2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Apache County

REPORT PROVIDED BY:

Arizona Criminal Justice Commission

1

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Shining Light on Arizona Youth
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:
Arizona Department of Gaming’s Office of Problem Gambling
Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission
Arizona Parent’s Commission on Drug Education and Prevention
Governor’s Division for Substance Abuse Policy
Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Tobacco Education and Prevention Program,
Arizona Department of Health Services

2

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 2008 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:
Jean Ajamie, Arizona Department of Education
Michelle Anderson, Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections
Steve Ballance, Maricopa County
Carisa Dwyer, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Charles Katz, Arizona State University
Dr. Manuel Medina, TERROS, Inc.
Kim O’Connor, Governor’s Office for
Children, Youth, and Families
Holly Orozco, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Catherine Osborn, Arizona Department of Education
Richard Porter, Arizona Department of Health Services
Gowri Shetty, Arizona Department of Health Services
Lisa Shumaker, Arizona Department of Health Services
Wendy Wolfersteig, Arizona State University
Nicole Yancey Johnson, Arizona Early Childhood Development
and Health Board
Governor’s Youth Commission

Additionally, the success of the 2008 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.

3

Introduction
CONTENTS:

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Summary for
Apache County

Introduction
The Risk and Protective
Factor Model of
Prevention
The Arizona Substance
Abuse Partnership
How to Read the Charts

This report summarizes some of the
findings from the 2008 Arizona Youth
Survey (AYS) administered to 8th, 10th
and 12th grade students during the
spring of 2008. The results for your
county are presented along with
comparisons to 2004 and 2006 survey
results where applicable, as well as to
the overall results for the state. 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.

Practical Implications of
the Assessment
Assessment and
Planning
Data Charts:
• Substance Use

All schools in Arizona are eligible to
participate in the survey, and
recruitment efforts were successful in
obtaining participation by schools in all
of the 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.

•

Antisocial Behavior
and Gambling

•

Risk & Protective
Factor Profiles
Where Youth
Obtained Alcohol
School Safety

•
•

Risk and Protective
Factor Scale Definitions
Data Tables
Contacts for Prevention
Appendix

Table 1 contains the characteristics of
the students who completed the survey

Table 1. Characteristics of Participants
Student Totals
County 2004

Total Students

Number

309

County 2006

Percent

100

Number

357

County 2008

Percent

100

Number

299

State 2008

Percent

Number

100

25,695

Percent

309

100.0

357

100.0

299

100.0

25,695

100.0

Male

144

47.2

167

47.6

153

51.9

12,462

49.5

Female

161

52.8

184

52.4

142

48.1

12,730

50.5

288

93.8

323

94.2

281

87.3

2,416

7.7

African American

0

0.0

2

0.6

6

1.9

1,962

6.3

Hispanic

2

0.7

1

0.3

17

5.3

11,563

37.0

White

13

4.2

12

3.5

12

3.7

13,824

44.3

Asian

0

0.0

0

0.0

3

0.9

951

3.0

Pacific Islander

0

0.0

0

0.0

3

0.9

511

1.6

Gender

Ethnicity*
Native American

*In 2008, students could mark more than one ethnic category and the 'other' category was removed.

4

Whenever data is obtained from a
sample of students instead of the entire
population, it is important to recognize
the strengths and weaknesses of the
data. One quick and 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 participated in the
survey and those that did not.

100

Grade
8

from your county and the state.
Because not every student answered all
of the questions, the number of
students in the gender and ethnicity
categories often will be less than the
total number of students.

Changes to the AYS
Survey for 2008
In an effort to shorten the AYS and
make it more responsive to local
priorities, the following changes were
made for 2008: 1) some of the
substance use questions were refined
and the use of over-the-counter drugs
was added, 2) some risk and protective
factor scales were removed where the
data could easily be obtained from
other sources or the scales measured
similar constructs (scales removed are

Risk and Protective Factors
Transitions and Mobility, Community
Disorganization, Intention to Use Drugs, and Social
Skills), 3) questions about where students get the
alcohol they drink were added, 4) an 8-State Norm
was added that can be used to compare the AYS
results on risk, protection, and antisocial behavior to a
more national sample (see the description of the 8State Norm later in this report), and 5) National
Outcome Measures that are needed for measuring the
performance of federally funded programs in Arizona
such as talking to parents about the dangers of
substance use were added.

Washington, Social Development Research Group
have investigated the relationship between risk and
protective factors and youth problem behavior. They
have found, for example, that children who live in
families with high levels of conflict are more likely
to become involved in problem behaviors such as
delinquency and drug use than children who live in
families with low levels of family conflict.
Protective factors exert a positive influence or buffer
against the negative influence of risk, thus reducing the
likelihood that adolescents will engage in problem
behaviors. Protective factors identified through research
include social bonding to family, school, community,
and peers; healthy beliefs and clear standards for
behavior; and individual characteristics. For bonding to
serve as a protective influence, it must occur through
involvement with peers and adults who communicate
healthy values and set clear standards for behavior.

The Risk and Protective Factor Model of
Substance Abuse Prevention
Many states, school districts and local agencies have
adopted the Risk and Protective Factor Model to
guide their prevention efforts. The Risk and
Protective Factor Model of Prevention 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 identified a set of risk factors for
youth problem behaviors. Risk factors are
characteristics of school, community, and family
environments, as well as characteristics of students
and their peer groups that are known to predict
increased likelihood of drug use, delinquency, school
dropout, teen pregnancy, and violent behavior among
youth. Dr. J. David Hawkins, Dr. Richard F.
Catalano, and their colleagues at the University of

T
T

T

T

T
T

T
T

T
T

T

T

Teen Pregnancy

T

School Drop-Out
Violence

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

SOURCE: COMMUNITIES THAT CARE (CTC) PREVENTION MODEL, CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION (CSAP), SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMSHA)

5

Constitutional Factors

Gang Involvement

Favorable Attitudes Toward
Drug Use & Other
Problem Behaviors

Friends Who Use Drugs &
Engage in a Problem Behavior

Alienation & Rebelliousness

Early & Persistent
Antisocial Behavior

Peer / Individual
Early Initiation of Drug Use &
Other Problem Behavior

Lack of Commitment to
School

Academic Failure

School
Favorable Parent Attitudes &
Involvement in the
Problem Behavior

T
T
T
T
T

Family Management Problems

T
T
T
T
T

Family Conflict

Community Disorganization

Low Neighborhood
Attachment

Transitions & Mobility

Availability of Drugs &
Firearms

T
T

Family History of the
Problem Behavior

Delinquency

The chart below shows the links between the 19 risk
factors and the five problem behaviors. The check
marks have been placed in the chart to indicate where
at least two well designed, published research studies
have shown a link between the risk factor and the
problem behavior.

Family

Extreme Economic &
Social Deprivation

Substance Abuse

Community
Community Laws & Norms
Favorable Toward Drug Use,
Firearms & Crime

Risk
Factors

By measuring both risk and protective factors in a
population, prevention programs can be implemented
that are designed to reduce the elevated risk factors and
increase the protective factors. For example, if academic
failure is identified as an elevated risk factor in a
community, then mentoring, tutoring, and increased
opportunities and rewards for classroom participation
can be provided to improve academic performance.

T
T

T
T

T

T

The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership
The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP) was established by Governor Napolitano’s Executive Order
2007-12 in June 2007. Chaired by the Governor’s Chief of Staff, ASAP is composed of representatives from
state government entities, federal entities, and community organizations. ASAP serves as the single statewide
council on substance abuse prevention, enforcement, and treatment.
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
prevention, treatment, and enforcement. Through coordination among its members and their agencies and
organizations ASAP strives to ensure that substance abuse funding is spent in the most efficient and efficacious
manner.
ASAP has identified four strategic focus areas for 2008: 1) child welfare and substance abuse; 2) law enforcement
and drug trafficking; 3) emerging trends and the state’s capacity to respond; and 4) data-driven decisions and
policy development.
There are currently six sub-committees that assist ASAP in meeting their goals:
•

Arizona Underage Drinking Committee - The purpose of this subcommittee is to develop a
statewide underage drinking initiative to prevent and reduce underage drinking in Arizona. Their
activities include state-level infrastructure change to improve cross coordination/collaboration
between state agencies; developing a comprehensive statewide prevention system focused on
preventing underage drinking; and collaborative projects to more effectively utilize resources
and support local efforts.

•

Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The purpose of this work group is to
continuously evaluate data related to substance abuse to move the state system through a datadriven process. This is achieved through the completion of a statewide Substance Abuse
Epidemiology Profile. This profile will be updated every two years, with specific analyses
completed each year.

•

Emerging Issues Sub-Committee of the Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The
purpose of this sub-committee is to provide understanding of emerging substance abuse
consumption and consequence trends in Arizona to state agencies, Boards, Commissions and
Committees, and ASAP and its sub-committees.

•

Methamphetamine Task Force – The purpose of this task force is to bring together
representatives from state agencies, local government, businesses, and community groups to
develop collaborative efforts among treatment, prevention, and law enforcement systems to
assess and address the impact of methamphetamine statewide through information sharing,
resource allocation, service coordination, and the development of statewide policy
recommendations sensitive to the needs of local and tribal communities.

•

Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team – The Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team serves as the
advisory body and policy-making entity for the Arizona Co-Occurring State Incentive Grant.
Team members represent a number of state agencies and community-based organizations.

•

Workforce Development Committee – This committee was formed specifically to identify and
address substance abuse prevention training and technical assistance needs across Arizona. This
will, in turn, help strengthen instruction for prevention professionals and volunteers in
community coalitions.

6

How to Read the Charts in this Report
There are five types of charts presented in this
report: 1) substance use, 2) antisocial behavior and
youth gambling, 3) risk factors, 4) protective factors,
and 5) where youth obtained alcohol. When
available, data from the 2004 and 2006
administrations will be included in the charts. The
actual percentages from the charts are presented in
tables at the end of this report.

•

Substance Use Charts
This report contains information about alcohol,
tobacco, and other drug use (referred to as ATOD
use throughout this report) and other problem
behaviors of students. The bars on each chart
represent the percentage of students in that grade
who reported the behavior. The three sections in the
charts represent different types of problem
behaviors. The definitions of each of the types of
behavior are provided below.
•

Risk and Protective Factor Charts
The risk and protective factor charts show the
percentage of students at high risk and with high
protection for each of the risk and protective factor
scales. The risk and protective factor scales measure
specific aspects of youths’ life experiences that are
predictive of whether they will engage in problem
behaviors. A definition of each risk and protective
factor scale is contained in Table 2. The factors are
grouped into four domains: community, family, school,
and peer/individual.

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.

•

Heavy use includes binge drinking (having five
or more drinks in a row during the two weeks
prior to the survey) and use of one-half a pack
or more of cigarettes per day.

The bars on the risk and protective factor charts,
represent the percentage of students whose answers
reflect significant risk or protection. There are bars for
the last three administrations of the AYS: 2004, 2006,
and 2008. By looking at 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 and
when assessing risk reduction and protective factor
enhancement efforts.

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol Charts

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling
Charts
•

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 animal
races. The chart also shows the percentage of
students who engaged in any gambling behavior
during the past year.

This chart displays data regarding the ways that
students obtained alcohol in the past 30 days. The data
focus on a subgroup of students who indicated at least
one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no
alcohol use are not represented.) It is important to note
that the charts represent a subgroup of users and not
the entire survey population. Additionally, the smaller
the sample, the more dramatic the influence of a
student's responses. For example, 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 legend indicates the sample size for
each grade surveyed to help clarify the value of the data.

Antisocial behavior (ASB) is a measure of
the percentage of students who report any
involvement during the past year with eight
antisocial behaviors: suspended from school,
drunk or high at school, sold illegal drugs,
stolen a vehicle, been arrested, attacked
someone to harm them, carried a handgun,
taken a handgun to school. The chart also
displays any incidents in the past 30 days of
drinking and driving or riding in a car with a
drinking driver.
7

How to Read the Charts in this Report (cont’d)
School Safety Charts

community and a more national sample. The 8-State
Norm value for each risk and protective factor scale
represents the percentage of youth at risk or with
protection for eight states across the country
(Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana,
Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah). In developing the
8-State Norm, the contribution of each of eight
states was proportional to its percentage of the
national population, which helps to make the results
more representative of youth nation-wide. A
comparison between the ATOD use rates from the
8-State norm and those from the national
Monitoring the Future Survey showed the rates to
be very similar, which provides added confidence in
the validity of the 8-State Norm. Brief definitions of
the risk and protective factors scales are provided in
Table 2 following the profile charts. For more
information about risk and protective factors, please
refer to the resources listed on the last page of this
report under Contacts for Prevention.

The school safety 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 or were picked on or
bullied at school. The complete questions and values
for each response option can be seen in Table 11.

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 Survey or
the 8-State Norm (described below). A comparison to
the state-wide and national results provides additional
information for your community in determining the
relative significance of levels of 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.

Drug Free Communities Reports
Table 12 contains the information that is reported
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 8-State Norm
The diamonds on the charts allow a comparison
between the levels of risk and protection in your

Practical Implications of the Assessment
No Child Left Behind
The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities section of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) requires that
schools and communities use six Principles of Effectiveness to guide their decisions and spending on federally
funded prevention and intervention programs. First introduced in 1998 by the Department of Education, the
Principles of Effectiveness outline a data-driven process for ensuring that prevention programs achieve the desired
results. The Principles of Effectiveness stipulate that local prevention programs and activities must:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

be based on a needs assessment using objective data regarding the incidence of drug use and violence,
target specific performance objectives,
be based on scientific research and be proven to reduce violence or drug use,
be based on the analysis of predictor variables such as risk and protective factors,
include meaningful and ongoing parental input in program implementation, and
have periodic evaluations of established performance measures.

The results of the AYS presented in this report can help your school and community comply with the NCLB Act. The
Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior charts provide information related to Principle 1 and the Risk and Protective
Factor charts provide information related to Principle 4. Overall, using the risk and protective factor framework helps
schools meet all of the Principles of Effectiveness, and thereby assists schools in complying with the NCLB Act.
8

Assessment and Planning
School and Community Improvement Using Survey Data
Why Conduct the Arizona
Youth Survey?
Data from the Arizona Youth
Survey can be used to help
schools and communities assess
current conditions and identify
and prioritize local prevention
issues.
Each risk and protective factor
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
county make key decisions
regarding regarding allocation
of resources, how and when to
address specific needs, and
which strategies are most
effective and known to produce
results.

What are the numbers telling you?
Review the charts and data tables presented in this report. Using the
table below, note your findings as you discuss the following questions.
Which 3-5 risk factors are of the greatest concern?
Which 3-5 protective factors are your community’s highest priority?
Which levels of 30-day drug use are of greatest concern?
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 of greatest concern?
º Which behaviors are your students exhibiting the most?
º At which grades do you see unacceptable behavior levels?
•
•
•

How to decide if a rate is “unacceptable.”
Look across the charts – which items stand out as either much
higher or much lower than the others?
• Compare your data with statewide and national data –
differences of five percent between local and other data are probably
significant.
•

Use these data for program and policy development.
Substance use and antisocial behavior data – identify issues, raise
awareness about the problems, and promote school and community
dialogue.
• Risk and protective factor data – identify key objectives that will
help your school or community achieve its prevention goals.
•

Use the resources listed on the last page of this report, Contacts for
Prevention, for ideas about prevention programs that have proven
effective in addressing the risk factors that are high in your community
and improving the protective factors that are low.

MEASURE

Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate
#3
#4
#1
#2

Risk Factors
Protective Factors
Substance Use
Antisocial Behaviors

9

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

10

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Apache County, Grade 8

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Apache County, Grade 8
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

11

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Apache County, Grade 8

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

12

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Apache County, Grade 8
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

13

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol

WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL*
2008 Apache County Student Survey, Grade 8
If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)
100
90
80
70

Percentages (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Got it some

other way

Took it from a
store or someone

else's home

Took it from home

Got at a party

Someone under
21 years

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

County 2008, Grade 8
Sample: 47 students**

State 2008

* Prior to 2008, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained alcohol. Also, because not all eight states ask where youth obtained alcohol, no 8-State value is reported.
** Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case of smaller sample sizes,
caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

14

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Apache County, Grade 8
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

15

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles
Low Neighborhood Attachment

Community Domain Risk Factors
Low neighborhood bonding is related to higher levels of 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.

Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

Community Domain Protective Factors
When opportunities are available in a community for positive participation, children are less likely to
engage in substance use and other problem behaviors.

Rewards for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for positive participation in activities helps youth bond to the community, thus lowering their risk
for substance use.

Poor Family Management

Family Domain Risk Factors
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.

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.

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.

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 Attachment

Family Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

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.

Academic Failure

Low Commitment to School

School Domain Risk Factors
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.
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.

16

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles (cont'd)
Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

School Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

Rebelliousness

Peer-Individual Risk Factors
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.

Early Initiation of Antisocial
Behavior and Drug Use

Early onset of drug use predicts the 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.

Attitudes Favorable Toward
Antisocial Behavior and Drug
Use

During the elementary school years, most children express anti-drug, anti-crime, and pro-social attitudes
and have 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Belief in the Moral Order

Peer-Individual Protective Factors
Young people who have a belief in what is “right” or “wrong” are less likely to use drugs.

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.

Prosocial Involvement

Participation in positive school and community activities helps provide protection for youth.

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.

17

Data Tables
Table 3. Percentage of Students Who Used ATODs During Their Lifetime
Grade 8

In your lifetime, on how many occasions (if any) have you:
(One or more occasions)

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to drink - more than
just a few sips?

42.5

40.8

40.7

47.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

57.9

57.3

46.2

25.9

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping tobacco, chewing
tobacco)?

34.6

24.6

21.9

7.1

Marijuana

used marijuana?

42.1

38.6

43.7

16.2

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

4.3

2.9

1.9

1.9

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

6.9

4.2

4.9

2.7

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray can, or inhaled
other gases or sprays, in order to get high?

13.5

13.0

15.8

14.3

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

4.5

2.3

1.2

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

2.0

2.8

1.5

1.0

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

4.0

3.2

0.8

2.2

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

2.8

1.1

1.7

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a doctor telling you
to take them?

n/a

n/a

19.2

12.2

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”, “crank”) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

7.3

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or Dexedrine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

3.1

3.8

3.8

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax,
barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

11.1

9.6

8.4

8.3

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of 2008 prescription stimulant, sedative and pain
reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

12.5

22.3

17.1

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

16.0

9.7

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

18

Data Tables
Table 4. Percentage of Students Who Used ATODs During the Past 30 Days
Grade 8

In the past 30 days, on how many occasions (if any) have you:
(One or more occasions)

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to drink - more than
just a few sips?

18.8

17.9

16.0

23.2

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

20.4

23.4

12.7

8.7

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping tobacco, chewing
tobacco)?

16.1

10.3

7.8

2.6

Marijuana

used marijuana?

19.5

18.9

22.0

7.6

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

2.7

1.5

0.4

0.8

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

2.7

1.8

1.9

1.0

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray can, or inhaled
other gases or sprays, in order to get high?

4.0

4.5

4.1

5.4

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

2.2

1.1

0.4

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

0.7

1.6

0.0

0.4

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

1.7

2.2

0.0

0.8

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

0.6

0.4

0.7

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a doctor telling you
to take them?

n/a

n/a

12.5

6.0

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”, “crank”) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

2.3

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or Dexedrine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

1.9

1.5

1.6

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax,
barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

5.0

5.6

3.8

3.4

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of prescription stimulant, sedative and pain reliever
questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

7.1

14.0

8.6

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

11.0

5.6

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

19

Data Tables
z

Table 5. Percentage of Students Reporting Heavy ATOD Use
Grade 8
County
2004

Binge Drinking

1/2 Pack (or
more) of
Cigarettes/Day

How many times have you
had 5 or more alcoholic
drinks in a row in the
past 2 weeks?
During the past 30 days, how many
cigarettes did you smoke per day?
(11 to 20 cigarettes, More than 20 cigarettes)

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

14.8

13.0

12.7

13.1

1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7

Table 6. Percentage of Students Reporting Antisocial Behavior
Grade 8

How many times in the past year
(12 months) have you:
(One or more times)

County
2004

Suspended from School
Drunk or High at School
Sold Illegal Drugs
Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle
Been Arrested
Attacked Someone with the Idea
of Seriously Hurting Them
Carried a Handgun
Carried a Handgun to School
During the past 30 days, how many
times did you:
(One or more times)

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

22.8

27.3

27.2

20.2

25.0

27.9

25.5

12.0

7.8

5.4

7.6

4.6

4.2

6.0

4.0

3.6

10.5

10.6

14.2

7.5

20.7

18.1

18.2

18.1

7.9

8.6

11.2

7.7

1.3

1.2
Grade 8

1.8

1.2

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

DRIVE a car or other vehicle when you had
been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

8.3

7.2

5.6

RIDE in a car or other vehicle driven by
someone who had been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

28.7

32.6

29.1

* These categories were not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

20

Data Tables
Table 7. Percentage of Students Gambling in the Past Year
Grade 8

How often have you done the following for money, possessions, or
anything of value:
(At least once in the past 12 months or more)

County
2004

Any Gambling
Played a slot machine, poker machine
or other gambling machine?
Played the lottery or scratch-off tickets?
Bet on sports?*
Played cards?
Bought a raffle ticket?
Played bingo?
Gambled on the Internet?
Played a dice game?*
Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?*
Bet on a horse or other animal race?*
Table 8. Percentage of Students Reporting Protection

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

n/a

62.5

72.4

69.1

n/a

2.3

5.1

6.4

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

20.7
n/a
23.4
n/a
38.7
4.3
n/a

22.4
39.9
39.0
21.6
41.4
5.1
31.0

24.8
31.8
43.7
20.4
32.6
6.3
31.5

n/a

18.8

37.1

32.7

n/a

n/a

7.3

6.4

Grade 8

Protective Factor

County
2004

Community Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Domain
Family Attachment
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
School Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer-Individual Domain
Belief in the Moral Order
Interaction with Prosocial Peers*
Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Total Protection
Students with High Protection**

County
2006

County
2008

32.3
39.0

24.0
34.2

27.2
34.2

39.3
31.3

48.2
60.2
65.3

44.3
57.2
62.9

47.4
59.0
57.7

51.5
59.7
61.4

65.7
52.1

54.5
51.7

53.5
44.3

60.3
51.2

58.9
52.6
43.8
64.2

56.4
47.7
41.1
61.2

58.8
55.7
45.3
62.1

59.4
53.1
39.0
59.4

48.9

41.2

35.1

43.8

*Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.
**High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.

21

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 9. Percentage of Students Reporting Risk
Grade 8
Risk Factor

County
2004

Community Domain
Low Neighborhood Attachment
Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use
Perceived Availability of Drugs
Perceived Availability of Handguns
Family Domain
Poor Family Management
Family Conflict
Family History of Antisocial Behavior
Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use
School Domain
Academic Failure
Low Commitment to School
Peer-Individual Domain
Rebelliousness
Early Initiation of ASB
Early Initiation of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use
Perceived Risk of Drug Use
Interaction with Antisocial Peers
Friend's Use of Drugs
Rewards for ASB
Gang Involvement
Total Risk
Students at High Risk*

County
2006

County
2008

45.9
40.6
31.2
26.1

45.5
42.1
30.9
26.8

44.0
40.1
33.3
30.1

38.5
36.6
38.2
37.8

50.4
46.4
60.6
37.7
18.1

51.3
43.3
57.5
42.5
20.9

47.5
44.6
57.7
47.0
15.7

45.5
53.5
40.3
49.3
26.8

56.0
26.6

62.3
30.9

64.6
28.3

47.3
41.0

33.8
47.7
51.5
42.3
33.6
56.4
65.9
58.5
50.2
38.6

39.1
46.8
51.0
43.4
35.9
52.6
70.0
55.3
49.9
40.4

39.1
49.1
44.0
49.3
35.4
60.2
72.9
52.6
42.0
45.0

43.1
39.4
30.3
44.6
29.1
44.5
58.2
39.4
45.6
26.9

42.7

43.7

38.3

38.7

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors)

22

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 10. Where Youth Obtained Alcohol
If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)
Sample size*
I bought it in a store such as a liquor store, convenience store,
supermarket, discount store, or gas station
I bought it at a restaurant, bar, or club
I bought it at a public event such as a concert or sporting event

Grade 8
State
2008

County
2008
47

4,418

12.8

5.0

4.3
14.9

3.0
2.9

I gave someone else money to buy it for me

34.0

21.4

My parent or guardian gave it to me
Another family member who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone not related to me who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone under the age of 21 gave it to me
I got it at a party
I took it from home
I took it from a store or someone else's home
I got it some other way

6.4
10.6
27.7
25.5
27.7
12.8
8.5

18.7
19.7
19.2
23.8
41.5
31.4
11.7

29.8

28.7

* Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are
not represented.) In the case of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

23

Data Tables
Table 11. Percentage of Students Reporting School Safety Issues
Grade 8
County
2004

Question

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times has someone
4-5 times
threatened or injured you with a weapon such as a gun, knife,
6-7 times
or club on school property?
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

81.0
9.8
5.6
1.3
0.3
0.0
0.0
2.0

86.2
6.3
4.0
1.4
0.9
0.0
0.6
0.6

88.6
6.2
2.6
0.7
0.4
0.4
0.7
0.4

87.1
6.6
3.5
1.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.9

During the past 12 months, how many times were you in a
physical fight on school property?

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
4-5 times
6-7 times
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

67.4
14.1
12.2
3.9
0.7
0.0
0.0
1.6

68.5
16.8
8.1
2.6
1.2
0.0
0.6
2.3

66.3
16.7
12.6
2.2
1.1
0.0
0.7
0.4

76.5
12.9
6.9
1.7
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.7

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

60.1
18.2

During the past 12 months, how often have you been picked
on or bullied by a student ON SCHOOL PROPERTY?*

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
4-5 times
6-7 times
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

3.8

53.3
22.1
9.9
5.1
1.5
1.1
1.8
5.1

59.4
13.2
11.5
4.3
1.9
1.2
0.8
7.7

0 days

81.8
9.2
5.0
1.0
3.0

85.8
6.9
3.5
1.4
2.3

84.1
9.6
3.3
1.1
1.9

89.9
5.8
2.7
0.6
1.0

During the past 30 days, on how many days did you not go to 1 day
school because you felt you would be unsafe at school or on 2-3 days
your way to or from school?
4-5 days
6 or more days

17.9

0 days
90.7
93.4
93.3
93.9
1 day
3.3
3.5
4.4
3.1
2-3 days
2.7
1.7
2.2
1.3
4-5 days
0.3
0.3
0.0
0.5
6 or more days
3.0
1.2
0.0
1.2
* In 2006 the choices for this question were Never , Once , Several Times and Very Often. This category was not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted
by 'n/a' in the data column).

During the past 30 days, on how many days did you carry a
weapon such as a gun, knife, or club ON SCHOOL
PROPERTY?

24

Data Tables
Table 12. Drug Free Communities Report*
County 2008
Outcome

Perception of Risk
(People are at Moderate or Great Risk of
harming themselves if they... )

Perception of Parent Disapproval
(Parents feel it would be Wrong or Very
Wrong to... )

Perception of Peer Disapproval
(I think it is Wrong or Very Wrong for
someone my age to...)

Past 30-Day Use

Definition

Substance

Male†

Female†

Sample

Percent

Sample

Percent

Sample

drink 1 or two drinks nearly every day

Alcohol

65.3

245

62.7

118

67.7

124

smoke 1 or more packs or cigarettes
per day

Cigarettes

67.7

248

65.0

120

71.2

125

smoke marijuana regularly

Marijuana

66.0

241

63.2

117

68.6

121

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

96.8

218

95.1

103

98.2

112

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

95.8

216

95.1

103

96.4

110

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

95.3

211

93.1

101

97.2

108

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

81.4

280

76.1

142

87.4

135

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

79.3

280

76.1

142

83.0

135

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

74.2

279

69.5

141

80.7

135

Alcohol

16.0

268

18.5

135

13.8

130

Cigarettes

12.7

259

14.2

127

11.6

129

at least one use in the Past 30 Days

Marijuana

Alcohol

had more than a sip or two of beer,
wine or hard liquor?
Average Age of Onset**
(How old were you when you first…)

Grade 8
Percent

Average age:

smoked a cigarette, even just a puff?

Cigarettes
Average age:
Marijuana

smoked marijuana?

Average age:

22.0

268

28.9

135

14.6

130

Percent

Sample

Percent

Sample

Percent

Sample

279

42.8

145

42.7

43.4

12.1 years
48.2

282

11.6 years
40.1

282
12 years

12.2 years
49.7

143

11.7 years
49.3

142
12 years

131

12.1 years
45.6

136

11.6 years
29.9

137
12 years

* The “Sample” column represents the sample size (the number of youth who answered the question). The "Percent" column represents the percentage of youth in the sample answering the
question as defined.
** For Average Age of Onset, “Sample” represents the number of youth who answered the question (including students responding that they never used). 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.

† 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.

25

Appendix
Appendix - Comparability of survey administratons
Issue
Drug Category

2004 AYS
On how many occasions (if any) have you:

2006 AYS

2008 AYS

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Notes regarding changes

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Hallucinogens

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the
past 30 days?

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the past
30 days?

Used LSD or other hallucinogens during the
past 30 days?

Substituted "hallucinogens" for "psychedelics" in 2008.
Comparable across all years.

Methamphetamines

Not applicable, no methamphetamine-specific
item on 2004 AYS

Used methamphetamines (meth, speed, crank,
crystal meth)?

Used methamphetamines (meth, crystal,
crank)?

2006 and 2008 provide slightly different examples, but
are cautiously comparable.

Prescription
stimulants

Used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”,
“crystal”, “crank”) without a doctor telling you
to take them?

Used stimulants, other than methamphetamines
(such as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin,
Adderal, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling
you to take them?

2004 is not comparable to any other years, data are
presented for archival interest. 2006 and 2008 data are
cautiously comparable.

Prescription
sedatives

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such
as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping
pills)?

2008 AYS added descriptor "prescription" and removed
qualifier "without a doctor telling you to take them." 2008
data are cautiously comparable with other years.

Ecstasy

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2008 AYS used "ecstasy" as the primary descriptor and
moved "MDMA" to examples. Comparable across years.

Prescription
drugs

Not applicable, no prescription drugs item on
2004 AYS

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills),
stimulants, other than methamphetamines (such
as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine) or
other prescription drugs (such as Oxycontin)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes)

Used prescription stimulants (Ritalin,
Adderall, or Dexedrine), sedatives
(tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax,
barbiturates, or sleeping pills) or pain relievers
(Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes )

In 2006, responses to the stimulant, sedative and other
prescription drug questions were calculated as one
measure. (2006 had no prescription pain reliever item.) In
2008, responses to the stimulant, sedative and
prescription pain reliever questions were calculated as
one measure. (2008 had no standalone prescription drug
item.) 2006 and 2008 data are cautiously comparable.
(Note that composite 2006 data will not match past
reports' prescription drugs category.)

Gambling
Category

Not applicable, no gambling items
on 2004 AYS

How often during the past 12 months
have you:

How often have you done the following for
money, possessions, or anything of value:

Sports betting

n/a

Bet on team sports?

Bet on sports?

Not comparable across years.

Race betting

n/a

Bet money on horse races?

Bet on a horse race or other animal race?

Not comparable across years.

Dice

n/a

Bet on dice games such as craps?

Played a dice game?

Not comparable across years.

Games of skill

n/a

Bet on games of personal skill such as pool,
darts, or bowling?

Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?

Comparable across years.

Protective Scale:
Peer-Individual
Interaction with
Prosocial Peers

Think of your four best friends (the friends you feel closest to). In the past year (12 months), how many of your best friends have:
(Scale is calculated based on the average response [0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 friends] to the following questions)
...participated in clubs, organizations and activities at school? ...made the commitment to stay drug-free?
...tried to do well in school? ...liked school? ...regularly attended religious services?(removed in 2008)

26

Regularly attended religious services was removed from
2008 AYS. 2004 and 2006 have been recalculated to
match 2008 AYS and are now comparable across all
years. Due to this recalculation, current reports may differ
slightly from past reports.

Contacts for Prevention
Arizona Department of Education
Student Services Division
www.ade.az.gov

Regional Prevention Contacts
Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, and Santa Cruz
Counties
Bill Burnett
Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)
(520) 618-8807

Arizona Department of Health Services
Division of Behavioral Health Services
Lisa Shumaker
(602) 364-4594
www.azdhs.gov/bhs/index.htm

Gila, La Paz, Pinal, and Yuma Counties
Linda Weinberg
Cenpatico Behavioral Health of Arizona
(866) 495-6738

Arizona Prevention Resource Center
(800) 432-2772
www.azprevention.org

Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai
Counties
Petrice Post
Northern Arizona Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(NARBHA)
(928) 214-2177

Center for Violence Prevention and Community
Safety
Charles Katz
(602) 543-6618
charles.katz@asu.edu
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)
http://prevention.samhsa.gov

Maricopa County
Juan Aristizabal
Magellan
(602) 797-8256

Governor’s Office of Children, Youth, and
Families
(602) 542-4043
http://www.governor.state.az.us/cyf/index.html

Gila River Indian Community
Joan Grey
Gila River Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(602) 528-7136

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities
U.S. Department of Education
www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS

Pasqua Yaqui Tribe
Centered Spirit Program
Jill Fabian
(520) 879-6067

Arizona Department of Gaming's Office of
Problem Gambling
Elise Mikkelsen
(602) 266-8299 ext. 351
www.problemgambling.az.gov

Navajo Nation
Department of Behavioral Health Services
(928) 871-6235

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMSHA)
www.samhsa.gov

White Mountain Apache Tribe
Apache Behavioral Health Services
(928) 338-4811

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/

Colorado River Indian Tribes
(928) 669-6577

Western Regional Center for the Application of
Prevention Technologies (CAPT)
www.westcapt.org

Other State and National Contacts:
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
Michelle Neitch/ Phillip Stevenson
(602) 364-1173/(602) 364-1157
www.azcjc.gov

Bach Harrison, L.L.C.
R. Steven Harrison, Ph.D.
(801) 359-2064
www.bach-harrison.com

27

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Cochise County

REPORT PROVIDED BY:

Arizona Criminal Justice Commission

1

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Shining Light on Arizona Youth
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:
Arizona Department of Gaming’s Office of Problem Gambling
Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission
Arizona Parent’s Commission on Drug Education and Prevention
Governor’s Division for Substance Abuse Policy
Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Tobacco Education and Prevention Program,
Arizona Department of Health Services

2

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 2008 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:
Jean Ajamie, Arizona Department of Education
Michelle Anderson, Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections
Steve Ballance, Maricopa County
Carisa Dwyer, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Charles Katz, Arizona State University
Dr. Manuel Medina, TERROS, Inc.
Kim O’Connor, Governor’s Office for
Children, Youth, and Families
Holly Orozco, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Catherine Osborn, Arizona Department of Education
Richard Porter, Arizona Department of Health Services
Gowri Shetty, Arizona Department of Health Services
Lisa Shumaker, Arizona Department of Health Services
Wendy Wolfersteig, Arizona State University
Nicole Yancey Johnson, Arizona Early Childhood Development
and Health Board
Governor’s Youth Commission

Additionally, the success of the 2008 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.

3

Introduction
CONTENTS:

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Summary for
Cochise County

Introduction
The Risk and Protective
Factor Model of
Prevention
The Arizona Substance
Abuse Partnership
How to Read the Charts

This report summarizes some of the
findings from the 2008 Arizona Youth
Survey (AYS) administered to 8th, 10th
and 12th grade students during the
spring of 2008. The results for your
county are presented along with
comparisons to 2004 and 2006 survey
results where applicable, as well as to
the overall results for the state. 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.

Practical Implications of
the Assessment
Assessment and
Planning
Data Charts:
• Substance Use

All schools in Arizona are eligible to
participate in the survey, and
recruitment efforts were successful in
obtaining participation by schools in all
of the 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.

•

Antisocial Behavior
and Gambling

•

Risk & Protective
Factor Profiles
Where Youth
Obtained Alcohol
School Safety

•
•

Risk and Protective
Factor Scale Definitions
Data Tables
Contacts for Prevention
Appendix

Table 1 contains the characteristics of
the students who completed the survey

Table 1. Characteristics of Participants
Student Totals
County 2004

Total Students

Number

County 2006

Percent

Number

County 2008

Percent

Number

State 2008

Percent

Number

Percent

1,746

100

1,576

100

1,163

100

54,734

100

8

733

42.0

837

53.1

414

35.6

25,695

46.9

10

562

32.2

549

34.8

487

41.9

16,089

29.4

12

451

25.8

190

12.1

262

22.5

12,950

23.7

Male

788

45.8

712

46.2

543

47.7

26,213

48.8

Female

933

54.2

829

53.8

596

52.3

27,514

51.2

Native American

28

1.6

30

2.0

101

6.8

4,812

7.4

African American

76

4.4

68

4.5

100

6.7

3,915

6.0

Hispanic

773

45.0

564

37.0

619

41.7

21,525

32.9

White

668

38.9

717

47.0

598

40.3

31,887

48.8

Asian

45

2.6

44

2.9

50

3.4

2,117

3.2

Pacific Islander

24

1.4

25

1.6

16

1.1

1,115

1.7

Grade

Gender

Ethnicity*

*In 2008, students could mark more than one ethnic category and the 'other' category was removed.

4

from your county and the state.
Because not every student answered all
of the questions, the number of
students in the gender and ethnicity
categories often will be less than the
total number of students.
Whenever data is obtained from a
sample of students instead of the entire
population, it is important to recognize
the strengths and weaknesses of the
data. One quick and 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 participated in the
survey and those that did not.
Changes to the AYS
Survey for 2008
In an effort to shorten the AYS and
make it more responsive to local
priorities, the following changes were
made for 2008: 1) some of the
substance use questions were refined
and the use of over-the-counter drugs
was added, 2) some risk and protective
factor scales were removed where the
data could easily be obtained from
other sources or the scales measured
similar constructs (scales removed are

Risk and Protective Factors
Transitions and Mobility, Community
Disorganization, Intention to Use Drugs, and Social
Skills), 3) questions about where students get the
alcohol they drink were added, 4) an 8-State Norm
was added that can be used to compare the AYS
results on risk, protection, and antisocial behavior to a
more national sample (see the description of the 8State Norm later in this report), and 5) National
Outcome Measures that are needed for measuring the
performance of federally funded programs in Arizona
such as talking to parents about the dangers of
substance use were added.

Washington, Social Development Research Group
have investigated the relationship between risk and
protective factors and youth problem behavior. They
have found, for example, that children who live in
families with high levels of conflict are more likely
to become involved in problem behaviors such as
delinquency and drug use than children who live in
families with low levels of family conflict.
Protective factors exert a positive influence or buffer
against the negative influence of risk, thus reducing the
likelihood that adolescents will engage in problem
behaviors. Protective factors identified through research
include social bonding to family, school, community,
and peers; healthy beliefs and clear standards for
behavior; and individual characteristics. For bonding to
serve as a protective influence, it must occur through
involvement with peers and adults who communicate
healthy values and set clear standards for behavior.

The Risk and Protective Factor Model of
Substance Abuse Prevention
Many states, school districts and local agencies have
adopted the Risk and Protective Factor Model to
guide their prevention efforts. The Risk and
Protective Factor Model of Prevention 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 identified a set of risk factors for
youth problem behaviors. Risk factors are
characteristics of school, community, and family
environments, as well as characteristics of students
and their peer groups that are known to predict
increased likelihood of drug use, delinquency, school
dropout, teen pregnancy, and violent behavior among
youth. Dr. J. David Hawkins, Dr. Richard F.
Catalano, and their colleagues at the University of

T
T

T

T

T
T

T
T

T
T

T

T

Teen Pregnancy

T

School Drop-Out
Violence

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

SOURCE: COMMUNITIES THAT CARE (CTC) PREVENTION MODEL, CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION (CSAP), SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMSHA)

5

Constitutional Factors

Gang Involvement

Favorable Attitudes Toward
Drug Use & Other
Problem Behaviors

Friends Who Use Drugs &
Engage in a Problem Behavior

Alienation & Rebelliousness

Early & Persistent
Antisocial Behavior

Peer / Individual
Early Initiation of Drug Use &
Other Problem Behavior

Lack of Commitment to
School

Academic Failure

School
Favorable Parent Attitudes &
Involvement in the
Problem Behavior

T
T
T
T
T

Family Management Problems

T
T
T
T
T

Family Conflict

Community Disorganization

Low Neighborhood
Attachment

Transitions & Mobility

Availability of Drugs &
Firearms

T
T

Family History of the
Problem Behavior

Delinquency

The chart below shows the links between the 19 risk
factors and the five problem behaviors. The check
marks have been placed in the chart to indicate where
at least two well designed, published research studies
have shown a link between the risk factor and the
problem behavior.

Family

Extreme Economic &
Social Deprivation

Substance Abuse

Community
Community Laws & Norms
Favorable Toward Drug Use,
Firearms & Crime

Risk
Factors

By measuring both risk and protective factors in a
population, prevention programs can be implemented
that are designed to reduce the elevated risk factors and
increase the protective factors. For example, if academic
failure is identified as an elevated risk factor in a
community, then mentoring, tutoring, and increased
opportunities and rewards for classroom participation
can be provided to improve academic performance.

T
T

T
T

T

T

The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership
The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP) was established by Governor Napolitano’s Executive Order
2007-12 in June 2007. Chaired by the Governor’s Chief of Staff, ASAP is composed of representatives from
state government entities, federal entities, and community organizations. ASAP serves as the single statewide
council on substance abuse prevention, enforcement, and treatment.
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
prevention, treatment, and enforcement. Through coordination among its members and their agencies and
organizations ASAP strives to ensure that substance abuse funding is spent in the most efficient and efficacious
manner.
ASAP has identified four strategic focus areas for 2008: 1) child welfare and substance abuse; 2) law enforcement
and drug trafficking; 3) emerging trends and the state’s capacity to respond; and 4) data-driven decisions and
policy development.
There are currently six sub-committees that assist ASAP in meeting their goals:
•

Arizona Underage Drinking Committee - The purpose of this subcommittee is to develop a
statewide underage drinking initiative to prevent and reduce underage drinking in Arizona. Their
activities include state-level infrastructure change to improve cross coordination/collaboration
between state agencies; developing a comprehensive statewide prevention system focused on
preventing underage drinking; and collaborative projects to more effectively utilize resources
and support local efforts.

•

Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The purpose of this work group is to
continuously evaluate data related to substance abuse to move the state system through a datadriven process. This is achieved through the completion of a statewide Substance Abuse
Epidemiology Profile. This profile will be updated every two years, with specific analyses
completed each year.

•

Emerging Issues Sub-Committee of the Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The
purpose of this sub-committee is to provide understanding of emerging substance abuse
consumption and consequence trends in Arizona to state agencies, Boards, Commissions and
Committees, and ASAP and its sub-committees.

•

Methamphetamine Task Force – The purpose of this task force is to bring together
representatives from state agencies, local government, businesses, and community groups to
develop collaborative efforts among treatment, prevention, and law enforcement systems to
assess and address the impact of methamphetamine statewide through information sharing,
resource allocation, service coordination, and the development of statewide policy
recommendations sensitive to the needs of local and tribal communities.

•

Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team – The Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team serves as the
advisory body and policy-making entity for the Arizona Co-Occurring State Incentive Grant.
Team members represent a number of state agencies and community-based organizations.

•

Workforce Development Committee – This committee was formed specifically to identify and
address substance abuse prevention training and technical assistance needs across Arizona. This
will, in turn, help strengthen instruction for prevention professionals and volunteers in
community coalitions.

6

How to Read the Charts in this Report
There are five types of charts presented in this
report: 1) substance use, 2) antisocial behavior and
youth gambling, 3) risk factors, 4) protective factors,
and 5) where youth obtained alcohol. When
available, data from the 2004 and 2006
administrations will be included in the charts. The
actual percentages from the charts are presented in
tables at the end of this report.

•

Substance Use Charts
This report contains information about alcohol,
tobacco, and other drug use (referred to as ATOD
use throughout this report) and other problem
behaviors of students. The bars on each chart
represent the percentage of students in that grade
who reported the behavior. The three sections in the
charts represent different types of problem
behaviors. The definitions of each of the types of
behavior are provided below.
•

Risk and Protective Factor Charts
The risk and protective factor charts show the
percentage of students at high risk and with high
protection for each of the risk and protective factor
scales. The risk and protective factor scales measure
specific aspects of youths’ life experiences that are
predictive of whether they will engage in problem
behaviors. A definition of each risk and protective
factor scale is contained in Table 2. The factors are
grouped into four domains: community, family, school,
and peer/individual.

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.

•

Heavy use includes binge drinking (having five
or more drinks in a row during the two weeks
prior to the survey) and use of one-half a pack
or more of cigarettes per day.

The bars on the risk and protective factor charts,
represent the percentage of students whose answers
reflect significant risk or protection. There are bars for
the last three administrations of the AYS: 2004, 2006,
and 2008. By looking at 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 and
when assessing risk reduction and protective factor
enhancement efforts.

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol Charts

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling
Charts
•

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 animal
races. The chart also shows the percentage of
students who engaged in any gambling behavior
during the past year.

This chart displays data regarding the ways that
students obtained alcohol in the past 30 days. The data
focus on a subgroup of students who indicated at least
one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no
alcohol use are not represented.) It is important to note
that the charts represent a subgroup of users and not
the entire survey population. Additionally, the smaller
the sample, the more dramatic the influence of a
student's responses. For example, 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 legend indicates the sample size for
each grade surveyed to help clarify the value of the data.

Antisocial behavior (ASB) is a measure of
the percentage of students who report any
involvement during the past year with eight
antisocial behaviors: suspended from school,
drunk or high at school, sold illegal drugs,
stolen a vehicle, been arrested, attacked
someone to harm them, carried a handgun,
taken a handgun to school. The chart also
displays any incidents in the past 30 days of
drinking and driving or riding in a car with a
drinking driver.
7

How to Read the Charts in this Report (cont’d)
School Safety Charts

community and a more national sample. The 8-State
Norm value for each risk and protective factor scale
represents the percentage of youth at risk or with
protection for eight states across the country
(Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana,
Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah). In developing the
8-State Norm, the contribution of each of eight
states was proportional to its percentage of the
national population, which helps to make the results
more representative of youth nation-wide. A
comparison between the ATOD use rates from the
8-State norm and those from the national
Monitoring the Future Survey showed the rates to
be very similar, which provides added confidence in
the validity of the 8-State Norm. Brief definitions of
the risk and protective factors scales are provided in
Table 2 following the profile charts. For more
information about risk and protective factors, please
refer to the resources listed on the last page of this
report under Contacts for Prevention.

The school safety 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 or were picked on or
bullied at school. The complete questions and values
for each response option can be seen in Table 11.

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 Survey or
the 8-State Norm (described below). A comparison to
the state-wide and national results provides additional
information for your community in determining the
relative significance of levels of 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.

Drug Free Communities Reports
Table 12 contains the information that is reported
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 8-State Norm
The diamonds on the charts allow a comparison
between the levels of risk and protection in your

Practical Implications of the Assessment
No Child Left Behind
The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities section of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) requires that
schools and communities use six Principles of Effectiveness to guide their decisions and spending on federally
funded prevention and intervention programs. First introduced in 1998 by the Department of Education, the
Principles of Effectiveness outline a data-driven process for ensuring that prevention programs achieve the desired
results. The Principles of Effectiveness stipulate that local prevention programs and activities must:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

be based on a needs assessment using objective data regarding the incidence of drug use and violence,
target specific performance objectives,
be based on scientific research and be proven to reduce violence or drug use,
be based on the analysis of predictor variables such as risk and protective factors,
include meaningful and ongoing parental input in program implementation, and
have periodic evaluations of established performance measures.

The results of the AYS presented in this report can help your school and community comply with the NCLB Act. The
Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior charts provide information related to Principle 1 and the Risk and Protective
Factor charts provide information related to Principle 4. Overall, using the risk and protective factor framework helps
schools meet all of the Principles of Effectiveness, and thereby assists schools in complying with the NCLB Act.
8

Assessment and Planning
School and Community Improvement Using Survey Data
Why Conduct the Arizona
Youth Survey?
Data from the Arizona Youth
Survey can be used to help
schools and communities assess
current conditions and identify
and prioritize local prevention
issues.
Each risk and protective factor
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
county make key decisions
regarding regarding allocation
of resources, how and when to
address specific needs, and
which strategies are most
effective and known to produce
results.

What are the numbers telling you?
Review the charts and data tables presented in this report. Using the
table below, note your findings as you discuss the following questions.
Which 3-5 risk factors are of the greatest concern?
Which 3-5 protective factors are your community’s highest priority?
Which levels of 30-day drug use are of greatest concern?
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 of greatest concern?
º Which behaviors are your students exhibiting the most?
º At which grades do you see unacceptable behavior levels?
•
•
•

How to decide if a rate is “unacceptable.”
Look across the charts – which items stand out as either much
higher or much lower than the others?
• Compare your data with statewide and national data –
differences of five percent between local and other data are probably
significant.
•

Use these data for program and policy development.
Substance use and antisocial behavior data – identify issues, raise
awareness about the problems, and promote school and community
dialogue.
• Risk and protective factor data – identify key objectives that will
help your school or community achieve its prevention goals.
•

Use the resources listed on the last page of this report, Contacts for
Prevention, for ideas about prevention programs that have proven
effective in addressing the risk factors that are high in your community
and improving the protective factors that are low.

MEASURE

Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate
#3
#4
#1
#2

Risk Factors
Protective Factors
Substance Use
Antisocial Behaviors

9

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

10

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Cochise County, Grade 8

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

11

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Cochise County, Grade 10

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

12

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Cochise County, Grade 12

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Cochise County, Grade 8
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

13

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Cochise County, Grade 10
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

14

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Cochise County, Grade 12
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

15

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Cochise County, Grade 8

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

16

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Cochise County, Grade 8
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

17

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Cochise County, Grade 10

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

18

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Cochise County, Grade 10
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

19

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Cochise County, Grade 12

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

20

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Cochise County, Grade 12
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

21

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol

WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL*
2008 Cochise County Student Survey, Grades 8, 10 & 12
If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)
100
90
80
70

Percentages (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Got it some

other way

Took it from a
store or someone

else's home

County 2008, Grade 12
Sample: 89 students**

Took it from home

Got at a party

County 2008, Grade 10
Sample: 142 students**

Someone under
21 years

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

County 2008, Grade 8
Sample: 86 students**

State 2008

* Prior to 2008, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained alcohol. Also, because not all eight states ask where youth obtained alcohol, no 8-State value is reported.
** Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case of smaller sample sizes,
caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

22

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Cochise County, Grade 8
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

23

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Cochise County, Grade 10
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

24

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Cochise County, Grade 12
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

25

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles
Low Neighborhood Attachment

Community Domain Risk Factors
Low neighborhood bonding is related to higher levels of 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.

Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

Community Domain Protective Factors
When opportunities are available in a community for positive participation, children are less likely to
engage in substance use and other problem behaviors.

Rewards for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for positive participation in activities helps youth bond to the community, thus lowering their risk
for substance use.

Poor Family Management

Family Domain Risk Factors
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.

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.

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.

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 Attachment

Family Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

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.

Academic Failure

Low Commitment to School

School Domain Risk Factors
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.
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.

26

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles (cont'd)
Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

School Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

Rebelliousness

Peer-Individual Risk Factors
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.

Early Initiation of Antisocial
Behavior and Drug Use

Early onset of drug use predicts the 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.

Attitudes Favorable Toward
Antisocial Behavior and Drug
Use

During the elementary school years, most children express anti-drug, anti-crime, and pro-social attitudes
and have 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Belief in the Moral Order

Peer-Individual Protective Factors
Young people who have a belief in what is “right” or “wrong” are less likely to use drugs.

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.

Prosocial Involvement

Participation in positive school and community activities helps provide protection for youth.

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.

27

Data Tables
Table 3. 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

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

62.9

48.2

53.3

47.8

70.4

73.6

70.7

66.2

80.0

72.4

76.3

74.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

44.5

33.8

27.1

25.9

46.3

48.7

44.7

39.9

50.1

46.2

59.3

50.8

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

10.1

10.3

11.2

7.1

11.4

14.7

14.9

12.9

16.2

23.7

20.3

17.7

Marijuana

used marijuana?

22.9

16.1

14.4

16.2

33.9

31.2

30.2

32.5

39.1

33.1

38.9

43.1

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

3.4

1.8

2.6

1.9

4.8

5.5

5.4

5.2

4.5

7.2

6.6

7.9

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

7.4

4.1

3.1

2.7

8.1

10.3

8.7

6.8

11.3

12.3

14.8

11.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

20.9

16.5

13.7

14.3

9.9

18.6

13.3

12.6

9.9

11.2

10.3

9.2

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

1.6

0.5

1.2

n/a

8.5

2.6

2.4

n/a

6.5

4.5

4.0

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

2.8

0.8

0.8

1.0

1.7

2.6

3.1

2.0

1.6

2.3

2.9

3.1

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

4.5

1.3

2.6

2.2

5.1

3.9

6.8

4.9

5.2

4.1

8.6

7.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

1.8

1.0

1.7

n/a

3.9

1.8

2.3

n/a

3.4

2.9

2.4

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

12.2

12.2

n/a

n/a

21.7

20.5

n/a

n/a

28.9

24.6

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

4.9

n/a

n/a

n/a

7.4

n/a

n/a

n/a

5.9

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

3.1

4.2

3.8

n/a

9.0

8.8

7.6

n/a

7.1

9.1

7.9

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

15.4

9.9

8.8

8.3

17.5

18.4

11.2

12.0

14.3

16.7

14.9

13.2

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of 2008 prescription stimulant, sedative
and pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

13.4

17.1

17.1

n/a

27.8

27.1

25.7

n/a

22.8

32.2

28.7

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

12.0

9.7

n/a

n/a

14.3

12.9

n/a

n/a

16.9

13.4

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

28

Data Tables
Table 4. 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 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

31.4

21.0

24.0

23.2

41.7

39.7

39.3

37.7

52.3

42.9

45.1

46.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

14.9

10.2

9.4

8.7

14.6

19.7

18.3

16.6

23.3

23.4

31.8

23.9

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

2.5

2.5

4.8

2.6

4.3

3.7

4.8

4.6

4.1

7.7

9.3

6.8

Marijuana

used marijuana?

11.2

5.1

6.7

7.6

12.5

12.6

15.3

15.1

11.5

12.8

10.9

18.7

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

2.3

1.0

1.0

0.8

1.5

1.9

3.1

1.9

1.4

4.5

1.2

2.4

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

4.2

1.1

0.8

1.0

3.7

4.9

3.9

2.2

4.1

5.6

4.5

3.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

9.1

6.0

3.9

5.4

2.9

4.9

4.1

3.0

1.6

4.0

0.8

1.6

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

0.6

0.0

0.4

n/a

3.3

0.7

0.6

n/a

1.7

0.0

0.8

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

1.0

0.1

0.3

0.4

0.6

0.7

1.1

0.7

0.5

1.2

0.8

1.0

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

1.6

0.3

0.3

0.8

1.1

1.3

3.1

1.5

1.4

1.2

2.5

2.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

0.7

0.3

0.7

n/a

1.7

0.9

1.0

n/a

1.7

0.8

1.0

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

6.0

6.0

n/a

n/a

10.8

9.4

n/a

n/a

12.5

10.5

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

2.5

n/a

n/a

n/a

3.3

n/a

n/a

n/a

2.7

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

1.0

0.8

1.6

n/a

2.8

4.0

2.9

n/a

1.8

1.7

2.1

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

8.0

4.1

3.1

3.4

8.2

10.1

3.8

4.5

5.2

5.8

3.8

5.0

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of prescription stimulant, sedative and
pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

6.0

7.8

8.6

n/a

14.0

14.0

12.2

n/a

10.0

14.5

13.1

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

6.8

5.6

n/a

n/a

6.4

6.4

n/a

n/a

7.5

5.9

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

29

Data Tables
z

Table 5. Percentage of Students Reporting Heavy ATOD Use
Grade 8

Binge Drinking

1/2 Pack (or
more) of
Cigarettes/Day

How many times have you
had 5 or more alcoholic
drinks in a row in the
past 2 weeks?
During the past 30 days, how many
cigarettes did you smoke per day?
(11 to 20 cigarettes, More than 20
cigarettes)

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

20.7

10.4

12.3

1.5

1.3

0.0

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

13.1

25.8

19.1

21.5

0.7

1.8

3.6

2.9

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

22.4

34.4

23.2

28.0

30.2

2.1

3.2

3.9

4.6

4.2

Table 6. Percentage of Students Reporting Antisocial Behavior
How many times in the past year
(12 months) have you:
(One or more times)
Suspended from School
Drunk or High at School
Sold Illegal Drugs
Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle
Been Arrested
Attacked Someone with the Idea
of Seriously Hurting Them
Carried a Handgun
Carried a Handgun to School
During the past 30 days, how many
times did you:
(One or more times)

Grade 8

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

15.5

18.4

20.0

14.1

9.8

12.9

7.2

3.4

6.6

3.4

10.4

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

20.2

10.2

15.1

14.2

14.6

9.1

10.0

16.1

10.2

12.0

22.4

22.2

21.4

20.5

19.7

20.8

19.4

22.2

4.0

4.6

7.8

9.4

10.0

9.8

6.7

10.1

7.9

10.4

3.8

3.6

3.6

4.8

3.8

3.7

2.9

2.8

3.5

2.7

7.8

7.3

7.5

8.2

7.8

10.2

9.2

8.9

8.4

9.4

8.7

19.8

16.8

16.2

18.1

21.5

21.5

16.7

16.1

13.3

17.3

14.2

12.9

7.5

6.0

8.0

7.7

5.8

9.7

7.4

7.2

6.2

8.8

8.7

8.1

2.0

0.9
0.8
Grade 8

1.2

1.4

0.8
0.4
Grade 10

1.3

1.3

0.6
2.4
Grade 12

1.4

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

DRIVE a car or other vehicle when you had
been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

5.7

9.2

RIDE in a car or other vehicle driven by
someone who had been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

30.7

28.7

State
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

5.6

n/a

8.8

7.2

29.1

n/a

27.3

33.5

* These categories were not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

30

State
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

7.9

n/a

25.3

19.4

16.1

29.1

n/a

37.8

36.1

29.7

Data Tables
Table 7. Percentage of Students Gambling in the Past Year
How often have you done the following for money,
possessions, or anything of value:
County
2004
(At least once in the past 12 months or more)
Any Gambling
Played a slot machine, poker machine
or other gambling machine?
Played the lottery or scratch-off tickets?
Bet on sports?*
Played cards?
Bought a raffle ticket?
Played bingo?
Gambled on the Internet?
Played a dice game?*
Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?*
Bet on a horse or other animal race?*
Table 8. Percentage of Students Reporting Protection

Grade 8
County
2008

n/a

54.4

74.8

n/a

2.5

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

69.1

n/a

53.4

68.4

65.9

n/a

45.6

66.4

60.6

6.8

6.4

n/a

0.8

6.6

6.1

n/a

2.4

4.0

5.8

29.1
n/a
21.4
n/a
18.1
5.6
n/a

33.4
37.7
48.5
27.6
30.2
7.4
33.6

24.8
31.8
43.7
20.4
32.6
6.3
31.5

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

28.9
n/a
26.7
n/a
12.4
5.2
n/a

23.1
29.0
43.8
22.4
22.0
4.3
21.3

21.8
30.2
43.7
20.7
23.2
5.1
25.1

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

19.2
n/a
15.1
n/a
6.6
2.4
n/a

23.0
22.5
42.4
27.8
17.1
4.4
19.2

19.0
25.6
40.6
18.9
14.7
4.7
19.2

n/a

17.3

34.8

32.7

n/a

21.3

34.1

31.3

n/a

19.2

26.3

27.0

n/a

n/a

12.9

6.4

n/a

n/a

11.1

5.8

n/a

n/a

15.1

5.1

Grade 8

Protective Factor
Community Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Domain
Family Attachment
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
School Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer-Individual Domain
Belief in the Moral Order
Interaction with Prosocial Peers*
Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Total Protection
Students with High Protection**

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2006

State
2008

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

45.1
31.8

42.6
31.2

42.6
38.8

49.1
60.1
59.9

50.7
60.5
59.1

61.3
51.3

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

39.3
31.3

41.4
37.0

42.0
32.5

35.4
35.4

48.9
58.7
59.2

51.5
59.7
61.4

47.9
53.7
53.9

41.0
47.9
52.8

53.9
43.5

60.6
53.6

60.3
51.2

54.4
53.9

50.8
51.3
44.7
64.4

58.0
53.6
37.7
63.5

56.9
56.4
38.8
69.3

59.4
53.1
39.0
59.4

47.5

41.3

48.9

43.8

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

37.1
35.4

43.9
34.0

39.4
48.8

36.0
35.5

36.1
33.2

44.7
49.9
46.1

46.1
54.0
55.1

58.0
54.2
54.1

60.7
57.7
54.5

47.6
48.7
51.8

56.2
55.2
55.8

55.4
56.8

50.7
47.5

62.4
59.8

56.5
40.6

65.8
59.8

57.3
45.6

64.3
45.4

62.5
52.2
41.0
62.3

59.4
57.5
43.7
58.6

62.7
52.1
35.7
61.4

66.5
55.3
41.2
59.7

47.0
54.5
37.9
53.5

57.5
65.8
37.8
58.1

61.4
53.9
33.1
58.8

53.6
52.5
36.4
52.2

48.9

41.0

38.4

46.7

45.8

52.6

41.5

43.3

*Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.
**High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.

31

State
2008

State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 9. Percentage of Students Reporting Risk
Grade 8
Risk Factor
Community Domain
Low Neighborhood Attachment
Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use
Perceived Availability of Drugs
Perceived Availability of Handguns
Family Domain
Poor Family Management
Family Conflict
Family History of Antisocial Behavior
Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use
School Domain
Academic Failure
Low Commitment to School
Peer-Individual Domain
Rebelliousness
Early Initiation of ASB
Early Initiation of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use
Perceived Risk of Drug Use
Interaction with Antisocial Peers
Friend's Use of Drugs
Rewards for ASB
Gang Involvement
Total Risk
Students at High Risk*

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

45.7
45.2
45.7
40.3

41.9
35.5
39.1
37.5

36.6
37.6
35.7
42.9

48.6
58.8
54.3
49.1
30.9

46.3
49.7
44.6
48.6
28.1

49.3
36.4

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

38.5
36.6
38.2
37.8

57.6
47.9
60.2
33.5

54.2
43.5
50.9
31.4

51.2
50.8
53.8
30.5

46.8
51.5
40.2
50.4
30.6

45.5
53.5
40.3
49.3
26.8

45.5
45.9
43.6
49.6
42.2

45.7
45.0
39.7
53.4
46.4

54.9
40.4

53.9
44.3

47.3
41.0

52.1
45.1

42.2
38.3
48.0
49.2
36.0
50.8
61.2
51.4
53.2
26.7

41.9
36.4
35.3
42.1
29.4
42.6
54.1
41.1
45.3
24.9

45.0
39.8
29.9
41.1
28.5
48.7
57.0
36.0
39.2
25.0

43.1
39.4
30.3
44.6
29.1
44.5
58.2
39.4
45.6
26.9

47.7

35.5

38.6

38.7

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

46.2
42.1
49.6
26.7

52.6
34.7
56.2
34.6

60.7
43.5
51.1
41.5

56.0
40.2
50.6
38.6

51.0
36.3
52.2
33.1

48.4
47.2
45.0
54.7
43.3

42.8
42.8
41.1
53.4
41.1

42.2
38.3
37.8
46.7
38.5

36.7
37.2
39.8
48.4
41.1

44.1
38.4
38.6
45.7
40.2

44.3
38.3
37.3
50.2
41.2

52.0
49.5

50.9
44.7

49.5
43.7

40.6
48.6

44.1
35.4

40.5
39.0

44.4
45.6

43.9
45.2
38.8
52.4
40.0
44.4
65.0
49.0
44.4
26.6

53.6
45.8
37.5
57.5
39.1
41.7
60.7
41.7
45.3
24.6

53.4
47.9
31.1
56.0
38.8
43.6
62.1
44.2
42.9
28.3

46.8
42.0
32.7
50.7
37.4
42.3
57.3
41.9
44.0
23.2

36.2
37.5
35.7
46.0
34.0
42.0
52.6
33.6
56.5
16.7

41.9
43.0
33.0
39.8
28.1
38.5
57.8
34.2
48.9
16.7

36.8
47.3
40.5
39.0
29.5
42.3
56.5
38.2
54.1
18.7

44.0
41.2
33.1
46.9
36.3
46.5
53.2
37.3
54.6
16.8

45.4

36.9

42.8

37.5

35.0

33.7

32.3

35.7

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors)

32

Grade 12
State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 10. Where Youth Obtained Alcohol
Grade 8

If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)

County
2008

Sample size*
I bought it in a store such as a liquor store, convenience store,
supermarket, discount store, or gas station
I bought it at a restaurant, bar, or club
I bought it at a public event such as a concert or sporting event

Grade 10

State
2008

County
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2008

State
2008

86

4,418

142

4,872

89

5,065

7.0

5.0

5.6

6.9

16.9

12.3

8.1
2.3

3.0
2.9

4.2
4.9

3.0
2.9

20.2
5.6

7.0
3.9

I gave someone else money to buy it for me

26.7

21.4

34.5

34.4

42.7

43.7

My parent or guardian gave it to me
Another family member who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone not related to me who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone under the age of 21 gave it to me
I got it at a party
I took it from home
I took it from a store or someone else's home
I got it some other way

15.1
19.8
22.1
24.4
44.2
25.6
4.7

18.7
19.7
19.2
23.8
41.5
31.4
11.7

15.5
16.9
29.6
25.4
50.0
23.9
6.3

14.8
18.7
28.7
24.8
53.1
23.2
11.3

4.5
13.5
29.2
9.0
61.8
7.9
4.5

13.0
18.2
39.5
22.0
57.6
13.8
8.0

30.2

28.7

25.4

23.6

19.1

17.9

* Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case
of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

33

Data Tables
Table 11. Percentage of Students Reporting School Safety Issues
Grade 8
County
2004

Question

County
2006

Grade 10

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

Grade 12

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
has someone threatened or injured you with a 4-5 times
weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school 6-7 times
property?
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

85.8
7.8
4.2
1.1
0.4
0.0
0.3
0.4

84.7
9.2
3.1
1.5
0.5
0.4
0.1
0.5

89.2
5.3
3.5
1.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.8

87.1
6.6
3.5
1.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.9

81.7
8.0
6.0
1.4
0.5
0.2
0.4
1.8

87.2
5.4
4.6
1.0
0.2
0.2
0.0
1.4

85.0
8.6
4.1
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.9

88.4
5.9
3.0
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.1

88.2
5.6
2.9
1.6
0.2
0.2
0.2
1.1

86.7
6.9
3.7
1.1
0.0
1.1
0.5
0.0

90.5
6.3
0.4
0.8
0.4
0.4
0.0
1.2

92.4
3.9
2.0
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.7

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
4-5 times
were you in a physical fight on school property? 6-7 times
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

68.8
15.6
10.6
2.5
0.4
0.6
0.1
1.5

73.8
14.4
6.6
3.1
1.1
0.2
0.1
0.6

73.0
17.4
7.3
1.3
0.8
0.0
0.0
0.3

76.5
12.9
6.9
1.7
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.7

80.7
8.9
6.5
1.4
0.7
0.5
0.0
1.3

82.0
10.9
4.9
0.8
0.4
0.6
0.0
0.4

86.3
8.1
2.8
1.1
0.9
0.2
0.0
0.6

85.2
8.8
3.9
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.7

88.4
6.7
3.8
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.2
0.4

86.2
8.0
4.8
0.0
1.1
0.0
0.0
0.0

90.0
7.2
1.2
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.8

91.5
5.0
2.1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how often have you
4-5 times
been picked on or bullied by a student ON
6-7 times
SCHOOL PROPERTY?*
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

59.9
18.8

59.4
13.2
11.5
4.3
1.9
1.2
0.8
7.7

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

70.1
14.3

4.7

62.2
9.2
10.9
4.1
1.9
2.1
1.1
8.4

69.1
10.3
9.6
3.2
1.4
1.1
0.6
4.6

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

80.9
6.4

5.2

61.9
10.4
14.4
2.8
2.0
0.5
1.0
7.1

4.3

72.5
8.0
7.6
3.6
3.6
0.8
0.4
3.6

82.3
6.6
5.7
1.5
0.8
0.5
0.3
2.4

88.4
6.8
3.2
0.6
0.9

88.8
5.3
3.6
0.5
1.8

89.9
5.8
2.7
0.6
1.0

90.8
5.1
2.2
0.7
1.3

93.1
3.3
2.2
0.6
0.8

84.4
9.1
4.1
1.1
1.3

91.1
5.1
2.2
0.6
1.0

92.4
3.4
2.2
0.9
1.1

96.3
2.7
0.5
0.5
0.0

90.1
7.1
1.6
0.8
0.4

93.8
3.3
1.8
0.4
0.7

90.0
2.4
1.2
0.4
6.0

94.4
1.5
1.1
0.5
2.6

0 days

During the past 30 days, on how many days did
1 day
you not go to school because you felt you would
2-3 days
be unsafe at school or on your way to or from
4-5 days
school?

6 or more days

87.9
6.0
3.6
0.8
1.7

16.1

0 days

10.9

8.5

91.9
93.7
94.6
93.9
92.9
88.6
90.5
93.8
93.1
88.9
3.2
2.5
2.8
3.1
1.8
2.8
2.8
2.2
1.1
2.6
2.1
1.6
0.5
1.3
1.8
1.8
1.9
1.2
0.4
0.5
0.6
1.0
0.3
0.5
0.9
1.4
1.3
0.5
0.0
0.5
6 or more days
2.2
1.1
1.8
1.2
2.5
5.5
3.5
2.2
5.4
7.4
* In 2006 the choices for this question were Never , Once , Several Times and Very Often. This category was not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

During the past 30 days, on how many days did 1 day
you carry a weapon such as a gun, knife, or
2-3 days
club ON SCHOOL PROPERTY?
4-5 days

34

Data Tables
Table 12. Drug Free Communities Report*
County 2008
Outcome

Definition

Substance

Grade 8

Grade 10

Grade 12

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

Perception of Risk
(People are at Moderate or Great Risk
of harming themselves if they... )

Perception of Parent Disapproval
(Parents feel it would be Wrong or
Very Wrong to... )

Perception of Peer Disapproval
(I think it is Wrong or Very Wrong for
someone my age to...)

Past 30-Day Use

Female†

Sample Percent

Sample

drink 1 or two drinks nearly every day

Alcohol

59.1

374

59.4

443

58.6

239

52.3

480

66.1

558

smoke 1 or more packs or cigarettes
per day

Cigarettes

82.5

378

87.9

447

91.2

239

84.7

483

89.5

562

smoke marijuana regularly

Marijuana

78.3

368

73.1

442

74.6

236

72.4

474

78.2

554

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

90.6

360

82.8

400

77.2

228

82.7

439

85.7

532

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

96.9

357

90.6

404

83.5

230

90.9

441

91.7

533

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

95.2

353

92.8

402

93.4

227

93.8

439

93.9

526

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

76.1

402

58.6

476

61.1

257

64.9

524

65.9

590

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

88.3

403

71.9

477

62.6

257

77.5

525

74.1

591

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

88.3

403

73.8

477

77.1

258

78.5

526

80.5

591

Alcohol

24.0

387

39.3

461

45.1

244

34.4

497

36.5

576

at least one use in the Past 30 Days

Cigarettes

9.4

384

18.3

447

31.8

239

16.4

489

19.7

563

6.7

386

15.3

459

10.9

239

12.5

495

10.4

570

Sample Percent

Sample

Marijuana

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

had more than a sip or two of beer,
wine or hard liquor?
Average Age of Onset**
(How old were you when you first…)

Male†

Sample Percent

smoked a cigarette, even just a puff?

smoked marijuana?

Alcohol
Average age:
Cigarettes
Average age:
Marijuana
Average age:

55.2

391

11.8 years
26.1

398

11.7 years
14.6

397

11.9 years

73.4

478

13.2 years
44.7

474

12.6 years
30.3

476

13.5 years

80.1

Sample Percent

256

13.8 years
62.0

258

13.5 years
42.6

258

14.1 years

66.5

517

12.7 years
39.2

523

12.6 years
28.8

524

13.2 years

71.2

587

13.2 years
44.5

586

12.7 years
26.8

586

13.7 years

* The “Sample” column represents the sample size (the number of youth who answered the question). The "Percent" column represents the percentage of youth in the sample answering the question as defined.
** For Average Age of Onset, “Sample” represents the number of youth who answered the question (including students responding that they never used). 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.

† 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.

35

Appendix
Appendix - Comparability of survey administratons
Issue
Drug Category

2004 AYS
On how many occasions (if any) have you:

2006 AYS

2008 AYS

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Notes regarding changes

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Hallucinogens

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the
past 30 days?

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the past
30 days?

Used LSD or other hallucinogens during the
past 30 days?

Substituted "hallucinogens" for "psychedelics" in 2008.
Comparable across all years.

Methamphetamines

Not applicable, no methamphetamine-specific
item on 2004 AYS

Used methamphetamines (meth, speed, crank,
crystal meth)?

Used methamphetamines (meth, crystal,
crank)?

2006 and 2008 provide slightly different examples, but
are cautiously comparable.

Prescription
stimulants

Used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”,
“crystal”, “crank”) without a doctor telling you
to take them?

Used stimulants, other than methamphetamines
(such as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin,
Adderal, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling
you to take them?

2004 is not comparable to any other years, data are
presented for archival interest. 2006 and 2008 data are
cautiously comparable.

Prescription
sedatives

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such
as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping
pills)?

2008 AYS added descriptor "prescription" and removed
qualifier "without a doctor telling you to take them." 2008
data are cautiously comparable with other years.

Ecstasy

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2008 AYS used "ecstasy" as the primary descriptor and
moved "MDMA" to examples. Comparable across years.

Prescription
drugs

Not applicable, no prescription drugs item on
2004 AYS

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills),
stimulants, other than methamphetamines (such
as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine) or
other prescription drugs (such as Oxycontin)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes)

Used prescription stimulants (Ritalin,
Adderall, or Dexedrine), sedatives
(tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax,
barbiturates, or sleeping pills) or pain relievers
(Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes )

In 2006, responses to the stimulant, sedative and other
prescription drug questions were calculated as one
measure. (2006 had no prescription pain reliever item.) In
2008, responses to the stimulant, sedative and
prescription pain reliever questions were calculated as
one measure. (2008 had no standalone prescription drug
item.) 2006 and 2008 data are cautiously comparable.
(Note that composite 2006 data will not match past
reports' prescription drugs category.)

Gambling
Category

Not applicable, no gambling items
on 2004 AYS

How often during the past 12 months
have you:

How often have you done the following for
money, possessions, or anything of value:

Sports betting

n/a

Bet on team sports?

Bet on sports?

Not comparable across years.

Race betting

n/a

Bet money on horse races?

Bet on a horse race or other animal race?

Not comparable across years.

Dice

n/a

Bet on dice games such as craps?

Played a dice game?

Not comparable across years.

Games of skill

n/a

Bet on games of personal skill such as pool,
darts, or bowling?

Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?

Comparable across years.

Protective Scale:
Peer-Individual
Interaction with
Prosocial Peers

Think of your four best friends (the friends you feel closest to). In the past year (12 months), how many of your best friends have:
(Scale is calculated based on the average response [0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 friends] to the following questions)
...participated in clubs, organizations and activities at school? ...made the commitment to stay drug-free?
...tried to do well in school? ...liked school? ...regularly attended religious services?(removed in 2008)

36

Regularly attended religious services was removed from
2008 AYS. 2004 and 2006 have been recalculated to
match 2008 AYS and are now comparable across all
years. Due to this recalculation, current reports may differ
slightly from past reports.

Contacts for Prevention
Arizona Department of Education
Student Services Division
www.ade.az.gov

Regional Prevention Contacts
Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, and Santa Cruz
Counties
Bill Burnett
Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)
(520) 618-8807

Arizona Department of Health Services
Division of Behavioral Health Services
Lisa Shumaker
(602) 364-4594
www.azdhs.gov/bhs/index.htm

Gila, La Paz, Pinal, and Yuma Counties
Linda Weinberg
Cenpatico Behavioral Health of Arizona
(866) 495-6738

Arizona Prevention Resource Center
(800) 432-2772
www.azprevention.org

Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai
Counties
Petrice Post
Northern Arizona Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(NARBHA)
(928) 214-2177

Center for Violence Prevention and Community
Safety
Charles Katz
(602) 543-6618
charles.katz@asu.edu
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)
http://prevention.samhsa.gov

Maricopa County
Juan Aristizabal
Magellan
(602) 797-8256

Governor’s Office of Children, Youth, and
Families
(602) 542-4043
http://www.governor.state.az.us/cyf/index.html

Gila River Indian Community
Joan Grey
Gila River Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(602) 528-7136

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities
U.S. Department of Education
www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS

Pasqua Yaqui Tribe
Centered Spirit Program
Jill Fabian
(520) 879-6067

Arizona Department of Gaming's Office of
Problem Gambling
Elise Mikkelsen
(602) 266-8299 ext. 351
www.problemgambling.az.gov

Navajo Nation
Department of Behavioral Health Services
(928) 871-6235

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMSHA)
www.samhsa.gov

White Mountain Apache Tribe
Apache Behavioral Health Services
(928) 338-4811

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/

Colorado River Indian Tribes
(928) 669-6577

Western Regional Center for the Application of
Prevention Technologies (CAPT)
www.westcapt.org

Other State and National Contacts:
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
Michelle Neitch/ Phillip Stevenson
(602) 364-1173/(602) 364-1157
www.azcjc.gov

Bach Harrison, L.L.C.
R. Steven Harrison, Ph.D.
(801) 359-2064
www.bach-harrison.com

37

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Coconino County

REPORT PROVIDED BY:

Arizona Criminal Justice Commission

1

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Shining Light on Arizona Youth
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:
Arizona Department of Gaming’s Office of Problem Gambling
Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission
Arizona Parent’s Commission on Drug Education and Prevention
Governor’s Division for Substance Abuse Policy
Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Tobacco Education and Prevention Program,
Arizona Department of Health Services

2

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 2008 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:
Jean Ajamie, Arizona Department of Education
Michelle Anderson, Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections
Steve Ballance, Maricopa County
Carisa Dwyer, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Charles Katz, Arizona State University
Dr. Manuel Medina, TERROS, Inc.
Kim O’Connor, Governor’s Office for
Children, Youth, and Families
Holly Orozco, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Catherine Osborn, Arizona Department of Education
Richard Porter, Arizona Department of Health Services
Gowri Shetty, Arizona Department of Health Services
Lisa Shumaker, Arizona Department of Health Services
Wendy Wolfersteig, Arizona State University
Nicole Yancey Johnson, Arizona Early Childhood Development
and Health Board
Governor’s Youth Commission

Additionally, the success of the 2008 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.

3

Introduction
CONTENTS:

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Summary for
Coconino County

Introduction
The Risk and Protective
Factor Model of
Prevention
The Arizona Substance
Abuse Partnership
How to Read the Charts

This report summarizes some of the
findings from the 2008 Arizona Youth
Survey (AYS) administered to 8th, 10th
and 12th grade students during the
spring of 2008. The results for your
county are presented along with
comparisons to 2004 and 2006 survey
results where applicable, as well as to
the overall results for the state. 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.

Practical Implications of
the Assessment
Assessment and
Planning
Data Charts:
• Substance Use

All schools in Arizona are eligible to
participate in the survey, and
recruitment efforts were successful in
obtaining participation by schools in all
of the 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.

•

Antisocial Behavior
and Gambling

•

Risk & Protective
Factor Profiles
Where Youth
Obtained Alcohol
School Safety

•
•

Risk and Protective
Factor Scale Definitions
Data Tables
Contacts for Prevention
Appendix

Table 1 contains the characteristics of
the students who completed the survey

Table 1. Characteristics of Participants
Student Totals
County 2004

Total Students

Number

County 2006

Percent

Number

County 2008

Percent

Number

State 2008

Percent

Number

Percent

1,225

100

1,107

100

1,129

100

54,734

100

8

200

16.3

470

42.5

379

33.6

25,695

46.9

10

595

48.6

337

30.4

400

35.4

16,089

29.4

12

430

35.1

300

27.1

350

31.0

12,950

23.7

Male

635

52.3

545

50.0

541

48.7

26,213

48.8

Female

579

47.7

545

50.0

571

51.3

27,514

51.2

Native American

414

34.2

415

38.6

245

18.5

4,812

7.4

African American

15

1.2

20

1.9

45

3.4

3,915

6.0

Hispanic

124

10.2

180

16.7

264

19.9

21,525

32.9

White

586

48.4

415

38.6

729

55.0

31,887

48.8

Asian

10

0.8

3

0.3

28

2.1

2,117

3.2

3

0.2

2

0.2

14

1.1

1,115

1.7

Grade

Gender

Ethnicity*

Pacific Islander

*In 2008, students could mark more than one ethnic category and the 'other' category was removed.

4

from your county and the state.
Because not every student answered all
of the questions, the number of
students in the gender and ethnicity
categories often will be less than the
total number of students.
Whenever data is obtained from a
sample of students instead of the entire
population, it is important to recognize
the strengths and weaknesses of the
data. One quick and 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 participated in the
survey and those that did not.
Changes to the AYS
Survey for 2008
In an effort to shorten the AYS and
make it more responsive to local
priorities, the following changes were
made for 2008: 1) some of the
substance use questions were refined
and the use of over-the-counter drugs
was added, 2) some risk and protective
factor scales were removed where the
data could easily be obtained from
other sources or the scales measured
similar constructs (scales removed are

Risk and Protective Factors
Transitions and Mobility, Community
Disorganization, Intention to Use Drugs, and Social
Skills), 3) questions about where students get the
alcohol they drink were added, 4) an 8-State Norm
was added that can be used to compare the AYS
results on risk, protection, and antisocial behavior to a
more national sample (see the description of the 8State Norm later in this report), and 5) National
Outcome Measures that are needed for measuring the
performance of federally funded programs in Arizona
such as talking to parents about the dangers of
substance use were added.

