Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout25- Police CITY Of SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Resolution of the City of San Bernardino From: Lee Dean, Chief of Police Subject: Authorizing the Chief of Police to Sign the Memorandum of Understanding With the Dept: Police San Bernardino City Unified School Or m District to Continue Involvement in the Date: July 15, 1996 Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E. ) Program Synopsis of Previous Council action: On 11-15-93, Resolution #93-416 was adopted authorizing the Chief of Police to sign a Memorandum of Understanding with the San Bernardino City Unified School District for the joint sponsorship of the Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E. ) Program. 12/18/95 -- Council directed police department staff to present a performance evaluation of the D.A.R.E. program between this date and next fiscal year. Resolution ##95-436 adopted authorizing D.A.R.E. program through FY95-96 . Recommended motion: Adopt resolution. Signature Contact person: Lt_ Larry NPigel Phone: 384.-5690 Supporting data attached: Yes Ward: FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: $212,089 (already budgeted) 001-223-5122 - $200-Dues Source: (Acct. No.) 001-223-5-11/5029 - $211 ,889-Personnel Services Acct. Description) Finance Council Notes: Previously Res 96- 75-0262 Agenda Item No CITY .OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION STAFF REPORT On 11-15-93 , the Mayor and Common Council authorized the Chief of Police to sign a Memorandum of Understanding with the San Bernardino City Unified School District to participate in the joint sponsorship of the Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E. ) Program and provide four full-time police officers to teach the DARE Program. Three D.A.R.E. Officers were funded by the City' s General Fund under Account #001-223 , Community Programs . Fifty percent of the fourth D.A.R.E. Officer was funded by a San Bernardino City Unified School District grant with the remaining 50% paid for by the City' s General Fund. The Police Department has received a proposed MOU to continue the joint sponsorship of the D.A.R.E. Program for the period of July 1, 1996 through June 30 , 1997 . As modified, the Police Department would provide three full-time police officers to teach the D.A.R.E. Program as funding for the fourth position has been eliminated from the Police Department' s budget . Adoption of the proposed resolution will authorize Police Chief Lee Dean to sign the Memorandum of Understanding on behalf of the City and the Police Department . During the Council meeting of December 18 , 1995, the City Council approved a resolution authorizing the Chief to sign the memorandum of understanding with the San Bernardino City Unified School District for the Drug Abuse Resistance Education Program. At that time, the Council also requested a performance evaluation of the program. The evaluation was conducted as a survey, the results of which are enclosed. The survey is presented by Lt . Neigel, Training Commander, San Bernardino Police Department, Jimmi Mitchell, San Bernardino City Unified School District Substance Programs, Cpl . Paul Pancucci, San Bernardino Police Department DARE, Cpl . R.J. Garcia San Bernardino Police Department DARE, Off . J. Turner San Bernardino Police Department, Off . P. Williams San Bernardino City Unified School District . We recommend that the resolution be adopted as written by the Council authorizing Chief Dean to sign the Memorandum with the San Bernardino City Unified School District . 75-0264 Sarn Betnardino City Unified School District E. Neal Roberts,Ed.D., Superintendent Harold L. Boring, Ed.D, Assistant Superintendent,Administrative Services Your Public Schools... There's No Better Place To Learn Lt. Lawrence Neigel June 28, 1996 Community Programs Unit San Bernardino City Police Department P.O. Box 1559 San Bernardino, CA 92401-1559 RE: Agreement/ Memorandum of Understanding for the DARE Program Amendment: Board of Education Approval Date: June 25, 1996 Documents Enclosed: ACTION REQUESTED: X 21 Agreement/Amendment Originals X > SIGN ALL ORIGINALS signed an District's behalf ► ' RETURN 1 ORIGINAL TO ADDRESS BELOW' Form W-9 (substitute) ► COMPLETE AND SIGN ► RETURN TO ADDRESS BELOW Survey Form ► COMPLETE AND SIGN > RETURN TO ADDRESS BELOW X Certification of Minutes None Origina(s) signed by both/all parties None for your files Other: Thank you for your assistance. We look forward to working with you. Sincerely, Please Return Documents to: San Bernardino City Unified School District r� �L t Administrative Services Office Harold L. Boring, Ed)D. Attn: Melinda A. Pure, Contract Analyst Assistant Superintendent 777 North "F" Street Administrative Services San Bernardino, California 92410-3017 mp / enclosure(s) i ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIVISION 777 N.F Street • San Bernardino,CA 92410 • (909) 381-1162 • y �1 San Bernardino City Unified School District CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES The Board met in regular session on the 25th day of June, 1996, at the usual meeting place thereof. The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. Members present: Brown,Diaz, Marinis,Neigel, Savage, Tillman, Yeager Members absent: None The adoption of the following resolution and order was moved by Member Brown, seconded by Member Tillman, and a vote being taken,the said resolution and order was adopted by the following votes of members present at that time. w AYES: Brown, Diaz, Marinis,Neigel, Savage, Tillman, Yeager NOES: None BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Education approves entering into the Memorandum of Understanding with the San Bernardino City Police Department for the joint sponsoring of the Drug Abuse Resistance Education(DARE) Program, effective July 1, 1996, through June 30, 1997, per terms of the Memorandum of Understanding. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Harold L. Boring, Assistant Superintendent, Administrative Services, be authorized to sign said Memorandum of Understanding on behalf of the Board of Education. 1, E.NEAL ROBERTS, Secretary of the Governing Board of the San Bernardino City Unified School District hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly made, adopted and entered in the Board minutes of the Governing Board of the San Bernardino City Unified School District on the 25th day of June, 1996. Dated: June 26, 1996 Secret4y of th Board of Education Agenda Item 8.36 ORIGINAL MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING Between SAN BERNARDINO CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT And SAN BERNARDINO CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT Concerning the DRUG ABUSE RESISTANCE EDUCATION (DARE) PROGRAM Project DARE(Drug Abuse Resistance Education) is a substance use prevention education program designed to equip children with skills for making decisions, managing stress, and withstanding negative peer pressures to use tobacco, drugs, and alcohol. This memorandum of understanding is entered into for the purpose of jointly sponsoring the Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) program in an effort to prevent substance abuse by students attending schools within the District. In order to accomplish this goal the San Bernardino City Unified School District and the San Bernardino City Police Department jointly agree as follows: The San Bernardino City Police Department shall provide three (3) full-time police officers to train District students in the DARE Program. Under certain circumstances and upon mutual agreement, the number of officers or the number of hours provided by the officers may be reduced. The San Bernardino City Police Department shall arrange for DARE Officer Training offered by the Los Angeles City Unified School District. All District schools within the San Bernardino City Unified School District boundaries are to be served. Delivery dates will be mutually agreed upon by the District and the Police Department. The San Bernardino City Unified School District will provide instructional materials, program scheduling and student/teacher materials. This Memorandum of Understanding shall be for a period beginning July 1, 1996, through June 30, 1997. It may be renewed, modified or terminated by mutual written consent of the parties involved. SAN BERNARDINO CITY POLICE SAN BERNARDINO CITY UNIFIED DEPARTMENT SCHOOL DISTRICT Lee Dean Harold L. Boring, Ed.D. lief of Police Assistant Superintendent- Administrative Services Date: Date: JUN 2 8 1996 PRESENTED BY: Lieutenant Lawrence Neigel Ji mi Mitchell, C rdin r SBCUSD Training Commander, SBPD High Risk/ Substan Ab se Programs 1 j Officer Larry Wi i or ;SB y Turner SBCUSD, D.A.R.E. Officer D.A.R.E. Officer Corporal Paul Pancucci Corporal J. Ci rcia SBPD, D.A.R.E. Officer SBPD, D.A.R.E. Officer PREPARED BY: Julie A. Miles, M.A. Program Monitor TABLE OF CONTENTS SignaturePage.................................................................................................................... ii Tableof Contents.............................................................................................................. in Listof Tables ..................................................................................................................... v Listof Figures.................................................................................................................... vi Introduction......................................................................................................................... 