HomeMy WebLinkAbout23-Police Department
-' /-."
~ITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
F,'om: Lee Dean, Chief of Police
Subject:
Resolution of the City of San Bernardino
Authorizing the Chief of Police to Sign
the Memorandum of Understanding With the
San Bernardino City Unified School
District to Continue Involvement in the
Drug Abuse Resistance Education (D.A.R.E.
PrngY';\m
Dept: Po lice
Date: July 15, 1996
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.
R~solution9#95-6436 adopted authorizing D.A.R.E. program
throuqh FY 5-9 .
Recommended motion:
Adopt resolution.
'IT9'>c8;-
'~'i:)I~~lO .N!WaV
~ 4?,~
Contact person:
It. I ar!"y Npigpl
Phone:
~A4_l:\hQn
Supporting data attached:
YP~
Ward:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount: $;>1;> ,ORQ (al rpady budgeted)
001-223-5122 - $200-Dues
Source: (Acct. No.) 001-223-5-11/5029 - $211.889-Personnpl Sprvic:p~
(Acct. Description)
Financ~~~
Council Notes:
Continued to
11/;819&
/0)7/9(,
Agenda Item No ~3
75-0262
v 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
1 RESOLUTION NO.
2 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO SIGN THE
3 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE SAN BERNARDINO CITY UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR A DRUG ABUSE RESISTANCE EDUCATION (DARE)
4 PROGRAM.
5 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:
6
7
SECTION 1.
Whereas the Mayor and Common Council approved
8 Resolution No. 93-416 providing for the joint sponsoring of the
9 Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) Program between the City
10 School District and the Police Department.
11
SECTION 2.
Therefore, be it resolved that the Mayor and
12 Common Council authorize the Chief of Police of the San Bernardino
13 Police Department to sign the Memorandum of Understanding with the
14 San Bernardino City Unified School District for the 1996-97 Fiscal
15 year, a copy of which is attached hereto marked Exhibit "A" and
16 incorporated herein by reference as fully as though set forth at
17 length.
18 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly
19 III
20 I I I
21 I I I
22 I I I
23 III
24 III
25 III
26 III
27 I I I
28 I I I
HTC:ms [DARE. Res]
1
1 RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO SIGN THE
2 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE SAN BERNARDINO CITY UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR A DRUG ABUSE RESISTANCE EDUCATION (DARE)
3 PROGRAM.
4 adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San
5 Bernardino at a
6 day of
7 Council Members:
8 NEGRETE
9 CURLIN
10 ARIAS
11 OBERHELMAN
12 DEVLIN
13 ANDERSON
14 MILLER
15
16
meeting thereof, held on the
, 1996, by the following vote, to wit:
A1ES
~
ABSTAIN
ABSENT
17
City Clerk
18
The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this
day
of
, 1996.
19
20
21
22
Tom Minor, Mayor
City of San Bernardino
Approved as to
23 form and legal content:
JAMES F. PENMAN,
24 City Attorney
25
/)
t~.,
26
By: .A~,~ 1.
('/-
27
'-.,
28
HTC,ms[DARE.Res]
2
ORIGINAL
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
Between
SAN BERNARDINO CITY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
And
SAN BERNARDINO CITY POUCE 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 Julv 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
DEPARTMENT
SAN BERNARDINO CITY UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT
Lee Dean
Chief of Police
--2:JL :.J) ~--) ~h
Harold L. Boring, Ed.D.)
Assistant Superintendent
Administrative Services
Date:
Date:
JUN 28 1996
San Bernardino City Unified School District
E. Neal Roberts, Ed.D., Superintendent
Harold L. Boring, Ed.D, Assistant Superintendent, Administrative Services
y-~..~... '"
There's No Better Place To Learn
Lt. Lawrence Neigel
Community Programs Unit
San Bernardino City Police Department
P.O. Box 1559
San Bernardino, CA 92401-1559
June 28, 1996
RE: Agreementl Memorandum of Understanding for the DARE Program
Amendment:
Documents Enclosed:
ACTION REQUESTED:
. 2 Agreement! Amendment Originals
signed on District's behalf
Form W-9 (substitute)
':'::}(--::::'-:::':.,C::..>:":':'.--::>:::-).""-,',?';.:;./:<-:.:,_:})".-'--,/)'::'.=(::)::?:.'--;,::t?::'.,):
~ SIGN ALL ORIGINALS
~ .RETlJRN .J... ORIGINAL TO ADDRESS BELOW
. COMPLETE AND SIGN
. RETURN TO ADDRESS BELOW
Thank you for your assistance. We look forward to working with you.
Sincerely,
Please Return Documents to:
~Xu.IiI,h)t~~~
Harold L. Boring, "",jU'
Assistant Superintenoent
Adminiotrative Services
San Bernardino City Unified School District
Administrative Services Office
Attn: Melinda A. Pure, Contract Analyst
777 North "F" Street
San Bernardino, California 92410-3017
mp I enclosure(s)
~
-
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIVISION
777 N. F Street . San Bernardino, CA 92410 . (909) 381-1162
San Bernardino City Unified School District
CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES
The Board met in regular session on the 25th day of June, 1996, at the usua1 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
follo\\ling votes of member3 present at that time.
.
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 I, 1996, through June 30,
1997, per terms of the Memorandum of Understanding.
BE IT FURlHER RESOLVED that Harold L. Boring, Assistant Superintendent, Administrative
Services, be authorized to sign said Memorandum of Understanding on behalf of the Board of
Education.