Washington, Social Development Research Group
have investigated the relationship between risk and
protective factors and youth problem behavior. They
have found, for example, that children who live in
families with high levels of conflict are more likely
to become involved in problem behaviors such as
delinquency and drug use than children who live in
families with low levels of family conflict.
Protective factors exert a positive influence or buffer
against the negative influence of risk, thus reducing the
likelihood that adolescents will engage in problem
behaviors. Protective factors identified through research
include social bonding to family, school, community,
and peers; healthy beliefs and clear standards for
behavior; and individual characteristics. For bonding to
serve as a protective influence, it must occur through
involvement with peers and adults who communicate
healthy values and set clear standards for behavior.

The Risk and Protective Factor Model of
Substance Abuse Prevention
Many states, school districts and local agencies have
adopted the Risk and Protective Factor Model to
guide their prevention efforts. The Risk and
Protective Factor Model of Prevention 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 identified a set of risk factors for
youth problem behaviors. Risk factors are
characteristics of school, community, and family
environments, as well as characteristics of students
and their peer groups that are known to predict
increased likelihood of drug use, delinquency, school
dropout, teen pregnancy, and violent behavior among
youth. Dr. J. David Hawkins, Dr. Richard F.
Catalano, and their colleagues at the University of

T
T

T

T

T
T

T
T

T
T

T

T

Teen Pregnancy

T

School Drop-Out
Violence

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

SOURCE: COMMUNITIES THAT CARE (CTC) PREVENTION MODEL, CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION (CSAP), SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMSHA)

5

Constitutional Factors

Gang Involvement

Favorable Attitudes Toward
Drug Use & Other
Problem Behaviors

Friends Who Use Drugs &
Engage in a Problem Behavior

Alienation & Rebelliousness

Early & Persistent
Antisocial Behavior

Peer / Individual
Early Initiation of Drug Use &
Other Problem Behavior

Lack of Commitment to
School

Academic Failure

School
Favorable Parent Attitudes &
Involvement in the
Problem Behavior

T
T
T
T
T

Family Management Problems

T
T
T
T
T

Family Conflict

Community Disorganization

Low Neighborhood
Attachment

Transitions & Mobility

Availability of Drugs &
Firearms

T
T

Family History of the
Problem Behavior

Delinquency

The chart below shows the links between the 19 risk
factors and the five problem behaviors. The check
marks have been placed in the chart to indicate where
at least two well designed, published research studies
have shown a link between the risk factor and the
problem behavior.

Family

Extreme Economic &
Social Deprivation

Substance Abuse

Community
Community Laws & Norms
Favorable Toward Drug Use,
Firearms & Crime

Risk
Factors

By measuring both risk and protective factors in a
population, prevention programs can be implemented
that are designed to reduce the elevated risk factors and
increase the protective factors. For example, if academic
failure is identified as an elevated risk factor in a
community, then mentoring, tutoring, and increased
opportunities and rewards for classroom participation
can be provided to improve academic performance.

T
T

T
T

T

T

The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership
The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP) was established by Governor Napolitano’s Executive Order
2007-12 in June 2007. Chaired by the Governor’s Chief of Staff, ASAP is composed of representatives from
state government entities, federal entities, and community organizations. ASAP serves as the single statewide
council on substance abuse prevention, enforcement, and treatment.
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
prevention, treatment, and enforcement. Through coordination among its members and their agencies and
organizations ASAP strives to ensure that substance abuse funding is spent in the most efficient and efficacious
manner.
ASAP has identified four strategic focus areas for 2008: 1) child welfare and substance abuse; 2) law enforcement
and drug trafficking; 3) emerging trends and the state’s capacity to respond; and 4) data-driven decisions and
policy development.
There are currently six sub-committees that assist ASAP in meeting their goals:
•

Arizona Underage Drinking Committee - The purpose of this subcommittee is to develop a
statewide underage drinking initiative to prevent and reduce underage drinking in Arizona. Their
activities include state-level infrastructure change to improve cross coordination/collaboration
between state agencies; developing a comprehensive statewide prevention system focused on
preventing underage drinking; and collaborative projects to more effectively utilize resources
and support local efforts.

•

Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The purpose of this work group is to
continuously evaluate data related to substance abuse to move the state system through a datadriven process. This is achieved through the completion of a statewide Substance Abuse
Epidemiology Profile. This profile will be updated every two years, with specific analyses
completed each year.

•

Emerging Issues Sub-Committee of the Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The
purpose of this sub-committee is to provide understanding of emerging substance abuse
consumption and consequence trends in Arizona to state agencies, Boards, Commissions and
Committees, and ASAP and its sub-committees.

•

Methamphetamine Task Force – The purpose of this task force is to bring together
representatives from state agencies, local government, businesses, and community groups to
develop collaborative efforts among treatment, prevention, and law enforcement systems to
assess and address the impact of methamphetamine statewide through information sharing,
resource allocation, service coordination, and the development of statewide policy
recommendations sensitive to the needs of local and tribal communities.

•

Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team – The Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team serves as the
advisory body and policy-making entity for the Arizona Co-Occurring State Incentive Grant.
Team members represent a number of state agencies and community-based organizations.

•

Workforce Development Committee – This committee was formed specifically to identify and
address substance abuse prevention training and technical assistance needs across Arizona. This
will, in turn, help strengthen instruction for prevention professionals and volunteers in
community coalitions.

6

How to Read the Charts in this Report
There are five types of charts presented in this
report: 1) substance use, 2) antisocial behavior and
youth gambling, 3) risk factors, 4) protective factors,
and 5) where youth obtained alcohol. When
available, data from the 2004 and 2006
administrations will be included in the charts. The
actual percentages from the charts are presented in
tables at the end of this report.

•

Substance Use Charts
This report contains information about alcohol,
tobacco, and other drug use (referred to as ATOD
use throughout this report) and other problem
behaviors of students. The bars on each chart
represent the percentage of students in that grade
who reported the behavior. The three sections in the
charts represent different types of problem
behaviors. The definitions of each of the types of
behavior are provided below.
•

Risk and Protective Factor Charts
The risk and protective factor charts show the
percentage of students at high risk and with high
protection for each of the risk and protective factor
scales. The risk and protective factor scales measure
specific aspects of youths’ life experiences that are
predictive of whether they will engage in problem
behaviors. A definition of each risk and protective
factor scale is contained in Table 2. The factors are
grouped into four domains: community, family, school,
and peer/individual.

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.

•

Heavy use includes binge drinking (having five
or more drinks in a row during the two weeks
prior to the survey) and use of one-half a pack
or more of cigarettes per day.

The bars on the risk and protective factor charts,
represent the percentage of students whose answers
reflect significant risk or protection. There are bars for
the last three administrations of the AYS: 2004, 2006,
and 2008. By looking at 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 and
when assessing risk reduction and protective factor
enhancement efforts.

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol Charts

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling
Charts
•

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 animal
races. The chart also shows the percentage of
students who engaged in any gambling behavior
during the past year.

This chart displays data regarding the ways that
students obtained alcohol in the past 30 days. The data
focus on a subgroup of students who indicated at least
one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no
alcohol use are not represented.) It is important to note
that the charts represent a subgroup of users and not
the entire survey population. Additionally, the smaller
the sample, the more dramatic the influence of a
student's responses. For example, 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 legend indicates the sample size for
each grade surveyed to help clarify the value of the data.

Antisocial behavior (ASB) is a measure of
the percentage of students who report any
involvement during the past year with eight
antisocial behaviors: suspended from school,
drunk or high at school, sold illegal drugs,
stolen a vehicle, been arrested, attacked
someone to harm them, carried a handgun,
taken a handgun to school. The chart also
displays any incidents in the past 30 days of
drinking and driving or riding in a car with a
drinking driver.
7

How to Read the Charts in this Report (cont’d)
School Safety Charts

community and a more national sample. The 8-State
Norm value for each risk and protective factor scale
represents the percentage of youth at risk or with
protection for eight states across the country
(Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana,
Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah). In developing the
8-State Norm, the contribution of each of eight
states was proportional to its percentage of the
national population, which helps to make the results
more representative of youth nation-wide. A
comparison between the ATOD use rates from the
8-State norm and those from the national
Monitoring the Future Survey showed the rates to
be very similar, which provides added confidence in
the validity of the 8-State Norm. Brief definitions of
the risk and protective factors scales are provided in
Table 2 following the profile charts. For more
information about risk and protective factors, please
refer to the resources listed on the last page of this
report under Contacts for Prevention.

The school safety 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 or were picked on or
bullied at school. The complete questions and values
for each response option can be seen in Table 11.

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 Survey or
the 8-State Norm (described below). A comparison to
the state-wide and national results provides additional
information for your community in determining the
relative significance of levels of 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.

Drug Free Communities Reports
Table 12 contains the information that is reported
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 8-State Norm
The diamonds on the charts allow a comparison
between the levels of risk and protection in your

Practical Implications of the Assessment
No Child Left Behind
The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities section of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) requires that
schools and communities use six Principles of Effectiveness to guide their decisions and spending on federally
funded prevention and intervention programs. First introduced in 1998 by the Department of Education, the
Principles of Effectiveness outline a data-driven process for ensuring that prevention programs achieve the desired
results. The Principles of Effectiveness stipulate that local prevention programs and activities must:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

be based on a needs assessment using objective data regarding the incidence of drug use and violence,
target specific performance objectives,
be based on scientific research and be proven to reduce violence or drug use,
be based on the analysis of predictor variables such as risk and protective factors,
include meaningful and ongoing parental input in program implementation, and
have periodic evaluations of established performance measures.

The results of the AYS presented in this report can help your school and community comply with the NCLB Act. The
Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior charts provide information related to Principle 1 and the Risk and Protective
Factor charts provide information related to Principle 4. Overall, using the risk and protective factor framework helps
schools meet all of the Principles of Effectiveness, and thereby assists schools in complying with the NCLB Act.
8

Assessment and Planning
School and Community Improvement Using Survey Data
Why Conduct the Arizona
Youth Survey?
Data from the Arizona Youth
Survey can be used to help
schools and communities assess
current conditions and identify
and prioritize local prevention
issues.
Each risk and protective factor
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
county make key decisions
regarding regarding allocation
of resources, how and when to
address specific needs, and
which strategies are most
effective and known to produce
results.

What are the numbers telling you?
Review the charts and data tables presented in this report. Using the
table below, note your findings as you discuss the following questions.
Which 3-5 risk factors are of the greatest concern?
Which 3-5 protective factors are your community’s highest priority?
Which levels of 30-day drug use are of greatest concern?
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 of greatest concern?
º Which behaviors are your students exhibiting the most?
º At which grades do you see unacceptable behavior levels?
•
•
•

How to decide if a rate is “unacceptable.”
Look across the charts – which items stand out as either much
higher or much lower than the others?
• Compare your data with statewide and national data –
differences of five percent between local and other data are probably
significant.
•

Use these data for program and policy development.
Substance use and antisocial behavior data – identify issues, raise
awareness about the problems, and promote school and community
dialogue.
• Risk and protective factor data – identify key objectives that will
help your school or community achieve its prevention goals.
•

Use the resources listed on the last page of this report, Contacts for
Prevention, for ideas about prevention programs that have proven
effective in addressing the risk factors that are high in your community
and improving the protective factors that are low.

MEASURE

Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate
#3
#4
#1
#2

Risk Factors
Protective Factors
Substance Use
Antisocial Behaviors

9

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

10

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Coconino County, Grade 8

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

11

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Coconino County, Grade 10

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

12

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Coconino County, Grade 12

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Coconino County, Grade 8
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

13

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Coconino County, Grade 10
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

14

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Coconino County, Grade 12
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

15

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Coconino County, Grade 8

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

16

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Coconino County, Grade 8
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

17

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Coconino County, Grade 10

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

18

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Coconino County, Grade 10
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

19

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Coconino County, Grade 12

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

20

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Coconino County, Grade 12
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

21

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol

WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL*
2008 Coconino County Student Survey, Grades 8, 10 & 12
If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)
100
90
80
70

Percentages (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Got it some

other way

Took it from a
store or someone

else's home

County 2008, Grade 12
Sample: 118 students**

Took it from home

Got at a party

County 2008, Grade 10
Sample: 111 students**

Someone under
21 years

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

County 2008, Grade 8
Sample: 64 students**

State 2008

* Prior to 2008, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained alcohol. Also, because not all eight states ask where youth obtained alcohol, no 8-State value is reported.
** Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case of smaller sample sizes,
caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

22

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Coconino County, Grade 8
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

23

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Coconino County, Grade 10
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

24

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Coconino County, Grade 12
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

25

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles
Low Neighborhood Attachment

Community Domain Risk Factors
Low neighborhood bonding is related to higher levels of 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.

Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

Community Domain Protective Factors
When opportunities are available in a community for positive participation, children are less likely to
engage in substance use and other problem behaviors.

Rewards for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for positive participation in activities helps youth bond to the community, thus lowering their risk
for substance use.

Poor Family Management

Family Domain Risk Factors
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.

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.

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.

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 Attachment

Family Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

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.

Academic Failure

Low Commitment to School

School Domain Risk Factors
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.
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.

26

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles (cont'd)
Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

School Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

Rebelliousness

Peer-Individual Risk Factors
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.

Early Initiation of Antisocial
Behavior and Drug Use

Early onset of drug use predicts the 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.

Attitudes Favorable Toward
Antisocial Behavior and Drug
Use

During the elementary school years, most children express anti-drug, anti-crime, and pro-social attitudes
and have 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Belief in the Moral Order

Peer-Individual Protective Factors
Young people who have a belief in what is “right” or “wrong” are less likely to use drugs.

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.

Prosocial Involvement

Participation in positive school and community activities helps provide protection for youth.

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.

27

Data Tables
Table 3. 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

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

46.5

50.9

47.5

47.8

69.4

71.4

62.6

66.2

76.3

79.9

76.7

74.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

51.0

41.7

34.5

25.9

53.3

59.9

44.5

39.9

58.6

70.2

52.6

50.8

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

19.6

12.8

11.1

7.1

17.9

20.4

14.9

12.9

19.1

26.6

19.6

17.7

Marijuana

used marijuana?

37.6

28.1

19.9

16.2

43.6

44.0

36.4

32.5

49.6

57.9

50.6

43.1

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

5.5

3.1

2.5

1.9

5.0

3.7

5.0

5.2

10.2

4.7

9.5

7.9

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

7.1

4.3

3.9

2.7

6.3

7.0

8.0

6.8

11.8

12.5

12.1

11.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

11.1

17.6

14.4

14.3

12.6

12.3

12.8

12.6

10.1

11.4

10.4

9.2

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

3.4

2.2

1.2

n/a

8.3

4.0

2.4

n/a

9.4

6.1

4.0

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

0.5

2.0

0.6

1.0

3.2

1.0

1.8

2.0

3.8

1.8

2.9

3.1

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2.1

2.0

3.6

2.2

5.8

6.0

5.5

4.9

8.7

5.2

7.8

7.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

1.7

1.4

1.7

n/a

1.4

1.8

2.3

n/a

0.8

1.7

2.4

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

15.6

12.2

n/a

n/a

21.4

20.5

n/a

n/a

27.2

24.6

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

6.1

n/a

n/a

n/a

6.5

n/a

n/a

n/a

11.5

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

4.9

4.2

3.8

n/a

2.7

6.3

7.6

n/a

7.7

4.1

7.9

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

10.1

8.8

9.2

8.3

19.2

10.2

10.6

12.0

23.2

18.1

11.9

13.2

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of 2008 prescription stimulant, sedative
and pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

14.5

21.2

17.1

n/a

14.5

25.2

25.7

n/a

21.9

31.5

28.7

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

11.4

9.7

n/a

n/a

11.8

12.9

n/a

n/a

9.8

13.4

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

28

Data Tables
Table 4. 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 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

24.5

26.7

22.2

23.2

43.2

37.9

34.2

37.7

47.3

48.1

38.6

46.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

23.5

14.9

10.6

8.7

23.3

23.5

16.3

16.6

28.3

26.7

21.3

23.9

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

8.0

3.9

3.9

2.6

4.8

6.0

5.1

4.6

5.2

8.5

7.8

6.8

Marijuana

used marijuana?

23.2

13.5

10.0

7.6

19.9

19.0

16.9

15.1

19.3

21.6

21.5

18.7

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

2.5

1.4

0.8

0.8

2.2

1.0

2.5

1.9

2.8

1.5

3.2

2.4

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

1.5

1.9

2.2

1.0

2.6

2.4

2.8

2.2

4.3

1.5

2.3

3.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

3.0

5.9

3.9

5.4

2.7

3.3

2.0

3.0

0.9

1.1

2.6

1.6

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

1.0

0.6

0.4

n/a

1.4

0.5

0.6

n/a

1.1

0.0

0.8

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

0.0

0.8

0.0

0.4

0.9

0.7

0.0

0.7

1.0

0.7

0.9

1.0

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

1.0

0.7

0.6

0.8

0.7

1.4

2.3

1.5

0.7

0.7

0.3

2.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

0.5

0.3

0.7

n/a

0.7

1.3

1.0

n/a

0.0

0.3

1.0

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

7.6

6.0

n/a

n/a

8.8

9.4

n/a

n/a

9.9

10.5

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

2.0

n/a

n/a

n/a

2.2

n/a

n/a

n/a

4.2

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

2.6

1.1

1.6

n/a

0.7

1.0

2.9

n/a

3.3

0.0

2.1

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

3.6

4.9

3.1

3.4

10.6

2.1

2.0

4.5

10.8

8.5

4.1

5.0

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of prescription stimulant, sedative and
pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

8.0

9.8

8.6

n/a

3.8

9.8

12.2

n/a

11.3

11.6

13.1

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

5.3

5.6

n/a

n/a

5.8

6.4

n/a

n/a

4.9

5.9

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

29

Data Tables
z

Table 5. Percentage of Students Reporting Heavy ATOD Use
Grade 8

Binge Drinking

1/2 Pack (or
more) of
Cigarettes/Day

How many times have you
had 5 or more alcoholic
drinks in a row in the
past 2 weeks?
During the past 30 days, how many
cigarettes did you smoke per day?
(11 to 20 cigarettes, More than 20
cigarettes)

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

19.8

17.4

12.2

0.0

0.5

1.4

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

13.1

26.4

24.7

21.7

0.7

2.2

2.2

2.3

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

22.4

32.9

25.0

23.6

30.2

2.1

5.5

3.5

3.2

4.2

Table 6. Percentage of Students Reporting Antisocial Behavior
How many times in the past year
(12 months) have you:
(One or more times)
Suspended from School
Drunk or High at School
Sold Illegal Drugs
Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle
Been Arrested
Attacked Someone with the Idea
of Seriously Hurting Them
Carried a Handgun
Carried a Handgun to School
During the past 30 days, how many
times did you:
(One or more times)

Grade 8

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

28.6

23.1

19.7

21.4

18.6

12.9

7.6

6.3

9.5

5.5

16.2

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

20.2

10.5

12.3

14.1

14.6

8.2

10.2

9.8

10.2

12.0

26.3

29.3

22.0

20.5

27.2

29.7

24.1

22.2

5.4

4.6

8.9

6.2

8.6

9.8

10.8

11.1

10.1

10.4

3.8

3.6

5.6

3.9

4.1

3.7

4.2

2.4

1.7

2.7

11.7

9.0

7.5

11.0

13.2

10.4

9.2

14.2

7.3

12.1

8.7

19.6

17.8

17.4

18.1

16.8

17.4

15.4

16.1

13.9

14.5

9.2

12.9

10.5

8.3

8.9

7.7

5.8

7.3

6.6

7.2

6.3

9.0

9.2

8.1

1.9
1.6
Grade 8

1.2

1.5

1.0
1.0
Grade 10

1.3

2.3

1.0
1.2
Grade 12

1.4

1.5
County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

DRIVE a car or other vehicle when you had
been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

9.6

6.0

RIDE in a car or other vehicle driven by
someone who had been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

32.1

25.7

State
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

5.6

n/a

10.5

9.1

29.1

n/a

31.4

26.1

* These categories were not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

30

State
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

7.9

n/a

17.1

13.5

16.1

29.1

n/a

30.4

26.2

29.7

Data Tables
Table 7. Percentage of Students Gambling in the Past Year
How often have you done the following for money,
possessions, or anything of value:
County
2004
(At least once in the past 12 months or more)
Any Gambling
Played a slot machine, poker machine
or other gambling machine?
Played the lottery or scratch-off tickets?
Bet on sports?*
Played cards?
Bought a raffle ticket?
Played bingo?
Gambled on the Internet?
Played a dice game?*
Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?*
Bet on a horse or other animal race?*
Table 8. Percentage of Students Reporting Protection

Grade 8
County
2008

n/a

61.1

71.5

n/a

3.8

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

69.1

n/a

51.5

67.8

65.9

n/a

51.6

63.4

60.6

3.8

6.4

n/a

2.0

5.0

6.1

n/a

1.5

2.6

5.8

32.8
n/a
23.3
n/a
20.5
6.4
n/a

24.1
37.2
42.3
30.7
29.6
4.9
27.6

24.8
31.8
43.7
20.4
32.6
6.3
31.5

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

27.7
n/a
24.4
n/a
11.4
4.4
n/a

23.4
32.2
46.2
25.4
26.9
3.8
26.2

21.8
30.2
43.7
20.7
23.2
5.1
25.1

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

22.6
n/a
29.9
n/a
12.9
2.9
n/a

20.2
28.1
44.1
26.9
13.1
3.2
21.4

19.0
25.6
40.6
18.9
14.7
4.7
19.2

n/a

29.0

33.0

32.7

n/a

22.1

30.5

31.3

n/a

23.0

26.7

27.0

n/a

n/a

7.1

6.4

n/a

n/a

4.3

5.8

n/a

n/a

4.0

5.1

Grade 8

Protective Factor
Community Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Domain
Family Attachment
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
School Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer-Individual Domain
Belief in the Moral Order
Interaction with Prosocial Peers*
Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Total Protection
Students with High Protection**

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2006

State
2008

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

33.0
32.3

40.7
28.9

44.7
35.0

43.4
55.1
54.3

53.0
58.2
65.9

54.8
46.0

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

39.3
31.3

40.0
37.7

29.9
38.8

47.6
41.6

59.0
65.1
64.9

51.5
59.7
61.4

46.9
54.9
58.1

44.2
53.2
57.2

67.2
57.5

63.6
49.2

60.3
51.2

62.6
66.1

56.1
39.8
30.3
62.4

59.5
50.4
37.1
62.4

64.8
51.5
45.4
61.3

59.4
53.1
39.0
59.4

40.0

43.2

45.1

43.8

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

37.1
35.4

40.0
33.7

36.4
31.2

32.1
38.4

36.1
33.2

47.7
57.8
56.4

46.1
54.0
55.1

59.1
58.8
62.7

60.7
57.9
66.2

56.2
54.7
56.3

56.2
55.2
55.8

61.3
66.2

66.7
69.8

62.4
59.8

58.8
51.6

65.1
49.5

66.1
50.3

64.3
45.4

65.8
56.9
49.2
62.3

67.5
53.7
39.1
64.3

72.1
62.1
43.9
66.3

66.5
55.3
41.2
59.7

53.2
49.9
40.2
49.5

48.2
52.4
36.8
53.1

59.1
57.0
43.3
55.5

53.6
52.5
36.4
52.2

54.5

48.7

55.0

46.7

47.2

45.7

48.0

43.3

*Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.
**High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.

31

State
2008

State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 9. Percentage of Students Reporting Risk
Grade 8
Risk Factor
Community Domain
Low Neighborhood Attachment
Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use
Perceived Availability of Drugs
Perceived Availability of Handguns
Family Domain
Poor Family Management
Family Conflict
Family History of Antisocial Behavior
Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use
School Domain
Academic Failure
Low Commitment to School
Peer-Individual Domain
Rebelliousness
Early Initiation of ASB
Early Initiation of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use
Perceived Risk of Drug Use
Interaction with Antisocial Peers
Friend's Use of Drugs
Rewards for ASB
Gang Involvement
Total Risk
Students at High Risk*

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

44.3
41.1
41.0
41.3

38.1
37.2
42.4
39.6

39.9
39.1
33.3
39.2

55.9
51.1
66.3
42.9
25.4

48.7
44.6
46.9
53.5
33.2

71.8
40.9

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

38.5
36.6
38.2
37.8

48.7
45.8
51.4
31.1

51.1
41.7
49.1
27.4

36.7
36.7
38.8
26.6

45.2
52.8
39.7
49.0
28.8

45.5
53.5
40.3
49.3
26.8

41.8
35.7
51.7
47.0
42.0

45.2
35.4
54.9
46.2
39.7

52.6
39.0

49.4
42.9

47.3
41.0

52.0
39.2

35.0
51.5
51.6
46.0
31.5
51.3
79.7
59.4
45.6
41.2

38.0
44.4
41.3
45.7
35.3
44.5
61.9
48.8
49.2
29.5

36.8
40.2
32.4
45.2
28.6
39.0
54.5
38.5
46.9
27.6

43.1
39.4
30.3
44.6
29.1
44.5
58.2
39.4
45.6
26.9

54.5

43.5

36.6

38.7

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

46.2
42.1
49.6
26.7

49.5
41.9
52.8
33.8

60.3
39.9
54.0
32.7

50.2
36.7
49.7
31.0

51.0
36.3
52.2
33.1

40.7
37.4
41.5
46.8
36.7

42.8
42.8
41.1
53.4
41.1

42.8
32.6
48.3
44.1
41.8

42.5
33.0
47.4
46.4
40.0

44.6
36.8
41.2
51.7
42.3

44.3
38.3
37.3
50.2
41.2

57.9
40.1

46.2
36.7

49.5
43.7

46.5
46.7

51.2
38.3

48.4
44.7

44.4
45.6

36.5
41.9
44.5
53.3
43.1
41.2
56.5
47.6
41.8
22.6

47.9
46.9
49.5
55.4
42.5
37.4
63.2
51.4
43.5
29.8

42.1
43.5
37.1
48.7
34.0
37.7
51.0
39.6
41.5
23.0

46.8
42.0
32.7
50.7
37.4
42.3
57.3
41.9
44.0
23.2

30.4
44.5
48.5
52.7
41.9
47.3
56.1
40.6
53.8
19.8

43.4
45.8
49.7
49.1
40.0
42.0
50.2
39.8
54.9
16.8

40.2
45.2
38.2
47.8
32.0
45.4
46.1
33.9
55.0
22.2

44.0
41.2
33.1
46.9
36.3
46.5
53.2
37.3
54.6
16.8

42.5

42.1

34.5

37.5

40.7

37.0

38.0

35.7

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors)

32

Grade 12
State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 10. Where Youth Obtained Alcohol
Grade 8

If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)

County
2008

Sample size*
I bought it in a store such as a liquor store, convenience store,
supermarket, discount store, or gas station
I bought it at a restaurant, bar, or club
I bought it at a public event such as a concert or sporting event

Grade 10

State
2008

County
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2008

State
2008

64

4,418

111

4,872

118

5,065

1.6

5.0

6.3

6.9

11.9

12.3

0.0
3.1

3.0
2.9

0.0
3.6

3.0
2.9

5.9
2.5

7.0
3.9

I gave someone else money to buy it for me

29.7

21.4

45.0

34.4

43.2

43.7

My parent or guardian gave it to me
Another family member who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone not related to me who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone under the age of 21 gave it to me
I got it at a party
I took it from home
I took it from a store or someone else's home
I got it some other way

10.9
23.4
25.0
35.9
39.1
29.7
10.9

18.7
19.7
19.2
23.8
41.5
31.4
11.7

12.6
17.1
34.2
27.9
47.7
29.7
18.0

14.8
18.7
28.7
24.8
53.1
23.2
11.3

5.1
21.2
45.8
28.8
52.5
13.6
7.6

13.0
18.2
39.5
22.0
57.6
13.8
8.0

37.5

28.7

25.2

23.6

20.3

17.9

* Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case
of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

33

Data Tables
Table 11. Percentage of Students Reporting School Safety Issues
Grade 8
County
2004

Question

County
2006

Grade 10

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

Grade 12

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
has someone threatened or injured you with a 4-5 times
weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school 6-7 times
property?
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

80.0
8.2
7.2
2.6
0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0

82.0
8.8
3.9
3.1
0.4
0.2
0.0
1.5

86.0
7.1
4.4
0.8
0.3
0.0
0.3
1.1

87.1
6.6
3.5
1.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.9

84.3
7.6
4.4
1.2
0.7
0.5
0.2
1.2

89.4
5.0
3.4
1.2
0.0
0.3
0.3
0.3

89.7
4.8
4.0
0.3
0.0
0.3
0.0
1.0

88.4
5.9
3.0
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.1

88.7
5.2
3.3
0.9
1.2
0.0
0.2
0.5

88.9
4.2
4.8
1.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.7

94.5
2.3
1.4
0.9
0.3
0.3
0.0
0.3

92.4
3.9
2.0
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.7

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
4-5 times
were you in a physical fight on school property? 6-7 times
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

57.6
18.2
15.7
4.0
2.5
0.0
0.5
1.5

71.5
12.8
10.4
2.0
0.4
0.9
0.4
1.5

77.1
11.6
6.4
3.0
1.1
0.3
0.0
0.6

76.5
12.9
6.9
1.7
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.7

79.1
12.2
4.9
1.5
1.0
0.3
0.0
0.9

80.7
10.9
5.9
0.6
0.3
0.6
0.0
0.9

83.4
9.3
4.5
1.0
0.3
0.5
0.0
1.0

85.2
8.8
3.9
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.7

86.5
6.4
3.3
1.9
0.2
0.5
0.0
1.2

88.3
6.9
3.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.4

89.9
5.8
2.9
0.6
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.6

91.5
5.0
2.1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how often have you
4-5 times
been picked on or bullied by a student ON
6-7 times
SCHOOL PROPERTY?*
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

66.2
14.4

59.4
13.2
11.5
4.3
1.9
1.2
0.8
7.7

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

71.7
11.8

4.0

71.4
11.6
6.3
3.0
1.8
0.8
0.8
4.5

69.1
10.3
9.6
3.2
1.4
1.1
0.6
4.6

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

85.5
7.2

3.8

55.9
14.0
12.9
4.7
1.1
1.7
1.9
7.7

1.4

82.5
4.9
5.2
2.6
0.6
0.9
0.0
3.4

82.3
6.6
5.7
1.5
0.8
0.5
0.3
2.4

90.7
4.7
2.2
1.1
1.3

92.6
4.4
1.9
0.5
0.5

89.9
5.8
2.7
0.6
1.0

91.0
5.1
1.2
1.4
1.4

92.2
2.8
3.1
0.3
1.6

95.7
2.3
0.8
1.0
0.3

91.1
5.1
2.2
0.6
1.0

94.3
3.1
0.7
0.9
0.9

95.2
2.8
1.0
1.0
0.0

97.7
1.4
0.9
0.0
0.0

93.8
3.3
1.8
0.4
0.7

92.2
1.7
1.2
0.6
4.3

94.4
1.5
1.1
0.5
2.6

0 days

During the past 30 days, on how many days did
1 day
you not go to school because you felt you would
2-3 days
be unsafe at school or on your way to or from
4-5 days
school?

6 or more days

79.6
12.2
4.6
1.5
2.0

15.6

0 days

12.5

5.9

89.2
88.6
93.9
93.9
93.1
91.5
89.8
93.8
89.6
89.0
7.2
3.4
3.6
3.1
3.2
1.6
3.3
2.2
2.1
1.4
1.5
2.9
1.4
1.3
1.5
2.8
1.5
1.2
1.4
1.7
0.5
1.3
0.0
0.5
0.5
1.3
1.0
0.5
0.5
1.0
6 or more days
1.5
3.8
1.1
1.2
1.7
2.8
4.3
2.2
6.4
6.9
* In 2006 the choices for this question were Never , Once , Several Times and Very Often. This category was not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

During the past 30 days, on how many days did 1 day
you carry a weapon such as a gun, knife, or
2-3 days
club ON SCHOOL PROPERTY?
4-5 days

34

Data Tables
Table 12. Drug Free Communities Report*
County 2008
Outcome

Definition

Substance

Grade 8

Grade 10

Grade 12

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

Perception of Risk
(People are at Moderate or Great Risk
of harming themselves if they... )

Perception of Parent Disapproval
(Parents feel it would be Wrong or
Very Wrong to... )

Perception of Peer Disapproval
(I think it is Wrong or Very Wrong for
someone my age to...)

Past 30-Day Use

Female†

Sample Percent

Sample

drink 1 or two drinks nearly every day

Alcohol

67.1

343

69.6

392

68.2

337

63.1

502

73.2

556

smoke 1 or more packs or cigarettes
per day

Cigarettes

87.2

345

93.1

392

91.7

339

89.5

505

92.1

557

smoke marijuana regularly

Marijuana

84.6

338

78.4

379

68.4

329

71.5

492

82.6

541

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

94.1

306

84.4

384

78.1

329

85.2

472

85.4

533

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

97.4

305

93.0

387

85.2

331

90.3

473

92.9

536

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

96.4

303

91.4

385

86.9

329

91.1

471

91.5

532

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

82.0

367

68.8

397

60.2

347

68.3

530

72.3

566

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

87.2

367

79.6

398

70.0

347

76.2

530

81.7

567

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

87.4

365

77.8

396

66.0

347

74.4

528

79.8

565

Alcohol

22.2

360

34.2

398

38.6

345

35.4

523

28.1

565

at least one use in the Past 30 Days

Cigarettes

10.6

349

16.3

393

21.3

342

20.4

510

12.5

560

10.0

360

16.9

397

21.5

344

18.7

520

13.5

565

Sample Percent

Sample

Marijuana

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

had more than a sip or two of beer,
wine or hard liquor?
Average Age of Onset**
(How old were you when you first…)

Male†

Sample Percent

smoked a cigarette, even just a puff?

smoked marijuana?

Alcohol
Average age:
Cigarettes
Average age:
Marijuana
Average age:

49.9

365

65.3

11.8 years
32.5

363

11.5 years
20.1

363
12 years

395

78.7

13 years
47.0

394

12.5 years
38.2

393

13.2 years

Sample Percent

348
14 years

54.8

347

13.1 years
52.3

346

14.2 years

66.9

528

12.9 years
48.6

527

12.5 years
39.0

526

13.3 years

62.5

565

13.3 years
41.5

561

12.5 years
34.6

560

13.5 years

* The “Sample” column represents the sample size (the number of youth who answered the question). The "Percent" column represents the percentage of youth in the sample answering the question as defined.
** For Average Age of Onset, “Sample” represents the number of youth who answered the question (including students responding that they never used). 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.

† 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.

35

Appendix
Appendix - Comparability of survey administratons
Issue
Drug Category

2004 AYS
On how many occasions (if any) have you:

2006 AYS

2008 AYS

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Notes regarding changes

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Hallucinogens

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the
past 30 days?

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the past
30 days?

Used LSD or other hallucinogens during the
past 30 days?

Substituted "hallucinogens" for "psychedelics" in 2008.
Comparable across all years.

Methamphetamines

Not applicable, no methamphetamine-specific
item on 2004 AYS

Used methamphetamines (meth, speed, crank,
crystal meth)?

Used methamphetamines (meth, crystal,
crank)?

2006 and 2008 provide slightly different examples, but
are cautiously comparable.

Prescription
stimulants

Used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”,
“crystal”, “crank”) without a doctor telling you
to take them?

Used stimulants, other than methamphetamines
(such as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin,
Adderal, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling
you to take them?

2004 is not comparable to any other years, data are
presented for archival interest. 2006 and 2008 data are
cautiously comparable.

Prescription
sedatives

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such
as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping
pills)?

2008 AYS added descriptor "prescription" and removed
qualifier "without a doctor telling you to take them." 2008
data are cautiously comparable with other years.

Ecstasy

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2008 AYS used "ecstasy" as the primary descriptor and
moved "MDMA" to examples. Comparable across years.

Prescription
drugs

Not applicable, no prescription drugs item on
2004 AYS

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills),
stimulants, other than methamphetamines (such
as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine) or
other prescription drugs (such as Oxycontin)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes)

Used prescription stimulants (Ritalin,
Adderall, or Dexedrine), sedatives
(tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax,
barbiturates, or sleeping pills) or pain relievers
(Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes )

In 2006, responses to the stimulant, sedative and other
prescription drug questions were calculated as one
measure. (2006 had no prescription pain reliever item.) In
2008, responses to the stimulant, sedative and
prescription pain reliever questions were calculated as
one measure. (2008 had no standalone prescription drug
item.) 2006 and 2008 data are cautiously comparable.
(Note that composite 2006 data will not match past
reports' prescription drugs category.)

Gambling
Category

Not applicable, no gambling items
on 2004 AYS

How often during the past 12 months
have you:

How often have you done the following for
money, possessions, or anything of value:

Sports betting

n/a

Bet on team sports?

Bet on sports?

Not comparable across years.

Race betting

n/a

Bet money on horse races?

Bet on a horse race or other animal race?

Not comparable across years.

Dice

n/a

Bet on dice games such as craps?

Played a dice game?

Not comparable across years.

Games of skill

n/a

Bet on games of personal skill such as pool,
darts, or bowling?

Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?

Comparable across years.

Protective Scale:
Peer-Individual
Interaction with
Prosocial Peers

Think of your four best friends (the friends you feel closest to). In the past year (12 months), how many of your best friends have:
(Scale is calculated based on the average response [0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 friends] to the following questions)
...participated in clubs, organizations and activities at school? ...made the commitment to stay drug-free?
...tried to do well in school? ...liked school? ...regularly attended religious services?(removed in 2008)

36

Regularly attended religious services was removed from
2008 AYS. 2004 and 2006 have been recalculated to
match 2008 AYS and are now comparable across all
years. Due to this recalculation, current reports may differ
slightly from past reports.

Contacts for Prevention
Arizona Department of Education
Student Services Division
www.ade.az.gov

Regional Prevention Contacts
Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, and Santa Cruz
Counties
Bill Burnett
Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)
(520) 618-8807

Arizona Department of Health Services
Division of Behavioral Health Services
Lisa Shumaker
(602) 364-4594
www.azdhs.gov/bhs/index.htm

Gila, La Paz, Pinal, and Yuma Counties
Linda Weinberg
Cenpatico Behavioral Health of Arizona
(866) 495-6738

Arizona Prevention Resource Center
(800) 432-2772
www.azprevention.org

Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai
Counties
Petrice Post
Northern Arizona Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(NARBHA)
(928) 214-2177

Center for Violence Prevention and Community
Safety
Charles Katz
(602) 543-6618
charles.katz@asu.edu
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)
http://prevention.samhsa.gov

Maricopa County
Juan Aristizabal
Magellan
(602) 797-8256

Governor’s Office of Children, Youth, and
Families
(602) 542-4043
http://www.governor.state.az.us/cyf/index.html

Gila River Indian Community
Joan Grey
Gila River Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(602) 528-7136

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities
U.S. Department of Education
www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS

Pasqua Yaqui Tribe
Centered Spirit Program
Jill Fabian
(520) 879-6067

Arizona Department of Gaming's Office of
Problem Gambling
Elise Mikkelsen
(602) 266-8299 ext. 351
www.problemgambling.az.gov

Navajo Nation
Department of Behavioral Health Services
(928) 871-6235

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMSHA)
www.samhsa.gov

White Mountain Apache Tribe
Apache Behavioral Health Services
(928) 338-4811

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/

Colorado River Indian Tribes
(928) 669-6577

Western Regional Center for the Application of
Prevention Technologies (CAPT)
www.westcapt.org

Other State and National Contacts:
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
Michelle Neitch/ Phillip Stevenson
(602) 364-1173/(602) 364-1157
www.azcjc.gov

Bach Harrison, L.L.C.
R. Steven Harrison, Ph.D.
(801) 359-2064
www.bach-harrison.com

37

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Gila County

REPORT PROVIDED BY:

Arizona Criminal Justice Commission

1

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Shining Light on Arizona Youth
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:
Arizona Department of Gaming’s Office of Problem Gambling
Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission
Arizona Parent’s Commission on Drug Education and Prevention
Governor’s Division for Substance Abuse Policy
Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Tobacco Education and Prevention Program,
Arizona Department of Health Services

2

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 2008 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:
Jean Ajamie, Arizona Department of Education
Michelle Anderson, Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections
Steve Ballance, Maricopa County
Carisa Dwyer, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Charles Katz, Arizona State University
Dr. Manuel Medina, TERROS, Inc.
Kim O’Connor, Governor’s Office for
Children, Youth, and Families
Holly Orozco, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Catherine Osborn, Arizona Department of Education
Richard Porter, Arizona Department of Health Services
Gowri Shetty, Arizona Department of Health Services
Lisa Shumaker, Arizona Department of Health Services
Wendy Wolfersteig, Arizona State University
Nicole Yancey Johnson, Arizona Early Childhood Development
and Health Board
Governor’s Youth Commission

Additionally, the success of the 2008 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.

3

Introduction
CONTENTS:

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Summary for
Gila County

Introduction
The Risk and Protective
Factor Model of
Prevention
The Arizona Substance
Abuse Partnership
How to Read the Charts

This report summarizes some of the
findings from the 2008 Arizona Youth
Survey (AYS) administered to 8th, 10th
and 12th grade students during the
spring of 2008. The results for your
county are presented along with
comparisons to 2004 and 2006 survey
results where applicable, as well as to
the overall results for the state. 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.

Practical Implications of
the Assessment
Assessment and
Planning
Data Charts:
• Substance Use

All schools in Arizona are eligible to
participate in the survey, and
recruitment efforts were successful in
obtaining participation by schools in all
of the 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.

•

Antisocial Behavior
and Gambling

•

Risk & Protective
Factor Profiles
Where Youth
Obtained Alcohol
School Safety

•
•

Risk and Protective
Factor Scale Definitions
Data Tables
Contacts for Prevention
Appendix

Table 1 contains the characteristics of
the students who completed the survey

Table 1. Characteristics of Participants
Student Totals
County 2004

Total Students

Number

County 2006

Percent

Number

County 2008

Percent

Number

State 2008

Percent

Number

Percent

832

100

831

100

835

100

54,734

100

8

215

25.8

360

43.3

369

44.2

25,695

46.9

10

342

41.1

284

34.2

264

31.6

16,089

29.4

12

275

33.1

187

22.5

202

24.2

12,950

23.7

Male

410

50.0

393

48.4

391

47.7

26,213

48.8

Female

410

50.0

419

51.6

428

52.3

27,514

51.2

186

22.8

173

21.3

176

16.8

4,812

7.4

9

1.1

4

0.5

28

2.7

3,915

6.0

Hispanic

172

21.1

163

20.0

302

28.8

21,525

32.9

White

385

47.2

428

52.6

508

48.5

31,887

48.8

Asian

4

0.5

5

0.6

15

1.4

2,117

3.2

Pacific Islander

6

0.7

2

0.2

19

1.8

1,115

1.7

Grade

Gender

Ethnicity*
Native American
African American

*In 2008, students could mark more than one ethnic category and the 'other' category was removed.

4

from your county and the state.
Because not every student answered all
of the questions, the number of
students in the gender and ethnicity
categories often will be less than the
total number of students.
Whenever data is obtained from a
sample of students instead of the entire
population, it is important to recognize
the strengths and weaknesses of the
data. One quick and 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 participated in the
survey and those that did not.
Changes to the AYS
Survey for 2008
In an effort to shorten the AYS and
make it more responsive to local
priorities, the following changes were
made for 2008: 1) some of the
substance use questions were refined
and the use of over-the-counter drugs
was added, 2) some risk and protective
factor scales were removed where the
data could easily be obtained from
other sources or the scales measured
similar constructs (scales removed are

Risk and Protective Factors
Transitions and Mobility, Community
Disorganization, Intention to Use Drugs, and Social
Skills), 3) questions about where students get the
alcohol they drink were added, 4) an 8-State Norm
was added that can be used to compare the AYS
results on risk, protection, and antisocial behavior to a
more national sample (see the description of the 8State Norm later in this report), and 5) National
Outcome Measures that are needed for measuring the
performance of federally funded programs in Arizona
such as talking to parents about the dangers of
substance use were added.

Washington, Social Development Research Group
have investigated the relationship between risk and
protective factors and youth problem behavior. They
have found, for example, that children who live in
families with high levels of conflict are more likely
to become involved in problem behaviors such as
delinquency and drug use than children who live in
families with low levels of family conflict.
Protective factors exert a positive influence or buffer
against the negative influence of risk, thus reducing the
likelihood that adolescents will engage in problem
behaviors. Protective factors identified through research
include social bonding to family, school, community,
and peers; healthy beliefs and clear standards for
behavior; and individual characteristics. For bonding to
serve as a protective influence, it must occur through
involvement with peers and adults who communicate
healthy values and set clear standards for behavior.

The Risk and Protective Factor Model of
Substance Abuse Prevention
Many states, school districts and local agencies have
adopted the Risk and Protective Factor Model to
guide their prevention efforts. The Risk and
Protective Factor Model of Prevention 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 identified a set of risk factors for
youth problem behaviors. Risk factors are
characteristics of school, community, and family
environments, as well as characteristics of students
and their peer groups that are known to predict
increased likelihood of drug use, delinquency, school
dropout, teen pregnancy, and violent behavior among
youth. Dr. J. David Hawkins, Dr. Richard F.
Catalano, and their colleagues at the University of

T
T

T

T

T
T

T
T

T
T

T

T

Teen Pregnancy

T

School Drop-Out
Violence

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

SOURCE: COMMUNITIES THAT CARE (CTC) PREVENTION MODEL, CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION (CSAP), SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMSHA)

5

Constitutional Factors

Gang Involvement

Favorable Attitudes Toward
Drug Use & Other
Problem Behaviors

Friends Who Use Drugs &
Engage in a Problem Behavior

Alienation & Rebelliousness

Early & Persistent
Antisocial Behavior

Peer / Individual
Early Initiation of Drug Use &
Other Problem Behavior

Lack of Commitment to
School

Academic Failure

School
Favorable Parent Attitudes &
Involvement in the
Problem Behavior

T
T
T
T
T

Family Management Problems

T
T
T
T
T

Family Conflict

Community Disorganization

Low Neighborhood
Attachment

Transitions & Mobility

Availability of Drugs &
Firearms

T
T

Family History of the
Problem Behavior

Delinquency

The chart below shows the links between the 19 risk
factors and the five problem behaviors. The check
marks have been placed in the chart to indicate where
at least two well designed, published research studies
have shown a link between the risk factor and the
problem behavior.

Family

Extreme Economic &
Social Deprivation

Substance Abuse

Community
Community Laws & Norms
Favorable Toward Drug Use,
Firearms & Crime

Risk
Factors

By measuring both risk and protective factors in a
population, prevention programs can be implemented
that are designed to reduce the elevated risk factors and
increase the protective factors. For example, if academic
failure is identified as an elevated risk factor in a
community, then mentoring, tutoring, and increased
opportunities and rewards for classroom participation
can be provided to improve academic performance.

T
T

T
T

T

T

The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership
The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP) was established by Governor Napolitano’s Executive Order
2007-12 in June 2007. Chaired by the Governor’s Chief of Staff, ASAP is composed of representatives from
state government entities, federal entities, and community organizations. ASAP serves as the single statewide
council on substance abuse prevention, enforcement, and treatment.
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
prevention, treatment, and enforcement. Through coordination among its members and their agencies and
organizations ASAP strives to ensure that substance abuse funding is spent in the most efficient and efficacious
manner.
ASAP has identified four strategic focus areas for 2008: 1) child welfare and substance abuse; 2) law enforcement
and drug trafficking; 3) emerging trends and the state’s capacity to respond; and 4) data-driven decisions and
policy development.
There are currently six sub-committees that assist ASAP in meeting their goals:
•

Arizona Underage Drinking Committee - The purpose of this subcommittee is to develop a
statewide underage drinking initiative to prevent and reduce underage drinking in Arizona. Their
activities include state-level infrastructure change to improve cross coordination/collaboration
between state agencies; developing a comprehensive statewide prevention system focused on
preventing underage drinking; and collaborative projects to more effectively utilize resources
and support local efforts.

•

Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The purpose of this work group is to
continuously evaluate data related to substance abuse to move the state system through a datadriven process. This is achieved through the completion of a statewide Substance Abuse
Epidemiology Profile. This profile will be updated every two years, with specific analyses
completed each year.

•

Emerging Issues Sub-Committee of the Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The
purpose of this sub-committee is to provide understanding of emerging substance abuse
consumption and consequence trends in Arizona to state agencies, Boards, Commissions and
Committees, and ASAP and its sub-committees.

•

Methamphetamine Task Force – The purpose of this task force is to bring together
representatives from state agencies, local government, businesses, and community groups to
develop collaborative efforts among treatment, prevention, and law enforcement systems to
assess and address the impact of methamphetamine statewide through information sharing,
resource allocation, service coordination, and the development of statewide policy
recommendations sensitive to the needs of local and tribal communities.

•

Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team – The Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team serves as the
advisory body and policy-making entity for the Arizona Co-Occurring State Incentive Grant.
Team members represent a number of state agencies and community-based organizations.

•

Workforce Development Committee – This committee was formed specifically to identify and
address substance abuse prevention training and technical assistance needs across Arizona. This
will, in turn, help strengthen instruction for prevention professionals and volunteers in
community coalitions.

6

How to Read the Charts in this Report
There are five types of charts presented in this
report: 1) substance use, 2) antisocial behavior and
youth gambling, 3) risk factors, 4) protective factors,
and 5) where youth obtained alcohol. When
available, data from the 2004 and 2006
administrations will be included in the charts. The
actual percentages from the charts are presented in
tables at the end of this report.

•

Substance Use Charts
This report contains information about alcohol,
tobacco, and other drug use (referred to as ATOD
use throughout this report) and other problem
behaviors of students. The bars on each chart
represent the percentage of students in that grade
who reported the behavior. The three sections in the
charts represent different types of problem
behaviors. The definitions of each of the types of
behavior are provided below.
•

Risk and Protective Factor Charts
The risk and protective factor charts show the
percentage of students at high risk and with high
protection for each of the risk and protective factor
scales. The risk and protective factor scales measure
specific aspects of youths’ life experiences that are
predictive of whether they will engage in problem
behaviors. A definition of each risk and protective
factor scale is contained in Table 2. The factors are
grouped into four domains: community, family, school,
and peer/individual.

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.

•

Heavy use includes binge drinking (having five
or more drinks in a row during the two weeks
prior to the survey) and use of one-half a pack
or more of cigarettes per day.

The bars on the risk and protective factor charts,
represent the percentage of students whose answers
reflect significant risk or protection. There are bars for
the last three administrations of the AYS: 2004, 2006,
and 2008. By looking at 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 and
when assessing risk reduction and protective factor
enhancement efforts.

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol Charts

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling
Charts
•

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 animal
races. The chart also shows the percentage of
students who engaged in any gambling behavior
during the past year.

This chart displays data regarding the ways that
students obtained alcohol in the past 30 days. The data
focus on a subgroup of students who indicated at least
one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no
alcohol use are not represented.) It is important to note
that the charts represent a subgroup of users and not
the entire survey population. Additionally, the smaller
the sample, the more dramatic the influence of a
student's responses. For example, 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 legend indicates the sample size for
each grade surveyed to help clarify the value of the data.

Antisocial behavior (ASB) is a measure of
the percentage of students who report any
involvement during the past year with eight
antisocial behaviors: suspended from school,
drunk or high at school, sold illegal drugs,
stolen a vehicle, been arrested, attacked
someone to harm them, carried a handgun,
taken a handgun to school. The chart also
displays any incidents in the past 30 days of
drinking and driving or riding in a car with a
drinking driver.
7

How to Read the Charts in this Report (cont’d)
School Safety Charts

community and a more national sample. The 8-State
Norm value for each risk and protective factor scale
represents the percentage of youth at risk or with
protection for eight states across the country
(Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana,
Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah). In developing the
8-State Norm, the contribution of each of eight
states was proportional to its percentage of the
national population, which helps to make the results
more representative of youth nation-wide. A
comparison between the ATOD use rates from the
8-State norm and those from the national
Monitoring the Future Survey showed the rates to
be very similar, which provides added confidence in
the validity of the 8-State Norm. Brief definitions of
the risk and protective factors scales are provided in
Table 2 following the profile charts. For more
information about risk and protective factors, please
refer to the resources listed on the last page of this
report under Contacts for Prevention.

The school safety 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 or were picked on or
bullied at school. The complete questions and values
for each response option can be seen in Table 11.

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 Survey or
the 8-State Norm (described below). A comparison to
the state-wide and national results provides additional
information for your community in determining the
relative significance of levels of 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.

Drug Free Communities Reports
Table 12 contains the information that is reported
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 8-State Norm
The diamonds on the charts allow a comparison
between the levels of risk and protection in your

Practical Implications of the Assessment
No Child Left Behind
The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities section of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) requires that
schools and communities use six Principles of Effectiveness to guide their decisions and spending on federally
funded prevention and intervention programs. First introduced in 1998 by the Department of Education, the
Principles of Effectiveness outline a data-driven process for ensuring that prevention programs achieve the desired
results. The Principles of Effectiveness stipulate that local prevention programs and activities must:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

be based on a needs assessment using objective data regarding the incidence of drug use and violence,
target specific performance objectives,
be based on scientific research and be proven to reduce violence or drug use,
be based on the analysis of predictor variables such as risk and protective factors,
include meaningful and ongoing parental input in program implementation, and
have periodic evaluations of established performance measures.

The results of the AYS presented in this report can help your school and community comply with the NCLB Act. The
Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior charts provide information related to Principle 1 and the Risk and Protective
Factor charts provide information related to Principle 4. Overall, using the risk and protective factor framework helps
schools meet all of the Principles of Effectiveness, and thereby assists schools in complying with the NCLB Act.
8

Assessment and Planning
School and Community Improvement Using Survey Data
Why Conduct the Arizona
Youth Survey?
Data from the Arizona Youth
Survey can be used to help
schools and communities assess
current conditions and identify
and prioritize local prevention
issues.
Each risk and protective factor
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
county make key decisions
regarding regarding allocation
of resources, how and when to
address specific needs, and
which strategies are most
effective and known to produce
results.

What are the numbers telling you?
Review the charts and data tables presented in this report. Using the
table below, note your findings as you discuss the following questions.
Which 3-5 risk factors are of the greatest concern?
Which 3-5 protective factors are your community’s highest priority?
Which levels of 30-day drug use are of greatest concern?
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 of greatest concern?
º Which behaviors are your students exhibiting the most?
º At which grades do you see unacceptable behavior levels?
•
•
•

How to decide if a rate is “unacceptable.”
Look across the charts – which items stand out as either much
higher or much lower than the others?
• Compare your data with statewide and national data –
differences of five percent between local and other data are probably
significant.
•

Use these data for program and policy development.
Substance use and antisocial behavior data – identify issues, raise
awareness about the problems, and promote school and community
dialogue.
• Risk and protective factor data – identify key objectives that will
help your school or community achieve its prevention goals.
•

Use the resources listed on the last page of this report, Contacts for
Prevention, for ideas about prevention programs that have proven
effective in addressing the risk factors that are high in your community
and improving the protective factors that are low.

MEASURE

Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate
#3
#4
#1
#2

Risk Factors
Protective Factors
Substance Use
Antisocial Behaviors

9

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

10

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Gila County, Grade 8

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

11

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Gila County, Grade 10

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

12

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Gila County, Grade 12

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Gila County, Grade 8
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

13

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Gila County, Grade 10
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

14

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Gila County, Grade 12
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

15

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Gila County, Grade 8

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

16

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Gila County, Grade 8
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

17

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Gila County, Grade 10

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

18

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Gila County, Grade 10
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

19

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Gila County, Grade 12

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

20

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Gila County, Grade 12
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

21

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol

WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL*
2008 Gila County Student Survey, Grades 8, 10 & 12
If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)
100
90
80
70

Percentages (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Got it some

other way

Took it from a
store or someone

else's home

County 2008, Grade 12
Sample: 75 students**

Took it from home

Got at a party

County 2008, Grade 10
Sample: 92 students**

Someone under
21 years

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

County 2008, Grade 8
Sample: 88 students**

State 2008

* Prior to 2008, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained alcohol. Also, because not all eight states ask where youth obtained alcohol, no 8-State value is reported.
** Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case of smaller sample sizes,
caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

22

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Gila County, Grade 8
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

23

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Gila County, Grade 10
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

24

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Gila County, Grade 12
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

25

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles
Low Neighborhood Attachment

Community Domain Risk Factors
Low neighborhood bonding is related to higher levels of 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.

Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

Community Domain Protective Factors
When opportunities are available in a community for positive participation, children are less likely to
engage in substance use and other problem behaviors.

Rewards for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for positive participation in activities helps youth bond to the community, thus lowering their risk
for substance use.

Poor Family Management

Family Domain Risk Factors
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.

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.

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.

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 Attachment

Family Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

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.

Academic Failure

Low Commitment to School

School Domain Risk Factors
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.
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.

26

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles (cont'd)
Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

School Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

Rebelliousness

Peer-Individual Risk Factors
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.

Early Initiation of Antisocial
Behavior and Drug Use

Early onset of drug use predicts the 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.

Attitudes Favorable Toward
Antisocial Behavior and Drug
Use

During the elementary school years, most children express anti-drug, anti-crime, and pro-social attitudes
and have 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Belief in the Moral Order

Peer-Individual Protective Factors
Young people who have a belief in what is “right” or “wrong” are less likely to use drugs.

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.

Prosocial Involvement

Participation in positive school and community activities helps provide protection for youth.

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.

27

Data Tables
Table 3. 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

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

53.5

63.7

55.2

47.8

68.0

70.2

70.4

66.2

87.8

78.2

78.8

74.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

42.9

44.5

38.7

25.9

44.2

48.9

55.3

39.9

62.6

50.3

54.9

50.8

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

9.0

23.3

19.7

7.1

20.5

26.7

31.7

12.9

31.1

29.1

29.9

17.7

Marijuana

used marijuana?

33.2

27.4

21.8

16.2

33.4

40.9

45.6

32.5

57.4

43.2

48.7

43.1

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

3.8

2.1

1.7

1.9

5.4

4.0

5.2

5.2

6.6

3.5

4.6

7.9

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

4.4

3.4

3.0

2.7

6.3

6.5

11.6

6.8

12.6

12.6

9.8

11.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

10.0

17.5

19.1

14.3

9.9

15.1

17.6

12.6

9.6

9.2

11.3

9.2

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

3.6

0.6

1.2

n/a

6.4

3.6

2.4

n/a

6.8

4.1

4.0

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

1.5

0.6

0.0

1.0

1.8

2.5

3.2

2.0

3.0

0.6

3.1

3.1

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2.4

2.2

1.1

2.2

3.3

1.3

5.2

4.9

4.1

2.9

2.6

7.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

1.5

2.8

1.7

n/a

1.3

2.8

2.3

n/a

2.4

2.6

2.4

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

15.8

12.2

n/a

n/a

23.6

20.5

n/a

n/a

25.9

24.6

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

3.8

n/a

n/a

n/a

5.4

n/a

n/a

n/a

7.7

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

4.9

2.5

3.8

n/a

5.3

5.2

7.6

n/a

5.3

6.2

7.9

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

13.0

9.3

8.3

8.3

12.4

15.3

11.6

12.0

15.6

15.4

10.9

13.2

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of 2008 prescription stimulant, sedative
and pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

15.1

18.9

17.1

n/a

20.8

28.0

25.7

n/a

19.2

29.4

28.7

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

13.3

9.7

n/a

n/a

16.1

12.9

n/a

n/a

18.1

13.4

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

28

Data Tables
Table 4. 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 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

29.2

34.3

29.6

23.2

39.8

48.1

43.5

37.7

58.5

42.1

42.9

46.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

18.4

15.6

16.0

8.7

16.4

22.6

25.0

16.6

23.8

20.1

25.1

23.9

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

3.3

13.0

9.4

2.6

8.9

14.7

13.1

4.6

12.9

7.3

11.2

6.8

Marijuana

used marijuana?

15.3

11.3

8.7

7.6

14.8

22.8

20.7

15.1

19.6

16.4

16.6

18.7

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

2.9

1.5

0.8

0.8

3.9

1.6

0.4

1.9

2.6

0.6

1.0

2.4

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

1.9

1.5

0.8

1.0

3.3

3.3

3.2

2.2

3.7

2.3

4.2

3.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

4.8

5.5

9.9

5.4

3.6

4.8

4.4

3.0

1.5

2.9

1.6

1.6

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

1.2

0.0

0.4

n/a

2.9

1.2

0.6

n/a

2.3

2.1

0.8

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.4

1.5

1.7

0.4

0.7

0.7

0.0

1.5

1.0

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

0.0

1.6

0.0

0.8

2.1

0.4

1.2

1.5

1.5

0.0

0.0

2.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

0.9

0.6

0.7

n/a

1.3

2.0

1.0

n/a

0.6

2.1

1.0

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

6.9

6.0

n/a

n/a

12.9

9.4

n/a

n/a

14.0

10.5

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

2.4

n/a

n/a

n/a

3.3

n/a

n/a

n/a

4.1

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

1.8

1.1

1.6

n/a

2.5

3.2

2.9

n/a

1.2

2.6

2.1

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

6.8

4.9

2.5

3.4

6.6

6.9

4.8

4.5

8.2

8.8

4.7

5.0

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of prescription stimulant, sedative and
pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

7.5

7.5

8.6

n/a

9.3

15.3

12.2

n/a

10.7

15.5

13.1

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

8.3

5.6

n/a

n/a

10.9

6.4

n/a

n/a

9.4

5.9

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

29

Data Tables
z

Table 5. Percentage of Students Reporting Heavy ATOD Use
Grade 8

Binge Drinking

1/2 Pack (or
more) of
Cigarettes/Day

How many times have you
had 5 or more alcoholic
drinks in a row in the
past 2 weeks?
During the past 30 days, how many
cigarettes did you smoke per day?
(11 to 20 cigarettes, More than 20
cigarettes)

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

23.9

19.3

18.1

1.5

3.2

1.7

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

13.1

25.4

31.9

31.0

0.7

3.6

3.8

2.1

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

22.4

41.4

23.6

28.7

30.2

2.1

4.5

1.7

3.1

4.2

Table 6. Percentage of Students Reporting Antisocial Behavior
How many times in the past year
(12 months) have you:
(One or more times)
Suspended from School
Drunk or High at School
Sold Illegal Drugs
Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle
Been Arrested
Attacked Someone with the Idea
of Seriously Hurting Them
Carried a Handgun
Carried a Handgun to School
During the past 30 days, how many
times did you:
(One or more times)

Grade 8

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

28.0

28.6

19.2

19.4

20.6

11.8

8.0

5.0

6.1

4.1

14.5

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

20.2

16.9

20.5

27.4

14.6

9.1

9.6

15.7

10.2

12.0

17.9

30.1

31.4

20.5

24.5

20.1

25.0

22.2

3.9

4.6

7.5

10.0

15.8

9.8

10.6

6.3

6.7

10.4

3.8

3.6

4.7

7.7

3.1

3.7

1.8

4.6

4.1

2.7

10.1

9.3

7.5

13.2

11.9

12.5

9.2

8.6

7.5

11.8

8.7

18.2

20.8

21.7

18.1

19.0

17.6

19.7

16.1

16.8

14.7

15.9

12.9

7.0

7.5

7.4

7.7

8.6

10.5

11.2

7.2

6.2

8.9

10.2

8.1

2.3

1.2
0.5
Grade 8

1.2

2.4

2.7
2.3
Grade 10

1.3

1.8

2.3
2.1
Grade 12

1.4

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

DRIVE a car or other vehicle when you had
been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

9.7

8.2

RIDE in a car or other vehicle driven by
someone who had been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

35.0

29.8

State
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

5.6

n/a

14.8

9.4

29.1

n/a

40.3

34.5

* These categories were not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

30

State
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

7.9

n/a

16.5

20.4

16.1

29.1

n/a

32.0

31.0

29.7

Data Tables
Table 7. Percentage of Students Gambling in the Past Year
How often have you done the following for money,
possessions, or anything of value:
County
2004
(At least once in the past 12 months or more)
Any Gambling
Played a slot machine, poker machine
or other gambling machine?
Played the lottery or scratch-off tickets?
Bet on sports?*
Played cards?
Bought a raffle ticket?
Played bingo?
Gambled on the Internet?
Played a dice game?*
Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?*
Bet on a horse or other animal race?*
Table 8. Percentage of Students Reporting Protection

Grade 8
County
2008

n/a

52.8

74.7

n/a

2.5

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

69.1

n/a

50.6

70.0

65.9

n/a

42.9

68.0

60.6

5.5

6.4

n/a

2.8

7.0

6.1

n/a

3.0

5.1

5.8

25.8
n/a
22.2
n/a
17.7
6.1
n/a

26.0
38.1
53.1
19.6
29.7
5.3
34.5

24.8
31.8
43.7
20.4
32.6
6.3
31.5

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

23.7
n/a
21.6
n/a
15.6
2.9
n/a

29.4
32.9
45.1
31.6
23.0
9.8
30.1

21.8
30.2
43.7
20.7
23.2
5.1
25.1

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

21.9
n/a
18.7
n/a
6.0
3.6
n/a

23.9
28.2
46.7
24.0
15.7
4.1
24.5

19.0
25.6
40.6
18.9
14.7
4.7
19.2

n/a

21.4

36.7

32.7

n/a

22.1

32.3

31.3

n/a

14.8

32.5

27.0

n/a

n/a

6.4

6.4

n/a

n/a

7.0

5.8

n/a

n/a

7.7

5.1

Grade 8

Protective Factor
Community Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Domain
Family Attachment
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
School Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer-Individual Domain
Belief in the Moral Order
Interaction with Prosocial Peers*
Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Total Protection
Students with High Protection**

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2006

State
2008

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

32.4
30.7

38.4
35.4

48.5
29.7

46.6
50.8
59.6

42.3
54.1
58.6

57.8
49.5

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

39.3
31.3

45.5
42.5

38.7
40.2

40.7
40.8

52.4
62.2
60.9

51.5
59.7
61.4

50.9
60.9
60.1

42.5
46.1
53.2

59.4
54.5

65.8
63.3

60.3
51.2

63.7
67.0

48.3
51.0
31.6
58.3

51.6
47.1
39.4
59.8

57.3
57.5
41.6
56.6

59.4
53.1
39.0
59.4

40.5

43.9

52.4

43.8

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

37.1
35.4

39.6
38.2

39.5
44.0

37.4
34.7

36.1
33.2

42.5
54.1
50.0

46.1
54.0
55.1

63.3
57.1
61.0

57.4
54.2
63.4

59.3
58.4
56.5

56.2
55.2
55.8

56.4
55.8

47.5
53.1

62.4
59.8

61.7
46.2

65.4
50.3

43.7
35.2

64.3
45.4

69.0
58.6
45.2
63.3

52.9
47.6
36.5
60.5

57.8
49.4
39.4
53.8

66.5
55.3
41.2
59.7

52.7
52.4
32.1
47.2

56.0
61.5
38.5
53.2

50.0
47.4
32.3
52.3

53.6
52.5
36.4
52.2

56.1

39.7

40.9

46.7

47.6

47.8

39.6

43.3

*Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.
**High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.

31

State
2008

State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 9. Percentage of Students Reporting Risk
Grade 8
Risk Factor
Community Domain
Low Neighborhood Attachment
Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use
Perceived Availability of Drugs
Perceived Availability of Handguns
Family Domain
Poor Family Management
Family Conflict
Family History of Antisocial Behavior
Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use
School Domain
Academic Failure
Low Commitment to School
Peer-Individual Domain
Rebelliousness
Early Initiation of ASB
Early Initiation of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use
Perceived Risk of Drug Use
Interaction with Antisocial Peers
Friend's Use of Drugs
Rewards for ASB
Gang Involvement
Total Risk
Students at High Risk*

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

45.5
51.2
47.5
38.5

45.8
48.2
43.1
48.4

39.9
42.1
44.7
46.8

55.4
49.7
67.0
46.7
30.0

52.8
57.4
57.5
53.3
34.7

62.0
40.2

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

38.5
36.6
38.2
37.8

50.2
48.3
47.9
38.5

53.7
57.5
54.7
33.9

53.4
56.6
56.2
33.6

43.2
56.7
49.4
50.4
29.7

45.5
53.5
40.3
49.3
26.8

38.8
41.7
51.4
44.1
39.9

51.9
43.9
57.8
52.0
47.8

54.7
43.8

48.2
41.2

47.3
41.0

58.9
39.8

35.0
45.3
49.5
52.3
39.6
58.8
68.0
62.7
53.4
29.3

37.9
47.9
50.0
44.8
37.5
50.2
67.3
59.2
55.0
26.9

41.2
37.8
39.2
47.0
34.2
47.7
63.2
50.6
48.3
28.8

43.1
39.4
30.3
44.6
29.1
44.5
58.2
39.4
45.6
26.9

52.6

51.9

47.0

38.7

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

46.2
42.1
49.6
26.7

56.7
44.5
58.3
52.1

55.4
40.0
49.4
44.4

62.3
46.3
59.6
44.7

51.0
36.3
52.2
33.1

45.1
45.4
58.8
58.2
43.1

42.8
42.8
41.1
53.4
41.1

43.2
38.2
50.4
46.4
49.8

43.6
40.7
43.9
38.5
37.5

41.5
39.4
46.8
56.8
40.0

44.3
38.3
37.3
50.2
41.2

60.8
48.6

55.7
46.8

49.5
43.7

45.8
55.5

39.8
41.0

45.2
53.1

44.4
45.6

37.7
43.0
36.2
42.1
34.9
30.7
58.7
40.1
38.6
23.2

52.2
53.1
44.3
57.6
42.1
45.0
65.6
50.5
51.1
26.3

53.1
57.4
48.8
53.5
42.5
50.8
69.3
53.9
47.0
36.4

46.8
42.0
32.7
50.7
37.4
42.3
57.3
41.9
44.0
23.2

32.8
42.3
49.1
47.4
32.6
40.9
58.8
44.0
55.6
18.0

43.2
43.2
32.6
31.8
27.0
36.2
53.8
25.8
55.4
20.2

51.8
51.3
33.8
57.6
36.5
49.0
60.1
37.0
52.8
20.0

44.0
41.2
33.1
46.9
36.3
46.5
53.2
37.3
54.6
16.8

37.1

44.3

50.4

37.5

42.2

32.1

45.0

35.7

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors)

32

Grade 12
State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 10. Where Youth Obtained Alcohol
Grade 8

If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)

County
2008

Sample size*
I bought it in a store such as a liquor store, convenience store,
supermarket, discount store, or gas station
I bought it at a restaurant, bar, or club
I bought it at a public event such as a concert or sporting event

Grade 10

State
2008

County
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2008

State
2008

88

4,418

92

4,872

75

5,065

2.3

5.0

6.5

6.9

10.7

12.3

2.3
1.1

3.0
2.9

3.3
2.2

3.0
2.9

1.3
0.0

7.0
3.9

I gave someone else money to buy it for me

30.7

21.4

44.6

34.4

61.3

43.7

My parent or guardian gave it to me
Another family member who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone not related to me who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone under the age of 21 gave it to me
I got it at a party
I took it from home
I took it from a store or someone else's home
I got it some other way

10.2
11.4
20.5
26.1
42.0
33.0
18.2

18.7
19.7
19.2
23.8
41.5
31.4
11.7

14.1
21.7
28.3
21.7
40.2
16.3
9.8

14.8
18.7
28.7
24.8
53.1
23.2
11.3

6.7
13.3
42.7
12.0
42.7
8.0
9.3

13.0
18.2
39.5
22.0
57.6
13.8
8.0

34.1

28.7

32.6

23.6

21.3

17.9

* Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case
of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

33

Data Tables
Table 11. Percentage of Students Reporting School Safety Issues
Grade 8
County
2004

Question

County
2006

Grade 10

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

Grade 12

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
has someone threatened or injured you with a 4-5 times
weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school 6-7 times
property?
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

85.2
8.6
1.4
2.4
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.9

80.6
10.0
4.8
2.0
0.3
1.1
0.0
1.1

88.2
6.9
3.3
1.1
0.3
0.3
0.0
0.0

87.1
6.6
3.5
1.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.9

86.3
5.7
3.6
0.9
0.9
0.6
0.3
1.8

85.1
6.3
3.7
0.7
0.7
1.1
1.1
1.1

86.3
6.2
4.3
1.2
0.4
0.0
0.4
1.2

88.4
5.9
3.0
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.1

89.7
4.0
3.3
1.1
0.4
0.0
0.4
1.1

92.1
3.4
2.3
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.0
0.6

86.7
5.1
3.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
2.1

92.4
3.9
2.0
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.7

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
4-5 times
were you in a physical fight on school property? 6-7 times
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

73.3
15.2
8.1
1.4
0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0

68.6
16.3
10.9
2.6
0.0
0.3
0.3
1.1

74.5
14.3
8.8
1.1
0.3
0.5
0.0
0.5

76.5
12.9
6.9
1.7
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.7

81.1
11.2
3.8
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.4

82.5
9.3
6.0
0.4
0.0
0.4
0.4
1.1

75.2
16.1
5.5
2.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.8

85.2
8.8
3.9
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.7

86.8
8.8
3.3
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.0
0.0

86.0
10.1
1.7
1.1
0.6
0.6
0.0
0.0

86.7
8.7
3.6
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.0

91.5
5.0
2.1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how often have you
4-5 times
been picked on or bullied by a student ON
6-7 times
SCHOOL PROPERTY?*
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

55.6
21.2

59.4
13.2
11.5
4.3
1.9
1.2
0.8
7.7

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

75.4
13.3

4.5

60.2
10.2
14.2
5.1
2.8
1.2
0.4
5.9

69.1
10.3
9.6
3.2
1.4
1.1
0.6
4.6

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

85.6
6.1

7.2

60.0
13.1
13.3
2.8
2.8
1.4
0.8
5.8

3.9

77.9
7.2
4.1
2.6
1.0
0.5
0.0
6.7

82.3
6.6
5.7
1.5
0.8
0.5
0.3
2.4

88.0
7.2
3.7
0.0
1.1

90.3
6.7
1.9
0.0
1.1

89.9
5.8
2.7
0.6
1.0

88.7
3.0
3.6
2.1
2.7

91.4
3.7
3.0
0.0
1.9

87.7
4.7
4.7
1.2
1.6

91.1
5.1
2.2
0.6
1.0

91.2
4.0
2.2
1.1
1.5

93.3
3.4
2.2
1.1
0.0

91.8
4.1
2.6
0.5
1.0

93.8
3.3
1.8
0.4
0.7

89.8
1.5
2.5
0.5
5.6

94.4
1.5
1.1
0.5
2.6

0 days

During the past 30 days, on how many days did
1 day
you not go to school because you felt you would
2-3 days
be unsafe at school or on your way to or from
4-5 days
school?

6 or more days

83.9
7.1
4.3
1.9
2.8

16.0

0 days

6.8

4.4

91.9
90.2
94.4
93.9
89.4
85.7
92.1
93.8
90.4
90.0
3.8
5.2
3.1
3.1
3.2
3.0
1.6
2.2
1.8
1.1
1.0
2.3
1.4
1.3
0.9
2.3
1.6
1.2
0.7
0.6
0.0
0.6
0.3
0.5
1.2
1.1
0.4
0.5
1.1
2.8
6 or more days
3.3
1.7
0.8
1.2
5.3
7.9
4.3
2.2
5.9
5.6
* In 2006 the choices for this question were Never , Once , Several Times and Very Often. This category was not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

During the past 30 days, on how many days did 1 day
you carry a weapon such as a gun, knife, or
2-3 days
club ON SCHOOL PROPERTY?
4-5 days

34

Data Tables
Table 12. Drug Free Communities Report*
County 2008
Outcome

Definition

Substance

Grade 8

Grade 10

Grade 12

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

Perception of Risk
(People are at Moderate or Great Risk
of harming themselves if they... )

Perception of Parent Disapproval
(Parents feel it would be Wrong or
Very Wrong to... )

Perception of Peer Disapproval
(I think it is Wrong or Very Wrong for
someone my age to...)

Past 30-Day Use

Female†

Sample Percent

Sample

drink 1 or two drinks nearly every day

Alcohol

56.8

354

57.3

241

55.7

194

52.6

369

60.5

408

smoke 1 or more packs or cigarettes
per day

Cigarettes

85.6

354

83.5

242

85.9

192

84.2

366

85.9

410

smoke marijuana regularly

Marijuana

82.5

349

66.8

229

72.0

189

72.5

357

77.4

398

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

87.9

338

81.2

229

81.9

188

83.4

349

85.0

394

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

94.2

344

91.8

231

86.8

190

89.8

353

93.2

400

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

95.9

340

90.4

229

90.0

190

90.9

352

94.4

395

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

72.1

365

62.2

259

50.5

198

65.4

382

61.7

426

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

80.3

366

67.8

258

62.9

197

72.7

381

72.1

426

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

82.8

366

67.8

258

68.0

197

74.9

382

73.9

425

Alcohol

29.6

361

43.5

248

42.9

198

32.6

377

41.8

416

at least one use in the Past 30 Days

Cigarettes

16.0

357

25.0

244

25.1

195

19.5

369

22.0

414

8.7

356

20.7

246

16.6

193

14.3

370

14.6

411

Sample Percent

Sample

Marijuana

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

had more than a sip or two of beer,
wine or hard liquor?
Average Age of Onset**
(How old were you when you first…)

Male†

Sample Percent

smoked a cigarette, even just a puff?

smoked marijuana?

Alcohol
Average age:
Cigarettes
Average age:
Marijuana
Average age:

58.2

364

11.8 years
35.3

363

11.6 years
20.1

363
12 years

77.0

257

83.0

12.8 years
55.3

257

12.4 years
49.8

257
13 years

Sample Percent

200
14 years

56.3

197

13.6 years
50.5

198

14.1 years

66.7

381

12.6 years
43.4

378

12.4 years
34.5

380

12.9 years

73.2

426

12.9 years
49.6

425

12.6 years
39.6

424

13.3 years

* The “Sample” column represents the sample size (the number of youth who answered the question). The "Percent" column represents the percentage of youth in the sample answering the question as defined.
** For Average Age of Onset, “Sample” represents the number of youth who answered the question (including students responding that they never used). 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.

† 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.

35

Appendix
Appendix - Comparability of survey administratons
Issue
Drug Category

2004 AYS
On how many occasions (if any) have you:

2006 AYS

2008 AYS

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Notes regarding changes

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Hallucinogens

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the
past 30 days?

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the past
30 days?

Used LSD or other hallucinogens during the
past 30 days?

Substituted "hallucinogens" for "psychedelics" in 2008.
Comparable across all years.

Methamphetamines

Not applicable, no methamphetamine-specific
item on 2004 AYS

Used methamphetamines (meth, speed, crank,
crystal meth)?

Used methamphetamines (meth, crystal,
crank)?

2006 and 2008 provide slightly different examples, but
are cautiously comparable.

Prescription
stimulants

Used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”,
“crystal”, “crank”) without a doctor telling you
to take them?

Used stimulants, other than methamphetamines
(such as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin,
Adderal, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling
you to take them?

2004 is not comparable to any other years, data are
presented for archival interest. 2006 and 2008 data are
cautiously comparable.

Prescription
sedatives

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such
as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping
pills)?

2008 AYS added descriptor "prescription" and removed
qualifier "without a doctor telling you to take them." 2008
data are cautiously comparable with other years.

Ecstasy

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2008 AYS used "ecstasy" as the primary descriptor and
moved "MDMA" to examples. Comparable across years.

Prescription
drugs

Not applicable, no prescription drugs item on
2004 AYS

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills),
stimulants, other than methamphetamines (such
as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine) or
other prescription drugs (such as Oxycontin)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes)

Used prescription stimulants (Ritalin,
Adderall, or Dexedrine), sedatives
(tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax,
barbiturates, or sleeping pills) or pain relievers
(Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes )

In 2006, responses to the stimulant, sedative and other
prescription drug questions were calculated as one
measure. (2006 had no prescription pain reliever item.) In
2008, responses to the stimulant, sedative and
prescription pain reliever questions were calculated as
one measure. (2008 had no standalone prescription drug
item.) 2006 and 2008 data are cautiously comparable.
(Note that composite 2006 data will not match past
reports' prescription drugs category.)

Gambling
Category

Not applicable, no gambling items
on 2004 AYS

How often during the past 12 months
have you:

How often have you done the following for
money, possessions, or anything of value:

Sports betting

n/a

Bet on team sports?

Bet on sports?

Not comparable across years.

Race betting

n/a

Bet money on horse races?

Bet on a horse race or other animal race?

Not comparable across years.

Dice

n/a

Bet on dice games such as craps?

Played a dice game?

Not comparable across years.

Games of skill

n/a

Bet on games of personal skill such as pool,
darts, or bowling?

Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?

Comparable across years.

Protective Scale:
Peer-Individual
Interaction with
Prosocial Peers

Think of your four best friends (the friends you feel closest to). In the past year (12 months), how many of your best friends have:
(Scale is calculated based on the average response [0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 friends] to the following questions)
...participated in clubs, organizations and activities at school? ...made the commitment to stay drug-free?
...tried to do well in school? ...liked school? ...regularly attended religious services?(removed in 2008)

36

Regularly attended religious services was removed from
2008 AYS. 2004 and 2006 have been recalculated to
match 2008 AYS and are now comparable across all
years. Due to this recalculation, current reports may differ
slightly from past reports.