2 TheQuestionnaire................................................................................................... 4 Administration of the Questionnaire....................................................................... 4 The Population Samples........................................................................... .............. 4 Sample Size Characteristics........................................................................ 5 Demographicsof Total Sample.......................................................................................... 8 ExecutiveSummary............................................................................................................ 9 aGraduates vs. Non-Graduates................................................................................. 9 ' Grade Level Results.............................................................................................. 10 GenderResults...................................................................................................... 11 EthnicityResults................................................................................................... 12 ' Questionnaire Responses: Graduates vs. Non-Graduates................................................. 14 Questionnaire Responses: Results Based on Grade Level................................................ 28 Questionnaire Responses: Results Based on Gender........................................................ 35 Questionnaire Responses: Results Based on Ethnicity..................................................... 42 Conclusions....................................................................................................................... 49 Limitations........................................................................................................................ 53 ' iii 1 Appendix A: Student Feedback SBPD Interoffice Memo................................................ 54 Appendix B: Impact of Teaching D.A.R.E.on Individual Officers................................. 56 References........................................................................................................................ 57 i i 1 1 i 1 i r iv 1 . LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Percentage of Graduates vs. Non-Graduates Responding at a Given UseLevel............................................................................................................ 19 Table 2: Percentage of Graduates and Non-Graduates Disagreeing With Statements of Intentions...................................................................................... 21 Table 3: Percentages of Graduates and Non-Graduates Responses for Each Drugand Attitude Level..................................................................................... 25 Table 4: Demographic Breakdown of SampleBbased on Grade Level............................ 28 Table 5: Percentages of 5th, 7th, and 9th Grade Students Reporting Drug Use Level.... 29 Table 6: Attitude Level by Drug for Grades 5, 7, and 9 (%)............................................ 31 Table 7: Demographic Breakdown of the Sampole Based on Gender.............................. 35 I o Table 8: Use Levels by Gender for All Drugs (/o)........................................................... 36 Table 9: Attitude Toward Drug Use by Gender(%)......................................................... 38 ' Table 10: Demographic Breakdown of Sample Based on Ethnicity................................ 42 Table 11: Drug Use Level by Ethnicity............................................................................ 43 Table 12: Attitude Level Chosen by Ethnic Groups for Drug Use (%)............................ 45 V , LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Percentage of Enrollment Surveyed................................................................... 6 Figure 2: Ethnic Distribution of the Survey Sample.......................................................... 7 Figure 3: Percent of Students Who Have Used Substances One or More Times: Graduates vs Non-Graduate.............................................................................. 20 Figure 4: Percent of Students Who Intend to Use Drugs Within the Next Year: Graduates vs. Non-Graduate............................................................................. 22 Figure 5: Percent of Students Who Intend to Use Drugs When They are Legal Adults: Graduate vs. Non-Graduate................................................................................ 23 Figure 6: Percent of Students Who Respond that Drugs are "Very (or) Sort of Dangerous": Graduate vs. Non-Graduate......................................................... 26 ' Figure 7: Percent of 5th, 7th, and 9th Grade Students Who Have Used Drugs One or MoreTimes....................................................................................................... 30 Figure 8: Percent of 5th, 7th, and 9th Grade Students Responding that Drugs are "Very (or) Sort of Dangerous".......................................................................... 32 ' Figure 9: Percent of Males vs. Females Having Used Drugs One or More Times.......... 37 Figure 10: Percent of Males vs. Females eRporting that Drugs are "Very (or) Sort of ' Dangerous"...................................................................................................... 39 ' Figure 11: Percent of Students Using Drugs One or More Times: Analyzedby Ethnicity..................................................................................... 44 Figure 12: Percent of Students Reporting that Drugs are "Very (or) Sort of Dangerous": Analyzed by Ethnicity 46 ' vi INTRODUCTION As reported in the 1995 San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools Planning and Development Department' s "A Review of a Decade of Student Drug Use and Attitude Surveys : National, California, and San Bernardino County" student drug use remains high in the state with one of two seventh graders, two of three ninth graders, and three of four eleventh graders using alcohol in the past six months . Since 1985, student drug use generally decreased until 1989 . Between 1989 and 1995 drug use has taken an upswing. The survey indicated some evidence that alcohol and tobacco use in the eleventh grade has leveled off, however, ninth graders are increasing their use of marijuana, tobacco, and hallucinogens . A summary of the evidence indicates the period between seventh and ninth grades as having the greatest gain in drug use . In the 1995 study, the responses to the question asking if students had "ever" used drugs indicated that 250 of 7th graders, 46% of 9th graders and 450 of 11th graders had used alcohol . Marijuana use was recorded at 13% by 7th graders, 24% by 9th graders, and 25% by 11th graders . The use of inhalants "within the past six months" was lower, but still indicated alarming percentages : 8%, 8%, and 6% for 7th, 9th, and 11th graders respectively. LSD was used in the same time period by 7% •of both 9th and 11th graders. A part of peer pressure is wanting to fit in with others . When asked if they would try to stop a friend from using alcohol or drugs, only 2 of 3 7th graders would try to stop their friends from using alcohol . Less than half of the students in 9th and 11th grades would try to stop their friends from using alcohol . Seven of ten students in the three grades would try to -- stop a friend from using marijuana. Because it is evident that the issue of substance use among our youth continues to be critical, San Bernardino City Unified School District has collaborated with the San Bernardino Police Department' s D.A.R.E. unit to present lessons aimed to 2 equip our 5th grade students with skills to resist peer pressure to experiment with and use harmful drugs, alcohol, and tobacco. In order to assess the program, as well as meet a program funding requirement, a survey was conducted at the 5th, 7th, and 9th grade levels in which students were asked to respond to questions pertaining to the content material of the D.A.R.E. program curriculum. Students were asked about their use of alcohol, marijuana, tobacco, inhalants and other drugs; their attitudes toward the above mentioned substances and resistance behaviors and peer influence where drug use is concerned. It is hoped that this survey will provide information that will enable the district to revise or modify its substance prevention and D.A.R.E. programs to meet the needs of the programs participants. 