I, 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
tfi~~r
Secre of th Board of Education
Agenda Item 8.36
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
t:I ;/3
jC /7/rb
-
-
PRESENTED BY:
.r..
...
-
-
-
XG'.'-rr
Lieutenant Lawrence Neigel
Training Commander, SBPD
-
...
...
cZZd,t!J()
SBCUSD, D.A.R.E. Officer
...
...
-
...
7
/ )
./
/
...
-
-
Corporal Paul Pancucci
SBPD, DAR.E. Officer
...
...
..
...
-
-
..
...
...
...
..
~
y Turner
, D.A.R.E. Officer
Corporal .1. cia
SBPD, DAR.E. Officer
PREPARED BY:
...
-
..
. ~'~~I~e ~.' Mil;;: ~~~r--
Program Monitor
...
...
..
..
..
-
-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
-
-
Signature Page...... ........... ................... .... ... ....... ... ... ............. ... ...... ........... ... ........ ........... ..... ii
Table of Contents....... ... ...... ... ............. .... ... .... ... ....... ...... ... ... ... ... ...... ........................... ...... iii
List of Tables ....... ........ ... ............. ... ... .... ... .... ... ... ... ...... ... ....... ... ...... ........ ........................... v
List of Figures..... ... ........ ......... ...... ....... ... .... .......... ... ........ ....... ...... ... ........... ... .......... .......... vi
Introduction.................................................................................................................. ....... 2
The Questionnaire.. ... ... ... ... ....... .... ... ...... ... ... ...... ... ............. ..... ... ... ... ........ .......... ..... 4
Administration of the Questionnaire. ... ... ... ... ... ... ...... ...... ... ......... ... ..... ............... ..... 4
The Population Samples... ... ... ....... ... .... ... ... ...... ... ... ...... ... ... ...... ... ... ..... ... ............ .... 4
Sample Size Characteristics. ... ... ......... ... ....... ... ... ... ........... ... ... ... ..... ....... ..... 5
Demographics of Total Sample... ... .......... ....... ... ... ................ ... ........ ... ...... ... ........... ..... ...... 8
Executive Summary. ......... ...... ...... ... ... .............. ...... ... ....... ... ........ ... ... ...... ... ........ ..... ..... ... ... 9
Graduates vs. Non-Graduates.... .... ............ .......... ... ...... ... ............... .......... ..... ..... .... 9
Grade Level Results. ... ... ... .... ... ... ............. ....... ...... ...... ........ ... ...... ...... ..... ..... ... ...... 10
Gender Results......... ... ...... .................... .......... ...... ... .............. ............ ..... ........... ... II
Ethnicity Results.... ... ... ... ... ... .... ... ... ....... ............ ... ... ...... ...... ... ...... ... ..... ... ............. 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
-
..
,-
Appendix A: Student Feedback SBPD Interoffice Memo................................................ 54
Appendix B: Impact of Teaching D.A.R.E.on Individual Officers................................. 56
References.................................................................................................................... .... 57
,.,"'!
.""
,-
-
..
..
-
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
iv
..
..
-
LIST OF TABLES
....
'''''
Table 1: Percentage of Graduates vs. Non-Graduates Responding at a Given
Use Level..... ... ... ................................................................................................. 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
Drug and Attitude Level..................................................................................... 25
-
..
Table 4: Demographic Breakdown ofSampleBbased 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
.
Table 8: Use Levels by Gender for All Drugs (%)........................................................... 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 EnroUment 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
More Times........................ ...... ................... ............. ...... .............. .......... ..... ...... :;0
..
...
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:
Analyzed by Ethnicity..................................................................................... 44
.
...
Figure 12: Percent of Students Reporting that Drugs are "Very (or) Sort of
Dangerous": Analyzed by Ethnicity............................................................... 46
...
-
.
...
..
...
..
-
..
VI
-
..
....,;
~t'~
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
25% of 7th graders, 46% of 9th graders and 45% 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 37th 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 DARE.
programs to meeUhe needs of the programs participants.
..
...
..
...
..
...
..
...
..
...
..
..
..
-
..
-
-
-
-
-
..
...
..
-
3
-
-
-
'1,"",-
THE QUESTIONNAIRE
Wl\
-
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
alcohol, marijuana, cigarettes, and inhalants, crack, cocaine, or
'etc. Also included were items which asked about the students'
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 77% of the student population at grades 5 and
7, and 56% 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
...
-
0'-'10';
?:..g'J.~'=
,"'-I~
?E?::a-J7.:;':JE 0!' ENROLLl'<IENT SlJRVEYED
".....
...
...
OM
100.00%
90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
% 50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
..
...
..
-
..
-
..
-
..
...
..
...
.
-
5th
7th
Grade Level
9th
..
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 7t~ grade student body were analyzed.
At the 9th grade level, 56 percent or 1670 students were surveyed.
...
..
-
..
-
..
-
..
-
..
...
..
...
..
6
'<-'
Figure 2
ETHNIC DISTRIBUTION OF THE SURVEY SAMPLE
'....
...
....
100.00%
80.00%
60.00%
40.00%
20.00%
0.00%
.'"
..
..
%
...
..
.
..
..
...
-
-
.
...
...
...
AA
AlP
c
H/L
o
. Sample
DlllI Enrolled
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 anyone ethnic group.
...
..
..
...
...
-
...
-
...
...
..
...
-
-
-
Ethnic Group
7
.<..1
'...."'.