Contacts for Prevention
Arizona Department of Education
Student Services Division
www.ade.az.gov

Regional Prevention Contacts
Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, and Santa Cruz
Counties
Bill Burnett
Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)
(520) 618-8807

Arizona Department of Health Services
Division of Behavioral Health Services
Lisa Shumaker
(602) 364-4594
www.azdhs.gov/bhs/index.htm

Gila, La Paz, Pinal, and Yuma Counties
Linda Weinberg
Cenpatico Behavioral Health of Arizona
(866) 495-6738

Arizona Prevention Resource Center
(800) 432-2772
www.azprevention.org

Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai
Counties
Petrice Post
Northern Arizona Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(NARBHA)
(928) 214-2177

Center for Violence Prevention and Community
Safety
Charles Katz
(602) 543-6618
charles.katz@asu.edu
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)
http://prevention.samhsa.gov

Maricopa County
Juan Aristizabal
Magellan
(602) 797-8256

Governor’s Office of Children, Youth, and
Families
(602) 542-4043
http://www.governor.state.az.us/cyf/index.html

Gila River Indian Community
Joan Grey
Gila River Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(602) 528-7136

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities
U.S. Department of Education
www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS

Pasqua Yaqui Tribe
Centered Spirit Program
Jill Fabian
(520) 879-6067

Arizona Department of Gaming's Office of
Problem Gambling
Elise Mikkelsen
(602) 266-8299 ext. 351
www.problemgambling.az.gov

Navajo Nation
Department of Behavioral Health Services
(928) 871-6235

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMSHA)
www.samhsa.gov

White Mountain Apache Tribe
Apache Behavioral Health Services
(928) 338-4811

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/

Colorado River Indian Tribes
(928) 669-6577

Western Regional Center for the Application of
Prevention Technologies (CAPT)
www.westcapt.org

Other State and National Contacts:
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
Michelle Neitch/ Phillip Stevenson
(602) 364-1173/(602) 364-1157
www.azcjc.gov

Bach Harrison, L.L.C.
R. Steven Harrison, Ph.D.
(801) 359-2064
www.bach-harrison.com

37

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Graham County

REPORT PROVIDED BY:

Arizona Criminal Justice Commission

1

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Shining Light on Arizona Youth
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:
Arizona Department of Gaming’s Office of Problem Gambling
Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission
Arizona Parent’s Commission on Drug Education and Prevention
Governor’s Division for Substance Abuse Policy
Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Tobacco Education and Prevention Program,
Arizona Department of Health Services

2

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 2008 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:
Jean Ajamie, Arizona Department of Education
Michelle Anderson, Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections
Steve Ballance, Maricopa County
Carisa Dwyer, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Charles Katz, Arizona State University
Dr. Manuel Medina, TERROS, Inc.
Kim O’Connor, Governor’s Office for
Children, Youth, and Families
Holly Orozco, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Catherine Osborn, Arizona Department of Education
Richard Porter, Arizona Department of Health Services
Gowri Shetty, Arizona Department of Health Services
Lisa Shumaker, Arizona Department of Health Services
Wendy Wolfersteig, Arizona State University
Nicole Yancey Johnson, Arizona Early Childhood Development
and Health Board
Governor’s Youth Commission

Additionally, the success of the 2008 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.

3

Introduction
CONTENTS:

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Summary for
Graham County

Introduction
The Risk and Protective
Factor Model of
Prevention
The Arizona Substance
Abuse Partnership
How to Read the Charts

This report summarizes some of the
findings from the 2008 Arizona Youth
Survey (AYS) administered to 8th, 10th
and 12th grade students during the
spring of 2008. The results for your
county are presented along with
comparisons to 2004 and 2006 survey
results where applicable, as well as to
the overall results for the state. 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.

Practical Implications of
the Assessment
Assessment and
Planning
Data Charts:
• Substance Use

All schools in Arizona are eligible to
participate in the survey, and
recruitment efforts were successful in
obtaining participation by schools in all
of the 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.

•

Antisocial Behavior
and Gambling

•

Risk & Protective
Factor Profiles
Where Youth
Obtained Alcohol
School Safety

•
•

Risk and Protective
Factor Scale Definitions
Data Tables
Contacts for Prevention
Appendix

Table 1 contains the characteristics of
the students who completed the survey

Table 1. Characteristics of Participants
Student Totals
County 2004

Total Students

Number

County 2006

Percent

Number

County 2008

Percent

Number

State 2008

Percent

Number

Percent

500

100

885

100

788

100

54,734

100

8

169

33.8

307

34.7

289

36.7

25,695

46.9

10

212

42.4

283

32.0

245

31.1

16,089

29.4

12

119

23.8

295

33.3

254

32.2

12,950

23.7

Male

223

45.1

417

47.8

386

49.5

26,213

48.8

Female

271

54.9

455

52.2

394

50.5

27,514

51.2

Native American

52

10.5

54

6.3

99

10.4

4,812

7.4

African American

10

2.0

11

1.3

37

3.9

3,915

6.0

Hispanic

173

35.1

260

30.3

293

30.6

21,525

32.9

White

224

45.4

491

57.2

512

53.6

31,887

48.8

Asian

5

1.0

3

0.3

7

0.7

2,117

3.2

Pacific Islander

3

0.6

3

0.3

8

0.8

1,115

1.7

Grade

Gender

Ethnicity*

*In 2008, students could mark more than one ethnic category and the 'other' category was removed.

4

from your county and the state.
Because not every student answered all
of the questions, the number of
students in the gender and ethnicity
categories often will be less than the
total number of students.
Whenever data is obtained from a
sample of students instead of the entire
population, it is important to recognize
the strengths and weaknesses of the
data. One quick and 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 participated in the
survey and those that did not.
Changes to the AYS
Survey for 2008
In an effort to shorten the AYS and
make it more responsive to local
priorities, the following changes were
made for 2008: 1) some of the
substance use questions were refined
and the use of over-the-counter drugs
was added, 2) some risk and protective
factor scales were removed where the
data could easily be obtained from
other sources or the scales measured
similar constructs (scales removed are

Risk and Protective Factors
Transitions and Mobility, Community
Disorganization, Intention to Use Drugs, and Social
Skills), 3) questions about where students get the
alcohol they drink were added, 4) an 8-State Norm
was added that can be used to compare the AYS
results on risk, protection, and antisocial behavior to a
more national sample (see the description of the 8State Norm later in this report), and 5) National
Outcome Measures that are needed for measuring the
performance of federally funded programs in Arizona
such as talking to parents about the dangers of
substance use were added.

Washington, Social Development Research Group
have investigated the relationship between risk and
protective factors and youth problem behavior. They
have found, for example, that children who live in
families with high levels of conflict are more likely
to become involved in problem behaviors such as
delinquency and drug use than children who live in
families with low levels of family conflict.
Protective factors exert a positive influence or buffer
against the negative influence of risk, thus reducing the
likelihood that adolescents will engage in problem
behaviors. Protective factors identified through research
include social bonding to family, school, community,
and peers; healthy beliefs and clear standards for
behavior; and individual characteristics. For bonding to
serve as a protective influence, it must occur through
involvement with peers and adults who communicate
healthy values and set clear standards for behavior.

The Risk and Protective Factor Model of
Substance Abuse Prevention
Many states, school districts and local agencies have
adopted the Risk and Protective Factor Model to
guide their prevention efforts. The Risk and
Protective Factor Model of Prevention 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 identified a set of risk factors for
youth problem behaviors. Risk factors are
characteristics of school, community, and family
environments, as well as characteristics of students
and their peer groups that are known to predict
increased likelihood of drug use, delinquency, school
dropout, teen pregnancy, and violent behavior among
youth. Dr. J. David Hawkins, Dr. Richard F.
Catalano, and their colleagues at the University of

T
T

T

T

T
T

T
T

T
T

T

T

Teen Pregnancy

T

School Drop-Out
Violence

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

SOURCE: COMMUNITIES THAT CARE (CTC) PREVENTION MODEL, CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION (CSAP), SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMSHA)

5

Constitutional Factors

Gang Involvement

Favorable Attitudes Toward
Drug Use & Other
Problem Behaviors

Friends Who Use Drugs &
Engage in a Problem Behavior

Alienation & Rebelliousness

Early & Persistent
Antisocial Behavior

Peer / Individual
Early Initiation of Drug Use &
Other Problem Behavior

Lack of Commitment to
School

Academic Failure

School
Favorable Parent Attitudes &
Involvement in the
Problem Behavior

T
T
T
T
T

Family Management Problems

T
T
T
T
T

Family Conflict

Community Disorganization

Low Neighborhood
Attachment

Transitions & Mobility

Availability of Drugs &
Firearms

T
T

Family History of the
Problem Behavior

Delinquency

The chart below shows the links between the 19 risk
factors and the five problem behaviors. The check
marks have been placed in the chart to indicate where
at least two well designed, published research studies
have shown a link between the risk factor and the
problem behavior.

Family

Extreme Economic &
Social Deprivation

Substance Abuse

Community
Community Laws & Norms
Favorable Toward Drug Use,
Firearms & Crime

Risk
Factors

By measuring both risk and protective factors in a
population, prevention programs can be implemented
that are designed to reduce the elevated risk factors and
increase the protective factors. For example, if academic
failure is identified as an elevated risk factor in a
community, then mentoring, tutoring, and increased
opportunities and rewards for classroom participation
can be provided to improve academic performance.

T
T

T
T

T

T

The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership
The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP) was established by Governor Napolitano’s Executive Order
2007-12 in June 2007. Chaired by the Governor’s Chief of Staff, ASAP is composed of representatives from
state government entities, federal entities, and community organizations. ASAP serves as the single statewide
council on substance abuse prevention, enforcement, and treatment.
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
prevention, treatment, and enforcement. Through coordination among its members and their agencies and
organizations ASAP strives to ensure that substance abuse funding is spent in the most efficient and efficacious
manner.
ASAP has identified four strategic focus areas for 2008: 1) child welfare and substance abuse; 2) law enforcement
and drug trafficking; 3) emerging trends and the state’s capacity to respond; and 4) data-driven decisions and
policy development.
There are currently six sub-committees that assist ASAP in meeting their goals:
•

Arizona Underage Drinking Committee - The purpose of this subcommittee is to develop a
statewide underage drinking initiative to prevent and reduce underage drinking in Arizona. Their
activities include state-level infrastructure change to improve cross coordination/collaboration
between state agencies; developing a comprehensive statewide prevention system focused on
preventing underage drinking; and collaborative projects to more effectively utilize resources
and support local efforts.

•

Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The purpose of this work group is to
continuously evaluate data related to substance abuse to move the state system through a datadriven process. This is achieved through the completion of a statewide Substance Abuse
Epidemiology Profile. This profile will be updated every two years, with specific analyses
completed each year.

•

Emerging Issues Sub-Committee of the Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The
purpose of this sub-committee is to provide understanding of emerging substance abuse
consumption and consequence trends in Arizona to state agencies, Boards, Commissions and
Committees, and ASAP and its sub-committees.

•

Methamphetamine Task Force – The purpose of this task force is to bring together
representatives from state agencies, local government, businesses, and community groups to
develop collaborative efforts among treatment, prevention, and law enforcement systems to
assess and address the impact of methamphetamine statewide through information sharing,
resource allocation, service coordination, and the development of statewide policy
recommendations sensitive to the needs of local and tribal communities.

•

Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team – The Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team serves as the
advisory body and policy-making entity for the Arizona Co-Occurring State Incentive Grant.
Team members represent a number of state agencies and community-based organizations.

•

Workforce Development Committee – This committee was formed specifically to identify and
address substance abuse prevention training and technical assistance needs across Arizona. This
will, in turn, help strengthen instruction for prevention professionals and volunteers in
community coalitions.

6

How to Read the Charts in this Report
There are five types of charts presented in this
report: 1) substance use, 2) antisocial behavior and
youth gambling, 3) risk factors, 4) protective factors,
and 5) where youth obtained alcohol. When
available, data from the 2004 and 2006
administrations will be included in the charts. The
actual percentages from the charts are presented in
tables at the end of this report.

•

Substance Use Charts
This report contains information about alcohol,
tobacco, and other drug use (referred to as ATOD
use throughout this report) and other problem
behaviors of students. The bars on each chart
represent the percentage of students in that grade
who reported the behavior. The three sections in the
charts represent different types of problem
behaviors. The definitions of each of the types of
behavior are provided below.
•

Risk and Protective Factor Charts
The risk and protective factor charts show the
percentage of students at high risk and with high
protection for each of the risk and protective factor
scales. The risk and protective factor scales measure
specific aspects of youths’ life experiences that are
predictive of whether they will engage in problem
behaviors. A definition of each risk and protective
factor scale is contained in Table 2. The factors are
grouped into four domains: community, family, school,
and peer/individual.

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.

•

Heavy use includes binge drinking (having five
or more drinks in a row during the two weeks
prior to the survey) and use of one-half a pack
or more of cigarettes per day.

The bars on the risk and protective factor charts,
represent the percentage of students whose answers
reflect significant risk or protection. There are bars for
the last three administrations of the AYS: 2004, 2006,
and 2008. By looking at 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 and
when assessing risk reduction and protective factor
enhancement efforts.

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol Charts

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling
Charts
•

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 animal
races. The chart also shows the percentage of
students who engaged in any gambling behavior
during the past year.

This chart displays data regarding the ways that
students obtained alcohol in the past 30 days. The data
focus on a subgroup of students who indicated at least
one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no
alcohol use are not represented.) It is important to note
that the charts represent a subgroup of users and not
the entire survey population. Additionally, the smaller
the sample, the more dramatic the influence of a
student's responses. For example, 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 legend indicates the sample size for
each grade surveyed to help clarify the value of the data.

Antisocial behavior (ASB) is a measure of
the percentage of students who report any
involvement during the past year with eight
antisocial behaviors: suspended from school,
drunk or high at school, sold illegal drugs,
stolen a vehicle, been arrested, attacked
someone to harm them, carried a handgun,
taken a handgun to school. The chart also
displays any incidents in the past 30 days of
drinking and driving or riding in a car with a
drinking driver.
7

How to Read the Charts in this Report (cont’d)
School Safety Charts

community and a more national sample. The 8-State
Norm value for each risk and protective factor scale
represents the percentage of youth at risk or with
protection for eight states across the country
(Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana,
Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah). In developing the
8-State Norm, the contribution of each of eight
states was proportional to its percentage of the
national population, which helps to make the results
more representative of youth nation-wide. A
comparison between the ATOD use rates from the
8-State norm and those from the national
Monitoring the Future Survey showed the rates to
be very similar, which provides added confidence in
the validity of the 8-State Norm. Brief definitions of
the risk and protective factors scales are provided in
Table 2 following the profile charts. For more
information about risk and protective factors, please
refer to the resources listed on the last page of this
report under Contacts for Prevention.

The school safety 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 or were picked on or
bullied at school. The complete questions and values
for each response option can be seen in Table 11.

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 Survey or
the 8-State Norm (described below). A comparison to
the state-wide and national results provides additional
information for your community in determining the
relative significance of levels of 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.

Drug Free Communities Reports
Table 12 contains the information that is reported
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 8-State Norm
The diamonds on the charts allow a comparison
between the levels of risk and protection in your

Practical Implications of the Assessment
No Child Left Behind
The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities section of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) requires that
schools and communities use six Principles of Effectiveness to guide their decisions and spending on federally
funded prevention and intervention programs. First introduced in 1998 by the Department of Education, the
Principles of Effectiveness outline a data-driven process for ensuring that prevention programs achieve the desired
results. The Principles of Effectiveness stipulate that local prevention programs and activities must:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

be based on a needs assessment using objective data regarding the incidence of drug use and violence,
target specific performance objectives,
be based on scientific research and be proven to reduce violence or drug use,
be based on the analysis of predictor variables such as risk and protective factors,
include meaningful and ongoing parental input in program implementation, and
have periodic evaluations of established performance measures.

The results of the AYS presented in this report can help your school and community comply with the NCLB Act. The
Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior charts provide information related to Principle 1 and the Risk and Protective
Factor charts provide information related to Principle 4. Overall, using the risk and protective factor framework helps
schools meet all of the Principles of Effectiveness, and thereby assists schools in complying with the NCLB Act.
8

Assessment and Planning
School and Community Improvement Using Survey Data
Why Conduct the Arizona
Youth Survey?
Data from the Arizona Youth
Survey can be used to help
schools and communities assess
current conditions and identify
and prioritize local prevention
issues.
Each risk and protective factor
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
county make key decisions
regarding regarding allocation
of resources, how and when to
address specific needs, and
which strategies are most
effective and known to produce
results.

What are the numbers telling you?
Review the charts and data tables presented in this report. Using the
table below, note your findings as you discuss the following questions.
Which 3-5 risk factors are of the greatest concern?
Which 3-5 protective factors are your community’s highest priority?
Which levels of 30-day drug use are of greatest concern?
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 of greatest concern?
º Which behaviors are your students exhibiting the most?
º At which grades do you see unacceptable behavior levels?
•
•
•

How to decide if a rate is “unacceptable.”
Look across the charts – which items stand out as either much
higher or much lower than the others?
• Compare your data with statewide and national data –
differences of five percent between local and other data are probably
significant.
•

Use these data for program and policy development.
Substance use and antisocial behavior data – identify issues, raise
awareness about the problems, and promote school and community
dialogue.
• Risk and protective factor data – identify key objectives that will
help your school or community achieve its prevention goals.
•

Use the resources listed on the last page of this report, Contacts for
Prevention, for ideas about prevention programs that have proven
effective in addressing the risk factors that are high in your community
and improving the protective factors that are low.

MEASURE

Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate
#3
#4
#1
#2

Risk Factors
Protective Factors
Substance Use
Antisocial Behaviors

9

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

10

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Graham County, Grade 8

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

11

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Graham County, Grade 10

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

12

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Graham County, Grade 12

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Graham County, Grade 8
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

13

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Graham County, Grade 10
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

14

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Graham County, Grade 12
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

15

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Graham County, Grade 8

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

16

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Graham County, Grade 8
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

17

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Graham County, Grade 10

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

18

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Graham County, Grade 10
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

19

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Graham County, Grade 12

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

20

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Graham County, Grade 12
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

21

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol

WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL*
2008 Graham County Student Survey, Grades 8, 10 & 12
If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)
100
90
80
70

Percentages (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Got it some

other way

Took it from a
store or someone

else's home

County 2008, Grade 12
Sample: 65 students**

Took it from home

Got at a party

County 2008, Grade 10
Sample: 66 students**

Someone under
21 years

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

County 2008, Grade 8
Sample: 47 students**

State 2008

* Prior to 2008, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained alcohol. Also, because not all eight states ask where youth obtained alcohol, no 8-State value is reported.
** Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case of smaller sample sizes,
caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

22

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Graham County, Grade 8
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

23

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Graham County, Grade 10
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

24

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Graham County, Grade 12
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

25

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles
Low Neighborhood Attachment

Community Domain Risk Factors
Low neighborhood bonding is related to higher levels of 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.

Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

Community Domain Protective Factors
When opportunities are available in a community for positive participation, children are less likely to
engage in substance use and other problem behaviors.

Rewards for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for positive participation in activities helps youth bond to the community, thus lowering their risk
for substance use.

Poor Family Management

Family Domain Risk Factors
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.

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.

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.

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 Attachment

Family Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

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.

Academic Failure

Low Commitment to School

School Domain Risk Factors
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.
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.

26

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles (cont'd)
Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

School Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

Rebelliousness

Peer-Individual Risk Factors
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.

Early Initiation of Antisocial
Behavior and Drug Use

Early onset of drug use predicts the 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.

Attitudes Favorable Toward
Antisocial Behavior and Drug
Use

During the elementary school years, most children express anti-drug, anti-crime, and pro-social attitudes
and have 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Belief in the Moral Order

Peer-Individual Protective Factors
Young people who have a belief in what is “right” or “wrong” are less likely to use drugs.

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.

Prosocial Involvement

Participation in positive school and community activities helps provide protection for youth.

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.

27

Data Tables
Table 3. 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

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

54.5

49.2

45.2

47.8

64.3

63.6

56.1

66.2

71.2

64.6

61.1

74.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

38.7

27.3

33.5

25.9

44.9

47.6

36.1

39.9

57.1

48.3

48.1

50.8

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

11.3

10.5

12.9

7.1

13.3

11.9

16.4

12.9

20.2

17.0

18.1

17.7

Marijuana

used marijuana?

22.8

18.0

14.8

16.2

40.1

41.7

30.2

32.5

50.4

41.3

34.7

43.1

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

1.8

2.8

2.8

1.9

4.8

6.7

5.1

5.2

2.5

7.8

4.5

7.9

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

4.4

3.7

3.9

2.7

6.8

9.5

6.4

6.8

17.8

18.0

11.5

11.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

16.7

13.9

17.4

14.3

14.5

19.5

14.1

12.6

17.6

18.1

13.9

9.2

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

4.0

2.8

1.2

n/a

9.5

1.7

2.4

n/a

11.0

4.5

4.0

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

3.1

1.8

1.4

1.0

2.9

2.1

3.0

2.0

5.0

1.9

1.6

3.1

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

1.3

3.0

3.2

2.2

4.4

2.5

3.0

4.9

2.6

2.3

2.0

7.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

2.6

2.1

1.7

n/a

2.9

2.1

2.3

n/a

3.9

1.6

2.4

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

14.8

12.2

n/a

n/a

16.2

20.5

n/a

n/a

19.3

24.6

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

4.9

n/a

n/a

n/a

7.2

n/a

n/a

n/a

10.2

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

2.2

3.5

3.8

n/a

11.3

3.9

7.6

n/a

8.6

4.5

7.9

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

17.8

8.9

11.0

8.3

12.4

16.3

10.7

12.0

22.4

17.9

10.3

13.2

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of 2008 prescription stimulant, sedative
and pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

11.6

20.8

17.1

n/a

23.6

20.1

25.7

n/a

25.8

22.6

28.7

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

12.7

9.7

n/a

n/a

13.2

12.9

n/a

n/a

13.6

13.4

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

28

Data Tables
Table 4. 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 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

26.8

25.7

20.6

23.2

40.5

38.2

34.7

37.7

44.1

40.2

36.8

46.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

11.9

9.0

10.5

8.7

16.7

14.8

15.1

16.6

25.4

21.3

15.1

23.9

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

1.8

3.4

4.2

2.6

3.8

2.9

7.6

4.6

10.1

8.9

6.9

6.8

Marijuana

used marijuana?

13.0

8.1

7.4

7.6

13.9

20.8

14.5

15.1

21.8

20.1

10.3

18.7

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

1.2

1.8

1.1

0.8

2.4

2.4

1.3

1.9

1.7

1.9

0.4

2.4

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

1.3

2.2

0.7

1.0

3.3

3.6

2.1

2.2

5.1

9.4

3.3

3.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

8.1

4.7

7.1

5.4

4.8

3.6

6.0

3.0

0.0

4.1

2.0

1.6

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

1.8

1.1

0.4

n/a

4.5

0.9

0.6

n/a

5.1

0.4

0.8

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

1.3

0.8

0.0

0.4

1.5

0.8

1.7

0.7

0.0

1.6

0.4

1.0

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

0.6

1.5

1.4

0.8

1.0

1.7

0.9

1.5

0.0

0.4

0.4

2.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

1.5

0.7

0.7

n/a

2.4

1.3

1.0

n/a

1.9

0.4

1.0

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

8.5

6.0

n/a

n/a

8.1

9.4

n/a

n/a

8.6

10.5

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

1.9

n/a

n/a

n/a

4.4

n/a

n/a

n/a

3.4

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

1.4

1.4

1.6

n/a

4.0

1.7

2.9

n/a

2.6

1.6

2.1

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

11.1

4.7

6.4

3.4

6.8

7.3

3.9

4.5

11.1

8.5

4.9

5.0

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of prescription stimulant, sedative and
pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

6.5

12.4

8.6

n/a

12.4

10.3

12.2

n/a

11.7

10.7

13.1

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

6.7

5.6

n/a

n/a

8.1

6.4

n/a

n/a

6.2

5.9

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

29

Data Tables
z

Table 5. Percentage of Students Reporting Heavy ATOD Use
Grade 8

Binge Drinking

1/2 Pack (or
more) of
Cigarettes/Day

How many times have you
had 5 or more alcoholic
drinks in a row in the
past 2 weeks?
During the past 30 days, how many
cigarettes did you smoke per day?
(11 to 20 cigarettes, More than 20
cigarettes)

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

21.0

18.8

11.5

1.9

1.4

1.5

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

13.1

24.5

26.9

23.7

0.7

2.9

2.6

3.9

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

22.4

33.6

26.6

21.5

30.2

2.1

1.7

2.1

3.4

4.2

Table 6. Percentage of Students Reporting Antisocial Behavior
How many times in the past year
(12 months) have you:
(One or more times)
Suspended from School
Drunk or High at School
Sold Illegal Drugs
Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle
Been Arrested
Attacked Someone with the Idea
of Seriously Hurting Them
Carried a Handgun
Carried a Handgun to School
During the past 30 days, how many
times did you:
(One or more times)

Grade 8

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

18.8

18.6

20.1

12.5

10.9

10.5

6.2

3.3

6.2

2.5

8.1

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

20.2

10.0

18.8

16.5

14.6

12.7

9.0

6.8

10.2

12.0

22.7

27.6

23.1

20.5

30.5

25.4

19.3

22.2

3.1

4.6

8.1

7.7

12.0

9.8

10.9

10.8

7.7

10.4

4.5

3.6

3.3

5.1

3.3

3.7

1.7

1.8

2.4

2.7

3.9

5.9

7.5

6.7

7.8

6.2

9.2

10.9

6.1

4.1

8.7

18.9

12.2

15.7

18.1

14.7

20.2

14.0

16.1

10.2

13.6

10.5

12.9

7.5

5.2

8.0

7.7

6.2

8.3

8.3

7.2

6.8

8.5

8.4

8.1

1.3

1.1
0.7
Grade 8

1.2

3.8

1.6
2.1
Grade 10

1.3

1.7

0.4
1.6
Grade 12

1.4

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

DRIVE a car or other vehicle when you had
been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

7.0

7.7

RIDE in a car or other vehicle driven by
someone who had been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

29.9

32.4

State
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

5.6

n/a

14.4

10.0

29.1

n/a

39.1

37.1

* These categories were not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

30

State
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

7.9

n/a

24.7

15.7

16.1

29.1

n/a

40.9

31.7

29.7

Data Tables
Table 7. Percentage of Students Gambling in the Past Year
How often have you done the following for money,
possessions, or anything of value:
County
2004
(At least once in the past 12 months or more)
Any Gambling
Played a slot machine, poker machine
or other gambling machine?
Played the lottery or scratch-off tickets?
Bet on sports?*
Played cards?
Bought a raffle ticket?
Played bingo?
Gambled on the Internet?
Played a dice game?*
Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?*
Bet on a horse or other animal race?*
Table 8. Percentage of Students Reporting Protection

Grade 8
County
2008

n/a

58.2

68.3

n/a

2.1

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

69.1

n/a

62.4

69.3

65.9

n/a

44.7

67.2

60.6

4.5

6.4

n/a

2.5

2.1

6.1

n/a

3.3

6.8

5.8

29.8
n/a
28.0
n/a
15.3
7.0
n/a

21.7
28.4
43.0
20.6
28.7
5.6
32.0

24.8
31.8
43.7
20.4
32.6
6.3
31.5

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

33.8
n/a
30.8
n/a
12.2
8.4
n/a

24.5
32.8
41.9
21.4
21.4
4.6
33.9

21.8
30.2
43.7
20.7
23.2
5.1
25.1

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

21.3
n/a
23.0
n/a
5.2
3.4
n/a

24.5
35.5
47.4
23.5
13.5
5.3
31.6

19.0
25.6
40.6
18.9
14.7
4.7
19.2

n/a

24.0

32.3

32.7

n/a

28.5

29.3

31.3

n/a

15.7

28.3

27.0

n/a

n/a

4.9

6.4

n/a

n/a

5.8

5.8

n/a

n/a

8.9

5.1

Grade 8

Protective Factor
Community Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Domain
Family Attachment
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
School Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer-Individual Domain
Belief in the Moral Order
Interaction with Prosocial Peers*
Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Total Protection
Students with High Protection**

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2006

State
2008

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

50.0
31.1

63.0
38.9

55.3
40.2

45.9
53.9
53.7

55.3
64.7
71.7

64.1
47.6

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

39.3
31.3

54.1
42.2

53.8
48.6

56.9
46.2

53.8
66.9
68.3

51.5
59.7
61.4

54.5
64.4
60.6

41.4
56.0
52.6

72.2
62.4

64.5
54.7

60.3
51.2

63.3
61.8

42.3
47.2
43.2
53.4

62.7
60.5
44.1
64.7

62.8
55.6
45.5
71.3

59.4
53.1
39.0
59.4

42.0

59.9

56.4

43.8

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

37.1
35.4

44.1
48.3

61.0
48.4

56.6
49.8

36.1
33.2

52.9
62.9
63.4

46.1
54.0
55.1

54.3
59.0
55.6

60.7
56.5
60.5

59.6
57.0
60.6

56.2
55.2
55.8

60.2
65.6

68.0
64.4

62.4
59.8

65.5
48.7

66.1
53.8

65.3
52.4

64.3
45.4

60.6
56.0
40.8
61.0

56.1
55.7
43.1
58.7

70.6
62.8
39.7
62.3

66.5
55.3
41.2
59.7

49.6
55.3
37.3
55.7

55.9
59.8
45.3
54.5

58.4
63.1
37.2
58.1

53.6
52.5
36.4
52.2

57.5

46.1

54.7

46.7

54.6

50.5

53.5

43.3

*Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.
**High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.

31

State
2008

State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 9. Percentage of Students Reporting Risk
Grade 8
Risk Factor
Community Domain
Low Neighborhood Attachment
Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use
Perceived Availability of Drugs
Perceived Availability of Handguns
Family Domain
Poor Family Management
Family Conflict
Family History of Antisocial Behavior
Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use
School Domain
Academic Failure
Low Commitment to School
Peer-Individual Domain
Rebelliousness
Early Initiation of ASB
Early Initiation of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use
Perceived Risk of Drug Use
Interaction with Antisocial Peers
Friend's Use of Drugs
Rewards for ASB
Gang Involvement
Total Risk
Students at High Risk*

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

48.8
46.9
53.1
55.8

33.1
31.0
33.6
47.7

33.5
35.1
36.4
49.1

50.3
55.8
60.3
53.2
28.2

40.6
46.1
43.4
46.3
28.5

57.6
54.3

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

38.5
36.6
38.2
37.8

46.6
45.0
49.0
35.4

43.5
47.3
50.9
36.2

40.9
32.7
43.5
29.0

38.4
55.8
48.9
48.3
21.5

45.5
53.5
40.3
49.3
26.8

38.2
40.4
51.2
47.1
36.0

46.7
42.7
49.8
52.7
40.9

46.9
36.0

51.1
45.3

47.3
41.0

49.3
39.8

40.0
37.7
42.7
56.2
43.7
53.4
66.2
54.8
63.4
23.6

38.7
37.3
33.9
42.6
33.6
37.2
50.5
38.4
46.2
15.3

45.6
40.8
34.5
42.7
24.5
32.7
56.0
33.9
40.6
20.7

43.1
39.4
30.3
44.6
29.1
44.5
58.2
39.4
45.6
26.9

52.7

36.5

40.5

38.7

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

46.2
42.1
49.6
26.7

55.9
39.7
59.5
35.3

42.7
27.8
52.9
39.2

50.2
30.3
48.3
44.0

51.0
36.3
52.2
33.1

36.6
37.4
41.6
49.1
34.5

42.8
42.8
41.1
53.4
41.1

40.2
47.9
55.6
45.8
36.4

38.8
37.9
44.8
41.8
30.0

34.5
38.5
37.1
47.3
32.3

44.3
38.3
37.3
50.2
41.2

51.3
42.4

54.8
38.8

49.5
43.7

45.7
34.5

40.4
38.6

43.9
39.1

44.4
45.6

42.8
31.9
41.1
42.7
34.1
36.4
57.5
41.3
37.2
25.7

52.2
46.4
40.9
47.5
47.1
37.7
55.7
42.9
51.3
17.1

43.3
42.3
32.8
43.8
29.2
35.4
52.5
36.6
34.0
23.8

46.8
42.0
32.7
50.7
37.4
42.3
57.3
41.9
44.0
23.2

40.7
40.3
41.2
43.7
31.1
44.9
60.0
44.3
51.3
19.5

44.2
39.6
39.2
42.3
32.1
39.3
46.8
34.2
55.1
8.9

43.8
41.4
31.6
39.2
22.4
29.7
48.4
25.6
48.2
13.4

44.0
41.2
33.1
46.9
36.3
46.5
53.2
37.3
54.6
16.8

34.9

38.5

33.5

37.5

37.0

30.8

28.7

35.7

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors)

32

Grade 12
State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 10. Where Youth Obtained Alcohol
Grade 8

If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)

County
2008

Sample size*
I bought it in a store such as a liquor store, convenience store,
supermarket, discount store, or gas station
I bought it at a restaurant, bar, or club
I bought it at a public event such as a concert or sporting event

Grade 10

State
2008

County
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2008

State
2008

47

4,418

66

4,872

65

5,065

2.1

5.0

1.5

6.9

7.7

12.3

4.3
2.1

3.0
2.9

1.5
1.5

3.0
2.9

3.1
1.5

7.0
3.9

I gave someone else money to buy it for me

21.3

21.4

50.0

34.4

46.2

43.7

My parent or guardian gave it to me
Another family member who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone not related to me who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone under the age of 21 gave it to me
I got it at a party
I took it from home
I took it from a store or someone else's home
I got it some other way

10.6
14.9
25.5
19.1
25.5
25.5
8.5

18.7
19.7
19.2
23.8
41.5
31.4
11.7

7.6
16.7
24.2
21.2
42.4
15.2
7.6

14.8
18.7
28.7
24.8
53.1
23.2
11.3

9.2
26.2
40.0
12.3
52.3
6.2
3.1

13.0
18.2
39.5
22.0
57.6
13.8
8.0

29.8

28.7

25.8

23.6

15.4

17.9

* Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case
of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

33

Data Tables
Table 11. Percentage of Students Reporting School Safety Issues
Grade 8
County
2004

Question

County
2006

Grade 10

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

Grade 12

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
has someone threatened or injured you with a 4-5 times
weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school 6-7 times
property?
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

93.9
2.5
1.2
1.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.2

90.1
4.0
3.0
1.0
0.3
0.3
0.3
1.0

85.4
6.6
4.5
0.3
1.7
0.0
0.7
0.7

87.1
6.6
3.5
1.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.9

91.5
3.3
2.8
0.5
0.0
0.9
0.5
0.5

89.8
2.9
4.4
1.1
0.7
0.4
0.0
0.7

88.4
5.8
2.1
1.7
0.4
0.0
0.0
1.7

88.4
5.9
3.0
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.1

89.1
3.4
2.5
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.0
2.5

94.1
3.5
2.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

92.3
5.2
1.6
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.4

92.4
3.9
2.0
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.7

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
4-5 times
were you in a physical fight on school property? 6-7 times
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

83.1
11.2
1.9
1.2
1.2
0.6
0.0
0.6

80.4
11.6
4.7
1.3
1.0
0.3
0.0
0.7

78.5
13.5
5.2
2.1
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.3

76.5
12.9
6.9
1.7
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.7

82.1
11.8
3.8
0.9
0.0
0.9
0.5
0.0

83.3
10.5
3.6
0.7
0.4
0.0
0.0
1.4

85.5
8.7
2.5
1.2
0.4
0.0
0.0
1.7

85.2
8.8
3.9
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.7

96.6
1.7
0.8
0.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

92.1
5.8
1.7
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0

90.3
6.5
1.2
0.8
0.4
0.0
0.4
0.4

91.5
5.0
2.1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how often have you
4-5 times
been picked on or bullied by a student ON
6-7 times
SCHOOL PROPERTY?*
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

66.3
15.0

59.4
13.2
11.5
4.3
1.9
1.2
0.8
7.7

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

73.5
9.6

4.8

72.6
11.2
7.1
2.5
2.5
0.4
0.4
3.3

69.1
10.3
9.6
3.2
1.4
1.1
0.6
4.6

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

82.5
8.6

3.7

49.3
14.0
11.5
7.0
3.1
2.1
1.4
11.5

1.7

80.2
7.7
8.5
1.6
0.0
0.4
0.0
1.6

82.3
6.6
5.7
1.5
0.8
0.5
0.3
2.4

91.4
4.3
2.0
0.7
1.7

91.2
4.2
3.2
0.4
1.1

89.9
5.8
2.7
0.6
1.0

93.3
3.3
1.9
0.5
1.0

91.6
2.9
2.9
1.1
1.5

92.1
3.8
1.7
0.0
2.5

91.1
5.1
2.2
0.6
1.0

95.0
0.0
2.5
1.7
0.8

94.9
3.4
0.7
0.3
0.7

96.4
3.2
0.0
0.0
0.4

93.8
3.3
1.8
0.4
0.7

93.5
0.8
1.2
1.2
3.3

94.4
1.5
1.1
0.5
2.6

0 days

During the past 30 days, on how many days did
1 day
you not go to school because you felt you would
2-3 days
be unsafe at school or on your way to or from
4-5 days
school?

6 or more days

91.2
5.0
1.9
0.0
1.9

15.0

0 days

12.1

7.2

95.5
96.0
93.6
93.9
93.8
90.5
92.4
93.8
91.5
91.8
1.3
0.7
4.6
3.1
1.4
4.0
0.4
2.2
1.7
1.4
1.3
2.3
1.1
1.3
1.0
0.7
2.1
1.2
1.7
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.5
1.5
0.0
0.5
0.8
0.7
6 or more days
1.9
1.0
0.7
1.2
3.3
3.3
5.0
2.2
4.2
5.8
* In 2006 the choices for this question were Never , Once , Several Times and Very Often. This category was not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

During the past 30 days, on how many days did 1 day
you carry a weapon such as a gun, knife, or
2-3 days
club ON SCHOOL PROPERTY?
4-5 days

34

Data Tables
Table 12. Drug Free Communities Report*
County 2008
Outcome

Definition

Substance

Grade 8

Grade 10

Grade 12

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

Perception of Risk
(People are at Moderate or Great Risk
of harming themselves if they... )

Perception of Parent Disapproval
(Parents feel it would be Wrong or
Very Wrong to... )

Perception of Peer Disapproval
(I think it is Wrong or Very Wrong for
someone my age to...)

Past 30-Day Use

Female†

Sample Percent

Sample

drink 1 or two drinks nearly every day

Alcohol

69.4

278

64.6

229

74.0

235

65.6

358

73.1

379

smoke 1 or more packs or cigarettes
per day

Cigarettes

85.7

279

85.7

230

93.6

236

86.9

360

89.2

380

smoke marijuana regularly

Marijuana

85.1

275

79.4

223

81.3

230

80.1

352

84.1

371

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

92.5

265

86.4

221

81.5

222

90.6

339

84.3

364

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

94.7

265

92.3

220

89.7

223

92.6

339

92.0

364

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

96.2

265

92.2

217

95.1

223

96.1

336

93.2

365

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

79.0

286

70.0

243

70.8

250

74.3

382

72.8

390

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

84.6

286

81.8

242

70.4

250

79.9

383

78.9

388

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

89.1

285

78.6

243

80.3

249

80.4

382

86.1

388

Alcohol

20.6

282

34.7

236

36.8

247

27.5

371

32.5

388

at least one use in the Past 30 Days

Cigarettes

10.5

277

15.1

232

15.1

239

13.5

364

13.2

379

7.4

283

14.5

234

10.3

243

11.4

367

9.8

388

Sample Percent

Sample

Marijuana

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

had more than a sip or two of beer,
wine or hard liquor?
Average Age of Onset**
(How old were you when you first…)

Male†

Sample Percent

smoked a cigarette, even just a puff?

smoked marijuana?

Alcohol
Average age:
Cigarettes
Average age:
Marijuana
Average age:

48.8

287

11.9 years
33.8

284

11.6 years
16.8

286

12.4 years

58.7

242

13.1 years
39.3

242

12.6 years
31.7

240

12.7 years

64.8

Sample Percent

253

53.9

14.1 years
50.4

252

13.5 years
39.3

252

13.8 years

384
13 years

40.6

382

12.4 years
29.1

381

12.7 years

60.0

390

13.2 years
40.7

388

12.9 years
27.8

389

13.6 years

* The “Sample” column represents the sample size (the number of youth who answered the question). The "Percent" column represents the percentage of youth in the sample answering the question as defined.
** For Average Age of Onset, “Sample” represents the number of youth who answered the question (including students responding that they never used). 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.

† 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.

35

Appendix
Appendix - Comparability of survey administratons
Issue
Drug Category

2004 AYS
On how many occasions (if any) have you:

2006 AYS

2008 AYS

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Notes regarding changes

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Hallucinogens

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the
past 30 days?

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the past
30 days?

Used LSD or other hallucinogens during the
past 30 days?

Substituted "hallucinogens" for "psychedelics" in 2008.
Comparable across all years.

Methamphetamines

Not applicable, no methamphetamine-specific
item on 2004 AYS

Used methamphetamines (meth, speed, crank,
crystal meth)?

Used methamphetamines (meth, crystal,
crank)?

2006 and 2008 provide slightly different examples, but
are cautiously comparable.

Prescription
stimulants

Used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”,
“crystal”, “crank”) without a doctor telling you
to take them?

Used stimulants, other than methamphetamines
(such as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin,
Adderal, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling
you to take them?

2004 is not comparable to any other years, data are
presented for archival interest. 2006 and 2008 data are
cautiously comparable.

Prescription
sedatives

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such
as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping
pills)?

2008 AYS added descriptor "prescription" and removed
qualifier "without a doctor telling you to take them." 2008
data are cautiously comparable with other years.

Ecstasy

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2008 AYS used "ecstasy" as the primary descriptor and
moved "MDMA" to examples. Comparable across years.

Prescription
drugs

Not applicable, no prescription drugs item on
2004 AYS

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills),
stimulants, other than methamphetamines (such
as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine) or
other prescription drugs (such as Oxycontin)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes)

Used prescription stimulants (Ritalin,
Adderall, or Dexedrine), sedatives
(tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax,
barbiturates, or sleeping pills) or pain relievers
(Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes )

In 2006, responses to the stimulant, sedative and other
prescription drug questions were calculated as one
measure. (2006 had no prescription pain reliever item.) In
2008, responses to the stimulant, sedative and
prescription pain reliever questions were calculated as
one measure. (2008 had no standalone prescription drug
item.) 2006 and 2008 data are cautiously comparable.
(Note that composite 2006 data will not match past
reports' prescription drugs category.)

Gambling
Category

Not applicable, no gambling items
on 2004 AYS

How often during the past 12 months
have you:

How often have you done the following for
money, possessions, or anything of value:

Sports betting

n/a

Bet on team sports?

Bet on sports?

Not comparable across years.

Race betting

n/a

Bet money on horse races?

Bet on a horse race or other animal race?

Not comparable across years.

Dice

n/a

Bet on dice games such as craps?

Played a dice game?

Not comparable across years.

Games of skill

n/a

Bet on games of personal skill such as pool,
darts, or bowling?

Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?

Comparable across years.

Protective Scale:
Peer-Individual
Interaction with
Prosocial Peers

Think of your four best friends (the friends you feel closest to). In the past year (12 months), how many of your best friends have:
(Scale is calculated based on the average response [0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 friends] to the following questions)
...participated in clubs, organizations and activities at school? ...made the commitment to stay drug-free?
...tried to do well in school? ...liked school? ...regularly attended religious services?(removed in 2008)

36

Regularly attended religious services was removed from
2008 AYS. 2004 and 2006 have been recalculated to
match 2008 AYS and are now comparable across all
years. Due to this recalculation, current reports may differ
slightly from past reports.

Contacts for Prevention
Arizona Department of Education
Student Services Division
www.ade.az.gov

Regional Prevention Contacts
Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, and Santa Cruz
Counties
Bill Burnett
Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)
(520) 618-8807

Arizona Department of Health Services
Division of Behavioral Health Services
Lisa Shumaker
(602) 364-4594
www.azdhs.gov/bhs/index.htm

Gila, La Paz, Pinal, and Yuma Counties
Linda Weinberg
Cenpatico Behavioral Health of Arizona
(866) 495-6738

Arizona Prevention Resource Center
(800) 432-2772
www.azprevention.org

Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai
Counties
Petrice Post
Northern Arizona Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(NARBHA)
(928) 214-2177

Center for Violence Prevention and Community
Safety
Charles Katz
(602) 543-6618
charles.katz@asu.edu
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)
http://prevention.samhsa.gov

Maricopa County
Juan Aristizabal
Magellan
(602) 797-8256

Governor’s Office of Children, Youth, and
Families
(602) 542-4043
http://www.governor.state.az.us/cyf/index.html

Gila River Indian Community
Joan Grey
Gila River Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(602) 528-7136

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities
U.S. Department of Education
www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS

Pasqua Yaqui Tribe
Centered Spirit Program
Jill Fabian
(520) 879-6067

Arizona Department of Gaming's Office of
Problem Gambling
Elise Mikkelsen
(602) 266-8299 ext. 351
www.problemgambling.az.gov

Navajo Nation
Department of Behavioral Health Services
(928) 871-6235

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMSHA)
www.samhsa.gov

White Mountain Apache Tribe
Apache Behavioral Health Services
(928) 338-4811

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/

Colorado River Indian Tribes
(928) 669-6577

Western Regional Center for the Application of
Prevention Technologies (CAPT)
www.westcapt.org

Other State and National Contacts:
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
Michelle Neitch/ Phillip Stevenson
(602) 364-1173/(602) 364-1157
www.azcjc.gov

Bach Harrison, L.L.C.
R. Steven Harrison, Ph.D.
(801) 359-2064
www.bach-harrison.com

37

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Greenlee County

REPORT PROVIDED BY:

Arizona Criminal Justice Commission

1

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Shining Light on Arizona Youth
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:
Arizona Department of Gaming’s Office of Problem Gambling
Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission
Arizona Parent’s Commission on Drug Education and Prevention
Governor’s Division for Substance Abuse Policy
Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Tobacco Education and Prevention Program,
Arizona Department of Health Services

2

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 2008 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:
Jean Ajamie, Arizona Department of Education
Michelle Anderson, Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections
Steve Ballance, Maricopa County
Carisa Dwyer, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Charles Katz, Arizona State University
Dr. Manuel Medina, TERROS, Inc.
Kim O’Connor, Governor’s Office for
Children, Youth, and Families
Holly Orozco, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Catherine Osborn, Arizona Department of Education
Richard Porter, Arizona Department of Health Services
Gowri Shetty, Arizona Department of Health Services
Lisa Shumaker, Arizona Department of Health Services
Wendy Wolfersteig, Arizona State University
Nicole Yancey Johnson, Arizona Early Childhood Development
and Health Board
Governor’s Youth Commission

Additionally, the success of the 2008 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.

3

Introduction
CONTENTS:

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Summary for
Greenlee County

Introduction
The Risk and Protective
Factor Model of
Prevention
The Arizona Substance
Abuse Partnership
How to Read the Charts

This report summarizes some of the
findings from the 2008 Arizona Youth
Survey (AYS) administered to 8th, 10th
and 12th grade students during the
spring of 2008. The results for your
county are presented along with
comparisons to 2004 and 2006 survey
results where applicable, as well as to
the overall results for the state. 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.

Practical Implications of
the Assessment
Assessment and
Planning
Data Charts:
• Substance Use

All schools in Arizona are eligible to
participate in the survey, and
recruitment efforts were successful in
obtaining participation by schools in all
of the 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.

•

Antisocial Behavior
and Gambling

•

Risk & Protective
Factor Profiles
Where Youth
Obtained Alcohol
School Safety

•
•

Risk and Protective
Factor Scale Definitions
Data Tables
Contacts for Prevention
Appendix

Table 1 contains the characteristics of
the students who completed the survey

Table 1. Characteristics of Participants
Student Totals
County 2004

Total Students

Number

County 2006

Percent

Number

County 2008

Percent

Number

State 2008

Percent

Number

Percent

248

100

239

100

162

100

54,734

100

8

98

39.5

85

35.6

79

48.8

25,695

46.9

10

75

30.2

85

35.6

57

35.2

16,089

29.4

12

75

30.2

69

28.9

26

16.0

12,950

23.7

Male

125

51.4

108

47.0

69

43.7

26,213

48.8

Female

118

48.6

122

53.0

89

56.3

27,514

51.2

Native American

7

2.8

4

1.7

17

7.1

4,812

7.4

African American

0

0.0

5

2.2

12

5.0

3,915

6.0

136

55.1

108

47.0

116

48.3

21,525

32.9

White

88

35.6

92

40.0

90

37.5

31,887

48.8

Asian

0

0.0

1

0.4

3

1.3

2,117

3.2

Pacific Islander

0

0.0

0

0.0

2

0.8

1,115

1.7

Grade

Gender

Ethnicity*

Hispanic

*In 2008, students could mark more than one ethnic category and the 'other' category was removed.

4

from your county and the state.
Because not every student answered all
of the questions, the number of
students in the gender and ethnicity
categories often will be less than the
total number of students.
Whenever data is obtained from a
sample of students instead of the entire
population, it is important to recognize
the strengths and weaknesses of the
data. One quick and 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 participated in the
survey and those that did not.
Changes to the AYS
Survey for 2008
In an effort to shorten the AYS and
make it more responsive to local
priorities, the following changes were
made for 2008: 1) some of the
substance use questions were refined
and the use of over-the-counter drugs
was added, 2) some risk and protective
factor scales were removed where the
data could easily be obtained from
other sources or the scales measured
similar constructs (scales removed are

Risk and Protective Factors
Transitions and Mobility, Community
Disorganization, Intention to Use Drugs, and Social
Skills), 3) questions about where students get the
alcohol they drink were added, 4) an 8-State Norm
was added that can be used to compare the AYS
results on risk, protection, and antisocial behavior to a
more national sample (see the description of the 8State Norm later in this report), and 5) National
Outcome Measures that are needed for measuring the
performance of federally funded programs in Arizona
such as talking to parents about the dangers of
substance use were added.

Washington, Social Development Research Group
have investigated the relationship between risk and
protective factors and youth problem behavior. They
have found, for example, that children who live in
families with high levels of conflict are more likely
to become involved in problem behaviors such as
delinquency and drug use than children who live in
families with low levels of family conflict.
Protective factors exert a positive influence or buffer
against the negative influence of risk, thus reducing the
likelihood that adolescents will engage in problem
behaviors. Protective factors identified through research
include social bonding to family, school, community,
and peers; healthy beliefs and clear standards for
behavior; and individual characteristics. For bonding to
serve as a protective influence, it must occur through
involvement with peers and adults who communicate
healthy values and set clear standards for behavior.

The Risk and Protective Factor Model of
Substance Abuse Prevention
Many states, school districts and local agencies have
adopted the Risk and Protective Factor Model to
guide their prevention efforts. The Risk and
Protective Factor Model of Prevention 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 identified a set of risk factors for
youth problem behaviors. Risk factors are
characteristics of school, community, and family
environments, as well as characteristics of students
and their peer groups that are known to predict
increased likelihood of drug use, delinquency, school
dropout, teen pregnancy, and violent behavior among
youth. Dr. J. David Hawkins, Dr. Richard F.
Catalano, and their colleagues at the University of

T
T

T

T

T
T

T
T

T
T

T

T

Teen Pregnancy

T

School Drop-Out
Violence

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

SOURCE: COMMUNITIES THAT CARE (CTC) PREVENTION MODEL, CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION (CSAP), SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMSHA)

5

Constitutional Factors

Gang Involvement

Favorable Attitudes Toward
Drug Use & Other
Problem Behaviors

Friends Who Use Drugs &
Engage in a Problem Behavior

Alienation & Rebelliousness

Early & Persistent
Antisocial Behavior

Peer / Individual
Early Initiation of Drug Use &
Other Problem Behavior

Lack of Commitment to
School

Academic Failure

School
Favorable Parent Attitudes &
Involvement in the
Problem Behavior

T
T
T
T
T

Family Management Problems

T
T
T
T
T

Family Conflict

Community Disorganization

Low Neighborhood
Attachment

Transitions & Mobility

Availability of Drugs &
Firearms

T
T

Family History of the
Problem Behavior

Delinquency

The chart below shows the links between the 19 risk
factors and the five problem behaviors. The check
marks have been placed in the chart to indicate where
at least two well designed, published research studies
have shown a link between the risk factor and the
problem behavior.

Family

Extreme Economic &
Social Deprivation

Substance Abuse

Community
Community Laws & Norms
Favorable Toward Drug Use,
Firearms & Crime

Risk
Factors

By measuring both risk and protective factors in a
population, prevention programs can be implemented
that are designed to reduce the elevated risk factors and
increase the protective factors. For example, if academic
failure is identified as an elevated risk factor in a
community, then mentoring, tutoring, and increased
opportunities and rewards for classroom participation
can be provided to improve academic performance.

T
T

T
T

T

T

The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership
The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP) was established by Governor Napolitano’s Executive Order
2007-12 in June 2007. Chaired by the Governor’s Chief of Staff, ASAP is composed of representatives from
state government entities, federal entities, and community organizations. ASAP serves as the single statewide
council on substance abuse prevention, enforcement, and treatment.
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
prevention, treatment, and enforcement. Through coordination among its members and their agencies and
organizations ASAP strives to ensure that substance abuse funding is spent in the most efficient and efficacious
manner.
ASAP has identified four strategic focus areas for 2008: 1) child welfare and substance abuse; 2) law enforcement
and drug trafficking; 3) emerging trends and the state’s capacity to respond; and 4) data-driven decisions and
policy development.
There are currently six sub-committees that assist ASAP in meeting their goals:
•

Arizona Underage Drinking Committee - The purpose of this subcommittee is to develop a
statewide underage drinking initiative to prevent and reduce underage drinking in Arizona. Their
activities include state-level infrastructure change to improve cross coordination/collaboration
between state agencies; developing a comprehensive statewide prevention system focused on
preventing underage drinking; and collaborative projects to more effectively utilize resources
and support local efforts.

•

Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The purpose of this work group is to
continuously evaluate data related to substance abuse to move the state system through a datadriven process. This is achieved through the completion of a statewide Substance Abuse
Epidemiology Profile. This profile will be updated every two years, with specific analyses
completed each year.

•

Emerging Issues Sub-Committee of the Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The
purpose of this sub-committee is to provide understanding of emerging substance abuse
consumption and consequence trends in Arizona to state agencies, Boards, Commissions and
Committees, and ASAP and its sub-committees.

•

Methamphetamine Task Force – The purpose of this task force is to bring together
representatives from state agencies, local government, businesses, and community groups to
develop collaborative efforts among treatment, prevention, and law enforcement systems to
assess and address the impact of methamphetamine statewide through information sharing,
resource allocation, service coordination, and the development of statewide policy
recommendations sensitive to the needs of local and tribal communities.

•

Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team – The Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team serves as the
advisory body and policy-making entity for the Arizona Co-Occurring State Incentive Grant.
Team members represent a number of state agencies and community-based organizations.

•

Workforce Development Committee – This committee was formed specifically to identify and
address substance abuse prevention training and technical assistance needs across Arizona. This
will, in turn, help strengthen instruction for prevention professionals and volunteers in
community coalitions.

6

How to Read the Charts in this Report
There are five types of charts presented in this
report: 1) substance use, 2) antisocial behavior and
youth gambling, 3) risk factors, 4) protective factors,
and 5) where youth obtained alcohol. When
available, data from the 2004 and 2006
administrations will be included in the charts. The
actual percentages from the charts are presented in
tables at the end of this report.

•

Substance Use Charts
This report contains information about alcohol,
tobacco, and other drug use (referred to as ATOD
use throughout this report) and other problem
behaviors of students. The bars on each chart
represent the percentage of students in that grade
who reported the behavior. The three sections in the
charts represent different types of problem
behaviors. The definitions of each of the types of
behavior are provided below.
•

Risk and Protective Factor Charts
The risk and protective factor charts show the
percentage of students at high risk and with high
protection for each of the risk and protective factor
scales. The risk and protective factor scales measure
specific aspects of youths’ life experiences that are
predictive of whether they will engage in problem
behaviors. A definition of each risk and protective
factor scale is contained in Table 2. The factors are
grouped into four domains: community, family, school,
and peer/individual.

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.

•

Heavy use includes binge drinking (having five
or more drinks in a row during the two weeks
prior to the survey) and use of one-half a pack
or more of cigarettes per day.

The bars on the risk and protective factor charts,
represent the percentage of students whose answers
reflect significant risk or protection. There are bars for
the last three administrations of the AYS: 2004, 2006,
and 2008. By looking at 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 and
when assessing risk reduction and protective factor
enhancement efforts.

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol Charts

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling
Charts
•

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 animal
races. The chart also shows the percentage of
students who engaged in any gambling behavior
during the past year.

This chart displays data regarding the ways that
students obtained alcohol in the past 30 days. The data
focus on a subgroup of students who indicated at least
one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no
alcohol use are not represented.) It is important to note
that the charts represent a subgroup of users and not
the entire survey population. Additionally, the smaller
the sample, the more dramatic the influence of a
student's responses. For example, 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 legend indicates the sample size for
each grade surveyed to help clarify the value of the data.

Antisocial behavior (ASB) is a measure of
the percentage of students who report any
involvement during the past year with eight
antisocial behaviors: suspended from school,
drunk or high at school, sold illegal drugs,
stolen a vehicle, been arrested, attacked
someone to harm them, carried a handgun,
taken a handgun to school. The chart also
displays any incidents in the past 30 days of
drinking and driving or riding in a car with a
drinking driver.
7

How to Read the Charts in this Report (cont’d)
School Safety Charts

community and a more national sample. The 8-State
Norm value for each risk and protective factor scale
represents the percentage of youth at risk or with
protection for eight states across the country
(Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana,
Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah). In developing the
8-State Norm, the contribution of each of eight
states was proportional to its percentage of the
national population, which helps to make the results
more representative of youth nation-wide. A
comparison between the ATOD use rates from the
8-State norm and those from the national
Monitoring the Future Survey showed the rates to
be very similar, which provides added confidence in
the validity of the 8-State Norm. Brief definitions of
the risk and protective factors scales are provided in
Table 2 following the profile charts. For more
information about risk and protective factors, please
refer to the resources listed on the last page of this
report under Contacts for Prevention.

The school safety 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 or were picked on or
bullied at school. The complete questions and values
for each response option can be seen in Table 11.

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 Survey or
the 8-State Norm (described below). A comparison to
the state-wide and national results provides additional
information for your community in determining the
relative significance of levels of 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.

Drug Free Communities Reports
Table 12 contains the information that is reported
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 8-State Norm
The diamonds on the charts allow a comparison
between the levels of risk and protection in your

Practical Implications of the Assessment
No Child Left Behind
The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities section of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) requires that
schools and communities use six Principles of Effectiveness to guide their decisions and spending on federally
funded prevention and intervention programs. First introduced in 1998 by the Department of Education, the
Principles of Effectiveness outline a data-driven process for ensuring that prevention programs achieve the desired
results. The Principles of Effectiveness stipulate that local prevention programs and activities must:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

be based on a needs assessment using objective data regarding the incidence of drug use and violence,
target specific performance objectives,
be based on scientific research and be proven to reduce violence or drug use,
be based on the analysis of predictor variables such as risk and protective factors,
include meaningful and ongoing parental input in program implementation, and
have periodic evaluations of established performance measures.

The results of the AYS presented in this report can help your school and community comply with the NCLB Act. The
Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior charts provide information related to Principle 1 and the Risk and Protective
Factor charts provide information related to Principle 4. Overall, using the risk and protective factor framework helps
schools meet all of the Principles of Effectiveness, and thereby assists schools in complying with the NCLB Act.
8

Assessment and Planning
School and Community Improvement Using Survey Data
Why Conduct the Arizona
Youth Survey?
Data from the Arizona Youth
Survey can be used to help
schools and communities assess
current conditions and identify
and prioritize local prevention
issues.
Each risk and protective factor
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
county make key decisions
regarding regarding allocation
of resources, how and when to
address specific needs, and
which strategies are most
effective and known to produce
results.

What are the numbers telling you?
Review the charts and data tables presented in this report. Using the
table below, note your findings as you discuss the following questions.
Which 3-5 risk factors are of the greatest concern?
Which 3-5 protective factors are your community’s highest priority?
Which levels of 30-day drug use are of greatest concern?
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 of greatest concern?
º Which behaviors are your students exhibiting the most?
º At which grades do you see unacceptable behavior levels?
•
•
•

How to decide if a rate is “unacceptable.”
Look across the charts – which items stand out as either much
higher or much lower than the others?
• Compare your data with statewide and national data –
differences of five percent between local and other data are probably
significant.
•

Use these data for program and policy development.
Substance use and antisocial behavior data – identify issues, raise
awareness about the problems, and promote school and community
dialogue.
• Risk and protective factor data – identify key objectives that will
help your school or community achieve its prevention goals.
•

Use the resources listed on the last page of this report, Contacts for
Prevention, for ideas about prevention programs that have proven
effective in addressing the risk factors that are high in your community
and improving the protective factors that are low.

MEASURE

Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate
#3
#4
#1
#2

Risk Factors
Protective Factors
Substance Use
Antisocial Behaviors

9

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

10

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Greenlee County, Grade 8

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

11

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Greenlee County, Grade 10

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

12

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Greenlee County, Grade 12

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Greenlee County, Grade 8
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

13

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Greenlee County, Grade 10
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

14

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Greenlee County, Grade 12
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

15

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Greenlee County, Grade 8

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

16

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Greenlee County, Grade 8
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

17

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Greenlee County, Grade 10

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

18

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Greenlee County, Grade 10
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

19

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Greenlee County, Grade 12

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

20

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Greenlee County, Grade 12
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

21

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol

WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL*
2008 Greenlee County Student Survey, Grades 8, 10 & 12
If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)
100
90
80
70

Percentages (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Got it some

other way

Took it from a
store or someone

else's home

County 2008, Grade 12
Sample: 13 students**

Took it from home

Got at a party

County 2008, Grade 10
Sample: 11 students**

Someone under
21 years

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

County 2008, Grade 8
Sample: 22 students**

State 2008

* Prior to 2008, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained alcohol. Also, because not all eight states ask where youth obtained alcohol, no 8-State value is reported.
** Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case of smaller sample sizes,
caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

22

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Greenlee County, Grade 8
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

23

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Greenlee County, Grade 10
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

24

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Greenlee County, Grade 12
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

25

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles
Low Neighborhood Attachment

Community Domain Risk Factors
Low neighborhood bonding is related to higher levels of 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.

Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

Community Domain Protective Factors
When opportunities are available in a community for positive participation, children are less likely to
engage in substance use and other problem behaviors.

Rewards for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for positive participation in activities helps youth bond to the community, thus lowering their risk
for substance use.

Poor Family Management

Family Domain Risk Factors
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.

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.

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.

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 Attachment

Family Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

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.

Academic Failure

Low Commitment to School

School Domain Risk Factors
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.
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.

26

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles (cont'd)
Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

School Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

Rebelliousness

Peer-Individual Risk Factors
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.

Early Initiation of Antisocial
Behavior and Drug Use

Early onset of drug use predicts the 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.

Attitudes Favorable Toward
Antisocial Behavior and Drug
Use

During the elementary school years, most children express anti-drug, anti-crime, and pro-social attitudes
and have 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Belief in the Moral Order

Peer-Individual Protective Factors
Young people who have a belief in what is “right” or “wrong” are less likely to use drugs.

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.

Prosocial Involvement

Participation in positive school and community activities helps provide protection for youth.

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.

27

Data Tables
Table 3. 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

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

61.5

65.5

67.1

47.8

74.3

69.5

81.1

66.2

86.5

86.6

88.0

74.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

50.5

44.6

26.9

25.9

64.9

55.4

42.0

39.9

74.0

63.2

76.0

50.8

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

28.9

34.6

16.5

7.1

28.4

43.8

31.5

12.9

32.9

37.9

57.7

17.7

Marijuana

used marijuana?

20.0

15.5

21.5

16.2

42.5

38.8

24.5

32.5

47.3

55.4

68.0

43.1

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

1.0

0.0

0.0

1.9

8.1

1.2

1.9

5.2

6.8

3.1

16.0

7.9

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

1.1

4.8

0.0

2.7

9.6

2.5

1.9

6.8

12.2

9.4

20.0

11.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

19.8

14.5

21.5

14.3

14.9

23.1

17.0

12.6

16.2

15.4

28.0

9.2

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

3.9

0.0

1.2

n/a

6.3

1.9

2.4

n/a

4.6

16.0

4.0

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

1.0

1.2

0.0

1.0

1.4

0.0

1.9

2.0

1.4

1.6

4.0

3.1

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

1.0

2.7

1.3

2.2

5.4

1.3

1.9

4.9

1.4

3.2

8.0

7.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

2.6

0.0

1.7

n/a

0.0

1.9

2.3

n/a

3.1

8.0

2.4

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

17.7

12.2

n/a

n/a

17.3

20.5

n/a

n/a

40.0

24.6

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

1.0

n/a

n/a

n/a

12.2

n/a

n/a

n/a

20.3

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

1.2

0.0

3.8

n/a

3.9

3.8

7.6

n/a

3.1

12.0

7.9

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

7.2

14.8

12.7

8.3

21.6

13.3

7.7

12.0

28.4

21.5

8.0

13.2

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of 2008 prescription stimulant, sedative
and pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

21.7

25.3

17.1

n/a

25.0

21.2

25.7

n/a

32.8

44.0

28.7

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

19.0

9.7

n/a

n/a

17.3

12.9

n/a

n/a

28.0

13.4

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

28

Data Tables
Table 4. 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 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

32.3

37.6

43.0

23.2

39.7

48.1

37.7

37.7

48.6

55.4

56.0

46.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

15.5

19.3

7.7

8.7

34.2

29.8

10.0

16.6

37.3

32.8

40.0

23.9

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

12.4

24.1

5.1

2.6

13.5

24.4

9.3

4.6

12.3

16.4

23.1

6.8

Marijuana

used marijuana?

8.2

6.0

10.1

7.6

15.3

14.7

7.5

15.1

18.1

22.7

36.0

18.7

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.8

4.1

0.0

0.0

1.9

2.7

1.5

8.0

2.4

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

0.0

0.0

0.0

1.0

2.7

0.0

1.9

2.2

5.4

1.6

8.0

3.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

10.4

6.1

7.6

5.4

4.1

5.3

3.8

3.0

1.4

4.7

12.0

1.6

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

0.0

0.0

0.4

n/a

1.3

0.0

0.6

n/a

0.0

0.0

0.8

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

0.0

1.3

0.0

0.4

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.7

0.0

1.6

0.0

1.0

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

1.0

1.4

0.0

0.8

1.4

0.0

0.0

1.5

0.0

0.0

0.0

2.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

1.3

0.0

0.7

n/a

0.0

0.0

1.0

n/a

3.1

4.0

1.0

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

12.7

6.0

n/a

n/a

11.5

9.4

n/a

n/a

16.0

10.5

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

0.0

n/a

n/a

n/a

2.7

n/a

n/a

n/a

9.5

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

1.2

0.0

1.6

n/a

1.2

0.0

2.9

n/a

1.5

8.0

2.1

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

3.1

5.1

2.5

3.4

9.5

5.1

3.8

4.5

10.8

9.2

4.0

5.0

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of prescription stimulant, sedative and
pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

9.6

15.2

8.6

n/a

15.7

13.5

12.2

n/a

17.9

20.0

13.1

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

11.4

5.6

n/a

n/a

3.8

6.4

n/a

n/a

20.0

5.9

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

29

Data Tables
z

Table 5. Percentage of Students Reporting Heavy ATOD Use
Grade 8

Binge Drinking

1/2 Pack (or
more) of
Cigarettes/Day

How many times have you
had 5 or more alcoholic
drinks in a row in the
past 2 weeks?
During the past 30 days, how many
cigarettes did you smoke per day?
(11 to 20 cigarettes, More than 20
cigarettes)

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

22.7

25.3

22.1

2.1

2.5

2.6

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

13.1

23.0

34.1

22.2

0.7

9.5

3.6

0.0

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

22.4

33.3

29.9

37.5

30.2

2.1

10.7

4.5

12.0

4.2

Table 6. Percentage of Students Reporting Antisocial Behavior
How many times in the past year
(12 months) have you:
(One or more times)
Suspended from School
Drunk or High at School
Sold Illegal Drugs
Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle
Been Arrested
Attacked Someone with the Idea
of Seriously Hurting Them
Carried a Handgun
Carried a Handgun to School
During the past 30 days, how many
times did you:
(One or more times)

Grade 8

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

8.2

15.3

17.7

8.2

18.3

12.7

3.1

0.0

2.0

1.2

3.1

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

20.2

14.9

23.8

15.8

14.6

6.7

13.4

23.1

10.2

12.0

28.8

31.0

19.6

20.5

33.3

37.3

53.8

22.2

5.1

4.6

10.8

4.9

3.5

9.8

9.3

9.1

11.5

10.4

5.1

3.6

8.1

6.2

0.0

3.7

0.0

3.0

7.7

2.7

4.8

11.4

7.5

13.5

7.4

10.5

9.2

10.7

4.5

19.2

8.7

13.3

13.1

27.8

18.1

21.6

20.2

10.5

16.1

17.3

23.5

11.5

12.9

5.1

4.8

8.9

7.7

4.1

1.2

5.3

7.2

6.7

8.8

11.5

8.1

0.0

0.0
3.8
Grade 8

1.2

0.0

0.0
0.0
Grade 10

1.3

0.0

1.5
3.8
Grade 12

1.4

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

DRIVE a car or other vehicle when you had
been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

6.0

5.1

RIDE in a car or other vehicle driven by
someone who had been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

28.6

40.3

State
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

5.6

n/a

17.6

10.5

29.1

n/a

34.1

46.4

* These categories were not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

30

State
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

7.9

n/a

28.4

46.2

16.1

29.1

n/a

50.7

69.2

29.7

Data Tables
Table 7. Percentage of Students Gambling in the Past Year
How often have you done the following for money,
possessions, or anything of value:
County
2004
(At least once in the past 12 months or more)
Any Gambling
Played a slot machine, poker machine
or other gambling machine?
Played the lottery or scratch-off tickets?
Bet on sports?*
Played cards?
Bought a raffle ticket?
Played bingo?
Gambled on the Internet?
Played a dice game?*
Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?*
Bet on a horse or other animal race?*
Table 8. Percentage of Students Reporting Protection

Grade 8
County
2008

n/a

56.0

73.4

n/a

4.8

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

69.1

n/a

56.8

71.9

65.9

n/a

52.2

76.9

60.6

2.5

6.4

n/a

5.1

1.8

6.1

n/a

0.0

0.0

5.8

31.3
n/a
22.0
n/a
13.6
4.8
n/a

26.6
43.0
44.3
22.8
32.9
3.8
32.9

24.8
31.8
43.7
20.4
32.6
6.3
31.5

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

27.3
n/a
34.7
n/a
12.3
2.7
n/a

19.3
38.6
38.6
22.8
22.8
5.4
21.1

21.8
30.2
43.7
20.7
23.2
5.1
25.1

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

21.2
n/a
26.2
n/a
8.1
3.2
n/a

23.1
46.2
57.7
30.8
38.5
11.5
30.8

19.0
25.6
40.6
18.9
14.7
4.7
19.2

n/a

20.7

34.2

32.7

n/a

27.3

24.6

31.3

n/a

23.0

42.3

27.0

n/a

n/a

3.8

6.4

n/a

n/a

1.8

5.8

n/a

n/a

7.7

5.1

Grade 8

Protective Factor
Community Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Domain
Family Attachment
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
School Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer-Individual Domain
Belief in the Moral Order
Interaction with Prosocial Peers*
Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Total Protection
Students with High Protection**

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2006

State
2008

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

62.1
51.5

58.1
43.4

42.3
29.9

57.9
73.5
72.9

49.4
53.7
54.3

73.5
73.5

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

39.3
31.3

43.5
49.3

52.1
54.9

45.7
41.5

42.7
49.3
50.0

51.5
59.7
61.4

43.7
50.0
62.3

43.2
62.3
60.0

77.4
60.7

74.4
56.4

60.3
51.2

63.5
70.8

58.2
65.3
48.0
56.7

58.8
59.5
38.6
64.6

48.1
43.6
30.4
65.4

59.4
53.1
39.0
59.4

69.4

52.9

44.3

43.8

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

37.1
35.4

39.4
35.6

55.0
45.5

45.8
37.5

36.1
33.2

38.5
58.3
52.0

46.1
54.0
55.1

59.1
54.4
55.2

56.5
49.2
59.7

69.6
60.9
56.5

56.2
55.2
55.8

67.1
71.8

61.4
57.9

62.4
59.8

62.7
52.0

77.9
50.0

73.1
34.6

64.3
45.4

53.4
56.5
45.9
50.7

55.6
60.0
53.6
62.3

64.8
59.6
42.1
71.9

66.5
55.3
41.2
59.7

30.1
46.7
45.3
39.2

39.7
56.7
41.8
53.0

16.0
61.5
26.9
34.6

53.6
52.5
36.4
52.2

52.0

58.8

40.4

46.7

41.3

50.7

26.9

43.3

*Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.
**High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.

31

State
2008

State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 9. Percentage of Students Reporting Risk
Grade 8
Risk Factor
Community Domain
Low Neighborhood Attachment
Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use
Perceived Availability of Drugs
Perceived Availability of Handguns
Family Domain
Poor Family Management
Family Conflict
Family History of Antisocial Behavior
Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use
School Domain
Academic Failure
Low Commitment to School
Peer-Individual Domain
Rebelliousness
Early Initiation of ASB
Early Initiation of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use
Perceived Risk of Drug Use
Interaction with Antisocial Peers
Friend's Use of Drugs
Rewards for ASB
Gang Involvement
Total Risk
Students at High Risk*

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

28.9
37.5
47.4
48.5

36.2
37.8
47.4
52.1

49.4
36.4
43.4
46.1

33.7
49.0
56.7
43.8
30.2

44.4
52.5
55.7
55.8
48.1

47.4
33.7

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

38.5
36.6
38.2
37.8

47.9
49.3
59.7
31.9

37.8
48.8
61.8
32.4

51.2
46.3
50.0
43.2

64.5
61.8
57.1
62.3
24.7

45.5
53.5
40.3
49.3
26.8

34.7
43.1
54.8
51.4
48.6

37.0
38.8
50.0
55.1
53.4

54.3
43.9

44.6
53.2

47.3
41.0

54.3
45.2

29.9
27.8
54.2
39.8
34.7
44.9
45.9
49.5
54.7
9.4

40.0
31.7
38.8
46.2
36.2
45.1
43.5
47.1
48.8
13.6

52.6
45.6
34.6
58.2
31.6
50.0
60.3
52.6
42.3
27.3

43.1
39.4
30.3
44.6
29.1
44.5
58.2
39.4
45.6
26.9

45.9

43.5

54.4

38.7

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

46.2
42.1
49.6
26.7

62.2
37.5
57.3
39.2

57.6
48.5
49.2
27.3

52.0
56.0
56.0
48.0

51.0
36.3
52.2
33.1

44.4
33.3
53.3
56.2
37.5

42.8
42.8
41.1
53.4
41.1

47.8
36.8
54.4
63.2
57.4

44.6
37.5
36.9
56.7
49.2

47.8
30.4
52.4
66.7
50.0

44.3
38.3
37.3
50.2
41.2

44.7
39.3

51.8
40.4

49.5
43.7

48.6
54.1

29.0
46.4

37.5
50.0

44.4
45.6

50.7
52.7
56.8
52.1
42.5
47.2
73.5
59.4
47.8
23.6

42.4
43.0
53.0
58.3
48.7
41.5
60.7
44.7
43.6
15.2

49.1
35.1
33.3
45.6
28.1
38.3
37.5
26.3
26.3
14.0

46.8
42.0
32.7
50.7
37.4
42.3
57.3
41.9
44.0
23.2

29.3
44.0
49.3
60.0
33.3
34.2
70.7
45.3
51.4
17.6

52.9
50.0
43.3
59.7
41.5
48.5
65.7
53.7
62.1
9.1

61.5
69.2
69.2
73.1
46.2
45.8
61.5
61.5
50.0
24.0

44.0
41.2
33.1
46.9
36.3
46.5
53.2
37.3
54.6
16.8

48.0

40.0

21.1

37.5

49.3

39.1

57.7

35.7

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors)

32

Grade 12
State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 10. Where Youth Obtained Alcohol
Grade 8

If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)

County
2008

Sample size*
I bought it in a store such as a liquor store, convenience store,
supermarket, discount store, or gas station
I bought it at a restaurant, bar, or club
I bought it at a public event such as a concert or sporting event

Grade 10

State
2008

County
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2008

State
2008

22

4,418

11

4,872

13

5,065

0.0

5.0

0.0

6.9

7.7

12.3

0.0
0.0

3.0
2.9

0.0
0.0

3.0
2.9

7.7
7.7

7.0
3.9

I gave someone else money to buy it for me

27.3

21.4

63.6

34.4

61.5

43.7

My parent or guardian gave it to me
Another family member who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone not related to me who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone under the age of 21 gave it to me
I got it at a party
I took it from home
I took it from a store or someone else's home
I got it some other way

9.1
27.3
18.2
31.8
36.4
27.3
13.6

18.7
19.7
19.2
23.8
41.5
31.4
11.7

18.2
36.4
18.2
0.0
36.4
36.4
9.1

14.8
18.7
28.7
24.8
53.1
23.2
11.3

38.5
38.5
53.8
38.5
69.2
30.8
23.1

13.0
18.2
39.5
22.0
57.6
13.8
8.0

40.9

28.7

27.3

23.6

38.5

17.9

* Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case
of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

33

Data Tables
Table 11. Percentage of Students Reporting School Safety Issues
Grade 8
County
2004

Question

County
2006

Grade 10

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

Grade 12

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
has someone threatened or injured you with a 4-5 times
weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school 6-7 times
property?
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

89.8
5.1
3.1
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0

91.7
3.6
4.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

89.9
8.9
0.0
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

87.1
6.6
3.5
1.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.9

87.8
9.5
1.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.4

92.9
2.4
2.4
1.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.2

93.0
5.3
1.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

88.4
5.9
3.0
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.1

93.2
4.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.4
0.0
1.4

90.9
3.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.0
0.0

84.6
7.7
0.0
3.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.8

92.4
3.9
2.0
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.7

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
4-5 times
were you in a physical fight on school property? 6-7 times
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

73.5
11.2
14.3
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

76.2
10.7
9.5
1.2
0.0
1.2
0.0
1.2

68.4
17.7
7.6
1.3
0.0
3.8
0.0
1.3

76.5
12.9
6.9
1.7
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.7

79.7
9.5
8.1
1.4
0.0
1.4
0.0
0.0

78.8
10.6
10.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

89.5
7.0
0.0
0.0
3.5
0.0
0.0
0.0

85.2
8.8
3.9
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.7

93.2
2.7
4.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

88.2
7.4
2.9
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

84.6
7.7
3.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.8

91.5
5.0
2.1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how often have you
4-5 times
been picked on or bullied by a student ON
6-7 times
SCHOOL PROPERTY?*
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

65.4
19.8

59.4
13.2
11.5
4.3
1.9
1.2
0.8
7.7

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

74.7
12.0

1.2

71.9
7.0
15.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.3

69.1
10.3
9.6
3.2
1.4
1.1
0.6
4.6

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

83.6
6.0

4.9

57.0
19.0
13.9
3.8
0.0
0.0
1.3
5.1

3.0

76.0
4.0
0.0
8.0
0.0
8.0
0.0
4.0

82.3
6.6
5.7
1.5
0.8
0.5
0.3
2.4

92.9
6.1
1.0
0.0
0.0

94.0
2.4
2.4
1.2
0.0

89.9
5.1
3.8
1.3
0.0

89.9
5.8
2.7
0.6
1.0

94.6
2.7
2.7
0.0
0.0

98.8
1.2
0.0
0.0
0.0

96.5
1.8
1.8
0.0
0.0

91.1
5.1
2.2
0.6
1.0

98.6
0.0
0.0
1.4
0.0

95.5
3.0
0.0
0.0
1.5

92.3
0.0
7.7
0.0
0.0

93.8
3.3
1.8
0.4
0.7

84.6
3.8
3.8
0.0
7.7

94.4
1.5
1.1
0.5
2.6

0 days

During the past 30 days, on how many days did
1 day
you not go to school because you felt you would
2-3 days
be unsafe at school or on your way to or from
4-5 days
school?

6 or more days

9.9

0 days

12.0

7.5

94.9
90.1
94.9
93.9
85.1
95.2
98.2
93.8
93.2
94.0
1.0
3.7
3.8
3.1
0.0
1.2
1.8
2.2
5.5
0.0
2.0
2.5
0.0
1.3
1.4
0.0
0.0
1.2
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.4
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
6 or more days
1.0
3.7
1.3
1.2
12.2
3.6
0.0
2.2
1.4
6.0
* In 2006 the choices for this question were Never , Once , Several Times and Very Often. This category was not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

During the past 30 days, on how many days did 1 day
you carry a weapon such as a gun, knife, or
2-3 days
club ON SCHOOL PROPERTY?
4-5 days

34

Data Tables
Table 12. Drug Free Communities Report*
County 2008
Outcome

Definition

Substance

Grade 8

Grade 10

Grade 12

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

Perception of Risk
(People are at Moderate or Great Risk
of harming themselves if they... )

Perception of Parent Disapproval
(Parents feel it would be Wrong or
Very Wrong to... )

Perception of Peer Disapproval
(I think it is Wrong or Very Wrong for
someone my age to...)