3 THE QUESTIONNAIRE The fifty-item questionnaire contained questions designed to assess the retention of content material provided throughout the course of the D.A.R.E. program lessons, resistance behaviors and peer influence where drug use is concerned; and use levels of I alcohol, marijuana, cigarettes, and inhalants, crack, cocaine, or etc. Also included were items which asked about the students' .w attitudes toward the above mentioned substances and whether or not they thought they would use them within the next year or when they were legal adults. For those students who have completed the D.A.R.E. program (graduates) , four items were included about the helpfulness of the program in avoiding drugs and alcohol, increasing their self-confidence and their ability to deal with peer pressure and the most important thing they learned from the D.A.R.E. program. Some of the items were borrowed or adapted from the D.A.R.E. America Survey. ' ADMINISTRATION OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE The management of the 1996 D.A.R.E. survey was assigned to the principal of the participating school. Due to the timing of the D.A.R.E. program initiation at year round schools, the administration window was chosen in order to obtain two sub- samples of 5th graders - D.A.R.E. graduates and those without D.A.R.E. education. The 7th and 9th grade administration was at the same time as the 5th grade. The survey was administered in the period chosen by the participating principals and proctored by the classroom teacher. The teachers were provided with guidelines for administration of the survey and how to handle student questions on survey items. Students marked their responses on machine scorable sheets. When students had completed their surveys, their score sheets and surveys were collected by the teacher. The score sheets were bound in paper bands and returned to the High Risk/ Substance Abuse office for forwarding to Management Information Systems for processing. THE POPULATION SAMPLES Grade Levels Assessed ' Fifth grade was selected as the target grade because the introduction of the D.A.R.E. curriculum begins at this level. The- other two grades 7th and 9th were chosen as a way to assess the long-term affects of the D.A.R.E. program because the majority of the students in these grade levels were involved in the D.A.R.E. program as 5th graders. 4 Sample Size Characteristics An average of 7790 of the student population at grades 5 and 7, and 569. of the student population at grade 9 were included in the final sample of those who completed the questionnaire. The survey was intended for 8, 983 students. The survey was completed by 6, 878 students in 50 of SBCUSD's 52 schools, however, 125 were eliminated due to missing the final deadline for returning the completed surveys to the High Risk/ Substance Abuse office. Approximately 2, 105 surveys were not returned at all. Also, 201 surveys were eliminated from analyses due to incomplete answer sheets (pertinent demographics missing) and inconsistent response patterns (e.g. answering multiple items outside the range of possible choices) . Answer sheets with unspecified D.A.R.E. status (graduate or non-graduate) and gender were not included in the final sample, however those with unspecified grade level were ® included. The final sample consisted of 6,482. Figure 1 provides the percentages of each grade included in the sample. Figure 2 provides a comparison of the ethnic distribution of the sample versus that of the district as a whole. 5 t t Figure_ 1 PERCENTAGE OF ENROLLMENT SURVEYED 100.00% 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% % 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% ' 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% 5th 7th 9th Grade Level The survey assessed 2201 5th grade students or 77 percent of SBCUSD's 5th grade student body. At the 7th grade level, 2420 surveys or 77 percent of the 7th grade student body were analyzed. At the 9th grade level, 56 percent or 1670 students were surveyed. r 6 ■ Figure 2 ETHNIC DISTRIBUTION OF THE SURVEY SAMPLE ■ 100.00% 80.00% 60.00% ■ Sample ■ % 40.00% ® Enrolled r 20.00% 0.00% AA A/P C H/L O Ethnic Group ■ t Students reported their race/ethnicity by indicating on ' their answer sheet which category best described them. African- American (AA) , Caucasian (C) , and Hispanic/Latino (H/L) students were slightly under represented, while Asian/Pacific ' Islander(A/P) was slightly over represented. The category of Other was included as an option. Overall, there were no gross over or under representations of any one ethnic group. ■ ■ ■ ■ DEMOGRAPHICS OF TOTAL SAMPLE GIVEN TO: 5TH, 7TH, and 9TH graders ADMINISTERED IN SBCUSD: SPRING SEMESTER 1996 CLASSES : 40 Elementary (no "D" track) 8 Middle 4 High (no alternative schools) TOTAL SURVEYED: 8 , 983 never returned: -2 , 105 late returns : - 125 eliminated: - 201 . FINAL SAMPLE: 6 , 482 GRADE LEVEL BREAKDOWN: Unspecified = (191) 5th = 34 . 0% (2201) 7th = 37 . 30 (2420) 9th = 25 . 80 (1670) GENDER BREAKDOWN: ■ Female = 50 . 7% (3288) ® Male = 49 . 3% (3194) ETHNIC BREAKDOWN: African-American/ Black = 16 . 7% (1084) Asian/ Pacific Islander = 5 . 2% (338) Caucasian/ White = 21 . 8% (1411) Hispanic/ Latino = 41 . 9% (2716) Other = 14 .4% , (933) D.A.R.E STATUS : Graduates = 71 . 6% (4639) Non-Graduates = 28 .4% (1843) ■ 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY During the 1996-97 school year SBCUSD High Risk/ Substance Abuse office conducted a district-wide survey of D.A.R. E . graduates and non-graduates in an attempt to evaluate the effectiveness of the program and it ' s long-term impact . The sample included fifth, seventh, and ninth grade students who answered questions about their use of alcohol, marijuana, cigarettes, and inhalants, etc . They also answered questions covering D.A.R.E. core curriculum and their attitudes toward drug use . Students who were graduates of the D.A.R.E . program were also asked specific questions about their perceptions of D.A.R.E . ' s helpfulness . When analyzing the results, the following information was evident : Graduates vs . Non-Graduates * Graduates responded correctly more often that smoking cigarettes, chewing tobacco and snuff can cause cancer, heart disease, and death. * Graduates responded correctly more often that fighting or threatening someone with a weapon is a bad way to deal with a disagreement . * Graduates responded correctly more often that abusing any chemical, such as glue or gasoline, as an inhalant can cause serious permanent injury to a person' s body and his/ her health. * Non-graduates responded that it would be easier to say "no" to a friend offering them cigarettes than did graduates . * Non-graduates responded that they would stop a friend from using alcohol more often than the graduates . 9 * Non-graduates responded that they would stop a ' friend from using inhalants, crack, cocaine, etc . more often than the graduates . ' * Graduates are using less marijuana than Non- graduates . ' * Graduates are using less inhalants, crack, cocaine, etc . than Non-graduates . * re e Alcohol and cigarettes equally q y used by Graduates and Non-graduates . * Graduates have fewer intentions of using alcohol, ' marijuana, cigarettes, and inhalants et cetera within the next year. ' * Graduates have fewer intentions of using marijuana, cigarettes, and inhalants et cetera when they are legal adults . ' * Non-Graduates have equal intentions Graduates and q of using alcohol when they are legal adults . ' * There are NO differences between Graduates and Non-Graduates in attitudes towards alcohol, ' marijuana, cigarettes, and inhalants, crack, cocaine, etc . GRADE LEVEL RESULTS * As grade level increased, the number of incorrect responses to items concerning content knowledge increased; therefore, the knowledge is not ' staying with them. * As grade level increased, the students were less likely to respond that they would say "no" to friends, stop friends from using, or be stopped by friends . 10 * As grade level increased, use of alcohol , marijuana, cigarettes, and inhalants, crack, cocaine, et cetera increased. * As grade level increased, so did the intention to use alcohol, marijuana, cigarettes, and inhalants, crack, cocaine, et cetera both within the next year and when the students are legal adults . * As grade level increased, the less dangerous ' alcohol, marijuana, cigarettes, and inhalants, crack, cocaine, et cetera were reported to be . ' * As grade level increased, the perception that D.A.R.E . has been helpful decreased. ' * As grade level increased the perception that police are helpful and care about young people ' decreased. GENDER RESULTS * Males gave more incorrect responses to the content knowledge items than did females; therefore, males are retaining less of the lessons . ' * Females reported that they are more likely to say "no" to a friend, stop a friend from using drugs, and be stopped by friends than the males reported. * Males use more alcohol, marijuana, cigarettes, and inhalants, crack, cocaine, et cetera than females . CMales reported more intentions than females of using alcohol, marijuana, cigarettes, and inhalants, crack, cocaine, et cetera within the next year and when they are legal adults . ' * Males reported that alcohol, marijuana,' cigarettes, and inhalants, crack, cocaine, et cetera are less dangerous than females reported. ' 11 x * Males reported less help from the D.A.R.E. program than females reported. * Females are more likely than males to respond that police are helpful and care about young people . ETHNICITY RESULTS * Asian/ Pacific Islanders have the LEAST retention of the content knowledge; Caucasians have the MOST retention of the content knowledge . * African-Americans reported the lowest use of alcohol and cigarettes . * Asian/ Pacific Islanders reported the lowest use of marijuana and the second lowest use of alcohol, but the second highest . use of cigarettes . * Caucasians reported the highest alcohol use, marijuana use, and cigarette use . * Hispanic/ Latinos reported the second highest use of alcohol and marijuana and the third highest use of cigarettes . * There were no ethnic differences for the use of inhalants, crack, cocaine, etc . * Asian/ Pacific Islanders have the greatest intention of using alcohol, marijuana, cigarettes, and inhalants, crack, cocaine et cetera within the next year and when they are legal adults . * Caucasians have the fewest intentions of drug use within the next year and when they are legal adults . * Overall, Caucasians reported that alcohol, marijuana, cigarettes, and inhalants, crack, cocaine et cetera were LESS dangerous than all other ethnic groups . 