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:
never returned:
late returns:
eliminated:
8,983
-2,105
- 125
- 201
..
-
.
-
FINAL SAMPLE:
6,482
..
GRADE LEVEL BREAKDOWN:
-
.
Unspecified =(191)
5th = 34.0% (2201)
7th = 37.3% (2420)
9th = 25.8% (1670)
...
..
-
GENDER BREAKDOWN:
..
...
50.7%
= 49.3%
(3288)
(3194)
Female =
Male
..
-
ETHNIC BREAKDOWN:
.
African-American/ Black =
Asian/ Pacific Islander =
Caucasian/ White
Hispanic/ Latino
Other
16.7%
5.2%
= 21. 8%
= 41. 9%
14.4%
-
-
-
-
D.A.R.E STATUS:
-
..
Graduates
Non-Graduates
= 71.6%(4639)
= 28.4% (1843)
-
-
-
..
8
-
.
(1084)
(338)
(1411)
(2716)
(933)
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.
-
....
,-
...
-
..
...
..
..
...
-
.
...
...
....
...
...
-
-
...
...
.
-
....
...
..
...
....
...
...
-
-
...
..
..
...
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
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
~OM.".
;"11'1.
...
..<.,."
-
-
-
...
..
...
..
...
..
...
..
...
..
-
..
-
.
-
-
-
.
...
-
-
..
-
..
...
-
...
..
*
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.
*
Alcohol and cigarettes are equally 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.
*
Graduates and Non-Graduates have equal intentions
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, ~rack,
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
",,"
"^'
II"",,
-
..
...
-
-
..
...
.
-
-
-
..
-
-
-
-
-
..
-
-
-
..
-
-
-
-
...
-
...
-
-
-
*
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.
*
Males 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
t,#
.~
...
-
..
....
..
...
..
-
..
...
..
-
..
...
..
-
...
...
..
...
..
...
..
...
..
...
..
...
..
...
..
-
..
*
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
h,..
* Asian/ Pacific Islanders reported mar~Juana as
MORE dangerous than all other ethnic groups.
-
...
*
African-Americans reported that alcohol and
cigarettes were MORE dangerous than all other
ethnic groups.
..
-
..
*
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.
.lll
..
..
..
-
..
-
..
-
..
-
-
...
..
..
-
...
..
...
..
...
...
13
-
..
-
t~
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.
..
..
..
..
TFS Smoking cigarettes, chewing tobacco, and snuff can
cause cancer, heart disease, and death.
..
..
Graduate
Non-Graduate
96 .6%
95.5%
-
..
TF6 Drinking alcohol causes changes in a person's
personality and increases violence and destructive
acts.
..
..
..
..
Graduate,
Non-Graduate
91.1%
90.4%
..
..
..
..
..
14
..
-
-
01'"
....
...
TF7 Marijuana interferes with a person's ambition and
ability to remember what they have learned.
...
-
Graduate
Non-Graduate
..
77.8%
76.5%
TF8 Cocaine is a highly addictive stimulant.
-
-
Graduate
Non-Graduate
-
-
89.2%
89.9%
-
TF 9 Cocaine can cause breathing problems, heart
attacks, and death even on the first try.
..
-
Graduate
Non-Graduate
..
..
74.4%
76.1%
..
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
Non-Graduate
...
.
89.8%
88.2%
..
TFll 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
Non-Graduate
-
94.1%
93.7%
-
TF12 Fighting or threatening someone with a weapon is a
bad way to deal with a disagreement.
..
-
Graduate
Non-Graduate
..
-
89.8%
88.2%
..
TF13 I can think of a lot of positive things to do
instead of using drugs.
..
..
Graduate
Non-Graduate
..
..
..
..
90.8%
89.4%
15
-
h"""
-
TF14 Being involved with gangs means using violence and
breaking the law.
...
..'1
Graduate
Non-Graduate
79.7%
80.7%
...
...
..
TF1S 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
Non-Graduate
79.7%
80.5%
...
...
TF16 The police are helpful.
..
-
Graduate
Non-Graduate
77.8%
77.6%
III
",.
TF17 The police care about young people.
..
""'
Graduate
Non-Graduate
76.1%
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
influence:
..
-
..
-
-
16
",.
..
hlOlt
P18 MY FRIENDS WOULD STOP ME FROM GETTING DRUNK.
.~
""
Graduate
Non-Graduate
....
..
60.6%
61. 9%
P19 MY FRIENDS WOULD STOP ME FROM USING MARIJUANA.
-
..
Graduate
Non-Graduate
-
-
65.1%
66.3%
-
P20 MY FRIENDS WOULD STOP ME FROM USING CIGARETTES.
..
Graduate
Non-Graduate
-
63.3%
63.9%
-
P21 MY FRIENDS WOULD STOP ME FROM USING INHALANTS,
COCAINE, CRACK OR ETC.
..
...
Graduate
Non-Graduate
-
-
72.8%
72.8%
-
P22 IT WOULD BE EASY FOR ME TO SAY "NO" TO A FRIEND
WHO OFFERED ME ALCOHOL.
-
Graduate
Non-Graduate
...
...
65.6%
66.7%
-
P23 IT WOULD BE EASY FOR ME TO SAY "NO" TO A FRIEND
WHO OFFERED ME MARIJUANA.
-
...
Graduate
Non-Graduate
-
68.6%
68.9%
-
P24 IT WOULD BE EASY FOR ME TO SAY "NO" TO A FRIEND
WHO OFFERED ME CIGARETTES.