Past 30-Day Use

Female†

Sample Percent

Sample

drink 1 or two drinks nearly every day

Alcohol

57.7

78

59.6

47

44.0

25

49.2

65

60.5

81

smoke 1 or more packs or cigarettes
per day

Cigarettes

85.9

78

83.0

47

84.0

25

83.3

66

86.2

80

smoke marijuana regularly

Marijuana

83.1

77

77.8

45

77.3

22

82.3

62

78.2

78

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

93.5

77

78.8

33

72.7

22

86.2

58

87.1

70

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

98.7

77

90.6

32

75.0

24

94.9

59

91.4

70

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

97.4

76

93.8

32

95.8

24

98.3

59

94.2

69

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

73.4

79

75.4

57

36.0

25

68.1

69

68.2

88

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

86.1

79

82.5

57

61.5

26

87.0

69

76.4

89

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

84.8

79

82.5

57

61.5

26

81.2

69

79.8

89

Alcohol

43.0

79

37.7

53

56.0

25

44.1

68

42.4

85

at least one use in the Past 30 Days

Cigarettes

7.7

78

10.0

50

40.0

25

11.9

67

14.6

82

10.1

79

7.5

53

36.0

25

16.2

68

10.6

85

Sample Percent

Sample

Marijuana

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

had more than a sip or two of beer,
wine or hard liquor?
Average Age of Onset**
(How old were you when you first…)

Male†

Sample Percent

smoked a cigarette, even just a puff?

smoked marijuana?

Alcohol
Average age:
Cigarettes
Average age:
Marijuana
Average age:

63.3

79

11.5 years
24.7

77

11.4 years
17.9

78

12.1 years

84.2

57

13.2 years
45.6

57

12.3 years
26.3

57

14.1 years

88.5

Sample Percent

26

13.3 years
84.6

26

13.3 years
73.1

26

13.6 years

71.0

69

12.1 years
43.3

67

12.7 years
29.4

68

12.8 years

77.5

89

12.8 years
41.6

89

12.2 years
29.2

89

13.6 years

* The “Sample” column represents the sample size (the number of youth who answered the question). The "Percent" column represents the percentage of youth in the sample answering the question as defined.
** For Average Age of Onset, “Sample” represents the number of youth who answered the question (including students responding that they never used). 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.

† 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.

35

Appendix
Appendix - Comparability of survey administratons
Issue
Drug Category

2004 AYS
On how many occasions (if any) have you:

2006 AYS

2008 AYS

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Notes regarding changes

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Hallucinogens

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the
past 30 days?

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the past
30 days?

Used LSD or other hallucinogens during the
past 30 days?

Substituted "hallucinogens" for "psychedelics" in 2008.
Comparable across all years.

Methamphetamines

Not applicable, no methamphetamine-specific
item on 2004 AYS

Used methamphetamines (meth, speed, crank,
crystal meth)?

Used methamphetamines (meth, crystal,
crank)?

2006 and 2008 provide slightly different examples, but
are cautiously comparable.

Prescription
stimulants

Used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”,
“crystal”, “crank”) without a doctor telling you
to take them?

Used stimulants, other than methamphetamines
(such as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin,
Adderal, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling
you to take them?

2004 is not comparable to any other years, data are
presented for archival interest. 2006 and 2008 data are
cautiously comparable.

Prescription
sedatives

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such
as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping
pills)?

2008 AYS added descriptor "prescription" and removed
qualifier "without a doctor telling you to take them." 2008
data are cautiously comparable with other years.

Ecstasy

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2008 AYS used "ecstasy" as the primary descriptor and
moved "MDMA" to examples. Comparable across years.

Prescription
drugs

Not applicable, no prescription drugs item on
2004 AYS

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills),
stimulants, other than methamphetamines (such
as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine) or
other prescription drugs (such as Oxycontin)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes)

Used prescription stimulants (Ritalin,
Adderall, or Dexedrine), sedatives
(tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax,
barbiturates, or sleeping pills) or pain relievers
(Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes )

In 2006, responses to the stimulant, sedative and other
prescription drug questions were calculated as one
measure. (2006 had no prescription pain reliever item.) In
2008, responses to the stimulant, sedative and
prescription pain reliever questions were calculated as
one measure. (2008 had no standalone prescription drug
item.) 2006 and 2008 data are cautiously comparable.
(Note that composite 2006 data will not match past
reports' prescription drugs category.)

Gambling
Category

Not applicable, no gambling items
on 2004 AYS

How often during the past 12 months
have you:

How often have you done the following for
money, possessions, or anything of value:

Sports betting

n/a

Bet on team sports?

Bet on sports?

Not comparable across years.

Race betting

n/a

Bet money on horse races?

Bet on a horse race or other animal race?

Not comparable across years.

Dice

n/a

Bet on dice games such as craps?

Played a dice game?

Not comparable across years.

Games of skill

n/a

Bet on games of personal skill such as pool,
darts, or bowling?

Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?

Comparable across years.

Protective Scale:
Peer-Individual
Interaction with
Prosocial Peers

Think of your four best friends (the friends you feel closest to). In the past year (12 months), how many of your best friends have:
(Scale is calculated based on the average response [0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 friends] to the following questions)
...participated in clubs, organizations and activities at school? ...made the commitment to stay drug-free?
...tried to do well in school? ...liked school? ...regularly attended religious services?(removed in 2008)

36

Regularly attended religious services was removed from
2008 AYS. 2004 and 2006 have been recalculated to
match 2008 AYS and are now comparable across all
years. Due to this recalculation, current reports may differ
slightly from past reports.

Contacts for Prevention
Arizona Department of Education
Student Services Division
www.ade.az.gov

Regional Prevention Contacts
Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, and Santa Cruz
Counties
Bill Burnett
Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)
(520) 618-8807

Arizona Department of Health Services
Division of Behavioral Health Services
Lisa Shumaker
(602) 364-4594
www.azdhs.gov/bhs/index.htm

Gila, La Paz, Pinal, and Yuma Counties
Linda Weinberg
Cenpatico Behavioral Health of Arizona
(866) 495-6738

Arizona Prevention Resource Center
(800) 432-2772
www.azprevention.org

Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai
Counties
Petrice Post
Northern Arizona Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(NARBHA)
(928) 214-2177

Center for Violence Prevention and Community
Safety
Charles Katz
(602) 543-6618
charles.katz@asu.edu
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)
http://prevention.samhsa.gov

Maricopa County
Juan Aristizabal
Magellan
(602) 797-8256

Governor’s Office of Children, Youth, and
Families
(602) 542-4043
http://www.governor.state.az.us/cyf/index.html

Gila River Indian Community
Joan Grey
Gila River Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(602) 528-7136

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities
U.S. Department of Education
www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS

Pasqua Yaqui Tribe
Centered Spirit Program
Jill Fabian
(520) 879-6067

Arizona Department of Gaming's Office of
Problem Gambling
Elise Mikkelsen
(602) 266-8299 ext. 351
www.problemgambling.az.gov

Navajo Nation
Department of Behavioral Health Services
(928) 871-6235

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMSHA)
www.samhsa.gov

White Mountain Apache Tribe
Apache Behavioral Health Services
(928) 338-4811

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/

Colorado River Indian Tribes
(928) 669-6577

Western Regional Center for the Application of
Prevention Technologies (CAPT)
www.westcapt.org

Other State and National Contacts:
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
Michelle Neitch/ Phillip Stevenson
(602) 364-1173/(602) 364-1157
www.azcjc.gov

Bach Harrison, L.L.C.
R. Steven Harrison, Ph.D.
(801) 359-2064
www.bach-harrison.com

37

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
La Paz County

REPORT PROVIDED BY:

Arizona Criminal Justice Commission

1

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Shining Light on Arizona Youth
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:
Arizona Department of Gaming’s Office of Problem Gambling
Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission
Arizona Parent’s Commission on Drug Education and Prevention
Governor’s Division for Substance Abuse Policy
Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Tobacco Education and Prevention Program,
Arizona Department of Health Services

2

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 2008 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:
Jean Ajamie, Arizona Department of Education
Michelle Anderson, Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections
Steve Ballance, Maricopa County
Carisa Dwyer, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Charles Katz, Arizona State University
Dr. Manuel Medina, TERROS, Inc.
Kim O’Connor, Governor’s Office for
Children, Youth, and Families
Holly Orozco, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Catherine Osborn, Arizona Department of Education
Richard Porter, Arizona Department of Health Services
Gowri Shetty, Arizona Department of Health Services
Lisa Shumaker, Arizona Department of Health Services
Wendy Wolfersteig, Arizona State University
Nicole Yancey Johnson, Arizona Early Childhood Development
and Health Board
Governor’s Youth Commission

Additionally, the success of the 2008 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.

3

Introduction
CONTENTS:

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Summary for
La Paz County

Introduction
The Risk and Protective
Factor Model of
Prevention
The Arizona Substance
Abuse Partnership
How to Read the Charts

This report summarizes some of the
findings from the 2008 Arizona Youth
Survey (AYS) administered to 8th, 10th
and 12th grade students during the
spring of 2008. The results for your
county are presented along with
comparisons to 2004 and 2006 survey
results where applicable, as well as to
the overall results for the state. 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.

Practical Implications of
the Assessment
Assessment and
Planning
Data Charts:
• Substance Use

All schools in Arizona are eligible to
participate in the survey, and
recruitment efforts were successful in
obtaining participation by schools in all
of the 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.

•

Antisocial Behavior
and Gambling

•

Risk & Protective
Factor Profiles
Where Youth
Obtained Alcohol
School Safety

•
•

Risk and Protective
Factor Scale Definitions
Data Tables
Contacts for Prevention
Appendix

Table 1 contains the characteristics of
the students who completed the survey

Table 1. Characteristics of Participants
Student Totals
County 2004

Total Students

Number

County 2006

Percent

Number

County 2008

Percent

Number

State 2008

Percent

Number

Percent

1,673

100

376

100

349

100

54,734

100

8

935

55.9

145

38.6

118

33.8

25,695

46.9

10

482

28.8

167

44.4

124

35.5

16,089

29.4

12

256

15.3

64

17.0

107

30.7

12,950

23.7

Male

788

47.9

172

47.4

189

55.4

26,213

48.8

Female

857

52.1

191

52.6

152

44.6

27,514

51.2

Native American

85

5.2

59

16.3

95

21.6

4,812

7.4

African American

21

1.3

7

1.9

20

4.6

3,915

6.0

1,136

69.5

130

35.9

157

35.8

21,525

32.9

White

307

18.8

146

40.3

155

35.3

31,887

48.8

Asian

17

1.0

2

0.6

5

1.1

2,117

3.2

3

0.2

3

0.8

7

1.6

1,115

1.7

Grade

Gender

Ethnicity*

Hispanic

Pacific Islander

*In 2008, students could mark more than one ethnic category and the 'other' category was removed.

4

from your county and the state.
Because not every student answered all
of the questions, the number of
students in the gender and ethnicity
categories often will be less than the
total number of students.
Whenever data is obtained from a
sample of students instead of the entire
population, it is important to recognize
the strengths and weaknesses of the
data. One quick and 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 participated in the
survey and those that did not.
Changes to the AYS
Survey for 2008
In an effort to shorten the AYS and
make it more responsive to local
priorities, the following changes were
made for 2008: 1) some of the
substance use questions were refined
and the use of over-the-counter drugs
was added, 2) some risk and protective
factor scales were removed where the
data could easily be obtained from
other sources or the scales measured
similar constructs (scales removed are

Risk and Protective Factors
Transitions and Mobility, Community
Disorganization, Intention to Use Drugs, and Social
Skills), 3) questions about where students get the
alcohol they drink were added, 4) an 8-State Norm
was added that can be used to compare the AYS
results on risk, protection, and antisocial behavior to a
more national sample (see the description of the 8State Norm later in this report), and 5) National
Outcome Measures that are needed for measuring the
performance of federally funded programs in Arizona
such as talking to parents about the dangers of
substance use were added.

Washington, Social Development Research Group
have investigated the relationship between risk and
protective factors and youth problem behavior. They
have found, for example, that children who live in
families with high levels of conflict are more likely
to become involved in problem behaviors such as
delinquency and drug use than children who live in
families with low levels of family conflict.
Protective factors exert a positive influence or buffer
against the negative influence of risk, thus reducing the
likelihood that adolescents will engage in problem
behaviors. Protective factors identified through research
include social bonding to family, school, community,
and peers; healthy beliefs and clear standards for
behavior; and individual characteristics. For bonding to
serve as a protective influence, it must occur through
involvement with peers and adults who communicate
healthy values and set clear standards for behavior.

The Risk and Protective Factor Model of
Substance Abuse Prevention
Many states, school districts and local agencies have
adopted the Risk and Protective Factor Model to
guide their prevention efforts. The Risk and
Protective Factor Model of Prevention 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 identified a set of risk factors for
youth problem behaviors. Risk factors are
characteristics of school, community, and family
environments, as well as characteristics of students
and their peer groups that are known to predict
increased likelihood of drug use, delinquency, school
dropout, teen pregnancy, and violent behavior among
youth. Dr. J. David Hawkins, Dr. Richard F.
Catalano, and their colleagues at the University of

T
T

T

T

T
T

T
T

T
T

T

T

Teen Pregnancy

T

School Drop-Out
Violence

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

SOURCE: COMMUNITIES THAT CARE (CTC) PREVENTION MODEL, CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION (CSAP), SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMSHA)

5

Constitutional Factors

Gang Involvement

Favorable Attitudes Toward
Drug Use & Other
Problem Behaviors

Friends Who Use Drugs &
Engage in a Problem Behavior

Alienation & Rebelliousness

Early & Persistent
Antisocial Behavior

Peer / Individual
Early Initiation of Drug Use &
Other Problem Behavior

Lack of Commitment to
School

Academic Failure

School
Favorable Parent Attitudes &
Involvement in the
Problem Behavior

T
T
T
T
T

Family Management Problems

T
T
T
T
T

Family Conflict

Community Disorganization

Low Neighborhood
Attachment

Transitions & Mobility

Availability of Drugs &
Firearms

T
T

Family History of the
Problem Behavior

Delinquency

The chart below shows the links between the 19 risk
factors and the five problem behaviors. The check
marks have been placed in the chart to indicate where
at least two well designed, published research studies
have shown a link between the risk factor and the
problem behavior.

Family

Extreme Economic &
Social Deprivation

Substance Abuse

Community
Community Laws & Norms
Favorable Toward Drug Use,
Firearms & Crime

Risk
Factors

By measuring both risk and protective factors in a
population, prevention programs can be implemented
that are designed to reduce the elevated risk factors and
increase the protective factors. For example, if academic
failure is identified as an elevated risk factor in a
community, then mentoring, tutoring, and increased
opportunities and rewards for classroom participation
can be provided to improve academic performance.

T
T

T
T

T

T

The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership
The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP) was established by Governor Napolitano’s Executive Order
2007-12 in June 2007. Chaired by the Governor’s Chief of Staff, ASAP is composed of representatives from
state government entities, federal entities, and community organizations. ASAP serves as the single statewide
council on substance abuse prevention, enforcement, and treatment.
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
prevention, treatment, and enforcement. Through coordination among its members and their agencies and
organizations ASAP strives to ensure that substance abuse funding is spent in the most efficient and efficacious
manner.
ASAP has identified four strategic focus areas for 2008: 1) child welfare and substance abuse; 2) law enforcement
and drug trafficking; 3) emerging trends and the state’s capacity to respond; and 4) data-driven decisions and
policy development.
There are currently six sub-committees that assist ASAP in meeting their goals:
•

Arizona Underage Drinking Committee - The purpose of this subcommittee is to develop a
statewide underage drinking initiative to prevent and reduce underage drinking in Arizona. Their
activities include state-level infrastructure change to improve cross coordination/collaboration
between state agencies; developing a comprehensive statewide prevention system focused on
preventing underage drinking; and collaborative projects to more effectively utilize resources
and support local efforts.

•

Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The purpose of this work group is to
continuously evaluate data related to substance abuse to move the state system through a datadriven process. This is achieved through the completion of a statewide Substance Abuse
Epidemiology Profile. This profile will be updated every two years, with specific analyses
completed each year.

•

Emerging Issues Sub-Committee of the Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The
purpose of this sub-committee is to provide understanding of emerging substance abuse
consumption and consequence trends in Arizona to state agencies, Boards, Commissions and
Committees, and ASAP and its sub-committees.

•

Methamphetamine Task Force – The purpose of this task force is to bring together
representatives from state agencies, local government, businesses, and community groups to
develop collaborative efforts among treatment, prevention, and law enforcement systems to
assess and address the impact of methamphetamine statewide through information sharing,
resource allocation, service coordination, and the development of statewide policy
recommendations sensitive to the needs of local and tribal communities.

•

Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team – The Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team serves as the
advisory body and policy-making entity for the Arizona Co-Occurring State Incentive Grant.
Team members represent a number of state agencies and community-based organizations.

•

Workforce Development Committee – This committee was formed specifically to identify and
address substance abuse prevention training and technical assistance needs across Arizona. This
will, in turn, help strengthen instruction for prevention professionals and volunteers in
community coalitions.

6

How to Read the Charts in this Report
There are five types of charts presented in this
report: 1) substance use, 2) antisocial behavior and
youth gambling, 3) risk factors, 4) protective factors,
and 5) where youth obtained alcohol. When
available, data from the 2004 and 2006
administrations will be included in the charts. The
actual percentages from the charts are presented in
tables at the end of this report.

•

Substance Use Charts
This report contains information about alcohol,
tobacco, and other drug use (referred to as ATOD
use throughout this report) and other problem
behaviors of students. The bars on each chart
represent the percentage of students in that grade
who reported the behavior. The three sections in the
charts represent different types of problem
behaviors. The definitions of each of the types of
behavior are provided below.
•

Risk and Protective Factor Charts
The risk and protective factor charts show the
percentage of students at high risk and with high
protection for each of the risk and protective factor
scales. The risk and protective factor scales measure
specific aspects of youths’ life experiences that are
predictive of whether they will engage in problem
behaviors. A definition of each risk and protective
factor scale is contained in Table 2. The factors are
grouped into four domains: community, family, school,
and peer/individual.

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.

•

Heavy use includes binge drinking (having five
or more drinks in a row during the two weeks
prior to the survey) and use of one-half a pack
or more of cigarettes per day.

The bars on the risk and protective factor charts,
represent the percentage of students whose answers
reflect significant risk or protection. There are bars for
the last three administrations of the AYS: 2004, 2006,
and 2008. By looking at 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 and
when assessing risk reduction and protective factor
enhancement efforts.

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol Charts

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling
Charts
•

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 animal
races. The chart also shows the percentage of
students who engaged in any gambling behavior
during the past year.

This chart displays data regarding the ways that
students obtained alcohol in the past 30 days. The data
focus on a subgroup of students who indicated at least
one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no
alcohol use are not represented.) It is important to note
that the charts represent a subgroup of users and not
the entire survey population. Additionally, the smaller
the sample, the more dramatic the influence of a
student's responses. For example, 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 legend indicates the sample size for
each grade surveyed to help clarify the value of the data.

Antisocial behavior (ASB) is a measure of
the percentage of students who report any
involvement during the past year with eight
antisocial behaviors: suspended from school,
drunk or high at school, sold illegal drugs,
stolen a vehicle, been arrested, attacked
someone to harm them, carried a handgun,
taken a handgun to school. The chart also
displays any incidents in the past 30 days of
drinking and driving or riding in a car with a
drinking driver.
7

How to Read the Charts in this Report (cont’d)
School Safety Charts

community and a more national sample. The 8-State
Norm value for each risk and protective factor scale
represents the percentage of youth at risk or with
protection for eight states across the country
(Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana,
Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah). In developing the
8-State Norm, the contribution of each of eight
states was proportional to its percentage of the
national population, which helps to make the results
more representative of youth nation-wide. A
comparison between the ATOD use rates from the
8-State norm and those from the national
Monitoring the Future Survey showed the rates to
be very similar, which provides added confidence in
the validity of the 8-State Norm. Brief definitions of
the risk and protective factors scales are provided in
Table 2 following the profile charts. For more
information about risk and protective factors, please
refer to the resources listed on the last page of this
report under Contacts for Prevention.

The school safety 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 or were picked on or
bullied at school. The complete questions and values
for each response option can be seen in Table 11.

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 Survey or
the 8-State Norm (described below). A comparison to
the state-wide and national results provides additional
information for your community in determining the
relative significance of levels of 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.

Drug Free Communities Reports
Table 12 contains the information that is reported
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 8-State Norm
The diamonds on the charts allow a comparison
between the levels of risk and protection in your

Practical Implications of the Assessment
No Child Left Behind
The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities section of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) requires that
schools and communities use six Principles of Effectiveness to guide their decisions and spending on federally
funded prevention and intervention programs. First introduced in 1998 by the Department of Education, the
Principles of Effectiveness outline a data-driven process for ensuring that prevention programs achieve the desired
results. The Principles of Effectiveness stipulate that local prevention programs and activities must:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

be based on a needs assessment using objective data regarding the incidence of drug use and violence,
target specific performance objectives,
be based on scientific research and be proven to reduce violence or drug use,
be based on the analysis of predictor variables such as risk and protective factors,
include meaningful and ongoing parental input in program implementation, and
have periodic evaluations of established performance measures.

The results of the AYS presented in this report can help your school and community comply with the NCLB Act. The
Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior charts provide information related to Principle 1 and the Risk and Protective
Factor charts provide information related to Principle 4. Overall, using the risk and protective factor framework helps
schools meet all of the Principles of Effectiveness, and thereby assists schools in complying with the NCLB Act.
8

Assessment and Planning
School and Community Improvement Using Survey Data
Why Conduct the Arizona
Youth Survey?
Data from the Arizona Youth
Survey can be used to help
schools and communities assess
current conditions and identify
and prioritize local prevention
issues.
Each risk and protective factor
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
county make key decisions
regarding regarding allocation
of resources, how and when to
address specific needs, and
which strategies are most
effective and known to produce
results.

What are the numbers telling you?
Review the charts and data tables presented in this report. Using the
table below, note your findings as you discuss the following questions.
Which 3-5 risk factors are of the greatest concern?
Which 3-5 protective factors are your community’s highest priority?
Which levels of 30-day drug use are of greatest concern?
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 of greatest concern?
º Which behaviors are your students exhibiting the most?
º At which grades do you see unacceptable behavior levels?
•
•
•

How to decide if a rate is “unacceptable.”
Look across the charts – which items stand out as either much
higher or much lower than the others?
• Compare your data with statewide and national data –
differences of five percent between local and other data are probably
significant.
•

Use these data for program and policy development.
Substance use and antisocial behavior data – identify issues, raise
awareness about the problems, and promote school and community
dialogue.
• Risk and protective factor data – identify key objectives that will
help your school or community achieve its prevention goals.
•

Use the resources listed on the last page of this report, Contacts for
Prevention, for ideas about prevention programs that have proven
effective in addressing the risk factors that are high in your community
and improving the protective factors that are low.

MEASURE

Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate
#3
#4
#1
#2

Risk Factors
Protective Factors
Substance Use
Antisocial Behaviors

9

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

10

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 La Paz County, Grade 8

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

11

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 La Paz County, Grade 10

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

12

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 La Paz County, Grade 12

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 La Paz County, Grade 8
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

13

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 La Paz County, Grade 10
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

14

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 La Paz County, Grade 12
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

15

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 La Paz County, Grade 8

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

16

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 La Paz County, Grade 8
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

17

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 La Paz County, Grade 10

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

18

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 La Paz County, Grade 10
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

19

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 La Paz County, Grade 12

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

20

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 La Paz County, Grade 12
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

21

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol

WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL*
2008 La Paz County Student Survey, Grades 8, 10 & 12
If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)
100
90
80
70

Percentages (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Got it some

other way

Took it from a
store or someone

else's home

County 2008, Grade 12
Sample: 34 students**

Took it from home

Got at a party

County 2008, Grade 10
Sample: 42 students**

Someone under
21 years

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

County 2008, Grade 8
Sample: 17 students**

State 2008

* Prior to 2008, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained alcohol. Also, because not all eight states ask where youth obtained alcohol, no 8-State value is reported.
** Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case of smaller sample sizes,
caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

22

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 La Paz County, Grade 8
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

23

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 La Paz County, Grade 10
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

24

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 La Paz County, Grade 12
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

25

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles
Low Neighborhood Attachment

Community Domain Risk Factors
Low neighborhood bonding is related to higher levels of 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.

Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

Community Domain Protective Factors
When opportunities are available in a community for positive participation, children are less likely to
engage in substance use and other problem behaviors.

Rewards for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for positive participation in activities helps youth bond to the community, thus lowering their risk
for substance use.

Poor Family Management

Family Domain Risk Factors
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.

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.

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.

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 Attachment

Family Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

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.

Academic Failure

Low Commitment to School

School Domain Risk Factors
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.
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.

26

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles (cont'd)
Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

School Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

Rebelliousness

Peer-Individual Risk Factors
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.

Early Initiation of Antisocial
Behavior and Drug Use

Early onset of drug use predicts the 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.

Attitudes Favorable Toward
Antisocial Behavior and Drug
Use

During the elementary school years, most children express anti-drug, anti-crime, and pro-social attitudes
and have 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Belief in the Moral Order

Peer-Individual Protective Factors
Young people who have a belief in what is “right” or “wrong” are less likely to use drugs.

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.

Prosocial Involvement

Participation in positive school and community activities helps provide protection for youth.

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.

27

Data Tables
Table 3. 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

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

49.3

53.0

47.9

47.8

64.5

66.2

65.6

66.2

84.1

69.4

71.7

74.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

33.8

37.0

34.8

25.9

39.0

44.5

38.0

39.9

64.6

46.8

57.0

50.8

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

7.3

8.1

8.6

7.1

9.9

22.3

18.7

12.9

16.5

23.8

19.8

17.7

Marijuana

used marijuana?

13.6

23.7

21.7

16.2

23.8

34.2

28.7

32.5

43.1

38.3

48.5

43.1

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

2.8

1.6

2.6

1.9

5.5

2.1

2.5

5.2

5.6

1.8

5.1

7.9

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

3.2

3.1

2.6

2.7

6.1

7.8

2.5

6.8

9.6

6.9

7.1

11.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

13.1

13.2

16.2

14.3

8.2

12.1

8.2

12.6

7.2

13.8

7.1

9.2

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

6.6

1.7

1.2

n/a

5.2

3.3

2.4

n/a

6.9

3.0

4.0

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

1.4

1.7

0.0

1.0

1.7

2.9

0.8

2.0

1.6

0.0

0.0

3.1

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

1.7

0.0

0.0

2.2

4.0

2.1

4.1

4.9

4.4

5.1

0.0

7.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

0.0

1.7

1.7

n/a

2.9

1.7

2.3

n/a

3.3

1.0

2.4

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

16.5

12.2

n/a

n/a

23.0

20.5

n/a

n/a

27.3

24.6

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

3.7

n/a

n/a

n/a

6.6

n/a

n/a

n/a

9.2

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

0.0

1.7

3.8

n/a

5.7

4.9

7.6

n/a

7.0

12.1

7.9

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

8.8

4.2

8.7

8.3

15.2

15.6

10.7

12.0

12.9

12.3

12.1

13.2

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of 2008 prescription stimulant, sedative
and pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

9.4

21.7

17.1

n/a

22.8

28.7

25.7

n/a

24.2

33.3

28.7

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

10.3

9.7

n/a

n/a

14.9

12.9

n/a

n/a

17.2

13.4

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

28

Data Tables
Table 4. 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 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

23.7

28.5

23.3

23.2

34.9

37.1

39.3

37.7

53.0

42.6

38.4

46.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

10.7

8.7

6.1

8.7

12.9

19.9

11.7

16.6

24.9

14.3

21.9

23.9

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

2.9

1.6

2.6

2.6

2.8

7.9

5.7

4.6

5.3

8.1

3.0

6.8

Marijuana

used marijuana?

6.5

14.1

9.6

7.6

11.4

11.5

13.3

15.1

14.8

16.7

21.2

18.7

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

1.7

0.8

0.9

0.8

1.9

0.7

1.7

1.9

2.8

0.0

1.0

2.4

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

1.7

1.6

1.7

1.0

2.3

0.7

0.8

2.2

2.4

3.4

2.0

3.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

5.7

6.5

6.0

5.4

1.7

2.2

1.6

3.0

1.2

0.0

2.0

1.6

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

4.8

1.7

0.4

n/a

0.7

1.7

0.6

n/a

5.2

2.0

0.8

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

0.7

1.6

0.0

0.4

0.6

1.4

0.0

0.7

0.4

0.0

0.0

1.0

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

0.7

0.0

0.0

0.8

1.7

1.4

0.0

1.5

0.4

1.8

0.0

2.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

0.0

0.0

0.7

n/a

0.0

0.8

1.0

n/a

1.6

1.0

1.0

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

7.9

6.0

n/a

n/a

14.8

9.4

n/a

n/a

10.1

10.5

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

2.0

n/a

n/a

n/a

2.3

n/a

n/a

n/a

3.6

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

0.0

1.7

1.6

n/a

2.2

2.5

2.9

n/a

1.9

2.0

2.1

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

4.5

1.7

4.3

3.4

7.0

8.0

4.9

4.5

4.4

6.8

3.0

5.0

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of prescription stimulant, sedative and
pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

3.9

10.4

8.6

n/a

10.7

18.9

12.2

n/a

12.9

13.1

13.1

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

7.8

5.6

n/a

n/a

8.3

6.4

n/a

n/a

8.1

5.9

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

29

Data Tables
z

Table 5. Percentage of Students Reporting Heavy ATOD Use
Grade 8

Binge Drinking

1/2 Pack (or
more) of
Cigarettes/Day

How many times have you
had 5 or more alcoholic
drinks in a row in the
past 2 weeks?
During the past 30 days, how many
cigarettes did you smoke per day?
(11 to 20 cigarettes, More than 20
cigarettes)

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

14.9

15.7

13.8

1.2

0.8

0.9

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

13.1

23.9

22.7

24.6

0.7

1.3

2.0

1.7

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

22.4

35.8

23.7

22.2

30.2

2.1

5.3

3.2

2.1

4.2

Table 6. Percentage of Students Reporting Antisocial Behavior
How many times in the past year
(12 months) have you:
(One or more times)
Suspended from School
Drunk or High at School
Sold Illegal Drugs
Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle
Been Arrested
Attacked Someone with the Idea
of Seriously Hurting Them
Carried a Handgun
Carried a Handgun to School
During the past 30 days, how many
times did you:
(One or more times)

Grade 8

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

12.8

18.1

17.9

9.3

16.2

12.8

3.5

6.8

5.0

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

20.2

14.5

11.8

24.8

12.0

14.3

19.3

17.9

8.6

4.6

7.0

4.6

4.4

3.4

3.6

6.8

10.4

11.5

14.5

7.5

16.6

16.0

20.5

6.5

15.7

1.9

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

14.6

12.5

11.7

10.9

10.2

20.5

23.0

21.7

22.0

22.2

9.8

9.8

11.0

7.0

7.0

10.4

3.2

5.7

3.7

3.5

3.4

0.0

2.7

15.9

7.2

11.6

9.2

12.0

8.3

12.9

8.7

18.1

16.9

14.5

22.1

16.1

12.1

13.3

10.9

12.9

11.2

7.7

8.0

6.6

7.4

7.2

5.9

6.7

10.9

8.1

1.5
1.7
Grade 8

1.2

2.5

1.4
3.3
Grade 10

1.3

2.0

3.3
1.0
Grade 12

1.4

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

DRIVE a car or other vehicle when you had
been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

10.5

7.7

RIDE in a car or other vehicle driven by
someone who had been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

41.8

38.5

State
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

5.6

n/a

9.4

13.7

29.1

n/a

40.6

44.7

* These categories were not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

30

State
2008

State
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

7.9

n/a

14.8

13.7

16.1

29.1

n/a

33.9

39.0

29.7

Data Tables
Table 7. Percentage of Students Gambling in the Past Year
How often have you done the following for money,
possessions, or anything of value:
County
2004
(At least once in the past 12 months or more)
Any Gambling
Played a slot machine, poker machine
or other gambling machine?
Played the lottery or scratch-off tickets?
Bet on sports?*
Played cards?
Bought a raffle ticket?
Played bingo?
Gambled on the Internet?
Played a dice game?*
Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?*
Bet on a horse or other animal race?*
Table 8. Percentage of Students Reporting Protection

Grade 8
County
2008

n/a

53.9

58.1

n/a

2.0

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

69.1

n/a

54.0

68.5

65.9

n/a

40.3

66.7

60.6

3.4

6.4

n/a

2.5

8.9

6.1

n/a

3.3

9.8

5.8

30.7
n/a
21.4
n/a
12.9
5.2
n/a

28.2
22.2
36.8
17.1
19.7
5.2
18.3

24.8
31.8
43.7
20.4
32.6
6.3
31.5

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

22.8
n/a
23.3
n/a
10.9
2.5
n/a

21.8
26.8
44.4
28.2
26.0
4.9
25.8

21.8
30.2
43.7
20.7
23.2
5.1
25.1

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

19.4
n/a
16.7
n/a
1.6
3.2
n/a

18.8
29.4
41.2
26.5
16.7
4.0
17.6

19.0
25.6
40.6
18.9
14.7
4.7
19.2

n/a

20.0

22.2

32.7

n/a

22.6

33.9

31.3

n/a

18.0

30.4

27.0

n/a

n/a

5.2

6.4

n/a

n/a

7.3

5.8

n/a

n/a

3.9

5.1

Grade 8

Protective Factor
Community Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Domain
Family Attachment
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
School Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer-Individual Domain
Belief in the Moral Order
Interaction with Prosocial Peers*
Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Total Protection
Students with High Protection**

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2006

State
2008

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

40.6
33.6

43.5
31.5

41.8
45.2

43.4
56.2
53.8

45.9
56.4
65.3

59.6
55.7

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

39.3
31.3

44.9
43.0

43.6
43.4

45.2
42.0

47.3
56.1
51.8

51.5
59.7
61.4

44.5
53.0
53.3

45.3
51.7
53.9

60.8
57.3

42.2
48.7

60.3
51.2

62.7
74.2

53.6
50.3
38.8
64.2

56.8
50.7
37.6
60.1

63.8
50.4
42.7
58.8

59.4
53.1
39.0
59.4

37.8

37.2

49.6

43.8

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

37.1
35.4

34.1
40.0

44.4
40.7

43.2
41.7

36.1
33.2

44.2
50.9
48.2

46.1
54.0
55.1

51.3
48.9
44.3

57.6
59.6
58.3

44.1
47.3
49.5

56.2
55.2
55.8

58.8
66.5

56.6
69.9

62.4
59.8

52.0
57.8

51.6
63.5

59.0
64.8

64.3
45.4

66.7
53.3
30.5
66.0

66.4
54.3
40.6
67.5

69.9
52.9
35.2
61.7

66.5
55.3
41.2
59.7

48.6
48.0
30.5
50.6

55.0
60.3
37.7
50.8

49.5
54.0
39.6
50.5

53.6
52.5
36.4
52.2

50.7

41.3

49.2

46.7

39.5

48.4

43.8

43.3

*Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.
**High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.

31

State
2008

State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 9. Percentage of Students Reporting Risk
Grade 8
Risk Factor
Community Domain
Low Neighborhood Attachment
Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use
Perceived Availability of Drugs
Perceived Availability of Handguns
Family Domain
Poor Family Management
Family Conflict
Family History of Antisocial Behavior
Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use
School Domain
Academic Failure
Low Commitment to School
Peer-Individual Domain
Rebelliousness
Early Initiation of ASB
Early Initiation of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use
Perceived Risk of Drug Use
Interaction with Antisocial Peers
Friend's Use of Drugs
Rewards for ASB
Gang Involvement
Total Risk
Students at High Risk*

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

44.2
32.5
37.9
36.9

41.1
35.7
33.0
38.2

44.0
40.0
35.4
45.1

53.4
51.3
46.4
43.8
24.5

42.5
53.4
56.1
45.7
29.0

54.1
30.9

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

38.5
36.6
38.2
37.8

46.2
35.4
46.1
28.5

48.5
53.4
43.3
28.5

47.9
56.3
45.7
30.8

44.0
50.0
55.2
51.3
27.8

45.5
53.5
40.3
49.3
26.8

46.8
37.9
43.9
47.0
38.1

44.3
40.2
44.5
52.7
44.2

57.0
42.1

62.9
46.5

47.3
41.0

50.9
29.8

38.8
34.0
34.9
44.2
29.0
44.9
53.5
36.4
42.2
32.0

45.4
45.5
42.3
34.9
25.8
32.5
54.2
44.4
48.6
25.0

48.7
43.0
35.7
46.2
28.2
52.2
69.9
38.1
37.7
28.1

43.1
39.4
30.3
44.6
29.1
44.5
58.2
39.4
45.6
26.9

32.3

35.2

46.2

38.7

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

46.2
42.1
49.6
26.7

58.2
38.8
51.3
31.5

61.7
60.0
49.1
40.0

56.2
49.5
49.5
38.1

51.0
36.3
52.2
33.1

34.5
46.5
53.9
49.6
42.7

42.8
42.8
41.1
53.4
41.1

47.2
38.3
51.1
49.1
42.7

41.0
48.3
44.8
56.1
57.9

54.3
36.8
49.5
55.3
47.9

44.3
38.3
37.3
50.2
41.2

56.8
36.4

53.8
45.2

49.5
43.7

57.3
43.5

40.7
38.7

46.6
33.0

44.4
45.6

35.3
36.5
31.2
46.5
28.1
35.0
59.4
35.7
29.7
32.4

46.9
42.9
40.4
48.1
37.4
39.7
60.7
41.7
35.0
16.4

33.3
48.4
35.5
43.3
37.5
44.2
59.2
34.5
35.0
22.9

46.8
42.0
32.7
50.7
37.4
42.3
57.3
41.9
44.0
23.2

34.7
47.7
45.9
43.9
33.3
42.3
62.7
39.8
41.4
25.8

41.9
43.3
40.3
46.6
31.0
43.1
61.9
28.6
42.9
18.3

45.1
46.1
43.1
41.7
29.4
53.8
59.6
36.4
45.5
22.1

44.0
41.2
33.1
46.9
36.3
46.5
53.2
37.3
54.6
16.8

31.2

30.5

39.5

37.5

39.5

32.8

39.0

35.7

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors)

32

Grade 12
State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 10. Where Youth Obtained Alcohol
Grade 8

If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)

County
2008

Sample size*
I bought it in a store such as a liquor store, convenience store,
supermarket, discount store, or gas station
I bought it at a restaurant, bar, or club
I bought it at a public event such as a concert or sporting event

Grade 10

State
2008

County
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2008

State
2008

17

4,418

42

4,872

34

5,065

0.0

5.0

7.1

6.9

8.8

12.3

0.0
5.9

3.0
2.9

2.4
2.4

3.0
2.9

14.7
5.9

7.0
3.9

I gave someone else money to buy it for me

35.3

21.4

35.7

34.4

44.1

43.7

My parent or guardian gave it to me
Another family member who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone not related to me who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone under the age of 21 gave it to me
I got it at a party
I took it from home
I took it from a store or someone else's home
I got it some other way

11.8
35.3
17.6
17.6
35.3
29.4
17.6

18.7
19.7
19.2
23.8
41.5
31.4
11.7

16.7
23.8
21.4
26.2
64.3
19.0
11.9

14.8
18.7
28.7
24.8
53.1
23.2
11.3

23.5
23.5
35.3
23.5
50.0
17.6
5.9

13.0
18.2
39.5
22.0
57.6
13.8
8.0

35.3

28.7

23.8

23.6

20.6

17.9

* Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case
of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

33

Data Tables
Table 11. Percentage of Students Reporting School Safety Issues
Grade 8
County
2004

Question

County
2006

Grade 10

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

Grade 12

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
has someone threatened or injured you with a 4-5 times
weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school 6-7 times
property?
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

85.6
8.2
3.7
1.0
0.2
0.2
0.1
1.0

80.7
12.9
4.3
1.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.7

85.5
6.0
2.6
2.6
0.9
0.9
0.0
1.7

87.1
6.6
3.5
1.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.9

82.6
8.2
3.6
1.9
0.4
0.4
0.4
2.5

84.4
8.1
1.9
1.2
1.2
0.6
0.0
2.5

86.1
4.9
6.6
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.0
0.0

88.4
5.9
3.0
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.1

87.3
5.2
4.8
1.2
0.4
0.0
0.4
0.8

90.5
3.2
3.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.2

95.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
1.0

92.4
3.9
2.0
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.7

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
4-5 times
were you in a physical fight on school property? 6-7 times
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

73.7
12.7
8.6
2.9
1.0
0.2
0.0
0.9

73.7
11.7
9.5
2.2
1.5
0.7
0.0
0.7

79.5
10.3
6.0
1.7
0.0
0.9
1.7
0.0

76.5
12.9
6.9
1.7
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.7

78.7
10.9
6.3
1.1
0.8
0.6
0.4
1.1

86.9
7.5
3.1
0.6
0.6
0.0
0.6
0.6

83.7
9.8
4.1
0.8
0.8
0.0
0.0
0.8

85.2
8.8
3.9
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.7

86.9
6.4
4.0
1.6
0.0
1.2
0.0
0.0

93.8
3.1
1.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.6

97.0
1.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0

91.5
5.0
2.1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how often have you
4-5 times
been picked on or bullied by a student ON
6-7 times
SCHOOL PROPERTY?*
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

53.7
21.3

59.4
13.2
11.5
4.3
1.9
1.2
0.8
7.7

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

74.4
15.0

3.8

68.3
7.5
10.0
4.2
2.5
0.8
0.8
5.8

69.1
10.3
9.6
3.2
1.4
1.1
0.6
4.6

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

85.9
9.4

6.6

60.7
9.4
8.5
8.5
0.9
1.7
0.9
9.4

0.0

82.2
8.9
5.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.0

82.3
6.6
5.7
1.5
0.8
0.5
0.3
2.4

84.9
8.6
2.2
2.9
1.4

87.9
5.2
3.4
1.7
1.7

89.9
5.8
2.7
0.6
1.0

89.2
6.6
3.0
0.2
1.1

92.5
5.0
1.9
0.6
0.0

88.4
7.4
2.5
0.0
1.7

91.1
5.1
2.2
0.6
1.0

90.4
2.4
2.8
2.8
1.6

93.8
4.7
0.0
0.0
1.6

93.1
4.0
1.0
1.0
1.0

93.8
3.3
1.8
0.4
0.7

90.1
3.0
1.0
0.0
5.9

94.4
1.5
1.1
0.5
2.6

0 days

During the past 30 days, on how many days did
1 day
you not go to school because you felt you would
2-3 days
be unsafe at school or on your way to or from
4-5 days
school?

6 or more days

87.7
6.4
3.8
0.8
1.3

18.4

0 days

6.9

4.7

94.5
92.8
93.9
93.9
93.6
88.8
91.0
93.8
93.2
90.5
2.5
4.3
3.5
3.1
1.9
5.0
3.3
2.2
2.0
1.6
0.9
2.2
0.0
1.3
2.1
2.5
0.8
1.2
1.6
3.2
0.2
0.0
1.7
0.5
0.9
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.2
0.0
6 or more days
1.9
0.7
0.9
1.2
1.5
3.8
4.9
2.2
2.0
4.8
* In 2006 the choices for this question were Never , Once , Several Times and Very Often. This category was not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

During the past 30 days, on how many days did 1 day
you carry a weapon such as a gun, knife, or
2-3 days
club ON SCHOOL PROPERTY?
4-5 days

34

Data Tables
Table 12. Drug Free Communities Report*
County 2008
Outcome

Definition

Substance

Grade 8

Grade 10

Grade 12

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

Perception of Risk
(People are at Moderate or Great Risk
of harming themselves if they... )

Perception of Parent Disapproval
(Parents feel it would be Wrong or
Very Wrong to... )

Perception of Peer Disapproval
(I think it is Wrong or Very Wrong for
someone my age to...)

Past 30-Day Use

Female†

Sample Percent

Sample

drink 1 or two drinks nearly every day

Alcohol

50.4

115

58.3

120

58.1

93

53.2

173

58.5

147

smoke 1 or more packs or cigarettes
per day

Cigarettes

68.7

115

81.7

120

87.1

93

74.6

173

84.4

147

smoke marijuana regularly

Marijuana

79.1

110

74.6

114

60.9

92

65.9

167

78.7

141

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

92.0

112

80.2

116

76.3

93

81.9

171

84.0

144

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

94.8

115

88.8

116

85.1

94

85.5

173

94.4

144

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

96.5

114

90.5

116

81.9

94

88.4

173

91.6

143

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

76.9

117

66.7

120

65.0

103

65.4

182

74.7

150

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

88.9

117

81.7

120

69.9

103

79.1

182

84.7

150

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

88.8

116

75.8

120

73.5

102

75.7

181

84.6

149

Alcohol

23.3

116

39.3

122

38.4

99

31.9

182

34.7

147

at least one use in the Past 30 Days

Cigarettes

6.1

115

11.7

120

21.9

96

16.9

178

8.2

146

9.6

114

13.3

120

21.2

99

16.8

179

11.0

146

Sample Percent

Sample

Marijuana

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

had more than a sip or two of beer,
wine or hard liquor?
Average Age of Onset**
(How old were you when you first…)

Male†

Sample Percent

smoked a cigarette, even just a puff?

smoked marijuana?

Alcohol
Average age:
Cigarettes
Average age:
Marijuana
Average age:

56.0

116

11.9 years
33.9

115

11.3 years
21.9

114

11.5 years

70.0

120

12.9 years
44.3

122

12.3 years
29.5

122

13.3 years

77.5

Sample Percent

102

66.9

14.3 years
64.7

102

12.7 years
52.9

102

13.7 years

181
13 years

51.6

182

12.1 years
36.8

182

12.5 years

69.1

149

13.3 years
40.3

149

12.5 years
30.4

148
14 years

* The “Sample” column represents the sample size (the number of youth who answered the question). The "Percent" column represents the percentage of youth in the sample answering the question as defined.
** For Average Age of Onset, “Sample” represents the number of youth who answered the question (including students responding that they never used). 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.

† 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.

35

Appendix
Appendix - Comparability of survey administratons
Issue
Drug Category

2004 AYS
On how many occasions (if any) have you:

2006 AYS

2008 AYS

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Notes regarding changes

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Hallucinogens

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the
past 30 days?

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the past
30 days?

Used LSD or other hallucinogens during the
past 30 days?

Substituted "hallucinogens" for "psychedelics" in 2008.
Comparable across all years.

Methamphetamines

Not applicable, no methamphetamine-specific
item on 2004 AYS

Used methamphetamines (meth, speed, crank,
crystal meth)?

Used methamphetamines (meth, crystal,
crank)?

2006 and 2008 provide slightly different examples, but
are cautiously comparable.

Prescription
stimulants

Used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”,
“crystal”, “crank”) without a doctor telling you
to take them?

Used stimulants, other than methamphetamines
(such as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin,
Adderal, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling
you to take them?

2004 is not comparable to any other years, data are
presented for archival interest. 2006 and 2008 data are
cautiously comparable.

Prescription
sedatives

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such
as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping
pills)?

2008 AYS added descriptor "prescription" and removed
qualifier "without a doctor telling you to take them." 2008
data are cautiously comparable with other years.

Ecstasy

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2008 AYS used "ecstasy" as the primary descriptor and
moved "MDMA" to examples. Comparable across years.

Prescription
drugs

Not applicable, no prescription drugs item on
2004 AYS

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills),
stimulants, other than methamphetamines (such
as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine) or
other prescription drugs (such as Oxycontin)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes)

Used prescription stimulants (Ritalin,
Adderall, or Dexedrine), sedatives
(tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax,
barbiturates, or sleeping pills) or pain relievers
(Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes )

In 2006, responses to the stimulant, sedative and other
prescription drug questions were calculated as one
measure. (2006 had no prescription pain reliever item.) In
2008, responses to the stimulant, sedative and
prescription pain reliever questions were calculated as
one measure. (2008 had no standalone prescription drug
item.) 2006 and 2008 data are cautiously comparable.
(Note that composite 2006 data will not match past
reports' prescription drugs category.)

Gambling
Category

Not applicable, no gambling items
on 2004 AYS

How often during the past 12 months
have you:

How often have you done the following for
money, possessions, or anything of value:

Sports betting

n/a

Bet on team sports?

Bet on sports?

Not comparable across years.

Race betting

n/a

Bet money on horse races?

Bet on a horse race or other animal race?

Not comparable across years.

Dice

n/a

Bet on dice games such as craps?

Played a dice game?

Not comparable across years.

Games of skill

n/a

Bet on games of personal skill such as pool,
darts, or bowling?

Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?

Comparable across years.

Protective Scale:
Peer-Individual
Interaction with
Prosocial Peers

Think of your four best friends (the friends you feel closest to). In the past year (12 months), how many of your best friends have:
(Scale is calculated based on the average response [0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 friends] to the following questions)
...participated in clubs, organizations and activities at school? ...made the commitment to stay drug-free?
...tried to do well in school? ...liked school? ...regularly attended religious services?(removed in 2008)

36

Regularly attended religious services was removed from
2008 AYS. 2004 and 2006 have been recalculated to
match 2008 AYS and are now comparable across all
years. Due to this recalculation, current reports may differ
slightly from past reports.

Contacts for Prevention
Arizona Department of Education
Student Services Division
www.ade.az.gov

Regional Prevention Contacts
Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, and Santa Cruz
Counties
Bill Burnett
Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)
(520) 618-8807

Arizona Department of Health Services
Division of Behavioral Health Services
Lisa Shumaker
(602) 364-4594
www.azdhs.gov/bhs/index.htm

Gila, La Paz, Pinal, and Yuma Counties
Linda Weinberg
Cenpatico Behavioral Health of Arizona
(866) 495-6738

Arizona Prevention Resource Center
(800) 432-2772
www.azprevention.org

Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai
Counties
Petrice Post
Northern Arizona Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(NARBHA)
(928) 214-2177

Center for Violence Prevention and Community
Safety
Charles Katz
(602) 543-6618
charles.katz@asu.edu
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)
http://prevention.samhsa.gov

Maricopa County
Juan Aristizabal
Magellan
(602) 797-8256

Governor’s Office of Children, Youth, and
Families
(602) 542-4043
http://www.governor.state.az.us/cyf/index.html

Gila River Indian Community
Joan Grey
Gila River Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(602) 528-7136

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities
U.S. Department of Education
www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS

Pasqua Yaqui Tribe
Centered Spirit Program
Jill Fabian
(520) 879-6067

Arizona Department of Gaming's Office of
Problem Gambling
Elise Mikkelsen
(602) 266-8299 ext. 351
www.problemgambling.az.gov

Navajo Nation
Department of Behavioral Health Services
(928) 871-6235

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMSHA)
www.samhsa.gov

White Mountain Apache Tribe
Apache Behavioral Health Services
(928) 338-4811

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/

Colorado River Indian Tribes
(928) 669-6577

Western Regional Center for the Application of
Prevention Technologies (CAPT)
www.westcapt.org

Other State and National Contacts:
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
Michelle Neitch/ Phillip Stevenson
(602) 364-1173/(602) 364-1157
www.azcjc.gov

Bach Harrison, L.L.C.
R. Steven Harrison, Ph.D.
(801) 359-2064
www.bach-harrison.com

37

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Maricopa County

REPORT PROVIDED BY:

Arizona Criminal Justice Commission

1

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Shining Light on Arizona Youth
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:
Arizona Department of Gaming’s Office of Problem Gambling
Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission
Arizona Parent’s Commission on Drug Education and Prevention
Governor’s Division for Substance Abuse Policy
Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Tobacco Education and Prevention Program,
Arizona Department of Health Services

2

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 2008 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:
Jean Ajamie, Arizona Department of Education
Michelle Anderson, Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections
Steve Ballance, Maricopa County
Carisa Dwyer, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Charles Katz, Arizona State University
Dr. Manuel Medina, TERROS, Inc.
Kim O’Connor, Governor’s Office for
Children, Youth, and Families
Holly Orozco, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Catherine Osborn, Arizona Department of Education
Richard Porter, Arizona Department of Health Services
Gowri Shetty, Arizona Department of Health Services
Lisa Shumaker, Arizona Department of Health Services
Wendy Wolfersteig, Arizona State University
Nicole Yancey Johnson, Arizona Early Childhood Development
and Health Board
Governor’s Youth Commission

Additionally, the success of the 2008 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.

3

Introduction
CONTENTS:

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Summary for
Maricopa County

Introduction
The Risk and Protective
Factor Model of
Prevention
The Arizona Substance
Abuse Partnership
How to Read the Charts

This report summarizes some of the
findings from the 2008 Arizona Youth
Survey (AYS) administered to 8th, 10th
and 12th grade students during the
spring of 2008. The results for your
county are presented along with
comparisons to 2004 and 2006 survey
results where applicable, as well as to
the overall results for the state. 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.

Practical Implications of
the Assessment
Assessment and
Planning
Data Charts:
• Substance Use

All schools in Arizona are eligible to
participate in the survey, and
recruitment efforts were successful in
obtaining participation by schools in all
of the 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.

•

Antisocial Behavior
and Gambling

•

Risk & Protective
Factor Profiles
Where Youth
Obtained Alcohol
School Safety

•
•

Risk and Protective
Factor Scale Definitions
Data Tables
Contacts for Prevention
Appendix

Table 1 contains the characteristics of
the students who completed the survey

Table 1. Characteristics of Participants
Student Totals
County 2004

Total Students

Number

County 2006

Percent

Number

County 2008

Percent

Number

State 2008

Percent

Number

Percent

21,970

100

36,654

100

32,929

100

54,734

100

8

11,337

51.6

17,172

46.8

16,911

51.4

25,695

46.9

10

5,918

26.9

11,310

30.9

8,647

26.3

16,089

29.4

12

4,715

21.5

8,172

22.3

7,371

22.4

12,950

23.7

Male

10,270

47.6

17,228

48.2

15,699

48.6

26,213

48.8

Female

11,324

52.4

18,518

51.8

16,590

51.4

27,514

51.2

7.4

Grade

Gender

Ethnicity*
Native American

466

2.2

839

2.4

1,824

4.7

4,812

African American

1,085

5.0

1,913

5.4

2,625

6.8

3,915

6.0

Hispanic

6,267

29.0

12,064

33.8

12,006

31.0

21,525

32.9

White

12,047

55.7

17,807

50.0

20,061

51.8

31,887

48.8

Asian

584

2.7

1,009

2.8

1,489

3.8

2,117

3.2

Pacific Islander

181

0.8

327

0.9

710

1.8

1,115

1.7

*In 2008, students could mark more than one ethnic category and the 'other' category was removed.

4

from your county and the state.
Because not every student answered all
of the questions, the number of
students in the gender and ethnicity
categories often will be less than the
total number of students.
Whenever data is obtained from a
sample of students instead of the entire
population, it is important to recognize
the strengths and weaknesses of the
data. One quick and 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 participated in the
survey and those that did not.
Changes to the AYS
Survey for 2008
In an effort to shorten the AYS and
make it more responsive to local
priorities, the following changes were
made for 2008: 1) some of the
substance use questions were refined
and the use of over-the-counter drugs
was added, 2) some risk and protective
factor scales were removed where the
data could easily be obtained from
other sources or the scales measured
similar constructs (scales removed are

Risk and Protective Factors
Transitions and Mobility, Community
Disorganization, Intention to Use Drugs, and Social
Skills), 3) questions about where students get the
alcohol they drink were added, 4) an 8-State Norm
was added that can be used to compare the AYS
results on risk, protection, and antisocial behavior to a
more national sample (see the description of the 8State Norm later in this report), and 5) National
Outcome Measures that are needed for measuring the
performance of federally funded programs in Arizona
such as talking to parents about the dangers of
substance use were added.

Washington, Social Development Research Group
have investigated the relationship between risk and
protective factors and youth problem behavior. They
have found, for example, that children who live in
families with high levels of conflict are more likely
to become involved in problem behaviors such as
delinquency and drug use than children who live in
families with low levels of family conflict.
Protective factors exert a positive influence or buffer
against the negative influence of risk, thus reducing the
likelihood that adolescents will engage in problem
behaviors. Protective factors identified through research
include social bonding to family, school, community,
and peers; healthy beliefs and clear standards for
behavior; and individual characteristics. For bonding to
serve as a protective influence, it must occur through
involvement with peers and adults who communicate
healthy values and set clear standards for behavior.

The Risk and Protective Factor Model of
Substance Abuse Prevention
Many states, school districts and local agencies have
adopted the Risk and Protective Factor Model to
guide their prevention efforts. The Risk and
Protective Factor Model of Prevention 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 identified a set of risk factors for
youth problem behaviors. Risk factors are
characteristics of school, community, and family
environments, as well as characteristics of students
and their peer groups that are known to predict
increased likelihood of drug use, delinquency, school
dropout, teen pregnancy, and violent behavior among
youth. Dr. J. David Hawkins, Dr. Richard F.
Catalano, and their colleagues at the University of

T
T

T

T

T
T

T
T

T
T

T

T

Teen Pregnancy

T

School Drop-Out
Violence

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

SOURCE: COMMUNITIES THAT CARE (CTC) PREVENTION MODEL, CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION (CSAP), SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMSHA)

5

Constitutional Factors

Gang Involvement

Favorable Attitudes Toward
Drug Use & Other
Problem Behaviors

Friends Who Use Drugs &
Engage in a Problem Behavior

Alienation & Rebelliousness

Early & Persistent
Antisocial Behavior

Peer / Individual
Early Initiation of Drug Use &
Other Problem Behavior

Lack of Commitment to
School

Academic Failure

School
Favorable Parent Attitudes &
Involvement in the
Problem Behavior

T
T
T
T
T

Family Management Problems

T
T
T
T
T

Family Conflict

Community Disorganization

Low Neighborhood
Attachment

Transitions & Mobility

Availability of Drugs &
Firearms

T
T

Family History of the
Problem Behavior

Delinquency

The chart below shows the links between the 19 risk
factors and the five problem behaviors. The check
marks have been placed in the chart to indicate where
at least two well designed, published research studies
have shown a link between the risk factor and the
problem behavior.

Family

Extreme Economic &
Social Deprivation

Substance Abuse

Community
Community Laws & Norms
Favorable Toward Drug Use,
Firearms & Crime

Risk
Factors

By measuring both risk and protective factors in a
population, prevention programs can be implemented
that are designed to reduce the elevated risk factors and
increase the protective factors. For example, if academic
failure is identified as an elevated risk factor in a
community, then mentoring, tutoring, and increased
opportunities and rewards for classroom participation
can be provided to improve academic performance.

T
T

T
T

T

T

The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership
The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP) was established by Governor Napolitano’s Executive Order
2007-12 in June 2007. Chaired by the Governor’s Chief of Staff, ASAP is composed of representatives from
state government entities, federal entities, and community organizations. ASAP serves as the single statewide
council on substance abuse prevention, enforcement, and treatment.
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
prevention, treatment, and enforcement. Through coordination among its members and their agencies and
organizations ASAP strives to ensure that substance abuse funding is spent in the most efficient and efficacious
manner.
ASAP has identified four strategic focus areas for 2008: 1) child welfare and substance abuse; 2) law enforcement
and drug trafficking; 3) emerging trends and the state’s capacity to respond; and 4) data-driven decisions and
policy development.
There are currently six sub-committees that assist ASAP in meeting their goals:
•

Arizona Underage Drinking Committee - The purpose of this subcommittee is to develop a
statewide underage drinking initiative to prevent and reduce underage drinking in Arizona. Their
activities include state-level infrastructure change to improve cross coordination/collaboration
between state agencies; developing a comprehensive statewide prevention system focused on
preventing underage drinking; and collaborative projects to more effectively utilize resources
and support local efforts.

•

Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The purpose of this work group is to
continuously evaluate data related to substance abuse to move the state system through a datadriven process. This is achieved through the completion of a statewide Substance Abuse
Epidemiology Profile. This profile will be updated every two years, with specific analyses
completed each year.

•

Emerging Issues Sub-Committee of the Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The
purpose of this sub-committee is to provide understanding of emerging substance abuse
consumption and consequence trends in Arizona to state agencies, Boards, Commissions and
Committees, and ASAP and its sub-committees.

•

Methamphetamine Task Force – The purpose of this task force is to bring together
representatives from state agencies, local government, businesses, and community groups to
develop collaborative efforts among treatment, prevention, and law enforcement systems to
assess and address the impact of methamphetamine statewide through information sharing,
resource allocation, service coordination, and the development of statewide policy
recommendations sensitive to the needs of local and tribal communities.

•

Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team – The Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team serves as the
advisory body and policy-making entity for the Arizona Co-Occurring State Incentive Grant.
Team members represent a number of state agencies and community-based organizations.

•

Workforce Development Committee – This committee was formed specifically to identify and
address substance abuse prevention training and technical assistance needs across Arizona. This
will, in turn, help strengthen instruction for prevention professionals and volunteers in
community coalitions.

6

How to Read the Charts in this Report
There are five types of charts presented in this
report: 1) substance use, 2) antisocial behavior and
youth gambling, 3) risk factors, 4) protective factors,
and 5) where youth obtained alcohol. When
available, data from the 2004 and 2006
administrations will be included in the charts. The
actual percentages from the charts are presented in
tables at the end of this report.

•

Substance Use Charts
This report contains information about alcohol,
tobacco, and other drug use (referred to as ATOD
use throughout this report) and other problem
behaviors of students. The bars on each chart
represent the percentage of students in that grade
who reported the behavior. The three sections in the
charts represent different types of problem
behaviors. The definitions of each of the types of
behavior are provided below.
•

Risk and Protective Factor Charts
The risk and protective factor charts show the
percentage of students at high risk and with high
protection for each of the risk and protective factor
scales. The risk and protective factor scales measure
specific aspects of youths’ life experiences that are
predictive of whether they will engage in problem
behaviors. A definition of each risk and protective
factor scale is contained in Table 2. The factors are
grouped into four domains: community, family, school,
and peer/individual.

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.

•

Heavy use includes binge drinking (having five
or more drinks in a row during the two weeks
prior to the survey) and use of one-half a pack
or more of cigarettes per day.

The bars on the risk and protective factor charts,
represent the percentage of students whose answers
reflect significant risk or protection. There are bars for
the last three administrations of the AYS: 2004, 2006,
and 2008. By looking at 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 and
when assessing risk reduction and protective factor
enhancement efforts.

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol Charts

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling
Charts
•

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 animal
races. The chart also shows the percentage of
students who engaged in any gambling behavior
during the past year.

This chart displays data regarding the ways that
students obtained alcohol in the past 30 days. The data
focus on a subgroup of students who indicated at least
one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no
alcohol use are not represented.) It is important to note
that the charts represent a subgroup of users and not
the entire survey population. Additionally, the smaller
the sample, the more dramatic the influence of a
student's responses. For example, 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 legend indicates the sample size for
each grade surveyed to help clarify the value of the data.

Antisocial behavior (ASB) is a measure of
the percentage of students who report any
involvement during the past year with eight
antisocial behaviors: suspended from school,
drunk or high at school, sold illegal drugs,
stolen a vehicle, been arrested, attacked
someone to harm them, carried a handgun,
taken a handgun to school. The chart also
displays any incidents in the past 30 days of
drinking and driving or riding in a car with a
drinking driver.
7

How to Read the Charts in this Report (cont’d)
School Safety Charts

community and a more national sample. The 8-State
Norm value for each risk and protective factor scale
represents the percentage of youth at risk or with
protection for eight states across the country
(Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana,
Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah). In developing the
8-State Norm, the contribution of each of eight
states was proportional to its percentage of the
national population, which helps to make the results
more representative of youth nation-wide. A
comparison between the ATOD use rates from the
8-State norm and those from the national
Monitoring the Future Survey showed the rates to
be very similar, which provides added confidence in
the validity of the 8-State Norm. Brief definitions of
the risk and protective factors scales are provided in
Table 2 following the profile charts. For more
information about risk and protective factors, please
refer to the resources listed on the last page of this
report under Contacts for Prevention.

The school safety 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 or were picked on or
bullied at school. The complete questions and values
for each response option can be seen in Table 11.

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 Survey or
the 8-State Norm (described below). A comparison to
the state-wide and national results provides additional
information for your community in determining the
relative significance of levels of 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.

Drug Free Communities Reports
Table 12 contains the information that is reported
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 8-State Norm
The diamonds on the charts allow a comparison
between the levels of risk and protection in your

Practical Implications of the Assessment
No Child Left Behind
The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities section of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) requires that
schools and communities use six Principles of Effectiveness to guide their decisions and spending on federally
funded prevention and intervention programs. First introduced in 1998 by the Department of Education, the
Principles of Effectiveness outline a data-driven process for ensuring that prevention programs achieve the desired
results. The Principles of Effectiveness stipulate that local prevention programs and activities must:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

be based on a needs assessment using objective data regarding the incidence of drug use and violence,
target specific performance objectives,
be based on scientific research and be proven to reduce violence or drug use,
be based on the analysis of predictor variables such as risk and protective factors,
include meaningful and ongoing parental input in program implementation, and
have periodic evaluations of established performance measures.

The results of the AYS presented in this report can help your school and community comply with the NCLB Act. The
Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior charts provide information related to Principle 1 and the Risk and Protective
Factor charts provide information related to Principle 4. Overall, using the risk and protective factor framework helps
schools meet all of the Principles of Effectiveness, and thereby assists schools in complying with the NCLB Act.
8

Assessment and Planning
School and Community Improvement Using Survey Data
Why Conduct the Arizona
Youth Survey?
Data from the Arizona Youth
Survey can be used to help
schools and communities assess
current conditions and identify
and prioritize local prevention
issues.
Each risk and protective factor
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
county make key decisions
regarding regarding allocation
of resources, how and when to
address specific needs, and
which strategies are most
effective and known to produce
results.

What are the numbers telling you?
Review the charts and data tables presented in this report. Using the
table below, note your findings as you discuss the following questions.
Which 3-5 risk factors are of the greatest concern?
Which 3-5 protective factors are your community’s highest priority?
Which levels of 30-day drug use are of greatest concern?
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 of greatest concern?
º Which behaviors are your students exhibiting the most?
º At which grades do you see unacceptable behavior levels?
•
•
•

How to decide if a rate is “unacceptable.”
Look across the charts – which items stand out as either much
higher or much lower than the others?
• Compare your data with statewide and national data –
differences of five percent between local and other data are probably
significant.
•

Use these data for program and policy development.
Substance use and antisocial behavior data – identify issues, raise
awareness about the problems, and promote school and community
dialogue.
• Risk and protective factor data – identify key objectives that will
help your school or community achieve its prevention goals.
•

Use the resources listed on the last page of this report, Contacts for
Prevention, for ideas about prevention programs that have proven
effective in addressing the risk factors that are high in your community
and improving the protective factors that are low.

MEASURE

Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate
#3
#4
#1
#2

Risk Factors
Protective Factors
Substance Use
Antisocial Behaviors

9

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

10

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Maricopa County, Grade 8

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

11

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Maricopa County, Grade 10

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

12

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Maricopa County, Grade 12

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Maricopa County, Grade 8
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

13

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Maricopa County, Grade 10
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

14

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Maricopa County, Grade 12
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

15

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Maricopa County, Grade 8

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

16

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Maricopa County, Grade 8
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

17

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Maricopa County, Grade 10

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

18

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Maricopa County, Grade 10
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

19

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Maricopa County, Grade 12

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

20

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Maricopa County, Grade 12
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

21

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol

WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL*
2008 Maricopa County Student Survey, Grades 8, 10 & 12
If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)
100
90
80
70

Percentages (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Got it some

other way

Took it from a
store or someone

County 2008, Grade 12
Sample: 2913 students**

else's home

Took it from home

Got at a party

County 2008, Grade 10
Sample: 2553 students**

Someone under
21 years

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

County 2008, Grade 8
Sample: 2826 students**

State 2008

* Prior to 2008, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained alcohol. Also, because not all eight states ask where youth obtained alcohol, no 8-State value is reported.
** Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case of smaller sample sizes,
caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

22

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Maricopa County, Grade 8
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

23

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Maricopa County, Grade 10
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

24

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Maricopa County, Grade 12
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

25

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles
Low Neighborhood Attachment

Community Domain Risk Factors
Low neighborhood bonding is related to higher levels of 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.

Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

Community Domain Protective Factors
When opportunities are available in a community for positive participation, children are less likely to
engage in substance use and other problem behaviors.

Rewards for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for positive participation in activities helps youth bond to the community, thus lowering their risk
for substance use.

Poor Family Management

Family Domain Risk Factors
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.

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.

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.

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 Attachment

Family Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

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.

Academic Failure

Low Commitment to School

School Domain Risk Factors
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.
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.

26

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles (cont'd)
Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

School Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

Rebelliousness

Peer-Individual Risk Factors
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.

Early Initiation of Antisocial
Behavior and Drug Use

Early onset of drug use predicts the 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.

Attitudes Favorable Toward
Antisocial Behavior and Drug
Use

During the elementary school years, most children express anti-drug, anti-crime, and pro-social attitudes
and have 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Belief in the Moral Order

Peer-Individual Protective Factors
Young people who have a belief in what is “right” or “wrong” are less likely to use drugs.

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.

Prosocial Involvement

Participation in positive school and community activities helps provide protection for youth.

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.

27

Data Tables
Table 3. 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

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

50.2

49.1

46.5

47.8

68.3

64.7

64.6

66.2

76.1

72.8

73.8

74.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

29.7

28.0

23.9

25.9

41.2

39.9

37.1

39.9

49.9

47.5

48.4

50.8

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

5.3

6.5

5.8

7.1

8.9

9.6

10.8

12.9

15.2

13.7

15.7

17.7

Marijuana

used marijuana?

18.7

16.6

14.7

16.2

34.2

31.1

31.1

32.5

43.0

41.1

42.5

43.1

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

2.2

1.8

1.9

1.9

5.0

3.7

5.1

5.2

8.1

5.4

8.5

7.9

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

3.2

3.4

2.6

2.7

6.8

6.3

6.2

6.8

10.4

10.8

10.8

11.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

12.6

14.6

13.7

14.3

10.0

10.8

12.1

12.6

8.8

9.2

8.3

9.2

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

2.3

1.1

1.2

n/a

4.1

2.0

2.4

n/a

6.0

3.8

4.0

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

1.3

1.3

1.1

1.0

2.4

2.0

1.9

2.0

3.4

3.1

3.3

3.1

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2.2

1.7

2.1

2.2

3.7

2.8

4.5

4.9

6.0

4.2

7.5

7.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

1.6

1.8

1.7

n/a

1.9

2.3

2.3

n/a

2.4

2.4

2.4

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

11.3

12.2

n/a

n/a

19.8

20.5

n/a

n/a

24.4

24.6

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

2.9

n/a

n/a

n/a

6.1

n/a

n/a

n/a

7.4

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

3.2

3.7

3.8

n/a

7.1

8.5

7.6

n/a

9.0

8.8

7.9

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

10.2

9.6

7.8

8.3

16.5

14.1

12.2

12.0

21.9

18.2

14.3

13.2

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of 2008 prescription stimulant, sedative
and pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

14.0

16.1

17.1

n/a

20.4

25.4

25.7

n/a

24.8

28.8

28.7

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

9.1

9.7

n/a

n/a

12.3

12.9

n/a

n/a

13.4

13.4

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

28

Data Tables
Table 4. 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 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

24.5

23.0

22.6

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

23.2

41.5

36.5

36.6

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

37.7

52.1

45.9

47.0

46.8

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

9.3

9.3

8.2

8.7

16.4

15.3

16.0

16.6

23.0

21.3

23.6

23.9

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

1.7

2.1

2.2

2.6

2.7

3.2

3.8

4.6

5.1

4.9

6.0

6.8

Marijuana

used marijuana?

8.7

7.7

7.1

7.6

15.5

14.5

15.0

15.1

18.5

18.1

19.5

18.7

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

1.3

0.9

0.8

0.8

2.1

1.6

1.8

1.9

2.1

1.5

2.6

2.4

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

1.5

1.7

1.1

1.0

2.3

2.2

2.0

2.2

3.3

3.0

3.2

3.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

5.3

5.9

5.3

5.4

2.6

2.8

2.9

3.0

1.4

1.4

1.2

1.6

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

0.9

0.4

0.4

n/a

1.3

0.6

0.6

n/a

1.3

0.8

0.8

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

0.6

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.7

0.6

0.7

0.7

0.9

0.8

1.1

1.0

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

0.8

0.7

0.9

0.8

0.9

0.8

1.4

1.5

0.9

0.9

2.3

2.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

0.8

0.8

0.7

n/a

1.0

1.0

1.0

n/a

1.0

0.9

1.0

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

5.5

6.0

n/a

n/a

8.9

9.4

n/a

n/a

10.6

10.5

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

1.3

n/a

n/a

n/a

2.4

n/a

n/a

n/a

2.4

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

1.4

1.6

1.6

n/a

2.9

3.3

2.9

n/a

2.7

2.3

2.1

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

5.0

4.4

3.3

3.4

8.2

6.4

4.8

4.5

10.3

7.4

5.5

5.0

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of prescription stimulant, sedative and
pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

6.8

8.1

8.6

n/a

9.9

12.0

12.2

n/a

10.7

13.7

13.1

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

5.3

5.6

n/a

n/a

5.7

6.4

n/a

n/a

5.7

5.9

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

29

Data Tables
z

Table 5. Percentage of Students Reporting Heavy ATOD Use
Grade 8

Binge Drinking

1/2 Pack (or
more) of
Cigarettes/Day

How many times have you
had 5 or more alcoholic
drinks in a row in the
past 2 weeks?
During the past 30 days, how many
cigarettes did you smoke per day?
(11 to 20 cigarettes, More than 20
cigarettes)

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

15.2

12.3

12.8

0.7

1.0

0.6

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

13.1

24.5

20.4

21.2

0.7

2.6

2.1

2.1

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

22.4

32.4

26.8

30.5

30.2

2.1

5.2

4.2

4.3

4.2

Table 6. Percentage of Students Reporting Antisocial Behavior
How many times in the past year
(12 months) have you:
(One or more times)
Suspended from School
Drunk or High at School
Sold Illegal Drugs
Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle
Been Arrested
Attacked Someone with the Idea
of Seriously Hurting Them
Carried a Handgun
Carried a Handgun to School
During the past 30 days, how many
times did you:
(One or more times)

Grade 8

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

17.3

19.4

20.3

12.2

11.7

11.3

4.5

4.7

4.5

4.4

7.3

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

20.2

10.8

14.7

12.7

14.6

8.5

8.7

9.0

10.2

12.0

18.6

18.8

19.0

20.5

20.4

20.2

22.0

22.2

4.6

4.6

8.3

8.6

9.4

9.8

9.7

9.8

10.7

10.4

3.6

3.6

3.8

4.4

3.2

3.7

2.4

3.0

2.7

2.7

7.1

6.6

7.5

7.3

8.0

7.8

9.2

7.7

6.8

7.5

8.7

17.0

17.2

17.5

18.1

15.4

15.2

15.1

16.1

12.5

12.6

12.1

12.9

5.8

7.3

7.4

7.7

5.0

7.1

6.2

7.2

4.9

6.3

7.7

8.1

1.5

1.5
1.2
Grade 8

1.2

1.2

1.6
1.2
Grade 10

1.3

1.1

1.2
1.3
Grade 12

1.4

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

DRIVE a car or other vehicle when you had
been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

5.6

5.2

RIDE in a car or other vehicle driven by
someone who had been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

29.8

28.3

State
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

5.6

n/a

7.3

6.7

29.1

n/a

28.8

26.7

* These categories were not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

30

State
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

7.9

n/a

16.2

15.0

16.1

29.1

n/a

30.0

26.9

29.7

Data Tables
Table 7. Percentage of Students Gambling in the Past Year
How often have you done the following for money,
possessions, or anything of value:
County
2004
(At least once in the past 12 months or more)
Any Gambling
Played a slot machine, poker machine
or other gambling machine?
Played the lottery or scratch-off tickets?
Bet on sports?*
Played cards?
Bought a raffle ticket?
Played bingo?
Gambled on the Internet?
Played a dice game?*
Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?*
Bet on a horse or other animal race?*
Table 8. Percentage of Students Reporting Protection

Grade 8
County
2008

n/a

53.4

68.9

n/a

2.6

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

69.1

n/a

51.0

65.0

65.9

n/a

45.6

59.5

60.6

6.7

6.4

n/a

2.6

6.6

6.1

n/a

3.0

6.0

5.8

26.0
n/a
24.4
n/a
18.0
5.7
n/a

24.8
31.8
43.5
19.1
34.0
6.5
31.7

24.8
31.8
43.7
20.4
32.6
6.3
31.5

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

21.0
n/a
26.4
n/a
12.1
4.9
n/a

21.7
30.0
43.9
18.9
24.0
4.8
24.9

21.8
30.2
43.7
20.7
23.2
5.1
25.1

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

16.5
n/a
25.1
n/a
6.8
4.5
n/a

18.4
24.7
40.1
16.6
14.6
4.6
18.1

19.0
25.6
40.6
18.9
14.7
4.7
19.2

n/a

20.0

32.5

32.7

n/a

20.9

30.8

31.3

n/a

18.3

26.7

27.0

n/a

n/a

6.3

6.4

n/a

n/a

5.0

5.8

n/a

n/a

4.2

5.1

Grade 8

Protective Factor
Community Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Domain
Family Attachment
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
School Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer-Individual Domain
Belief in the Moral Order
Interaction with Prosocial Peers*
Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Total Protection
Students with High Protection**

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2006

State
2008

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

41.5
32.3

38.2
30.5

38.0
31.0

50.6
60.1
60.8

49.7
58.1
61.1

62.4
51.6

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

39.3
31.3

40.3
36.4

38.0
36.2

36.6
35.2

51.6
59.7
61.5

51.5
59.7
61.4

47.7
56.9
57.0

44.8
54.1
55.4

59.9
51.1

60.7
51.1

60.3
51.2

63.3
60.5

53.9
51.3
39.9
58.3

54.4
50.4
37.4
57.7

59.3
53.3
38.6
58.5

59.4
53.1
39.0
59.4

43.5

36.7

43.5

43.8

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

37.1
35.4

40.1
35.6

38.2
34.7

35.4
32.4

36.1
33.2

47.1
54.4
56.4

46.1
54.0
55.1

56.9
57.2
57.2

57.7
56.1
56.3

55.8
54.8
55.9

56.2
55.2
55.8

66.8
63.5

65.7
60.1

62.4
59.8

64.4
42.7

67.5
47.5

67.0
43.9

64.3
45.4

62.6
53.0
44.8
59.3

63.4
54.8
40.9
61.3

66.4
56.4
44.9
58.7

66.5
55.3
41.2
59.7

50.2
51.7
42.9
49.7

51.6
53.2
40.4
53.9

54.0
51.6
38.0
51.7

53.6
52.5
36.4
52.2

47.9

44.4

47.7

46.7

45.1

44.1

42.9

43.3

*Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.
**High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.

