2002 Arizona Youth Survey Gender Study
REPORT PROVIDED BY:
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
THIS REPORT IS PROVIDED BY THE Arizona Criminal Justice Commission SPECIAL THANKS TO: Administrative Office of the Courts Arizona Department of Education Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission Arizona Prevention Resource Center Bureau of Substance Abuse Treatment and Prevention Division of Behavioral Services Arizona Department of Health Services Governor's Division of Substance Abuse Prevention Governor's Office for Children, Youth, and Families
2
INTRODUCTION
2002 Arizona Youth Survey
Summary for CONTENTS:
Introduction: ? Demographics ? Risk & Protective Framework Tools for Assessment and Planning How to Read the Charts Data Charts: ? Substance Use & Antisocial Behavior ? Risk & Protective Factor Profiles ? School Safety Risk and Protective Factor Definitions Data Tables Bibliography Contacts for Prevention
What is the Risk and Protective Factor Framework? Risk- and protective-focused prevention is based on a simple premise: To prevent a problem from happening, we need to identify the factors that increase the risk of that problem developing and then find ways to reduce the risks. Just as medical researchers have found risk factors for heart attacks such as diets high in fats, lack of exercise, and smoking, a team of researchers at the University of Washington have defined a set of risk factors for drug abuse. The research team also found that some children exposed to multiple risk factors manage to avoid behavior problems later even though they were exposed to the same risks as children who exhibited behavior problems. Based on research, they identified protective factors and processes that work together to buffer children from the effects of highrisk exposure and lead to the development of healthy behaviors. Risk factors include characteristics of community, family, and school environments, and characteristics of students and their peer groups, that are known to predict increased likelihood of a drug use, delinquency, and violent behaviors among youth (Hawkins, Catalano, & Miller, 1992; Hawkins, Arthur & Catalano, 1995; Brewer, Hawkins, Catalano, & Neckerman, 1995). Protective factors exert a positive influence or buffer against the negative influence of risk, thus reducing the likelihood that adolescents will engage in problem behaviors. Protective factors identified through research reviewed by the Social Development Research Group include individual characteristics; social bonding to family, school, community, and peers; and healthy beliefs and clear standards for behavior.
Male and Female Students 8th 10th and 12th Grades
This report summarizes some of the findings from the 2002 Arizona Youth Student Survey administered to 8th, 10th and 12th grade students during January, February and March 2002. The results are presented as overall results for the State. The survey was designed to assess school safety, adolescent substance use, anti-social behavior and the risk and protective factors that predict these adolescent problem behaviors. The participating schools were selected to ensure that students from all counties and who attend large and small schools were represented in the survey. Careful selection of the schools that were sampled and uniform administration of the survey have resulted in survey data that are valid and representative of the students in grades 8, 10, and 12 in Arizona. Table 1 contains the characteristics of the students who completed the survey from the State.
Table 1. Characteristics of Participants1
Male Number Total Students Grade 8 10 12 Ethnicity White African American. Native American Hispanic
1
Female Number 6001 Percent 100.0 %
Percent 100.0 %
5877
2068 2148 1661
35.2 % 36.5 % 28.3 %
2131 2129 1741
35.5 % 35.5 % 29.0 %
3461 215 363 1354 180
58.9 % 3.7 % 6.2 % 23.0 % 3.1 %
3504 186 329 1491 185
58.4 % 3.1 % 5.5 % 24.8 % 3.1 %
Asian
Due to response rate, ethnicity numbers do not equal total student numbers.
3
TOOLS FOR ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING
2002 Arizona Youth Survey Report
Prepared by The Arizona Criminal Justice Commission
DELINQUENCY TEEN PREGNANCY SUBSTANCE ABUSE SCHOOL DROP-OUT VIOLENCE
Research on risk and protective factors has important implications for prevention efforts. The premise of this approach is that in order to promote positive youth development and prevent problem behaviors, it is necessary to address those factors that predict the problem. By measuring risk and protective factors in a population, specific risk factors that are elevated and widespread can be identified and targeted by preventive interventions that also promote related protective factors. For example, if academic failure is identified as an elevated risk factor in a community, then mentoring and tutoring interventions can be provided that will improve academic performance, and also increase opportunities and rewards for classroom participation. Risk- and protective-focused drug abuse prevention is based on the work of J. David Hawkins, Ph.D., Richard F. Catalano, Ph.D.; and a team of researchers at the University of Washington in Seattle. Beginning in the early 1980's the group researched adolescent problem behaviors and identified risk factors for adolescent drug abuse and delinquency. Not surprisingly, they found that an interrelationship exists between adolescent drug abuse, delinquency, school dropout, teen pregnancy, and violence and were able to identify risk factors for these problems.