...
..
Graduate
Non-Graduate
-
-
...
-
-
-
...
69.0%
70.8%
17
'-
.oy.,
P25 IT WOULD BE EASY FOR ME TO SAY "NOH TO A FRIEND
WHO OFFERED ME INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE, ETC.
...
....
Graduate
Non-Graduate
....
72.5%
73.4%
P26 I WOULD STOP A FRIEND FROM USING ALCOHOL.
-
..
Graduate
Non-Graduate
-
..
69.6%
71.8%
P27 I WOULD STOP A FRIEND FROM USING MARIJUANA.
..
..
Graduate
Non-Graduate
-
71.4%
72 .5%
P28 I WOULD STOP A FRIEND FROM USING CIGARETTES.
.
..
Graduate
Non-Graduate
..
..
70.4%
72 .4%
P29 I WOULD STOP A FRIEND FROM USING INHALANTS,
COCAINE, CRACK, ETC.
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%.
-
..
Graduate
Non-Graduate
.
..
..
..
-
76.0%
76.8%
-
.
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
-
-
I'.
..
Table 1
-
...
Percentages of Graduates and Non-Graduates responding
at a given use level.
...
..
INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE,ETC.
Never used it........ 89.7%
Used once or twice in
the past year......
Use it sometimes.....
Use it regularly.....
-
IlRllil
..
ALCOHOL
Never used it.... ....
Used once or twice in
the past year... ...
Use it sometimes.....
Use it regularly.....
..
..
..
..
...
MARIJUANA
Never used it........
Used once or twice in
the past year......
Use it sometimes. ....
Use it regularly. ....
..
..
..
-
..
CIGARETTES
Never used it........
Used once or twice in
the past year.. ....
Use it sometimes.....
Use it regularly.....
..
...
...
..
..
..
..
..
..
GRADUATE
NON-GRADUATE
56.5% 59.8%
27.0% 23.3%
12.5% 11.4%
2.7% 3.6%
77 .4%
75.5%
11.6%
5.7%
4.0%
11.4%
6.3%
5.0%
70.4%
70.6%
19.2%
5.6%
3.3%
18.6%
5.9%
3.3%
87.8%
6.8%
1.1%
1. 0%
7.1%
1. 7%
1. 7%
...
-
..
..
..
-
..
-
..
19
-
-
F:..gure 3
-
...
?ERCENT OF STUDENTS WHO HAVE USED SUBSTANCES ONE OR
YORE TIMES: GRADUATE VS. NON-GRADUATE
...
-
..
iii
..
c::: <.i
III
Cii ..
CIl
.c::
.5 III
CIl
..
..
t!!
III
Cl
0
III
c:::
III
::l
::"
...
III
::iii
'0
.c::
0
u
<
0.00%
..
..
..
..
..
..
-
..
-
..
..
..
..
.
-
..
-
..
20.00%
40.00% % 60.00%
80.00% 100.00%
II Non-Grads
. Grads
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
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.
-
*'''-.
-
FUTURE INTENTIONS FOR DRUG USE
-
...
-
...
-
.
-
.
...
..
Table 2
..
..
Percentage of Graduates and Non-Graduates Disagreeing
With Statements of Intentions
...
--
..
STATEMENT
.
I THINK THAT WITHIN THE
NEXT YEAR I WILL USE...
-
.
ALCOHOL
MARIJUANA
CIGARETTES
INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE
..
..
-
..
I THINK THAT WHEN I AM A
LEGAL ADULT I WILL USE...
-
11/
ALCOHOL
MARIJUANA
CIGARETTES
INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE
..
11/
GRADUATES
NON-GRADUATES
73.1%
80.9%
82.2%
89.8%
69.5%
75.0%
78.7%
84.7%
64.7% 62.2%
83.8% 78.5%
81. 3% 76.2%
90.4% 85.3%
..
..
-
.
...
..
-
..
21
'1'>111'
Figure 4
""II>.
-
?~RCSNT OF STUDENTS WHO INTEND TO USE DRUGS WITHIN THE
NEXT YEAR: GRADUATE VS. NON-GRADUATE
....
...
-
qj
-
r:: U
1\I
ii W
.r::
.5 III
Gl
:::
e
1\I
Cl
(3
1\I
r::
1\I
:l
.-
'C
1\I
~
'0
.r::
0
CJ
Ci:
0.00%
..
-
..
-
..
-
..
""
..
-
..
""
..
""
.
-
..
-
..
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00% 100.00%
11II Non.Grads
. Grads
...
..
-
..
-
..
-
-
-
..
22
hE'
~igu:::-~ 5
...
?SKC2~T OF STUDENTS WHO INTEND TO USE DRUGS WHEN THEY
ARE LEGAL ADULTS: GRADUATE VS. NON-GRADUATE
-
...
-
..
vi
..
c I.i
III
'1ij ..
W
.c
..5 III
Ql
=
l!!
III
01
<3
III
C
III
~
....
'C
III
:E
'0
.c
0
CJ
<
0.00%
-
-
...
..
...
.
...
..
..
.
...
..
-
..
...
..
...
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00% 100.00%
. Non-Grads
. Grads
..
-
..
-
..
...
..
...
..
-
..
23
',=,
RESISTANCE TECHNIQUES
...
-
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....
Go Along with friends
anyway. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Say "no thanks"........
Walk Away.... ..........
Ignore them............
11.6%
11.3%
..
