (Blueprints for Violence Prevention) www.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints/ Gila River Indian Community Julie Jimenez Gila River Regional Behavioral Health Authority 520-562-3321 ext. 7031 Pascua Yaqui Tribe Ralph Cota Centered Spirit Program 480-768-2063 Other State and National Contacts: Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Steve Irvine/Michelle Neitch/Phillip Stevenson 602-364-1173/602-364-1557/602-364-1157 www.azcjc.gov Arizona Department of Education School Safety and Prevention www.ade.az.gov/sa/health/ Arizona Department of Gaming’s Office of Problem Gambling Kimberly Zill 602-255-3889 www.problemgambling.az.gov 57 Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP) www.samhsa.gov/about/csap.aspx Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Model Programs Guide www.ojjdp.gov/mpg/ Office of Justice Programs Crime Solutions www.crimesolutions.gov Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities U.S. Department of Education www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) Evidence Based Practices www.samhsa.gov/ebpwebguide/index.asp Western Regional Center for the Application of Prevention Technologies (CAPT) casat.unr.edu/westcapt.html Bach Harrison, L.L.C. R. Steven Harrison, Ph.D. 801-359-2064 www.bach-harrison.com