YOUTH AT RISK
Community
Availability of Drugs and Firearms Community Laws and Norms Favorable Toward Drug Use Transitions and Mobility Low Neighborhood Attachment and Community Disorganization Extreme Economic and Social Deprivation
Family
Family History of High Risk Behavior Family Management Problems Family Conflict Parental Attitudes and Involvement
School
Early and Persistent Antisocial Behavior Academic Failure in Elementary School Lack of Commitment to School
Individual/Peer
Alienation and Rebelliousness Friends Who Engage in a Problem Behavior Favorable Attitudes Toward the Problem Behavior Early Initiation of the Problem Behavior
4
School Improvement Using Survey Data
How do I decide which intervention(s) to employ?
Strategies should be selected based on the risk factors that are high in your community and the protective factors which are low. Strategies should be age appropriate and employed prior to the onset of the problem behavior. Strategies chosen should address more than a single risk and protective factor.
How do I know whether or not the intervention was effective?
No isolated strategy offers the solution to reducing youth problem behaviors.
Participation in the bi-annual administration of the survey provides trend data necessary for determining the effectiveness of the implemented intervention(s) and also provides data for determining any new efforts that are needed.
No single strategy offers the solution.
HOW TO READ THE CHARTS
1. Student responses for risk and protective factors, substance use, antisocial behavior and school safety questions are displayed by grade on the following pages. 2. The bars represent the percent of students in your school who reported elevated risk or protection, substance use or antisocial behaviors, or school safety concerns. 3. Scanning across these charts, you can easily determine which factors are more (or least) prevalent, thus identifying which of the factors are most important for your school or community to address. 4. Bars will be complemented by a small dot. This dot shows the comparison to all Arizona students sampled, and provides additional information for your school and community in determining the relative importance of each risk and protective factor. Additional explanations of cut-points, dots, and the 7-state norm line are located on the following page. 5. Actual percentages are provided in the data tables following the charts. 6. Brief definitions of the risk and protective factors can be found following the graphs.
5
CUT-POINTS, DO CUT-POINTS, DOTS, DASHED LINES TS, DASHED LINES HOW TO READ THE CHARTS
In order to read the Risk and Protective Factor Charts, there are three features to keep in mind while scanning the chart: 1) cut-points help with distinguishing between students at risk and those not-at-risk, 2) dots indicating school rates compared to state rates, and 3) dashed lines showing comparisons to other state levels.
?
Cut-Points
Before the percentage of youth at risk on a given scale could be calculated, a scale value or cut-point needed to be determined that would separate the at-risk group from the not-at-risk group. The Prevention Needs Assessment (PNA) survey was designed to assess adolescent substance use, anti-social behavior and the risk and protective factors that predict these adolescent problem behaviors. The Arizona Youth Survey, and other surveys designed for other states and areas, follow the PNA format and have the same goal of gathering information on the prevention needs of students, schools, communities, and states. Since PNA surveys have been given to over 200,000 youth nationwide, it was possible to select two groups of youth, one that was more at risk for problem behaviors and another group that was less at risk. A cut-point score was then determined for each risk and protective factor scale that best divided the youth from the two groups into their appropriate group, more at-risk or less at-risk. The criteria for selecting the more at-risk and the less at-risk groups included academic grades (the more at-risk group received "D" and "F" grades, the less at-risk group received "A" and "B" grades), ATOD use (the more at-risk group had more regular use, the less at-risk group had no drug use and use of alcohol or tobacco on only a few occasions), and antisocial behavior (the more at-risk group had two or more serious delinquent acts in the past year, the less at-risk group had no serious delinquent acts). The cut-points that were determined by analyzing the results of the more at-risk and less at-risk groups will remain constant and will be used to produce the profiles for future surveys. Since the cut-points for each scale will remain fixed, the percentage of youth above the cut-point on a scale (at-risk) will provide a method for evaluating the progress of prevention programs over time. For example, if the percentage of youth at risk for family conflict in a community prior to implementing a community-wide family/parenting program was 60 percent and then decreased to 40 percent one year after the program was implemented, the program would be viewed as helping to reduce family conflict.
?
Dots
The Dots on the charts represent the percentage of all of the youth surveyed from Arizona who reported `elevated risk' or `elevated protection'. The comparison to the state-wide sample provides additional information for your community in determining the relative importance of each risk or protective factor level. Scanning across the charts, you can easily determine which factors are most (or least) prevalent for your community. This is the first step in identifying the levels of risk and protection that are operating in your community and which factors your community may choose to address.
?
Dashed Line
Levels of risk and protection in your community also can be compared to a more national sample. The dashed line on each risk and protective factor chart represents the percentage of youth at risk or with protection for the seven state sample upon which the cut-points were developed. The seven states included in the norm group were Colorado, Illinois, Kansas, Maine, Oregon, Utah, and Washington. All the states have a mix of urban and rural students. Again, brief definitions of the risk and protective factors are provided in Table 2. For more information about risk and protective factors, please refer to the resources listed on the last page of this report under Contacts for Prevention.