7.9%
10.1%
41. 7%
20.8%
12.9%
-
50.6%
17.7%
9.5%
...
-
...
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.
...
...
-
..
-
...
-
...
-
...
-
..
-
...
-
...
24
-
...
-~...
,.~
Table 3
Ft.
...
Percentages of Graduates and Non-Graduates Responses
for Each Drug and Attitude Level
'.
...
..
J21:J.!g Graduates Non-Graduates
P43 ALCOHOL
very dangerous 61. 7% 65.8%
sort of dangerous 21. 8% 17.0%
not too dangerous 9.8% 10.2%
not dangerous at all 4.5% 6.5%
P44 MARIJUANA
very dangerous 71.7% 74.4%
sort of dangerous 13.1% 11.1%
not too dangerous 6.7% 7.0%
not dangerous at all 5.7% 7.2%
P45 CIGARETTES
very dangerous 62.0% 62.8%
sort of dangerous 20.8% 17.9%
not too dangerous 8.8% 8.4%
not dangerous at all 5.4% 6.7%
P46 INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE
very dangerous 86.6% 83.3%
sort of dangerous 5.6% 6.3%
not t'?o dangerous 2.4% 2.2%
not dangerous at all 2.3% 2.0%
-
-
...
..
-
..
-
..
-
...
..
...
..
-
..
-
-
-
..
..
..
...
..
...
..
...
25
..
...
..
!..",
....
~"
..
...
-
vi
-
s: c..i
I'll
ii -
w
.s:
.5 Ul
CIl
:::
l!!
I'll
CI
(3
I'll
s:
I'll
:l
:::'l
"-
I'll
:E
'0
.s:
0
C,l
Ci
0.00%
..
.
..
..
-,
..
...
..
...
..
...
..
-
..
..
..
-
?igure 6
PE:RCE:NT OF STUDENTS WHO RESPONDED THAT DRUGS ARE "VERY
OR) SORT OF DANGEROUS": GRADUATE VS. NON-GRADUATE
. Non-Grads
. Grads
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00% 100.00%
Graduates reported that alcohol, mar~'Juana, and
cigarettes are more dangerous than Non-graduates
reported. Non-graduates reported that inhalants,
crack, cocaine et cetera were more dangerous than
Graduates reported.
..
-
..
-
..
...
..
...
..
...
..
26
The 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.
-
QUESTIONS SPECIFIC TO D.A.R.E. GRADUATES
"...
...
-
...
-
-
47 THE MOST IMPORTANT THING I LEARNED FROM D.A.R.E
WAS:
-
..
How to handle/ avoid peer pressure.......
Not to use drugs and alcohol............
Information about drugs and alcohol......
Drugs and alcohol are dangerous/
consequences of use and abuse.. ..... ...
r did not learn anything from D.A.R.E....
-
..
-
..
...
35.9%
16.5%
10.8%
23.4%
5.1%
48 HOW HELPFUL HAS D.A.R.E. BEEN IN TEACHING YOU ABOUT
HOW TO AVOID DRUGS AND ALCOHOL?
-
-
-
Very helpful. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sort of helpful..........................
Not too helpful. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Not helpful at all.......................
...
..
...
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. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sort of helpful..........................
Not too helpful..........................
Not helpful at all.......................
-
..
...
58.5%
19.6%
7.9%
6.0%
58.6%
19.7%
6.9%
7.0%
...
50 HOW HELPFUL HAS D.A.R.E. BEEN IN KEEPING YOU AWAY
FROM ALCOHOL, CIGARETTES, MARIJUANA, AND OTHER
DRUGS?
-
..
Very helpful. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sort of helpful..........................
Not too helpful. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Not helpful at all.......................
-
...
...
...
27
-
..
60.0%
15.6%
7.4%
8.4%
.".~,
,OJ!;
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
-
..
N
1.
GENDER
-
1113(50.6)
FEMALE
..
-
MALE
1088 (49.4)
..
RACE
-
..
AFRICAN-AMERICAN
ASIAN/ PACIFIC
CAUCASIAN/ WHITE
HISPANIC/ LATINO
OTHER
387(17.6)
93 ( 4.2)
464(21.1)
901(40.9)
348(15.8)
...
..
-
-
STATUS
-
D.A.R.E. GRADUATE 1306(59.3)
NON-GRADUATE 895(40.7)
..
7TH
N
1.
nH
N
1.
1242 (51.3)
1178(48.7)
395(16.3)
125( 5.2)
503(20.8)
1035(42.8)
332(13.7)
2044(84.5)
376(15.5)
847(50.7)
823(49.3)
260(15.6)
96 ( 5.7)
422(25.5)
703(42.5)
173(10.5)
1174(70.3)
496(29.7)
-
..
...
..
...
.
-
..
-
.
28
-
...
USE LEVELS IN GRADES 5, 7, AND 9
"II".
-
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
too
-
Percentages of 5th, 7th, and 9th Grade Students Reporting
Drug Use Levels
..
...
I2.nlg ~ 1t.h 2111
ALCOHOL
Never used it. . . . . . .. . . . 78.1% 55.2% 34.5%
Used it once or twice in
the past year........ . 18.5% 30.0% 30.3%
Use it sometimes....... . 1.7% 11.5% 26.5%
Use it regularly........ .3% 2.1% 7.1%
MARIJUANA
Never used it. . . . . . . . . . . 91.6% 77.7% 58.7%
Used it once or twice in
the past year........ . 18.5% 12.1% 16.9%
Use it sometimes....... . .6% 5.5% 13.1%
Use it regularly....... . .2% 3.5% 9.8%
CIGARETTES
Never used it.......... . 85.3% 68.3% 55.2%
Used it once or twice in
the past year........ . 11.8% 20.6% 25.9%
Use it sometimes........ 1. 2% 7.0% 9.7%
Use it regularly........ .5% 2.6% 7.4%
INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE, ETC.