31

State
2008

State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 9. Percentage of Students Reporting Risk
Grade 8
Risk Factor
Community Domain
Low Neighborhood Attachment
Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use
Perceived Availability of Drugs
Perceived Availability of Handguns
Family Domain
Poor Family Management
Family Conflict
Family History of Antisocial Behavior
Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use
School Domain
Academic Failure
Low Commitment to School
Peer-Individual Domain
Rebelliousness
Early Initiation of ASB
Early Initiation of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use
Perceived Risk of Drug Use
Interaction with Antisocial Peers
Friend's Use of Drugs
Rewards for ASB
Gang Involvement
Total Risk
Students at High Risk*

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

38.5
35.4
39.1
35.1

39.2
36.5
37.6
36.0

36.8
36.0
38.4
36.5

45.6
52.3
42.2
44.2
27.3

47.2
52.0
39.4
47.9
28.3

46.2
39.4

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

38.5
36.6
38.2
37.8

42.7
38.7
51.5
24.4

44.2
39.5
47.1
26.3

43.2
39.1
50.2
24.6

45.4
52.9
38.2
48.9
26.2

45.5
53.5
40.3
49.3
26.8

42.6
40.9
40.8
47.2
41.9

43.1
42.1
39.9
48.5
39.0

45.8
40.6

45.6
40.2

47.3
41.0

46.3
46.9

36.5
36.3
34.8
44.9
32.4
47.0
55.9
41.6
48.0
22.7

43.1
39.0
32.7
46.0
31.0
44.3
56.9
39.2
48.5
24.9

42.7
38.9
28.7
44.3
28.4
43.4
57.6
38.4
45.9
26.7

43.1
39.4
30.3
44.6
29.1
44.5
58.2
39.4
45.6
26.9

38.6

35.4

37.9

38.7

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

46.2
42.1
49.6
26.7

48.3
34.4
54.4
33.1

48.1
32.0
50.3
33.4

48.1
34.1
53.1
32.0

51.0
36.3
52.2
33.1

42.0
43.5
37.4
52.9
40.6

42.8
42.8
41.1
53.4
41.1

46.3
38.6
38.8
43.5
42.6

44.8
38.2
35.5
45.1
39.0

45.4
38.8
34.4
48.7
41.1

44.3
38.3
37.3
50.2
41.2

48.5
38.5

46.7
44.2

49.5
43.7

39.9
50.1

42.6
43.8

42.8
47.1

44.4
45.6

39.4
35.8
35.0
51.4
39.3
41.2
53.0
43.6
43.2
19.9

46.0
40.3
33.2
47.6
34.4
38.7
55.1
40.5
44.4
22.0

45.5
38.2
30.3
49.7
37.5
42.0
54.1
41.3
45.4
21.2

46.8
42.0
32.7
50.7
37.4
42.3
57.3
41.9
44.0
23.2

36.8
36.4
35.9
46.6
38.2
45.7
48.0
37.5
53.6
16.9

43.5
36.4
32.1
45.4
34.7
40.6
50.2
34.9
53.6
15.3

42.5
38.3
30.8
46.2
38.5
47.8
50.5
37.4
55.4
15.7

44.0
41.2
33.1
46.9
36.3
46.5
53.2
37.3
54.6
16.8

36.5

33.2

35.0

37.5

35.8

32.9

34.2

35.7

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors)

32

Grade 12
State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 10. Where Youth Obtained Alcohol
Grade 8

If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)

County
2008

Sample size*
I bought it in a store such as a liquor store, convenience store,
supermarket, discount store, or gas station
I bought it at a restaurant, bar, or club
I bought it at a public event such as a concert or sporting event

Grade 10

State
2008

County
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2008

State
2008

2,826

4,418

2,553

4,872

2,913

5,065

5.1

5.0

6.9

6.9

11.6

12.3

3.3
3.0

3.0
2.9

2.6
2.6

3.0
2.9

5.7
4.2

7.0
3.9

I gave someone else money to buy it for me

20.3

21.4

32.0

34.4

42.8

43.7

My parent or guardian gave it to me
Another family member who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone not related to me who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone under the age of 21 gave it to me
I got it at a party
I took it from home
I took it from a store or someone else's home
I got it some other way

19.7
20.0
18.4
23.7
42.1
32.8
12.1

18.7
19.7
19.2
23.8
41.5
31.4
11.7

14.9
16.4
27.7
26.1
54.5
26.2
12.8

14.8
18.7
28.7
24.8
53.1
23.2
11.3

14.4
17.9
39.9
23.5
58.9
14.7
9.0

13.0
18.2
39.5
22.0
57.6
13.8
8.0

28.1

28.7

22.8

23.6

16.3

17.9

* Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case
of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

33

Data Tables
Table 11. Percentage of Students Reporting School Safety Issues
Grade 8
County
2004

Question

County
2006

Grade 10

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

Grade 12

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
has someone threatened or injured you with a 4-5 times
weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school 6-7 times
property?
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

84.1
8.8
3.8
1.1
0.5
0.4
0.1
1.2

85.0
7.3
4.1
1.2
0.6
0.3
0.3
1.2

87.1
6.8
3.4
1.0
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.9

87.1
6.6
3.5
1.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.9

87.3
6.7
3.0
1.0
0.5
0.2
0.2
1.1

86.5
6.4
3.9
1.2
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.1

88.8
6.0
2.6
0.7
0.3
0.3
0.2
1.0

88.4
5.9
3.0
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.1

90.2
4.7
3.0
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.7

90.9
4.1
3.0
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.7

92.8
3.6
2.0
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.6

92.4
3.9
2.0
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.7

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
4-5 times
were you in a physical fight on school property? 6-7 times
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

74.1
13.9
7.7
2.1
0.7
0.3
0.2
1.0

77.1
12.4
6.7
1.8
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.9

77.5
12.4
6.6
1.5
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.8

76.5
12.9
6.9
1.7
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.7

85.0
8.7
4.5
0.9
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.4

85.9
8.1
3.9
0.9
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.6

86.8
8.0
3.4
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.5

85.2
8.8
3.9
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.7

90.6
5.6
2.4
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.3

92.0
5.0
1.8
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.4

92.4
4.5
1.8
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4

91.5
5.0
2.1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how often have you
4-5 times
been picked on or bullied by a student ON
6-7 times
SCHOOL PROPERTY?*
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

62.6
19.1

59.4
13.2
11.5
4.3
1.9
1.2
0.8
7.7

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

76.9
12.9

2.2

69.4
10.7
9.6
3.1
1.3
1.1
0.6
4.2

69.1
10.3
9.6
3.2
1.4
1.1
0.6
4.6

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

86.3
7.9

4.7

60.1
12.9
11.3
4.4
1.8
1.2
0.7
7.5

1.3

83.7
6.3
5.4
1.2
0.6
0.5
0.4
1.9

82.3
6.6
5.7
1.5
0.8
0.5
0.3
2.4

90.0
5.6
2.6
0.6
1.1

90.4
5.6
2.5
0.6
0.9

89.9
5.8
2.7
0.6
1.0

93.4
3.6
1.7
0.4
0.8

92.5
4.0
2.0
0.5
1.0

92.3
4.5
1.8
0.5
0.8

91.1
5.1
2.2
0.6
1.0

95.2
2.4
1.4
0.5
0.6

95.4
2.3
1.2
0.4
0.7

94.1
3.1
1.7
0.4
0.7

93.8
3.3
1.8
0.4
0.7

95.5
1.1
0.9
0.5
1.9

94.4
1.5
1.1
0.5
2.6

0 days

During the past 30 days, on how many days did
1 day
you not go to school because you felt you would
2-3 days
be unsafe at school or on your way to or from
4-5 days
school?

6 or more days

89.5
5.8
2.8
0.7
1.1

13.6

0 days

7.9

4.5

94.2
93.4
94.0
93.9
95.8
93.8
95.0
93.8
95.8
95.2
2.7
3.1
2.9
3.1
1.5
2.2
2.1
2.2
1.1
1.2
1.4
1.5
1.3
1.3
0.9
1.3
0.9
1.2
0.8
0.8
0.4
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.6
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.5
6 or more days
1.3
1.5
1.2
1.2
1.5
2.1
1.5
2.2
1.9
2.3
* In 2006 the choices for this question were Never , Once , Several Times and Very Often. This category was not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

During the past 30 days, on how many days did 1 day
you carry a weapon such as a gun, knife, or
2-3 days
club ON SCHOOL PROPERTY?
4-5 days

34

Data Tables
Table 12. Drug Free Communities Report*
County 2008
Outcome

Definition

Substance

Grade 8

Grade 10

Grade 12

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

Perception of Risk
(People are at Moderate or Great Risk
of harming themselves if they... )

Perception of Parent Disapproval
(Parents feel it would be Wrong or
Very Wrong to... )

Perception of Peer Disapproval
(I think it is Wrong or Very Wrong for
someone my age to...)

Past 30-Day Use

Female†

Sample Percent

Sample

drink 1 or two drinks nearly every day

Alcohol

60.4 15,457

63.3

8,057

64.1

6,859

56.4 14,289

67.3 15,537

smoke 1 or more packs or cigarettes
per day

Cigarettes

83.4 15,557

89.2

8,106

90.3

6,880

84.3 14,366

88.7 15,627

smoke marijuana regularly

Marijuana

81.3 15,138

73.9

7,895

68.3

6,742

72.1 14,021

80.5 15,222

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

90.7 14,188

84.6

7,534

75.5

6,481

84.5 13,149

86.5 14,563

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

96.5 14,268

94.1

7,572

86.8

6,508

92.9 13,219

94.3 14,630

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

96.4 14,110

94.0

7,524

90.0

6,465

93.6 13,098

94.9 14,506

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

77.9 16,581

61.7

8,510

53.9

7,234

68.4 15,384

68.2 16,341

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

87.1 16,578

75.0

8,506

62.1

7,230

78.2 15,367

78.5 16,343

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

86.6 16,557

72.9

8,492

66.1

7,215

76.6 15,352

80.2 16,310

Alcohol

22.6 16,168

36.6

8,304

47.0

7,064

29.8 14,922

33.5 16,040

at least one use in the Past 30 Days

Cigarettes

8.2 15,728

16.0

8,166

23.6

6,937

14.1 14,521

13.3 15,756

7.1 16,081

15.0

8,239

19.5

6,987

13.2 14,780

10.8 15,955

Marijuana

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

had more than a sip or two of beer,
wine or hard liquor?
Average Age of Onset**
(How old were you when you first…)

Male†

Sample Percent

smoked a cigarette, even just a puff?

smoked marijuana?

Alcohol
Average age:
Cigarettes
Average age:
Marijuana
Average age:

50.9 16,571
11.8 years
25.4 16,587
11.6 years
15.0 16,640
12.2 years

68.0

8,519

13.2 years
39.4

8,511

75.7

8,525

13.6 years

Sample Percent

Sample

7,243

59.6 15,385

62.3 16,345

14.2 years

12.7 years

13.1 years

50.6

7,246

34.7 15,375

34.8 16,364

14 years

12.6 years

12.9 years

7,253

27.2 15,412

24.9 16,402

14.6 years

13.4 years

13.8 years

12.9 years
32.1

Sample Percent

44.2

* The “Sample” column represents the sample size (the number of youth who answered the question). The "Percent" column represents the percentage of youth in the sample answering the question as defined.
** For Average Age of Onset, “Sample” represents the number of youth who answered the question (including students responding that they never used). 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.

† 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.

35

Appendix
Appendix - Comparability of survey administratons
Issue
Drug Category

2004 AYS
On how many occasions (if any) have you:

2006 AYS

2008 AYS

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Notes regarding changes

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Hallucinogens

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the
past 30 days?

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the past
30 days?

Used LSD or other hallucinogens during the
past 30 days?

Substituted "hallucinogens" for "psychedelics" in 2008.
Comparable across all years.

Methamphetamines

Not applicable, no methamphetamine-specific
item on 2004 AYS

Used methamphetamines (meth, speed, crank,
crystal meth)?

Used methamphetamines (meth, crystal,
crank)?

2006 and 2008 provide slightly different examples, but
are cautiously comparable.

Prescription
stimulants

Used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”,
“crystal”, “crank”) without a doctor telling you
to take them?

Used stimulants, other than methamphetamines
(such as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin,
Adderal, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling
you to take them?

2004 is not comparable to any other years, data are
presented for archival interest. 2006 and 2008 data are
cautiously comparable.

Prescription
sedatives

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such
as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping
pills)?

2008 AYS added descriptor "prescription" and removed
qualifier "without a doctor telling you to take them." 2008
data are cautiously comparable with other years.

Ecstasy

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2008 AYS used "ecstasy" as the primary descriptor and
moved "MDMA" to examples. Comparable across years.

Prescription
drugs

Not applicable, no prescription drugs item on
2004 AYS

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills),
stimulants, other than methamphetamines (such
as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine) or
other prescription drugs (such as Oxycontin)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes)

Used prescription stimulants (Ritalin,
Adderall, or Dexedrine), sedatives
(tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax,
barbiturates, or sleeping pills) or pain relievers
(Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes )

In 2006, responses to the stimulant, sedative and other
prescription drug questions were calculated as one
measure. (2006 had no prescription pain reliever item.) In
2008, responses to the stimulant, sedative and
prescription pain reliever questions were calculated as
one measure. (2008 had no standalone prescription drug
item.) 2006 and 2008 data are cautiously comparable.
(Note that composite 2006 data will not match past
reports' prescription drugs category.)

Gambling
Category

Not applicable, no gambling items
on 2004 AYS

How often during the past 12 months
have you:

How often have you done the following for
money, possessions, or anything of value:

Sports betting

n/a

Bet on team sports?

Bet on sports?

Not comparable across years.

Race betting

n/a

Bet money on horse races?

Bet on a horse race or other animal race?

Not comparable across years.

Dice

n/a

Bet on dice games such as craps?

Played a dice game?

Not comparable across years.

Games of skill

n/a

Bet on games of personal skill such as pool,
darts, or bowling?

Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?

Comparable across years.

Protective Scale:
Peer-Individual
Interaction with
Prosocial Peers

Think of your four best friends (the friends you feel closest to). In the past year (12 months), how many of your best friends have:
(Scale is calculated based on the average response [0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 friends] to the following questions)
...participated in clubs, organizations and activities at school? ...made the commitment to stay drug-free?
...tried to do well in school? ...liked school? ...regularly attended religious services?(removed in 2008)

36

Regularly attended religious services was removed from
2008 AYS. 2004 and 2006 have been recalculated to
match 2008 AYS and are now comparable across all
years. Due to this recalculation, current reports may differ
slightly from past reports.

Contacts for Prevention
Arizona Department of Education
Student Services Division
www.ade.az.gov

Regional Prevention Contacts
Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, and Santa Cruz
Counties
Bill Burnett
Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)
(520) 618-8807

Arizona Department of Health Services
Division of Behavioral Health Services
Lisa Shumaker
(602) 364-4594
www.azdhs.gov/bhs/index.htm

Gila, La Paz, Pinal, and Yuma Counties
Linda Weinberg
Cenpatico Behavioral Health of Arizona
(866) 495-6738

Arizona Prevention Resource Center
(800) 432-2772
www.azprevention.org

Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai
Counties
Petrice Post
Northern Arizona Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(NARBHA)
(928) 214-2177

Center for Violence Prevention and Community
Safety
Charles Katz
(602) 543-6618
charles.katz@asu.edu
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)
http://prevention.samhsa.gov

Maricopa County
Juan Aristizabal
Magellan
(602) 797-8256

Governor’s Office of Children, Youth, and
Families
(602) 542-4043
http://www.governor.state.az.us/cyf/index.html

Gila River Indian Community
Joan Grey
Gila River Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(602) 528-7136

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities
U.S. Department of Education
www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS

Pasqua Yaqui Tribe
Centered Spirit Program
Jill Fabian
(520) 879-6067

Arizona Department of Gaming's Office of
Problem Gambling
Elise Mikkelsen
(602) 266-8299 ext. 351
www.problemgambling.az.gov

Navajo Nation
Department of Behavioral Health Services
(928) 871-6235

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMSHA)
www.samhsa.gov

White Mountain Apache Tribe
Apache Behavioral Health Services
(928) 338-4811

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/

Colorado River Indian Tribes
(928) 669-6577

Western Regional Center for the Application of
Prevention Technologies (CAPT)
www.westcapt.org

Other State and National Contacts:
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
Michelle Neitch/ Phillip Stevenson
(602) 364-1173/(602) 364-1157
www.azcjc.gov

Bach Harrison, L.L.C.
R. Steven Harrison, Ph.D.
(801) 359-2064
www.bach-harrison.com

37

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Mohave County

REPORT PROVIDED BY:

Arizona Criminal Justice Commission

1

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Shining Light on Arizona Youth
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:
Arizona Department of Gaming’s Office of Problem Gambling
Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission
Arizona Parent’s Commission on Drug Education and Prevention
Governor’s Division for Substance Abuse Policy
Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Tobacco Education and Prevention Program,
Arizona Department of Health Services

2

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 2008 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:
Jean Ajamie, Arizona Department of Education
Michelle Anderson, Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections
Steve Ballance, Maricopa County
Carisa Dwyer, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Charles Katz, Arizona State University
Dr. Manuel Medina, TERROS, Inc.
Kim O’Connor, Governor’s Office for
Children, Youth, and Families
Holly Orozco, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Catherine Osborn, Arizona Department of Education
Richard Porter, Arizona Department of Health Services
Gowri Shetty, Arizona Department of Health Services
Lisa Shumaker, Arizona Department of Health Services
Wendy Wolfersteig, Arizona State University
Nicole Yancey Johnson, Arizona Early Childhood Development
and Health Board
Governor’s Youth Commission

Additionally, the success of the 2008 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.

3

Introduction
CONTENTS:

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Summary for
Mohave County

Introduction
The Risk and Protective
Factor Model of
Prevention
The Arizona Substance
Abuse Partnership
How to Read the Charts

This report summarizes some of the
findings from the 2008 Arizona Youth
Survey (AYS) administered to 8th, 10th
and 12th grade students during the
spring of 2008. The results for your
county are presented along with
comparisons to 2004 and 2006 survey
results where applicable, as well as to
the overall results for the state. 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.

Practical Implications of
the Assessment
Assessment and
Planning
Data Charts:
• Substance Use

All schools in Arizona are eligible to
participate in the survey, and
recruitment efforts were successful in
obtaining participation by schools in all
of the 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.

•

Antisocial Behavior
and Gambling

•

Risk & Protective
Factor Profiles
Where Youth
Obtained Alcohol
School Safety

•
•

Risk and Protective
Factor Scale Definitions
Data Tables
Contacts for Prevention
Appendix

Table 1 contains the characteristics of
the students who completed the survey

Table 1. Characteristics of Participants
Student Totals
County 2004

Total Students

Number

County 2006

Percent

Number

County 2008

Percent

Number

State 2008

Percent

Number

Percent

1,558

100

1,877

100

1,772

100

54,734

100

8

567

36.4

459

24.5

549

31.0

25,695

46.9

10

608

39.0

835

44.5

701

39.6

16,089

29.4

12

383

24.6

583

31.1

522

29.5

12,950

23.7

Male

723

46.9

894

48.9

851

48.9

26,213

48.8

Female

817

53.1

934

51.1

890

51.1

27,514

51.2

Native American

19

1.2

44

2.4

124

5.9

4,812

7.4

African American

23

1.5

24

1.3

49

2.3

3,915

6.0

345

22.4

343

18.8

344

16.4

21,525

32.9

White

1,055

68.6

1,288

70.7

1,484

70.9

31,887

48.8

Asian

11

0.7

13

0.7

53

2.5

2,117

3.2

Pacific Islander

13

0.8

10

0.5

40

1.9

1,115

1.7

Grade

Gender

Ethnicity*

Hispanic

*In 2008, students could mark more than one ethnic category and the 'other' category was removed.

4

from your county and the state.
Because not every student answered all
of the questions, the number of
students in the gender and ethnicity
categories often will be less than the
total number of students.
Whenever data is obtained from a
sample of students instead of the entire
population, it is important to recognize
the strengths and weaknesses of the
data. One quick and 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 participated in the
survey and those that did not.
Changes to the AYS
Survey for 2008
In an effort to shorten the AYS and
make it more responsive to local
priorities, the following changes were
made for 2008: 1) some of the
substance use questions were refined
and the use of over-the-counter drugs
was added, 2) some risk and protective
factor scales were removed where the
data could easily be obtained from
other sources or the scales measured
similar constructs (scales removed are

Risk and Protective Factors
Transitions and Mobility, Community
Disorganization, Intention to Use Drugs, and Social
Skills), 3) questions about where students get the
alcohol they drink were added, 4) an 8-State Norm
was added that can be used to compare the AYS
results on risk, protection, and antisocial behavior to a
more national sample (see the description of the 8State Norm later in this report), and 5) National
Outcome Measures that are needed for measuring the
performance of federally funded programs in Arizona
such as talking to parents about the dangers of
substance use were added.

Washington, Social Development Research Group
have investigated the relationship between risk and
protective factors and youth problem behavior. They
have found, for example, that children who live in
families with high levels of conflict are more likely
to become involved in problem behaviors such as
delinquency and drug use than children who live in
families with low levels of family conflict.
Protective factors exert a positive influence or buffer
against the negative influence of risk, thus reducing the
likelihood that adolescents will engage in problem
behaviors. Protective factors identified through research
include social bonding to family, school, community,
and peers; healthy beliefs and clear standards for
behavior; and individual characteristics. For bonding to
serve as a protective influence, it must occur through
involvement with peers and adults who communicate
healthy values and set clear standards for behavior.

The Risk and Protective Factor Model of
Substance Abuse Prevention
Many states, school districts and local agencies have
adopted the Risk and Protective Factor Model to
guide their prevention efforts. The Risk and
Protective Factor Model of Prevention 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 identified a set of risk factors for
youth problem behaviors. Risk factors are
characteristics of school, community, and family
environments, as well as characteristics of students
and their peer groups that are known to predict
increased likelihood of drug use, delinquency, school
dropout, teen pregnancy, and violent behavior among
youth. Dr. J. David Hawkins, Dr. Richard F.
Catalano, and their colleagues at the University of

T
T

T

T

T
T

T
T

T
T

T

T

Teen Pregnancy

T

School Drop-Out
Violence

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

SOURCE: COMMUNITIES THAT CARE (CTC) PREVENTION MODEL, CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION (CSAP), SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMSHA)

5

Constitutional Factors

Gang Involvement

Favorable Attitudes Toward
Drug Use & Other
Problem Behaviors

Friends Who Use Drugs &
Engage in a Problem Behavior

Alienation & Rebelliousness

Early & Persistent
Antisocial Behavior

Peer / Individual
Early Initiation of Drug Use &
Other Problem Behavior

Lack of Commitment to
School

Academic Failure

School
Favorable Parent Attitudes &
Involvement in the
Problem Behavior

T
T
T
T
T

Family Management Problems

T
T
T
T
T

Family Conflict

Community Disorganization

Low Neighborhood
Attachment

Transitions & Mobility

Availability of Drugs &
Firearms

T
T

Family History of the
Problem Behavior

Delinquency

The chart below shows the links between the 19 risk
factors and the five problem behaviors. The check
marks have been placed in the chart to indicate where
at least two well designed, published research studies
have shown a link between the risk factor and the
problem behavior.

Family

Extreme Economic &
Social Deprivation

Substance Abuse

Community
Community Laws & Norms
Favorable Toward Drug Use,
Firearms & Crime

Risk
Factors

By measuring both risk and protective factors in a
population, prevention programs can be implemented
that are designed to reduce the elevated risk factors and
increase the protective factors. For example, if academic
failure is identified as an elevated risk factor in a
community, then mentoring, tutoring, and increased
opportunities and rewards for classroom participation
can be provided to improve academic performance.

T
T

T
T

T

T

The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership
The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP) was established by Governor Napolitano’s Executive Order
2007-12 in June 2007. Chaired by the Governor’s Chief of Staff, ASAP is composed of representatives from
state government entities, federal entities, and community organizations. ASAP serves as the single statewide
council on substance abuse prevention, enforcement, and treatment.
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
prevention, treatment, and enforcement. Through coordination among its members and their agencies and
organizations ASAP strives to ensure that substance abuse funding is spent in the most efficient and efficacious
manner.
ASAP has identified four strategic focus areas for 2008: 1) child welfare and substance abuse; 2) law enforcement
and drug trafficking; 3) emerging trends and the state’s capacity to respond; and 4) data-driven decisions and
policy development.
There are currently six sub-committees that assist ASAP in meeting their goals:
•

Arizona Underage Drinking Committee - The purpose of this subcommittee is to develop a
statewide underage drinking initiative to prevent and reduce underage drinking in Arizona. Their
activities include state-level infrastructure change to improve cross coordination/collaboration
between state agencies; developing a comprehensive statewide prevention system focused on
preventing underage drinking; and collaborative projects to more effectively utilize resources
and support local efforts.

•

Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The purpose of this work group is to
continuously evaluate data related to substance abuse to move the state system through a datadriven process. This is achieved through the completion of a statewide Substance Abuse
Epidemiology Profile. This profile will be updated every two years, with specific analyses
completed each year.

•

Emerging Issues Sub-Committee of the Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The
purpose of this sub-committee is to provide understanding of emerging substance abuse
consumption and consequence trends in Arizona to state agencies, Boards, Commissions and
Committees, and ASAP and its sub-committees.

•

Methamphetamine Task Force – The purpose of this task force is to bring together
representatives from state agencies, local government, businesses, and community groups to
develop collaborative efforts among treatment, prevention, and law enforcement systems to
assess and address the impact of methamphetamine statewide through information sharing,
resource allocation, service coordination, and the development of statewide policy
recommendations sensitive to the needs of local and tribal communities.

•

Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team – The Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team serves as the
advisory body and policy-making entity for the Arizona Co-Occurring State Incentive Grant.
Team members represent a number of state agencies and community-based organizations.

•

Workforce Development Committee – This committee was formed specifically to identify and
address substance abuse prevention training and technical assistance needs across Arizona. This
will, in turn, help strengthen instruction for prevention professionals and volunteers in
community coalitions.

6

How to Read the Charts in this Report
There are five types of charts presented in this
report: 1) substance use, 2) antisocial behavior and
youth gambling, 3) risk factors, 4) protective factors,
and 5) where youth obtained alcohol. When
available, data from the 2004 and 2006
administrations will be included in the charts. The
actual percentages from the charts are presented in
tables at the end of this report.

•

Substance Use Charts
This report contains information about alcohol,
tobacco, and other drug use (referred to as ATOD
use throughout this report) and other problem
behaviors of students. The bars on each chart
represent the percentage of students in that grade
who reported the behavior. The three sections in the
charts represent different types of problem
behaviors. The definitions of each of the types of
behavior are provided below.
•

Risk and Protective Factor Charts
The risk and protective factor charts show the
percentage of students at high risk and with high
protection for each of the risk and protective factor
scales. The risk and protective factor scales measure
specific aspects of youths’ life experiences that are
predictive of whether they will engage in problem
behaviors. A definition of each risk and protective
factor scale is contained in Table 2. The factors are
grouped into four domains: community, family, school,
and peer/individual.

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.

•

Heavy use includes binge drinking (having five
or more drinks in a row during the two weeks
prior to the survey) and use of one-half a pack
or more of cigarettes per day.

The bars on the risk and protective factor charts,
represent the percentage of students whose answers
reflect significant risk or protection. There are bars for
the last three administrations of the AYS: 2004, 2006,
and 2008. By looking at 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 and
when assessing risk reduction and protective factor
enhancement efforts.

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol Charts

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling
Charts
•

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 animal
races. The chart also shows the percentage of
students who engaged in any gambling behavior
during the past year.

This chart displays data regarding the ways that
students obtained alcohol in the past 30 days. The data
focus on a subgroup of students who indicated at least
one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no
alcohol use are not represented.) It is important to note
that the charts represent a subgroup of users and not
the entire survey population. Additionally, the smaller
the sample, the more dramatic the influence of a
student's responses. For example, 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 legend indicates the sample size for
each grade surveyed to help clarify the value of the data.

Antisocial behavior (ASB) is a measure of
the percentage of students who report any
involvement during the past year with eight
antisocial behaviors: suspended from school,
drunk or high at school, sold illegal drugs,
stolen a vehicle, been arrested, attacked
someone to harm them, carried a handgun,
taken a handgun to school. The chart also
displays any incidents in the past 30 days of
drinking and driving or riding in a car with a
drinking driver.
7

How to Read the Charts in this Report (cont’d)
School Safety Charts

community and a more national sample. The 8-State
Norm value for each risk and protective factor scale
represents the percentage of youth at risk or with
protection for eight states across the country
(Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana,
Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah). In developing the
8-State Norm, the contribution of each of eight
states was proportional to its percentage of the
national population, which helps to make the results
more representative of youth nation-wide. A
comparison between the ATOD use rates from the
8-State norm and those from the national
Monitoring the Future Survey showed the rates to
be very similar, which provides added confidence in
the validity of the 8-State Norm. Brief definitions of
the risk and protective factors scales are provided in
Table 2 following the profile charts. For more
information about risk and protective factors, please
refer to the resources listed on the last page of this
report under Contacts for Prevention.

The school safety 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 or were picked on or
bullied at school. The complete questions and values
for each response option can be seen in Table 11.

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 Survey or
the 8-State Norm (described below). A comparison to
the state-wide and national results provides additional
information for your community in determining the
relative significance of levels of 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.

Drug Free Communities Reports
Table 12 contains the information that is reported
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 8-State Norm
The diamonds on the charts allow a comparison
between the levels of risk and protection in your

Practical Implications of the Assessment
No Child Left Behind
The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities section of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) requires that
schools and communities use six Principles of Effectiveness to guide their decisions and spending on federally
funded prevention and intervention programs. First introduced in 1998 by the Department of Education, the
Principles of Effectiveness outline a data-driven process for ensuring that prevention programs achieve the desired
results. The Principles of Effectiveness stipulate that local prevention programs and activities must:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

be based on a needs assessment using objective data regarding the incidence of drug use and violence,
target specific performance objectives,
be based on scientific research and be proven to reduce violence or drug use,
be based on the analysis of predictor variables such as risk and protective factors,
include meaningful and ongoing parental input in program implementation, and
have periodic evaluations of established performance measures.

The results of the AYS presented in this report can help your school and community comply with the NCLB Act. The
Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior charts provide information related to Principle 1 and the Risk and Protective
Factor charts provide information related to Principle 4. Overall, using the risk and protective factor framework helps
schools meet all of the Principles of Effectiveness, and thereby assists schools in complying with the NCLB Act.
8

Assessment and Planning
School and Community Improvement Using Survey Data
Why Conduct the Arizona
Youth Survey?
Data from the Arizona Youth
Survey can be used to help
schools and communities assess
current conditions and identify
and prioritize local prevention
issues.
Each risk and protective factor
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
county make key decisions
regarding regarding allocation
of resources, how and when to
address specific needs, and
which strategies are most
effective and known to produce
results.

What are the numbers telling you?
Review the charts and data tables presented in this report. Using the
table below, note your findings as you discuss the following questions.
Which 3-5 risk factors are of the greatest concern?
Which 3-5 protective factors are your community’s highest priority?
Which levels of 30-day drug use are of greatest concern?
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 of greatest concern?
º Which behaviors are your students exhibiting the most?
º At which grades do you see unacceptable behavior levels?
•
•
•

How to decide if a rate is “unacceptable.”
Look across the charts – which items stand out as either much
higher or much lower than the others?
• Compare your data with statewide and national data –
differences of five percent between local and other data are probably
significant.
•

Use these data for program and policy development.
Substance use and antisocial behavior data – identify issues, raise
awareness about the problems, and promote school and community
dialogue.
• Risk and protective factor data – identify key objectives that will
help your school or community achieve its prevention goals.
•

Use the resources listed on the last page of this report, Contacts for
Prevention, for ideas about prevention programs that have proven
effective in addressing the risk factors that are high in your community
and improving the protective factors that are low.

MEASURE

Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate
#3
#4
#1
#2

Risk Factors
Protective Factors
Substance Use
Antisocial Behaviors

9

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

10

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Mohave County, Grade 8

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

11

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Mohave County, Grade 10

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

12

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Mohave County, Grade 12

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Mohave County, Grade 8
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

13

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Mohave County, Grade 10
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

14

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Mohave County, Grade 12
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

15

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Mohave County, Grade 8

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

16

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Mohave County, Grade 8
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

17

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Mohave County, Grade 10

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

18

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Mohave County, Grade 10
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

19

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Mohave County, Grade 12

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

20

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Mohave County, Grade 12
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

21

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol

WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL*
2008 Mohave County Student Survey, Grades 8, 10 & 12
If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)
100
90
80
70

Percentages (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Got it some

other way

Took it from a
store or someone

else's home

County 2008, Grade 12
Sample: 194 students**

Took it from home

Got at a party

County 2008, Grade 10
Sample: 246 students**

Someone under
21 years

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

County 2008, Grade 8
Sample: 119 students**

State 2008

* Prior to 2008, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained alcohol. Also, because not all eight states ask where youth obtained alcohol, no 8-State value is reported.
** Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case of smaller sample sizes,
caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

22

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Mohave County, Grade 8
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

23

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Mohave County, Grade 10
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

24

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Mohave County, Grade 12
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

25

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles
Low Neighborhood Attachment

Community Domain Risk Factors
Low neighborhood bonding is related to higher levels of 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.

Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

Community Domain Protective Factors
When opportunities are available in a community for positive participation, children are less likely to
engage in substance use and other problem behaviors.

Rewards for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for positive participation in activities helps youth bond to the community, thus lowering their risk
for substance use.

Poor Family Management

Family Domain Risk Factors
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.

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.

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.

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 Attachment

Family Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

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.

Academic Failure

Low Commitment to School

School Domain Risk Factors
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.
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.

26

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles (cont'd)
Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

School Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

Rebelliousness

Peer-Individual Risk Factors
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.

Early Initiation of Antisocial
Behavior and Drug Use

Early onset of drug use predicts the 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.

Attitudes Favorable Toward
Antisocial Behavior and Drug
Use

During the elementary school years, most children express anti-drug, anti-crime, and pro-social attitudes
and have 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Belief in the Moral Order

Peer-Individual Protective Factors
Young people who have a belief in what is “right” or “wrong” are less likely to use drugs.

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.

Prosocial Involvement

Participation in positive school and community activities helps provide protection for youth.

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.

27

Data Tables
Table 3. 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

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

55.5

64.1

53.8

47.8

77.8

75.5

73.3

66.2

85.8

78.3

78.0

74.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

32.9

36.8

26.1

25.9

48.7

47.1

43.1

39.9

56.0

52.3

49.6

50.8

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

6.6

5.6

7.3

7.1

10.2

11.6

14.4

12.9

14.3

17.2

18.4

17.7

Marijuana

used marijuana?

23.8

23.4

13.2

16.2

42.1

40.8

36.3

32.5

49.2

46.1

41.5

43.1

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

1.5

2.7

1.7

1.9

6.0

6.6

6.6

5.2

8.7

7.0

7.5

7.9

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

2.0

3.0

1.5

2.7

6.3

8.8

4.4

6.8

14.0

10.4

8.1

11.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

12.5

16.6

19.3

14.3

12.8

13.3

12.2

12.6

13.2

11.2

9.4

9.2

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

3.8

1.3

1.2

n/a

9.7

2.8

2.4

n/a

9.2

4.9

4.0

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

1.1

1.3

1.7

1.0

1.2

2.9

2.1

2.0

1.6

2.6

3.6

3.1

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

1.7

1.8

2.5

2.2

3.3

6.0

5.0

4.9

7.5

5.7

7.1

7.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

1.0

1.9

1.7

n/a

1.9

3.1

2.3

n/a

3.2

2.0

2.4

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

17.2

12.2

n/a

n/a

24.9

20.5

n/a

n/a

27.5

24.6

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

2.6

n/a

n/a

n/a

6.5

n/a

n/a

n/a

10.6

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

4.4

4.0

3.8

n/a

8.9

6.6

7.6

n/a

8.1

3.4

7.9

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

11.1

12.7

12.5

8.3

19.8

18.8

16.2

12.0

23.9

21.1

14.3

13.2

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of 2008 prescription stimulant, sedative
and pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

19.0

23.4

17.1

n/a

25.3

29.1

25.7

n/a

27.2

30.4

28.7

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

13.6

9.7

n/a

n/a

14.8

12.9

n/a

n/a

13.3

13.4

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

28

Data Tables
Table 4. 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 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

26.6

34.6

24.3

23.2

48.2

46.2

40.4

37.7

55.9

50.7

43.6

46.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

10.4

13.1

7.6

8.7

18.1

19.9

17.9

16.6

29.7

20.6

20.8

23.9

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

1.8

1.6

1.5

2.6

1.5

3.1

6.1

4.6

3.2

5.9

6.1

6.8

Marijuana

used marijuana?

9.9

10.0

5.1

7.6

16.0

19.1

16.8

15.1

21.0

18.4

16.5

18.7

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

0.9

1.0

0.4

0.8

2.2

2.3

2.8

1.9

2.4

4.5

2.0

2.4

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

0.4

0.5

0.6

1.0

1.5

2.7

1.2

2.2

4.0

4.0

2.4

3.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

5.2

6.4

5.3

5.4

2.9

3.3

3.4

3.0

2.6

1.8

1.8

1.6

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

0.8

0.6

0.4

n/a

3.6

0.7

0.6

n/a

2.4

0.4

0.8

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

0.7

1.0

0.8

0.4

0.7

1.0

0.4

0.7

0.8

0.8

1.0

1.0

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

0.2

0.8

1.0

0.8

0.7

1.4

1.5

1.5

0.8

1.4

2.6

2.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

0.5

1.1

0.7

n/a

0.8

0.7

1.0

n/a

1.4

0.6

1.0

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

7.6

6.0

n/a

n/a

11.2

9.4

n/a

n/a

12.7

10.5

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

0.8

n/a

n/a

n/a

3.3

n/a

n/a

n/a

3.2

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

1.5

1.3

1.6

n/a

3.7

2.2

2.9

n/a

2.9

1.2

2.1

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

6.5

5.0

4.3

3.4

10.1

9.8

4.7

4.5

14.4

10.1

5.0

5.0

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of prescription stimulant, sedative and
pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

9.5

10.9

8.6

n/a

13.4

13.1

12.2

n/a

15.0

13.1

13.1

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

7.3

5.6

n/a

n/a

8.1

6.4

n/a

n/a

6.7

5.9

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

29

Data Tables
z

Table 5. Percentage of Students Reporting Heavy ATOD Use
Grade 8

Binge Drinking

1/2 Pack (or
more) of
Cigarettes/Day

How many times have you
had 5 or more alcoholic
drinks in a row in the
past 2 weeks?
During the past 30 days, how many
cigarettes did you smoke per day?
(11 to 20 cigarettes, More than 20
cigarettes)

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

17.3

21.3

13.5

1.3

1.2

1.3

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

13.1

27.9

28.5

25.7

0.7

5.0

5.4

3.3

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

22.4

33.7

33.1

28.3

30.2

2.1

6.2

6.7

3.8

4.2

Table 6. Percentage of Students Reporting Antisocial Behavior
How many times in the past year
(12 months) have you:
(One or more times)
Suspended from School
Drunk or High at School
Sold Illegal Drugs
Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle
Been Arrested
Attacked Someone with the Idea
of Seriously Hurting Them
Carried a Handgun
Carried a Handgun to School
During the past 30 days, how many
times did you:
(One or more times)

Grade 8

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

18.8

24.0

16.7

13.0

16.0

11.7

5.6

4.2

5.0

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

20.2

12.9

17.3

14.0

12.0

21.9

23.0

22.2

14.6

10.6

11.0

13.0

10.2

20.5

23.7

22.3

19.2

3.0

4.6

9.0

9.8

22.2

9.2

9.8

13.5

10.1

7.4

6.7

4.1

3.6

3.6

10.4

4.1

3.9

3.7

3.2

3.2

1.9

10.3

11.9

8.2

7.5

2.7

8.8

10.3

10.2

9.2

12.4

8.1

9.7

8.7

21.7

19.3

20.3

18.1

16.4

19.9

16.7

16.1

14.2

12.7

13.8

12.9

9.7

6.3

2.4

7.8

7.7

3.5

5.9

6.4

7.2

5.0

7.7

5.6

8.1

1.5
0.4
Grade 8

1.2

1.2

1.0
1.0
Grade 10

1.3

1.1

1.7
0.8
Grade 12

1.4

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

DRIVE a car or other vehicle when you had
been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

7.9

6.3

RIDE in a car or other vehicle driven by
someone who had been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

39.9

32.5

State
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

5.6

n/a

9.4

8.0

29.1

n/a

36.7

28.0

* These categories were not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

30

State
2008

State
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

7.9

n/a

20.3

15.6

16.1

29.1

n/a

32.0

26.4

29.7

Data Tables
Table 7. Percentage of Students Gambling in the Past Year
How often have you done the following for money,
possessions, or anything of value:
County
2004
(At least once in the past 12 months or more)
Any Gambling
Played a slot machine, poker machine
or other gambling machine?
Played the lottery or scratch-off tickets?
Bet on sports?*
Played cards?
Bought a raffle ticket?
Played bingo?
Gambled on the Internet?
Played a dice game?*
Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?*
Bet on a horse or other animal race?*
Table 8. Percentage of Students Reporting Protection

Grade 8
County
2008

n/a

57.9

69.7

n/a

3.1

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

69.1

n/a

51.8

67.5

65.9

n/a

49.9

59.9

60.6

5.8

6.4

n/a

3.0

6.4

6.1

n/a

4.8

5.9

5.8

32.1
n/a
28.3
n/a
14.8
6.1
n/a

26.4
31.6
46.6
25.0
25.0
6.2
33.1

24.8
31.8
43.7
20.4
32.6
6.3
31.5

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

28.5
n/a
27.9
n/a
9.5
6.0
n/a

21.7
28.3
46.1
27.7
19.4
7.0
23.2

21.8
30.2
43.7
20.7
23.2
5.1
25.1

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

25.4
n/a
27.2
n/a
5.5
5.7
n/a

22.9
18.9
38.4
21.2
13.3
2.9
19.8

19.0
25.6
40.6
18.9
14.7
4.7
19.2

n/a

23.3

33.7

32.7

n/a

22.3

31.6

31.3

n/a

18.6

24.7

27.0

n/a

n/a

5.0

6.4

n/a

n/a

6.2

5.8

n/a

n/a

2.7

5.1

Grade 8

Protective Factor
Community Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Domain
Family Attachment
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
School Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer-Individual Domain
Belief in the Moral Order
Interaction with Prosocial Peers*
Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Total Protection
Students with High Protection**

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2006

State
2008

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

45.1
25.8

37.9
27.6

45.0
28.7

47.6
57.5
57.5

42.7
54.5
56.7

54.0
43.5

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

39.3
31.3

39.2
30.9

39.2
33.0

38.0
30.6

53.6
59.2
62.7

51.5
59.7
61.4

42.6
52.6
54.0

43.2
48.2
51.7

54.0
46.2

55.4
54.8

60.3
51.2

52.9
55.8

50.7
43.5
34.8
51.9

45.1
41.2
30.0
52.7

62.6
52.8
36.5
58.4

59.4
53.1
39.0
59.4

36.6

31.8

45.3

43.8

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

37.1
35.4

30.1
24.3

36.3
27.0

37.6
31.8

36.1
33.2

42.9
51.7
55.1

46.1
54.0
55.1

51.9
54.9
55.3

51.5
49.2
49.9

58.3
53.8
56.1

56.2
55.2
55.8

53.5
52.7

56.6
57.6

62.4
59.8

48.6
36.4

56.6
40.2

63.6
47.0

64.3
45.4

58.9
50.5
38.6
55.3

57.5
44.9
32.8
54.2

66.9
48.8
39.4
58.1

66.5
55.3
41.2
59.7

45.9
44.2
27.3
41.1

46.1
43.5
29.2
40.6

52.5
51.6
32.0
49.7

53.6
52.5
36.4
52.2

38.5

36.7

46.1

46.7

36.3

33.7

44.1

43.3

*Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.
**High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.

31

State
2008

State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 9. Percentage of Students Reporting Risk
Grade 8
Risk Factor
Community Domain
Low Neighborhood Attachment
Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use
Perceived Availability of Drugs
Perceived Availability of Handguns
Family Domain
Poor Family Management
Family Conflict
Family History of Antisocial Behavior
Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use
School Domain
Academic Failure
Low Commitment to School
Peer-Individual Domain
Rebelliousness
Early Initiation of ASB
Early Initiation of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use
Perceived Risk of Drug Use
Interaction with Antisocial Peers
Friend's Use of Drugs
Rewards for ASB
Gang Involvement
Total Risk
Students at High Risk*

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

50.2
38.0
46.1
40.7

47.8
48.4
46.6
43.6

47.0
38.6
36.5
42.4

45.2
54.9
48.0
46.7
31.7

49.3
58.4
56.7
55.8
40.4

53.1
49.9

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

38.5
36.6
38.2
37.8

56.2
50.3
59.7
26.3

53.9
50.9
58.9
33.2

56.9
48.2
53.0
29.3

38.4
58.6
46.8
52.1
30.9

45.5
53.5
40.3
49.3
26.8

49.1
44.2
55.5
51.9
49.8

45.2
46.6
53.4
58.7
53.4

54.1
51.2

48.5
48.8

47.3
41.0

51.5
50.6

40.0
41.8
39.4
51.5
36.5
52.1
61.6
46.4
50.0
25.8

50.5
46.0
42.6
52.9
42.6
50.1
66.3
52.4
57.0
19.8

44.2
39.8
30.9
40.1
28.8
42.4
57.0
37.3
43.0
19.5

43.1
39.4
30.3
44.6
29.1
44.5
58.2
39.4
45.6
26.9

46.6

49.2

39.1

38.7

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

46.2
42.1
49.6
26.7

57.8
40.6
60.7
39.3

62.9
45.0
58.5
36.1

61.9
43.3
50.9
36.5

51.0
36.3
52.2
33.1

40.9
43.5
49.2
56.5
51.1

42.8
42.8
41.1
53.4
41.1

48.9
40.3
51.3
52.9
52.1

49.6
43.8
48.2
55.5
54.3

42.2
41.7
39.3
53.1
47.6

44.3
38.3
37.3
50.2
41.2

56.7
49.2

50.7
45.8

49.5
43.7

49.3
54.5

45.6
48.1

43.6
45.0

44.4
45.6

40.2
41.1
45.1
51.0
44.1
44.9
60.2
47.6
47.1
22.9

51.2
48.3
44.0
55.6
42.9
43.9
61.3
48.5
47.8
19.0

48.7
45.1
35.5
51.5
42.2
44.9
65.1
47.0
43.9
16.4

46.8
42.0
32.7
50.7
37.4
42.3
57.3
41.9
44.0
23.2

38.2
42.6
45.8
50.9
42.5
49.6
55.6
42.8
51.6
18.3

46.2
39.6
37.9
49.3
37.3
44.6
53.0
35.9
54.7
15.2

45.0
45.0
35.9
44.6
32.0
45.3
58.3
33.5
51.5
10.0

44.0
41.2
33.1
46.9
36.3
46.5
53.2
37.3
54.6
16.8

42.9

46.2

43.3

37.5

43.2

40.9

40.5

35.7

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors)

32

Grade 12
State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 10. Where Youth Obtained Alcohol
Grade 8

If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)

County
2008

Grade 10

State
2008

County
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2008

State
2008

Sample size*
I bought it in a store such as a liquor store, convenience store,
supermarket, discount store, or gas station
I bought it at a restaurant, bar, or club
I bought it at a public event such as a concert or sporting event

119

4,418

246

4,872

194

5,065

0.8

5.0

6.5

6.9

10.3

12.3

0.8
0.8

3.0
2.9

2.0
2.4

3.0
2.9

3.6
2.6

7.0
3.9

I gave someone else money to buy it for me

24.4

21.4

42.3

34.4

54.6

43.7

My parent or guardian gave it to me
Another family member who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone not related to me who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone under the age of 21 gave it to me
I got it at a party
I took it from home
I took it from a store or someone else's home
I got it some other way

28.6
10.9
22.7
22.7
43.7
39.5
11.8

18.7
19.7
19.2
23.8
41.5
31.4
11.7

21.1
13.4
32.9
26.0
51.6
19.9
13.0

14.8
18.7
28.7
24.8
53.1
23.2
11.3

18.6
17.5
41.8
21.6
57.2
16.0
6.2

13.0
18.2
39.5
22.0
57.6
13.8
8.0

19.3

28.7

22.8

23.6

20.1

17.9

* Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case
of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

33

Data Tables
Table 11. Percentage of Students Reporting School Safety Issues
Grade 8
County
2004

Question

County
2006

Grade 10

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

Grade 12

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
has someone threatened or injured you with a 4-5 times
weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school 6-7 times
property?
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

85.1
7.4
3.8
1.3
0.4
0.2
0.5
1.4

82.6
7.7
5.4
1.1
0.5
0.7
0.2
1.8

88.2
5.4
4.1
1.3
0.6
0.0
0.0
0.4

87.1
6.6
3.5
1.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.9

88.4
5.5
3.3
1.7
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.8

83.4
7.2
5.6
1.1
0.4
0.1
0.0
2.2

88.3
5.7
3.3
0.4
0.4
0.1
0.0
1.7

88.4
5.9
3.0
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.1

91.6
3.9
2.4
0.5
0.5
0.0
0.0
1.1

91.7
3.5
2.0
0.9
0.0
0.4
0.4
1.1

92.7
4.1
2.4
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.2

92.4
3.9
2.0
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.7

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
4-5 times
were you in a physical fight on school property? 6-7 times
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

68.2
16.3
9.9
3.1
0.4
0.7
0.5
0.9

70.8
16.3
8.8
1.8
0.9
0.2
0.2
0.9

75.8
12.2
8.1
1.9
0.2
0.9
0.4
0.6

76.5
12.9
6.9
1.7
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.7

82.1
9.5
5.6
1.3
0.5
0.0
0.2
0.8

82.0
10.3
5.3
1.0
0.1
0.4
0.0
1.0

86.6
8.3
3.1
0.6
0.4
0.0
0.1
0.9

85.2
8.8
3.9
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.7

91.3
5.6
2.4
0.3
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.3

91.3
4.4
2.6
0.7
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.7

89.8
6.5
2.2
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.4
0.8

91.5
5.0
2.1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how often have you
4-5 times
been picked on or bullied by a student ON
6-7 times
SCHOOL PROPERTY?*
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

61.0
19.1

59.4
13.2
11.5
4.3
1.9
1.2
0.8
7.7

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

68.4
14.8

5.2

69.4
8.7
10.3
2.6
1.0
0.6
1.0
6.4

69.1
10.3
9.6
3.2
1.4
1.1
0.6
4.6

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

85.2
6.1

6.2

55.1
13.6
12.0
4.1
1.1
0.6
0.6
12.9

1.8

79.5
8.0
6.1
2.2
1.2
0.0
0.8
2.3

82.3
6.6
5.7
1.5
0.8
0.5
0.3
2.4

88.9
6.3
1.6
0.7
2.5

90.8
5.1
2.8
0.4
0.9

89.9
5.8
2.7
0.6
1.0

93.2
3.3
1.5
0.5
1.5

94.9
2.6
1.5
0.2
0.7

92.9
4.2
1.9
0.3
0.7

91.1
5.1
2.2
0.6
1.0

94.2
2.9
1.1
0.8
1.1

96.3
2.0
0.4
0.6
0.7

95.3
3.1
0.8
0.4
0.4

93.8
3.3
1.8
0.4
0.7

96.3
2.0
0.4
0.0
1.4

94.4
1.5
1.1
0.5
2.6

0 days

During the past 30 days, on how many days did
1 day
you not go to school because you felt you would
2-3 days
be unsafe at school or on your way to or from
4-5 days
school?

6 or more days

91.2
5.4
1.4
0.2
1.8

13.7

0 days

11.6

6.8

92.4
93.4
96.0
93.9
95.7
93.7
95.0
93.8
96.3
93.5
2.5
2.3
2.3
3.1
1.2
2.0
1.6
2.2
1.3
1.7
1.8
1.6
1.1
1.3
1.3
1.0
0.7
1.2
0.3
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.2
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.0
0.4
6 or more days
2.5
2.1
0.4
1.2
1.7
3.1
2.2
2.2
2.1
3.7
* In 2006 the choices for this question were Never , Once , Several Times and Very Often. This category was not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

During the past 30 days, on how many days did 1 day
you carry a weapon such as a gun, knife, or
2-3 days
club ON SCHOOL PROPERTY?
4-5 days

34

Data Tables
Table 12. Drug Free Communities Report*
County 2008
Outcome

Definition

Substance

Grade 8

Grade 10

Grade 12

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

Perception of Risk
(People are at Moderate or Great Risk
of harming themselves if they... )

Perception of Parent Disapproval
(Parents feel it would be Wrong or
Very Wrong to... )

Perception of Peer Disapproval
(I think it is Wrong or Very Wrong for
someone my age to...)

Past 30-Day Use

Female†

Sample Percent

Sample

drink 1 or two drinks nearly every day

Alcohol

57.8

516

56.8

672

60.3

496

51.8

796

63.8

861

smoke 1 or more packs or cigarettes
per day

Cigarettes

89.6

518

89.2

673

90.2

498

88.1

795

91.1

867

smoke marijuana regularly

Marijuana

83.8

500

70.7

651

73.3

487

70.6

776

79.8

837

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

89.5

496

74.7

637

69.8

477

75.3

758

80.2

827

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

97.0

496

91.2

648

85.9

476

90.7

760

92.6

834

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

95.3

493

90.5

639

89.9

475

90.7

751

92.9

831

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

75.9

539

53.5

692

53.3

516

58.2

833

62.5

885

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

87.5

538

72.5

690

67.2

516

75.5

832

76.0

883

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

87.0

538

70.5

688

72.4

514

74.2

831

78.1

880

Alcohol

24.3

534

40.4

683

43.6

509

34.9

820

37.6

878

at least one use in the Past 30 Days

Cigarettes

7.6

527

17.9

676

20.8

499

15.4

804

15.3

871

5.1

531

16.8

678

16.5

504

14.5

806

11.5

877

Sample Percent

Sample

Marijuana

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

had more than a sip or two of beer,
wine or hard liquor?
Average Age of Onset**
(How old were you when you first…)

Male†

Sample Percent

smoked a cigarette, even just a puff?

smoked marijuana?

Alcohol
Average age:
Cigarettes
Average age:
Marijuana
Average age:

55.2

538

11.9 years
26.5

533

11.6 years
12.8

539

12.2 years

75.6

689

13.1 years
45.9

690

12.8 years
36.4

690

13.6 years

81.2

Sample Percent

517

13.9 years
52.9

518

13.6 years
43.0

519

14.4 years

70.3

832

12.9 years
41.6

834

12.7 years
33.1

834

13.5 years

71.4

881

13.3 years
42.4

876

12.9 years
29.0

884

14.1 years

* The “Sample” column represents the sample size (the number of youth who answered the question). The "Percent" column represents the percentage of youth in the sample answering the question as defined.
** For Average Age of Onset, “Sample” represents the number of youth who answered the question (including students responding that they never used). 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.

† 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.

35

Appendix
Appendix - Comparability of survey administratons
Issue
Drug Category

2004 AYS
On how many occasions (if any) have you:

2006 AYS

2008 AYS

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Notes regarding changes

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Hallucinogens

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the
past 30 days?

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the past
30 days?

Used LSD or other hallucinogens during the
past 30 days?

Substituted "hallucinogens" for "psychedelics" in 2008.
Comparable across all years.

Methamphetamines

Not applicable, no methamphetamine-specific
item on 2004 AYS

Used methamphetamines (meth, speed, crank,
crystal meth)?

Used methamphetamines (meth, crystal,
crank)?

2006 and 2008 provide slightly different examples, but
are cautiously comparable.

Prescription
stimulants

Used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”,
“crystal”, “crank”) without a doctor telling you
to take them?

Used stimulants, other than methamphetamines
(such as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin,
Adderal, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling
you to take them?

2004 is not comparable to any other years, data are
presented for archival interest. 2006 and 2008 data are
cautiously comparable.

Prescription
sedatives

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such
as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping
pills)?

2008 AYS added descriptor "prescription" and removed
qualifier "without a doctor telling you to take them." 2008
data are cautiously comparable with other years.

Ecstasy

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2008 AYS used "ecstasy" as the primary descriptor and
moved "MDMA" to examples. Comparable across years.

Prescription
drugs

Not applicable, no prescription drugs item on
2004 AYS

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills),
stimulants, other than methamphetamines (such
as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine) or
other prescription drugs (such as Oxycontin)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes)

Used prescription stimulants (Ritalin,
Adderall, or Dexedrine), sedatives
(tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax,
barbiturates, or sleeping pills) or pain relievers
(Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes )

In 2006, responses to the stimulant, sedative and other
prescription drug questions were calculated as one
measure. (2006 had no prescription pain reliever item.) In
2008, responses to the stimulant, sedative and
prescription pain reliever questions were calculated as
one measure. (2008 had no standalone prescription drug
item.) 2006 and 2008 data are cautiously comparable.
(Note that composite 2006 data will not match past
reports' prescription drugs category.)

Gambling
Category

Not applicable, no gambling items
on 2004 AYS

How often during the past 12 months
have you:

How often have you done the following for
money, possessions, or anything of value:

Sports betting

n/a

Bet on team sports?

Bet on sports?

Not comparable across years.

Race betting

n/a

Bet money on horse races?

Bet on a horse race or other animal race?

Not comparable across years.

Dice

n/a

Bet on dice games such as craps?

Played a dice game?

Not comparable across years.

Games of skill

n/a

Bet on games of personal skill such as pool,
darts, or bowling?

Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?

Comparable across years.

Protective Scale:
Peer-Individual
Interaction with
Prosocial Peers

Think of your four best friends (the friends you feel closest to). In the past year (12 months), how many of your best friends have:
(Scale is calculated based on the average response [0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 friends] to the following questions)
...participated in clubs, organizations and activities at school? ...made the commitment to stay drug-free?
...tried to do well in school? ...liked school? ...regularly attended religious services?(removed in 2008)

36

Regularly attended religious services was removed from
2008 AYS. 2004 and 2006 have been recalculated to
match 2008 AYS and are now comparable across all
years. Due to this recalculation, current reports may differ
slightly from past reports.

Contacts for Prevention
Arizona Department of Education
Student Services Division
www.ade.az.gov

Regional Prevention Contacts
Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, and Santa Cruz
Counties
Bill Burnett
Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)
(520) 618-8807

Arizona Department of Health Services
Division of Behavioral Health Services
Lisa Shumaker
(602) 364-4594
www.azdhs.gov/bhs/index.htm

Gila, La Paz, Pinal, and Yuma Counties
Linda Weinberg
Cenpatico Behavioral Health of Arizona
(866) 495-6738

Arizona Prevention Resource Center
(800) 432-2772
www.azprevention.org

Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai
Counties
Petrice Post
Northern Arizona Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(NARBHA)
(928) 214-2177

Center for Violence Prevention and Community
Safety
Charles Katz
(602) 543-6618
charles.katz@asu.edu
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)
http://prevention.samhsa.gov

Maricopa County
Juan Aristizabal
Magellan
(602) 797-8256

Governor’s Office of Children, Youth, and
Families
(602) 542-4043
http://www.governor.state.az.us/cyf/index.html

Gila River Indian Community
Joan Grey
Gila River Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(602) 528-7136

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities
U.S. Department of Education
www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS

Pasqua Yaqui Tribe
Centered Spirit Program
Jill Fabian
(520) 879-6067

Arizona Department of Gaming's Office of
Problem Gambling
Elise Mikkelsen
(602) 266-8299 ext. 351
www.problemgambling.az.gov

Navajo Nation
Department of Behavioral Health Services
(928) 871-6235

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMSHA)
www.samhsa.gov

White Mountain Apache Tribe
Apache Behavioral Health Services
(928) 338-4811

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/

Colorado River Indian Tribes
(928) 669-6577

Western Regional Center for the Application of
Prevention Technologies (CAPT)
www.westcapt.org

Other State and National Contacts:
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
Michelle Neitch/ Phillip Stevenson
(602) 364-1173/(602) 364-1157
www.azcjc.gov

Bach Harrison, L.L.C.
R. Steven Harrison, Ph.D.
(801) 359-2064
www.bach-harrison.com

37

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Navajo County

REPORT PROVIDED BY:

Arizona Criminal Justice Commission

1

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Shining Light on Arizona Youth
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:
Arizona Department of Gaming’s Office of Problem Gambling
Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission
Arizona Parent’s Commission on Drug Education and Prevention
Governor’s Division for Substance Abuse Policy
Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Tobacco Education and Prevention Program,
Arizona Department of Health Services

2

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 2008 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:
Jean Ajamie, Arizona Department of Education
Michelle Anderson, Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections
Steve Ballance, Maricopa County
Carisa Dwyer, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Charles Katz, Arizona State University
Dr. Manuel Medina, TERROS, Inc.
Kim O’Connor, Governor’s Office for
Children, Youth, and Families
Holly Orozco, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Catherine Osborn, Arizona Department of Education
Richard Porter, Arizona Department of Health Services
Gowri Shetty, Arizona Department of Health Services
Lisa Shumaker, Arizona Department of Health Services
Wendy Wolfersteig, Arizona State University
Nicole Yancey Johnson, Arizona Early Childhood Development
and Health Board
Governor’s Youth Commission

Additionally, the success of the 2008 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.

3

Introduction
CONTENTS:

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Summary for
Navajo County

Introduction
The Risk and Protective
Factor Model of
Prevention
The Arizona Substance
Abuse Partnership
How to Read the Charts

This report summarizes some of the
findings from the 2008 Arizona Youth
Survey (AYS) administered to 8th, 10th
and 12th grade students during the
spring of 2008. The results for your
county are presented along with
comparisons to 2004 and 2006 survey
results where applicable, as well as to
the overall results for the state. 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.

Practical Implications of
the Assessment
Assessment and
Planning
Data Charts:
• Substance Use

All schools in Arizona are eligible to
participate in the survey, and
recruitment efforts were successful in
obtaining participation by schools in all
of the 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.

•

Antisocial Behavior
and Gambling

•

Risk & Protective
Factor Profiles
Where Youth
Obtained Alcohol
School Safety

•
•

Risk and Protective
Factor Scale Definitions
Data Tables
Contacts for Prevention
Appendix

Table 1 contains the characteristics of
the students who completed the survey

Table 1. Characteristics of Participants
Student Totals
County 2004

Total Students

Number

County 2006

Percent

Number

County 2008

Percent

Number

State 2008

Percent

Number

Percent

1,399

100

1,415

100

1,706

100

54,734

100

8

449

32.1

558

39.4

489

28.7

25,695

46.9

10

512

36.6

496

35.1

682

40.0

16,089

29.4

12

438

31.3

361

25.5

535

31.4

12,950

23.7

Male

652

47.1

664

47.7

800

47.4

26,213

48.8

Female

732

52.9

727

52.3

886

52.6

27,514

51.2

Native American

731

52.7

607

44.0

746

39.0

4,812

7.4

African American

13

0.9

20

1.5

48

2.5

3,915

6.0

Hispanic

96

6.9

95

6.9

252

13.2

21,525

32.9

White

500

36.1

592

43.0

834

43.6

31,887

48.8

Asian

4

0.3

6

0.4

20

1.0

2,117

3.2

Pacific Islander

5

0.4

6

0.4

14

0.7

1,115

1.7

Grade

Gender

Ethnicity*

*In 2008, students could mark more than one ethnic category and the 'other' category was removed.

4

from your county and the state.
Because not every student answered all
of the questions, the number of
students in the gender and ethnicity
categories often will be less than the
total number of students.
Whenever data is obtained from a
sample of students instead of the entire
population, it is important to recognize
the strengths and weaknesses of the
data. One quick and 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 participated in the
survey and those that did not.
Changes to the AYS
Survey for 2008
In an effort to shorten the AYS and
make it more responsive to local
priorities, the following changes were
made for 2008: 1) some of the
substance use questions were refined
and the use of over-the-counter drugs
was added, 2) some risk and protective
factor scales were removed where the
data could easily be obtained from
other sources or the scales measured
similar constructs (scales removed are

Risk and Protective Factors
Transitions and Mobility, Community
Disorganization, Intention to Use Drugs, and Social
Skills), 3) questions about where students get the
alcohol they drink were added, 4) an 8-State Norm
was added that can be used to compare the AYS
results on risk, protection, and antisocial behavior to a
more national sample (see the description of the 8State Norm later in this report), and 5) National
Outcome Measures that are needed for measuring the
performance of federally funded programs in Arizona
such as talking to parents about the dangers of
substance use were added.

Washington, Social Development Research Group
have investigated the relationship between risk and
protective factors and youth problem behavior. They
have found, for example, that children who live in
families with high levels of conflict are more likely
to become involved in problem behaviors such as
delinquency and drug use than children who live in
families with low levels of family conflict.
Protective factors exert a positive influence or buffer
against the negative influence of risk, thus reducing the
likelihood that adolescents will engage in problem
behaviors. Protective factors identified through research
include social bonding to family, school, community,
and peers; healthy beliefs and clear standards for
behavior; and individual characteristics. For bonding to
serve as a protective influence, it must occur through
involvement with peers and adults who communicate
healthy values and set clear standards for behavior.

The Risk and Protective Factor Model of
Substance Abuse Prevention
Many states, school districts and local agencies have
adopted the Risk and Protective Factor Model to
guide their prevention efforts. The Risk and
Protective Factor Model of Prevention 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 identified a set of risk factors for
youth problem behaviors. Risk factors are
characteristics of school, community, and family
environments, as well as characteristics of students
and their peer groups that are known to predict
increased likelihood of drug use, delinquency, school
dropout, teen pregnancy, and violent behavior among
youth. Dr. J. David Hawkins, Dr. Richard F.
Catalano, and their colleagues at the University of

T
T

T

T

T
T

T
T

T
T

T

T

Teen Pregnancy

T

School Drop-Out
Violence

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

SOURCE: COMMUNITIES THAT CARE (CTC) PREVENTION MODEL, CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION (CSAP), SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMSHA)

5

Constitutional Factors

Gang Involvement

Favorable Attitudes Toward
Drug Use & Other
Problem Behaviors

Friends Who Use Drugs &
Engage in a Problem Behavior

Alienation & Rebelliousness

Early & Persistent
Antisocial Behavior

Peer / Individual
Early Initiation of Drug Use &
Other Problem Behavior

Lack of Commitment to
School

Academic Failure

School
Favorable Parent Attitudes &
Involvement in the
Problem Behavior

T
T
T
T
T

Family Management Problems

T
T
T
T
T

Family Conflict

Community Disorganization

Low Neighborhood
Attachment

Transitions & Mobility

Availability of Drugs &
Firearms

T
T

Family History of the
Problem Behavior

Delinquency

The chart below shows the links between the 19 risk
factors and the five problem behaviors. The check
marks have been placed in the chart to indicate where
at least two well designed, published research studies
have shown a link between the risk factor and the
problem behavior.

Family

Extreme Economic &
Social Deprivation

Substance Abuse

Community
Community Laws & Norms
Favorable Toward Drug Use,
Firearms & Crime

Risk
Factors

By measuring both risk and protective factors in a
population, prevention programs can be implemented
that are designed to reduce the elevated risk factors and
increase the protective factors. For example, if academic
failure is identified as an elevated risk factor in a
community, then mentoring, tutoring, and increased
opportunities and rewards for classroom participation
can be provided to improve academic performance.

T
T

T
T

T

T

The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership
The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP) was established by Governor Napolitano’s Executive Order
2007-12 in June 2007. Chaired by the Governor’s Chief of Staff, ASAP is composed of representatives from
state government entities, federal entities, and community organizations. ASAP serves as the single statewide
council on substance abuse prevention, enforcement, and treatment.
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
prevention, treatment, and enforcement. Through coordination among its members and their agencies and
organizations ASAP strives to ensure that substance abuse funding is spent in the most efficient and efficacious
manner.
ASAP has identified four strategic focus areas for 2008: 1) child welfare and substance abuse; 2) law enforcement
and drug trafficking; 3) emerging trends and the state’s capacity to respond; and 4) data-driven decisions and
policy development.
There are currently six sub-committees that assist ASAP in meeting their goals:
•

Arizona Underage Drinking Committee - The purpose of this subcommittee is to develop a
statewide underage drinking initiative to prevent and reduce underage drinking in Arizona. Their
activities include state-level infrastructure change to improve cross coordination/collaboration
between state agencies; developing a comprehensive statewide prevention system focused on
preventing underage drinking; and collaborative projects to more effectively utilize resources
and support local efforts.

•

Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The purpose of this work group is to
continuously evaluate data related to substance abuse to move the state system through a datadriven process. This is achieved through the completion of a statewide Substance Abuse
Epidemiology Profile. This profile will be updated every two years, with specific analyses
completed each year.

•

Emerging Issues Sub-Committee of the Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The
purpose of this sub-committee is to provide understanding of emerging substance abuse
consumption and consequence trends in Arizona to state agencies, Boards, Commissions and
Committees, and ASAP and its sub-committees.

•

Methamphetamine Task Force – The purpose of this task force is to bring together
representatives from state agencies, local government, businesses, and community groups to
develop collaborative efforts among treatment, prevention, and law enforcement systems to
assess and address the impact of methamphetamine statewide through information sharing,
resource allocation, service coordination, and the development of statewide policy
recommendations sensitive to the needs of local and tribal communities.

•

Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team – The Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team serves as the
advisory body and policy-making entity for the Arizona Co-Occurring State Incentive Grant.
Team members represent a number of state agencies and community-based organizations.

•

Workforce Development Committee – This committee was formed specifically to identify and
address substance abuse prevention training and technical assistance needs across Arizona. This
will, in turn, help strengthen instruction for prevention professionals and volunteers in
community coalitions.

6

How to Read the Charts in this Report
There are five types of charts presented in this
report: 1) substance use, 2) antisocial behavior and
youth gambling, 3) risk factors, 4) protective factors,
and 5) where youth obtained alcohol. When
available, data from the 2004 and 2006
administrations will be included in the charts. The
actual percentages from the charts are presented in
tables at the end of this report.

•

Substance Use Charts
This report contains information about alcohol,
tobacco, and other drug use (referred to as ATOD
use throughout this report) and other problem
behaviors of students. The bars on each chart
represent the percentage of students in that grade
who reported the behavior. The three sections in the
charts represent different types of problem
behaviors. The definitions of each of the types of
behavior are provided below.
•

Risk and Protective Factor Charts
The risk and protective factor charts show the
percentage of students at high risk and with high
protection for each of the risk and protective factor
scales. The risk and protective factor scales measure
specific aspects of youths’ life experiences that are
predictive of whether they will engage in problem
behaviors. A definition of each risk and protective
factor scale is contained in Table 2. The factors are
grouped into four domains: community, family, school,
and peer/individual.

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.

•

Heavy use includes binge drinking (having five
or more drinks in a row during the two weeks
prior to the survey) and use of one-half a pack
or more of cigarettes per day.

The bars on the risk and protective factor charts,
represent the percentage of students whose answers
reflect significant risk or protection. There are bars for
the last three administrations of the AYS: 2004, 2006,
and 2008. By looking at 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 and
when assessing risk reduction and protective factor
enhancement efforts.

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol Charts

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling
Charts
•

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 animal
races. The chart also shows the percentage of
students who engaged in any gambling behavior
during the past year.

This chart displays data regarding the ways that
students obtained alcohol in the past 30 days. The data
focus on a subgroup of students who indicated at least
one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no
alcohol use are not represented.) It is important to note
that the charts represent a subgroup of users and not
the entire survey population. Additionally, the smaller
the sample, the more dramatic the influence of a
student's responses. For example, 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 legend indicates the sample size for
each grade surveyed to help clarify the value of the data.

Antisocial behavior (ASB) is a measure of
the percentage of students who report any
involvement during the past year with eight
antisocial behaviors: suspended from school,
drunk or high at school, sold illegal drugs,
stolen a vehicle, been arrested, attacked
someone to harm them, carried a handgun,
taken a handgun to school. The chart also
displays any incidents in the past 30 days of
drinking and driving or riding in a car with a
drinking driver.
7

How to Read the Charts in this Report (cont’d)
School Safety Charts

community and a more national sample. The 8-State
Norm value for each risk and protective factor scale
represents the percentage of youth at risk or with
protection for eight states across the country
(Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana,
Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah). In developing the
8-State Norm, the contribution of each of eight
states was proportional to its percentage of the
national population, which helps to make the results
more representative of youth nation-wide. A
comparison between the ATOD use rates from the
8-State norm and those from the national
Monitoring the Future Survey showed the rates to
be very similar, which provides added confidence in
the validity of the 8-State Norm. Brief definitions of
the risk and protective factors scales are provided in
Table 2 following the profile charts. For more
information about risk and protective factors, please
refer to the resources listed on the last page of this
report under Contacts for Prevention.

The school safety 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 or were picked on or
bullied at school. The complete questions and values
for each response option can be seen in Table 11.

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 Survey or
the 8-State Norm (described below). A comparison to
the state-wide and national results provides additional
information for your community in determining the
relative significance of levels of 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.

Drug Free Communities Reports
Table 12 contains the information that is reported
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 8-State Norm
The diamonds on the charts allow a comparison
between the levels of risk and protection in your

Practical Implications of the Assessment
No Child Left Behind
The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities section of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) requires that
schools and communities use six Principles of Effectiveness to guide their decisions and spending on federally
funded prevention and intervention programs. First introduced in 1998 by the Department of Education, the
Principles of Effectiveness outline a data-driven process for ensuring that prevention programs achieve the desired
results. The Principles of Effectiveness stipulate that local prevention programs and activities must:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

be based on a needs assessment using objective data regarding the incidence of drug use and violence,
target specific performance objectives,
be based on scientific research and be proven to reduce violence or drug use,
be based on the analysis of predictor variables such as risk and protective factors,
include meaningful and ongoing parental input in program implementation, and
have periodic evaluations of established performance measures.

The results of the AYS presented in this report can help your school and community comply with the NCLB Act. The
Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior charts provide information related to Principle 1 and the Risk and Protective
Factor charts provide information related to Principle 4. Overall, using the risk and protective factor framework helps
schools meet all of the Principles of Effectiveness, and thereby assists schools in complying with the NCLB Act.
8

Assessment and Planning
School and Community Improvement Using Survey Data
Why Conduct the Arizona
Youth Survey?
Data from the Arizona Youth
Survey can be used to help
schools and communities assess
current conditions and identify
and prioritize local prevention
issues.
Each risk and protective factor
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
county make key decisions
regarding regarding allocation
of resources, how and when to
address specific needs, and
which strategies are most
effective and known to produce
results.

What are the numbers telling you?
Review the charts and data tables presented in this report. Using the
table below, note your findings as you discuss the following questions.
Which 3-5 risk factors are of the greatest concern?
Which 3-5 protective factors are your community’s highest priority?
Which levels of 30-day drug use are of greatest concern?
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 of greatest concern?
º Which behaviors are your students exhibiting the most?
º At which grades do you see unacceptable behavior levels?
•
•
•

How to decide if a rate is “unacceptable.”
Look across the charts – which items stand out as either much
higher or much lower than the others?
• Compare your data with statewide and national data –
differences of five percent between local and other data are probably
significant.
•

Use these data for program and policy development.
Substance use and antisocial behavior data – identify issues, raise
awareness about the problems, and promote school and community
dialogue.
• Risk and protective factor data – identify key objectives that will
help your school or community achieve its prevention goals.
•

Use the resources listed on the last page of this report, Contacts for
Prevention, for ideas about prevention programs that have proven
effective in addressing the risk factors that are high in your community
and improving the protective factors that are low.

MEASURE

Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate
#3
#4
#1
#2

Risk Factors
Protective Factors
Substance Use
Antisocial Behaviors

9

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

10

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Navajo County, Grade 8

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

11

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Navajo County, Grade 10

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

12

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Navajo County, Grade 12

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Navajo County, Grade 8
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

13

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Navajo County, Grade 10
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

14

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Navajo County, Grade 12
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

15

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Navajo County, Grade 8

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

16

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Navajo County, Grade 8
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

17

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Navajo County, Grade 10

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

18

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Navajo County, Grade 10
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

19

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Navajo County, Grade 12

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

20

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Navajo County, Grade 12
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

21

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol

WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL*
2008 Navajo County Student Survey, Grades 8, 10 & 12
If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)
100
90
80
70

Percentages (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Got it some

other way

Took it from a
store or someone

else's home

County 2008, Grade 12
Sample: 179 students**

Took it from home

Got at a party

County 2008, Grade 10
Sample: 184 students**

Someone under
21 years

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

County 2008, Grade 8
Sample: 96 students**

State 2008

* Prior to 2008, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained alcohol. Also, because not all eight states ask where youth obtained alcohol, no 8-State value is reported.
** Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case of smaller sample sizes,
caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

22

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Navajo County, Grade 8
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

23

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Navajo County, Grade 10
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

24

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Navajo County, Grade 12
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

25

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles
Low Neighborhood Attachment

Community Domain Risk Factors
Low neighborhood bonding is related to higher levels of 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.

Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

Community Domain Protective Factors
When opportunities are available in a community for positive participation, children are less likely to
engage in substance use and other problem behaviors.

Rewards for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for positive participation in activities helps youth bond to the community, thus lowering their risk
for substance use.

Poor Family Management

Family Domain Risk Factors
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.

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.

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.

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 Attachment

Family Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

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.

Academic Failure

Low Commitment to School

School Domain Risk Factors
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.
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.

26

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles (cont'd)
Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

School Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

Rebelliousness

Peer-Individual Risk Factors
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.

Early Initiation of Antisocial
Behavior and Drug Use

Early onset of drug use predicts the 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.

Attitudes Favorable Toward
Antisocial Behavior and Drug
Use

During the elementary school years, most children express anti-drug, anti-crime, and pro-social attitudes
and have 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Belief in the Moral Order

Peer-Individual Protective Factors
Young people who have a belief in what is “right” or “wrong” are less likely to use drugs.

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.

Prosocial Involvement

Participation in positive school and community activities helps provide protection for youth.

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.

27

Data Tables
Table 3. 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

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

42.9

49.7

45.9

47.8

65.0

61.8

61.2

66.2

75.1

61.5

72.9

74.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

45.6

46.5

33.5

25.9

57.4

51.7

49.1

39.9

70.1

50.3

57.1

50.8

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

18.0

18.4

12.1

7.1

19.1

22.6

19.5

12.9

28.2

25.9

26.5

17.7

Marijuana

used marijuana?

27.0

31.2

26.7

16.2

45.7

43.9

42.5

32.5

60.9

44.7

55.7

43.1

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

4.3

4.1

2.3

1.9

7.1

4.3

4.1

5.2

9.7

6.3

5.6

7.9

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

6.2

4.8

2.5

2.7

12.2

11.5

9.2

6.8

16.4

15.2

12.7

11.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

13.2

14.4

13.2

14.3

12.9

13.8

13.3

12.6

12.0

11.6

7.9

9.2

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

5.2

1.3

1.2

n/a

10.6

6.3

2.4

n/a

16.5

7.7

4.0

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

2.8

1.1

0.6

1.0

2.6

2.0

1.7

2.0

1.4

2.9

1.9

3.1

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

3.5

2.8

1.5

2.2

6.6

3.4

4.0

4.9

4.9

5.1

3.8

7.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

2.4

1.0

1.7

n/a

1.6

2.3

2.3

n/a

3.1

2.7

2.4

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

13.4

12.2

n/a

n/a

22.3

20.5

n/a

n/a

29.4

24.6

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

4.8

n/a

n/a

n/a

11.6

n/a

n/a

n/a

14.7

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

4.4

4.6

3.8

n/a

5.0

5.8

7.6

n/a

7.8

5.6

7.9

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

13.7

11.5

9.0

8.3

9.6

12.9

10.6

12.0

15.6

13.1

10.0

13.2

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of 2008 prescription stimulant, sedative
and pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

14.1

18.4

17.1

n/a

20.5

26.3

25.7

n/a

22.8

32.1

28.7

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

7.7

9.7

n/a

n/a

12.8

12.9

n/a

n/a

15.0

13.4

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

28

Data Tables
Table 4. 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 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

19.8

26.6

24.0

23.2

35.1

33.7

32.3

37.7

40.9

30.4

39.3

46.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

17.7

20.4

13.3

8.7

23.8

20.4

18.9

16.6

29.6

18.3

23.9

23.9

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

6.1

5.3

3.7

2.6

6.4

7.8

7.3

4.6

7.9

6.5

10.5

6.8

Marijuana

used marijuana?

14.8

17.6

13.5

7.6

21.7

20.8

20.5

15.1

24.9

17.1

23.0

18.7

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

3.0

1.7

0.4

0.8

3.8

2.2

2.0

1.9

2.5

0.3

1.5

2.4

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

3.0

2.5

0.8

1.0

4.4

3.3

3.4

2.2

3.9

2.1

3.3

3.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

5.5

5.7

4.6

5.4

2.4

3.1

2.7

3.0

1.4

2.1

1.5

1.6

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

2.6

0.4

0.4

n/a

3.7

1.2

0.6

n/a

2.5

0.8

0.8

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

1.1

0.2

0.0

0.4

0.0

0.2

0.8

0.7

0.2

0.0

0.8

1.0

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

1.4

1.1

0.6

0.8

0.6

1.4

1.5

1.5

1.2

0.0

0.6

2.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

0.6

0.4

0.7

n/a

0.7

1.2

1.0

n/a

0.3

1.3

1.0

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

6.5

6.0

n/a

n/a

10.7

9.4

n/a

n/a

13.5

10.5

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

1.8

n/a

n/a

n/a

4.4

n/a

n/a

n/a

6.1

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

1.3

2.1

1.6

n/a

2.7

1.8

2.9

n/a

2.1

2.3

2.1

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

5.5

5.5

4.0

3.4

4.2

4.5

4.0

4.5

5.8

3.8

4.6

5.0

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of prescription stimulant, sedative and
pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

6.4

9.6

8.6

n/a

7.7

12.5

12.2

n/a

8.6

16.1

13.1

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

4.2

5.6

n/a

n/a

6.0

6.4

n/a

n/a

6.6

5.9

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

29

Data Tables
z

Table 5. Percentage of Students Reporting Heavy ATOD Use
Grade 8

Binge Drinking

1/2 Pack (or
more) of
Cigarettes/Day

How many times have you
had 5 or more alcoholic
drinks in a row in the
past 2 weeks?
During the past 30 days, how many
cigarettes did you smoke per day?
(11 to 20 cigarettes, More than 20
cigarettes)

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

17.7

15.7

15.8

0.9

1.4

1.1

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

13.1

25.2

22.4

22.7

0.7

0.8

2.3

1.6

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

22.4

26.6

19.4

25.9

30.2

2.1

4.0

1.7

2.5

4.2

Table 6. Percentage of Students Reporting Antisocial Behavior
How many times in the past year
(12 months) have you:
(One or more times)
Suspended from School
Drunk or High at School
Sold Illegal Drugs
Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle
Been Arrested
Attacked Someone with the Idea
of Seriously Hurting Them
Carried a Handgun
Carried a Handgun to School
During the past 30 days, how many
times did you:
(One or more times)

Grade 8

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

15.4

23.5

16.9

20.2

21.6

20.1

8.2

6.0

5.0

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

20.2

13.8

17.1

19.8

12.0

32.3

32.4

29.9

14.6

14.3

10.9

13.4

10.2

20.5

32.4

25.1

29.5

5.4

4.6

10.9

7.4

22.2

10.9

9.8

12.1

8.4

12.3

4.6

1.7

3.6

4.9

10.4

4.9

5.5

3.7

3.0

4.3

3.4

10.2

13.2

7.5

7.5

2.7

11.3

10.0

11.0

9.2

11.3

9.2

11.8

8.7

16.1

18.8

15.6

18.1

18.7

15.2

15.6

16.1

17.5

11.1

15.2

12.9

8.6

9.5

1.6

8.7

7.7

7.9

8.8

8.6

7.2

7.9

8.8

8.7

8.1

1.4
0.4
Grade 8

1.2

1.0

1.3
1.4
Grade 10

1.3

1.4

1.2
0.6
Grade 12

1.4

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

DRIVE a car or other vehicle when you had
been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

9.5

8.3

RIDE in a car or other vehicle driven by
someone who had been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

30.2

30.5

State
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

5.6

n/a

8.7

9.6

29.1

n/a

30.5

27.3

* These categories were not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

30

State
2008

State
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

7.9

n/a

12.4

14.8

16.1

29.1

n/a

22.8

31.9

29.7

Data Tables
Table 7. Percentage of Students Gambling in the Past Year
How often have you done the following for money,
possessions, or anything of value:
County
2004
(At least once in the past 12 months or more)
Any Gambling
Played a slot machine, poker machine
or other gambling machine?
Played the lottery or scratch-off tickets?
Bet on sports?*
Played cards?
Bought a raffle ticket?
Played bingo?
Gambled on the Internet?
Played a dice game?*
Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?*
Bet on a horse or other animal race?*
Table 8. Percentage of Students Reporting Protection

Grade 8
County
2008

n/a

55.2

74.1

n/a

2.7

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

69.1

n/a

51.8

64.8

65.9

n/a

41.5

64.4

60.6

4.0

6.4

n/a

2.5

4.2

6.1

n/a

2.6

4.0

5.8

29.1
n/a
21.7
n/a
24.5
5.1
n/a

20.6
34.2
44.0
30.8
31.6
5.9
31.7

24.8
31.8
43.7
20.4
32.6
6.3
31.5

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

18.5
n/a
20.7
n/a
12.6
4.1
n/a

15.9
29.1
39.3
24.9
22.9
4.1
26.1

21.8
30.2
43.7
20.7
23.2
5.1
25.1

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

17.7
n/a
14.9
n/a
12.3
2.3
n/a

17.8
34.4
40.9
26.8
21.9
4.4
25.2

19.0
25.6
40.6
18.9
14.7
4.7
19.2

n/a

26.8

31.5

32.7

n/a

20.3

25.4

31.3

n/a

15.1

29.2

27.0

n/a

n/a

6.2

6.4

n/a

n/a

3.5

5.8

n/a

n/a

3.6

5.1

Grade 8

Protective Factor
Community Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Domain
Family Attachment
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
School Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer-Individual Domain
Belief in the Moral Order
Interaction with Prosocial Peers*
Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Total Protection
Students with High Protection**

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2006

State
2008

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

45.8
42.1

42.4
40.4

51.3
44.0

54.3
60.7
66.0

47.2
60.9
65.1

61.2
51.0

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

39.3
31.3

37.8
52.2

40.4
48.0

41.2
48.8

54.1
61.8
67.1

51.5
59.7
61.4

47.0
53.3
57.1

46.4
50.9
60.6

64.8
56.4

67.0
60.3

60.3
51.2

61.1
55.2

60.0
49.3
45.4
61.8

58.8
53.0
44.3
65.2

68.6
58.8
52.5
66.4

59.4
53.1
39.0
59.4

50.1

40.7

59.5

43.8

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

37.1
35.4

40.8
55.1

45.0
57.0

43.2
45.4

36.1
33.2

47.2
55.1
57.5

46.1
54.0
55.1

62.3
57.2
63.4

63.1
60.0
62.3

57.1
57.6
61.2

56.2
55.2
55.8

63.1
66.2

61.6
58.7

62.4
59.8

61.9
45.2

65.5
51.0

65.9
52.7

64.3
45.4

65.3
53.2
42.6
60.7

68.0
60.0
38.9
60.8

71.8
61.1
40.6
64.4

66.5
55.3
41.2
59.7

55.4
58.6
42.0
53.5

59.7
61.2
36.6
57.3

53.4
60.6
34.3
56.1

53.6
52.5
36.4
52.2

52.3

54.4

51.3

46.7

52.3

55.1

52.2

43.3

*Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.
**High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.