12 r * Asian/ Pacific Islanders reported marijuana as MORE dangerous than all other ethnic groups . ' * African-Americans reported that alcohol and cigarettes were MORE dangerous than all other ethnic groups . r * African-Americans reported the program as most helpful, followed by Asians then Caucasians, with Hispanic/ Latinos responding most negatively towards the D.A.R.E . program. * Hispanic/ Latinos were MOST likely to respond that the police are helpful; African-Americans were the LEAST likely to respond the police are helpful . 1 13 QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES : GRADUATES VS. NON-GRADUATES Graduates = 4639 , males = 2222 , females = 2417 Non-Graduates = 1843 , males 972 , females = 871 CONTENT KNOWLEDGE ITEMS The first portion of the questionnaire consisted of thirteen true - false items . The items were pulled directly from D.A.R.E. curriculum and reflect content knowledge that should have been learned by those in the program. The last two items do not pertain to the curriculum directly, but were an attempt to ascertain the students ' attitudes towards the police . Police officers act as D.A.R.E. curriculum instructors . The following results indicate the percentage of those answering the statement correctly. All true - false items were written so that TRUE would be correct . The two questions dealing with the police are neither true nor false, they are merely opinions of the students . TF5 Smoking cigarettes, chewing tobacco, and snuff can cause cancer, heart disease, and death. Graduate 96 . 60 +li■ Non-Graduate 95 . 5% TF6 Drinking alcohol causes changes in a person' s personality and increases violence and destructive acts. Graduate 91 . 101 Non-Graduate 90 .4% 14 TF7 Marijuana interferes with a person' s ambition and ability to remember what they have learned. Graduate 77 . 8. Non-Graduate 76 . 5. TF8 Cocaine is a highly addictive stimulant. Graduate 89 . 2. Non-Graduate 89 . 9. TF 9 Cocaine can cause breathing problems, heart attacks, and death even on the first try. Graduate 74 . 4. Non-Graduate 76 . 106 TF10 Abusing any chemical, such as glue or gasoline, as an inhalant can cause serious permanent injury to a person' s body and his/ her health. Graduate 89 . 8. Non-Graduate 88 . 2. TF11 Using drugs can have a bad effect not only on a person' s health, but also on his/ her school work, family, and friendships. Graduate 94 . 1. Non-Graduate 93 . 70 TF12 Fighting or threatening someone with a weapon is a bad way to deal with a disagreement. Graduate 89 . 8. Non-Graduate 88 . 2. TF13 I can think of a lot of positive things to do instead of using drugs. Graduate 90 . 801 Non-Graduate 89 . 4. 15 TF14 Being involved with gangs means using violence and breaking the law. Graduate 79 . 70 Non-Graduate 80 . 70 TF15 One way for people to avoid the pressure to join gangs is to engage in positive actions that satisfy their needs of belonging, being cared about, and being recognized. Graduate .79 . 7. Non-Graduate 80 . 5. TF16 The police are helpful. Graduate 77 . 806 Non-Graduate 77 . 6. TF17 The police care about young people. Graduate 76 . 1. Non-Graduate 75 . 0. RESISTANCE BEHAVIORS AND PEER INFLUENCE ITEMS Twelve items were concerned with resistance behaviors and peer influence . The D.A.R.E. curriculum focuses on various ways to counteract negative peer pressure . Also, items were included to see if students involved in the D.A.R.E. program are influencing their friends to stay away from alcohol, marijuana, cigarettes, and other drugs . The following results indicate the percentage of students who were in agreement with the statements designed to assess resistance behaviors and peer yr influence : 16 P18 MY FRIENDS WOULD STOP ME FROM GETTING DRUNK. Graduate 60 . 6% Non-Graduate 61 . 90 P19 MY FRIENDS WOULD STOP ME FROM USING MARIJUANA. Graduate 65 . 106 Non-Graduate 66 . 3% P20 MY FRIENDS WOULD STOP ME FROM USING CIGARETTES . Graduate 63 . 3% Non-Graduate 63 . 9. tP21 MY FRIENDS WOULD STOP ME FROM USING INHALANT'S, COCAINE, CRACK OR ETC. Graduate 72 . 8. Non-Graduate 72 . 8. r P22 IT WOULD BE EASY FOR ME TO SAY "NO" TO A FRIEND WHO OFFERED ME ALCOHOL. Graduate 65 . 6. Non-Graduate 66 . 7. P23 IT WOULD BE EASY FOR ME TO SAY "NO" TO A FRIEND WHO OFFERED ME MARIJUANA. Graduate 68 . 6. Non-Graduate 68 . 96 P24 IT WOULD BE EASY FOR ME TO SAY "NO" TO A FRIEND WHO OFFERED ME CIGARETTES. Graduate 69 . 0. Non-Graduate 70 . 80 ' 17 P25 IT WOULD BE EASY FOR ME TO SAY "NO" TO A FRIEND WHO OFFERED ME INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE, ETC. Graduate 72 . 5. Non-Graduate 73 . 4% P26 I WOULD STOP A FRIEND FROM USING ALCOHOL. Graduate 69 . 6. Non-Graduate 71 . 8. P27 I WOULD STOP A FRIEND FROM USING MARIJUANA. Graduate 71 . 4. Non-Graduate 72 . 50 P28 I WOULD STOP A FRIEND FROM USING CIGARETTES . Graduate 70 . 4. Non-Graduate 72 .4. P29 I WOULD STOP A FRIEND FROM USING INHALANTS, COCAINE, CRACK, ETC. Graduate 76 . 001 Non-Graduate 76 . 8. On the average, Graduates of the D.A.R.E . program AGREED with the statements 69 . 88% of the time and DISAGREED 30 . 13% of the time. The Non-Graduates AGREED 73 . 39% of the time and DISAGREED 26 . 62% . USE LEVELS OF SUBSTANCES The survey assessed the use levels of four separate substances covered in the D.A.R.E. curriculum as "drugs" : alcohol, marijuana, cigarettes, and inhalants, crack, cocaine et cetera. Table 1 illustrates the percentages of students responding at a given use level for the four substances . 18 Table 1 Percentages of Graduates and Non-Graduates responding at a given use level . DRUG GRADUATE NON-GRADUATE ALCOHOL Never used it . . . . . . . . 56 . 50 59 . 80 Used once or twice in the past year. . . . . . 27 . 01 23 . 3% Use it sometimes . . . . . 12 . 51 11 . 41 Use it regularly. . . . . 2 . 71 3 . 61 MARIJUANA Never used it . . . . . . . . 77 .41 75 . 51 Used once or twice in the past year. . . . . . 11 . 61 11 .41 Use it sometimes . . . . . 5 . 71 6 . 31 Use it regularly. . . . . 4 . 01 5 . 01 CIGARETTES Never used it . . . . . . . . 70 .41 70 . 61 Used once or twice in AW the past year. . . . . . 19 . 21 18 . 61 Use it sometimes . . . . . 5 . 61 5 . 91 Use it regularly. . . . . 3 . 31 3 . 31 INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE, ETC. Never used it . . . . . . . . 89 . 7% 87 . 81 Used once or twice in the past year. . . . . . 6 . 86 7 . 106 Use it sometimes . . . . . 1 . 11 1 . 71 Use it regularly. . . . . 1 . 01 1 . 71 w 19 l i ( Figure 3 PERCENT OF STUDENTS WHO HAVE USED SUBSTANCES ONE OR MORE TIMES : GRADUATE VS . NON-GRADUATE c L � c _ N .r M ® Non-Grads m v ■Grads c is i 0 0 a 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% % 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% s Graduates report using alcohol and cigarettes more than Non-graduates . Non-Graduates report using more marijuana and inhalants, crack, cocaine, et cetera than Graduates . 20 FUTURE INTENTIONS FOR DRUG USE Because of the lack of ability to do a longitudinal study at this time as to the nature of the long-term effects of the D.A.R.E. program and it ' s impact on drug use, questions were included to assess the students ' drug use intentions for the next year and for when they are legal adults . Table 2 illustrates the percentages of students responding that they DISAGREED with the statements . They did not have any intentions of doing the drug in question within the .specified time range . Table 2 Percentage of Graduates and Non-Graduates Disagreeing With Statements of Intentions STATEMENT GRADUATES NON-GRADUATES I THINK THAT WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR I WILL USE . . . ALCOHOL 73. 10 69 . 50 MARIJUANA 80 . 90 75 . 0% CIGARETTES 82 . 2% 78 . 70 INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE 89 . 80 84 . 7% I THINK THAT WHEN I AM A LEGAL ADULT I WILL USE. . . ALCOHOL 64 . 70 62 . 2% MARIJUANA 83 . 8% 78 . 506 CIGARETTES 81 . 301 76 . 20 INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE 90 .401 85 . 30 21 t Figure 4 PERCENT OF STUDENTS WHO INTEND TO USE DRUGS WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR: GRADUATE VS . NON-GRADUATE N m W C N Z 0 a ® Non-Grads m c� v ■Grads ca L CC� G O u • a 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 22 Figure 5 PERCENT OF STUDENTS WHO INTEND TO USE DRUGS WHEN THEY ARE LEGAL ADULTS : GRADUATE VS . NON-GRADUATE vi c m r � w L c _ N L m ® Non-Grads v ■Grads c �a 0 0 Q 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 23 RESISTANCE TECHNIQUES op Mr One item on the questionnaire was included to see which specific techniques taught in the D.A.R. E . curriculum were being implemented by the students to resist drugs or alcohol . P42 IF YOUR FRIENDS ASK YOU TO USE DRUGS AND YOU DON'T WANT TO, WHAT WOULD YOU USUALLY DO? Graduates Non-Graduates Avoid the situation. . . . 11 . 606 11 . 31 Go Along with friends anyway. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . 9% 10 . 10 ' Say "no thanks".... . . . . 50 . 60 41 . 70 Walk Away. 17 . 7% 20 . 80 Ignore them. . . . . . . . . . . . 