Never used it.......... . 92.5% 90.1% 84.8%
Used it once or twice in
the past year........ . 5.7% 6.3% 8.7%
Use it sometimes..... ... 19- 1.4% 2.3%
. 0
Use it regularly. . . . . . . . .4% .8% 2.7%
-
....
-
..
...
....
..
...
.
..
....
..
...
-
....
-
-
-
....
-
....
-
-
29
-
-
-
.-"-,,
..,,~
..
-
...
-
..
-
..
...
..
-
..
-
..
".
..
-
...
-
w
-
...
-
..
..
..
-
..
-
..
-
..
-
..
iii
...
c:: .
.!.:!
IlIW
.c
.5
(/l
Ql
t:
Ql
~
III
en
U
III
c::
III
:::l
.-
'C;
III
:&
Fig'c.:.re 7
?SRCENT OF 5TH, 7TH, AND 9TH GRADE STUDENTS WHO HAVE USED
DRUGS ONE OR MORE TIMES
'0
.c
o
\,l
<
lID 9th
o 7th
. 5th
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
30
-
....
ATTITUDES TOWARD DRUG USE IN GRADES 5, 7, AND 9
"'it\.
...
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 (%)
..
-
-
D.1.J.l.g 2JJ. 1..t..h 2til
ALCOHOL
Very dangerous..... . .... 81. 5% 60.9% 41.8%
Sort of dangerous...... . 9.3% 22.7% 31.5%
Not too dangerous. . . . . . . 4.0% 9.7% 17.8%
Not dangerous at all... . 2.8% 4.3% 8.7%
MARIJUANA
Very dangerous......... . 87.9% 72.8% 51.0%
Sort of jangerous. . . . . . . 5.4% 13.3% 20. J %
Not too dangerous...... . 1. 9% 6.1% 13 .1%
Not dangerous at all... . 2.3% 4.6% 12/3%
CIGARETTES
Very dangerous........ .. 77.1% 61.2% 45.5%
Sort of dangerous. . . . . . . 13 .3% 21.6% 25.9%
Not too dangerous. . . . . . . 3.9% 8.5% 14.9%
Not dangerous at all... . 3.0% 5.1% 9.9%
INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE,ETC.
Very dangerous........ .. 89.5% 86.4% 80.7%
Sort of dangerous. . . . . . . 4.8% 4.9% 8.0%
Not too dangerous. . . . . . . 1. 0% 2.6% 3.7%
Not dangerous at all... . 1. 5% 2.0% 3.4%
..
....
..
-
.
-
-
....
..
..
....
..
....
.
-
..
...
-
-
-
-
..
-
..
31
-
..
t,....l
jM,
...
....
-
-
-
-
..
...
.
-
..
-
...
".
..
...
-
-
...
...
..
-
..
...
..
-
..
...
..
...
..
...
..
Figure 8
FERCENT OF 5TH, 7TH, AND 9TH GRADE STUDENTS RESPONDING THAT
DRUGS ARE "VERY DANGEROUS (OR) SORT OF DANGEROUS"
vi
..
c:: .
.!~
."w
.c
.s
III
Ql
..
..
e
."
Cl
C3
."
c::
."
:::I
.....
'C
."
:i
'0
.c
o
u
C(
DB 9th
o 7th
. 5th
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 .2TIi
Avoid the situation 12.0% 11.5% 10.5%
Go along with friends anyway 3.8% 9.9% 11.7%
Say II no thanks" 38.5% 48.6% 60.7%
Walk away 27.8% 17.6% 8.4%
Ignore them 15.5% 9.4% 5.7%
...
...
...
..
...
-
D.A.R.E. SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR GRADES 5, 7, AND 9
...
-
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.
..
-
...
The most important thing I learned from D.A.R.E. was:
..
...
~ 1.t.h ~
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?
...
~
1..t.h
~
...
..
Very helpful. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sort of helpful.................
Not too helpful.................
Not helpful at all..............
85.5%
9.7%
1. 6%
3.0%
62.5%
21. 5%
9.2%
6.1%
37.5%
32.0%
14.6%
13.9%
...
..
-
..
-
33
..
...
..
-
...
How helpful has D.A.R.E. been in helping you increase
your confidence in yourself and you ability to deal
with pressure?
...
....
...
...
..
Very helpful....................
Sort of helpful.................
Not too helpful............... . .
Not helpful at all.... ..........
...
...
.5..t.h
83.7%
10.7%
2.1%
3.5%
2t..h
61. 5%
23.3%
7.8%
6.7%
2t.h
42.2%
27.9%
12.4%
15.7%
..
How helpful has D.A.R.E. been in keeping you away from
alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana, and other drugs?
-
...
...
-
Very helpful. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sort of helpful.................
Not too helpful.................
Not helpful at all..............
...
...
..
...
.
...
'-
...
..
...
..
..
...
..
...
...
..
...
...
34
..
...
.5..t.h
87.5%
7.6%
2.3%
2.4%
1J;;.h
64.1%
19.0%
7.5%
8.4%
2t.h
40.7%
22.6%
14.7%
20.4%
--
4""
QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES:
RESULTS BASED ON GENDER
The results of the survey were analyzed by gender to
determine if any gender differences exist in the
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
...