6
School Improvement Using Survey Data
Why the Arizona Youth Survey?
Data from the Arizona Youth Survey can be used to help school and community planners assess current conditions and prioritize areas of greatest need. Each risk and protective factor can be linked to specific types of interventions that have been shown to be effective in either reducing risk(s) or enhancing protection(s). The steps outlined here will help your school and community make key decisions regarding allocation of resources, how and when to address specific needs, and which strategies are most effective and known to produce results.
What are the numbers telling you?
Review the charts and data tables presented in this report. Using the table below, note your findings as you discuss the following questions. ? Which 3-5 risk factors appear to be higher than you would want? ? Which 3-5 protective factors appear to be lower than you would want? ? Which levels of 30-day drug use are increasing and/or unacceptably high? Which substances are your students using the most? At which grades do you see unacceptable usage levels? ? Which levels of antisocial behaviors are increasing and/or unacceptably high? Which behaviors are your students exhibiting the most? At which grades do you see unacceptable behavior levels?
How to decide if a rate is "unacceptable."
? ? ?
Look across the charts ? which items stand out as either much higher or much lower than the other? Compare your data with statewide and national data ? differences of 5 percent between local and other data are probably significant. Determine the standards and values held within your community ? For example: Is it acceptable in your community for 75 percent of high school students to drink alcohol regularly even when the statewide percentage is 90? Substance use and antisocial behavior data ? raise awareness about the problems and promote dialogue; Risk and protective factor data ? identify exactly where the community needs to take action; Promising approaches ? talk with resources listed on the last page of this report for ideas about programs that have proven effective in addressing the risk factors that are high in your community, and improving the protective factors that are low.
Use these data for planning.
? ? ?
MEASURE
Risk Factors Protective Factors Substance Use Antisocial Behaviors
Unacceptable Rate #1
Unacceptable Rate #2
Unacceptable Rate #3
Unacceptable Rate #4
7
Table 2. Risk and Protective Factor Definitions
Community and Personal Transitions & Mobility Community Domain Risk Factors Neighborhoods with high rates of residential mobility have been shown to have higher rates of juvenile crime and drug selling, while children who experience frequent residential moves and stressful life transitions have been shown to have higher risk for school failure, delinquency, and drug use. Research has shown that neighborhoods with high population density, lack of natural surveillance of public places, physical deterioration, and high rates of adult crime also have higher rates of juvenile crime and drug selling. A low level of bonding to the neighborhood is related to higher levels of juvenile crime and drug selling. Research has shown that legal restrictions on alcohol and tobacco use, such as raising the legal drinking age, restricting smoking in public places, and increased taxation have been followed by decreases in consumption. Moreover, national surveys of high school seniors have shown that shifts in normative attitudes toward drug use have preceded changes in prevalence of use. The availability of cigarettes, alcohol, marijuana, and other illegal drugs has been related to the use of these substances by adolescents. The availability of handguns is also related to a higher risk of crime and substance use by adolescents. Community Domain Protective Factors Opportunities for Positive Involvement Rewards for Positive Involvement Family History of Antisocial Behavior Family Conflict Parental Attitudes Favorable Toward Antisocial Behavior & Drugs Poor Family Discipline Poor Family Supervision Family Attachment When opportunities are available in a community for positive participation, children are less likely to engage in substance use and other problem behaviors. Rewards for positive participation in activities helps children bond to the community, thus lowering their risk for substance use. Family Domain Risk Factors When children are raised in a family with a history of problem behaviors (e.g., violence or ATOD use), the children are more likely to engage in these behaviors. Children raised in families high in conflict, whether or not the child is directly involved in the conflict, appear at risk for both delinquency and drug use. In families where parents use illegal drugs, are heavy users of alcohol, or are tolerant of children's use, children are more likely to become drug abusers during adolescence. The risk is further increased if parents involve children in their own drug (or alcohol) using behavior, for example, asking the child to light the parent's cigarette or get the parent a beer from the refrigerator. Parents' use of inconsistent and/or unusually harsh or severe punishment with their children places them at higher risk for substance use and other problem behaviors. Parents' failure to provide clear expectations and to monitor their children's behavior makes it more likely that they will engage in drug abuse whether or not there are family drug problems. Young people who feel that they are a valued part of their family are less likely to engage in substance use and other problem behaviors. Family Domain Protective Factors Young people who are exposed to more opportunities to participate meaningfully in the responsibilities and activities of the family are less likely to engage in drug use and other problem behaviors. When parents, siblings, and other family members praise, encourage, and attend to things done well by their child, children are less likely to engage in substance use and problem behaviors. School Domain Risk Factors Beginning in the late elementary grades (grades 4-6) academic failure increases the risk of both drug abuse and delinquency. It appears that the experience of failure itself, for whatever reasons, increases the risk of problem behaviors.