31

State
2008

State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 9. Percentage of Students Reporting Risk
Grade 8
Risk Factor
Community Domain
Low Neighborhood Attachment
Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use
Perceived Availability of Drugs
Perceived Availability of Handguns
Family Domain
Poor Family Management
Family Conflict
Family History of Antisocial Behavior
Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use
School Domain
Academic Failure
Low Commitment to School
Peer-Individual Domain
Rebelliousness
Early Initiation of ASB
Early Initiation of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use
Perceived Risk of Drug Use
Interaction with Antisocial Peers
Friend's Use of Drugs
Rewards for ASB
Gang Involvement
Total Risk
Students at High Risk*

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

41.5
33.1
39.4
33.3

36.3
38.4
36.0
33.9

40.3
37.7
35.5
38.5

43.6
48.5
53.7
39.1
18.6

45.9
47.2
51.9
48.4
29.6

53.6
37.0

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

38.5
36.6
38.2
37.8

52.1
49.2
49.2
31.0

46.0
51.2
48.8
32.7

48.6
41.5
43.7
28.7

45.8
53.3
48.3
47.3
27.6

45.5
53.5
40.3
49.3
26.8

42.2
39.3
57.9
47.0
34.9

39.8
36.1
53.3
46.5
32.3

52.4
38.4

47.6
38.8

47.3
41.0

57.1
37.6

31.8
37.4
42.4
47.6
30.9
42.8
58.6
44.7
46.5
26.1

41.4
45.6
45.0
45.1
32.9
46.1
65.1
46.4
46.7
26.5

38.4
34.9
37.1
41.3
32.2
47.1
54.4
44.1
41.0
22.0

43.1
39.4
30.3
44.6
29.1
44.5
58.2
39.4
45.6
26.9

39.4

37.4

39.3

38.7

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

46.2
42.1
49.6
26.7

52.5
39.3
49.3
35.2

53.3
30.0
44.9
44.2

55.5
38.3
47.9
36.0

51.0
36.3
52.2
33.1

40.5
39.8
52.9
50.2
34.9

42.8
42.8
41.1
53.4
41.1

35.5
34.6
53.3
41.9
33.9

37.2
35.3
45.7
39.6
26.3

39.0
35.0
49.7
50.1
34.5

44.3
38.3
37.3
50.2
41.2

48.3
34.5

56.6
40.1

49.5
43.7

47.3
33.3

45.4
36.3

48.9
36.3

44.4
45.6

42.4
41.7
48.3
52.1
39.8
37.2
63.1
51.0
38.0
31.8

40.6
44.5
42.6
49.4
31.6
34.6
59.1
46.0
41.3
21.8

45.6
45.6
41.2
46.9
33.1
34.6
63.6
46.2
39.8
26.6

46.8
42.0
32.7
50.7
37.4
42.3
57.3
41.9
44.0
23.2

34.5
47.4
53.2
48.0
33.1
37.8
63.3
40.4
50.9
29.3

42.2
45.3
37.7
37.1
25.7
27.7
53.0
35.8
45.4
16.7

47.4
46.7
41.2
47.2
28.4
37.4
61.0
41.0
51.2
17.7

44.0
41.2
33.1
46.9
36.3
46.5
53.2
37.3
54.6
16.8

43.4

36.3

39.3

37.5

36.5

32.4

39.0

35.7

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors)

32

Grade 12
State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 10. Where Youth Obtained Alcohol
Grade 8

If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)

County
2008

Sample size*
I bought it in a store such as a liquor store, convenience store,
supermarket, discount store, or gas station
I bought it at a restaurant, bar, or club
I bought it at a public event such as a concert or sporting event

Grade 10

State
2008

County
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2008

State
2008

96

4,418

184

4,872

179

5,065

4.2

5.0

11.4

6.9

5.6

12.3

1.0
5.2

3.0
2.9

2.7
2.7

3.0
2.9

1.1
2.8

7.0
3.9

I gave someone else money to buy it for me

27.1

21.4

49.5

34.4

48.6

43.7

My parent or guardian gave it to me
Another family member who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone not related to me who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone under the age of 21 gave it to me
I got it at a party
I took it from home
I took it from a store or someone else's home
I got it some other way

17.7
21.9
24.0
32.3
29.2
28.1
8.3

18.7
19.7
19.2
23.8
41.5
31.4
11.7

5.4
25.0
36.4
23.4
41.3
12.0
9.2

14.8
18.7
28.7
24.8
53.1
23.2
11.3

8.4
22.9
40.8
17.9
44.7
8.9
6.7

13.0
18.2
39.5
22.0
57.6
13.8
8.0

40.6

28.7

38.6

23.6

33.5

17.9

* Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case
of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

33

Data Tables
Table 11. Percentage of Students Reporting School Safety Issues
Grade 8
County
2004

Question

County
2006

Grade 10

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

Grade 12

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
has someone threatened or injured you with a 4-5 times
weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school 6-7 times
property?
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

83.4
7.5
5.2
1.6
0.2
0.2
0.5
1.4

85.0
7.4
4.3
1.2
0.6
0.4
0.2
1.0

88.0
5.2
4.4
0.8
0.2
0.0
0.2
1.2

87.1
6.6
3.5
1.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.9

89.1
4.7
3.2
0.8
0.4
0.4
0.0
1.4

86.5
7.9
2.7
1.2
0.2
0.2
0.0
1.2

87.4
5.2
3.9
1.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
1.5

88.4
5.9
3.0
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.1

88.8
5.3
4.1
0.5
0.5
0.7
0.0
0.2

90.8
3.3
3.1
0.3
0.6
0.6
0.0
1.4

92.6
4.2
1.7
0.8
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.4

92.4
3.9
2.0
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.7

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
4-5 times
were you in a physical fight on school property? 6-7 times
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

69.5
16.0
9.0
2.3
0.9
0.9
0.0
1.4

70.4
13.8
9.4
2.9
1.3
0.6
0.2
1.3

73.4
15.2
8.1
1.7
0.8
0.0
0.2
0.6

76.5
12.9
6.9
1.7
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.7

82.4
9.7
5.3
1.8
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.4

84.6
10.1
2.9
1.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.6

84.6
8.5
4.4
0.5
0.6
0.0
0.2
1.4

85.2
8.8
3.9
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.7

89.2
6.4
3.0
0.7
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.5

89.4
6.2
2.0
1.1
0.3
0.0
0.6
0.6

90.3
4.6
2.1
1.3
0.6
0.4
0.0
0.8

91.5
5.0
2.1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how often have you
4-5 times
been picked on or bullied by a student ON
6-7 times
SCHOOL PROPERTY?*
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

60.2
18.7

59.4
13.2
11.5
4.3
1.9
1.2
0.8
7.7

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

76.4
11.1

3.1

62.4
11.9
12.6
5.2
0.6
1.4
0.2
5.8

69.1
10.3
9.6
3.2
1.4
1.1
0.6
4.6

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

83.4
8.2

5.8

56.3
14.8
13.9
5.4
2.1
2.5
0.4
4.6

2.8

82.6
6.7
5.2
1.5
0.6
0.8
0.4
2.3

82.3
6.6
5.7
1.5
0.8
0.5
0.3
2.4

86.7
7.1
2.7
2.1
1.3

89.8
5.4
2.7
0.8
1.2

89.9
5.8
2.7
0.6
1.0

89.7
4.8
3.0
0.8
1.8

92.6
3.7
2.7
0.0
1.0

89.4
4.8
2.6
0.9
2.3

91.1
5.1
2.2
0.6
1.0

93.3
2.8
2.5
0.7
0.7

96.9
1.4
0.8
0.0
0.8

92.7
1.9
3.2
0.8
1.3

93.8
3.3
1.8
0.4
0.7

91.4
2.1
1.9
0.4
4.2

94.4
1.5
1.1
0.5
2.6

0 days

During the past 30 days, on how many days did
1 day
you not go to school because you felt you would
2-3 days
be unsafe at school or on your way to or from
4-5 days
school?

6 or more days

84.6
7.3
5.0
1.1
2.0

15.3

0 days

9.4

5.6

90.6
92.0
93.9
93.9
92.1
89.3
91.8
93.8
90.6
88.1
4.8
2.7
2.7
3.1
3.4
2.7
2.1
2.2
2.1
2.0
1.4
1.9
1.5
1.3
1.6
2.5
2.6
1.2
1.6
2.3
0.7
0.6
0.2
0.5
0.2
1.0
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.9
6 or more days
2.5
2.7
1.7
1.2
2.8
4.5
3.0
2.2
5.3
6.8
* In 2006 the choices for this question were Never , Once , Several Times and Very Often. This category was not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

During the past 30 days, on how many days did 1 day
you carry a weapon such as a gun, knife, or
2-3 days
club ON SCHOOL PROPERTY?
4-5 days

34

Data Tables
Table 12. Drug Free Communities Report*
County 2008
Outcome

Definition

Substance

Grade 8

Grade 10

Grade 12

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

Perception of Risk
(People are at Moderate or Great Risk
of harming themselves if they... )

Perception of Parent Disapproval
(Parents feel it would be Wrong or
Very Wrong to... )

Perception of Peer Disapproval
(I think it is Wrong or Very Wrong for
someone my age to...)

Past 30-Day Use

Female†

Sample Percent

Sample

drink 1 or two drinks nearly every day

Alcohol

62.3

467

69.5

649

70.2

514

63.9

756

70.8

855

smoke 1 or more packs or cigarettes
per day

Cigarettes

78.7

470

83.4

650

88.8

517

82.1

759

85.1

859

smoke marijuana regularly

Marijuana

72.6

456

77.4

636

73.3

506

71.2

743

77.8

836

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

90.5

444

92.2

616

87.4

501

89.2

723

91.3

818

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

92.6

445

91.8

619

83.3

502

85.1

726

92.8

820

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

91.4

440

94.1

613

90.9

496

91.0

715

93.7

815

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

80.6

480

75.0

663

69.6

529

73.1

785

76.4

867

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

82.0

478

75.3

664

68.8

529

73.2

785

76.6

866

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

81.3

476

75.7

666

73.3

528

75.2

782

77.5

868

Alcohol

24.0

479

32.3

657

39.3

522

32.2

771

32.3

867

at least one use in the Past 30 Days

Cigarettes

13.3

474

18.9

647

23.9

518

22.7

763

15.6

857

13.5

475

20.5

648

23.0

518

19.3

762

19.3

859

Sample Percent

Sample

Marijuana

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

had more than a sip or two of beer,
wine or hard liquor?
Average Age of Onset**
(How old were you when you first…)

Male†

Sample Percent

smoked a cigarette, even just a puff?

smoked marijuana?

Alcohol
Average age:
Cigarettes
Average age:
Marijuana
Average age:

48.2

485

64.7

11.9 years
35.4

483

11.5 years
27.7

484

11.7 years

672

73.0

13 years
52.0

667

12.2 years
44.7

673

12.7 years

Sample Percent

526
14 years

59.4

529

12.9 years
58.3

532

13.9 years

57.3

789

12.9 years
50.3

789

12.2 years
44.1

791

12.8 years

67.6

874

13.4 years
49.3

870

12.5 years
44.6

878

13.2 years

* The “Sample” column represents the sample size (the number of youth who answered the question). The "Percent" column represents the percentage of youth in the sample answering the question as defined.
** For Average Age of Onset, “Sample” represents the number of youth who answered the question (including students responding that they never used). 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.

† 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.

35

Appendix
Appendix - Comparability of survey administratons
Issue
Drug Category

2004 AYS
On how many occasions (if any) have you:

2006 AYS

2008 AYS

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Notes regarding changes

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Hallucinogens

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the
past 30 days?

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the past
30 days?

Used LSD or other hallucinogens during the
past 30 days?

Substituted "hallucinogens" for "psychedelics" in 2008.
Comparable across all years.

Methamphetamines

Not applicable, no methamphetamine-specific
item on 2004 AYS

Used methamphetamines (meth, speed, crank,
crystal meth)?

Used methamphetamines (meth, crystal,
crank)?

2006 and 2008 provide slightly different examples, but
are cautiously comparable.

Prescription
stimulants

Used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”,
“crystal”, “crank”) without a doctor telling you
to take them?

Used stimulants, other than methamphetamines
(such as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin,
Adderal, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling
you to take them?

2004 is not comparable to any other years, data are
presented for archival interest. 2006 and 2008 data are
cautiously comparable.

Prescription
sedatives

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such
as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping
pills)?

2008 AYS added descriptor "prescription" and removed
qualifier "without a doctor telling you to take them." 2008
data are cautiously comparable with other years.

Ecstasy

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2008 AYS used "ecstasy" as the primary descriptor and
moved "MDMA" to examples. Comparable across years.

Prescription
drugs

Not applicable, no prescription drugs item on
2004 AYS

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills),
stimulants, other than methamphetamines (such
as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine) or
other prescription drugs (such as Oxycontin)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes)

Used prescription stimulants (Ritalin,
Adderall, or Dexedrine), sedatives
(tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax,
barbiturates, or sleeping pills) or pain relievers
(Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes )

In 2006, responses to the stimulant, sedative and other
prescription drug questions were calculated as one
measure. (2006 had no prescription pain reliever item.) In
2008, responses to the stimulant, sedative and
prescription pain reliever questions were calculated as
one measure. (2008 had no standalone prescription drug
item.) 2006 and 2008 data are cautiously comparable.
(Note that composite 2006 data will not match past
reports' prescription drugs category.)

Gambling
Category

Not applicable, no gambling items
on 2004 AYS

How often during the past 12 months
have you:

How often have you done the following for
money, possessions, or anything of value:

Sports betting

n/a

Bet on team sports?

Bet on sports?

Not comparable across years.

Race betting

n/a

Bet money on horse races?

Bet on a horse race or other animal race?

Not comparable across years.

Dice

n/a

Bet on dice games such as craps?

Played a dice game?

Not comparable across years.

Games of skill

n/a

Bet on games of personal skill such as pool,
darts, or bowling?

Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?

Comparable across years.

Protective Scale:
Peer-Individual
Interaction with
Prosocial Peers

Think of your four best friends (the friends you feel closest to). In the past year (12 months), how many of your best friends have:
(Scale is calculated based on the average response [0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 friends] to the following questions)
...participated in clubs, organizations and activities at school? ...made the commitment to stay drug-free?
...tried to do well in school? ...liked school? ...regularly attended religious services?(removed in 2008)

36

Regularly attended religious services was removed from
2008 AYS. 2004 and 2006 have been recalculated to
match 2008 AYS and are now comparable across all
years. Due to this recalculation, current reports may differ
slightly from past reports.

Contacts for Prevention
Arizona Department of Education
Student Services Division
www.ade.az.gov

Regional Prevention Contacts
Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, and Santa Cruz
Counties
Bill Burnett
Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)
(520) 618-8807

Arizona Department of Health Services
Division of Behavioral Health Services
Lisa Shumaker
(602) 364-4594
www.azdhs.gov/bhs/index.htm

Gila, La Paz, Pinal, and Yuma Counties
Linda Weinberg
Cenpatico Behavioral Health of Arizona
(866) 495-6738

Arizona Prevention Resource Center
(800) 432-2772
www.azprevention.org

Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai
Counties
Petrice Post
Northern Arizona Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(NARBHA)
(928) 214-2177

Center for Violence Prevention and Community
Safety
Charles Katz
(602) 543-6618
charles.katz@asu.edu
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)
http://prevention.samhsa.gov

Maricopa County
Juan Aristizabal
Magellan
(602) 797-8256

Governor’s Office of Children, Youth, and
Families
(602) 542-4043
http://www.governor.state.az.us/cyf/index.html

Gila River Indian Community
Joan Grey
Gila River Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(602) 528-7136

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities
U.S. Department of Education
www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS

Pasqua Yaqui Tribe
Centered Spirit Program
Jill Fabian
(520) 879-6067

Arizona Department of Gaming's Office of
Problem Gambling
Elise Mikkelsen
(602) 266-8299 ext. 351
www.problemgambling.az.gov

Navajo Nation
Department of Behavioral Health Services
(928) 871-6235

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMSHA)
www.samhsa.gov

White Mountain Apache Tribe
Apache Behavioral Health Services
(928) 338-4811

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/

Colorado River Indian Tribes
(928) 669-6577

Western Regional Center for the Application of
Prevention Technologies (CAPT)
www.westcapt.org

Other State and National Contacts:
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
Michelle Neitch/ Phillip Stevenson
(602) 364-1173/(602) 364-1157
www.azcjc.gov

Bach Harrison, L.L.C.
R. Steven Harrison, Ph.D.
(801) 359-2064
www.bach-harrison.com

37

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Pima County

REPORT PROVIDED BY:

Arizona Criminal Justice Commission

1

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Shining Light on Arizona Youth
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:
Arizona Department of Gaming’s Office of Problem Gambling
Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission
Arizona Parent’s Commission on Drug Education and Prevention
Governor’s Division for Substance Abuse Policy
Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Tobacco Education and Prevention Program,
Arizona Department of Health Services

2

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 2008 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:
Jean Ajamie, Arizona Department of Education
Michelle Anderson, Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections
Steve Ballance, Maricopa County
Carisa Dwyer, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Charles Katz, Arizona State University
Dr. Manuel Medina, TERROS, Inc.
Kim O’Connor, Governor’s Office for
Children, Youth, and Families
Holly Orozco, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Catherine Osborn, Arizona Department of Education
Richard Porter, Arizona Department of Health Services
Gowri Shetty, Arizona Department of Health Services
Lisa Shumaker, Arizona Department of Health Services
Wendy Wolfersteig, Arizona State University
Nicole Yancey Johnson, Arizona Early Childhood Development
and Health Board
Governor’s Youth Commission

Additionally, the success of the 2008 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.

3

Introduction
CONTENTS:

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Summary for
Pima County

Introduction
The Risk and Protective
Factor Model of
Prevention
The Arizona Substance
Abuse Partnership
How to Read the Charts

This report summarizes some of the
findings from the 2008 Arizona Youth
Survey (AYS) administered to 8th, 10th
and 12th grade students during the
spring of 2008. The results for your
county are presented along with
comparisons to 2004 and 2006 survey
results where applicable, as well as to
the overall results for the state. 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.

Practical Implications of
the Assessment
Assessment and
Planning
Data Charts:
• Substance Use

All schools in Arizona are eligible to
participate in the survey, and
recruitment efforts were successful in
obtaining participation by schools in all
of the 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.

•

Antisocial Behavior
and Gambling

•

Risk & Protective
Factor Profiles
Where Youth
Obtained Alcohol
School Safety

•
•

Risk and Protective
Factor Scale Definitions
Data Tables
Contacts for Prevention
Appendix

Table 1 contains the characteristics of
the students who completed the survey

Table 1. Characteristics of Participants
Student Totals
County 2004

Total Students

Number

County 2006

Percent

Number

County 2008

Percent

Number

State 2008

Percent

Number

Percent

5,430

100

7,600

100

4,961

100

54,734

100

8

2,250

41.4

2,563

33.7

1,515

30.5

25,695

46.9

10

1,797

33.1

2,686

35.3

1,828

36.8

16,089

29.4

12

1,383

25.5

2,351

30.9

1,618

32.6

12,950

23.7

Male

2,489

46.5

3,514

47.6

2,388

49.1

26,213

48.8

Female

2,864

53.5

3,862

52.4

2,472

50.9

27,514

51.2

Native American

104

1.9

227

3.1

396

6.4

4,812

7.4

African American

176

3.3

337

4.6

400

6.5

3,915

6.0

Hispanic

2,072

38.8

3,521

48.1

2,462

40.0

21,525

32.9

White

2,554

47.9

2,696

36.8

2,587

42.1

31,887

48.8

Asian

114

2.1

184

2.5

208

3.4

2,117

3.2

39

0.7

51

0.7

99

1.6

1,115

1.7

Grade

Gender

Ethnicity*

Pacific Islander

*In 2008, students could mark more than one ethnic category and the 'other' category was removed.

4

from your county and the state.
Because not every student answered all
of the questions, the number of
students in the gender and ethnicity
categories often will be less than the
total number of students.
Whenever data is obtained from a
sample of students instead of the entire
population, it is important to recognize
the strengths and weaknesses of the
data. One quick and 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 participated in the
survey and those that did not.
Changes to the AYS
Survey for 2008
In an effort to shorten the AYS and
make it more responsive to local
priorities, the following changes were
made for 2008: 1) some of the
substance use questions were refined
and the use of over-the-counter drugs
was added, 2) some risk and protective
factor scales were removed where the
data could easily be obtained from
other sources or the scales measured
similar constructs (scales removed are

Risk and Protective Factors
Transitions and Mobility, Community
Disorganization, Intention to Use Drugs, and Social
Skills), 3) questions about where students get the
alcohol they drink were added, 4) an 8-State Norm
was added that can be used to compare the AYS
results on risk, protection, and antisocial behavior to a
more national sample (see the description of the 8State Norm later in this report), and 5) National
Outcome Measures that are needed for measuring the
performance of federally funded programs in Arizona
such as talking to parents about the dangers of
substance use were added.

Washington, Social Development Research Group
have investigated the relationship between risk and
protective factors and youth problem behavior. They
have found, for example, that children who live in
families with high levels of conflict are more likely
to become involved in problem behaviors such as
delinquency and drug use than children who live in
families with low levels of family conflict.
Protective factors exert a positive influence or buffer
against the negative influence of risk, thus reducing the
likelihood that adolescents will engage in problem
behaviors. Protective factors identified through research
include social bonding to family, school, community,
and peers; healthy beliefs and clear standards for
behavior; and individual characteristics. For bonding to
serve as a protective influence, it must occur through
involvement with peers and adults who communicate
healthy values and set clear standards for behavior.

The Risk and Protective Factor Model of
Substance Abuse Prevention
Many states, school districts and local agencies have
adopted the Risk and Protective Factor Model to
guide their prevention efforts. The Risk and
Protective Factor Model of Prevention 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 identified a set of risk factors for
youth problem behaviors. Risk factors are
characteristics of school, community, and family
environments, as well as characteristics of students
and their peer groups that are known to predict
increased likelihood of drug use, delinquency, school
dropout, teen pregnancy, and violent behavior among
youth. Dr. J. David Hawkins, Dr. Richard F.
Catalano, and their colleagues at the University of

T
T

T

T

T
T

T
T

T
T

T

T

Teen Pregnancy

T

School Drop-Out
Violence

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

SOURCE: COMMUNITIES THAT CARE (CTC) PREVENTION MODEL, CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION (CSAP), SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMSHA)

5

Constitutional Factors

Gang Involvement

Favorable Attitudes Toward
Drug Use & Other
Problem Behaviors

Friends Who Use Drugs &
Engage in a Problem Behavior

Alienation & Rebelliousness

Early & Persistent
Antisocial Behavior

Peer / Individual
Early Initiation of Drug Use &
Other Problem Behavior

Lack of Commitment to
School

Academic Failure

School
Favorable Parent Attitudes &
Involvement in the
Problem Behavior

T
T
T
T
T

Family Management Problems

T
T
T
T
T

Family Conflict

Community Disorganization

Low Neighborhood
Attachment

Transitions & Mobility

Availability of Drugs &
Firearms

T
T

Family History of the
Problem Behavior

Delinquency

The chart below shows the links between the 19 risk
factors and the five problem behaviors. The check
marks have been placed in the chart to indicate where
at least two well designed, published research studies
have shown a link between the risk factor and the
problem behavior.

Family

Extreme Economic &
Social Deprivation

Substance Abuse

Community
Community Laws & Norms
Favorable Toward Drug Use,
Firearms & Crime

Risk
Factors

By measuring both risk and protective factors in a
population, prevention programs can be implemented
that are designed to reduce the elevated risk factors and
increase the protective factors. For example, if academic
failure is identified as an elevated risk factor in a
community, then mentoring, tutoring, and increased
opportunities and rewards for classroom participation
can be provided to improve academic performance.

T
T

T
T

T

T

The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership
The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP) was established by Governor Napolitano’s Executive Order
2007-12 in June 2007. Chaired by the Governor’s Chief of Staff, ASAP is composed of representatives from
state government entities, federal entities, and community organizations. ASAP serves as the single statewide
council on substance abuse prevention, enforcement, and treatment.
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
prevention, treatment, and enforcement. Through coordination among its members and their agencies and
organizations ASAP strives to ensure that substance abuse funding is spent in the most efficient and efficacious
manner.
ASAP has identified four strategic focus areas for 2008: 1) child welfare and substance abuse; 2) law enforcement
and drug trafficking; 3) emerging trends and the state’s capacity to respond; and 4) data-driven decisions and
policy development.
There are currently six sub-committees that assist ASAP in meeting their goals:
•

Arizona Underage Drinking Committee - The purpose of this subcommittee is to develop a
statewide underage drinking initiative to prevent and reduce underage drinking in Arizona. Their
activities include state-level infrastructure change to improve cross coordination/collaboration
between state agencies; developing a comprehensive statewide prevention system focused on
preventing underage drinking; and collaborative projects to more effectively utilize resources
and support local efforts.

•

Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The purpose of this work group is to
continuously evaluate data related to substance abuse to move the state system through a datadriven process. This is achieved through the completion of a statewide Substance Abuse
Epidemiology Profile. This profile will be updated every two years, with specific analyses
completed each year.

•

Emerging Issues Sub-Committee of the Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The
purpose of this sub-committee is to provide understanding of emerging substance abuse
consumption and consequence trends in Arizona to state agencies, Boards, Commissions and
Committees, and ASAP and its sub-committees.

•

Methamphetamine Task Force – The purpose of this task force is to bring together
representatives from state agencies, local government, businesses, and community groups to
develop collaborative efforts among treatment, prevention, and law enforcement systems to
assess and address the impact of methamphetamine statewide through information sharing,
resource allocation, service coordination, and the development of statewide policy
recommendations sensitive to the needs of local and tribal communities.

•

Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team – The Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team serves as the
advisory body and policy-making entity for the Arizona Co-Occurring State Incentive Grant.
Team members represent a number of state agencies and community-based organizations.

•

Workforce Development Committee – This committee was formed specifically to identify and
address substance abuse prevention training and technical assistance needs across Arizona. This
will, in turn, help strengthen instruction for prevention professionals and volunteers in
community coalitions.

6

How to Read the Charts in this Report
There are five types of charts presented in this
report: 1) substance use, 2) antisocial behavior and
youth gambling, 3) risk factors, 4) protective factors,
and 5) where youth obtained alcohol. When
available, data from the 2004 and 2006
administrations will be included in the charts. The
actual percentages from the charts are presented in
tables at the end of this report.

•

Substance Use Charts
This report contains information about alcohol,
tobacco, and other drug use (referred to as ATOD
use throughout this report) and other problem
behaviors of students. The bars on each chart
represent the percentage of students in that grade
who reported the behavior. The three sections in the
charts represent different types of problem
behaviors. The definitions of each of the types of
behavior are provided below.
•

Risk and Protective Factor Charts
The risk and protective factor charts show the
percentage of students at high risk and with high
protection for each of the risk and protective factor
scales. The risk and protective factor scales measure
specific aspects of youths’ life experiences that are
predictive of whether they will engage in problem
behaviors. A definition of each risk and protective
factor scale is contained in Table 2. The factors are
grouped into four domains: community, family, school,
and peer/individual.

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.

•

Heavy use includes binge drinking (having five
or more drinks in a row during the two weeks
prior to the survey) and use of one-half a pack
or more of cigarettes per day.

The bars on the risk and protective factor charts,
represent the percentage of students whose answers
reflect significant risk or protection. There are bars for
the last three administrations of the AYS: 2004, 2006,
and 2008. By looking at 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 and
when assessing risk reduction and protective factor
enhancement efforts.

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol Charts

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling
Charts
•

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 animal
races. The chart also shows the percentage of
students who engaged in any gambling behavior
during the past year.

This chart displays data regarding the ways that
students obtained alcohol in the past 30 days. The data
focus on a subgroup of students who indicated at least
one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no
alcohol use are not represented.) It is important to note
that the charts represent a subgroup of users and not
the entire survey population. Additionally, the smaller
the sample, the more dramatic the influence of a
student's responses. For example, 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 legend indicates the sample size for
each grade surveyed to help clarify the value of the data.

Antisocial behavior (ASB) is a measure of
the percentage of students who report any
involvement during the past year with eight
antisocial behaviors: suspended from school,
drunk or high at school, sold illegal drugs,
stolen a vehicle, been arrested, attacked
someone to harm them, carried a handgun,
taken a handgun to school. The chart also
displays any incidents in the past 30 days of
drinking and driving or riding in a car with a
drinking driver.
7

How to Read the Charts in this Report (cont’d)
School Safety Charts

community and a more national sample. The 8-State
Norm value for each risk and protective factor scale
represents the percentage of youth at risk or with
protection for eight states across the country
(Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana,
Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah). In developing the
8-State Norm, the contribution of each of eight
states was proportional to its percentage of the
national population, which helps to make the results
more representative of youth nation-wide. A
comparison between the ATOD use rates from the
8-State norm and those from the national
Monitoring the Future Survey showed the rates to
be very similar, which provides added confidence in
the validity of the 8-State Norm. Brief definitions of
the risk and protective factors scales are provided in
Table 2 following the profile charts. For more
information about risk and protective factors, please
refer to the resources listed on the last page of this
report under Contacts for Prevention.

The school safety 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 or were picked on or
bullied at school. The complete questions and values
for each response option can be seen in Table 11.

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 Survey or
the 8-State Norm (described below). A comparison to
the state-wide and national results provides additional
information for your community in determining the
relative significance of levels of 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.

Drug Free Communities Reports
Table 12 contains the information that is reported
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 8-State Norm
The diamonds on the charts allow a comparison
between the levels of risk and protection in your

Practical Implications of the Assessment
No Child Left Behind
The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities section of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) requires that
schools and communities use six Principles of Effectiveness to guide their decisions and spending on federally
funded prevention and intervention programs. First introduced in 1998 by the Department of Education, the
Principles of Effectiveness outline a data-driven process for ensuring that prevention programs achieve the desired
results. The Principles of Effectiveness stipulate that local prevention programs and activities must:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

be based on a needs assessment using objective data regarding the incidence of drug use and violence,
target specific performance objectives,
be based on scientific research and be proven to reduce violence or drug use,
be based on the analysis of predictor variables such as risk and protective factors,
include meaningful and ongoing parental input in program implementation, and
have periodic evaluations of established performance measures.

The results of the AYS presented in this report can help your school and community comply with the NCLB Act. The
Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior charts provide information related to Principle 1 and the Risk and Protective
Factor charts provide information related to Principle 4. Overall, using the risk and protective factor framework helps
schools meet all of the Principles of Effectiveness, and thereby assists schools in complying with the NCLB Act.
8

Assessment and Planning
School and Community Improvement Using Survey Data
Why Conduct the Arizona
Youth Survey?
Data from the Arizona Youth
Survey can be used to help
schools and communities assess
current conditions and identify
and prioritize local prevention
issues.
Each risk and protective factor
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
county make key decisions
regarding regarding allocation
of resources, how and when to
address specific needs, and
which strategies are most
effective and known to produce
results.

What are the numbers telling you?
Review the charts and data tables presented in this report. Using the
table below, note your findings as you discuss the following questions.
Which 3-5 risk factors are of the greatest concern?
Which 3-5 protective factors are your community’s highest priority?
Which levels of 30-day drug use are of greatest concern?
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 of greatest concern?
º Which behaviors are your students exhibiting the most?
º At which grades do you see unacceptable behavior levels?
•
•
•

How to decide if a rate is “unacceptable.”
Look across the charts – which items stand out as either much
higher or much lower than the others?
• Compare your data with statewide and national data –
differences of five percent between local and other data are probably
significant.
•

Use these data for program and policy development.
Substance use and antisocial behavior data – identify issues, raise
awareness about the problems, and promote school and community
dialogue.
• Risk and protective factor data – identify key objectives that will
help your school or community achieve its prevention goals.
•

Use the resources listed on the last page of this report, Contacts for
Prevention, for ideas about prevention programs that have proven
effective in addressing the risk factors that are high in your community
and improving the protective factors that are low.

MEASURE

Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate
#3
#4
#1
#2

Risk Factors
Protective Factors
Substance Use
Antisocial Behaviors

9

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

10

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Pima County, Grade 8

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

11

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Pima County, Grade 10

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

12

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Pima County, Grade 12

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Pima County, Grade 8
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

13

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Pima County, Grade 10
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

14

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Pima County, Grade 12
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

15

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Pima County, Grade 8

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

16

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Pima County, Grade 8
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

17

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Pima County, Grade 10

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

18

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Pima County, Grade 10
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

19

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Pima County, Grade 12

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

20

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Pima County, Grade 12
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

21

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol

WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL*
2008 Pima County Student Survey, Grades 8, 10 & 12
If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)
100
90
80
70

Percentages (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Got it some

other way

Took it from a
store or someone

else's home

County 2008, Grade 12
Sample: 641 students**

Took it from home

Got at a party

County 2008, Grade 10
Sample: 557 students**

Someone under
21 years

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

County 2008, Grade 8
Sample: 220 students**

State 2008

* Prior to 2008, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained alcohol. Also, because not all eight states ask where youth obtained alcohol, no 8-State value is reported.
** Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case of smaller sample sizes,
caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

22

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Pima County, Grade 8
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

23

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Pima County, Grade 10
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

24

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Pima County, Grade 12
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

25

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles
Low Neighborhood Attachment

Community Domain Risk Factors
Low neighborhood bonding is related to higher levels of 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.

Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

Community Domain Protective Factors
When opportunities are available in a community for positive participation, children are less likely to
engage in substance use and other problem behaviors.

Rewards for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for positive participation in activities helps youth bond to the community, thus lowering their risk
for substance use.

Poor Family Management

Family Domain Risk Factors
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.

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.

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.

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 Attachment

Family Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

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.

Academic Failure

Low Commitment to School

School Domain Risk Factors
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.
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.

26

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles (cont'd)
Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

School Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

Rebelliousness

Peer-Individual Risk Factors
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.

Early Initiation of Antisocial
Behavior and Drug Use

Early onset of drug use predicts the 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.

Attitudes Favorable Toward
Antisocial Behavior and Drug
Use

During the elementary school years, most children express anti-drug, anti-crime, and pro-social attitudes
and have 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Belief in the Moral Order

Peer-Individual Protective Factors
Young people who have a belief in what is “right” or “wrong” are less likely to use drugs.

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.

Prosocial Involvement

Participation in positive school and community activities helps provide protection for youth.

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.

27

Data Tables
Table 3. 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

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

55.4

50.7

43.6

47.8

68.8

73.0

66.9

66.2

77.0

78.5

76.3

74.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

35.5

32.1

24.1

25.9

40.7

45.6

40.5

39.9

49.1

49.3

51.5

50.8

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

6.0

7.2

6.7

7.1

6.1

8.1

10.5

12.9

12.4

11.9

15.1

17.7

Marijuana

used marijuana?

22.9

21.7

17.4

16.2

36.3

39.8

34.4

32.5

45.6

44.9

42.3

43.1

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

2.2

2.6

2.3

1.9

4.3

5.0

6.6

5.2

7.2

6.1

7.9

7.9

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

3.6

4.2

2.8

2.7

8.5

10.7

9.0

6.8

10.1

11.6

12.3

11.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

16.8

17.1

13.5

14.3

10.1

12.3

12.5

12.6

5.9

9.2

8.9

9.2

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

2.0

1.1

1.2

n/a

3.9

2.1

2.4

n/a

4.8

2.7

4.0

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

1.7

1.4

1.1

1.0

2.7

2.4

2.7

2.0

2.9

3.1

2.9

3.1

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2.9

3.0

3.2

2.2

4.7

4.7

7.0

4.9

5.3

5.1

7.7

7.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

1.7

0.8

1.7

n/a

2.0

1.9

2.3

n/a

1.5

2.1

2.4

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

10.6

12.2

n/a

n/a

20.9

20.5

n/a

n/a

23.4

24.6

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

2.9

n/a

n/a

n/a

5.8

n/a

n/a

n/a

6.0

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

4.4

3.2

3.8

n/a

8.6

8.4

7.6

n/a

9.0

7.8

7.9

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

13.1

10.3

7.0

8.3

17.8

15.8

10.7

12.0

17.9

16.8

11.6

13.2

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of 2008 prescription stimulant, sedative
and pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

15.3

15.6

17.1

n/a

22.6

25.2

25.7

n/a

23.5

27.9

28.7

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

9.1

9.7

n/a

n/a

13.7

12.9

n/a

n/a

13.5

13.4

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

28

Data Tables
Table 4. 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 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

27.7

24.2

20.2

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

23.2

38.0

43.3

38.7

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

37.7

48.4

49.8

47.4

46.8

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

9.9

11.5

8.0

8.7

13.8

16.4

16.3

16.6

18.3

20.5

23.2

23.9

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

1.8

2.3

2.3

2.6

2.1

2.2

3.2

4.6

3.6

3.7

5.1

6.8

Marijuana

used marijuana?

11.2

10.6

7.2

7.6

16.4

18.1

15.7

15.1

17.9

18.7

17.6

18.7

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

1.3

1.3

0.9

0.8

2.2

1.9

2.3

1.9

1.5

2.0

2.6

2.4

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

1.4

1.9

1.0

1.0

3.6

4.3

2.8

2.2

3.5

3.7

3.5

3.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

7.5

7.5

5.4

5.4

3.1

3.4

2.8

3.0

1.3

2.0

2.0

1.6

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

0.6

0.3

0.4

n/a

1.2

0.5

0.6

n/a

0.8

0.3

0.8

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

0.5

1.0

0.4

0.4

0.9

1.0

1.0

0.7

0.5

1.0

1.0

1.0

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

0.8

1.2

1.3

0.8

1.1

1.4

2.1

1.5

0.9

1.3

2.1

2.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

0.8

0.4

0.7

n/a

1.1

0.8

1.0

n/a

0.8

1.0

1.0

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

5.2

6.0

n/a

n/a

9.5

9.4

n/a

n/a

8.6

10.5

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

1.4

n/a

n/a

n/a

2.7

n/a

n/a

n/a

2.4

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

1.8

1.6

1.6

n/a

3.6

3.0

2.9

n/a

2.2

1.8

2.1

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

7.0

4.4

3.0

3.4

8.4

7.2

4.4

4.5

7.0

6.1

4.4

5.0

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of prescription stimulant, sedative and
pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

7.9

7.6

8.6

n/a

11.7

11.8

12.2

n/a

9.1

11.1

13.1

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

5.9

5.6

n/a

n/a

7.0

6.4

n/a

n/a

5.5

5.9

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

29

Data Tables
z

Table 5. Percentage of Students Reporting Heavy ATOD Use
Grade 8

Binge Drinking

1/2 Pack (or
more) of
Cigarettes/Day

How many times have you
had 5 or more alcoholic
drinks in a row in the
past 2 weeks?
During the past 30 days, how many
cigarettes did you smoke per day?
(11 to 20 cigarettes, More than 20
cigarettes)

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

16.6

14.0

10.7

0.8

0.6

0.3

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

13.1

22.5

22.1

22.1

0.7

1.4

2.1

1.4

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

22.4

29.4

30.0

29.2

30.2

2.1

3.2

3.4

3.8

4.2

Table 6. Percentage of Students Reporting Antisocial Behavior
How many times in the past year
(12 months) have you:
(One or more times)
Suspended from School
Drunk or High at School
Sold Illegal Drugs
Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle
Been Arrested
Attacked Someone with the Idea
of Seriously Hurting Them
Carried a Handgun
Carried a Handgun to School
During the past 30 days, how many
times did you:
(One or more times)

Grade 8

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

17.5

19.8

17.5

14.6

15.0

11.5

6.5

7.0

5.1

6.1

10.4

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

20.2

12.0

13.8

15.7

14.6

8.3

8.9

10.2

10.2

12.0

20.4

23.2

20.8

20.5

20.9

21.1

19.0

22.2

4.9

4.6

10.1

11.2

11.4

9.8

9.4

9.6

10.4

10.4

3.8

3.6

4.4

4.8

4.0

3.7

2.3

3.1

1.8

2.7

12.4

10.1

7.5

9.7

11.8

12.0

9.2

9.0

9.8

10.6

8.7

20.1

19.9

19.8

18.1

15.3

18.4

18.9

16.1

12.6

12.8

13.1

12.9

7.7

9.0

7.6

7.7

6.3

8.4

8.7

7.2

5.0

7.2

7.9

8.1

1.2

2.9
2.2
Grade 8

1.2

2.0

2.0
1.6
Grade 10

1.3

1.0

1.7
1.0
Grade 12

1.4

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

DRIVE a car or other vehicle when you had
been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

7.9

5.5

RIDE in a car or other vehicle driven by
someone who had been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

34.0

27.6

State
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

5.6

n/a

9.1

8.9

29.1

n/a

36.6

31.3

* These categories were not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

30

State
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

7.9

n/a

18.2

15.6

16.1

29.1

n/a

33.7

31.3

29.7

Data Tables
Table 7. Percentage of Students Gambling in the Past Year
How often have you done the following for money,
possessions, or anything of value:
County
2004
(At least once in the past 12 months or more)
Any Gambling
Played a slot machine, poker machine
or other gambling machine?
Played the lottery or scratch-off tickets?
Bet on sports?*
Played cards?
Bought a raffle ticket?
Played bingo?
Gambled on the Internet?
Played a dice game?*
Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?*
Bet on a horse or other animal race?*
Table 8. Percentage of Students Reporting Protection

Grade 8
County
2008

n/a

53.2

65.3

n/a

2.6

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

69.1

n/a

52.4

63.1

65.9

n/a

46.5

58.4

60.6

5.3

6.4

n/a

2.5

5.0

6.1

n/a

3.2

5.0

5.8

24.0
n/a
26.9
n/a
18.1
7.1
n/a

23.0
27.6
42.2
19.4
26.3
5.8
24.9

24.8
31.8
43.7
20.4
32.6
6.3
31.5

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

23.6
n/a
26.0
n/a
11.2
6.0
n/a

20.6
28.2
40.0
18.7
20.1
5.0
20.8

21.8
30.2
43.7
20.7
23.2
5.1
25.1

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

18.1
n/a
25.0
n/a
6.0
4.5
n/a

17.5
23.4
38.4
19.2
11.6
4.3
17.5

19.0
25.6
40.6
18.9
14.7
4.7
19.2

n/a

22.0

31.8

32.7

n/a

21.6

30.2

31.3

n/a

18.7

24.8

27.0

n/a

n/a

8.9

6.4

n/a

n/a

7.6

5.8

n/a

n/a

5.9

5.1

Grade 8

Protective Factor
Community Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Domain
Family Attachment
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
School Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer-Individual Domain
Belief in the Moral Order
Interaction with Prosocial Peers*
Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Total Protection
Students with High Protection**

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2006

State
2008

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

36.5
28.8

31.5
27.7

36.2
29.8

51.2
60.2
63.0

46.6
55.8
59.1

62.3
54.0

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

39.3
31.3

36.8
33.3

30.5
31.5

31.7
30.6

53.5
61.4
62.8

51.5
59.7
61.4

47.1
55.9
57.0

43.3
52.7
55.5

56.8
48.4

58.4
51.9

60.3
51.2

65.6
64.4

52.9
48.6
39.1
58.8

53.9
44.9
36.6
59.9

61.4
50.1
40.2
58.3

59.4
53.1
39.0
59.4

42.3

33.6

41.0

43.8

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

37.1
35.4

36.0
30.2

31.9
30.0

33.0
29.2

36.1
33.2

44.0
52.6
53.8

46.1
54.0
55.1

56.7
55.5
55.4

54.4
54.9
56.2

56.6
57.9
55.3

56.2
55.2
55.8

61.3
59.8

62.8
64.6

62.4
59.8

62.5
44.8

64.1
47.0

64.4
49.9

64.3
45.4

64.0
55.9
45.9
61.9

61.4
53.6
40.8
62.2

67.8
53.1
37.0
60.3

66.5
55.3
41.2
59.7

51.3
55.9
45.6
55.3

48.6
53.7
39.4
54.5

54.9
53.9
36.2
53.5

53.6
52.5
36.4
52.2

50.5

42.3

45.8

46.7

45.3

41.3

45.0

43.3

*Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.
**High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.

31

State
2008

State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 9. Percentage of Students Reporting Risk
Grade 8
Risk Factor
Community Domain
Low Neighborhood Attachment
Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use
Perceived Availability of Drugs
Perceived Availability of Handguns
Family Domain
Poor Family Management
Family Conflict
Family History of Antisocial Behavior
Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use
School Domain
Academic Failure
Low Commitment to School
Peer-Individual Domain
Rebelliousness
Early Initiation of ASB
Early Initiation of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use
Perceived Risk of Drug Use
Interaction with Antisocial Peers
Friend's Use of Drugs
Rewards for ASB
Gang Involvement
Total Risk
Students at High Risk*

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

41.4
42.6
44.6
41.0

46.1
43.9
39.0
37.8

38.5
37.7
36.0
39.8

45.2
53.1
49.1
48.5
29.6

51.6
52.2
47.2
48.7
28.2

54.8
41.1

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

38.5
36.6
38.2
37.8

46.4
45.4
51.9
27.5

49.8
45.3
50.9
27.9

49.2
44.2
49.0
25.6

46.9
51.7
39.2
44.6
24.9

45.5
53.5
40.3
49.3
26.8

44.1
42.6
44.5
48.0
41.5

49.6
44.5
46.2
52.1
43.2

55.1
44.1

49.7
42.4

47.3
41.0

49.4
43.6

39.6
42.2
41.0
48.2
37.3
52.7
60.9
48.4
54.0
28.8

46.6
43.7
38.4
49.0
37.2
51.2
62.7
42.9
50.9
30.8

43.6
37.9
29.7
43.9
30.2
48.3
58.6
40.7
45.6
26.5

43.1
39.4
30.3
44.6
29.1
44.5
58.2
39.4
45.6
26.9

43.9

39.3

36.9

38.7

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

46.2
42.1
49.6
26.7

51.1
39.0
55.9
33.9

49.1
37.3
53.6
33.6

53.6
37.2
52.1
31.2

51.0
36.3
52.2
33.1

45.5
39.9
44.5
54.5
41.4

42.8
42.8
41.1
53.4
41.1

46.9
38.9
41.0
43.0
43.5

46.9
38.6
39.6
47.5
42.9

44.5
38.3
39.3
52.4
40.3

44.3
38.3
37.3
50.2
41.2

55.7
44.6

53.1
42.9

49.5
43.7

46.7
48.7

45.2
48.1

46.8
43.2

44.4
45.6

39.2
40.9
35.2
49.9
38.3
40.2
56.6
40.6
42.6
19.3

50.7
43.9
39.8
52.5
37.4
39.7
61.6
47.7
47.7
25.7

46.8
46.4
34.1
52.4
38.3
46.3
58.6
42.1
42.9
25.1

46.8
42.0
32.7
50.7
37.4
42.3
57.3
41.9
44.0
23.2

34.8
39.7
37.6
44.9
35.8
45.5
51.7
36.9
52.3
17.1

45.8
41.8
33.3
47.2
35.0
42.3
54.7
37.3
55.4
17.0

44.7
44.0
32.8
45.6
33.5
47.5
53.3
37.1
53.9
17.4

44.0
41.2
33.1
46.9
36.3
46.5
53.2
37.3
54.6
16.8

38.5

38.3

40.2

37.5

37.1

34.4

35.3

35.7

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors)

32

Grade 12
State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 10. Where Youth Obtained Alcohol
Grade 8

If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)

County
2008

Grade 10

State
2008

County
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2008

State
2008

Sample size*
I bought it in a store such as a liquor store, convenience store,
supermarket, discount store, or gas station
I bought it at a restaurant, bar, or club
I bought it at a public event such as a concert or sporting event

220

4,418

557

4,872

641

5,065

7.3

5.0

6.8

6.9

12.9

12.3

2.3
1.4

3.0
2.9

2.3
2.7

3.0
2.9

6.7
3.3

7.0
3.9

I gave someone else money to buy it for me

17.7

21.4

32.1

34.4

41.7

43.7

My parent or guardian gave it to me
Another family member who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone not related to me who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone under the age of 21 gave it to me
I got it at a party
I took it from home
I took it from a store or someone else's home
I got it some other way

18.6
18.2
18.6
20.5
42.7
28.6
8.6

18.7
19.7
19.2
23.8
41.5
31.4
11.7

14.7
23.9
28.0
21.4
54.0
20.3
7.4

14.8
18.7
28.7
24.8
53.1
23.2
11.3

10.6
18.9
38.1
19.8
56.9
13.1
6.6

13.0
18.2
39.5
22.0
57.6
13.8
8.0

26.8

28.7

18.7

23.6

16.2

17.9

* Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case
of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

33

Data Tables
Table 11. Percentage of Students Reporting School Safety Issues
Grade 8
County
2004

Question

County
2006

Grade 10

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

Grade 12

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
has someone threatened or injured you with a 4-5 times
weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school 6-7 times
property?
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

82.0
9.6
4.5
1.5
0.4
0.2
0.1
1.6

83.5
8.3
4.4
1.2
0.5
0.5
0.3
1.3

87.2
6.8
3.8
0.9
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.8

87.1
6.6
3.5
1.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.9

87.0
7.4
3.0
0.8
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.8

84.7
8.0
3.7
1.1
0.5
0.3
0.2
1.5

87.9
5.8
3.4
0.9
0.6
0.2
0.1
1.0

88.4
5.9
3.0
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.1

90.9
4.6
2.3
0.7
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.6

88.9
5.2
3.7
0.6
0.5
0.1
0.4
0.6

92.6
3.4
1.9
0.8
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.8

92.4
3.9
2.0
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.7

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
4-5 times
were you in a physical fight on school property? 6-7 times
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

68.8
15.2
10.2
2.7
0.6
0.7
0.3
1.5

73.4
14.2
7.0
2.5
0.7
0.6
0.5
1.1

79.3
10.3
6.2
1.8
0.7
0.2
0.4
1.1

76.5
12.9
6.9
1.7
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.7

84.4
8.8
3.7
1.2
0.4
0.1
0.4
1.0

84.7
9.0
4.0
1.0
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.7

84.3
9.0
5.2
0.7
0.5
0.1
0.1
0.2

85.2
8.8
3.9
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.7

92.2
4.3
2.1
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.1

91.1
5.6
2.0
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.5

92.0
4.6
2.3
0.4
0.1
0.3
0.0
0.3

91.5
5.0
2.1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how often have you
4-5 times
been picked on or bullied by a student ON
6-7 times
SCHOOL PROPERTY?*
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

60.2
19.4

59.4
13.2
11.5
4.3
1.9
1.2
0.8
7.7

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

75.1
13.2

2.8

70.2
9.5
9.7
3.0
1.4
1.2
1.0
4.0

69.1
10.3
9.6
3.2
1.4
1.1
0.6
4.6

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

85.0
8.1

5.7

60.5
13.3
11.6
2.6
1.3
1.2
0.8
8.9

1.9

80.6
7.1
5.5
1.7
1.2
0.3
0.3
3.4

82.3
6.6
5.7
1.5
0.8
0.5
0.3
2.4

86.8
7.3
3.0
1.2
1.8

88.8
5.7
3.1
0.7
1.7

89.9
5.8
2.7
0.6
1.0

93.5
2.8
1.6
1.0
1.2

90.9
5.0
2.2
0.6
1.3

90.8
5.1
2.3
0.9
0.9

91.1
5.1
2.2
0.6
1.0

95.1
2.8
1.4
0.3
0.4

94.1
3.1
1.5
0.4
0.8

94.1
3.4
1.7
0.2
0.7

93.8
3.3
1.8
0.4
0.7

94.6
1.9
0.9
0.2
2.4

94.4
1.5
1.1
0.5
2.6

0 days

During the past 30 days, on how many days did
1 day
you not go to school because you felt you would
2-3 days
be unsafe at school or on your way to or from
4-5 days
school?

6 or more days

87.9
6.7
3.4
0.7
1.3

14.6

0 days

8.9

4.9

93.8
92.3
93.8
93.9
94.1
92.2
93.1
93.8
95.3
94.3
3.1
3.5
2.7
3.1
1.9
2.7
2.3
2.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
1.9
1.2
1.3
1.2
1.6
1.8
1.2
0.6
0.9
0.3
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.5
6 or more days
1.1
1.6
1.7
1.2
2.4
3.0
2.3
2.2
2.5
2.6
* In 2006 the choices for this question were Never , Once , Several Times and Very Often. This category was not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

During the past 30 days, on how many days did 1 day
you carry a weapon such as a gun, knife, or
2-3 days
club ON SCHOOL PROPERTY?
4-5 days

34

Data Tables
Table 12. Drug Free Communities Report*
County 2008
Outcome

Definition

Substance

Grade 8

Grade 10

Grade 12

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

Perception of Risk
(People are at Moderate or Great Risk
of harming themselves if they... )

Perception of Parent Disapproval
(Parents feel it would be Wrong or
Very Wrong to... )

Perception of Peer Disapproval
(I think it is Wrong or Very Wrong for
someone my age to...)

Past 30-Day Use

Female†

Sample Percent

Sample

drink 1 or two drinks nearly every day

Alcohol

57.5

1,302

60.6

1,702

63.7

1,501

56.1

2,137

65.1

2,287

smoke 1 or more packs or cigarettes
per day

Cigarettes

81.1

1,314

84.4

1,714

88.9

1,509

84.3

2,154

85.9

2,299

smoke marijuana regularly

Marijuana

77.0

1,273

69.2

1,664

67.8

1,477

66.9

2,104

75.1

2,230

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

92.6

1,195

85.1

1,618

77.5

1,459

83.6

2,005

85.6

2,191

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

97.0

1,207

93.7

1,627

86.8

1,459

91.9

2,023

92.7

2,194

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

96.1

1,190

91.9

1,616

90.8

1,449

92.2

2,003

93.4

2,177

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

78.5

1,440

62.4

1,780

57.6

1,578

64.4

2,309

67.0

2,400

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

87.9

1,440

76.4

1,782

65.3

1,580

74.2

2,309

78.1

2,403

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

86.2

1,438

72.7

1,777

70.0

1,579

72.4

2,307

79.3

2,397

Alcohol

20.2

1,378

38.7

1,743

47.4

1,546

34.2

2,224

37.9

2,356

at least one use in the Past 30 Days

Cigarettes

8.0

1,338

16.3

1,726

23.2

1,517

17.7

2,175

14.8

2,321

7.2

1,367

15.7

1,727

17.6

1,528

15.6

2,199

12.4

2,337

Sample Percent

Sample

Marijuana

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

had more than a sip or two of beer,
wine or hard liquor?
Average Age of Onset**
(How old were you when you first…)

Male†

Sample Percent

smoked a cigarette, even just a puff?

smoked marijuana?

Alcohol
Average age:
Cigarettes
Average age:
Marijuana
Average age:

51.6

1,443

11.9 years
26.3

1,440

11.7 years
18.8

1,449
12 years

71.4

1,777

13.3 years
42.6

1,784

12.8 years
36.1

1,787

13.3 years

80.0

Sample Percent

1,584

14.2 years
54.4

1,582

13.9 years
45.3

1,588

14.3 years

67.3

2,305

13.1 years
43.7

2,304

13.1 years
35.5

2,316

13.4 years

69.1

2,409

13.5 years
39.5

2,412

13.1 years
32.5

2,417

13.6 years

* The “Sample” column represents the sample size (the number of youth who answered the question). The "Percent" column represents the percentage of youth in the sample answering the question as defined.
** For Average Age of Onset, “Sample” represents the number of youth who answered the question (including students responding that they never used). 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.

† 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.

35

Appendix
Appendix - Comparability of survey administratons
Issue
Drug Category

2004 AYS
On how many occasions (if any) have you:

2006 AYS

2008 AYS

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Notes regarding changes

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Hallucinogens

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the
past 30 days?

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the past
30 days?

Used LSD or other hallucinogens during the
past 30 days?

Substituted "hallucinogens" for "psychedelics" in 2008.
Comparable across all years.

Methamphetamines

Not applicable, no methamphetamine-specific
item on 2004 AYS

Used methamphetamines (meth, speed, crank,
crystal meth)?

Used methamphetamines (meth, crystal,
crank)?

2006 and 2008 provide slightly different examples, but
are cautiously comparable.

Prescription
stimulants

Used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”,
“crystal”, “crank”) without a doctor telling you
to take them?

Used stimulants, other than methamphetamines
(such as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin,
Adderal, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling
you to take them?

2004 is not comparable to any other years, data are
presented for archival interest. 2006 and 2008 data are
cautiously comparable.

Prescription
sedatives

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such
as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping
pills)?

2008 AYS added descriptor "prescription" and removed
qualifier "without a doctor telling you to take them." 2008
data are cautiously comparable with other years.

Ecstasy

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2008 AYS used "ecstasy" as the primary descriptor and
moved "MDMA" to examples. Comparable across years.

Prescription
drugs

Not applicable, no prescription drugs item on
2004 AYS

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills),
stimulants, other than methamphetamines (such
as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine) or
other prescription drugs (such as Oxycontin)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes)

Used prescription stimulants (Ritalin,
Adderall, or Dexedrine), sedatives
(tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax,
barbiturates, or sleeping pills) or pain relievers
(Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes )

In 2006, responses to the stimulant, sedative and other
prescription drug questions were calculated as one
measure. (2006 had no prescription pain reliever item.) In
2008, responses to the stimulant, sedative and
prescription pain reliever questions were calculated as
one measure. (2008 had no standalone prescription drug
item.) 2006 and 2008 data are cautiously comparable.
(Note that composite 2006 data will not match past
reports' prescription drugs category.)

Gambling
Category

Not applicable, no gambling items
on 2004 AYS

How often during the past 12 months
have you:

How often have you done the following for
money, possessions, or anything of value:

Sports betting

n/a

Bet on team sports?

Bet on sports?

Not comparable across years.

Race betting

n/a

Bet money on horse races?

Bet on a horse race or other animal race?

Not comparable across years.

Dice

n/a

Bet on dice games such as craps?

Played a dice game?

Not comparable across years.

Games of skill

n/a

Bet on games of personal skill such as pool,
darts, or bowling?

Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?

Comparable across years.

Protective Scale:
Peer-Individual
Interaction with
Prosocial Peers

Think of your four best friends (the friends you feel closest to). In the past year (12 months), how many of your best friends have:
(Scale is calculated based on the average response [0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 friends] to the following questions)
...participated in clubs, organizations and activities at school? ...made the commitment to stay drug-free?
...tried to do well in school? ...liked school? ...regularly attended religious services?(removed in 2008)

36

Regularly attended religious services was removed from
2008 AYS. 2004 and 2006 have been recalculated to
match 2008 AYS and are now comparable across all
years. Due to this recalculation, current reports may differ
slightly from past reports.

Contacts for Prevention
Arizona Department of Education
Student Services Division
www.ade.az.gov

Regional Prevention Contacts
Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, and Santa Cruz
Counties
Bill Burnett
Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)
(520) 618-8807

Arizona Department of Health Services
Division of Behavioral Health Services
Lisa Shumaker
(602) 364-4594
www.azdhs.gov/bhs/index.htm

Gila, La Paz, Pinal, and Yuma Counties
Linda Weinberg
Cenpatico Behavioral Health of Arizona
(866) 495-6738

Arizona Prevention Resource Center
(800) 432-2772
www.azprevention.org

Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai
Counties
Petrice Post
Northern Arizona Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(NARBHA)
(928) 214-2177

Center for Violence Prevention and Community
Safety
Charles Katz
(602) 543-6618
charles.katz@asu.edu
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)
http://prevention.samhsa.gov

Maricopa County
Juan Aristizabal
Magellan
(602) 797-8256

Governor’s Office of Children, Youth, and
Families
(602) 542-4043
http://www.governor.state.az.us/cyf/index.html

Gila River Indian Community
Joan Grey
Gila River Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(602) 528-7136

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities
U.S. Department of Education
www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS

Pasqua Yaqui Tribe
Centered Spirit Program
Jill Fabian
(520) 879-6067

Arizona Department of Gaming's Office of
Problem Gambling
Elise Mikkelsen
(602) 266-8299 ext. 351
www.problemgambling.az.gov

Navajo Nation
Department of Behavioral Health Services
(928) 871-6235

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMSHA)
www.samhsa.gov

White Mountain Apache Tribe
Apache Behavioral Health Services
(928) 338-4811

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/

Colorado River Indian Tribes
(928) 669-6577

Western Regional Center for the Application of
Prevention Technologies (CAPT)
www.westcapt.org

Other State and National Contacts:
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
Michelle Neitch/ Phillip Stevenson
(602) 364-1173/(602) 364-1157
www.azcjc.gov

Bach Harrison, L.L.C.
R. Steven Harrison, Ph.D.
(801) 359-2064
www.bach-harrison.com

37

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Pinal County

REPORT PROVIDED BY:

Arizona Criminal Justice Commission

1

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Shining Light on Arizona Youth
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:
Arizona Department of Gaming’s Office of Problem Gambling
Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission
Arizona Parent’s Commission on Drug Education and Prevention
Governor’s Division for Substance Abuse Policy
Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Tobacco Education and Prevention Program,
Arizona Department of Health Services

2

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 2008 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:
Jean Ajamie, Arizona Department of Education
Michelle Anderson, Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections
Steve Ballance, Maricopa County
Carisa Dwyer, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Charles Katz, Arizona State University
Dr. Manuel Medina, TERROS, Inc.
Kim O’Connor, Governor’s Office for
Children, Youth, and Families
Holly Orozco, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Catherine Osborn, Arizona Department of Education
Richard Porter, Arizona Department of Health Services
Gowri Shetty, Arizona Department of Health Services
Lisa Shumaker, Arizona Department of Health Services
Wendy Wolfersteig, Arizona State University
Nicole Yancey Johnson, Arizona Early Childhood Development
and Health Board
Governor’s Youth Commission

Additionally, the success of the 2008 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.

3

Introduction
CONTENTS:

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Summary for
Pinal County

Introduction
The Risk and Protective
Factor Model of
Prevention
The Arizona Substance
Abuse Partnership
How to Read the Charts

This report summarizes some of the
findings from the 2008 Arizona Youth
Survey (AYS) administered to 8th, 10th
and 12th grade students during the
spring of 2008. The results for your
county are presented along with
comparisons to 2004 and 2006 survey
results where applicable, as well as to
the overall results for the state. 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.

Practical Implications of
the Assessment
Assessment and
Planning
Data Charts:
• Substance Use

All schools in Arizona are eligible to
participate in the survey, and
recruitment efforts were successful in
obtaining participation by schools in all
of the 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.

•

Antisocial Behavior
and Gambling

•

Risk & Protective
Factor Profiles
Where Youth
Obtained Alcohol
School Safety

•
•

Risk and Protective
Factor Scale Definitions
Data Tables
Contacts for Prevention
Appendix

Table 1 contains the characteristics of
the students who completed the survey

Table 1. Characteristics of Participants
Student Totals
County 2004

Total Students

Number

County 2006

Percent

Number

County 2008

Percent

Number

State 2008

Percent

Number

Percent

1,616

100

1,848

100

2,896

100

54,734

100

8

574

35.5

1,079

58.4

1,609

55.6

25,695

46.9

10

650

40.2

481

26.0

936

32.3

16,089

29.4

12

392

24.3

288

15.6

351

12.1

12,950

23.7

Male

703

44.0

862

48.1

1,426

50.0

26,213

48.8

Female

894

56.0

931

51.9

1,425

50.0

27,514

51.2

Native American

152

9.6

157

8.8

334

9.0

4,812

7.4

African American

65

4.1

111

6.2

319

8.6

3,915

6.0

Hispanic

580

36.7

682

38.3

1,600

43.1

21,525

32.9

White

687

43.5

697

39.2

1,305

35.2

31,887

48.8

Asian

13

0.8

27

1.5

85

2.3

2,117

3.2

6

0.4

6

0.3

66

1.8

1,115

1.7

Grade

Gender

Ethnicity*

Pacific Islander

*In 2008, students could mark more than one ethnic category and the 'other' category was removed.

4

from your county and the state.
Because not every student answered all
of the questions, the number of
students in the gender and ethnicity
categories often will be less than the
total number of students.
Whenever data is obtained from a
sample of students instead of the entire
population, it is important to recognize
the strengths and weaknesses of the
data. One quick and 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 participated in the
survey and those that did not.
Changes to the AYS
Survey for 2008
In an effort to shorten the AYS and
make it more responsive to local
priorities, the following changes were
made for 2008: 1) some of the
substance use questions were refined
and the use of over-the-counter drugs
was added, 2) some risk and protective
factor scales were removed where the
data could easily be obtained from
other sources or the scales measured
similar constructs (scales removed are

Risk and Protective Factors
Transitions and Mobility, Community
Disorganization, Intention to Use Drugs, and Social
Skills), 3) questions about where students get the
alcohol they drink were added, 4) an 8-State Norm
was added that can be used to compare the AYS
results on risk, protection, and antisocial behavior to a
more national sample (see the description of the 8State Norm later in this report), and 5) National
Outcome Measures that are needed for measuring the
performance of federally funded programs in Arizona
such as talking to parents about the dangers of
substance use were added.

Washington, Social Development Research Group
have investigated the relationship between risk and
protective factors and youth problem behavior. They
have found, for example, that children who live in
families with high levels of conflict are more likely
to become involved in problem behaviors such as
delinquency and drug use than children who live in
families with low levels of family conflict.
Protective factors exert a positive influence or buffer
against the negative influence of risk, thus reducing the
likelihood that adolescents will engage in problem
behaviors. Protective factors identified through research
include social bonding to family, school, community,
and peers; healthy beliefs and clear standards for
behavior; and individual characteristics. For bonding to
serve as a protective influence, it must occur through
involvement with peers and adults who communicate
healthy values and set clear standards for behavior.

The Risk and Protective Factor Model of
Substance Abuse Prevention
Many states, school districts and local agencies have
adopted the Risk and Protective Factor Model to
guide their prevention efforts. The Risk and
Protective Factor Model of Prevention 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 identified a set of risk factors for
youth problem behaviors. Risk factors are
characteristics of school, community, and family
environments, as well as characteristics of students
and their peer groups that are known to predict
increased likelihood of drug use, delinquency, school
dropout, teen pregnancy, and violent behavior among
youth. Dr. J. David Hawkins, Dr. Richard F.
Catalano, and their colleagues at the University of

T
T

T

T

T
T

T
T

T
T

T

T

Teen Pregnancy

T

School Drop-Out
Violence

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

SOURCE: COMMUNITIES THAT CARE (CTC) PREVENTION MODEL, CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION (CSAP), SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMSHA)

5

Constitutional Factors

Gang Involvement

Favorable Attitudes Toward
Drug Use & Other
Problem Behaviors

Friends Who Use Drugs &
Engage in a Problem Behavior

Alienation & Rebelliousness

Early & Persistent
Antisocial Behavior

Peer / Individual
Early Initiation of Drug Use &
Other Problem Behavior

Lack of Commitment to
School

Academic Failure

School
Favorable Parent Attitudes &
Involvement in the
Problem Behavior

T
T
T
T
T

Family Management Problems

T
T
T
T
T

Family Conflict

Community Disorganization

Low Neighborhood
Attachment

Transitions & Mobility

Availability of Drugs &
Firearms

T
T

Family History of the
Problem Behavior

Delinquency

The chart below shows the links between the 19 risk
factors and the five problem behaviors. The check
marks have been placed in the chart to indicate where
at least two well designed, published research studies
have shown a link between the risk factor and the
problem behavior.

Family

Extreme Economic &
Social Deprivation

Substance Abuse

Community
Community Laws & Norms
Favorable Toward Drug Use,
Firearms & Crime

Risk
Factors

By measuring both risk and protective factors in a
population, prevention programs can be implemented
that are designed to reduce the elevated risk factors and
increase the protective factors. For example, if academic
failure is identified as an elevated risk factor in a
community, then mentoring, tutoring, and increased
opportunities and rewards for classroom participation
can be provided to improve academic performance.

T
T

T
T

T

T

The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership
The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP) was established by Governor Napolitano’s Executive Order
2007-12 in June 2007. Chaired by the Governor’s Chief of Staff, ASAP is composed of representatives from
state government entities, federal entities, and community organizations. ASAP serves as the single statewide
council on substance abuse prevention, enforcement, and treatment.
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
prevention, treatment, and enforcement. Through coordination among its members and their agencies and
organizations ASAP strives to ensure that substance abuse funding is spent in the most efficient and efficacious
manner.
ASAP has identified four strategic focus areas for 2008: 1) child welfare and substance abuse; 2) law enforcement
and drug trafficking; 3) emerging trends and the state’s capacity to respond; and 4) data-driven decisions and
policy development.
There are currently six sub-committees that assist ASAP in meeting their goals:
•

Arizona Underage Drinking Committee - The purpose of this subcommittee is to develop a
statewide underage drinking initiative to prevent and reduce underage drinking in Arizona. Their
activities include state-level infrastructure change to improve cross coordination/collaboration
between state agencies; developing a comprehensive statewide prevention system focused on
preventing underage drinking; and collaborative projects to more effectively utilize resources
and support local efforts.

•

Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The purpose of this work group is to
continuously evaluate data related to substance abuse to move the state system through a datadriven process. This is achieved through the completion of a statewide Substance Abuse
Epidemiology Profile. This profile will be updated every two years, with specific analyses
completed each year.

•

Emerging Issues Sub-Committee of the Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The
purpose of this sub-committee is to provide understanding of emerging substance abuse
consumption and consequence trends in Arizona to state agencies, Boards, Commissions and
Committees, and ASAP and its sub-committees.

•

Methamphetamine Task Force – The purpose of this task force is to bring together
representatives from state agencies, local government, businesses, and community groups to
develop collaborative efforts among treatment, prevention, and law enforcement systems to
assess and address the impact of methamphetamine statewide through information sharing,
resource allocation, service coordination, and the development of statewide policy
recommendations sensitive to the needs of local and tribal communities.

•

Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team – The Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team serves as the
advisory body and policy-making entity for the Arizona Co-Occurring State Incentive Grant.
Team members represent a number of state agencies and community-based organizations.

•

Workforce Development Committee – This committee was formed specifically to identify and
address substance abuse prevention training and technical assistance needs across Arizona. This
will, in turn, help strengthen instruction for prevention professionals and volunteers in
community coalitions.

6

How to Read the Charts in this Report
There are five types of charts presented in this
report: 1) substance use, 2) antisocial behavior and
youth gambling, 3) risk factors, 4) protective factors,
and 5) where youth obtained alcohol. When
available, data from the 2004 and 2006
administrations will be included in the charts. The
actual percentages from the charts are presented in
tables at the end of this report.

•

Substance Use Charts
This report contains information about alcohol,
tobacco, and other drug use (referred to as ATOD
use throughout this report) and other problem
behaviors of students. The bars on each chart
represent the percentage of students in that grade
who reported the behavior. The three sections in the
charts represent different types of problem
behaviors. The definitions of each of the types of
behavior are provided below.
•

Risk and Protective Factor Charts
The risk and protective factor charts show the
percentage of students at high risk and with high
protection for each of the risk and protective factor
scales. The risk and protective factor scales measure
specific aspects of youths’ life experiences that are
predictive of whether they will engage in problem
behaviors. A definition of each risk and protective
factor scale is contained in Table 2. The factors are
grouped into four domains: community, family, school,
and peer/individual.

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.

•

Heavy use includes binge drinking (having five
or more drinks in a row during the two weeks
prior to the survey) and use of one-half a pack
or more of cigarettes per day.

The bars on the risk and protective factor charts,
represent the percentage of students whose answers
reflect significant risk or protection. There are bars for
the last three administrations of the AYS: 2004, 2006,
and 2008. By looking at 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 and
when assessing risk reduction and protective factor
enhancement efforts.

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol Charts

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling
Charts
•

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 animal
races. The chart also shows the percentage of
students who engaged in any gambling behavior
during the past year.

This chart displays data regarding the ways that
students obtained alcohol in the past 30 days. The data
focus on a subgroup of students who indicated at least
one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no
alcohol use are not represented.) It is important to note
that the charts represent a subgroup of users and not
the entire survey population. Additionally, the smaller
the sample, the more dramatic the influence of a
student's responses. For example, 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 legend indicates the sample size for
each grade surveyed to help clarify the value of the data.

Antisocial behavior (ASB) is a measure of
the percentage of students who report any
involvement during the past year with eight
antisocial behaviors: suspended from school,
drunk or high at school, sold illegal drugs,
stolen a vehicle, been arrested, attacked
someone to harm them, carried a handgun,
taken a handgun to school. The chart also
displays any incidents in the past 30 days of
drinking and driving or riding in a car with a
drinking driver.
7

How to Read the Charts in this Report (cont’d)
School Safety Charts

community and a more national sample. The 8-State
Norm value for each risk and protective factor scale
represents the percentage of youth at risk or with
protection for eight states across the country
(Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana,
Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah). In developing the
8-State Norm, the contribution of each of eight
states was proportional to its percentage of the
national population, which helps to make the results
more representative of youth nation-wide. A
comparison between the ATOD use rates from the
8-State norm and those from the national
Monitoring the Future Survey showed the rates to
be very similar, which provides added confidence in
the validity of the 8-State Norm. Brief definitions of
the risk and protective factors scales are provided in
Table 2 following the profile charts. For more
information about risk and protective factors, please
refer to the resources listed on the last page of this
report under Contacts for Prevention.

The school safety 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 or were picked on or
bullied at school. The complete questions and values
for each response option can be seen in Table 11.

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 Survey or
the 8-State Norm (described below). A comparison to
the state-wide and national results provides additional
information for your community in determining the
relative significance of levels of 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.

Drug Free Communities Reports
Table 12 contains the information that is reported
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 8-State Norm
The diamonds on the charts allow a comparison
between the levels of risk and protection in your

Practical Implications of the Assessment
No Child Left Behind
The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities section of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) requires that
schools and communities use six Principles of Effectiveness to guide their decisions and spending on federally
funded prevention and intervention programs. First introduced in 1998 by the Department of Education, the
Principles of Effectiveness outline a data-driven process for ensuring that prevention programs achieve the desired
results. The Principles of Effectiveness stipulate that local prevention programs and activities must:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

be based on a needs assessment using objective data regarding the incidence of drug use and violence,
target specific performance objectives,
be based on scientific research and be proven to reduce violence or drug use,
be based on the analysis of predictor variables such as risk and protective factors,
include meaningful and ongoing parental input in program implementation, and
have periodic evaluations of established performance measures.

The results of the AYS presented in this report can help your school and community comply with the NCLB Act. The
Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior charts provide information related to Principle 1 and the Risk and Protective
Factor charts provide information related to Principle 4. Overall, using the risk and protective factor framework helps
schools meet all of the Principles of Effectiveness, and thereby assists schools in complying with the NCLB Act.
8

Assessment and Planning
School and Community Improvement Using Survey Data
Why Conduct the Arizona
Youth Survey?
Data from the Arizona Youth
Survey can be used to help
schools and communities assess
current conditions and identify
and prioritize local prevention
issues.
Each risk and protective factor
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
county make key decisions
regarding regarding allocation
of resources, how and when to
address specific needs, and
which strategies are most
effective and known to produce
results.

What are the numbers telling you?
Review the charts and data tables presented in this report. Using the
table below, note your findings as you discuss the following questions.
Which 3-5 risk factors are of the greatest concern?
Which 3-5 protective factors are your community’s highest priority?
Which levels of 30-day drug use are of greatest concern?
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 of greatest concern?
º Which behaviors are your students exhibiting the most?
º At which grades do you see unacceptable behavior levels?
•
•
•

How to decide if a rate is “unacceptable.”
Look across the charts – which items stand out as either much
higher or much lower than the others?
• Compare your data with statewide and national data –
differences of five percent between local and other data are probably
significant.
•

Use these data for program and policy development.
Substance use and antisocial behavior data – identify issues, raise
awareness about the problems, and promote school and community
dialogue.
• Risk and protective factor data – identify key objectives that will
help your school or community achieve its prevention goals.
•

Use the resources listed on the last page of this report, Contacts for
Prevention, for ideas about prevention programs that have proven
effective in addressing the risk factors that are high in your community
and improving the protective factors that are low.

MEASURE

Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate
#3
#4
#1
#2

Risk Factors
Protective Factors
Substance Use
Antisocial Behaviors

9

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

10

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Pinal County, Grade 8

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

11

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Pinal County, Grade 10

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

12

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Pinal County, Grade 12

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Pinal County, Grade 8
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

13

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Pinal County, Grade 10
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

14

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Pinal County, Grade 12
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

15

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Pinal County, Grade 8

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

16

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Pinal County, Grade 8
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

17

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Pinal County, Grade 10

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

18

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Pinal County, Grade 10
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

19

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Pinal County, Grade 12

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

20

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Pinal County, Grade 12
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

21

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol

WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL*
2008 Pinal County Student Survey, Grades 8, 10 & 12
If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)
100
90
80
70

Percentages (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Got it some

other way

Took it from a
store or someone

else's home

County 2008, Grade 12
Sample: 153 students**

Took it from home

Got at a party

County 2008, Grade 10
Sample: 308 students**

Someone under
21 years

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

County 2008, Grade 8
Sample: 331 students**

State 2008

* Prior to 2008, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained alcohol. Also, because not all eight states ask where youth obtained alcohol, no 8-State value is reported.
** Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case of smaller sample sizes,
caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

22

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Pinal County, Grade 8
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

23

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Pinal County, Grade 10
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

24

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Pinal County, Grade 12
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

25

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles
Low Neighborhood Attachment

Community Domain Risk Factors
Low neighborhood bonding is related to higher levels of 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.

Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

Community Domain Protective Factors
When opportunities are available in a community for positive participation, children are less likely to
engage in substance use and other problem behaviors.

Rewards for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for positive participation in activities helps youth bond to the community, thus lowering their risk
for substance use.

Poor Family Management

Family Domain Risk Factors
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.

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.

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.

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 Attachment

Family Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

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.

Academic Failure

Low Commitment to School

School Domain Risk Factors
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.
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.

26

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles (cont'd)
Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

School Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

Rebelliousness

Peer-Individual Risk Factors
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.

Early Initiation of Antisocial
Behavior and Drug Use

Early onset of drug use predicts the 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.

Attitudes Favorable Toward
Antisocial Behavior and Drug
Use

During the elementary school years, most children express anti-drug, anti-crime, and pro-social attitudes
and have 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Belief in the Moral Order

Peer-Individual Protective Factors
Young people who have a belief in what is “right” or “wrong” are less likely to use drugs.

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.

Prosocial Involvement

Participation in positive school and community activities helps provide protection for youth.

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.