-
l:!
.1
...
TOTAL NUMBER
3288(50.7)
-
....
GRADES
5TH
7TH
9TH
1113 (33.9)
1242(37.8)
847(25.8)
-
-
-
ETHNICITY
African-American
Asian/ Pacific
Caucasian
Hispanic/ Latino
Other
558(17.0)
162( 4.9)
696(21.2)
1367(41.6)
476(14.5)
...
-
...
-
...
STATUS
D.A.R.E. GRADUATE
NON-GRADUATE
2417(73.5)
871(26.5)
.
...
~
N
1.
3194(49.3)
1088(34.1)
1178(36.9)
823 (25.8)
526(16.5)
17.6 ( 5. 5)
715(22.4)
1349(42.2)
400(12.5)
2222(69.6)
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 (%)
-
-
.
l2ROO FEMALE MALE.
1. 1.
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
...
..
-
jl<"-
Figure 9
...
PERCENT OF MALES VS. FEMALES HAVING USED DRUGS ONE OR MORE
TIMES
-
..
...
..
III
..
c: u
Cll
iii -
w
.c
.5 III
CIl
=
CIl
...
Cll
CI
(3
Cll
c:
Cll
~
....
'C
Cll
::::i
'0
.c
0
u
<
0.00%
..
..
-
..
..
..
...
...
...
..
-
...
-
""
...
-
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
. Males
. Females
...
..
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 (%)
...
..
-
I2El!Q FEMALES MALES
1- 1-
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
Sort of dangerous 11.5 13 .4
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 danger9us 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
...
.
;~""
....
F.:.gu:;:e 10
j't1IIIl
....
PERCENT OF AALES VS. FEMALES REPORTING THAT DRUGS ARE "VERY
(OR) SORT OF DANGEROUS"
-
.w
...
.
iii
..
C .
.!!!~
caw
J:
.5
Ul
GI
..
..
2!
ca
Cl
U
..
III
..
liIl
...
ca
c
ca
~
.-
'C
ca
:Iii
III
.. ,
..
..
..
...
..
..
..
...
..
'0
J:
o
CJ
~
. Males
. Females
..
..
-
-
""
-
-
..
...
..
-
..
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
39
-
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
-
~
~
-
..
Avoid the situation......
Go along with friends
anyway. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Say "no thanks"....... ...
Walk Away. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ignore them...............
10.1
12.9
-
..
6.3
51. 7
18.2
10.9
10.8
44.4
19.0
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:
...
..
How to handle/ avoid peer pressure.....
Not to use drugs and alcohol...........
Information about drugs and alcohol...
Drugs and alcohol are dangerous/
consequences of use and abuse..:.....
I did not learn anything from D.A.R.E..
FEMALES MALES
~ ~
37.8 39.1
17.5 19.7
11.6 11.5
28.3 21. 0
4.7 8.7
..
..
..
-
..
-
..
..
..
..
40
-
-
"..
...
How helpful has D.A.R.E. been in teaching you about how
to avoid drugs and alcohol?
...
...
...
Very helpful. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sort of helpful........................
Not too helpful........................
Not at all helpful.....................
-
11II
!II
FEMALES
1.
63.3
21. 5
8.7
5.7
MALES
.i
60.2
20.6
8.8
9.4
How helpful has D.A.R.E. been in helping you
your confidence in yourself and your ability
with peer pressure?
...
-
..
.'
...
Very helpful. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
Sort of helpful........................
Not too helpful........................
Not at all helpful.....................
-
11II
...
..
FEMALES
.i
64.2
21.3
7.5
6.4
increase
to deal
MALES
.i
59.9
20.6
7.9
10.6
How helpful has D.A.R.E. been in keeping you away from
alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana, and other drugs?
-
-
-
...
-
Very helpful. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sort of helpful....... .................
Not too helpful........................
Not at all helpful.....................
...
-
-
-
...
...
..
-
...
-
-
41
-
...
FEMALES
.i
65.0
17.4
8.1
8.8
MALES
.i
62.8
16.2
8.1
11.6
'-
,.'.1
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
Rill
MAI& FEMALE .2J:H
7TH ;Llli
...
..
-
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)
...
...
..
...
..
...
..
...
..
-
..
...
..
...
..
...
-
-
..
42
-
..
,.~.
i"-" USE LEVELS BY ETHNICITY
"'"
The following results indicate drug use level for each
...
ethnic group. See Table 11.
...
... Table 11
.. Use Level By Ethnicity
Drug
...
. ETHNICITY
- m3.OO M Af .c HL Q
..
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
... it sometimes........ .
Use 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
...
-
.>,,.;
''<II;oj
F::.gl,.l~2 11
".,
PSRCENT OF STUDENTS USING DRUGS ONE OR MORE TIMES: ANALYZSD
BY ETHNICITY
...
...
..
...
..
...
..
-
.
-
..
-
..
-
..
-
..
-
..
-
..
iii
-
c ,:
.!!!~
taW
.s=
.5
III
1Il
==
l!!
ta
Cl
<3
ta
C
ta
:l
.....
'C
ta
~
DO
.H/L
mnc
_AlP
ElAA
1111111111111111111111111111111111111
---
-- ---
----
--~-
'0
.s=
o
u
((
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
-
..
-
..
...
..
-
..
-
..
44
11110
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 (%)
...