Community Disorganization Low Neighborhood Attachment Laws and Norms Favorable Toward Drug Use
Perceived Availability of Drugs and Handguns
Opportunities for Positive Involvement Rewards for Positive Involvement
Academic Failure
8
Table 2. Risk and Protective Factor Definitions (Continued)
Low Commitment to School Surveys of high school seniors have shown that the use of hallucinogens, cocaine, heroin, stimulants, and sedatives or nonmedically prescribed tranquilizers is significantly lower among students who expect to attend college than among those who do not. Factors such as liking school, spending time on homework, and perceiving the coursework as relevant are also negatively related to drug use. School Domain Protective Factors When young people are given more opportunities to participate meaningfully in important activities at school, they are less likely to engage in drug use and other problem behaviors. When young people are recognized and rewarded for their contributions at school, they are less likely to be involved in substance use and other problem behaviors Peer-Individual Risk Factors Young people who accept or condone antisocial behavior are more likely to engage in a variety of problem behaviors, including drug use.
Opportunities for Positive Involvement Rewards for Positive Involvement
Favorable Attitudes Toward Antisocial Behavior Early Initiation of Problem Early onset of drug use predicts misuse of drugs. The earlier the onset of any drug use, the greater the involvement in other drug use and the greater frequency of use. Onset of drug use prior to the age of 15 is a consistent predictor of drug abuse, Behavior and a later age of onset of drug use has been shown to predict lower drug involvement and a greater probability of discontinuation of use. Favorable Attitudes Toward Drug Use Initiation of use of any substance is preceded by values favorable to its use. During the elementary school years, most children express anti-drug, anti-crime, and pro-social attitudes and have difficulty imagining why people use drugs. However, in middle school, as more youth are exposed to others who use drugs, their attitudes often shift toward greater acceptance of these behaviors. Youth who express positive attitudes toward drug use are at higher risk for subsequent drug use. Young people who associate with peers who engage in alcohol or substance abuse are much more likely to engage in the same behavior. Peer drug use has consistently been found to be among the strongest predictors of substance use among youth. Even when young people come from well-managed families and do not experience other risk factors, spending time with friends who use drugs greatly increases the risk of that problem developing.
Friends' Use of Drugs
Interaction with Antisocial Young people who associate with peers who engage in problem behaviors are at higher risk for engaging in antisocial behavior themselves. Peers Low Perceived Risk of Drug Use Rewards for Antisocial Involvement Rebelliousness Young people who do not perceive drug use to be risky are far more likely to engage in drug use. Young people who receive rewards for their antisocial behavior are at higher risk for engaging further in antisocial behavior and substance use. Young people who do not feel part of society, are not bound by rules, don't believe in trying to be successful or responsible, or who take an active rebellious stance toward society, are at higher risk of abusing drugs. In addition, high tolerance for deviance, a strong need for independence, and normlessness have all been linked with drug use. Young people who seek out opportunities for dangerous, risky behavior in general are at higher risk for participating in drug use and other problem behaviors. Peer-Individual Protective Factors Young people who regularly attend religious services are less likely to engage in problem behaviors. Young people who are socially competent and engage in positive interpersonal relations with their peers are less likely to use drugs and engage in other problem behaviors. Young people who have a belief in what is "right" or "wrong" are less likely to use drugs.
Sensation Seeking
Religiosity Social Skills Belief in the Moral Order
9
Percentage of Youth with Protective Factor Percentage of Youth at Risk