27

Data Tables
Table 3. 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

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

58.4

57.9

56.9

47.8

70.4

72.8

71.8

66.2

77.6

78.8

77.6

74.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

43.2

38.7

34.1

25.9

51.8

56.5

44.1

39.9

56.8

60.1

56.0

50.8

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

10.9

10.5

8.1

7.1

10.5

14.8

14.8

12.9

16.1

16.7

20.6

17.7

Marijuana

used marijuana?

29.0

23.0

23.2

16.2

45.4

47.2

40.9

32.5

50.8

56.0

47.3

43.1

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

5.1

3.1

2.0

1.9

7.1

5.8

6.2

5.2

7.0

7.3

9.6

7.9

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

7.7

4.1

3.1

2.7

11.0

12.7

8.8

6.8

12.5

17.6

13.8

11.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

18.3

19.4

17.7

14.3

16.0

16.8

14.3

12.6

12.1

15.2

14.8

9.2

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

3.8

1.4

1.2

n/a

11.3

2.4

2.4

n/a

12.8

7.6

4.0

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

2.4

2.6

1.0

1.0

3.2

1.2

2.4

2.0

4.2

3.5

3.3

3.1

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

3.3

2.5

2.6

2.2

5.0

5.2

6.8

4.9

6.6

6.2

9.4

7.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

1.7

2.0

1.7

n/a

2.2

3.5

2.3

n/a

2.0

3.3

2.4

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

14.1

12.2

n/a

n/a

24.9

20.5

n/a

n/a

25.6

24.6

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

7.7

n/a

n/a

n/a

8.6

n/a

n/a

n/a

11.3

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

3.3

5.3

3.8

n/a

9.8

6.8

7.6

n/a

11.9

9.3

7.9

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

12.7

10.9

9.9

8.3

16.5

15.6

11.8

12.0

16.4

19.0

13.2

13.2

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of 2008 prescription stimulant, sedative
and pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

15.1

20.1

17.1

n/a

22.0

29.3

25.7

n/a

26.7

28.8

28.7

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

12.9

9.7

n/a

n/a

15.3

12.9

n/a

n/a

15.6

13.4

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

28

Data Tables
Table 4. 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 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

29.4

30.3

29.5

23.2

43.1

44.1

41.6

37.7

46.9

51.1

52.8

46.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

15.6

14.6

11.4

8.7

20.8

18.6

17.5

16.6

23.5

23.1

24.5

23.9

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

3.1

3.5

2.8

2.6

3.3

5.0

5.6

4.6

5.3

5.9

7.5

6.8

Marijuana

used marijuana?

15.6

13.6

11.3

7.6

20.7

23.5

15.9

15.1

20.7

19.6

20.5

18.7

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

4.9

1.3

0.8

0.8

4.0

2.6

2.7

1.9

2.9

4.3

2.7

2.4

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

2.7

1.7

0.9

1.0

4.2

6.0

4.1

2.2

3.2

4.7

4.5

3.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

7.1

8.9

6.6

5.4

4.5

3.8

3.6

3.0

1.3

1.5

4.5

1.6

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

1.1

0.3

0.4

n/a

4.6

0.5

0.6

n/a

1.6

1.8

0.8

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

0.9

0.8

0.6

0.4

1.1

0.5

1.2

0.7

0.8

0.4

1.5

1.0

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

1.3

1.0

1.0

0.8

1.6

1.2

1.9

1.5

1.3

0.8

3.0

2.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

0.8

1.0

0.7

n/a

0.5

1.2

1.0

n/a

1.2

0.6

1.0

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

8.1

6.0

n/a

n/a

12.4

9.4

n/a

n/a

13.0

10.5

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

5.1

n/a

n/a

n/a

3.8

n/a

n/a

n/a

4.7

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

1.7

2.5

1.6

n/a

3.7

2.9

2.9

n/a

2.7

2.4

2.1

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

5.8

5.2

4.5

3.4

9.1

7.4

4.1

4.5

8.8

8.5

6.0

5.0

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of prescription stimulant, sedative and
pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

8.0

10.9

8.6

n/a

12.3

14.3

12.2

n/a

12.5

13.8

13.1

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

6.2

5.6

n/a

n/a

9.9

6.4

n/a

n/a

9.3

5.9

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

29

Data Tables
z

Table 5. Percentage of Students Reporting Heavy ATOD Use
Grade 8

Binge Drinking

1/2 Pack (or
more) of
Cigarettes/Day

How many times have you
had 5 or more alcoholic
drinks in a row in the
past 2 weeks?
During the past 30 days, how many
cigarettes did you smoke per day?
(11 to 20 cigarettes, More than 20
cigarettes)

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

18.6

16.9

16.8

1.5

1.4

1.0

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

13.1

27.1

24.8

25.9

0.7

4.6

3.6

2.6

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

22.4

27.9

30.2

34.5

30.2

2.1

5.6

4.1

6.5

4.2

Table 6. Percentage of Students Reporting Antisocial Behavior
How many times in the past year
(12 months) have you:
(One or more times)
Suspended from School
Drunk or High at School
Sold Illegal Drugs
Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle
Been Arrested
Attacked Someone with the Idea
of Seriously Hurting Them
Carried a Handgun
Carried a Handgun to School
During the past 30 days, how many
times did you:
(One or more times)

Grade 8

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

23.1

24.3

25.2

19.5

19.4

17.0

4.6

6.1

6.7

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

20.2

18.0

30.1

21.4

12.0

25.4

33.5

29.3

14.6

10.8

19.5

14.3

10.2

20.5

23.7

32.1

30.0

5.9

4.6

12.6

12.2

22.2

11.7

9.8

9.5

14.4

13.0

4.2

4.2

3.6

6.8

10.4

9.9

5.1

3.7

4.1

7.1

6.2

15.3

11.9

11.1

7.5

2.7

10.8

15.7

12.9

9.2

9.7

14.2

13.2

8.7

22.2

22.4

20.6

18.1

22.5

23.7

21.0

16.1

16.2

20.8

19.1

12.9

6.7

9.1

2.0

8.6

7.7

8.0

8.9

9.9

7.2

6.7

9.9

12.3

8.1

1.6
1.6
Grade 8

1.2

2.5

2.2
1.7
Grade 10

1.3

2.3

3.0
3.2
Grade 12

1.4

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

DRIVE a car or other vehicle when you had
been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

8.8

6.9

RIDE in a car or other vehicle driven by
someone who had been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

36.7

32.6

State
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

5.6

n/a

15.5

9.7

29.1

n/a

42.0

36.9

* These categories were not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

30

State
2008

State
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

7.9

n/a

22.3

20.3

16.1

29.1

n/a

38.6

41.4

29.7

Data Tables
Table 7. Percentage of Students Gambling in the Past Year
How often have you done the following for money,
possessions, or anything of value:
County
2004
(At least once in the past 12 months or more)
Any Gambling
Played a slot machine, poker machine
or other gambling machine?
Played the lottery or scratch-off tickets?
Bet on sports?*
Played cards?
Bought a raffle ticket?
Played bingo?
Gambled on the Internet?
Played a dice game?*
Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?*
Bet on a horse or other animal race?*
Table 8. Percentage of Students Reporting Protection

Grade 8
County
2008

n/a

56.7

71.9

n/a

2.1

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

69.1

n/a

55.0

67.3

65.9

n/a

47.3

67.6

60.6

5.8

6.4

n/a

1.5

5.4

6.1

n/a

2.8

7.2

5.8

29.5
n/a
24.4
n/a
18.8
7.0
n/a

28.1
30.9
45.1
19.2
33.5
7.2
33.9

24.8
31.8
43.7
20.4
32.6
6.3
31.5

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

25.8
n/a
25.4
n/a
14.2
6.5
n/a

21.4
31.0
42.9
19.8
24.5
4.7
28.3

21.8
30.2
43.7
20.7
23.2
5.1
25.1

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

17.1
n/a
20.6
n/a
8.9
5.6
n/a

26.6
28.4
43.8
23.2
17.8
6.6
25.7

19.0
25.6
40.6
18.9
14.7
4.7
19.2

n/a

23.1

34.3

32.7

n/a

23.9

33.7

31.3

n/a

22.4

31.0

27.0

n/a

n/a

5.5

6.4

n/a

n/a

5.4

5.8

n/a

n/a

4.8

5.1

Grade 8

Protective Factor
Community Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Domain
Family Attachment
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
School Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer-Individual Domain
Belief in the Moral Order
Interaction with Prosocial Peers*
Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Total Protection
Students with High Protection**

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2006

State
2008

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

38.9
31.0

31.4
26.8

32.9
29.2

43.9
54.1
52.5

44.1
50.8
55.1

59.2
53.4

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

39.3
31.3

31.8
36.2

24.6
39.3

28.9
32.0

47.9
56.8
58.3

51.5
59.7
61.4

43.6
52.4
55.2

33.8
44.0
44.6

58.0
50.4

59.6
48.2

60.3
51.2

54.4
51.5

47.2
46.9
35.8
57.3

50.2
51.8
40.6
59.3

54.9
50.9
37.2
58.4

59.4
53.1
39.0
59.4

34.7

34.2

41.0

43.8

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

37.1
35.4

31.3
34.7

21.9
32.8

29.4
38.3

36.1
33.2

42.1
51.7
49.5

46.1
54.0
55.1

54.2
54.2
52.7

52.2
49.4
50.4

52.2
55.9
51.0

56.2
55.2
55.8

52.8
58.8

50.8
53.1

62.4
59.8

53.5
41.3

53.7
42.9

49.4
42.4

64.3
45.4

58.8
50.1
38.5
55.5

57.0
48.5
31.1
58.5

63.7
49.4
30.9
58.2

66.5
55.3
41.2
59.7

49.2
54.6
32.9
49.5

45.7
44.0
28.7
51.1

48.5
45.2
28.4
52.0

53.6
52.5
36.4
52.2

44.0

33.8

36.6

46.7

39.5

35.5

37.1

43.3

*Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.
**High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.

31

State
2008

State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 9. Percentage of Students Reporting Risk
Grade 8
Risk Factor
Community Domain
Low Neighborhood Attachment
Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use
Perceived Availability of Drugs
Perceived Availability of Handguns
Family Domain
Poor Family Management
Family Conflict
Family History of Antisocial Behavior
Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use
School Domain
Academic Failure
Low Commitment to School
Peer-Individual Domain
Rebelliousness
Early Initiation of ASB
Early Initiation of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use
Perceived Risk of Drug Use
Interaction with Antisocial Peers
Friend's Use of Drugs
Rewards for ASB
Gang Involvement
Total Risk
Students at High Risk*

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

45.8
46.8
43.6
39.1

44.5
44.4
42.8
40.4

44.6
41.1
44.5
41.9

51.5
56.4
59.0
46.7
32.4

50.3
53.6
49.5
45.9
33.5

59.9
44.3

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

38.5
36.6
38.2
37.8

52.7
52.4
55.7
31.3

56.7
55.0
54.2
29.6

53.8
52.2
56.8
35.0

46.8
58.0
52.9
52.5
30.0

45.5
53.5
40.3
49.3
26.8

46.4
43.1
54.1
46.8
39.9

53.6
47.1
59.9
55.0
42.1

53.3
44.5

51.0
43.0

47.3
41.0

52.3
42.1

40.2
47.5
51.0
50.3
40.3
56.8
69.6
56.2
55.3
34.2

48.0
48.6
43.8
49.8
37.3
52.2
65.8
50.2
51.3
29.7

47.6
46.1
38.6
48.3
35.7
51.2
67.1
48.6
52.8
33.1

43.1
39.4
30.3
44.6
29.1
44.5
58.2
39.4
45.6
26.9

51.9

44.3

47.5

38.7

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

46.2
42.1
49.6
26.7

59.5
48.9
59.4
41.3

60.6
51.2
60.9
44.5

57.9
47.8
56.5
37.8

51.0
36.3
52.2
33.1

47.5
43.9
50.3
53.3
40.5

42.8
42.8
41.1
53.4
41.1

43.1
38.4
49.1
40.9
42.0

48.3
41.3
55.0
51.0
45.2

43.4
42.1
49.5
55.0
42.7

44.3
38.3
37.3
50.2
41.2

59.1
45.3

57.9
43.6

49.5
43.7

41.4
45.0

48.5
44.0

49.5
50.6

44.4
45.6

42.0
47.0
45.6
51.4
40.8
44.5
63.0
50.3
43.5
30.9

54.5
59.8
49.4
54.5
44.4
47.4
73.4
51.2
50.3
37.6

54.4
54.6
40.9
56.4
39.8
49.1
70.9
50.2
44.8
35.7

46.8
42.0
32.7
50.7
37.4
42.3
57.3
41.9
44.0
23.2

39.9
41.8
47.6
40.1
32.1
40.5
60.3
39.2
47.4
30.1

44.4
53.3
46.2
47.6
38.7
47.1
65.3
44.8
52.9
22.9

54.6
54.7
40.2
50.6
35.5
50.6
69.3
43.0
56.0
23.3

44.0
41.2
33.1
46.9
36.3
46.5
53.2
37.3
54.6
16.8

42.8

45.2

45.5

37.5

38.8

45.1

44.4

35.7

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors)

32

Grade 12
State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 10. Where Youth Obtained Alcohol
Grade 8

If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)

County
2008

Grade 10

State
2008

County
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2008

State
2008

Sample size*
I bought it in a store such as a liquor store, convenience store,
supermarket, discount store, or gas station
I bought it at a restaurant, bar, or club
I bought it at a public event such as a concert or sporting event

331

4,418

308

4,872

153

5,065

4.2

5.0

7.1

6.9

11.1

12.3

1.5
2.1

3.0
2.9

5.5
4.9

3.0
2.9

3.9
2.6

7.0
3.9

I gave someone else money to buy it for me

24.8

21.4

35.1

34.4

47.1

43.7

My parent or guardian gave it to me
Another family member who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone not related to me who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone under the age of 21 gave it to me
I got it at a party
I took it from home
I took it from a store or someone else's home
I got it some other way

15.1
22.1
22.1
25.7
37.5
30.8
15.4

18.7
19.7
19.2
23.8
41.5
31.4
11.7

14.0
27.3
28.2
22.1
52.9
19.5
8.1

14.8
18.7
28.7
24.8
53.1
23.2
11.3

10.5
24.2
37.9
19.6
49.0
9.8
2.6

13.0
18.2
39.5
22.0
57.6
13.8
8.0

32.3

28.7

23.7

23.6

19.0

17.9

* Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case
of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

33

Data Tables
Table 11. Percentage of Students Reporting School Safety Issues
Grade 8
County
2004

Question

County
2006

Grade 10

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

Grade 12

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
has someone threatened or injured you with a 4-5 times
weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school 6-7 times
property?
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

80.8
9.1
6.1
0.9
0.9
0.2
0.0
2.0

80.3
9.2
5.6
1.9
0.4
0.7
0.4
1.5

86.4
5.6
4.1
1.3
0.5
0.3
0.0
1.9

87.1
6.6
3.5
1.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.9

83.8
7.3
4.7
1.2
1.2
0.2
0.2
1.4

81.6
9.3
4.1
0.7
1.1
0.7
0.0
2.6

86.1
6.2
4.0
0.9
0.5
0.3
0.3
1.7

88.4
5.9
3.0
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.1

87.8
5.7
4.7
0.5
0.3
0.0
0.3
0.8

89.2
5.8
1.8
1.1
0.4
0.7
0.0
1.1

90.4
4.2
3.3
0.0
0.3
0.3
0.6
0.9

92.4
3.9
2.0
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.7

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
4-5 times
were you in a physical fight on school property? 6-7 times
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

68.8
16.4
9.5
1.8
0.7
1.1
0.4
1.4

72.2
14.4
7.9
2.2
1.0
0.3
0.5
1.5

72.0
14.5
8.5
2.9
0.4
0.3
0.3
1.0

76.5
12.9
6.9
1.7
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.7

80.1
10.0
6.7
0.9
0.6
0.6
0.2
0.9

76.7
12.4
7.2
1.3
1.1
0.7
0.2
0.4

78.6
11.1
5.8
1.5
1.2
0.1
0.3
1.4

85.2
8.8
3.9
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.7

89.4
5.9
3.6
0.3
0.0
0.3
0.3
0.3

86.5
6.9
4.7
0.4
0.0
0.4
0.0
1.1

89.2
4.8
3.9
0.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.2

91.5
5.0
2.1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how often have you
4-5 times
been picked on or bullied by a student ON
6-7 times
SCHOOL PROPERTY?*
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

59.9
19.5

59.4
13.2
11.5
4.3
1.9
1.2
0.8
7.7

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

72.0
12.6

4.0

73.4
7.6
7.1
4.0
1.4
1.4
0.5
4.8

69.1
10.3
9.6
3.2
1.4
1.1
0.6
4.6

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

85.5
8.0

6.1

58.9
13.2
11.2
3.9
2.8
0.6
0.6
8.7

1.8

83.7
3.6
5.7
2.1
1.5
0.0
0.3
3.0

82.3
6.6
5.7
1.5
0.8
0.5
0.3
2.4

87.0
7.1
3.8
0.8
1.4

85.2
8.5
4.1
0.8
1.4

89.9
5.8
2.7
0.6
1.0

89.0
5.8
2.4
0.9
1.9

91.7
3.1
2.8
1.1
1.3

85.8
7.8
3.2
0.7
2.5

91.1
5.1
2.2
0.6
1.0

93.3
2.8
2.3
0.8
0.8

93.8
4.4
1.1
0.0
0.7

91.5
3.6
2.7
0.6
1.5

93.8
3.3
1.8
0.4
0.7

92.8
1.8
1.2
0.6
3.6

94.4
1.5
1.1
0.5
2.6

0 days

During the past 30 days, on how many days did
1 day
you not go to school because you felt you would
2-3 days
be unsafe at school or on your way to or from
4-5 days
school?

6 or more days

88.3
5.9
3.4
0.5
2.0

14.5

0 days

11.5

4.7

93.8
92.7
92.7
93.9
93.1
90.9
91.2
93.8
95.0
93.0
2.1
3.6
3.8
3.1
2.4
2.0
3.4
2.2
1.6
0.7
1.2
1.7
1.3
1.3
1.9
2.7
1.0
1.2
1.0
0.7
1.4
0.8
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.5
0.5
1.1
6 or more days
1.4
1.3
1.5
1.2
2.0
3.8
3.5
2.2
1.8
4.4
* In 2006 the choices for this question were Never , Once , Several Times and Very Often. This category was not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

During the past 30 days, on how many days did 1 day
you carry a weapon such as a gun, knife, or
2-3 days
club ON SCHOOL PROPERTY?
4-5 days

34

Data Tables
Table 12. Drug Free Communities Report*
County 2008
Outcome

Definition

Substance

Grade 8

Grade 10

Grade 12

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

Perception of Risk
(People are at Moderate or Great Risk
of harming themselves if they... )

Perception of Parent Disapproval
(Parents feel it would be Wrong or
Very Wrong to... )

Perception of Peer Disapproval
(I think it is Wrong or Very Wrong for
someone my age to...)

Past 30-Day Use

Female†

Sample Percent

Sample

drink 1 or two drinks nearly every day

Alcohol

55.9

1,457

54.7

838

56.9

327

51.7

1,273

59.1

1,312

smoke 1 or more packs or cigarettes
per day

Cigarettes

80.5

1,468

84.4

844

85.8

330

79.3

1,283

85.4

1,321

smoke marijuana regularly

Marijuana

76.5

1,431

69.6

826

66.6

320

70.1

1,253

76.1

1,287

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

89.1

1,332

83.4

782

72.8

309

83.9

1,158

86.2

1,232

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

94.9

1,340

92.9

787

81.2

309

91.5

1,166

93.6

1,237

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

94.8

1,325

93.2

780

89.6

309

92.5

1,154

94.8

1,227

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

72.2

1,581

58.9

910

53.6

338

66.9

1,388

64.5

1,402

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

82.9

1,577

71.2

906

65.9

340

76.3

1,384

77.6

1,399

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

82.0

1,574

71.5

904

68.1

339

76.4

1,378

77.4

1,400

Alcohol

29.5

1,531

41.6

866

52.8

335

33.3

1,322

39.1

1,373

at least one use in the Past 30 Days

Cigarettes

11.4

1,488

17.5

855

24.5

331

16.4

1,293

13.8

1,343

11.3

1,515

15.9

853

20.5

327

13.9

1,305

14.0

1,352

Sample Percent

Sample

Marijuana

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

had more than a sip or two of beer,
wine or hard liquor?
Average Age of Onset**
(How old were you when you first…)

Male†

Sample Percent

smoked a cigarette, even just a puff?

smoked marijuana?

Alcohol
Average age:
Cigarettes
Average age:
Marijuana
Average age:

62.0

1,574

11.8 years
34.7

1,575

11.6 years
22.7

1,583

12.1 years

75.4

914

12.9 years
47.6

907

12.3 years
41.6

911

13.3 years

81.4

Sample Percent

339

13.8 years
57.4

340

13.4 years
50.7

341

13.8 years

66.2

1,383

12.3 years
40.9

1,380

12.1 years
31.7

1,387

12.7 years

71.2

1,404

12.7 years
42.6

1,401

12.2 years
32.8

1,407

13.1 years

* The “Sample” column represents the sample size (the number of youth who answered the question). The "Percent" column represents the percentage of youth in the sample answering the question as defined.
** For Average Age of Onset, “Sample” represents the number of youth who answered the question (including students responding that they never used). 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.

† 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.

35

Appendix
Appendix - Comparability of survey administratons
Issue
Drug Category

2004 AYS
On how many occasions (if any) have you:

2006 AYS

2008 AYS

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Notes regarding changes

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Hallucinogens

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the
past 30 days?

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the past
30 days?

Used LSD or other hallucinogens during the
past 30 days?

Substituted "hallucinogens" for "psychedelics" in 2008.
Comparable across all years.

Methamphetamines

Not applicable, no methamphetamine-specific
item on 2004 AYS

Used methamphetamines (meth, speed, crank,
crystal meth)?

Used methamphetamines (meth, crystal,
crank)?

2006 and 2008 provide slightly different examples, but
are cautiously comparable.

Prescription
stimulants

Used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”,
“crystal”, “crank”) without a doctor telling you
to take them?

Used stimulants, other than methamphetamines
(such as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin,
Adderal, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling
you to take them?

2004 is not comparable to any other years, data are
presented for archival interest. 2006 and 2008 data are
cautiously comparable.

Prescription
sedatives

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such
as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping
pills)?

2008 AYS added descriptor "prescription" and removed
qualifier "without a doctor telling you to take them." 2008
data are cautiously comparable with other years.

Ecstasy

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2008 AYS used "ecstasy" as the primary descriptor and
moved "MDMA" to examples. Comparable across years.

Prescription
drugs

Not applicable, no prescription drugs item on
2004 AYS

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills),
stimulants, other than methamphetamines (such
as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine) or
other prescription drugs (such as Oxycontin)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes)

Used prescription stimulants (Ritalin,
Adderall, or Dexedrine), sedatives
(tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax,
barbiturates, or sleeping pills) or pain relievers
(Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes )

In 2006, responses to the stimulant, sedative and other
prescription drug questions were calculated as one
measure. (2006 had no prescription pain reliever item.) In
2008, responses to the stimulant, sedative and
prescription pain reliever questions were calculated as
one measure. (2008 had no standalone prescription drug
item.) 2006 and 2008 data are cautiously comparable.
(Note that composite 2006 data will not match past
reports' prescription drugs category.)

Gambling
Category

Not applicable, no gambling items
on 2004 AYS

How often during the past 12 months
have you:

How often have you done the following for
money, possessions, or anything of value:

Sports betting

n/a

Bet on team sports?

Bet on sports?

Not comparable across years.

Race betting

n/a

Bet money on horse races?

Bet on a horse race or other animal race?

Not comparable across years.

Dice

n/a

Bet on dice games such as craps?

Played a dice game?

Not comparable across years.

Games of skill

n/a

Bet on games of personal skill such as pool,
darts, or bowling?

Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?

Comparable across years.

Protective Scale:
Peer-Individual
Interaction with
Prosocial Peers

Think of your four best friends (the friends you feel closest to). In the past year (12 months), how many of your best friends have:
(Scale is calculated based on the average response [0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 friends] to the following questions)
...participated in clubs, organizations and activities at school? ...made the commitment to stay drug-free?
...tried to do well in school? ...liked school? ...regularly attended religious services?(removed in 2008)

36

Regularly attended religious services was removed from
2008 AYS. 2004 and 2006 have been recalculated to
match 2008 AYS and are now comparable across all
years. Due to this recalculation, current reports may differ
slightly from past reports.

Contacts for Prevention
Arizona Department of Education
Student Services Division
www.ade.az.gov

Regional Prevention Contacts
Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, and Santa Cruz
Counties
Bill Burnett
Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)
(520) 618-8807

Arizona Department of Health Services
Division of Behavioral Health Services
Lisa Shumaker
(602) 364-4594
www.azdhs.gov/bhs/index.htm

Gila, La Paz, Pinal, and Yuma Counties
Linda Weinberg
Cenpatico Behavioral Health of Arizona
(866) 495-6738

Arizona Prevention Resource Center
(800) 432-2772
www.azprevention.org

Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai
Counties
Petrice Post
Northern Arizona Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(NARBHA)
(928) 214-2177

Center for Violence Prevention and Community
Safety
Charles Katz
(602) 543-6618
charles.katz@asu.edu
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)
http://prevention.samhsa.gov

Maricopa County
Juan Aristizabal
Magellan
(602) 797-8256

Governor’s Office of Children, Youth, and
Families
(602) 542-4043
http://www.governor.state.az.us/cyf/index.html

Gila River Indian Community
Joan Grey
Gila River Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(602) 528-7136

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities
U.S. Department of Education
www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS

Pasqua Yaqui Tribe
Centered Spirit Program
Jill Fabian
(520) 879-6067

Arizona Department of Gaming's Office of
Problem Gambling
Elise Mikkelsen
(602) 266-8299 ext. 351
www.problemgambling.az.gov

Navajo Nation
Department of Behavioral Health Services
(928) 871-6235

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMSHA)
www.samhsa.gov

White Mountain Apache Tribe
Apache Behavioral Health Services
(928) 338-4811

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/

Colorado River Indian Tribes
(928) 669-6577

Western Regional Center for the Application of
Prevention Technologies (CAPT)
www.westcapt.org

Other State and National Contacts:
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
Michelle Neitch/ Phillip Stevenson
(602) 364-1173/(602) 364-1157
www.azcjc.gov

Bach Harrison, L.L.C.
R. Steven Harrison, Ph.D.
(801) 359-2064
www.bach-harrison.com

37

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Santa Cruz County

REPORT PROVIDED BY:

Arizona Criminal Justice Commission

1

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Shining Light on Arizona Youth
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:
Arizona Department of Gaming’s Office of Problem Gambling
Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission
Arizona Parent’s Commission on Drug Education and Prevention
Governor’s Division for Substance Abuse Policy
Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Tobacco Education and Prevention Program,
Arizona Department of Health Services

2

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 2008 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:
Jean Ajamie, Arizona Department of Education
Michelle Anderson, Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections
Steve Ballance, Maricopa County
Carisa Dwyer, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Charles Katz, Arizona State University
Dr. Manuel Medina, TERROS, Inc.
Kim O’Connor, Governor’s Office for
Children, Youth, and Families
Holly Orozco, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Catherine Osborn, Arizona Department of Education
Richard Porter, Arizona Department of Health Services
Gowri Shetty, Arizona Department of Health Services
Lisa Shumaker, Arizona Department of Health Services
Wendy Wolfersteig, Arizona State University
Nicole Yancey Johnson, Arizona Early Childhood Development
and Health Board
Governor’s Youth Commission

Additionally, the success of the 2008 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.

3

Introduction
CONTENTS:

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Summary for
Santa Cruz County

Introduction
The Risk and Protective
Factor Model of
Prevention
The Arizona Substance
Abuse Partnership
How to Read the Charts

This report summarizes some of the
findings from the 2008 Arizona Youth
Survey (AYS) administered to 8th, 10th
and 12th grade students during the
spring of 2008. The results for your
county are presented along with
comparisons to 2004 and 2006 survey
results where applicable, as well as to
the overall results for the state. 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.

Practical Implications of
the Assessment
Assessment and
Planning
Data Charts:
• Substance Use

All schools in Arizona are eligible to
participate in the survey, and
recruitment efforts were successful in
obtaining participation by schools in all
of the 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.

•

Antisocial Behavior
and Gambling

•

Risk & Protective
Factor Profiles
Where Youth
Obtained Alcohol
School Safety

•
•

Risk and Protective
Factor Scale Definitions
Data Tables
Contacts for Prevention
Appendix

Table 1 contains the characteristics of
the students who completed the survey

Table 1. Characteristics of Participants
Student Totals
County 2004

Total Students

Number

County 2006

Percent

Number

County 2008

Percent

Number

State 2008

Percent

Number

Percent

1,328

100

1,355

100

1,175

100

54,734

100

8

509

38.3

341

25.2

221

18.8

25,695

46.9

10

444

33.4

553

40.8

538

45.8

16,089

29.4

12

375

28.2

461

34.0

416

35.4

12,950

23.7

Male

675

51.3

638

47.8

564

48.7

26,213

48.8

Female

641

48.7

697

52.2

594

51.3

27,514

51.2

Native American

5

0.4

8

0.6

63

4.1

4,812

7.4

African American

6

0.5

6

0.5

33

2.2

3,915

6.0

1,211

91.7

1,230

92.6

1,116

72.8

21,525

32.9

White

64

4.8

53

4.0

290

18.9

31,887

48.8

Asian

2

0.2

8

0.6

16

1.0

2,117

3.2

Pacific Islander

4

0.3

2

0.2

16

1.0

1,115

1.7

Grade

Gender

Ethnicity*

Hispanic

*In 2008, students could mark more than one ethnic category and the 'other' category was removed.

4

from your county and the state.
Because not every student answered all
of the questions, the number of
students in the gender and ethnicity
categories often will be less than the
total number of students.
Whenever data is obtained from a
sample of students instead of the entire
population, it is important to recognize
the strengths and weaknesses of the
data. One quick and 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 participated in the
survey and those that did not.
Changes to the AYS
Survey for 2008
In an effort to shorten the AYS and
make it more responsive to local
priorities, the following changes were
made for 2008: 1) some of the
substance use questions were refined
and the use of over-the-counter drugs
was added, 2) some risk and protective
factor scales were removed where the
data could easily be obtained from
other sources or the scales measured
similar constructs (scales removed are

Risk and Protective Factors
Transitions and Mobility, Community
Disorganization, Intention to Use Drugs, and Social
Skills), 3) questions about where students get the
alcohol they drink were added, 4) an 8-State Norm
was added that can be used to compare the AYS
results on risk, protection, and antisocial behavior to a
more national sample (see the description of the 8State Norm later in this report), and 5) National
Outcome Measures that are needed for measuring the
performance of federally funded programs in Arizona
such as talking to parents about the dangers of
substance use were added.

Washington, Social Development Research Group
have investigated the relationship between risk and
protective factors and youth problem behavior. They
have found, for example, that children who live in
families with high levels of conflict are more likely
to become involved in problem behaviors such as
delinquency and drug use than children who live in
families with low levels of family conflict.
Protective factors exert a positive influence or buffer
against the negative influence of risk, thus reducing the
likelihood that adolescents will engage in problem
behaviors. Protective factors identified through research
include social bonding to family, school, community,
and peers; healthy beliefs and clear standards for
behavior; and individual characteristics. For bonding to
serve as a protective influence, it must occur through
involvement with peers and adults who communicate
healthy values and set clear standards for behavior.

The Risk and Protective Factor Model of
Substance Abuse Prevention
Many states, school districts and local agencies have
adopted the Risk and Protective Factor Model to
guide their prevention efforts. The Risk and
Protective Factor Model of Prevention 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 identified a set of risk factors for
youth problem behaviors. Risk factors are
characteristics of school, community, and family
environments, as well as characteristics of students
and their peer groups that are known to predict
increased likelihood of drug use, delinquency, school
dropout, teen pregnancy, and violent behavior among
youth. Dr. J. David Hawkins, Dr. Richard F.
Catalano, and their colleagues at the University of

T
T

T

T

T
T

T
T

T
T

T

T

Teen Pregnancy

T

School Drop-Out
Violence

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

SOURCE: COMMUNITIES THAT CARE (CTC) PREVENTION MODEL, CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION (CSAP), SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMSHA)

5

Constitutional Factors

Gang Involvement

Favorable Attitudes Toward
Drug Use & Other
Problem Behaviors

Friends Who Use Drugs &
Engage in a Problem Behavior

Alienation & Rebelliousness

Early & Persistent
Antisocial Behavior

Peer / Individual
Early Initiation of Drug Use &
Other Problem Behavior

Lack of Commitment to
School

Academic Failure

School
Favorable Parent Attitudes &
Involvement in the
Problem Behavior

T
T
T
T
T

Family Management Problems

T
T
T
T
T

Family Conflict

Community Disorganization

Low Neighborhood
Attachment

Transitions & Mobility

Availability of Drugs &
Firearms

T
T

Family History of the
Problem Behavior

Delinquency

The chart below shows the links between the 19 risk
factors and the five problem behaviors. The check
marks have been placed in the chart to indicate where
at least two well designed, published research studies
have shown a link between the risk factor and the
problem behavior.

Family

Extreme Economic &
Social Deprivation

Substance Abuse

Community
Community Laws & Norms
Favorable Toward Drug Use,
Firearms & Crime

Risk
Factors

By measuring both risk and protective factors in a
population, prevention programs can be implemented
that are designed to reduce the elevated risk factors and
increase the protective factors. For example, if academic
failure is identified as an elevated risk factor in a
community, then mentoring, tutoring, and increased
opportunities and rewards for classroom participation
can be provided to improve academic performance.

T
T

T
T

T

T

The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership
The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP) was established by Governor Napolitano’s Executive Order
2007-12 in June 2007. Chaired by the Governor’s Chief of Staff, ASAP is composed of representatives from
state government entities, federal entities, and community organizations. ASAP serves as the single statewide
council on substance abuse prevention, enforcement, and treatment.
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
prevention, treatment, and enforcement. Through coordination among its members and their agencies and
organizations ASAP strives to ensure that substance abuse funding is spent in the most efficient and efficacious
manner.
ASAP has identified four strategic focus areas for 2008: 1) child welfare and substance abuse; 2) law enforcement
and drug trafficking; 3) emerging trends and the state’s capacity to respond; and 4) data-driven decisions and
policy development.
There are currently six sub-committees that assist ASAP in meeting their goals:
•

Arizona Underage Drinking Committee - The purpose of this subcommittee is to develop a
statewide underage drinking initiative to prevent and reduce underage drinking in Arizona. Their
activities include state-level infrastructure change to improve cross coordination/collaboration
between state agencies; developing a comprehensive statewide prevention system focused on
preventing underage drinking; and collaborative projects to more effectively utilize resources
and support local efforts.

•

Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The purpose of this work group is to
continuously evaluate data related to substance abuse to move the state system through a datadriven process. This is achieved through the completion of a statewide Substance Abuse
Epidemiology Profile. This profile will be updated every two years, with specific analyses
completed each year.

•

Emerging Issues Sub-Committee of the Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The
purpose of this sub-committee is to provide understanding of emerging substance abuse
consumption and consequence trends in Arizona to state agencies, Boards, Commissions and
Committees, and ASAP and its sub-committees.

•

Methamphetamine Task Force – The purpose of this task force is to bring together
representatives from state agencies, local government, businesses, and community groups to
develop collaborative efforts among treatment, prevention, and law enforcement systems to
assess and address the impact of methamphetamine statewide through information sharing,
resource allocation, service coordination, and the development of statewide policy
recommendations sensitive to the needs of local and tribal communities.

•

Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team – The Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team serves as the
advisory body and policy-making entity for the Arizona Co-Occurring State Incentive Grant.
Team members represent a number of state agencies and community-based organizations.

•

Workforce Development Committee – This committee was formed specifically to identify and
address substance abuse prevention training and technical assistance needs across Arizona. This
will, in turn, help strengthen instruction for prevention professionals and volunteers in
community coalitions.

6

How to Read the Charts in this Report
There are five types of charts presented in this
report: 1) substance use, 2) antisocial behavior and
youth gambling, 3) risk factors, 4) protective factors,
and 5) where youth obtained alcohol. When
available, data from the 2004 and 2006
administrations will be included in the charts. The
actual percentages from the charts are presented in
tables at the end of this report.

•

Substance Use Charts
This report contains information about alcohol,
tobacco, and other drug use (referred to as ATOD
use throughout this report) and other problem
behaviors of students. The bars on each chart
represent the percentage of students in that grade
who reported the behavior. The three sections in the
charts represent different types of problem
behaviors. The definitions of each of the types of
behavior are provided below.
•

Risk and Protective Factor Charts
The risk and protective factor charts show the
percentage of students at high risk and with high
protection for each of the risk and protective factor
scales. The risk and protective factor scales measure
specific aspects of youths’ life experiences that are
predictive of whether they will engage in problem
behaviors. A definition of each risk and protective
factor scale is contained in Table 2. The factors are
grouped into four domains: community, family, school,
and peer/individual.

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.

•

Heavy use includes binge drinking (having five
or more drinks in a row during the two weeks
prior to the survey) and use of one-half a pack
or more of cigarettes per day.

The bars on the risk and protective factor charts,
represent the percentage of students whose answers
reflect significant risk or protection. There are bars for
the last three administrations of the AYS: 2004, 2006,
and 2008. By looking at 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 and
when assessing risk reduction and protective factor
enhancement efforts.

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol Charts

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling
Charts
•

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 animal
races. The chart also shows the percentage of
students who engaged in any gambling behavior
during the past year.

This chart displays data regarding the ways that
students obtained alcohol in the past 30 days. The data
focus on a subgroup of students who indicated at least
one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no
alcohol use are not represented.) It is important to note
that the charts represent a subgroup of users and not
the entire survey population. Additionally, the smaller
the sample, the more dramatic the influence of a
student's responses. For example, 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 legend indicates the sample size for
each grade surveyed to help clarify the value of the data.

Antisocial behavior (ASB) is a measure of
the percentage of students who report any
involvement during the past year with eight
antisocial behaviors: suspended from school,
drunk or high at school, sold illegal drugs,
stolen a vehicle, been arrested, attacked
someone to harm them, carried a handgun,
taken a handgun to school. The chart also
displays any incidents in the past 30 days of
drinking and driving or riding in a car with a
drinking driver.
7

How to Read the Charts in this Report (cont’d)
School Safety Charts

community and a more national sample. The 8-State
Norm value for each risk and protective factor scale
represents the percentage of youth at risk or with
protection for eight states across the country
(Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana,
Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah). In developing the
8-State Norm, the contribution of each of eight
states was proportional to its percentage of the
national population, which helps to make the results
more representative of youth nation-wide. A
comparison between the ATOD use rates from the
8-State norm and those from the national
Monitoring the Future Survey showed the rates to
be very similar, which provides added confidence in
the validity of the 8-State Norm. Brief definitions of
the risk and protective factors scales are provided in
Table 2 following the profile charts. For more
information about risk and protective factors, please
refer to the resources listed on the last page of this
report under Contacts for Prevention.

The school safety 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 or were picked on or
bullied at school. The complete questions and values
for each response option can be seen in Table 11.

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 Survey or
the 8-State Norm (described below). A comparison to
the state-wide and national results provides additional
information for your community in determining the
relative significance of levels of 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.

Drug Free Communities Reports
Table 12 contains the information that is reported
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 8-State Norm
The diamonds on the charts allow a comparison
between the levels of risk and protection in your

Practical Implications of the Assessment
No Child Left Behind
The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities section of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) requires that
schools and communities use six Principles of Effectiveness to guide their decisions and spending on federally
funded prevention and intervention programs. First introduced in 1998 by the Department of Education, the
Principles of Effectiveness outline a data-driven process for ensuring that prevention programs achieve the desired
results. The Principles of Effectiveness stipulate that local prevention programs and activities must:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

be based on a needs assessment using objective data regarding the incidence of drug use and violence,
target specific performance objectives,
be based on scientific research and be proven to reduce violence or drug use,
be based on the analysis of predictor variables such as risk and protective factors,
include meaningful and ongoing parental input in program implementation, and
have periodic evaluations of established performance measures.

The results of the AYS presented in this report can help your school and community comply with the NCLB Act. The
Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior charts provide information related to Principle 1 and the Risk and Protective
Factor charts provide information related to Principle 4. Overall, using the risk and protective factor framework helps
schools meet all of the Principles of Effectiveness, and thereby assists schools in complying with the NCLB Act.
8

Assessment and Planning
School and Community Improvement Using Survey Data
Why Conduct the Arizona
Youth Survey?
Data from the Arizona Youth
Survey can be used to help
schools and communities assess
current conditions and identify
and prioritize local prevention
issues.
Each risk and protective factor
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
county make key decisions
regarding regarding allocation
of resources, how and when to
address specific needs, and
which strategies are most
effective and known to produce
results.

What are the numbers telling you?
Review the charts and data tables presented in this report. Using the
table below, note your findings as you discuss the following questions.
Which 3-5 risk factors are of the greatest concern?
Which 3-5 protective factors are your community’s highest priority?
Which levels of 30-day drug use are of greatest concern?
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 of greatest concern?
º Which behaviors are your students exhibiting the most?
º At which grades do you see unacceptable behavior levels?
•
•
•

How to decide if a rate is “unacceptable.”
Look across the charts – which items stand out as either much
higher or much lower than the others?
• Compare your data with statewide and national data –
differences of five percent between local and other data are probably
significant.
•

Use these data for program and policy development.
Substance use and antisocial behavior data – identify issues, raise
awareness about the problems, and promote school and community
dialogue.
• Risk and protective factor data – identify key objectives that will
help your school or community achieve its prevention goals.
•

Use the resources listed on the last page of this report, Contacts for
Prevention, for ideas about prevention programs that have proven
effective in addressing the risk factors that are high in your community
and improving the protective factors that are low.

MEASURE

Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate
#3
#4
#1
#2

Risk Factors
Protective Factors
Substance Use
Antisocial Behaviors

9

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

10

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Santa Cruz County, Grade 8

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

11

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Santa Cruz County, Grade 10

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

12

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Santa Cruz County, Grade 12

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Santa Cruz County, Grade 8
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

13

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Santa Cruz County, Grade 10
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

14

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Santa Cruz County, Grade 12
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

15

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Santa Cruz County, Grade 8

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

16

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Santa Cruz County, Grade 8
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

17

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Santa Cruz County, Grade 10

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

18

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Santa Cruz County, Grade 10
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

19

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Santa Cruz County, Grade 12

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

20

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Santa Cruz County, Grade 12
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

21

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol

WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL*
2008 Santa Cruz County Student Survey, Grades 8, 10 & 12
If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)
100
90
80
70

Percentages (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Got it some

other way

Took it from a
store or someone

else's home

County 2008, Grade 12
Sample: 192 students**

Took it from home

Got at a party

County 2008, Grade 10
Sample: 196 students**

Someone under
21 years

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

County 2008, Grade 8
Sample: 42 students**

State 2008

* Prior to 2008, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained alcohol. Also, because not all eight states ask where youth obtained alcohol, no 8-State value is reported.
** Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case of smaller sample sizes,
caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

22

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Santa Cruz County, Grade 8
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

23

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Santa Cruz County, Grade 10
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

24

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Santa Cruz County, Grade 12
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

25

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles
Low Neighborhood Attachment

Community Domain Risk Factors
Low neighborhood bonding is related to higher levels of 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.

Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

Community Domain Protective Factors
When opportunities are available in a community for positive participation, children are less likely to
engage in substance use and other problem behaviors.

Rewards for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for positive participation in activities helps youth bond to the community, thus lowering their risk
for substance use.

Poor Family Management

Family Domain Risk Factors
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.

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.

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.

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 Attachment

Family Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

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.

Academic Failure

Low Commitment to School

School Domain Risk Factors
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.
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.

26

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles (cont'd)
Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

School Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

Rebelliousness

Peer-Individual Risk Factors
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.

Early Initiation of Antisocial
Behavior and Drug Use

Early onset of drug use predicts the 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.

Attitudes Favorable Toward
Antisocial Behavior and Drug
Use

During the elementary school years, most children express anti-drug, anti-crime, and pro-social attitudes
and have 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Belief in the Moral Order

Peer-Individual Protective Factors
Young people who have a belief in what is “right” or “wrong” are less likely to use drugs.

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.

Prosocial Involvement

Participation in positive school and community activities helps provide protection for youth.

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.

27

Data Tables
Table 3. 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

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

59.2

53.3

56.4

47.8

80.2

78.6

73.1

66.2

87.6

85.1

80.6

74.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

36.6

34.1

26.0

25.9

62.3

55.7

41.6

39.9

68.3

63.5

63.8

50.8

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

8.0

9.9

4.8

7.1

14.3

12.5

8.2

12.9

13.4

15.0

20.1

17.7

Marijuana

used marijuana?

12.5

11.7

16.1

16.2

30.7

24.4

23.6

32.5

34.8

31.7

36.5

43.1

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

2.4

1.3

0.9

1.9

5.7

3.6

3.4

5.2

3.3

3.4

3.2

7.9

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

3.9

4.2

1.9

2.7

10.5

10.2

5.0

6.8

13.6

14.7

13.6

11.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

14.7

16.5

11.8

14.3

13.1

12.8

11.6

12.6

6.2

8.1

5.8

9.2

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

1.6

0.0

1.2

n/a

3.1

0.8

2.4

n/a

2.3

1.5

4.0

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

1.0

1.3

0.5

1.0

1.4

1.9

0.4

2.0

1.9

1.4

1.0

3.1

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2.1

1.0

0.9

2.2

5.1

4.3

3.6

4.9

4.9

3.0

3.6

7.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

1.9

0.5

1.7

n/a

2.6

1.2

2.3

n/a

0.7

2.5

2.4

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

9.0

12.2

n/a

n/a

13.3

20.5

n/a

n/a

13.5

24.6

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

3.9

n/a

n/a

n/a

6.4

n/a

n/a

n/a

3.0

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

3.8

2.4

3.8

n/a

4.1

4.0

7.6

n/a

4.3

2.5

7.9

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

11.9

10.4

5.2

8.3

14.5

11.3

11.4

12.0

15.2

11.2

6.1

13.2

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of 2008 prescription stimulant, sedative
and pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

14.1

13.7

17.1

n/a

16.6

21.6

25.7

n/a

14.1

16.5

28.7

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

8.5

9.7

n/a

n/a

11.4

12.9

n/a

n/a

6.4

13.4

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

28

Data Tables
Table 4. 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 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

25.4

28.0

22.4

23.2

50.9

49.7

46.6

37.7

60.5

61.2

57.1

46.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

14.1

9.1

6.9

8.7

30.6

26.1

18.2

16.6

35.5

31.2

36.5

23.9

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

2.5

5.3

1.4

2.6

4.5

5.1

2.2

4.6

6.3

4.4

6.8

6.8

Marijuana

used marijuana?

5.6

6.4

8.5

7.6

11.3

10.8

6.8

15.1

13.4

12.1

15.6

18.7

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

1.6

1.6

0.0

0.8

2.3

2.7

1.4

1.9

3.0

1.1

1.8

2.4

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

1.8

1.6

0.5

1.0

5.9

5.9

1.8

2.2

7.4

5.6

4.8

3.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

5.5

7.7

6.6

5.4

4.5

4.3

4.2

3.0

1.9

1.6

1.3

1.6

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

1.3

0.0

0.4

n/a

0.8

0.2

0.6

n/a

1.4

0.8

0.8

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

0.6

1.0

0.0

0.4

0.7

1.4

0.2

0.7

0.8

0.0

0.5

1.0

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

1.2

0.7

0.0

0.8

0.9

1.6

1.6

1.5

1.9

0.7

1.5

2.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

1.6

0.5

0.7

n/a

1.2

0.4

1.0

n/a

0.2

2.3

1.0

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

5.7

6.0

n/a

n/a

6.9

9.4

n/a

n/a

5.1

10.5

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

2.5

n/a

n/a

n/a

2.1

n/a

n/a

n/a

2.2

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

1.6

0.9

1.6

n/a

2.5

1.6

2.9

n/a

1.4

1.5

2.1

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

7.3

5.7

1.4

3.4

7.3

7.3

3.4

4.5

8.4

4.5

2.6

5.0

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of prescription stimulant, sedative and
pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

8.8

6.2

8.6

n/a

9.8

10.2

12.2

n/a

6.4

6.9

13.1

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

6.2

5.6

n/a

n/a

7.0

6.4

n/a

n/a

3.6

5.9

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

29

Data Tables
z

Table 5. Percentage of Students Reporting Heavy ATOD Use
Grade 8

Binge Drinking

1/2 Pack (or
more) of
Cigarettes/Day

How many times have you
had 5 or more alcoholic
drinks in a row in the
past 2 weeks?
During the past 30 days, how many
cigarettes did you smoke per day?
(11 to 20 cigarettes, More than 20
cigarettes)

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

17.7

22.7

12.6

0.9

1.3

0.0

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

13.1

34.6

30.9

29.2

0.7

2.8

3.1

1.4

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

22.4

43.6

40.9

41.7

30.2

2.1

2.8

3.3

3.9

4.2

Table 6. Percentage of Students Reporting Antisocial Behavior
How many times in the past year
(12 months) have you:
(One or more times)
Suspended from School
Drunk or High at School
Sold Illegal Drugs
Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle
Been Arrested
Attacked Someone with the Idea
of Seriously Hurting Them
Carried a Handgun
Carried a Handgun to School
During the past 30 days, how many
times did you:
(One or more times)

Grade 8

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

23.9

22.3

20.6

11.9

11.1

8.1

5.1

4.7

6.3

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

20.2

14.4

14.6

13.6

14.6

12.0

17.7

15.5

12.9

20.5

4.7

4.6

8.2

7.2

7.1

6.8

3.3

3.6

4.3

5.7

9.2

10.0

5.2

7.5

8.9

16.4

20.0

15.6

18.1

7.8

8.0

4.7

1.8

2.0
0.0
Grade 8

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

DRIVE a car or other vehicle when you had
been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

11.3

5.7

RIDE in a car or other vehicle driven by
someone who had been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

38.6

33.8

State
2008

Grade 12
County
2006

County
2008

15.3

6.6

15.6

10.2

19.5

18.4

21.3

22.2

9.8

7.3

6.1

7.8

10.4

3.1

3.7

1.6

2.1

2.2

2.7

9.9

7.3

9.2

9.9

7.2

7.5

8.7

14.4

13.5

10.8

16.1

12.1

11.9

12.9

12.9

7.7

7.8

6.7

7.1

7.2

4.0

5.3

6.2

8.1

1.2

1.1

1.7
1.2
Grade 10

1.3

0.8

1.6
1.5
Grade 12

1.4

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

5.6

n/a

10.1

10.1

29.1

n/a

42.6

36.5

* These categories were not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

30

State
2008

State
2008

County
2004

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

7.9

n/a

27.9

26.3

16.1

29.1

n/a

49.6

42.6

29.7

Data Tables
Table 7. Percentage of Students Gambling in the Past Year
How often have you done the following for money,
possessions, or anything of value:
County
2004
(At least once in the past 12 months or more)
Any Gambling
Played a slot machine, poker machine
or other gambling machine?
Played the lottery or scratch-off tickets?
Bet on sports?*
Played cards?
Bought a raffle ticket?
Played bingo?
Gambled on the Internet?
Played a dice game?*
Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?*
Bet on a horse or other animal race?*
Table 8. Percentage of Students Reporting Protection

Grade 8
County
2008

n/a

65.2

71.5

n/a

6.6

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

69.1

n/a

54.2

72.8

65.9

n/a

50.4

62.8

60.6

8.9

6.4

n/a

2.9

7.2

6.1

n/a

2.6

6.5

5.8

28.7
n/a
34.5
n/a
25.2
15.2
n/a

27.1
38.0
42.7
25.5
32.9
7.6
34.9

24.8
31.8
43.7
20.4
32.6
6.3
31.5

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

20.8
n/a
26.4
n/a
13.2
9.3
n/a

25.1
38.5
46.9
24.9
24.7
8.6
26.9

21.8
30.2
43.7
20.7
23.2
5.1
25.1

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

18.5
n/a
23.5
n/a
6.4
4.2
n/a

17.9
32.4
41.9
21.5
16.1
9.1
20.3

19.0
25.6
40.6
18.9
14.7
4.7
19.2

n/a

24.6

35.2

32.7

n/a

22.0

40.4

31.3

n/a

18.1

31.6

27.0

n/a

n/a

9.9

6.4

n/a

n/a

9.9

5.8

n/a

n/a

9.5

5.1

Grade 8

Protective Factor
Community Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Domain
Family Attachment
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
School Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer-Individual Domain
Belief in the Moral Order
Interaction with Prosocial Peers*
Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Total Protection
Students with High Protection**

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2006

State
2008

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

40.0
29.2

46.5
30.8

47.2
39.4

49.3
61.1
58.3

48.9
58.0
61.0

55.9
53.0

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

39.3
31.3

32.8
36.8

42.9
34.6

40.8
41.4

53.6
62.1
64.2

51.5
59.7
61.4

50.9
57.1
61.5

46.2
54.5
54.7

50.9
48.1

56.8
48.4

60.3
51.2

55.7
60.1

49.5
57.1
37.2
63.7

53.3
56.8
33.7
59.6

51.2
51.0
36.5
57.6

59.4
53.1
39.0
59.4

41.5

40.6

46.6

43.8

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

37.1
35.4

40.8
36.1

40.3
35.3

34.0
27.8

36.1
33.2

50.4
61.4
62.0

46.1
54.0
55.1

62.9
70.8
64.3

62.7
63.0
64.6

56.7
52.2
55.9

56.2
55.2
55.8

60.3
61.8

60.4
62.6

62.4
59.8

60.4
44.0

65.0
51.3

59.5
46.6

64.3
45.4

61.3
54.5
35.6
62.0

62.6
56.6
33.4
58.2

67.0
62.4
33.2
64.2

66.5
55.3
41.2
59.7

52.7
59.9
36.5
56.9

53.8
62.0
40.0
53.3

49.1
59.0
30.0
50.5

53.6
52.5
36.4
52.2

46.8

44.1

49.0

46.7

48.3

51.1

39.8

43.3

*Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.
**High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.

31

State
2008

State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 9. Percentage of Students Reporting Risk
Grade 8
Risk Factor
Community Domain
Low Neighborhood Attachment
Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use
Perceived Availability of Drugs
Perceived Availability of Handguns
Family Domain
Poor Family Management
Family Conflict
Family History of Antisocial Behavior
Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use
School Domain
Academic Failure
Low Commitment to School
Peer-Individual Domain
Rebelliousness
Early Initiation of ASB
Early Initiation of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use
Perceived Risk of Drug Use
Interaction with Antisocial Peers
Friend's Use of Drugs
Rewards for ASB
Gang Involvement
Total Risk
Students at High Risk*

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

43.2
39.3
39.1
34.7

43.8
37.9
35.3
32.8

32.8
41.1
30.2
28.7

49.1
54.2
44.8
50.0
27.6

50.7
49.3
39.5
45.7
27.8

56.4
33.6

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

38.5
36.6
38.2
37.8

47.4
44.8
56.7
22.1

43.7
42.7
49.0
20.2

43.0
41.0
39.3
20.2

52.8
51.0
31.8
49.5
30.3

45.5
53.5
40.3
49.3
26.8

38.9
34.6
47.2
47.5
41.9

45.1
39.0
38.8
52.1
47.6

54.4
30.9

54.6
39.3

47.3
41.0

60.4
32.7

46.4
40.0
38.0
46.5
34.3
42.9
67.9
42.9
47.0
36.1

42.8
42.5
36.4
42.9
30.4
45.0
58.0
43.5
44.7
38.1

44.5
36.2
31.3
40.1
33.2
47.5
58.1
46.0
41.6
27.0

43.1
39.4
30.3
44.6
29.1
44.5
58.2
39.4
45.6
26.9

42.4

40.4

38.4

38.7

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

46.2
42.1
49.6
26.7

46.2
35.1
60.5
29.9

42.0
40.4
54.6
22.9

49.5
36.3
51.4
25.3

51.0
36.3
52.2
33.1

42.7
35.4
35.7
52.7
41.1

42.8
42.8
41.1
53.4
41.1

34.8
37.7
41.6
45.6
44.9

36.7
34.0
33.4
44.4
45.2

40.7
34.2
35.0
47.3
43.5

44.3
38.3
37.3
50.2
41.2

56.7
32.1

48.8
28.7

49.5
43.7

57.5
37.1

50.4
29.4

45.3
32.6

44.4
45.6

36.1
35.9
38.0
55.1
43.5
39.5
62.9
51.9
41.4
34.1

49.7
38.0
38.5
50.6
42.0
30.4
56.8
46.4
46.7
32.4

48.2
38.9
29.0
47.7
36.9
34.8
57.2
37.5
45.1
27.5

46.8
42.0
32.7
50.7
37.4
42.3
57.3
41.9
44.0
23.2

35.4
40.9
34.1
48.5
34.0
35.1
59.5
41.8
56.4
17.1

45.5
33.5
34.4
44.3
38.3
34.8
46.7
37.5
58.1
15.3

50.6
39.8
32.5
45.7
35.7
37.6
60.2
41.9
58.8
23.1

44.0
41.2
33.1
46.9
36.3
46.5
53.2
37.3
54.6
16.8

38.3

37.6

30.0

37.5

34.9

31.0

35.7

35.7

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors)

32

Grade 12
State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 10. Where Youth Obtained Alcohol
Grade 8

If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)

County
2008

Sample size*
I bought it in a store such as a liquor store, convenience store,
supermarket, discount store, or gas station
I bought it at a restaurant, bar, or club
I bought it at a public event such as a concert or sporting event
I gave someone else money to buy it for me
My parent or guardian gave it to me
Another family member who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone not related to me who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone under the age of 21 gave it to me
I got it at a party
I took it from home
I took it from a store or someone else's home
I got it some other way

Grade 10

State
2008

County
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2008

State
2008

42

4,418

196

4,872

192

5,065

9.5

5.0

9.7

6.9

30.2

12.3

2.4
9.5

3.0
2.9

7.1
5.6

3.0
2.9

35.4
6.2

7.0
3.9

9.5

21.4

32.7

34.4

39.6

43.7

21.4
26.2
11.9
19.0
54.8
11.9
16.7

18.7
19.7
19.2
23.8
41.5
31.4
11.7

11.7
17.3
27.0
21.4
60.7
20.9
6.1

14.8
18.7
28.7
24.8
53.1
23.2
11.3

8.9
14.6
30.7
22.9
68.2
17.7
8.9

13.0
18.2
39.5
22.0
57.6
13.8
8.0

31.0

28.7

19.9

23.6

24.0

17.9

* Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case
of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

33

Data Tables
Table 11. Percentage of Students Reporting School Safety Issues
Grade 8
County
2004

Question

County
2006

Grade 10

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

Grade 12

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
has someone threatened or injured you with a 4-5 times
weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school 6-7 times
property?
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

80.5
11.8
3.8
1.8
0.2
0.0
0.0
2.0

82.7
7.0
4.0
1.5
0.6
0.6
0.3
3.3

90.1
3.8
1.9
0.5
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9

87.1
6.6
3.5
1.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.9

84.6
6.6
5.7
1.4
0.9
0.0
0.0
0.9

87.5
6.1
4.2
1.5
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.6

93.5
2.9
1.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.6

88.4
5.9
3.0
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.1

89.0
7.5
2.4
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.5

91.9
4.0
2.9
0.7
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.2

93.0
4.0
1.5
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.7

92.4
3.9
2.0
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.7

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
4-5 times
were you in a physical fight on school property? 6-7 times
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

65.1
18.0
9.4
4.2
1.0
0.6
0.6
1.0

62.0
20.1
9.3
4.2
0.6
1.5
0.3
2.1

73.9
11.8
9.5
2.4
0.9
0.5
0.0
0.9

76.5
12.9
6.9
1.7
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.7

77.7
12.6
7.7
0.7
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.5

75.6
11.6
8.6
2.2
0.4
0.4
0.2
1.1

83.2
10.6
3.7
1.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.4

85.2
8.8
3.9
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.7

86.4
9.3
2.1
0.3
0.5
0.0
0.8
0.5

88.1
7.3
2.9
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.2

89.0
5.7
3.2
0.7
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.7

91.5
5.0
2.1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how often have you
4-5 times
been picked on or bullied by a student ON
6-7 times
SCHOOL PROPERTY?*
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

48.9
27.4

59.4
13.2
11.5
4.3
1.9
1.2
0.8
7.7

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

71.7
14.6

2.4

71.1
11.8
9.0
2.2
1.2
0.8
0.6
3.3

69.1
10.3
9.6
3.2
1.4
1.1
0.6
4.6

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

80.0
11.2

6.1

63.0
12.8
11.4
2.8
4.3
0.9
0.5
4.3

1.3

80.8
8.2
7.5
1.5
0.0
0.2
0.2
1.5

82.3
6.6
5.7
1.5
0.8
0.5
0.3
2.4

84.9
6.6
4.2
0.9
3.3

90.4
5.3
3.3
0.5
0.5

89.9
5.8
2.7
0.6
1.0

88.9
5.7
3.2
0.5
1.8

88.2
5.9
3.5
0.7
1.7

90.8
4.9
2.7
0.8
0.8

91.1
5.1
2.2
0.6
1.0

94.9
2.2
1.3
0.8
0.8

94.5
2.6
1.3
0.7
0.9

93.7
3.3
2.3
0.5
0.3

93.8
3.3
1.8
0.4
0.7

95.0
2.3
1.3
0.3
1.3

94.4
1.5
1.1
0.5
2.6

0 days

During the past 30 days, on how many days did
1 day
you not go to school because you felt you would
2-3 days
be unsafe at school or on your way to or from
4-5 days
school?

6 or more days

85.0
8.6
3.6
1.4
1.4

17.6

0 days

11.3

7.5

92.2
91.6
96.6
93.9
92.5
93.4
94.9
93.8
97.8
94.5
3.6
3.0
1.0
3.1
1.8
2.4
2.6
2.2
0.5
1.8
1.6
1.8
0.5
1.3
2.5
1.3
0.8
1.2
0.3
1.8
0.8
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.9
0.4
0.2
0.5
0.5
0.7
6 or more days
1.8
2.1
1.0
1.2
2.3
2.6
1.6
2.2
0.8
1.3
* In 2006 the choices for this question were Never , Once , Several Times and Very Often. This category was not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

During the past 30 days, on how many days did 1 day
you carry a weapon such as a gun, knife, or
2-3 days
club ON SCHOOL PROPERTY?
4-5 days

34

Data Tables
Table 12. Drug Free Communities Report*
County 2008
Outcome

Definition

Substance

Grade 8

Grade 10

Grade 12

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

Perception of Risk
(People are at Moderate or Great Risk
of harming themselves if they... )

Perception of Parent Disapproval
(Parents feel it would be Wrong or
Very Wrong to... )

Perception of Peer Disapproval
(I think it is Wrong or Very Wrong for
someone my age to...)

Past 30-Day Use

Female†

Sample Percent

Sample

drink 1 or two drinks nearly every day

Alcohol

60.6

203

64.1

487

65.5

388

56.7

506

70.6

555

smoke 1 or more packs or cigarettes
per day

Cigarettes

77.9

204

83.0

488

83.2

388

79.1

508

85.2

555

smoke marijuana regularly

Marijuana

78.6

201

77.4

473

75.9

374

71.1

494

83.2

537

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

89.4

198

84.0

444

69.8

367

77.7

480

81.5

514

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

97.0

197

93.3

445

84.2

367

90.0

478

91.1

516

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

96.4

196

97.0

440

94.3

368

96.0

476

95.7

513

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

73.1

212

55.5

521

51.6

407

56.4

544

58.4

579

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

88.2

211

75.6

520

58.2

407

70.7

543

73.0

578

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

91.0

210

84.4

520

78.6

406

81.3

540

85.7

579

Alcohol

22.4

210

46.6

504

57.1

399

45.9

523

45.6

574

at least one use in the Past 30 Days

Cigarettes

6.9

203

18.2

494

36.5

389

25.2

511

19.7

558

8.5

211

6.8

498

15.6

398

11.5

520

9.1

570

Sample Percent

Sample

Marijuana

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

had more than a sip or two of beer,
wine or hard liquor?
Average Age of Onset**
(How old were you when you first…)

Male†

Sample Percent

smoked a cigarette, even just a puff?

smoked marijuana?

Alcohol
Average age:
Cigarettes
Average age:
Marijuana
Average age:

61.5

213

12.1 years
26.6

214

12.3 years
16.6

211

12.9 years

76.6

525

13.5 years
46.5

523

13.3 years
24.4

525
14 years

86.0

Sample Percent

406

14.2 years
65.8

407

14.2 years
39.1

407

15.2 years

74.8

544

13.2 years
51.8

546

79.1

47.7

13.3 years
32.7

542

14.1 years

583

13.9 years
581
14 years
23.8

584

14.9 years

* The “Sample” column represents the sample size (the number of youth who answered the question). The "Percent" column represents the percentage of youth in the sample answering the question as defined.
** For Average Age of Onset, “Sample” represents the number of youth who answered the question (including students responding that they never used). 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.

† 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.

35

Appendix
Appendix - Comparability of survey administratons
Issue
Drug Category

2004 AYS
On how many occasions (if any) have you:

2006 AYS

2008 AYS

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Notes regarding changes

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Hallucinogens

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the
past 30 days?

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the past
30 days?

Used LSD or other hallucinogens during the
past 30 days?

Substituted "hallucinogens" for "psychedelics" in 2008.
Comparable across all years.

Methamphetamines

Not applicable, no methamphetamine-specific
item on 2004 AYS

Used methamphetamines (meth, speed, crank,
crystal meth)?

Used methamphetamines (meth, crystal,
crank)?

2006 and 2008 provide slightly different examples, but
are cautiously comparable.

Prescription
stimulants

Used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”,
“crystal”, “crank”) without a doctor telling you
to take them?

Used stimulants, other than methamphetamines
(such as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin,
Adderal, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling
you to take them?

2004 is not comparable to any other years, data are
presented for archival interest. 2006 and 2008 data are
cautiously comparable.

Prescription
sedatives

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such
as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping
pills)?

2008 AYS added descriptor "prescription" and removed
qualifier "without a doctor telling you to take them." 2008
data are cautiously comparable with other years.

Ecstasy

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2008 AYS used "ecstasy" as the primary descriptor and
moved "MDMA" to examples. Comparable across years.

Prescription
drugs

Not applicable, no prescription drugs item on
2004 AYS

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills),
stimulants, other than methamphetamines (such
as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine) or
other prescription drugs (such as Oxycontin)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes)

Used prescription stimulants (Ritalin,
Adderall, or Dexedrine), sedatives
(tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax,
barbiturates, or sleeping pills) or pain relievers
(Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes )

In 2006, responses to the stimulant, sedative and other
prescription drug questions were calculated as one
measure. (2006 had no prescription pain reliever item.) In
2008, responses to the stimulant, sedative and
prescription pain reliever questions were calculated as
one measure. (2008 had no standalone prescription drug
item.) 2006 and 2008 data are cautiously comparable.
(Note that composite 2006 data will not match past
reports' prescription drugs category.)

Gambling
Category

Not applicable, no gambling items
on 2004 AYS

How often during the past 12 months
have you:

How often have you done the following for
money, possessions, or anything of value:

Sports betting

n/a

Bet on team sports?

Bet on sports?

Not comparable across years.

Race betting

n/a

Bet money on horse races?

Bet on a horse race or other animal race?

Not comparable across years.

Dice

n/a

Bet on dice games such as craps?

Played a dice game?

Not comparable across years.

Games of skill

n/a

Bet on games of personal skill such as pool,
darts, or bowling?

Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?

Comparable across years.

Protective Scale:
Peer-Individual
Interaction with
Prosocial Peers

Think of your four best friends (the friends you feel closest to). In the past year (12 months), how many of your best friends have:
(Scale is calculated based on the average response [0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 friends] to the following questions)
...participated in clubs, organizations and activities at school? ...made the commitment to stay drug-free?
...tried to do well in school? ...liked school? ...regularly attended religious services?(removed in 2008)

36

Regularly attended religious services was removed from
2008 AYS. 2004 and 2006 have been recalculated to
match 2008 AYS and are now comparable across all
years. Due to this recalculation, current reports may differ
slightly from past reports.

Contacts for Prevention
Arizona Department of Education
Student Services Division
www.ade.az.gov

Regional Prevention Contacts
Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, and Santa Cruz
Counties
Bill Burnett
Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)
(520) 618-8807

Arizona Department of Health Services
Division of Behavioral Health Services
Lisa Shumaker
(602) 364-4594
www.azdhs.gov/bhs/index.htm

Gila, La Paz, Pinal, and Yuma Counties
Linda Weinberg
Cenpatico Behavioral Health of Arizona
(866) 495-6738

Arizona Prevention Resource Center
(800) 432-2772
www.azprevention.org

Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai
Counties
Petrice Post
Northern Arizona Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(NARBHA)
(928) 214-2177

Center for Violence Prevention and Community
Safety
Charles Katz
(602) 543-6618
charles.katz@asu.edu
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)
http://prevention.samhsa.gov

Maricopa County
Juan Aristizabal
Magellan
(602) 797-8256

Governor’s Office of Children, Youth, and
Families
(602) 542-4043
http://www.governor.state.az.us/cyf/index.html

Gila River Indian Community
Joan Grey
Gila River Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(602) 528-7136

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities
U.S. Department of Education
www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS

Pasqua Yaqui Tribe
Centered Spirit Program
Jill Fabian
(520) 879-6067

Arizona Department of Gaming's Office of
Problem Gambling
Elise Mikkelsen
(602) 266-8299 ext. 351
www.problemgambling.az.gov

Navajo Nation
Department of Behavioral Health Services
(928) 871-6235

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMSHA)
www.samhsa.gov

White Mountain Apache Tribe
Apache Behavioral Health Services
(928) 338-4811

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/

Colorado River Indian Tribes
(928) 669-6577

Western Regional Center for the Application of
Prevention Technologies (CAPT)
www.westcapt.org

Other State and National Contacts:
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
Michelle Neitch/ Phillip Stevenson
(602) 364-1173/(602) 364-1157
www.azcjc.gov

Bach Harrison, L.L.C.
R. Steven Harrison, Ph.D.
(801) 359-2064
www.bach-harrison.com

37

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Yavapai County

REPORT PROVIDED BY:

Arizona Criminal Justice Commission

1

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Shining Light on Arizona Youth
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:
Arizona Department of Gaming’s Office of Problem Gambling
Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission
Arizona Parent’s Commission on Drug Education and Prevention
Governor’s Division for Substance Abuse Policy
Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Tobacco Education and Prevention Program,
Arizona Department of Health Services

2

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 2008 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:
Jean Ajamie, Arizona Department of Education
Michelle Anderson, Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections
Steve Ballance, Maricopa County
Carisa Dwyer, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Charles Katz, Arizona State University
Dr. Manuel Medina, TERROS, Inc.
Kim O’Connor, Governor’s Office for
Children, Youth, and Families
Holly Orozco, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Catherine Osborn, Arizona Department of Education
Richard Porter, Arizona Department of Health Services
Gowri Shetty, Arizona Department of Health Services
Lisa Shumaker, Arizona Department of Health Services
Wendy Wolfersteig, Arizona State University
Nicole Yancey Johnson, Arizona Early Childhood Development
and Health Board
Governor’s Youth Commission

Additionally, the success of the 2008 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.

3

Introduction
CONTENTS:

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Summary for
Yavapai County

Introduction
The Risk and Protective
Factor Model of
Prevention
The Arizona Substance
Abuse Partnership
How to Read the Charts

This report summarizes some of the
findings from the 2008 Arizona Youth
Survey (AYS) administered to 8th, 10th
and 12th grade students during the
spring of 2008. The results for your
county are presented along with
comparisons to 2004 and 2006 survey
results where applicable, as well as to
the overall results for the state. 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.

Practical Implications of
the Assessment
Assessment and
Planning
Data Charts:
• Substance Use

All schools in Arizona are eligible to
participate in the survey, and
recruitment efforts were successful in
obtaining participation by schools in all
of the 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.

•

Antisocial Behavior
and Gambling

•

Risk & Protective
Factor Profiles
Where Youth
Obtained Alcohol
School Safety

•
•

Risk and Protective
Factor Scale Definitions
Data Tables
Contacts for Prevention
Appendix

Table 1 contains the characteristics of
the students who completed the survey

Table 1. Characteristics of Participants
Student Totals
County 2004

Total Students

Number

County 2006

Percent

Number

County 2008

Percent

Number

State 2008

Percent

Number

Percent

746

100

1,656

100

2,853

100

54,734

100

8

467

62.6

621

37.5

1,148

40.2

25,695

46.9

10

146

19.6

650

39.3

976

34.2

16,089

29.4

12

133

17.8

385

23.2

729

25.6

12,950

23.7

Male

364

49.6

791

49.4

1,375

49.0

26,213

48.8

Female

370

50.4

810

50.6

1,431

51.0

27,514

51.2

Native American

39

5.4

60

3.7

172

5.2

4,812

7.4

African American

4

0.6

21

1.3

109

3.3

3,915

6.0

95

13.1

311

19.3

665

20.0

21,525

32.9

White

560

77.1

1,112

68.9

2,220

66.8

31,887

48.8

Asian

3

0.4

25

1.5

88

2.6

2,117

3.2

Pacific Islander

2

0.3

13

0.8

69

2.1

1,115

1.7

Grade

Gender

Ethnicity*

Hispanic

*In 2008, students could mark more than one ethnic category and the 'other' category was removed.

4

from your county and the state.
Because not every student answered all
of the questions, the number of
students in the gender and ethnicity
categories often will be less than the
total number of students.
Whenever data is obtained from a
sample of students instead of the entire
population, it is important to recognize
the strengths and weaknesses of the
data. One quick and 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 participated in the
survey and those that did not.
Changes to the AYS
Survey for 2008
In an effort to shorten the AYS and
make it more responsive to local
priorities, the following changes were
made for 2008: 1) some of the
substance use questions were refined
and the use of over-the-counter drugs
was added, 2) some risk and protective
factor scales were removed where the
data could easily be obtained from
other sources or the scales measured
similar constructs (scales removed are

Risk and Protective Factors
Transitions and Mobility, Community
Disorganization, Intention to Use Drugs, and Social
Skills), 3) questions about where students get the
alcohol they drink were added, 4) an 8-State Norm
was added that can be used to compare the AYS
results on risk, protection, and antisocial behavior to a
more national sample (see the description of the 8State Norm later in this report), and 5) National
Outcome Measures that are needed for measuring the
performance of federally funded programs in Arizona
such as talking to parents about the dangers of
substance use were added.

Washington, Social Development Research Group
have investigated the relationship between risk and
protective factors and youth problem behavior. They
have found, for example, that children who live in
families with high levels of conflict are more likely
to become involved in problem behaviors such as
delinquency and drug use than children who live in
families with low levels of family conflict.
Protective factors exert a positive influence or buffer
against the negative influence of risk, thus reducing the
likelihood that adolescents will engage in problem
behaviors. Protective factors identified through research
include social bonding to family, school, community,
and peers; healthy beliefs and clear standards for
behavior; and individual characteristics. For bonding to
serve as a protective influence, it must occur through
involvement with peers and adults who communicate
healthy values and set clear standards for behavior.

The Risk and Protective Factor Model of
Substance Abuse Prevention
Many states, school districts and local agencies have
adopted the Risk and Protective Factor Model to
guide their prevention efforts. The Risk and
Protective Factor Model of Prevention 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 identified a set of risk factors for
youth problem behaviors. Risk factors are
characteristics of school, community, and family
environments, as well as characteristics of students
and their peer groups that are known to predict
increased likelihood of drug use, delinquency, school
dropout, teen pregnancy, and violent behavior among
youth. Dr. J. David Hawkins, Dr. Richard F.
Catalano, and their colleagues at the University of

T
T

T

T

T
T

T
T

T
T

T

T

Teen Pregnancy

T

School Drop-Out
Violence

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

SOURCE: COMMUNITIES THAT CARE (CTC) PREVENTION MODEL, CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION (CSAP), SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMSHA)

5

Constitutional Factors

Gang Involvement

Favorable Attitudes Toward
Drug Use & Other
Problem Behaviors

Friends Who Use Drugs &
Engage in a Problem Behavior

Alienation & Rebelliousness

Early & Persistent
Antisocial Behavior

Peer / Individual
Early Initiation of Drug Use &
Other Problem Behavior

Lack of Commitment to
School

Academic Failure

School
Favorable Parent Attitudes &
Involvement in the
Problem Behavior

T
T
T
T
T

Family Management Problems

T
T
T
T
T

Family Conflict

Community Disorganization

Low Neighborhood
Attachment

Transitions & Mobility

Availability of Drugs &
Firearms

T
T

Family History of the
Problem Behavior

Delinquency

The chart below shows the links between the 19 risk
factors and the five problem behaviors. The check
marks have been placed in the chart to indicate where
at least two well designed, published research studies
have shown a link between the risk factor and the
problem behavior.

Family

Extreme Economic &
Social Deprivation

Substance Abuse

Community
Community Laws & Norms
Favorable Toward Drug Use,
Firearms & Crime

Risk
Factors

By measuring both risk and protective factors in a
population, prevention programs can be implemented
that are designed to reduce the elevated risk factors and
increase the protective factors. For example, if academic
failure is identified as an elevated risk factor in a
community, then mentoring, tutoring, and increased
opportunities and rewards for classroom participation
can be provided to improve academic performance.

T
T

T
T

T

T

The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership
The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP) was established by Governor Napolitano’s Executive Order
2007-12 in June 2007. Chaired by the Governor’s Chief of Staff, ASAP is composed of representatives from
state government entities, federal entities, and community organizations. ASAP serves as the single statewide
council on substance abuse prevention, enforcement, and treatment.
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
prevention, treatment, and enforcement. Through coordination among its members and their agencies and
organizations ASAP strives to ensure that substance abuse funding is spent in the most efficient and efficacious
manner.
ASAP has identified four strategic focus areas for 2008: 1) child welfare and substance abuse; 2) law enforcement
and drug trafficking; 3) emerging trends and the state’s capacity to respond; and 4) data-driven decisions and
policy development.
There are currently six sub-committees that assist ASAP in meeting their goals:
•

Arizona Underage Drinking Committee - The purpose of this subcommittee is to develop a
statewide underage drinking initiative to prevent and reduce underage drinking in Arizona. Their
activities include state-level infrastructure change to improve cross coordination/collaboration
between state agencies; developing a comprehensive statewide prevention system focused on
preventing underage drinking; and collaborative projects to more effectively utilize resources
and support local efforts.

•

Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The purpose of this work group is to
continuously evaluate data related to substance abuse to move the state system through a datadriven process. This is achieved through the completion of a statewide Substance Abuse
Epidemiology Profile. This profile will be updated every two years, with specific analyses
completed each year.

•

Emerging Issues Sub-Committee of the Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The
purpose of this sub-committee is to provide understanding of emerging substance abuse
consumption and consequence trends in Arizona to state agencies, Boards, Commissions and
Committees, and ASAP and its sub-committees.

•

Methamphetamine Task Force – The purpose of this task force is to bring together
representatives from state agencies, local government, businesses, and community groups to
develop collaborative efforts among treatment, prevention, and law enforcement systems to
assess and address the impact of methamphetamine statewide through information sharing,
resource allocation, service coordination, and the development of statewide policy
recommendations sensitive to the needs of local and tribal communities.

•

Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team – The Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team serves as the
advisory body and policy-making entity for the Arizona Co-Occurring State Incentive Grant.
Team members represent a number of state agencies and community-based organizations.

•

Workforce Development Committee – This committee was formed specifically to identify and
address substance abuse prevention training and technical assistance needs across Arizona. This
will, in turn, help strengthen instruction for prevention professionals and volunteers in
community coalitions.

6

How to Read the Charts in this Report
There are five types of charts presented in this
report: 1) substance use, 2) antisocial behavior and
youth gambling, 3) risk factors, 4) protective factors,
and 5) where youth obtained alcohol. When
available, data from the 2004 and 2006
administrations will be included in the charts. The
actual percentages from the charts are presented in
tables at the end of this report.

•

Substance Use Charts
This report contains information about alcohol,
tobacco, and other drug use (referred to as ATOD
use throughout this report) and other problem
behaviors of students. The bars on each chart
represent the percentage of students in that grade
who reported the behavior. The three sections in the
charts represent different types of problem
behaviors. The definitions of each of the types of
behavior are provided below.
•

Risk and Protective Factor Charts
The risk and protective factor charts show the
percentage of students at high risk and with high
protection for each of the risk and protective factor
scales. The risk and protective factor scales measure
specific aspects of youths’ life experiences that are
predictive of whether they will engage in problem
behaviors. A definition of each risk and protective
factor scale is contained in Table 2. The factors are
grouped into four domains: community, family, school,
and peer/individual.

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.

•

Heavy use includes binge drinking (having five
or more drinks in a row during the two weeks
prior to the survey) and use of one-half a pack
or more of cigarettes per day.

The bars on the risk and protective factor charts,
represent the percentage of students whose answers
reflect significant risk or protection. There are bars for
the last three administrations of the AYS: 2004, 2006,
and 2008. By looking at 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 and
when assessing risk reduction and protective factor
enhancement efforts.

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol Charts

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling
Charts
•

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 animal
races. The chart also shows the percentage of
students who engaged in any gambling behavior
during the past year.

This chart displays data regarding the ways that
students obtained alcohol in the past 30 days. The data
focus on a subgroup of students who indicated at least
one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no
alcohol use are not represented.) It is important to note
that the charts represent a subgroup of users and not
the entire survey population. Additionally, the smaller
the sample, the more dramatic the influence of a
student's responses. For example, 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 legend indicates the sample size for
each grade surveyed to help clarify the value of the data.