..
-
l2RllQ
..
...
ALCOHOL
Very dangerous
Sort of dangerous
Not too dangerous
Not at all dangerous
..
...
..
...
MARIJUANA
Very dangerous
Sort of dangerous
Not too dangerous
Not at all dangerous
..
-
.
-
CIGARETTES
Very dangerous
Sort of dangerous
Not too dangerous
Not at all dangerous
..
...
.
-
INHALANTS, CRACK, COCAINE,
Very dangerous
Sort of dangerous
Not too dangerous
Not at all dangerous
....
-
..
...
AA
73.7
15.1
6.8
4.0
73.3
10.3
7.0
5.4
72.9
15.7
6.0
5.1
ETC
91. 0
4.8
1.5
2.5
Af
67.0
23.1
5.1
4.5
78.7
12.8
2.7
5.8
61. 2
22.4
10.9
5.2
89.3
5.5
1.8
3.4
ETHNICITY
.c
56.7
24.0
12.6
6.5
71.4
13 .1
8.4
7.1
59.3
20.5
11. 8
8.3
88.7
6.4
2.4
2.3
HI.
62.0
21.7
10.6
5.4
72 .4
14.4
6.7
6.3
64.0
21. 7
8.2
5:7
88.3
6.5
3.0
2.0
Q
68.2
18.1
9.5
3.6
78.6
10.2
5.6
5.3
64.3
22.0
9.0
4.3
89.4
5.4
2.1
2.6
..
-
..
...
..
45
'),.;...,.'
Fic'-1re 12
...
..,
?ERCENT OF STUDENTS REPORTING THAT DRUGS ARE "VERY (OR) SORT
OF DANGEROUS"
too
-
.
<Ii
..
C U
ell
'i ..
W
J:
.5 en
Ql
==
Ql
...
ell
Cl
U
ell
C
ell
::I
:::-
...
ell
::E
'0
J:
0
U
Ci
-
.
...
..
-.
.
-
.
-
..
..
..
...
.
..
-
..
.
..
1I111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111!11111I1111I11I11I111I1I11111I1I111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
---- ---- ---- --
- --::.-~-- -- - ~--=======--=----==-------
1I111111111111111111!11111I11I11I111111111I11I111111111111111I11I11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111'1111111111
---- ---
==--:o:---==--==----- -=--- ---=--=--=- -===-=-- =- - - --~
===------::...=~------"----"--~~
11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111'11'111'11'111"111illllllllll'IIIII'11 1111'11'111111111'1111111111111 1'1 1,11111111111111111
-- --- --- --- ---- - - --
- -- -----
-- --
-------
-~--- -------- --- ---
~-~--------
111111111111'1111111111'11 l'II'IIiIII'" 11'>1 1'1'11'11','11111'111 111'1111'11',',"11"1'1'" 11,11,1,,1
- -
- - -
- -- - -
- - --
-- -- -
- -
- ---
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
00
.H/L
IDDC
II AlP
liIAA
..
...
..
-
..
...
..
-
.
46
1,_,
RESISTANCE TECHNIQUES USED BY ETHNICITY
,'11'11
...
If your friends ask you to use drugs and you don't
want to, what would you usually do?
,..
...
M bE ~ HI. Q
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 Af ~ HI. Q
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?
'...
M
l>E.
.c.
HL
Q
....
.
Very helpful. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 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?
-
-
M
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
..
.
...
How helpful has D.A.R.E. been in keeping you away from
alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana, and other drugs?
..
...
..
-
M. Af .c. HL Q
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
...
-
~Wll'
CONCLUSIONS
.II~"
...
..
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
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 (73% vs.
70%). 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
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, 43% Graduates and 40% Non-Graduates
alike are using alcohol and 30% 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
-
-
,..~,..
...
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 82%) 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 bee!} 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 (Le., "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.
I".
,,..
...
-
..
...
..
..
...
..
...
..
...
..
....
.
...
..
-
-
-
-
-
..
...
..
-
..
-
..
50
...
..
t;....
...
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 78% agreed that the police are
helpful and 76% 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:
.,.
...
-
III
-
..
....
...
..
-
iii
-
..
-
..
-
*
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.
.
lOIt
..
-
..
*
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 mayor 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 follQw-ups to insure the continued
long-term effectiveness of the program.
III
-
iii
-
..
-
..
52
-
..
'.-.le
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 tperefore
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
-
..
IIUIl
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 70% 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
70% 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
-
..
!---j..-
-
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.
,-e"
...
'"
...
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
1'1""
...
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.
..
...,
ill
...
..
-
...
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
....
..
-
".
REFERENCES
,-
..
-
Bureau of Justice Assistance. An introduction to the
National DARE Parent Program. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Program. 1993.
..
..
Carter, David L. (1995). Community
D.A.R.E.: A Practitioner's Perspective.
Assistance Bulletin, June (1995).
policing and
Bureau of Justice
,..
-
..
Donnermeyer, Joseph F.
D.A.R.E. Evaluation: State
University, Columbus, Ohio.
(1995) .
of Ohio.
Executive Summarv:
The Ohio State
..
-
-
Donnermeyer, Joseph F., and Phillips, G. Howard.
(1996). D.A.R.E. Works! A D.A.R.E. Evaluation with 3.150
Ohio 11th Graders. The Ohio State University, Columbus,
Ohio.
-
..
-
"
,..
-
..
-
..
...
..
-
..
,..
..
,..
..
-
..
-
-
57
..
..