100 90 100 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
10
0
Low Neighborhood Attachment Community Disorganization Transitions & Mobility Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use Perceived Availability of Drugs Perceived Availability of Handguns Poor Family Management Family Conflict
Opp. for Prosocial Involvement
Community
Community
Comm Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Attachment
Family
Family History of Antisocial Behavior Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use Academic Failure
Family Opp. for Prosocial Involvement
Family
Low Commitment to School Rebelliousness Early Initiation of ASB Early Initiation of Drug Use Attitudes Favorable to ASB Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use Perceived Risk of Drug Use Interaction with Antisocial Peers Friend's Use of Drugs Sensation Seeking Rewards for ASB Depressive Symptoms Gang Involvement
School
Family Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Protective Factors 2002 Student Survey, Grade 8
Risk Factors 2002 Student Survey, Grade 8
Risk and Protective Factor Profiles
10
School
Male 2002 Female 2002 State 2002 - - 7 State Norm
Opp. for Prosocial Involvment
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer / Individual
Social Skills
Male 2002 Female 2002 State 2002 - - 7 State Norm
Peer / Individual
Belief in the Moral Order
Percentage of Youth with Protective Factor
Percentage of Youth at Risk
100 90
100 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0
Low Neighborhood Attachment Community Disorganization Transitions & Mobility Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use Perceived Availability of Drugs Perceived Availability of Handguns Poor Family Management Family Conflict Family History of Antisocial Behavior Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use Academic Failure Low Commitment to School Rebelliousness Early Initiation of ASB Early Initiation of Drug Use Attitudes Favorable to ASB Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use Perceived Risk of Drug Use Interaction with Antisocial Peers Friend's Use of Drugs Sensation Seeking Rewards for ASB Depressive Symptoms Gang Involvement Male 2002 Female 2002 State 2002 - - 7 State Norm
Opp. for Prosocial Involvement
Community
Community
Comm Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Attachment
Family
Family Opp. for Prosocial Involvement
Family
Family Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
School
Risk Factors 2002 Student Survey, Grade 10
Protective Factors 2002 Student Survey, Grade 10
Risk and Protective Factor Profiles
11
School
Male 2002 Female 2002 State 2002 - - 7 State Norm
Opp. for Prosocial Involvment
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer / Individual
Social Skills
Peer / Individual
Belief in the Moral Order
Percentage of Youth with Protective Factor Percentage of Youth at Risk
100 90 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
10
100
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0
0
Low Neighborhood Attachment Community Disorganization Transitions & Mobility Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use Perceived Availability of Drugs Perceived Availability of Handguns Poor Family Management Family Conflict
Opp. for Prosocial Involvement
Community
Community
Comm Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Family Attachment
Family
Family History of Antisocial Behavior Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use Academic Failure
Family Opp. for Prosocial Involvement
Family
Low Commitment to School Rebelliousness Early Initiation of ASB Early Initiation of Drug Use Attitudes Favorable to ASB Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use Perceived Risk of Drug Use Interaction with Antisocial Peers Friend's Use of Drugs Sensation Seeking Rewards for ASB Depressive Symptoms Gang Involvement
School
Family Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Protective Factors 2002 Student Survey, Grade 12
Risk Factors 2002 Student Survey, Grade 12
Risk and Protective Factor Profiles
12
School
Male 2002 Female 2002 State 2002 - - 7 State Norm
Opp. for Prosocial Involvment
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement
Peer / Individual
Social Skills
Male 2002 Female 2002 State 2002 - - 7 State Norm