9 . 50 12 . 90 j ATTITUDES TOWARD DRUG USE In order to ascertain the students ' attitudes toward drug use, four items were used to determine how dangerous they thought alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana, and inhalants, crack, cocaine, etc . are for people their age . Table 3 represents the category chosen by Graduates and Non-Graduates . i t . t 24 Table 3 Percentages of Graduates and Non-Graduates Responses for Each Drug and Attitude Level Drucr Graduates Non-Graduates P43 ALCOHOL very dangerous 61 . 7% 65 . 80 sort of dangerous 21 . 80 17 . 0% not too dangerous 9 . 86 10 . 20 not dangerous at all 4 . 51 6 . 51 P44 MARIJUANA very dangerous 71 . 76 74 . 41 sort of dangerous 13 . 16 11 . 11 not too dangerous 6 . 76 7 . 06 not dangerous at all 5 . 71 7 . 21 P45 CIGARETTES very dangerous 62 . 01 62 . 81 sort of dangerous 20 . 81 17 . 91 not too dangerous 8 . 86 8 .41 not dangerous at all 5 .41 6 . 71 P46 INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE very dangerous 86 . 61 83 . 36 sort of dangerous 5 . 66 6 . 36 not too dangerous 2 .46 2 . 21 not dangerous at all 2 . 31 2 . 01 25 1 Figure 6 PERCENT OF STUDENTS WHO RESPONDED THAT DRUGS ARE "VERY (OR) SORT- OF DANGEROUS" : GRADUATE VS . NON—GRADUATE 11111;11:11: EMMMMMMMMMMMM N C tp U W C L c� ® Non-Grads �a v ■Grads MMMMM c 0 r o Q 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% i Graduates reported that alcohol, marijuana, and cigarettes are more dangerous than Non-graduates reported. Non-graduates reported that inhalants, crack, cocaine et cetera were more dangerous. than Graduates reported. I 26 1 QUESTIONS SPECIFIC TO D.A.R.E. GRADUATES iThe following four items were included to tap into the perceptions of D.A.R.E . graduates as to the usefulness of the program. The percentages of graduates responding to each option are presented with the items . 47 THE MOST IMPORTANT THING I LEARNED FROM D.A.R.E WAS : How to handle/ avoid peer pressure . . . . . . . 35 . 90 Not to use drugs and alcohol . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 . 50 Information about drugs and alcohol . . . . . . 10 . 8. Drugs and alcohol are dangerous/ consequences of use and abuse . . . . . . . . . . 23 . 40 I did not learn anything from D.A.R.E. . . . 5 . 10 Ob 48 HOW HELPFUL HAS D.A.R.E. BEEN IN TEACHING YOU ABOUT HOW TO AVOID DRUGS AND ALCOHOL? Very helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 . 5% Sort of helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 . 60 Not too helpful , . . . . . . . . 7 . 90 Not helpful at all . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . O06 49 HOW HELPFUL HAS D.A.R.E. BEEN IN HELPING YOU INCREASE YOU CONFIDENCE IN YOURSELF AND YOUR ABILITY TO DEAL WITH PEER PRESSURE? Very helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 . 6% Sort of helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 . 70 Not too helpful . . . : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 6 : 9% Not helpful at all 7 . 00-. 50 HOW HELPFUL HAS D.A.R.E. BEEN IN KEEPING YOU AWAY FROM ALCOHOL, CIGARETTES, MARIJUANA, AND OTHER DRUGS? very helpful ful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 . 0% 1 Sort, of helpful . : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 15 . 60 Not too helpful . 7 . 40 Not helpful at all . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 .40 t 27 QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES : RESULTS BASED ON GRADE LEVEL The results from the survey were also analyzed by grade level to assess the long-term impact that D.A.R.E . may have on students . Table 4 shows a breakdown of the demographics based on grade level . Table 4 Demographic Breakdown of Sample Based on Grade Level DEMOGRAPHIC 5TH 7TH 9TH GENDER N o N o N o FEMALE 1113 (50 . 6) 1242 (51 . 3) 847 (50 . 7) MALE 1088 (49 .4) 1178 (48 . 7) 823 (49 . 3) RACE AFRICAN-AMERICAN 387 (17 . 6) 395 (16 . 3) 260(15 . 6) ASIAN/ PACIFIC 93 ( 4 . 2) 125 ( 5 . 2) 96 ( 5 . 7) CAUCASIAN/ WHITE 464 (21 . 1) 503 (20 . 8) 422 (25 . 5) HISPANIC/ LATINO 901 (40 . 9) 1035 (42 . 8) 703 (42 . 5) OTHER 348 (15 . 8) 332 (13 . 7) 173 (10 . 5) ! STATUS D.A.R.E. GRADUATE 1306 (59 . 3) 2044 (84 . 5) 1174 (70 . 3) NON-GRADUATE 895 (40 . 7) 376 (15 . 5) 496 (29 . 7) 28 USE LEVELS IN GRADES 5, 7, AND 9 Table 5 shows the use levels of students in grades 5 , 7 , and 9 for alcohol, marijuana, cigarettes, and inhalants, crack, cocaine, etc . Table 5 Percentages of 5th, 7th, and 9th Grade Students Reporting Drug Use Levels Drua 5th 7th 9th ALCOHOL Never used it . . . . . . . . . . . 78 . 10 55 . 2% 34 . 5% Used it once or twice in the past year. . . . . . . . . 18 . 50 30 . 0% 30 . 30 Use it sometimes . . . . . . . . 1 . 76 11 . 50 26 . 5% Use it regularly. . 31 2 . 10 7 . 10 MARIJUANA Never used it . . . . . . . . . . . 91 . 66 77 . 7% 58 . 70 Used it once or twice in the past year. . . . . . . . . 18 . 5% 12 . 1% 16 . 90 Use it sometimes . . . . . . . . . 601 5 . 50 13 . 16 Use it regularly. . . . . . . . . 2% 3 . 5% 9 . 86 CIGARETTES Never used it . . . . . . . . . . . 85 . 3% 68 . 36 55 . 26 Used it once or twice in the past year. . . . . . . . . 11 . 86 20 . 601 25 . 96 Use it sometimes . . . . . . . . 1 . 26 7 . 006 9 . 76 Use it regularly. . 5% 2 . 6% 7 . 46 INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE, ETC. Never used it . . . . . . . . . . . 92 . 501 90 . 16 84 . 86 Used it once or twice in the past year. . . . . . . . . 5 . 76 6 . 36 8 . 76 Use it sometimes . . . . . . . . . 1% 1 .4% 2 . 3% Use it regularly. . . . . . . . .4% . 86 2 . 76 29 Figure 7 PERCENT OF 5TH, 7TH, AND 9TH GRADE STUDENTS WHO HAVE USED DRUGS ONE OR MORE TIMES vi C v c� iv W t C (D ®9th L ❑7th ca U ■ 5th cc ca 0 0 a 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% ril► 30 ATTITUDES TOWARD DRUG USE IN GRADES 5, 7, AND 9 Table 6 represents the breakdown of attitude level by drug for students in each grade level . Table 6 Attitude Level by Drug for Grades 5 , 7, and 9 (o) Drua 5th 7th 9th ALCOHOL Very dangerous . . . . . . . . . . 81 . 5% 60 . 90 41 . 8% Sort of dangerous . . . . . . . 9 . 3% 22 . 7o 31 . 5% Not too dangerous . . . . . . . 4 . Oo 9 . 70 17 . 8% Not dangerous at all . . . . 2 . 8% 4 . 30 8 . 706 MARIJUANA Very dangerous . . . . . . . . . . 87 . 90 72 . 8% 51 . 0% Sort of dangerous . . . . . . . 5 . 40 13 . 3% 20 . 1 % Not too dangerous . . . . . . . 1 . 90 6 . 10 13 . 10 Not dangerous at all . . . . 2 . 3% 4 . 6% 12/30 CIGARETTES Very dangerous . . . . . . . . . . 77 . 1% 61 . 206 45 . 5 , Sort of dangerous . . . . . . . 13 . 30 21 . 60 25 . 90 Not too dangerous . . . . . . . 3 . 901 8 . 50 14 . 90 Not dangerous at all . . . . 3 . 006 5 . 106 9 . 90 INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE,ETC. Very dangerous . . . . . . . . . . 89 . 5% 86 . 406 80 . 70 Sort of dangerous . . . . . . . 4 . 86 4 . 9% 8 . 0% Not too dangerous . . . . . . . 1 . O0 2 . 606 3 . 7% Not dangerous at all . . . . 1 . 5% 2 . 0% 3 . 406 i 31 Figure 8 PERCENT OF 5TH, 7TH, AND 9TH GRADE STUDENTS RESPONDING THAT DRUGS ARE "VERY DANGEROUS (OR) SORT OF DANGEROUS" N m W t N d Z °.' ®9th ❑7th U ■5th 0 0 a 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 32 RESISTANCE TECHNIQUE USED BY GRADES 5, 7, AND 9 P42 If your friends ask you to use drugs and you don' t want to, what would you usually do? 5TH 7TH 9TH Avoid the situation 12 . 0% 11 . 50 10 . 5. Go along with friends anyway 3 . 8. 9 . 90-0 11 . 7. ® Say "no thanks" 38 . 5. 48 . 6. 60 . 7. Walk away 27 . 8. 17 . 6. 8 . 4. Ignore them 15 . 506 9 . 4. 5 . 7. D.A.R.E. SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR GRADES 5, 7, AND 9 M The D.A.R.E. specific questions were broken down by grade level, but only those students who were D.A.R.E. graduates responded to the following items . The results are given as percentages of each grade responding to the choice listed. f The most important thing I learned from D.A.R.E. was: 5th 7th 9th How to handle/ avoid peer pressure. . . 28 . 4 43 . 8 40 . 1 Not to use drugs and alcohol . . . . . . . . . 26 .4 16 . 8 12 . 8 Information about drugs and alcohol . . 7 . 8 10 . 7 17 . 0 Drugs and alcohol are dangerous/ consequences of use and abuse . . . . . . 36 . 1 23 . 1 16 . 8 I did not learn anything from D.A.R.E . 1 . 2 5 . 7 13 . 3 How helpful has D.A.R.E. been in teaching you how to avoid drugs and alcohol? 5th 7th 9th Very helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 . 506 62 . 51 37 . 50 Sort of helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 . 706 21 . 5. 32 . 01 Not too helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . 6. 9 . 206 14 . 606 Not helpful at all . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 , 0. 6 . 1. 13 . 9. 33 i . How helpful has D.A.R.E. been in helping you increase your confidence in yourself and you ability to deal with pressure? 5th 7th 9th Very helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 . 71 61 . 50 42 . 20 Sort of helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 . 71 23 . 30 27 . 91 Not too helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . 11 7 . 81 12 . 41 Not helpful at all . 3 . 51 6 . 71 15 . 71 How helpful has D.A.R.E. been in keeping you away from alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana, and other drugs? 5th 7th 9th r Very helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 . 51 64 . 11 40 . 71 Sort of helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . 61 19 . 01 22 . 61 Not too helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . 30 7 . 51 14 . 71 Not helpful at all . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 .41 8 . 41 20 .41 1 ' 34 QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES : RESULTS BASED ON GENDER The results of the survey were analyzed by gender to determine if any gender differences exist in the r effectiveness of the D.A.R.E . program. Table 7 shows the demographic breakdown of the sample based on gender. Table 7 Demographic Breakdown of the Sample Based on Gender DEMOGRAPHICS FEMALE MALE N o N TOTAL NUMBER 3288 (50 . 7) 3194 (49 . 3) GRADES 5TH 1113 (33 . 9) 1088 (34 . 1) 7TH 1242 (37 . 8) 1178 (36 . 9) 9TH 847 (25 . 8) 823 (25 . 8) ETHNICITY African-American 558 (17 . 0) 526 (16 . 5) Asian/ Pacific 162 ( 4 . 9) 176 ( 5 . 5) Caucasian 696 (21 . 2) 715 (22 .4) Hispanic/ Latino 1367 (41 . 6) 1349 (42 . 2) Other 476 (14 . 5) 400 (12 . 5) STATUS D.A.R.E. GRADUATE 2417 (73 . 5) 2222 (69 . 6) NON-GRADUATE 871 (26 . 5) 972 (30 .4) 35 USE LEVELS BY GENDER Table 8. represents the use levels for all drugs by gender in percentage form. Table 8 Use Levels By Gender for All Drugs (o) DRUG FEMALE MALE 0 ALCOHOL Never used it . . . . . . . . . . . 60 . 2 54 . 6 Used once or twice in the past year. . . . . . 23 . 8 28 . 1 Use it sometimes . . . . . . . . 12 . 2 12 . 2 Use it regularly. . . . . . . . 2 . 5 3 . 5 MARIJUANA Never used it . . . . . . . . . . . 80 . 2 73 .4 Used once or twice in the past year. . . . . . . . 9 . 6 13 . 6 Use it sometimes . . . . . . . . 5 .4 6 .4 Use it regularly. . . . . . . . 3 . 4 5 . 3 CIGARETTES Never used it . . . . . . . . . . . 73 . 7 67 . 2 Used once or twice in the past year. . . . . . . . 17 . 3 20 . 7 Use it sometimes . . . . . . . . 5 . 1 6 . 3 Use it regularly. . . . . . . . 2 . 5 4 . 1 INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE, ETC Never used it . . . . . . . . . . . 90 . 2 88 . 1 Used once or twice in the past year. . . . . . . . 6 . 2 7 . 7 Use it sometimes . . . . . . . . 1 . 5 1 . 1. Use it regularly. . . . . . . . . 9 1 . 5 36 i �gure 9 PERCENT OF MALES VS . FEMALES HAVING USED DRUGS ONE OR MORE TIMES vi .r r a W t c N d ® Males U ■ Females c c� .c R 0 0 Q 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% Males report using more of each drug type listed than females . 37 ATTITUDES TOWARD DRUG USE BY GENDER Table 9 shows the attitude level toward drug use, by people the age of the students, chosen for each drug type listed. Table 9 Attitude Toward Drug Use By Gender M DRUG FEMALES MALES o 0 ALCOHOL Very dangerous 66 . 5 58 . 1 Sort of dangerous 19 . 4 21 . 2 Not too dangerous 8 . 2 11 .4 Not dangerous at all 3 . 8 6 . 3 MARIJUANA Very dangerous 75 . 7 67 . 5 i Sort of dangerous 11 . 5 13 .4 I Not too dangerous 5 . 5 7 . 9 Not dangerous at all 4 . 6 7 . 5 CIGARETTES ' Very dangerous 65 . 1 59 . 2 Sort of dangerous 19 . 9 20 . 0 Not too dangerous 7 . 3 10 . 1 Not dangerous at all 4 . 7 7 . 0 INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE, ETC Very dangerous 91 . 6 86 . 3 Sort of dangerous 4 . 9 7 . 2 Not too dangerous 1 . 9 3 . 0 Not dangerous at all 1 .4 3 . 3 38 t t Figure 10 PERCENT OF MALES VS . FEMALES REPORTING THAT DRUGS ARE "VERY (OR) SORT OF DANGEROUS" t ui c� W C N d t � ® Males m v ■ Females t � ca •L t � - 0 t 0 a M 6 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% t t t t t t t 39 t , RESISTANCE TECHNIQUES USED BY MALES AND FEMALES The following results are percentages of males and females responding to a given choice for the item on the survey dealing with resistance techniques learned in the D.A. R. E . curriculum. If your friends ask you to use drugs and you don' t want to, what would you usually do? FEMALES MALES 0 Avoid the situation. . . . . . 10 . 1 12 . 9 Go along with friends anyway. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . 3 10 . 8 Say "no thanks" . . . . . . . . . . 51 . 7 44 .4 Walk Away. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 . 2 19 . 0 Ignore them. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 . 9 10 . 1 D.A.R.E. SPECIFIC QUESTIONS BY GENDER The following items were specific to Graduates of the D.A.R.E . program. The results are presented as percentages of females and males choosing one of the forced choice responses . The most important thing I learned from D.A.R.E. was : FEMALES MALES 0 0 How to handle/ avoid peer pressure . . . . . 37 . 8 39 . 1 Not to use drugs and alcohol . . . . . . . . . . . 17 . 5 19 . 7 Information about drugs and alcohol . . . 11 . 6 11 . 5 Drugs and alcohol are dangerous/ consequences of use and abuse . . . . . . . . 28 . 3 21 . 0 I did not learn anything from D.A.R.E. . 4 . 7 8 . 7 40 How helpful has D.A.R.E. been in teaching you about how to avoid drugs and alcohol? FEMALES MALES 0 Very helpful ful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 . 3 60 . 2 Sort of helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 . 5 20 . 6 Not too helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 . 7 8 . 8 Not at all helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . 7 9 .4 iHow helpful has D.A.R.E. been in helping you increase your confidence in yourself and your ability to deal ' with peer pressure? FEMALES MALES 0 Very helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 . 2 59 . 9 Sort of helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 . 3 20 . 6 Not too helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . 5 7 . 9 Not at all helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 .4 10 . 6 How helpful has D.A.R.E. been in keeping you away from alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana, and other drugs? FEMALES MALES o Very helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 . 0 62 . 8 Sort of helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 .4 16 . 2 I ■ Not too helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8 . 1 8 . 1 Not at all helpful . 8 . 8 11 . 6 41 QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES : RESULTS BASED ON ETHNICITY The survey results were analyzed by ethnic group to determine if the program is impacting different groups in the same or a different manner. Table 10 represents the demographic breakdown of the sample based on ethnicity. Table 10 Demographic Breakdown of Sample Based on Ethnicity DEMOGRAPHICS N (06) MALE FEMALE 5TH 7TH 9TH AFRICAN-AMERICAN 1084 (31 . 6) 526 558 387 396 260 (AA) ASIAN/ PACIFIC 338 ( 9 . 8) 176 162 93 125 96 (AP) CAUCASIAN 1411 (21 . 9) 715 696 464 503 422 HISPANIC/ LATINO 2716 (42 . 3) 1349 1367 901 1035 703 (HL) OTHER 876 13 . 6) 400 476 348 332 173 (0) I 42 USE LEVELS BY ETHNICITY The following results indicate drug use level for each ethnic group . See Table 11 . Table 11 Drug Use Level By Ethnicity ETHNICITY DRUG AA AP C HL O ALCOHOL Never used it . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 . 8 68 . 5 54 . 0 54.. 0 62 . 9 Used once or twice in past year. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 . 2 20 . 7 26 . 0 28 . 7 25 . 0 Use it sometimes . . . . . . . . . 7 . 8 7 . 8 14 . 8 14 . 4 9 . 2 Use it regularly. . . . . . . . . 1 . 0 3 . 0 5 . 1 2 . 8 2 . 8 MARIJUANA Never used it . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 .4 82 . 1 77 . 5 76 . 4 81 . 7 Used once or twice in past year. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 . 6 10 . 4 10 . 2 12 . 7 9 . 9 Use it sometimes . . . . . . . . . 4 . 9 3 . 3 6 . 6 6 . 7 4 . 8 Use it regularly. . . . . . . . . 4 . 0 4 . 2 5 . 7 4 . 2 3 . 5 CIGARETTES Never used it . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 . 2 73 . 7 64 . 8 70 . 9 74 .4 Used once or twice in past year. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 . 1 7 . 2 6 . 3 7 . 5 5 . 8 Use it sometimes . . . . . . . . . 2 . 3 6 . 0 7 . 6 6 . 2 5 . 9 Use it regularly. . . . . . . . . 1 . 6 6 . 0 6 . 8 1 . 9 3 . 4 INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE, ETC Never used it . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 . 7 88 . 6 89 . 7 90 . 0 91 . 5 Used once or twice in past year. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . 6 7 . 2 6 . 3 7 . 5 5 . 8 Use it sometimes . . . . . . . . . . 5 . 9 1 . 6 1 . 5 1 . 4 Use it regularly. . . . . . . . . . 8 3 . 3 1 . 6 1 . 5 1 . 3 43 Figure 11 PERCENT OF STUDENTS USING DRUGS ONE OR MORE TIMES : ANALYZED tBY ETHNICITY �w cCV r � W c _ N 1 L ❑o ,OEM ' v ■ H/L ®C ®A/P ®AA 0 1 0 R 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% s t 1 44 ATTITUDES TOWARD DRUG USE BY ETHNICITY Table 12 represents the attitude level chosen by each ethnic group for the drugs listed. The choices ranged from "very dangerous" to "not dangerous at all" for each drug type . Table 12 Attitude Level Chosen By Ethnic Groups For Drug Use (o) ETHNICITY DRUG AA AP C HL O ALCOHOL Very dangerous 73 . 7 67 . 0 56 . 7 62 . 0 68 . 2 Sort of dangerous 15 . 1 23 . 1 24 . 0 21 . 7 18 . 1 Not too dangerous 6 . 8 5 . 1 12 . 6 10 . 6 9 . 5 Not at all dangerous 4 . 0 4 . 5 6 . 5 5 .4 3 . 6 MARIJUANA Very dangerous 73 . 3 78 . 7 71 . 4 72 .4 78 . 6 Sort of dangerous 10 . 3 12 . 8 13 . 1 14 .4 10 . 2 Not too dangerous 7 . 0 2 . 7 8 .4 6 . 7 5 . 6 Not at all dangerous 5 . 4 5 . 8 7 . 1 6 . 3 5 . 3 CIGARETTES Very dangerous 72 . 9 61 . 2 59 . 3 64 . 0 64 . 3 Sort of dangerous 15 . 7 22 .4 20 . 5 21 . 7 22 . 0 w Not too dangerous 6 . 0 10 . 9 11 . 8 8 . 2 9 . 0 Not at all dangerous 5 . 1 5 . 2 8 . 3 5 . 7 4 . 3 INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE, ETC Very dangerous 91 . 0 89 . 3 88 . 7 88 . 3 89 . 