Antisocial behavior (ASB) is a measure of
the percentage of students who report any
involvement during the past year with eight
antisocial behaviors: suspended from school,
drunk or high at school, sold illegal drugs,
stolen a vehicle, been arrested, attacked
someone to harm them, carried a handgun,
taken a handgun to school. The chart also
displays any incidents in the past 30 days of
drinking and driving or riding in a car with a
drinking driver.
7

How to Read the Charts in this Report (cont’d)
School Safety Charts

community and a more national sample. The 8-State
Norm value for each risk and protective factor scale
represents the percentage of youth at risk or with
protection for eight states across the country
(Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana,
Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah). In developing the
8-State Norm, the contribution of each of eight
states was proportional to its percentage of the
national population, which helps to make the results
more representative of youth nation-wide. A
comparison between the ATOD use rates from the
8-State norm and those from the national
Monitoring the Future Survey showed the rates to
be very similar, which provides added confidence in
the validity of the 8-State Norm. Brief definitions of
the risk and protective factors scales are provided in
Table 2 following the profile charts. For more
information about risk and protective factors, please
refer to the resources listed on the last page of this
report under Contacts for Prevention.

The school safety 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 or were picked on or
bullied at school. The complete questions and values
for each response option can be seen in Table 11.

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 Survey or
the 8-State Norm (described below). A comparison to
the state-wide and national results provides additional
information for your community in determining the
relative significance of levels of 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.

Drug Free Communities Reports
Table 12 contains the information that is reported
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 8-State Norm
The diamonds on the charts allow a comparison
between the levels of risk and protection in your

Practical Implications of the Assessment
No Child Left Behind
The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities section of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) requires that
schools and communities use six Principles of Effectiveness to guide their decisions and spending on federally
funded prevention and intervention programs. First introduced in 1998 by the Department of Education, the
Principles of Effectiveness outline a data-driven process for ensuring that prevention programs achieve the desired
results. The Principles of Effectiveness stipulate that local prevention programs and activities must:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

be based on a needs assessment using objective data regarding the incidence of drug use and violence,
target specific performance objectives,
be based on scientific research and be proven to reduce violence or drug use,
be based on the analysis of predictor variables such as risk and protective factors,
include meaningful and ongoing parental input in program implementation, and
have periodic evaluations of established performance measures.

The results of the AYS presented in this report can help your school and community comply with the NCLB Act. The
Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior charts provide information related to Principle 1 and the Risk and Protective
Factor charts provide information related to Principle 4. Overall, using the risk and protective factor framework helps
schools meet all of the Principles of Effectiveness, and thereby assists schools in complying with the NCLB Act.
8

Assessment and Planning
School and Community Improvement Using Survey Data
Why Conduct the Arizona
Youth Survey?
Data from the Arizona Youth
Survey can be used to help
schools and communities assess
current conditions and identify
and prioritize local prevention
issues.
Each risk and protective factor
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
county make key decisions
regarding regarding allocation
of resources, how and when to
address specific needs, and
which strategies are most
effective and known to produce
results.

What are the numbers telling you?
Review the charts and data tables presented in this report. Using the
table below, note your findings as you discuss the following questions.
Which 3-5 risk factors are of the greatest concern?
Which 3-5 protective factors are your community’s highest priority?
Which levels of 30-day drug use are of greatest concern?
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 of greatest concern?
º Which behaviors are your students exhibiting the most?
º At which grades do you see unacceptable behavior levels?
•
•
•

How to decide if a rate is “unacceptable.”
Look across the charts – which items stand out as either much
higher or much lower than the others?
• Compare your data with statewide and national data –
differences of five percent between local and other data are probably
significant.
•

Use these data for program and policy development.
Substance use and antisocial behavior data – identify issues, raise
awareness about the problems, and promote school and community
dialogue.
• Risk and protective factor data – identify key objectives that will
help your school or community achieve its prevention goals.
•

Use the resources listed on the last page of this report, Contacts for
Prevention, for ideas about prevention programs that have proven
effective in addressing the risk factors that are high in your community
and improving the protective factors that are low.

MEASURE

Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate
#3
#4
#1
#2

Risk Factors
Protective Factors
Substance Use
Antisocial Behaviors

9

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

10

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Yavapai County, Grade 8

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

11

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Yavapai County, Grade 10

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

12

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Yavapai County, Grade 12

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Yavapai County, Grade 8
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

13

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Yavapai County, Grade 10
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

14

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Yavapai County, Grade 12
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

15

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

State 2008

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

County 2008

Bet on Sports**

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

County 2006

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2004

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Yavapai County, Grade 8

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

16

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Yavapai County, Grade 8
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

17

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Yavapai County, Grade 10

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

18

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Yavapai County, Grade 10
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

19

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Yavapai County, Grade 12

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

20

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006
County 2004

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Yavapai County, Grade 12
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

21

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

State 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2004

8-State

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol

WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL*
2008 Yavapai County Student Survey, Grades 8, 10 & 12
If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)
100
90
80
70

Percentages (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Got it some

other way

Took it from a
store or someone

else's home

County 2008, Grade 12
Sample: 308 students**

Took it from home

Got at a party

County 2008, Grade 10
Sample: 303 students**

Someone under
21 years

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

County 2008, Grade 8
Sample: 206 students**

State 2008

* Prior to 2008, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained alcohol. Also, because not all eight states ask where youth obtained alcohol, no 8-State value is reported.
** Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case of smaller sample sizes,
caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

22

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Yavapai County, Grade 8
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

23

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Yavapai County, Grade 10
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

24

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Yavapai County, Grade 12
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

County 2008

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

25

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2006

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2004

State 2008

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles
Low Neighborhood Attachment

Community Domain Risk Factors
Low neighborhood bonding is related to higher levels of 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.

Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

Community Domain Protective Factors
When opportunities are available in a community for positive participation, children are less likely to
engage in substance use and other problem behaviors.

Rewards for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for positive participation in activities helps youth bond to the community, thus lowering their risk
for substance use.

Poor Family Management

Family Domain Risk Factors
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.

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.

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.

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 Attachment

Family Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

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.

Academic Failure

Low Commitment to School

School Domain Risk Factors
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.
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.

26

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles (cont'd)
Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

School Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

Rebelliousness

Peer-Individual Risk Factors
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.

Early Initiation of Antisocial
Behavior and Drug Use

Early onset of drug use predicts the 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.

Attitudes Favorable Toward
Antisocial Behavior and Drug
Use

During the elementary school years, most children express anti-drug, anti-crime, and pro-social attitudes
and have 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Belief in the Moral Order

Peer-Individual Protective Factors
Young people who have a belief in what is “right” or “wrong” are less likely to use drugs.

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.

Prosocial Involvement

Participation in positive school and community activities helps provide protection for youth.

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.

27

Data Tables
Table 3. 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

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

57.5

51.8

49.7

47.8

77.2

77.7

68.3

66.2

77.3

80.6

78.9

74.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

36.5

28.7

27.2

25.9

61.5

46.9

40.7

39.9

69.7

55.8

53.8

50.8

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

10.9

8.8

9.7

7.1

21.1

22.8

20.7

12.9

22.7

28.1

29.0

17.7

Marijuana

used marijuana?

20.2

15.4

14.5

16.2

43.0

38.3

29.3

32.5

51.1

47.9

45.5

43.1

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

2.0

2.0

1.7

1.9

6.5

4.5

5.0

5.2

10.9

6.4

9.2

7.9

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

2.0

3.7

2.8

2.7

12.0

7.0

5.5

6.8

16.9

6.8

10.9

11.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

13.8

14.6

13.9

14.3

13.6

13.3

14.4

12.6

17.8

12.4

15.2

9.2

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

2.7

1.3

1.2

n/a

3.7

2.7

2.4

n/a

6.1

3.5

4.0

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

1.3

1.5

1.1

1.0

3.6

2.1

2.7

2.0

3.8

1.9

3.2

3.1

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

1.1

2.1

2.7

2.2

3.6

2.6

4.0

4.9

9.8

4.1

6.0

7.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

1.3

2.1

1.7

n/a

3.5

2.8

2.3

n/a

4.0

3.1

2.4

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

14.7

12.2

n/a

n/a

21.3

20.5

n/a

n/a

29.5

24.6

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

3.3

n/a

n/a

n/a

11.3

n/a

n/a

n/a

18.2

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

4.4

3.8

3.8

n/a

6.4

6.1

7.6

n/a

6.8

9.4

7.9

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

10.7

11.5

10.8

8.3

24.3

17.6

13.5

12.0

24.6

16.0

15.1

13.2

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of 2008 prescription stimulant, sedative
and pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

16.9

21.3

17.1

n/a

22.4

26.9

25.7

n/a

24.5

33.2

28.7

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

9.3

9.7

n/a

n/a

13.7

12.9

n/a

n/a

13.8

13.4

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

28

Data Tables
Table 4. 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 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

26.8

24.2

22.7

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

23.2

49.0

49.0

38.4

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

37.7

49.6

55.0

50.6

46.8

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to
drink - more than just a few sips?

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

9.3

9.4

8.3

8.7

23.0

19.8

16.4

16.6

38.5

24.4

24.1

23.9

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping
tobacco, chewing tobacco)?

2.6

2.9

3.7

2.6

4.9

8.5

7.4

4.6

6.8

10.1

13.5

6.8

Marijuana

used marijuana?

6.1

7.0

6.3

7.6

19.1

18.0

14.1

15.1

17.7

17.0

18.5

18.7

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

0.9

0.6

0.5

0.8

2.9

1.5

1.3

1.9

2.3

2.0

2.2

2.4

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

0.2

1.1

0.8

1.0

4.3

2.0

1.0

2.2

4.6

1.5

2.0

3.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray
can, or inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get
high?

6.6

6.1

4.5

5.4

5.6

4.8

3.0

3.0

0.8

1.2

3.1

1.6

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

n/a

0.8

0.4

0.4

n/a

2.0

0.6

0.6

n/a

0.9

0.6

0.8

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

0.7

0.8

0.5

0.4

0.7

1.1

0.9

0.7

0.8

0.0

0.7

1.0

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

0.4

0.4

0.8

0.8

0.7

1.7

0.9

1.5

0.8

0.9

0.6

2.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

n/a

0.4

0.6

0.7

n/a

1.7

1.0

1.0

n/a

2.1

1.3

1.0

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

6.6

6.0

n/a

n/a

10.1

9.4

n/a

n/a

12.4

10.5

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”,
“crank”) without a doctor telling you to take them?

1.1

n/a

n/a

n/a

5.0

n/a

n/a

n/a

4.6

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

1.1

1.5

1.6

n/a

2.4

2.4

2.9

n/a

3.6

2.5

2.1

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

4.4

5.0

4.4

3.4

13.7

7.9

5.2

4.5

10.8

5.8

5.3

5.0

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of prescription stimulant, sedative and
pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

n/a

7.7

9.8

8.6

n/a

11.9

13.0

12.2

n/a

10.6

14.5

13.1

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

n/a

5.7

5.6

n/a

n/a

6.4

6.4

n/a

n/a

6.0

5.9

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

29

Data Tables
z

Table 5. Percentage of Students Reporting Heavy ATOD Use
Grade 8

Binge Drinking

1/2 Pack (or
more) of
Cigarettes/Day

How many times have you
had 5 or more alcoholic
drinks in a row in the
past 2 weeks?
During the past 30 days, how many
cigarettes did you smoke per day?
(11 to 20 cigarettes, More than 20
cigarettes)

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

13.0

11.9

12.4

0.9

1.6

1.0

State
2008

Grade 12

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

13.1

29.7

31.2

22.3

0.7

8.1

3.1

2.5

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

22.4

30.8

34.5

33.1

30.2

2.1

15.5

5.9

5.7

4.2

Table 6. Percentage of Students Reporting Antisocial Behavior
How many times in the past year
(12 months) have you:
(One or more times)
Suspended from School
Drunk or High at School
Sold Illegal Drugs
Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle
Been Arrested
Attacked Someone with the Idea
of Seriously Hurting Them
Carried a Handgun
Carried a Handgun to School
During the past 30 days, how many
times did you:
(One or more times)

Grade 8

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

15.3

17.6

17.6

11.2

11.3

10.7

2.2

3.3

3.7

3.8

9.1

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

20.2

23.4

15.2

15.1

14.6

7.6

8.8

8.8

10.2

12.0

23.1

27.7

18.8

20.5

18.6

25.4

24.4

22.2

3.3

4.6

10.5

9.9

8.6

9.8

9.2

12.5

11.9

10.4

3.1

3.6

6.9

6.0

5.0

3.7

3.8

3.6

3.2

2.7

7.8

8.9

7.5

14.7

10.9

9.8

9.2

12.2

7.9

7.0

8.7

15.2

17.1

19.9

18.1

22.1

17.8

17.0

16.1

12.4

13.1

16.5

12.9

8.2

7.8

7.7

7.7

11.2

8.4

9.4

7.2

9.2

8.3

10.9

8.1

0.4

0.9
0.5
Grade 8

1.2

2.2

1.5
1.9
Grade 10

1.3

0.8

2.5
2.4
Grade 12

1.4

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

DRIVE a car or other vehicle when you had
been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

5.8

4.4

RIDE in a car or other vehicle driven by
someone who had been drinking alcohol?*

n/a

31.6

27.1

State
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

5.6

n/a

11.9

8.3

29.1

n/a

34.8

28.1

* These categories were not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

30

State
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

7.9

n/a

19.4

20.1

16.1

29.1

n/a

34.3

33.5

29.7

Data Tables
Table 7. Percentage of Students Gambling in the Past Year
How often have you done the following for money,
possessions, or anything of value:
County
2004
(At least once in the past 12 months or more)
Any Gambling
Played a slot machine, poker machine
or other gambling machine?
Played the lottery or scratch-off tickets?
Bet on sports?*
Played cards?
Bought a raffle ticket?
Played bingo?
Gambled on the Internet?
Played a dice game?*
Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?*
Bet on a horse or other animal race?*
Table 8. Percentage of Students Reporting Protection

Grade 8
County
2008

n/a

51.1

68.3

n/a

3.0

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

69.1

n/a

49.8

69.0

65.9

n/a

45.2

61.5

60.6

5.5

6.4

n/a

4.9

6.3

6.1

n/a

4.3

5.7

5.8

24.6
n/a
22.0
n/a
15.1
6.6
n/a

23.2
30.7
45.2
24.0
28.9
6.1
33.2

24.8
31.8
43.7
20.4
32.6
6.3
31.5

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

20.0
n/a
28.3
n/a
10.0
7.1
n/a

22.3
29.9
48.7
23.0
21.7
5.2
29.9

21.8
30.2
43.7
20.7
23.2
5.1
25.1

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

14.9
n/a
28.4
n/a
4.7
4.7
n/a

17.9
27.6
44.3
18.8
14.4
5.7
18.8

19.0
25.6
40.6
18.9
14.7
4.7
19.2

n/a

21.2

32.7

32.7

n/a

22.4

35.0

31.3

n/a

15.4

29.4

27.0

n/a

n/a

6.1

6.4

n/a

n/a

6.0

5.8

n/a

n/a

6.9

5.1

Grade 8

Protective Factor
Community Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Domain
Family Attachment
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
School Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer-Individual Domain
Belief in the Moral Order
Interaction with Prosocial Peers*
Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Total Protection
Students with High Protection**

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2006

State
2008

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

47.0
32.6

43.8
31.0

45.7
30.8

55.2
64.5
67.1

53.7
60.4
64.1

67.8
62.5

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

39.3
31.3

32.8
34.9

40.1
34.6

42.1
32.2

54.1
61.0
63.9

51.5
59.7
61.4

39.3
49.1
50.4

46.4
55.0
56.7

55.7
50.5

60.6
53.4

60.3
51.2

53.1
61.5

63.4
51.7
45.6
64.6

55.5
54.0
46.6
62.1

63.1
56.2
42.3
64.5

59.4
53.1
39.0
59.4

55.7

41.3

53.5

43.8

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

37.1
35.4

41.3
39.2

39.1
39.8

41.8
30.2

36.1
33.2

45.6
49.7
51.1

46.1
54.0
55.1

54.3
52.1
49.1

60.1
56.0
57.7

60.5
53.9
56.1

56.2
55.2
55.8

56.1
64.4

55.5
54.4

62.4
59.8

53.8
53.4

59.0
51.6

52.6
37.1

64.3
45.4

45.4
50.0
41.7
58.0

58.0
52.1
38.8
60.2

61.9
51.6
38.9
59.3

66.5
55.3
41.2
59.7

48.8
38.5
35.4
42.6

47.4
52.3
44.3
46.4

47.2
47.2
36.2
46.8

53.6
52.5
36.4
52.2

33.6

45.4

45.3

46.7

34.8

42.8

37.3

43.3

*Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.
**High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.

31

State
2008

State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 9. Percentage of Students Reporting Risk
Grade 8
Risk Factor
Community Domain
Low Neighborhood Attachment
Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use
Perceived Availability of Drugs
Perceived Availability of Handguns
Family Domain
Poor Family Management
Family Conflict
Family History of Antisocial Behavior
Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use
School Domain
Academic Failure
Low Commitment to School
Peer-Individual Domain
Rebelliousness
Early Initiation of ASB
Early Initiation of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use
Perceived Risk of Drug Use
Interaction with Antisocial Peers
Friend's Use of Drugs
Rewards for ASB
Gang Involvement
Total Risk
Students at High Risk*

Grade 10

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

46.6
40.0
42.7
50.2

46.3
37.1
42.7
45.3

45.2
34.4
36.5
42.0

40.1
47.3
50.5
50.7
32.1

43.7
53.9
45.3
57.4
36.8

56.1
44.5

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

38.5
36.6
38.2
37.8

66.7
62.8
57.8
44.4

54.9
49.5
54.6
32.6

52.9
48.0
50.4
35.2

39.9
53.5
40.2
52.6
29.9

45.5
53.5
40.3
49.3
26.8

49.6
43.9
66.7
58.2
52.1

49.0
41.4
48.4
56.1
51.9

47.4
50.1

50.2
49.2

47.3
41.0

62.0
51.4

32.5
39.0
43.8
44.8
31.7
51.0
56.5
46.1
47.5
13.9

46.1
38.7
34.2
44.7
31.5
40.3
54.4
37.3
41.8
15.6

41.5
38.9
31.3
44.7
25.7
41.4
51.4
35.0
41.7
18.5

43.1
39.4
30.3
44.6
29.1
44.5
58.2
39.4
45.6
26.9

45.2

37.9

40.8

38.7

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

46.2
42.1
49.6
26.7

54.8
49.2
56.6
51.6

57.7
43.9
54.7
39.9

57.1
40.7
50.6
37.7

51.0
36.3
52.2
33.1

44.2
47.8
40.4
60.0
45.4

42.8
42.8
41.1
53.4
41.1

45.8
47.9
57.5
52.4
56.5

52.9
40.0
45.8
49.0
46.1

44.9
37.3
41.5
57.1
45.9

44.3
38.3
37.3
50.2
41.2

55.5
50.0

51.1
55.3

49.5
43.7

40.6
47.7

44.4
44.7

45.2
57.9

44.4
45.6

46.0
52.4
50.7
54.5
48.3
48.9
68.1
47.6
43.7
24.8

49.8
45.5
42.0
58.7
45.0
46.7
66.6
50.1
46.1
20.7

51.1
44.2
33.5
56.2
36.3
41.5
58.2
35.9
42.1
18.4

46.8
42.0
32.7
50.7
37.4
42.3
57.3
41.9
44.0
23.2

35.4
55.0
54.2
45.0
39.8
55.4
60.8
42.0
44.5
23.4

49.5
37.5
38.4
51.4
37.7
45.5
54.2
38.7
55.3
18.9

46.1
42.1
38.7
58.5
40.8
52.4
60.9
39.6
57.3
16.2

44.0
41.2
33.1
46.9
36.3
46.5
53.2
37.3
54.6
16.8

50.0

47.8

43.5

37.5

46.6

38.6

42.5

35.7

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors)

32

Grade 12
State
2008

State
2008

Data Tables
Table 10. Where Youth Obtained Alcohol
Grade 8

If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)

County
2008

Grade 10

State
2008

County
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2008

State
2008

Sample size*
I bought it in a store such as a liquor store, convenience store,
supermarket, discount store, or gas station
I bought it at a restaurant, bar, or club
I bought it at a public event such as a concert or sporting event

206

4,418

303

4,872

308

5,065

3.4

5.0

4.3

6.9

9.1

12.3

3.9
2.4

3.0
2.9

2.3
2.6

3.0
2.9

4.2
2.3

7.0
3.9

I gave someone else money to buy it for me

20.4

21.4

33.3

34.4

47.7

43.7

My parent or guardian gave it to me
Another family member who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone not related to me who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone under the age of 21 gave it to me
I got it at a party
I took it from home
I took it from a store or someone else's home
I got it some other way

20.9
20.4
19.4
17.0
41.7
29.1
8.7

18.7
19.7
19.2
23.8
41.5
31.4
11.7

20.5
21.8
34.3
30.4
50.8
21.5
14.2

14.8
18.7
28.7
24.8
53.1
23.2
11.3

14.0
15.6
44.8
23.7
56.5
13.0
6.8

13.0
18.2
39.5
22.0
57.6
13.8
8.0

27.2

28.7

28.4

23.6

16.9

17.9

* Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case
of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

33

Data Tables
Table 11. Percentage of Students Reporting School Safety Issues
Grade 8
County
2004

Question

County
2006

Grade 10

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

Grade 12

County
2008

State
2008

County
2004

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
has someone threatened or injured you with a 4-5 times
weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school 6-7 times
property?
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

87.7
5.8
3.9
0.9
0.2
0.4
0.0
1.1

85.6
7.3
4.9
1.2
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.7

88.4
6.6
3.2
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.5

87.1
6.6
3.5
1.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.9

86.1
6.9
4.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.1

84.7
6.7
3.8
0.8
1.3
0.5
0.2
2.1

85.9
7.0
4.2
0.6
0.8
0.2
0.3
0.9

88.4
5.9
3.0
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.1

93.1
3.8
2.3
0.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

88.9
6.2
2.4
0.5
0.3
0.8
0.0
0.8

88.9
6.5
2.0
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.1
1.7

92.4
3.9
2.0
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.7

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how many times
4-5 times
were you in a physical fight on school property? 6-7 times
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

76.3
12.4
6.7
2.2
0.7
0.9
0.0
0.9

72.4
15.8
7.7
2.2
0.5
0.2
0.2
1.0

72.6
15.8
8.0
2.1
1.0
0.4
0.1
0.1

76.5
12.9
6.9
1.7
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.7

75.7
13.2
7.6
1.4
0.0
1.4
0.0
0.7

81.5
11.1
4.7
0.8
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.8

82.8
12.0
3.8
0.7
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.3

85.2
8.8
3.9
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.7

92.2
5.4
1.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.8

89.5
5.9
2.7
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.5

88.0
7.7
3.3
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.6

91.5
5.0
2.1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how often have you
4-5 times
been picked on or bullied by a student ON
6-7 times
SCHOOL PROPERTY?*
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

53.7
19.7

59.4
13.2
11.5
4.3
1.9
1.2
0.8
7.7

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

70.4
10.8

5.5

65.6
11.2
9.3
3.5
2.0
1.7
0.6
6.1

69.1
10.3
9.6
3.2
1.4
1.1
0.6
4.6

n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a

84.7
9.0

8.0

53.0
14.0
12.4
4.5
2.1
2.0
1.2
10.6

1.9

78.6
7.4
7.7
1.1
0.4
0.3
0.6
3.9

82.3
6.6
5.7
1.5
0.8
0.5
0.3
2.4

91.4
4.6
2.5
0.7
0.8

91.5
5.2
2.3
0.1
0.9

89.9
5.8
2.7
0.6
1.0

91.0
5.5
2.1
0.7
0.7

92.9
5.5
1.0
0.2
0.5

88.2
7.3
3.4
0.3
0.8

91.1
5.1
2.2
0.6
1.0

96.9
0.8
2.3
0.0
0.0

94.6
2.2
1.6
0.5
1.1

91.4
5.9
2.4
0.1
0.1

93.8
3.3
1.8
0.4
0.7

89.2
2.3
1.4
0.9
6.2

94.4
1.5
1.1
0.5
2.6

0 days

During the past 30 days, on how many days did
1 day
you not go to school because you felt you would
2-3 days
be unsafe at school or on your way to or from
4-5 days
school?

6 or more days

92.0
2.4
4.3
0.2
1.1

18.7

0 days

13.3

4.4

93.9
93.6
93.3
93.9
91.0
87.8
90.8
93.8
94.5
89.4
2.8
3.7
4.3
3.1
2.1
3.6
2.2
2.2
1.6
2.2
1.3
0.5
1.2
1.3
0.7
2.5
2.1
1.2
0.0
0.8
1.1
0.5
0.2
0.5
1.4
1.3
0.2
0.5
1.6
0.5
6 or more days
0.9
1.7
1.1
1.2
4.9
4.7
4.7
2.2
2.3
7.0
* In 2006 the choices for this question were Never , Once , Several Times and Very Often. This category was not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

During the past 30 days, on how many days did 1 day
you carry a weapon such as a gun, knife, or
2-3 days
club ON SCHOOL PROPERTY?
4-5 days

34

Data Tables
Table 12. Drug Free Communities Report*
County 2008
Outcome

Definition

Substance

Grade 8

Grade 10

Grade 12

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

Perception of Risk
(People are at Moderate or Great Risk
of harming themselves if they... )

Perception of Parent Disapproval
(Parents feel it would be Wrong or
Very Wrong to... )

Perception of Peer Disapproval
(I think it is Wrong or Very Wrong for
someone my age to...)

Past 30-Day Use

Female†

Sample Percent

Sample

drink 1 or two drinks nearly every day

Alcohol

58.3

1,097

58.9

930

58.7

659

53.8

1,276

63.3

1,369

smoke 1 or more packs or cigarettes
per day

Cigarettes

86.5

1,102

88.8

932

88.0

661

85.4

1,280

90.0

1,374

smoke marijuana regularly

Marijuana

83.9

1,058

74.3

917

66.6

646

73.7

1,251

79.0

1,328

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

88.5

1,065

81.0

906

72.4

620

81.3

1,222

82.7

1,327

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

94.9

1,073

93.2

911

84.3

623

92.0

1,230

91.6

1,335

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

96.1

1,064

91.8

906

90.8

619

93.2

1,221

93.3

1,327

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

78.9

1,138

60.0

963

48.3

715

64.1

1,355

65.6

1,419

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

87.2

1,142

74.7

961

57.5

715

76.8

1,353

74.2

1,421

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

87.7

1,136

75.6

963

66.9

714

78.4

1,349

78.5

1,421

Alcohol

22.7

1,127

38.4

945

50.6

690

34.0

1,314

36.0

1,406

at least one use in the Past 30 Days

Cigarettes

8.3

1,108

16.4

934

24.1

668

13.7

1,287

16.1

1,381

6.3

1,120

14.1

939

18.5

681

11.4

1,307

12.4

1,390

Sample Percent

Sample

Marijuana

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

had more than a sip or two of beer,
wine or hard liquor?
Average Age of Onset**
(How old were you when you first…)

Male†

Sample Percent

smoked a cigarette, even just a puff?

smoked marijuana?

Alcohol
Average age:
Cigarettes
Average age:
Marijuana
Average age:

53.9

1,126

70.2

11.8 years
28.1

1,131

11.6 years
14.2

1,138
12 years

961
13 years

42.7

963

79.2

963

13.3 years

718

13.9 years
56.8

12.6 years
29.8

Sample Percent

716
14 years

47.1

717

14.5 years

63.9

1,349

67.8

12.7 years
37.5

1,349

12.8 years
26.8

1,352

13.5 years

1,414
13 years

42.8

1,419

12.8 years
28.3

1,423

13.5 years

* The “Sample” column represents the sample size (the number of youth who answered the question). The "Percent" column represents the percentage of youth in the sample answering the question as defined.
** For Average Age of Onset, “Sample” represents the number of youth who answered the question (including students responding that they never used). 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.

† 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.

35

Appendix
Appendix - Comparability of survey administratons
Issue
Drug Category

2004 AYS
On how many occasions (if any) have you:

2006 AYS

2008 AYS

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Notes regarding changes

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Hallucinogens

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the
past 30 days?

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the past
30 days?

Used LSD or other hallucinogens during the
past 30 days?

Substituted "hallucinogens" for "psychedelics" in 2008.
Comparable across all years.

Methamphetamines

Not applicable, no methamphetamine-specific
item on 2004 AYS

Used methamphetamines (meth, speed, crank,
crystal meth)?

Used methamphetamines (meth, crystal,
crank)?

2006 and 2008 provide slightly different examples, but
are cautiously comparable.

Prescription
stimulants

Used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”,
“crystal”, “crank”) without a doctor telling you
to take them?

Used stimulants, other than methamphetamines
(such as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin,
Adderal, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling
you to take them?

2004 is not comparable to any other years, data are
presented for archival interest. 2006 and 2008 data are
cautiously comparable.

Prescription
sedatives

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such
as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping
pills)?

2008 AYS added descriptor "prescription" and removed
qualifier "without a doctor telling you to take them." 2008
data are cautiously comparable with other years.

Ecstasy

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2008 AYS used "ecstasy" as the primary descriptor and
moved "MDMA" to examples. Comparable across years.

Prescription
drugs

Not applicable, no prescription drugs item on
2004 AYS

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills),
stimulants, other than methamphetamines (such
as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine) or
other prescription drugs (such as Oxycontin)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes)

Used prescription stimulants (Ritalin,
Adderall, or Dexedrine), sedatives
(tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax,
barbiturates, or sleeping pills) or pain relievers
(Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes )

In 2006, responses to the stimulant, sedative and other
prescription drug questions were calculated as one
measure. (2006 had no prescription pain reliever item.) In
2008, responses to the stimulant, sedative and
prescription pain reliever questions were calculated as
one measure. (2008 had no standalone prescription drug
item.) 2006 and 2008 data are cautiously comparable.
(Note that composite 2006 data will not match past
reports' prescription drugs category.)

Gambling
Category

Not applicable, no gambling items
on 2004 AYS

How often during the past 12 months
have you:

How often have you done the following for
money, possessions, or anything of value:

Sports betting

n/a

Bet on team sports?

Bet on sports?

Not comparable across years.

Race betting

n/a

Bet money on horse races?

Bet on a horse race or other animal race?

Not comparable across years.

Dice

n/a

Bet on dice games such as craps?

Played a dice game?

Not comparable across years.

Games of skill

n/a

Bet on games of personal skill such as pool,
darts, or bowling?

Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?

Comparable across years.

Protective Scale:
Peer-Individual
Interaction with
Prosocial Peers

Think of your four best friends (the friends you feel closest to). In the past year (12 months), how many of your best friends have:
(Scale is calculated based on the average response [0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 friends] to the following questions)
...participated in clubs, organizations and activities at school? ...made the commitment to stay drug-free?
...tried to do well in school? ...liked school? ...regularly attended religious services?(removed in 2008)

36

Regularly attended religious services was removed from
2008 AYS. 2004 and 2006 have been recalculated to
match 2008 AYS and are now comparable across all
years. Due to this recalculation, current reports may differ
slightly from past reports.

Contacts for Prevention
Arizona Department of Education
Student Services Division
www.ade.az.gov

Regional Prevention Contacts
Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, and Santa Cruz
Counties
Bill Burnett
Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)
(520) 618-8807

Arizona Department of Health Services
Division of Behavioral Health Services
Lisa Shumaker
(602) 364-4594
www.azdhs.gov/bhs/index.htm

Gila, La Paz, Pinal, and Yuma Counties
Linda Weinberg
Cenpatico Behavioral Health of Arizona
(866) 495-6738

Arizona Prevention Resource Center
(800) 432-2772
www.azprevention.org

Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai
Counties
Petrice Post
Northern Arizona Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(NARBHA)
(928) 214-2177

Center for Violence Prevention and Community
Safety
Charles Katz
(602) 543-6618
charles.katz@asu.edu
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)
http://prevention.samhsa.gov

Maricopa County
Juan Aristizabal
Magellan
(602) 797-8256

Governor’s Office of Children, Youth, and
Families
(602) 542-4043
http://www.governor.state.az.us/cyf/index.html

Gila River Indian Community
Joan Grey
Gila River Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(602) 528-7136

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities
U.S. Department of Education
www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS

Pasqua Yaqui Tribe
Centered Spirit Program
Jill Fabian
(520) 879-6067

Arizona Department of Gaming's Office of
Problem Gambling
Elise Mikkelsen
(602) 266-8299 ext. 351
www.problemgambling.az.gov

Navajo Nation
Department of Behavioral Health Services
(928) 871-6235

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMSHA)
www.samhsa.gov

White Mountain Apache Tribe
Apache Behavioral Health Services
(928) 338-4811

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/

Colorado River Indian Tribes
(928) 669-6577

Western Regional Center for the Application of
Prevention Technologies (CAPT)
www.westcapt.org

Other State and National Contacts:
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
Michelle Neitch/ Phillip Stevenson
(602) 364-1173/(602) 364-1157
www.azcjc.gov

Bach Harrison, L.L.C.
R. Steven Harrison, Ph.D.
(801) 359-2064
www.bach-harrison.com

37

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Yuma County

REPORT PROVIDED BY:

Arizona Criminal Justice Commission

1

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Shining Light on Arizona Youth
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
IN PARTNERSHIP WITH:
Arizona Department of Gaming’s Office of Problem Gambling
Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission
Arizona Parent’s Commission on Drug Education and Prevention
Governor’s Division for Substance Abuse Policy
Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Tobacco Education and Prevention Program,
Arizona Department of Health Services

2

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 2008 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:
Jean Ajamie, Arizona Department of Education
Michelle Anderson, Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections
Steve Ballance, Maricopa County
Carisa Dwyer, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Charles Katz, Arizona State University
Dr. Manuel Medina, TERROS, Inc.
Kim O’Connor, Governor’s Office for
Children, Youth, and Families
Holly Orozco, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth, and Families
Catherine Osborn, Arizona Department of Education
Richard Porter, Arizona Department of Health Services
Gowri Shetty, Arizona Department of Health Services
Lisa Shumaker, Arizona Department of Health Services
Wendy Wolfersteig, Arizona State University
Nicole Yancey Johnson, Arizona Early Childhood Development
and Health Board
Governor’s Youth Commission

Additionally, the success of the 2008 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.

3

Introduction
CONTENTS:

2008 Arizona Youth Survey
Summary for
Yuma County

Introduction
The Risk and Protective
Factor Model of
Prevention
The Arizona Substance
Abuse Partnership
How to Read the Charts

This report summarizes some of the
findings from the 2008 Arizona Youth
Survey (AYS) administered to 8th, 10th
and 12th grade students during the
spring of 2008. The results for your
county are presented along with
comparisons to 2004 and 2006 survey
results where applicable, as well as to
the overall results for the state. 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.

Practical Implications of
the Assessment
Assessment and
Planning
Data Charts:
• Substance Use

All schools in Arizona are eligible to
participate in the survey, and
recruitment efforts were successful in
obtaining participation by schools in all
of the 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.

•

Antisocial Behavior
and Gambling

•

Risk & Protective
Factor Profiles
Where Youth
Obtained Alcohol
School Safety

•
•

Risk and Protective
Factor Scale Definitions
Data Tables
Contacts for Prevention
Appendix

Table 1 contains the characteristics of
the students who completed the survey

Table 1. Characteristics of Participants
Student Totals
County 2006

Total Students

Number

County 2008

Percent

Number

State 2008

Percent

Number

Percent

2,629

100

1,716

100

54,734

100

1,518

57.7

1,306

76.1

25,695

46.9

10

813

30.9

204

11.9

16,089

29.4

12

298

11.3

206

12.0

12,950

23.7

Male

1,275

49.8

838

49.5

26,213

48.8

Female

1,283

50.2

854

50.5

27,514

51.2

Native American

29

1.2

139

6.6

4,812

7.4

African American

58

2.3

84

4.0

3,915

6.0

1,812

71.9

1,312

62.0

21,525

32.9

White

454

18.0

502

23.7

31,887

48.8

Asian

21

0.8

46

2.2

2,117

3.2

Pacific Islander

14

0.6

32

1.5

1,115

1.7

Grade
8

Gender

Ethnicity*

Hispanic

*In 2008, students could mark more than one ethnic category and the 'other' category was removed.

4

from your county and the state.
Because not every student answered all
of the questions, the number of
students in the gender and ethnicity
categories often will be less than the
total number of students.
Whenever data is obtained from a
sample of students instead of the entire
population, it is important to recognize
the strengths and weaknesses of the
data. One quick and 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 participated in the
survey and those that did not.
Changes to the AYS
Survey for 2008
In an effort to shorten the AYS and
make it more responsive to local
priorities, the following changes were
made for 2008: 1) some of the
substance use questions were refined
and the use of over-the-counter drugs
was added, 2) some risk and protective
factor scales were removed where the
data could easily be obtained from
other sources or the scales measured
similar constructs (scales removed are

Risk and Protective Factors
Transitions and Mobility, Community
Disorganization, Intention to Use Drugs, and Social
Skills), 3) questions about where students get the
alcohol they drink were added, 4) an 8-State Norm
was added that can be used to compare the AYS
results on risk, protection, and antisocial behavior to a
more national sample (see the description of the 8State Norm later in this report), and 5) National
Outcome Measures that are needed for measuring the
performance of federally funded programs in Arizona
such as talking to parents about the dangers of
substance use were added.

Washington, Social Development Research Group
have investigated the relationship between risk and
protective factors and youth problem behavior. They
have found, for example, that children who live in
families with high levels of conflict are more likely
to become involved in problem behaviors such as
delinquency and drug use than children who live in
families with low levels of family conflict.
Protective factors exert a positive influence or buffer
against the negative influence of risk, thus reducing the
likelihood that adolescents will engage in problem
behaviors. Protective factors identified through research
include social bonding to family, school, community,
and peers; healthy beliefs and clear standards for
behavior; and individual characteristics. For bonding to
serve as a protective influence, it must occur through
involvement with peers and adults who communicate
healthy values and set clear standards for behavior.

The Risk and Protective Factor Model of
Substance Abuse Prevention
Many states, school districts and local agencies have
adopted the Risk and Protective Factor Model to
guide their prevention efforts. The Risk and
Protective Factor Model of Prevention 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 identified a set of risk factors for
youth problem behaviors. Risk factors are
characteristics of school, community, and family
environments, as well as characteristics of students
and their peer groups that are known to predict
increased likelihood of drug use, delinquency, school
dropout, teen pregnancy, and violent behavior among
youth. Dr. J. David Hawkins, Dr. Richard F.
Catalano, and their colleagues at the University of

T
T

T

T

T
T

T
T

T
T

T

T

Teen Pregnancy

T

School Drop-Out
Violence

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

SOURCE: COMMUNITIES THAT CARE (CTC) PREVENTION MODEL, CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION (CSAP), SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMSHA)

5

Constitutional Factors

Gang Involvement

Favorable Attitudes Toward
Drug Use & Other
Problem Behaviors

Friends Who Use Drugs &
Engage in a Problem Behavior

Alienation & Rebelliousness

Early & Persistent
Antisocial Behavior

Peer / Individual
Early Initiation of Drug Use &
Other Problem Behavior

Lack of Commitment to
School

Academic Failure

School
Favorable Parent Attitudes &
Involvement in the
Problem Behavior

T
T
T
T
T

Family Management Problems

T
T
T
T
T

Family Conflict

Community Disorganization

Low Neighborhood
Attachment

Transitions & Mobility

Availability of Drugs &
Firearms

T
T

Family History of the
Problem Behavior

Delinquency

The chart below shows the links between the 19 risk
factors and the five problem behaviors. The check
marks have been placed in the chart to indicate where
at least two well designed, published research studies
have shown a link between the risk factor and the
problem behavior.

Family

Extreme Economic &
Social Deprivation

Substance Abuse

Community
Community Laws & Norms
Favorable Toward Drug Use,
Firearms & Crime

Risk
Factors

By measuring both risk and protective factors in a
population, prevention programs can be implemented
that are designed to reduce the elevated risk factors and
increase the protective factors. For example, if academic
failure is identified as an elevated risk factor in a
community, then mentoring, tutoring, and increased
opportunities and rewards for classroom participation
can be provided to improve academic performance.

T
T

T
T

T

T

The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership
The Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP) was established by Governor Napolitano’s Executive Order
2007-12 in June 2007. Chaired by the Governor’s Chief of Staff, ASAP is composed of representatives from
state government entities, federal entities, and community organizations. ASAP serves as the single statewide
council on substance abuse prevention, enforcement, and treatment.
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
prevention, treatment, and enforcement. Through coordination among its members and their agencies and
organizations ASAP strives to ensure that substance abuse funding is spent in the most efficient and efficacious
manner.
ASAP has identified four strategic focus areas for 2008: 1) child welfare and substance abuse; 2) law enforcement
and drug trafficking; 3) emerging trends and the state’s capacity to respond; and 4) data-driven decisions and
policy development.
There are currently six sub-committees that assist ASAP in meeting their goals:
•

Arizona Underage Drinking Committee - The purpose of this subcommittee is to develop a
statewide underage drinking initiative to prevent and reduce underage drinking in Arizona. Their
activities include state-level infrastructure change to improve cross coordination/collaboration
between state agencies; developing a comprehensive statewide prevention system focused on
preventing underage drinking; and collaborative projects to more effectively utilize resources
and support local efforts.

•

Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The purpose of this work group is to
continuously evaluate data related to substance abuse to move the state system through a datadriven process. This is achieved through the completion of a statewide Substance Abuse
Epidemiology Profile. This profile will be updated every two years, with specific analyses
completed each year.

•

Emerging Issues Sub-Committee of the Substance Abuse Epidemiology Work Group – The
purpose of this sub-committee is to provide understanding of emerging substance abuse
consumption and consequence trends in Arizona to state agencies, Boards, Commissions and
Committees, and ASAP and its sub-committees.

•

Methamphetamine Task Force – The purpose of this task force is to bring together
representatives from state agencies, local government, businesses, and community groups to
develop collaborative efforts among treatment, prevention, and law enforcement systems to
assess and address the impact of methamphetamine statewide through information sharing,
resource allocation, service coordination, and the development of statewide policy
recommendations sensitive to the needs of local and tribal communities.

•

Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team – The Co-Occurring Policy Advisory Team serves as the
advisory body and policy-making entity for the Arizona Co-Occurring State Incentive Grant.
Team members represent a number of state agencies and community-based organizations.

•

Workforce Development Committee – This committee was formed specifically to identify and
address substance abuse prevention training and technical assistance needs across Arizona. This
will, in turn, help strengthen instruction for prevention professionals and volunteers in
community coalitions.

6

How to Read the Charts in this Report
There are five types of charts presented in this
report: 1) substance use, 2) antisocial behavior and
youth gambling, 3) risk factors, 4) protective factors,
and 5) where youth obtained alcohol. When
available, data from the 2004 and 2006
administrations will be included in the charts. The
actual percentages from the charts are presented in
tables at the end of this report.

•

Substance Use Charts
This report contains information about alcohol,
tobacco, and other drug use (referred to as ATOD
use throughout this report) and other problem
behaviors of students. The bars on each chart
represent the percentage of students in that grade
who reported the behavior. The three sections in the
charts represent different types of problem
behaviors. The definitions of each of the types of
behavior are provided below.
•

Risk and Protective Factor Charts
The risk and protective factor charts show the
percentage of students at high risk and with high
protection for each of the risk and protective factor
scales. The risk and protective factor scales measure
specific aspects of youths’ life experiences that are
predictive of whether they will engage in problem
behaviors. A definition of each risk and protective
factor scale is contained in Table 2. The factors are
grouped into four domains: community, family, school,
and peer/individual.

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.

•

Heavy use includes binge drinking (having five
or more drinks in a row during the two weeks
prior to the survey) and use of one-half a pack
or more of cigarettes per day.

The bars on the risk and protective factor charts,
represent the percentage of students whose answers
reflect significant risk or protection. There are bars for
the last three administrations of the AYS: 2004, 2006,
and 2008. By looking at 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 and
when assessing risk reduction and protective factor
enhancement efforts.

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol Charts

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling
Charts
•

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 animal
races. The chart also shows the percentage of
students who engaged in any gambling behavior
during the past year.

This chart displays data regarding the ways that
students obtained alcohol in the past 30 days. The data
focus on a subgroup of students who indicated at least
one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no
alcohol use are not represented.) It is important to note
that the charts represent a subgroup of users and not
the entire survey population. Additionally, the smaller
the sample, the more dramatic the influence of a
student's responses. For example, 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 legend indicates the sample size for
each grade surveyed to help clarify the value of the data.

Antisocial behavior (ASB) is a measure of
the percentage of students who report any
involvement during the past year with eight
antisocial behaviors: suspended from school,
drunk or high at school, sold illegal drugs,
stolen a vehicle, been arrested, attacked
someone to harm them, carried a handgun,
taken a handgun to school. The chart also
displays any incidents in the past 30 days of
drinking and driving or riding in a car with a
drinking driver.
7

How to Read the Charts in this Report (cont’d)
School Safety Charts

community and a more national sample. The 8-State
Norm value for each risk and protective factor scale
represents the percentage of youth at risk or with
protection for eight states across the country
(Arizona, Arkansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana,
Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah). In developing the
8-State Norm, the contribution of each of eight
states was proportional to its percentage of the
national population, which helps to make the results
more representative of youth nation-wide. A
comparison between the ATOD use rates from the
8-State norm and those from the national
Monitoring the Future Survey showed the rates to
be very similar, which provides added confidence in
the validity of the 8-State Norm. Brief definitions of
the risk and protective factors scales are provided in
Table 2 following the profile charts. For more
information about risk and protective factors, please
refer to the resources listed on the last page of this
report under Contacts for Prevention.

The school safety 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 or were picked on or
bullied at school. The complete questions and values
for each response option can be seen in Table 11.

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 Survey or
the 8-State Norm (described below). A comparison to
the state-wide and national results provides additional
information for your community in determining the
relative significance of levels of 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.

Drug Free Communities Reports
Table 12 contains the information that is reported
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 8-State Norm
The diamonds on the charts allow a comparison
between the levels of risk and protection in your

Practical Implications of the Assessment
No Child Left Behind
The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities section of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) requires that
schools and communities use six Principles of Effectiveness to guide their decisions and spending on federally
funded prevention and intervention programs. First introduced in 1998 by the Department of Education, the
Principles of Effectiveness outline a data-driven process for ensuring that prevention programs achieve the desired
results. The Principles of Effectiveness stipulate that local prevention programs and activities must:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

be based on a needs assessment using objective data regarding the incidence of drug use and violence,
target specific performance objectives,
be based on scientific research and be proven to reduce violence or drug use,
be based on the analysis of predictor variables such as risk and protective factors,
include meaningful and ongoing parental input in program implementation, and
have periodic evaluations of established performance measures.

The results of the AYS presented in this report can help your school and community comply with the NCLB Act. The
Substance Use and Antisocial Behavior charts provide information related to Principle 1 and the Risk and Protective
Factor charts provide information related to Principle 4. Overall, using the risk and protective factor framework helps
schools meet all of the Principles of Effectiveness, and thereby assists schools in complying with the NCLB Act.
8

Assessment and Planning
School and Community Improvement Using Survey Data
Why Conduct the Arizona
Youth Survey?
Data from the Arizona Youth
Survey can be used to help
schools and communities assess
current conditions and identify
and prioritize local prevention
issues.
Each risk and protective factor
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
county make key decisions
regarding regarding allocation
of resources, how and when to
address specific needs, and
which strategies are most
effective and known to produce
results.

What are the numbers telling you?
Review the charts and data tables presented in this report. Using the
table below, note your findings as you discuss the following questions.
Which 3-5 risk factors are of the greatest concern?
Which 3-5 protective factors are your community’s highest priority?
Which levels of 30-day drug use are of greatest concern?
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 of greatest concern?
º Which behaviors are your students exhibiting the most?
º At which grades do you see unacceptable behavior levels?
•
•
•

How to decide if a rate is “unacceptable.”
Look across the charts – which items stand out as either much
higher or much lower than the others?
• Compare your data with statewide and national data –
differences of five percent between local and other data are probably
significant.
•

Use these data for program and policy development.
Substance use and antisocial behavior data – identify issues, raise
awareness about the problems, and promote school and community
dialogue.
• Risk and protective factor data – identify key objectives that will
help your school or community achieve its prevention goals.
•

Use the resources listed on the last page of this report, Contacts for
Prevention, for ideas about prevention programs that have proven
effective in addressing the risk factors that are high in your community
and improving the protective factors that are low.

MEASURE

Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate Unacceptable Rate
#3
#4
#1
#2

Risk Factors
Protective Factors
Substance Use
Antisocial Behaviors

9

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

10

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Yuma County, Grade 8

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

11

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Yuma County, Grade 10

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Substance Use

LIFETIME, 30 DAY & HEAVY ATOD USE
100

60

50

40

Percentage (%)

** Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior 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.

1/2 Pack (or More)
Cigarettes/Day
Binge Drinking
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol
Over-the-Counter
Drugs*†
Prescription
Drugs**†
Prescription
Sedatives**†
Prescription
Stimulants**
Prescription Pain
Relievers*†
Steroids
Ecstasy**
Heroin or Other
Opiates
Methamphetamines**
Inhalants
Cocaine
Hallucinogens**
Marijuana
Chewing Tobacco
Cigarettes
Alcohol

12

MTF
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006

Heavy Use
30-Day Use
Lifetime Use

2008 Yuma County, Grade 12

90

80

70

30

20

10

0

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Yuma County, Grade 8
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

13

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

State 2008

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

Bet on Sports**

County 2008

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2006

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Yuma County, Grade 10
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

14

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

State 2008

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

Bet on Sports**

County 2008

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2006

Antisocial Behavior and Gambling

ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR, DRINKING/DRIVING & GAMBLING*
2008 Yuma County, Grade 12
Drinking & Driving
Past 30 Days

Antisocial Behavior Past Year

100

Total
Gambling

Gambling Behavior Past Year

90
80
70

Percentage (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

8-State

** Because not all eight states ask gambling and drinking & driving questions, no 8-State value is reported. Gambling and drinking & driving data were not collected prior to 2006.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and 2006 administration. Non-comparable data are omitted from charts. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

15

Any Gambling
Past Year

Bet on a horse/
other race?**

Bet on Games
of Skill**

Bet on Dice**

Gambled on the
lnternet

State 2008

Played Bingo

Bought Raffle
Ticket

Bet on Cards

Bet on Sports**

County 2008

Played the Lottery

Played Slots/
Video Poker

Passenger with
Drinking Driver

Drinking and
Driving

Handgun to School

Carried a Handgun

Attacked to Harm

Been Arrested

Stolen a Vehicle

Sold Illegal Drugs

Drunk or High
at School

Suspended from
School

County 2006

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Yuma County, Grade 8

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

16

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Yuma County, Grade 8
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

17

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

State 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

County 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Yuma County, Grade 10

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

18

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Yuma County, Grade 10
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

19

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

State 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

County 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

8-State

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

RISK PROFILE

2008 Yuma County, Grade 12

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

Percentage (%) of youth at risk

Students at High Risk*
Gang Involvement
Rewards for ASB
Friend's Use of Drugs
Interaction with
Antisocial Peers
Perceived Risk
of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable
to ASB
Early Initiation
of Drug Use
Early Initiation
of ASB

20

Rebelliousness
Low Commitment
to School
Academic Failure
Parent Attitudes
Favor Drug Use
Parent Attitudes
Favorable to ASB
Family History
of Antisocial Behavior
Family Conflict
Poor Family
Management
Perceived Availability
of Handguns
Perceived Availability
of Drugs
Laws & Norms
Favor Drug Use
Low Neighborhood
Attachment

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors.)

8-State
State 2008
County 2008
County 2006

Total
Peer / Individual
School
Family
Community
100

90

10

0

Risk and Protective Factor Profiles

PROTECTIVE PROFILE
2008 Yuma County, Grade 12
100

Community

Family

School

Peer / Individual

Total

90

Percentage (%) of youth with protection

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

21

Students with
High Protection*

** High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

State 2008

Prosocial
Involvement

Interaction with
Prosocial Peers**

Belief in the
Moral Order

County 2008

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

Family
Attachment

Rewards for
Prosocial
Involvement

Opportunities
for Prosocial
Involvement

County 2006

8-State

Where Youth Obtained Alcohol

WHERE YOUTH OBTAINED ALCOHOL*
2008 Yuma County Student Survey, Grades 8, 10 & 12
If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)
100
90
80
70

Percentages (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Got it some

other way

Took it from a
store or someone

else's home

County 2008, Grade 12
Sample: 91 students**

Took it from home

Got at a party

County 2008, Grade 10
Sample: 61 students**

Someone under
21 years

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

County 2008, Grade 8
Sample: 207 students**

State 2008

* Prior to 2008, the AYS did not survey where youth obtained alcohol. Also, because not all eight states ask where youth obtained alcohol, no 8-State value is reported.
** Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case of smaller sample sizes,
caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

22

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Yuma County, Grade 8
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

23

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2008

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2006

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Yuma County, Grade 10
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

24

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2008

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2006

State 2008

School Safety

SCHOOL SAFETY PROFILE*
2008 Yuma County, Grade 12
Percentage of students reporting any experience
with the indicated safety issue in the past year
70

60

Percent (%) of Students

50

40

30

20

10

0

** Because not all eight states ask school safety questions, no 8-State value is reported.
** Bullying on school property was not measured in the 2004 survey administration.

25

Picked On or
Bullied on
School Property**

County 2008

In a Physical
Fight on
School Property

Threatened or
Injured on
School Property

Carried a Weapon
on School Property

Felt Unsafe
at School
County 2006

State 2008

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles
Low Neighborhood Attachment

Community Domain Risk Factors
Low neighborhood bonding is related to higher levels of 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.

Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

Community Domain Protective Factors
When opportunities are available in a community for positive participation, children are less likely to
engage in substance use and other problem behaviors.

Rewards for Prosocial
Involvement

Rewards for positive participation in activities helps youth bond to the community, thus lowering their risk
for substance use.

Poor Family Management

Family Domain Risk Factors
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.

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.

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.

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 Attachment

Family Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

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.

Academic Failure

Low Commitment to School

School Domain Risk Factors
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.
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.

26

Risk and Protective Scale Definitions
Table 2. Scales that Measure the Risk and Protective Factors Shown in the Profiles (cont'd)
Opportunities for Prosocial
Involvement

School Domain Protective Factors
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.

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.

Rebelliousness

Peer-Individual Risk Factors
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.

Early Initiation of Antisocial
Behavior and Drug Use

Early onset of drug use predicts the 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.

Attitudes Favorable Toward
Antisocial Behavior and Drug
Use

During the elementary school years, most children express anti-drug, anti-crime, and pro-social attitudes
and have 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Belief in the Moral Order

Peer-Individual Protective Factors
Young people who have a belief in what is “right” or “wrong” are less likely to use drugs.

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.

Prosocial Involvement

Participation in positive school and community activities helps provide protection for youth.

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.

27

Data Tables
Table 3. 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
County
2006

County
2008

Grade 10
State
2008

County
2006

County
2008

Grade 12
State
2008

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to drink more than just a few sips?

52.9

51.1

47.8

66.0

62.7

66.2

71.9

73.3

74.8

Cigarettes

smoked cigarettes?

31.8

25.8

25.9

46.4

44.1

39.9

45.2

51.8

50.8

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping tobacco,
chewing tobacco)?

7.6

6.8

7.1

9.6

14.0

12.9

11.8

12.2

17.7

Marijuana

used marijuana?

16.1

14.6

16.2

25.8

15.8

32.5

32.5

28.9

43.1

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

2.0

1.6

1.9

2.9

1.6

5.2

3.4

5.2

7.9

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

4.3

3.4

2.7

5.9

2.1

6.8

10.8

9.8

11.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray can, or
inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get high?

14.8

15.4

14.3

9.2

9.5

12.6

6.9

6.7

9.2

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

3.3

1.7

1.2

6.1

2.7

2.4

6.6

5.7

4.0

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

1.7

0.9

1.0

2.0

0.5

2.0

0.8

2.1

3.1

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2.0

2.7

2.2

2.5

2.7

4.9

2.0

7.3

7.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

1.2

1.2

1.7

1.3

1.6

2.3

0.4

1.6

2.4

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a doctor
telling you to take them?

n/a

13.4

12.2

n/a

12.8

20.5

n/a

15.5

24.6

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”, “crank”)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

3.0

3.8

3.8

4.6

3.2

7.6

5.8

3.1

7.9

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

11.9

8.5

8.3

9.0

6.4

12.0

12.4

9.3

13.2

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of 2008 prescription stimulant, sedative and
pain reliever questions (see appendix for details)

16.1

17.4

17.1

14.0

17.0

25.7

17.2

21.2

28.7

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

9.3

9.7

n/a

6.4

12.9

n/a

9.3

13.4

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

28

Data Tables
Table 4. 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)
Alcohol

had alcoholic beverages (beer, wine or hard liquor) to drink more than just a few sips?

Cigarettes

Grade 8
County
2006

County
2008

Grade 12

Grade 10
State
2008

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

24.5

24.4

23.2

41.5

40.0

37.7

43.1

54.4

46.8

smoked cigarettes?

9.9

8.9

8.7

20.7

18.7

16.6

19.8

27.0

23.9

Chewing Tobacco

used smokeless tobacco (chew, snuff, plug, dipping tobacco,
chewing tobacco)?

2.7

3.1

2.6

3.2

6.2

4.6

4.6

5.1

6.8

Marijuana

used marijuana?

5.5

6.0

7.6

11.4

4.8

15.1

9.4

14.9

18.7

Hallucinogens**

used LSD or other hallucinogens?

0.9

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.5

1.9

1.5

2.6

2.4

Cocaine

used cocaine or crack?

1.1

1.0

1.0

2.8

0.5

2.2

3.4

3.1

3.2

Inhalants

sniffed glue, breathed the contents of an aerosol spray can, or
inhaled other gases or sprays, in order to get high?

7.0

5.6

5.4

2.4

2.1

3.0

1.9

2.1

1.6

Methamphetamines**

used methamphetamines (meth, crystal, crank)?

1.0

0.9

0.4

1.7

0.0

0.6

2.3

2.1

0.8

Heroin or Other Opiates

used heroin or other opiates?

0.5

0.3

0.4

0.3

0.0

0.7

0.4

1.6

1.0

Ecstasy**

used Ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

0.5

0.8

0.8

0.4

1.1

1.5

0.0

2.1

2.0

Steroids

used steroids or anabolic steroids (such
as Anadrol, Oxandrin, Durabolin,
Equipoise or Depotesterone)?

0.5

0.5

0.7

0.9

1.1

1.0

0.4

1.6

1.0

Prescription Pain
Relievers*

used prescription pain relievers (such
as Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine) without a doctor
telling you to take them?

n/a

6.8

6.0

n/a

4.3

9.4

n/a

8.3

10.5

Stimulants
(2004 only)**

used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”, “crystal”, “crank”)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Prescription
Stimulants**

used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin, Adderall, or
Dexedrine) without a doctor telling you to take them?

1.6

1.3

1.6

1.6

1.1

2.9

2.7

1.0

2.1

Prescription
Sedatives**

used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)?

5.0

2.5

3.4

4.8

3.7

4.5

4.6

4.7

5.0

Prescription Drugs**

combined results of prescription stimulant, sedative and pain
reliever questions (see appendix for details)

7.4

8.5

8.6

7.1

7.4

12.2

6.0

10.9

13.1

Over-the-Counter
Drugs*

used over-the-counter drugs (such
as cough syrup, cold medicine, or diet
pills) for the purposes of getting high?

n/a

4.8

5.6

n/a

3.7

6.4

n/a

4.7

5.9

* Substance categories that were not measured and reported in one or more survey administrations prior to 2008 (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).
** Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.

29

Data Tables
z

Table 5. Percentage of Students Reporting Heavy ATOD Use
Grade 8
County
2006

Binge Drinking

1/2 Pack (or
more) of
Cigarettes/Day

How many times have you
had 5 or more alcoholic
drinks in a row in the
past 2 weeks?

Grade 10

County
2008

State
2008

County
2006

County
2008

Grade 12
State
2008

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

13.1

14.1

13.1

26.6

20.8

22.4

30.7

36.1

30.2

0.6

0.7

0.7

1.6

2.2

2.1

2.3

2.1

4.2

During the past 30 days, how many
cigarettes did you smoke per day?
(11 to 20 cigarettes, More than 20 cigarettes)

Table 6. Percentage of Students Reporting Antisocial Behavior
How many times in the past year
(12 months) have you:
(One or more times)
Suspended from School
Drunk or High at School
Sold Illegal Drugs
Stolen or Tried to Steal a Motor Vehicle
Been Arrested
Attacked Someone with the Idea
of Seriously Hurting Them
Carried a Handgun
Carried a Handgun to School
During the past 30 days, how many
times did you:
(One or more times)

Grade 8
County
2006

Grade 10

County
2008

State
2008

County
2006

County
2008

Grade 12
State
2008

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

15.5

18.6

20.2

17.9

15.7

14.6

12.4

16.1

10.2

10.7

11.1

12.0

17.6

11.2

20.5

14.1

16.8

22.2

3.9

3.4

4.6

8.0

4.6

9.8

8.6

9.5

10.4

5.0

3.7

3.6

3.9

4.1

3.7

2.8

3.1

2.7

9.2

8.4

7.5

11.8

10.3

9.2

9.4

17.8

8.7

18.9

19.9

18.1

16.9

13.9

16.1

15.7

15.2

12.9

8.4

8.9

7.7

8.3

8.6

7.2

8.1

11.1

8.1

1.3

1.2
Grade 8

1.2

1.8

1.5
Grade 10

1.3

1.4

1.5
Grade 12

1.4

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

DRIVE a car or other vehicle when you had
been drinking alcohol?*

7.2

6.4

5.6

11.6

14.4

7.9

19.2

17.3

16.1

RIDE in a car or other vehicle driven by
someone who had been drinking alcohol?*

36.8

32.8

29.1

44.4

38.5

29.1

44.0

50.0

29.7

* These categories were not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

30

Data Tables
Table 7. 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 or more)
Any Gambling
Played a slot machine, poker machine
or other gambling machine?
Played the lottery or scratch-off tickets?
Bet on sports?*
Played cards?
Bought a raffle ticket?
Played bingo?
Gambled on the Internet?
Played a dice game?*
Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?*
Bet on a horse or other animal race?*
Table 8. Percentage of Students Reporting Protection

Grade 8
County
2006

State
2008

County
2006

Community Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Domain
Family Attachment
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
School Domain
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer-Individual Domain
Belief in the Moral Order
Interaction with Prosocial Peers*
Prosocial Involvement
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Total Protection
Students with High Protection**

County
2008

State
2008

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

54.2

66.2

69.1

50.3

65.3

65.9

47.2

60.6

60.6

2.3

7.0

6.4

2.4

7.1

6.1

2.3

8.6

5.8

25.2
n/a
28.0
n/a
19.7
5.7
n/a

22.7
30.9
41.4
23.7
29.7
5.6
31.3

24.8
31.8
43.7
20.4
32.6
6.3
31.5

20.9
n/a
23.8
n/a
12.7
7.1
n/a

25.5
29.1
39.0
21.2
25.6
8.2
20.7

21.8
30.2
43.7
20.7
23.2
5.1
25.1

23.9
n/a
18.4
n/a
8.1
5.2
n/a

21.4
28.1
33.7
18.0
17.9
5.7
17.0

19.0
25.6
40.6
18.9
14.7
4.7
19.2

21.8

32.8

32.7

20.3

27.3

31.3

16.3

22.8

27.0

n/a

5.5

6.4

n/a

8.2

5.8

n/a

8.2

5.1

Grade 8

Protective Factor

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2008

County
2006

Grade 12

Grade 10

County
2008

State
2008

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

42.0
27.6

44.8
26.8

39.3
31.3

34.0
34.1

38.0
38.4

37.1
35.4

35.5
37.2

28.6
35.0

36.1
33.2

43.5
53.1
55.3

47.2
55.3
55.7

51.5
59.7
61.4

41.6
51.9
48.2

42.9
57.4
52.4

46.1
54.0
55.1

48.1
51.7
48.9

55.0
57.9
46.0

56.2
55.2
55.8

53.6
48.2

57.9
46.5

60.3
51.2

51.1
63.6

67.7
73.6

62.4
59.8

53.9
53.8

64.2
56.2

64.3
45.4

52.7
49.3
35.9
60.7

56.4
49.0
33.8
59.2

59.4
53.1
39.0
59.4

63.8
49.2
23.6
63.8

72.8
54.6
22.8
62.8

66.5
55.3
41.2
59.7

53.3
53.7
27.7
59.8

58.2
52.8
18.7
61.7

53.6
52.5
36.4
52.2

32.4

32.9

43.8

31.3

50.5

46.7

32.0

41.9

43.3

*Denotes a change in the wording of the question between 2008 and prior administrations. Consult appendix for a detailed explanation.
**High Protection youth are defined as the percentage of students who have five or more protective factors operating in their lives.

31

Data Tables
Table 9. Percentage of Students Reporting Risk
Grade 8
Risk Factor
Community Domain
Low Neighborhood Attachment
Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use
Perceived Availability of Drugs
Perceived Availability of Handguns
Family Domain
Poor Family Management
Family Conflict
Family History of Antisocial Behavior
Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use
School Domain
Academic Failure
Low Commitment to School
Peer-Individual Domain
Rebelliousness
Early Initiation of ASB
Early Initiation of Drug Use
Attitudes Favorable to ASB
Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use
Perceived Risk of Drug Use
Interaction with Antisocial Peers
Friend's Use of Drugs
Rewards for ASB
Gang Involvement
Total Risk
Students at High Risk*

County
2006

County
2008

Grade 10
State
2008

County
2006

County
2008

Grade 12
State
2008

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

42.2
34.4
34.6
37.3

42.3
33.3
36.3
35.9

38.5
36.6
38.2
37.8

54.1
37.7
43.8
29.4

48.9
30.2
41.6
25.7

46.2
42.1
49.6
26.7

45.3
28.5
44.5
34.3

46.4
32.0
40.9
27.1

51.0
36.3
52.2
33.1

49.5
59.0
46.2
50.1
28.1

51.8
55.7
37.8
51.6
28.3

45.5
53.5
40.3
49.3
26.8

51.0
38.5
36.9
47.2
39.2

42.4
39.8
31.6
46.2
32.7

42.8
42.8
41.1
53.4
41.1

46.6
40.5
42.3
39.9
36.0

43.7
30.6
28.8
47.5
37.9

44.3
38.3
37.3
50.2
41.2

52.8
39.6

49.8
38.0

47.3
41.0

59.0
34.7

53.8
31.2

49.5
43.7

54.7
29.7

55.2
25.0

44.4
45.6

47.9
36.5
37.2
46.6
33.2
46.8
59.6
42.6
48.5
34.7

45.1
38.9
30.9
46.5
28.9
45.7
59.1
37.4
43.6
32.0

43.1
39.4
30.3
44.6
29.1
44.5
58.2
39.4
45.6
26.9

48.3
39.7
33.2
46.2
34.9
37.2
62.0
43.0
37.0
39.1

42.3
42.2
24.6
43.2
30.3
36.4
65.1
34.7
32.6
37.6

46.8
42.0
32.7
50.7
37.4
42.3
57.3
41.9
44.0
23.2

44.7
37.3
29.8
41.1
27.9
37.8
53.9
28.6
41.2
25.5

45.4
45.8
29.6
48.2
30.1
33.5
52.0
28.3
39.9
32.2

44.0
41.2
33.1
46.9
36.3
46.5
53.2
37.3
54.6
16.8

36.7

33.2

38.7

29.0

29.6

37.5

22.9

26.6

35.7

* 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: eight or more risk factors, 10th & 12th grades: nine or more risk factors)

32

Data Tables
Table 10. Where Youth Obtained Alcohol
Grade 8

If during the past 30 days you drank alcohol, how did you get it?
(Mark all that apply)

County
2008

Grade 10

State
2008

County
2008

Grade 12

State
2008

County
2008

State
2008

Sample size*
I bought it in a store such as a liquor store, convenience store,
supermarket, discount store, or gas station
I bought it at a restaurant, bar, or club
I bought it at a public event such as a concert or sporting event

207

4,418

61

4,872

91

5,065

7.2

5.0

11.5

6.9

26.4

12.3

3.9
1.4

3.0
2.9

14.8
3.3

3.0
2.9

19.8
9.9

7.0
3.9

I gave someone else money to buy it for me

19.8

21.4

24.6

34.4

26.4

43.7

My parent or guardian gave it to me
Another family member who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone not related to me who is 21 or older gave it to me
Someone under the age of 21 gave it to me
I got it at a party
I took it from home
I took it from a store or someone else's home
I got it some other way

15.5
18.4
15.9
25.1
47.8
29.0
9.2

18.7
19.7
19.2
23.8
41.5
31.4
11.7

11.5
16.4
18.0
4.9
62.3
8.2
6.6

14.8
18.7
28.7
24.8
53.1
23.2
11.3

11.0
19.8
29.7
13.2
62.6
8.8
6.6

13.0
18.2
39.5
22.0
57.6
13.8
8.0

27.1

28.7

21.3

23.6

24.2

17.9

* Sample size represents the number of students who indicated at least one means of obtaining alcohol. (Students reporting no alcohol use are not represented.) In the case
of smaller sample sizes, caution should be exercised before generalizing results to the entire community.

33

Data Tables
Table 11. Percentage of Students Reporting School Safety Issues
Grade 8
County
2006

Question

County
2008

Grade 10
State
2008

County
2006

County
2008

Grade 12
State
2008

County
2006

County
2008

State
2008

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?

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
4-5 times
6-7 times
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

83.3
9.4
4.1
1.3
0.4
0.1
0.1
1.2

85.6
7.5
4.3
1.3
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.7

87.1
6.6
3.5
1.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.9

86.2
6.9
3.0
1.7
0.7
0.5
0.1
0.9

92.9
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.5

88.4
5.9
3.0
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.1

90.0
4.5
2.8
1.7
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.7

93.9
2.0
2.0
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.5

92.4
3.9
2.0
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.7

During the past 12 months, how many times were
you in a physical fight on school property?

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
4-5 times
6-7 times
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

74.7
12.3
7.7
3.1
0.6
0.4
0.3
1.0

75.5
13.5
6.7
1.5
1.2
0.4
0.4
0.9

76.5
12.9
6.9
1.7
0.6
0.4
0.3
0.7

81.7
9.4
5.2
2.0
0.1
0.7
0.0
0.9

86.3
4.6
6.1
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.5

85.2
8.8
3.9
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.7

91.2
5.6
2.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.7
0.4

90.9
5.1
3.5
0.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0

91.5
5.0
2.1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.4

0 times
1 time
2-3 times
During the past 12 months, how often have you
4-5 times
been picked on or bullied by a student ON SCHOOL
6-7 times
PROPERTY?*
8-9 times
10-11 times
12 or more times

64.1
19.8

59.4
13.2
11.5
4.3
1.9
1.2
0.8
7.7

78.3
12.6

1.7

79.5
7.2
8.2
1.5
0.5
0.0
1.0
2.1

69.1
10.3
9.6
3.2
1.4
1.1
0.6
4.6

89.3
7.1

4.5

61.6
14.1
10.7
4.1
1.8
1.7
0.5
5.6

0.7

84.7
6.1
3.1
1.5
1.0
1.0
0.0
2.6

82.3
6.6
5.7
1.5
0.8
0.5
0.3
2.4

88.6
6.3
3.2
0.4
1.4

89.2
6.2
3.0
0.6
1.0

89.9
5.8
2.7
0.6
1.0

90.2
5.5
2.0
0.7
1.7

89.7
5.6
2.6
1.5
0.5

91.1
5.1
2.2
0.6
1.0

90.5
6.0
2.5
0.4
0.7

89.3
4.1
3.1
0.5
3.1

93.8
3.3
1.8
0.4
0.7

0 days

During the past 30 days, on how many days did you 1 day
not go to school because you felt you would be
2-3 days
unsafe at school or on your way to or from school? 4-5 days
6 or more days

11.6

0 days

7.4

2.9

93.0
93.1
93.9
92.8
95.4
93.8
93.6
94.4
94.4
3.0
3.3
3.1
3.3
1.0
2.2
1.1
0.5
1.5
1.3
1.9
1.3
1.3
0.5
1.2
0.4
1.5
1.1
0.4
0.2
0.5
0.8
1.5
0.5
0.7
1.0
0.5
6 or more days
2.4
1.4
1.2
1.8
1.5
2.2
4.3
2.6
2.6
* In 2006 the choices for this question were Never , Once , Several Times and Very Often. This category was not measured the in 2004 survey administration (also denoted by 'n/a' in the data column).

During the past 30 days, on how many days did you 1 day
carry a weapon such as a gun, knife, or club ON
2-3 days
SCHOOL PROPERTY?
4-5 days

34

Data Tables
Table 12. Drug Free Communities Report*
County 2008
Outcome

Definition

Substance

Grade 8

Grade 10

Grade 12

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

Perception of Risk
(People are at Moderate or Great Risk
of harming themselves if they... )

Perception of Parent Disapproval
(Parents feel it would be Wrong or
Very Wrong to... )

Perception of Peer Disapproval
(I think it is Wrong or Very Wrong for
someone my age to...)

Past 30-Day Use

Female†

Sample Percent

Sample

drink 1 or two drinks nearly every day

Alcohol

57.8

1,117

60.8

186

61.5

182

52.4

706

64.5

758

smoke 1 or more packs or cigarettes
per day

Cigarettes

83.3

1,127

80.7

187

82.8

186

80.6

707

84.8

772

smoke marijuana regularly

Marijuana

83.3

1,086

81.1

185

78.5

181

80.8

693

83.7

738

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

89.5

928

88.8

170

75.6

176

86.9

609

88.1

647

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

96.9

935

94.7

170

86.4

177

95.9

614

94.5

650

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

96.9

927

97.0

169

93.8

177

96.9

608

96.0

648

drink beer, wine, or hard liquor
regularly

Alcohol

77.9

1,291

65.7

198

54.3

199

76.2

818

71.3

846

smoke cigarettes

Cigarettes

86.2

1,293

75.8

198

66.7

198

83.5

819

81.6

846

smoke marijuana

Marijuana

88.1

1,287

88.4

198

81.1

196

87.3

816

87.3

841

Alcohol

24.4

1,215

40.0

190

54.4

195

26.8

764

32.4

814

at least one use in the Past 30 Days

Cigarettes

8.9

1,168

18.7

187

27.0

189

11.8

738

12.7

785

6.0

1,213

4.8

189

14.9

194

6.8

762

7.1

812

Sample Percent

Sample

Marijuana

Percent Sample Percent Sample Percent

had more than a sip or two of beer,
wine or hard liquor?
Average Age of Onset**
(How old were you when you first…)

Male†

Sample Percent

smoked a cigarette, even just a puff?

smoked marijuana?

Alcohol
Average age:
Cigarettes
Average age:
Marijuana
Average age:

55.1

1,288

11.8 years
26.6

1,289

11.6 years
14.7

1,291

12.1 years

65.3

199

13.5 years
46.2

197

13.2 years
16.6

199

13.2 years

80.0

Sample Percent

200

14.7 years
54.8

197

14.1 years
30.5

200

14.4 years

58.4

819

12.4 years
31.8

824

12.2 years
18.4

822

12.7 years

60.1

844

12.6 years
32.6

835

12.5 years
15.3

844

12.8 years

* The “Sample” column represents the sample size (the number of youth who answered the question). The "Percent" column represents the percentage of youth in the sample answering the question as defined.
** For Average Age of Onset, “Sample” represents the number of youth who answered the question (including students responding that they never used). 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.

† 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.

35

Appendix
Appendix - Comparability of survey administratons
Issue
Drug Category

2004 AYS
On how many occasions (if any) have you:

2006 AYS

2008 AYS

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Notes regarding changes

On how many occasions (if any) have you:

Hallucinogens

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the
past 30 days?

Used LSD or other psychedelics during the past
30 days?

Used LSD or other hallucinogens during the
past 30 days?

Substituted "hallucinogens" for "psychedelics" in 2008.
Comparable across all years.

Methamphetamines

Not applicable, no methamphetamine-specific
item on 2004 AYS

Used methamphetamines (meth, speed, crank,
crystal meth)?

Used methamphetamines (meth, crystal,
crank)?

2006 and 2008 provide slightly different examples, but
are cautiously comparable.

Prescription
stimulants

Used stimulants (“amphetamines”, “meth”,
“crystal”, “crank”) without a doctor telling you
to take them?

Used stimulants, other than methamphetamines
(such as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription stimulants (such as Ritalin,
Adderal, or Dexedrine) without a doctor telling
you to take them?

2004 is not comparable to any other years, data are
presented for archival interest. 2006 and 2008 data are
cautiously comparable.

Prescription
sedatives

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium
or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills)
without a doctor telling you to take them?

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills) without a
doctor telling you to take them?

Used prescription sedatives (tranquilizers, such
as Valium or Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping
pills)?

2008 AYS added descriptor "prescription" and removed
qualifier "without a doctor telling you to take them." 2008
data are cautiously comparable with other years.

Ecstasy

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used MDMA (‘X’, ‘E’, or ecstasy)?

Used ecstasy (‘X’, ‘E’, or MDMA)?

2008 AYS used "ecstasy" as the primary descriptor and
moved "MDMA" to examples. Comparable across years.

Prescription
drugs

Not applicable, no prescription drugs item on
2004 AYS

Used sedatives (tranquilizers, such as Valium or
Xanax, barbiturates, or sleeping pills),
stimulants, other than methamphetamines (such
as amphetamines, Ritalin, or Dexedrine) or
other prescription drugs (such as Oxycontin)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes)

Used prescription stimulants (Ritalin,
Adderall, or Dexedrine), sedatives
(tranquilizers, such as Valium or Xanax,
barbiturates, or sleeping pills) or pain relievers
(Vicodin, OxyContin, Percocet or Codeine)
without a doctor telling you to take them?
(composite question, see notes )

In 2006, responses to the stimulant, sedative and other
prescription drug questions were calculated as one
measure. (2006 had no prescription pain reliever item.) In
2008, responses to the stimulant, sedative and
prescription pain reliever questions were calculated as
one measure. (2008 had no standalone prescription drug
item.) 2006 and 2008 data are cautiously comparable.
(Note that composite 2006 data will not match past
reports' prescription drugs category.)

Gambling
Category

Not applicable, no gambling items
on 2004 AYS

How often during the past 12 months
have you:

How often have you done the following for
money, possessions, or anything of value:

Sports betting

n/a

Bet on team sports?

Bet on sports?

Not comparable across years.

Race betting

n/a

Bet money on horse races?

Bet on a horse race or other animal race?

Not comparable across years.

Dice

n/a

Bet on dice games such as craps?

Played a dice game?

Not comparable across years.

Games of skill

n/a

Bet on games of personal skill such as pool,
darts, or bowling?

Bet on a game of personal skill such as pool or
a video game?

Comparable across years.

Protective Scale:
Peer-Individual
Interaction with
Prosocial Peers

Think of your four best friends (the friends you feel closest to). In the past year (12 months), how many of your best friends have:
(Scale is calculated based on the average response [0, 1, 2, 3 or 4 friends] to the following questions)
...participated in clubs, organizations and activities at school? ...made the commitment to stay drug-free?
...tried to do well in school? ...liked school? ...regularly attended religious services?(removed in 2008)

36

Regularly attended religious services was removed from
2008 AYS. 2004 and 2006 have been recalculated to
match 2008 AYS and are now comparable across all
years. Due to this recalculation, current reports may differ
slightly from past reports.

Contacts for Prevention
Arizona Department of Education
Student Services Division
www.ade.az.gov

Regional Prevention Contacts
Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Pima, and Santa Cruz
Counties
Bill Burnett
Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA)
(520) 618-8807

Arizona Department of Health Services
Division of Behavioral Health Services
Lisa Shumaker
(602) 364-4594
www.azdhs.gov/bhs/index.htm

Gila, La Paz, Pinal, and Yuma Counties
Linda Weinberg
Cenpatico Behavioral Health of Arizona
(866) 495-6738

Arizona Prevention Resource Center
(800) 432-2772
www.azprevention.org

Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo, and Yavapai
Counties
Petrice Post
Northern Arizona Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(NARBHA)
(928) 214-2177

Center for Violence Prevention and Community
Safety
Charles Katz
(602) 543-6618
charles.katz@asu.edu
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)
http://prevention.samhsa.gov

Maricopa County
Juan Aristizabal
Magellan
(602) 797-8256

Governor’s Office of Children, Youth, and
Families
(602) 542-4043
http://www.governor.state.az.us/cyf/index.html

Gila River Indian Community
Joan Grey
Gila River Regional Behavioral Health Authority
(602) 528-7136

Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities
U.S. Department of Education
www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS

Pasqua Yaqui Tribe
Centered Spirit Program
Jill Fabian
(520) 879-6067

Arizona Department of Gaming's Office of
Problem Gambling
Elise Mikkelsen
(602) 266-8299 ext. 351
www.problemgambling.az.gov

Navajo Nation
Department of Behavioral Health Services
(928) 871-6235

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMSHA)
www.samhsa.gov

White Mountain Apache Tribe
Apache Behavioral Health Services
(928) 338-4811

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention
http://ojjdp.ncjrs.org/

Colorado River Indian Tribes
(928) 669-6577

Western Regional Center for the Application of
Prevention Technologies (CAPT)
www.westcapt.org

Other State and National Contacts:
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
Michelle Neitch/ Phillip Stevenson
(602) 364-1173/(602) 364-1157
www.azcjc.gov

Bach Harrison, L.L.C.
R. Steven Harrison, Ph.D.
(801) 359-2064
www.bach-harrison.com

37