Peer / Individual
Belief in the Moral Order
Percentages (%)
Percentages (%)
100 70 80 90
100 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0
Alcohol
Alcohol Cigarettes Chewing Tobacco Marijuana Inhalants Hallucinogens Cocaine Methamphetamines Steroids Heroin Sedatives Ecstasy Alcohol Cigarettes Chewing Tobacco Marijuana Inhalants Hallucinogens Cocaine Methamphetamines Steroids Heroin Sedatives Ecstasy Binge Drinking 1/2 Pack of Cigarettes/Day Suspended from School Drunk or High at School Sold Illegal Drugs Stolen a Vehicle Been Arrested Attacked to Harm Carried a Handgun Handgun to School
Cigarettes
Chewing Tobacco
Marijuana
Inhalants
Hallucinogens
Lifetime Use
Lifetime Use
Cocaine
Methamphetamines
Steroids
Heroin
Sedatives
Ecstasy
Alcohol
Cigarettes
Chewing Tobacco
Marijuana
Inhalants
2002 Student Survey, Grade 10
2002 Student Survey, Grade 8
ATOD Use and Antisocial Behavior AND ANITSOCIAL BEHAVIOR
13
30-Day Use Heavy Use
Male 2002 State 2002 Female 2002
Hallucinogens
Cocaine
30-Day Use
Methamphetamines
Steroids
Heroin
Sedatives
Ecstasy
Binge Drinking
Heavy Use
1/2 Pack of Cigarettes/Day
Suspended from School
Drunk or High at School
Sold Illegal Drugs
Stolen a Vehicle
Male 2002
State 2002
Been Arrested
Female 2002
Attacked to Harm
Antisocial Behavior
Carried a Handgun
Antisocial Behavior
Handgun to School
Percentages (%)
100 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0
Alcohol Cigarettes Chewing Tobacco Marijuana Inhalants Hallucinogens Cocaine Methamphetamines Steroids Heroin Sedatives Ecstasy Alcohol Cigarettes Chewing Tobacco Marijuana Inhalants Hallucinogens Cocaine Methamphetamines Steroids Heroin Sedatives Ecstasy Binge Drinking 1/2 Pack of Cigarettes/Day Suspended from School Drunk or High at School Sold Illegal Drugs Stolen a Vehicle Been Arrested Attacked to Harm Carried a Handgun Handgun to School
Lifetime Use
2002 Student Survey, Grade 12
ATOD Use and Antisocial Behavior
14
30-Day Use Heavy Use
Male 2002
Antisocial Behavior
State 2002
Female 2002
Community Safety Profile
2002 Student Survey, Grade 8
100
90
Male 2002 Female 2002
80
State 2002
70
Percentage (%)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Unsafe at School
Carried a Weapon
Threatened or Injured
In a Physical Fight
2002 Student Survey, Grade 10
100
90
Male 2002 Female 2002 State 2002
80
70
Percentage (%)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Unsafe at School
Carried a Weapon
Threatened or Injured
In a Physical Fight
15
Community Safety Profile
2002 Student Survey, Grade 12
100
90
Male 2002 Female 2002 State 2002
80
70
Percentage (%)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Unsafe at School
Carried a Weapon
Threatened or Injured
In a Physical Fight
16
Table 3. Number of Students Who Completed the Survey
Number of Youth State 5720 Grade 8 Male Female 2068 2131 State 5472 Grade 10 Male Female 2148 2129 State 4238 Grade 12 Male Female 1661 1741
Table 4. Percentage of Students Reporting Risk
Risk Factor State Community Domain Low Neighborhood Attachment Community Disorganization Transitions & Mobility Laws & Norms Favor Drug Use Perceived Availability of Drugs Perceived Availability of Handguns Family Domain Poor Family Management Family Conflict Family History of Antisocial Behavior Parent Attitudes Favorable to ASB Parent Attitudes Favor Drug Use School Domain Academic Failure Low Commitment to School Peer-Individual Domain Rebelliousness Early Initiation of ASB Early Initiation of Drug Use Attitudes Favorable to ASB Attitudes Favorable to Drug Use Perceived Risk of Drug Use Interaction with Antisocial Peers Friend's Use of Drugs Sensation Seeking Rewards for ASB Depressive Symptoms Gang Involvement Table 5. Percentage of Students Reporting Protection Protective Factor State Community Domain Opp. for Prosocial Involvement Comm Rewards for Prosocial Involvement Family Domain Family Attachment Family Opp. for Prosocial Involvement Family Rewards for Prosocial Involvement School Domain Opp. for Prosocial Involvement Rewards for Prosocial Involvement Peer-Individual Domain Social Skills Belief in the Moral Order 59.5 50.0 55.5 47.1 63.9 52.6 53.8 58.9 47.2 50.2 60.7 67.6 64.1 45.4 53.2 34.3 74.1 55.6 56.2 48.9 54.3 47.2 58.1 50.3 58.6 60.8 55.9 55.8 61.5 65.9 64.2 49.5 61.4 50.5 67.0 48.5 52.4 59.2 61.0 57.0 