4 �. Sort of dangerous 4 . 8 5 . 5 6 . 4 6 . 5 5 .4 Not too dangerous 1 . 5 1 . 8 2 .4 3 . 0 2 . 1 Not at all dangerous 2 . 5 3 . 4 2 . 3 2 . 0 2 . 6 45 r Figure 12 PERCENT OF STUDENTS REPORTING THAT DRUGS ARE "VERY (OR) SORT OF DANGEROUS" N c4 W L C N L El U ■ H/L � ®C �a .L ®A/P ®AA 0 L 0 Q 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% • 46 RESISTANCE TECHNIQUES USED BY ETHNICITY If your friends ask you to use drugs and you don' t want to, what would you usually do? AA AP C HL O Avoid the situation. . . . . . . . . . 14 . 5 12 . 4 10 . 8 10 . 9 10 . 5 Go along with friends anyway. 5 . 6 9 . 2 9 . 4 9 . 6 6 . 8 Say "no thanks" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 . 3 53 . 0 52 . 2 46 . 7 47 . 0 Walk away. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 . 8 17 . 5 16 . 7 18 . 0 21 . 7 Ignore them. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 . 0 6 . 2 8 . 5 12 . 0 11 . 5 D.A.R.E. SPECIFIC QUESTIONS BY ETHNICITY The responses for the following D.A.R.E. specific items come from only the D.A.R.E. program graduates . They are presented as percentages (%) of the ethnic groups choosing each response option. The most important thing I learned from D.A.R.E. was: AA AP C HL O How to handle/ avoid peer pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 . 6 35 . 8 35 .4 37 . 8 36 . 6 Not to use drugs and alcohol . 18 . 5 19 . 8 16 . 9 19 .4 18 . 9 Information about drugs and alcohol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . 0 7 .8 16 . 8 11 . 3 10 . 8 Drugs and alcohol are dangerous/consequences of use and abuse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 . 7 29 . 6 20 . 0 26 . 0 27 . 5 I did not learn anything from D.A.R.E. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . 2 7 . 0 10 . 9 5 . 5 6 . 3 ® 47 How helpful has D.A.R.E. been in teaching you about how to avoid drugs and alcohol? AA AP C HL O Very helpful ful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 . 7 55 . 7 52 . 4 63 . 5 65 . 6 Sort of helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 . 3 25 . 6 23 . 3 20 . 3 21 . 3 Not too helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . 3 10 . 2 12 .4 8 . 8 5 . 1 Not at all helpful . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . 0 7 . 2 10 . 6 6 . 7 6 . 7 How helpful has D.A.R.E. been in helping you increase your confidence in yourself and your ability to deal with peer pressure? AA AP C HL O Very helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 . 0 63 . 0 55 . 7 64 . 1 67 . 5 Sort of helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 . 2 28 . 2 22 . 9 20 . 7 21 . 3 Not too helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . 1 8 . 6 9 . 8 8 . 2 5 . 0 Not at all helpful . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . 1 7 . 3 12 . 5 7 . 2 6 . 5 I How helpful has D.A.R.E. been in keeping you away from alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana, and other drugs? AA AP C HL O Very helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 . 7 63 . 0 55 . 7 64 . 1 67 . 5 Sort of helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 . 5 19 . 3 18 . 6 17 . 1 14 . 8 Not too helpful . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . 1 9 . 1 8 . 7 8 . 6 7 . 7 Not at all helpful . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . 0 7 .4 16 . 0 9 . 4 8 .4 48 CONCLUSIONS The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the D.A.R.E. program as it exists in the San Bernardino City Unified School District . There were many aspects of the program which received attention in the survey and the results were strong in some areas and weak in others . The first strength to be uncovered was in the area of r content knowledge . While the Graduates and Non-Graduates have a similar content knowledge about drugs, the Graduates were more likely to know the consequences of drug abuse and fighting. Unfortunately, the area next covered by the survey dealt with peer factors and the results were not encouraging. Non-Graduates reported that it would be easier to say "no" to friends offering cigarettes, that they would stop friends from using alcohol and inhalants, crack, cocaine, et cetera more often than Graduates reported. Overall, the Non-Graduates reported slightly more positive peer resistance and influence than the Graduates (73a vs . 700) . Regardless of this small numerical difference overall, the low percentages of students reporting positive resistance is alarming. Research has shown that the most direct and influential link to alcohol and drug use among M young people is the peer group, especially close friends . If adolescents associate with close peers who discourage substance use, they are much less likely to use alcohol and drugs themselves and vice versa (Donnermeyer, 1995) . When current use levels were examined, the results were ambiguous . While Graduates and Non-Graduates are not #* statistically different in their consumption of alcohol and cigarettes, they are different in their use' of marijuana and inhalants, crack, cocaine, et cetera. Non-Graduates use more marijuana and inhalants, crack, cocaine, et cetera than do the Graduates . However, 43o Graduates and 40% Non-Graduates alike are using alcohol and 300 of both Graduates and Non- Graduates are using cigarettes . One important aspect of this study was to examine the effectiveness of the prevention program from the point of view of how it affects the future intentions of participants to use alcohol and drugs . It should be noted that an 49 W intention is not a perfect predictor of future actions, however an intention is indicative of an individual ' s orientation (Ibid, 1995) . When examining the results of the items dealing with future intentions within the next year and when the students are legal adults, the results favored D.A.R.E . Graduates in every category except for the intention to use alcohol when they are legal adults . There is still intention to use at some level for both groups, but the intentions are lower for Graduates . This lends some support as to the long-term effectiveness of the program. While there are no significant differences between Graduates and Non-Graduates in their attitudes towards alcohol, marijuana, cigarettes, and inhalants, crack, cocaine, et cetera, the majority (approximately 82a) of all the respondents felt that the four drug groups were "very (or) sort of dangerous" . While this result is good, it introduces the question of why the students are still using drugs at a fairly high rate, if they are reporting the drugs as dangerous . There appears to be a dissonance between what the student knows and what the student is engaging in. The grade level results were as expected. As grade level increases the drug use level increases, attitudes become more lenient, peer pressure becomes a more salient factor, and intentions to use drugs within the future increase . Research on the D.A.R.E. program support a continued involvement by the D.A.R.E . officers beyond the 5th grade level . A recent study by Donnermeyer and Phillips (1996) indicate that "students who had been through D.A.R.E. at the elementary. level, and had received one or more reinforcements by participating in either or both a junior high or senior high school D.A.R.E. program (i .e . , "multiple D.A.R.E. " exposures) , showed the lowest levels of drug involvement . " The gender results were not as equal as expected. The results indicate that males are not being reached by the program as effectively as females . Males are retaining less content knowledge, reporting less peer resistance, higher drug use, higher future intentions of drug use, more lenient attitudes toward drugs and less help from the D.A.R.E. program. While this could be due to cultural influences beyond the scope of this study, the D.A.R.E. program needs to address the differences as they exist between males and females . 50 The results based on ethnicity are complicated. Overall, the Caucasians are retaining the most content knowledge, reporting the most lenient attitudes towards drugs, reporting the lowest future intentions, but using the most alcohol, marijuana, and cigarettes . African-Americans report the most help from the D.A.R.E . program, the least use of alcohol and cigarettes which corresponds to the groups reporting that alcohol and cigarettes are the more dangerous than any other ethnic group reported. Asians/ Pacific Islanders are second in reporting how helpful D.A.R. E . has been, but they have the least retention of content knowledge, the highest intentions of future use in all drug categories .. Combined with the group' s reporting the lowest use of marijuana and second highest use of cigarettes, and the most severe attitudes concerning marijuana, these results are seemingly ambiguous . Hispanic/ Latinos which made up the largest portion of the sample are approximately in the middle of all the continuums looked at . Regardless of the above reported conclusions, one group of results is perhaps more important than most because they are based on the subjective responses of D.A.R.E. graduates about the program itself . Approximately 86% of all Graduates reported that the program was "very (or) sort of helpful" in teaching them how to avoid drugs and alcohol . Almost 86% reported that D.A.R.E. was "very (or) sort of helpful" in increasing their self-confidence and their ability to deal with peer pressure and 84% reported that the program was "very (or) sort of helpful" in keeping