Findings from a Connecticut Study 2 0 1 8 N A T I O N A L P R E V - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶

Aug 07, 2023 237 likes •491 views

Why Do Retailers Continue to Sell Alcohol to Minors? Findings from a Connecticut Study 2 0 1 8 N A T I O N A L P R E V E N T I O N N E T W O R K C O N F E R E N C E A U G U S T 3 0 , 2 0 1 8 P R E S E N T E D B Y : G R E G O R Y C A R

SLIDE 1

2 0 1 8 N A T I O N A L P R E V E N T I O N N E T W O R K C O N F E R E N C E A U G U S T 3 0 , 2 0 1 8 P R E S E N T E D B Y : G R E G O R Y C A R V E R S U P E R V I S I N G S P E C I A L I N V E S T I G A T O R S T E P H A N I E M O R A N , B A , C P S P R I M A R Y P R E V E N T I O N S E R V I C E S C O O R D I N A T O R

Why Do Retailers Continue to Sell Alcohol to Minors? Findings from a Connecticut Study

SLIDE 2

Learning Objectives

 Understand the procedure used.  Identify key components and cultural

considerations.

 Increase awareness of the challenges to

reduce youth access to alcohol.

 Familiarize participants with next steps

to address retailer non-compliance.

SLIDE 3

Connecticut

 Population: 3,588,184  Size: 5,018 square miles  Population

 Largest City - Bridgeport:  147,022 people  $43,137 median income  Smallest Town - Union:  854 people  $88,125 median income

SLIDE 4

Alcohol Compliance Checks in Connecticut

 Partners

 CT Department of

Consumer Protection, Liquor Control Division

 Law Enforcement  Youth Inspectors  Community Coalitions

 Active Permits: 6152

 1895 Restaurant  1281 Package Store  891 Grocery Store  809 Café  45 Winery

SLIDE 5

 Sec. 30-86. Sale or

delivery to minors, intoxicated persons and habitual drunkards prohibited.

 Subject to Sec. 30-11

Penalties

 Sec. 30-11. Penalties

 “…shall, for each offense,

be fined not more than

ne thousand dollars or

imprisoned not more than

ne year or both.”

 First Offense is a $750 fine

and a 3 day suspension of the liquor license

Alcohol Compliance Checks in Connecticut

SLIDE 6

Underage Drinking in Connecticut

 Alcohol is the most

common substance used by youth

 Prevention Initiatives

 PFS-2015  CT SPF Coalitions  Local Prevention Councils

 Youth have identified

that the #1 place to get alcohol is from home or an older friend or family member.

 Age of Onset:

 13 years old

SLIDE 7

Problem Substances of Greatest Concern According to Informants, By Age Group*

32 30 13 1 40 24 2 18 10 23 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 12-17 years old 18-25 years old Prescription Drugs Heroin Marijuana Tobacco Alcohol *CT CRS, 2018

SLIDE 8

Percent of 12 to 17 Year Olds Reporting Past Month Alcohol Use and Binge Drinking:

NSDUH, Connecticut, 2004-05 to 2015-16

20.9 20.2 19.6 18.3 18.6 17.8 16.8 17.6 14.2 12.8 13.6 11.21 12.1 11.9 13.2 13.5 13.3 11.2 10.2 8.1 7.5 6.3 6.09 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

Past Month Alcohol Use Past Month Binge Drinking

SLIDE 9

Percent of High School Students Reporting Past 30-Day Alcohol Use and Binge Drinking:

CT School Health Survey (YRBS), Connecticut, 2005-2017

45.3 44.7 43.5 41.5 36.7 30.2 30.4 27.8 26.2 24.2 22.3 20.8 14.2 14.9 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017

Alcohol Use Binge Drinking

SLIDE 10

Purpose of Study

 Determine a statewide baseline for alcohol sales to

minors.

 Assess the results/outcomes of our interventions.  Initial Hypothesis:

 20-30% of inspected establishments would sell to minors.

SLIDE 11

Preparation

 Connect With Partners

 Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection, Liquor

Control Division

 UConn School of Social Work, Evaluation  Center for Prevention Evaluation and Statistics  Connecticut Department of Administrative Services

SLIDE 12

Eleni Rodis & Jenna Powers, UConn School of Social Work

 List of Active Permits was

cleaned

 Used Proportional

Stratified Sampling

 RAND Command in Excel

to select establishments

 95% Confidence

5% Error

 Tools Used:

 Proportional Stratified

Sampling Calculator: www.surveysystem.com

 Excel, RAND Command

Pulling the Random Sample

SLIDE 13

Process Began in November 2017

 Combination of

Synar and Best Practices of Alcohol Compliance Checks

 Developed an

Inspection Form

Establishing a Protocol

SLIDE 14

Youth Inspectors

 Part-Time Paid State

Employees

 Most Have Experience

from TPEP Program

 9 Youth Inspectors

 2 – Seventeen Year Olds  5 – Eighteen Year Olds  2 – Twenty Year Olds  5 - Female  4 - Male

Establishing a Protocol

SLIDE 15

Began January 2018, Completed July 2018

 On Premise

 Primarily purchased beer  Avoided mixed drinks  Multiple Youth Inspectors

sent in to sit at a table or bar

 Multiple Youth Inspectors

attempted to purchase

 Off Premise

 Primarily purchased beer

r malt liquor – based on

demographics

 One Youth Inspector went

in and attempted to purchase

 Easier type of inspection

The Inspection

SLIDE 16

356 Inspection Sample Size 32 Deemed Ineligible 324 Total Completed Inspections

174 On-Premise Inspected

150 Off-Premise Inspected

The Outcome

SLIDE 17

Inspection Snapshot

SLIDE 18

Inspection Snapshot

SLIDE 19

Overall On-Premise vs. Off-Premise

45% 55%

Inspections

Compliant Non- Compliant 48 98 126 52 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Compliant Non- Compliant

The Data

SLIDE 20

55% Non-Compliance Rate

The Data

122 47 5 88 62 95 26 5 28 24 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Total Inspections Non-Compliant

SLIDE 21

Asked for Identification

 51.6% of establishments

inspected requested ID

 37.9% of establishments

that requested ID, sold

The Data

50 100 150 200 250 On Premise Off Premise Total Inspections Non- Compliant ID Requested ID Requested and Sold

SLIDE 22

The Unexpected

 How do we count

multiple sales to minors at one establishment?

 29 establishments sold to

multiple minors

 Alcohol Inspections Take

More Time than Tobacco

 Restaurants and Bars

 Storage and Disposal of

the Alcohol

 Inspector was only asked

nce if he was the minor’s

Parent/Guardian

 Youth Inspector’s ID was

nly confiscated once

 Amount of retailers who

sold after checking ID

SLIDE 23

What We Learned

 Highest Non-Compliance:

 Restaurants  Urban Areas

 Cultural Factors and

Barriers:

 Clerks and Youth Inspectors

 Store owners were less

likely to sell vs. employees

 Need for Merchant

Education

 On-Premise Establishments  Training on checking ID’s  Assuming an older adult is

a parent/guardian

 Need to continue and

strengthen our efforts

SLIDE 24

Next Steps

 Send Compliant and Non-Compliant Letters  Merchant Education  Continue Work With Community Coalitions  Enhance collaboration with Liquor Control Division  Look at Options for a Statewide Campaign  Sustainable Funding for Compliance Inspections  Recruiting and Training Youth Inspectors (volunteer)

SLIDE 25