60.7 64.2 48.2 58.3 58.3 49.4 57.8 56.5 48.3 54.4 53.9 49.9 61.2 58.7 61.5 56.9 57.7 61.5 54.7 55.6 61.3 59.0 59.5 40.7 31.9 40.0 33.6 40.3 46.3 37.4 47.9 52.1 41.9 41.6 38.0 48.2 21.7 39.4 41.4 39.6 46.8 35.1 48.6 55.2 38.7 46.1 34.0 37.4 21.9 40.2 25.9 40.6 46.2 39.5 46.6 48.6 45.0 37.4 41.5 57.9 20.9 40.9 31.1 39.0 54.5 47.2 45.3 48.2 44.8 44.6 34.6 43.8 13.6 45.6 40.8 40.8 61.4 50.4 50.1 52.9 45.2 52.4 34.2 36.2 17.1 36.1 21.7 36.8 47.5 44.2 40.8 43.5 44.4 36.8 35.6 51.1 10.0 38.6 32.2 40.6 53.3 46.4 47.6 47.8 41.3 46.5 40.1 39.7 10.7 43.9 44.4 43.1 60.7 50.3 55.6 55.3 42.9 58.2 41.7 33.4 12.4 33.7 20.7 38.5 46.6 43.0 40.2 41.0 40.1 35.6 38.7 45.6 9.1 52.3 41.2 56.8 45.9 46.9 36.0 46.5 45.4 49.2 51.8 43.2 38.9 43.7 44.6 47.1 51.5 40.5 38.3 43.1 46.1 40.5 41.7 25.8 42.2 39.7 36.0 41.1 25.0 42.9 51.4 43.9 42.2 26.0 41.5 34.3 37.7 44.3 44.0 46.5 29.8 36.8 51.3 46.5 36.6 38.6 38.6 37.8 41.8 46.2 31.4 35.5 42.9 45.2 51.2 28.8 33.7 51.8 49.3 41.9 34.0 37.3 34.7 41.7 38.1 43.1 47.4 34.9 39.9 37.5 37.1 41.7 46.4 36.4 38.6 40.3 38.5 44.0 48.4 33.2 41.7 35.4 39.3 40.0 45.3 35.1 50.5 24.7 38.9 41.0 45.4 36.9 50.9 30.7 39.4 38.6 45.2 33.3 49.8 18.7 44.3 39.5 45.1 33.1 60.1 32.7 44.2 42.6 44.6 35.5 61.5 41.3 44.3 36.5 45.9 30.7 59.0 24.4 Grade 8 Male Female State Grade 10 Male Female State Grade 12 Male Female
Grade 8 Male Female 40.6 30.1 40.3 33.6
State 43.6 42.3
Grade 10 Male Female 44.9 42.2 42.7 42.7
State 43.2 37.4
Grade 12 Male Female 46.2 39.8 40.8 35.0
17
Table 6. Percentage of Students Who Used ATODs During Their Lifetime
Grade 8 Drug Used Alcohol Cigarettes Chewing Tobacco Marijuana Inhalants Hallucinogens Cocaine Amphetamines Steroids Heroin Sedatives Ecstasy Any Drug State 56.9 39.6 25.9 26.6 11.9 2.4 4.5 2.9 2.2 1.9 2.1 5.5 33.2 Male 55.0 38.1 31.4 27.4 10.3 2.4 4.3 2.4 1.9 2.0 1.4 5.0 32.2 Grade 8 Drug Used Alcohol Cigarettes Chewing Tobacco Marijuana Inhalants Hallucinogens Cocaine Amphetamines Steroids Heroin Sedatives Ecstasy Any Drug State 34.4 9.1 4.0 14.3 6.5 1.5 2.6 1.0 1.2 1.2 1.0 3.6 19.9 Male 30.7 8.7 4.2 14.1 5.0 1.3 2.2 0.9 1.0 0.8 0.6 3.0 18.8 Grade 8 Drug Used Alcohol Cigarettes State 14.1 1.2 Male 13.0 1.2 Grade 8 Behavior Suspended from School Drunk or High at School Sold Illegal Drugs Stolen a Vehicle Been Arrested Attacked to Harm Carried a Handgun Handgun to School State 18.1 15.4 5.7 3.3 9.1 11.6 6.7 1.4 Male 22.7 14.6 7.3 4.4 11.4 13.1 10.7 2.2 Female 13.5 16.0 4.1 2.0 6.7 9.9 2.8 0.5 State 11.6 20.5 9.9 3.6 8.0 10.8 5.0 1.3 Female 14.8 1.1 State 26.0 3.5 Female 37.3 9.7 3.8 14.8 7.9 1.8 2.8 0.9 1.3 1.7 1.3 4.1 21.0 State 47.9 18.1 4.7 22.4 3.4 3.2 3.5 2.6 1.5 1.4 2.6 2.5 25.7 Female 58.6 40.4 20.2 25.7 13.4 2.3 4.8 3.1 2.3 1.9 2.5 5.9 33.5 State 72.3 49.8 23.2 41.6 10.4 8.3 8.2 6.8 2.7 3.2 5.7 8.2 44.5 Grade 10 Male 71.0 48.7 31.3 43.4 12.0 8.4 8.0 6.5 3.8 3.6 5.6 7.8 45.7 Grade 10 Male 45.2 16.6 6.5 23.0 3.6 3.9 3.4 2.7 2.2 1.6 2.4 3.2 26.2 Grade 10 Male 27.0 3.8 Grade 10 Male 14.0 21.8 13.7 4.9 11.0 14.9 8.3 2.3 Female 9.0 19.3 6.3 2.3 5.0 6.7 1.7 0.4 State 8.1 23.8 10.0 2.1 8.2 9.1 4.9 1.0 Female 25.2 3.0 State 32.2 6.0 Female 50.5 19.6 2.7 21.9 3.2 2.6 3.7 2.5 0.9 1.3 2.7 1.9 25.3 State 58.9 23.2 5.9 25.4 2.0 3.1 4.0 2.2 0.9 1.3 3.4 3.2 28.6 Female 73.4 50.2 15.4 39.9 8.9 8.4 8.5 7.0 1.6 2.8 5.9 8.4 43.3 State 80.8 61.1 24.1 50.8 10.1 12.6 12.0 8.6 2.7 3.8 7.4 12.0 52.8 Grade 12 Male 80.4 61.1 35.0 54.6 10.8 15.0 13.1 9.2 4.6 3.6 9.0 12.8 56.8 Grade 12 Male 59.4 22.7 9.2 30.4 2.3 4.4 5.4 2.6 1.3 1.1 4.0 4.5 33.6 Grade 12 Male 37.0 6.2 Grade 12 Male 11.7 29.7 15.5 2.9 11.9 13.6 8.1 1.8 Female 4.8 18.4 4.9 1.2 4.7 4.8 1.9 0.1 Female 27.9 5.9 Female 58.6 23.8 2.8 20.8 1.8 1.9 2.7 1.8 0.5 1.4 2.8 2.1 24.1 Female 81.4 61.4 13.8 47.5 9.5 10.4 11.0 8.0 0.9 4.0 5.9 11.3 49.2
Table 7. Percentage of Students Who Used ATODs During the Past 30 Days
Table 8. Percentage of Students With Heavy Use of Alcohol and Cigarettes
Table 9. Percentage of Students With Antisocial Behavior in the Past Year
18
Table 10. Percentage of Students in the State and Your School Reporting Safety and School Issues Grade 8 Response State Male Female Safety During the past 30 days, on 0 days 94.63 92.40 97.29 how many days did you carry a 1 day 1.82 2.99 0.51 weapon such as a gun, knife, or 2-3 days 1.34 1.61 1.02 club on school property?