them away from alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana and other drugs . While the previous results of the study cannot be and should not be disregarded, it is important to keep in mind what the outcome would be without a drug prevention program in place . Imagine what the SBCUSD students ' use levels, future intentions and attitudes towards drugs might be without the D.A.R.E. program. "Even minor reductions in the vulnerability to alcohol and drug use converts to improving the quality of, life of young people and to the savings of millions of tax dollars when the costs of the alternatives of treatment, hospitalizations and incarceration are considered" (Donnermeyer, 1995, p. 6) Finally, the two items which attempted to ascertain the students perceptions toward the police yielded interesting results . Regardless of D.A.R.E . status (Graduate versus 51 Non-Graduate) approximately 78o agreed that the police are helpful and 76s agreed that police care about young people . When analyzed by grade however, as grade increases this perception that police are helpful and care about young people decreases . This could be due, in part, to the lack of follow-up by the D.A.R.E . program in later grades . The presence of D.A.R.E. officers in the class room is an additional benefit of the program - their presence offers students the opportunity to gain a trustworthy adult friend, develop positive attitude toward law enforcement personnel, and acquire greater respect for the law (Bureau of Justice, 1993 ) . Also not to be overlooked, is the socialization force that D.A.R.E. offers the students . Through constant positive exposure to a police officer over a sustained period of time, the student may develop positive attitudes toward the community and its values while instilling in young people the foundation of responsible citizenship (Carter, 1995) . While the results indicate marginal effectiveness in all areas, there are several areas of weakness which need to be addressed if the D.A.R.E. program is to remain in SBCUSD as its only drug prevention program. Recommendations for the D.A.R.E. program based on these results are as follows : * The curriculum needs to be amended in some fashion to decrease the dissonance between the content knowledge that the students are learning and their behaviors as far as drug use and peer resistance techniques are concerned. * The curriculum needs to amended in some fashion to insure that males and all ethnic groups are being more effectively reached regardless of any cultural factors which may or may not be at work. * The D.A.R.E. program needs to be implemented fully as it was designed with the junior high and senior high school follow-ups to insure the continued long-term effectiveness of the program. .a 52 LIMITATIONS The limitations of this study are inherent in any large scale effort to reduce attitudes and behaviors into numbers for statistical analyses . The wording of the items may bias the reader in an unexpected effect . The answers could be based on what the student knows to be socially correct versus what they are truly engaging in or believe . A specific limitation that became apparent after review deal with items P18 to P21 . The interpretation of the statements can be done in two distinctly different ways, therefore, any results based on these four items must be taken lightly. Also, D.A.R.E . ' s cumulative effects in community wide concerns and initiatives were not investigated and therefore cannot support or deny the long-term effectiveness that D.A.R.E. may have on student interaction within the community. The weight and implications of this study are yet to be determined. It certainly has serious limitations due to the nature of the type of survey and should be combined with other investigations to get a broader and more accurate portrayal of the programs impact on teachers, parents, students (see Appendix A for student feedback) , D.A.R.E. officers (see Appendix B for D.A.R.E. officer feedback) and the community as a whole . The study has a potential to be used to promote an anti-D.A.R.E. agenda and it may also be viewed as providing some interesting insight and opening up a range of issues relevant to SBCUSD that are worthy of further exploration. 53 APPENDIX A City of San Bernardino San Bernardino Police Department Interoffice Memorandum To : Lieutenant Larry Neigel From: Corporal P. Pancucci Subject : D.A.R.E . Survey/ Study Date : April 18 , 1996 On April 4 , 1996 , at approximately 1600 hours, Officer J.T. Turner, Officer R. J. Garcia and myself, Corporal P . Pancucci, went to the Wrightwood Campground to interview approximately 100 students from throughout the San Bernardino Unified School District who represent the peer counselors . All of these students represent the high schools in San Bernardino, and the purpose of the meeting with these students was to see what impact the D.A.R.E . Program had on their lives . It should be noted that approximately 100 students were in attendance and when asked how many of the students had had D.A.R.E. , there was a response from approximately 700 of the students who stated that they had. One asked what percentage the students believed that D.A.R.E. Had some impact on their life or assist them in the prevention of using the drugs and/ or alcohol- approximately 50% of the 70o stated that it had had a definite impact on their life and their decision process in resisting drugs . When asked how many of the students believed that it was beneficial to have police officers to teach the D.A.R.E. curriculum, they stated that most students looked up to the police officers and found that the police officers could create a good relationship with the officer. The students stated that their best experience with D.A.R.E . was that it really does keep kids off drugs, and their 54 negative comments about D.A.R.E . were that there was no support system for the students after they received D.A.R. E . in the fifth grade . They felt that D.A.R.E . could be much more affective if it was taught in the middle schools and the high schools . In summary, the interviews with the 100 students showed to be very beneficial and to my belief, was a fair and accurate account of the D.A.R. E . Program. The best asset that D.A.R.E . taught was it gave students an alternative to drug usage and is another tool that allows our students to make decisions that will positively affect the rest of their life . The negative comments about the D.A.R.E. Program was the fact that the students felt that after they received D.A.R.E . in the fifth grade, were abandoned and all of the decision making was left to themselves . They felt that D.A.R.E. could be much more effective if it was taught in the middle and high schools . 55 APPENDIX B IMPACT OF TEACHING D.A.R.E . ON INDIVIDUAL OFFICERS I believe that D.A.R. E . has been one of the most rewarding positions within my 14 year law enforcement career. I ' ve worked as a patrolman, investigator, SWAT field supervisor and other various jobs within Federal Law Enforcement . To date, D.A.R.E . has been the most enjoyable by far. As police officers, we are constantly reminded of life' s frailties within our communities . Often the community and officers share a common opinion of despair. In most cases, an officer' s presence within the neighborhood can be viewed in a negative manner. D.A.R.E . gives us the opportunity to be seen in a positive persona by not only the students we teach, but communities we serve as well . It' s a proactive approach to opening better lines of communication between the community, schools, and law enforcement . ,w I will never forget my first week in D.A.R.E. because it brought back into focus what I think this job is truly about . Providing good quality service to the citizens we serve and protect . It seems like a lot of people dislike the police but in reality those numbers are very small . I know more people within the community in two years of teaching D.A.R.E. than four years of patrolling the streets . My outlook is very upbeat and positive towards others in all facets of my life ! I truly believe I make a difference and a positive impact on young peoples' lives that I communicate with daily. Most importantly, you become a lot more understanding and sensitive to the needs of others . We are trained to respond and react, which becomes second nature in time . However, in my mind, the best officer. . . the officer I desire to be . . .responds and reacts with a human touch that lets his victims know. . . "I'm here to help because I really care ! " 56 r 1 1 REFERENCES 1 Bureau of Justice Assistance . An introduction to the i National DARE Parent Program. Washington, DC: U. S . Department of Justice, Office of Justice Program. 1993 . 1 Carter, David L. (1995) . Community policing and D.A.R.E. : A Practitioner' s Perspective . Bureau of Justice Assistance Bulletin, June (1995) . Donnermeyer, Joseph F. (1995) . Executive Summary: D.A.R.E . Evaluation: State of Ohio. The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. Donnermeyer, Joseph F. , and Phillips, G. Howard. 1 (1996) . D.A.R. E . Works ! A D.A.R.E . Evaluation with 3 , 150 Ohio 11th Graders . The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. i 1 i 1 57 DRUG ABUSE RESISTANCE EDUCATION (DARE) EFFECTIVENESS SURVEY RESULTS Spring 1996 HIGH RISK / SUBSTANCE ABUSE OFFICE San Bernardino City Unified School District San Bernardino, California July 1996