4-5 days 0.51 0.62 0.29 6 or more days 1.70 94.66 3.22 1.16 0.25 0.71 89.96 5.41 2.75 0.74 0.25 0.12 0.00 0.79 78.52 12.65 5.86 1.23 0.57 0.05 0.13 0.98 2.37 95.52 2.72 0.90 0.21 0.66 88.34 5.03 4.04 0.95 0.29 0.21 0.00 1.14 71.97 15.51 8.43 1.65 0.73 0.08 0.28 1.36 0.89 93.97 3.63 1.50 0.31 0.58 91.66 5.58 1.68 0.50 0.14 0.03 0.00 0.43 84.89 9.66 3.51 0.92 0.47 0.03 0.00 0.52
State
94.20 0.99 1.17 0.39 3.24 97.71 1.09 0.74 0.09 0.37 91.00 3.98 3.35 0.67 0.09 0.09 0.12 0.69 87.63 7.27 3.62 0.52 0.20 0.10 0.05 0.60
Grade 10 Male Female
97.75 0.85 0.51 0.21 0.68 97.55 1.62 0.77 0.00 0.06 92.76 3.89 2.77 0.33 0.02 0.02 0.06 0.14 93.68 4.49 1.48 0.13 0.13 0.02 0.01 0.06 88.66 2.06 1.41 0.78 7.09 96.74 1.07 0.58 0.23 1.38 91.96 3.32 2.09 0.72 0.24 0.22 0.11 1.33 89.53 5.38 3.28 0.49 0.37 0.30 0.07 0.59
State
93.24 1.22 0.82 0.60 4.12 97.42 1.19 0.47 0.18 0.74 94.42 2.59 1.44 0.52 0.12 0.16 0.05 0.69 93.54 3.56 1.82 0.34 0.28 0.14 0.03 0.29
Grade 12 Male Female
88.66 2.06 1.41 0.78 7.09 96.74 1.07 0.58 0.23 1.38 91.96 3.32 2.09 0.72 0.24 0.22 0.11 1.33 89.53 5.38 3.28 0.49 0.37 0.30 0.07 0.59 97.51 0.44 0.27 0.43 1.35 98.07 1.29 0.38 0.12 0.13 96.68 1.94 0.85 0.33 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.08 97.35 1.82 0.42 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00
During the past 30 days, on how many days did you not go to school because you felt you would be unsafe at school or on your way to or from school?
0 days 1 day 2-3 days 4-5 days 6 or more days
During the past 12 months, how many times has someone threatened or injured you with a weapon such as a gun, knife, or club on school property?
0 times 1 time 2-3 times 4-5 times 6-7 times 8-9 times 10-11 times 12 or more times
During the past 12 months, how many times were you in a physical fight on school property?
0 times 1 time 2-3 times 4-5 times 6-7 times 8-9 times 10-11 times 12 or more times
19
CONTACTS FOR PREVENTION
Regional Prevention Contacts
Cochise, Graham, Greenlee, Pima and Santa Cruz Counties Bill Burnett Community Partnership of Southern Arizona (CPSA) 520-318-6907 Yuma and La Paz Counties Martha Castenada The EXCEL Group 520-341-9199 Apache, Coconino, Mohave, Navajo and Yavapai Counties Petrice Post Northern Arizona Regional Behavioral Health Authority (NARBHA) 520-214-2177 Gila and Pinal Counties Heidi Haeder-Heild Pinal Gila Behavioral Health Association (PGBHA) 480-982-1317 Maricopa County Leticia D'Amore ValueOptions 602-685-3947 Gila River Health Care Corporation (GRHCC) Tom Cummins 520-562-3321 Pasqua Yaqui Tribe Behavioral Health Luis P. Canez, Jr. 520-879-6060 Navajo Nation Josepha Molina 928-871-6239
Other State and National Contacts:
Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Kristen Roof /Steve Ballance 602-364-1394/602-364-1157 www.acjc.state.az.us Arizona Department of Education Student Services Division 602-542-8700 www.ade.az.gov Arizona Department of Health Services Division of Behavioral Health Services Lisa Shumaker 602-364-4630 www.hs.state.az.us/bhs/ops Arizona Prevention Resource Center 800-432-2772 www.azprevention.org Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP) www.samsha.gov/centers/csap/csap.html Governor's Division of Children, Youth, and Families 602-542-3456 http://www.governor.state.az.us/cyf/index.html Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities U.S. Department of Education www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFS Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMSHA) www.samhsa.gov Western Regional Center for the Application of Prevention Technologies (CAPT) www.westcapt.org
20
