Evaluating Community-Driven Strategies to Prevent Underage Drinking Parties

Introduction: Underage drinking parties are events that often entail high levels of drinking and alcohol-related consequences. As a result, many communities across the U.S. are pursuing strategies—often including passage of local social host ordinances (SHOs)—to prevent or reduce the number and size of underage drinking parties. This study used a community-based participatory approach to assess the impact of local efforts to implement a comprehensive set of environmental strategies to address underage drinking parties as a high-risk setting for youth drinking. 12 intervention communities and 12 delayed intervention communities across 7 states (New York, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Colorado, New Mexico, California) participated in the study.

Methods: The research team provided technical assistance, training, and modest financial support over a 3-year period to build the capacity of an existing substance abuse prevention coalition in each of the intervention communities. It was expected that these capacity-building efforts would enable and stimulate the coalitions to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the problem and plan and implement environmental strategies, such as SHOs, designed to prevent underage drinking parties. The process and impact of the trial were assessed using an annual Coalition Survey, Law Enforcement Agency Survey, and Youth Survey (aged 15-20), and a post-only Parent Survey.

Results: The most common strategies pursued were awareness campaigns (focused on the problem of underage drinking parties) (by 11 of 12 intervention coalitions) and passage of a SHO (also by 11 of 12 intervention coalitions). Seven of the intervention coalitions succeeded in passing a SHO either immediately prior to, or during, the 3-year intervention period; this compares with 2 delayed-intervention coalitions passing a SHO during this time. Analyses of the impact of the intervention on drinking party attendance, party size, and party hosting by parents, as assessed in the Youth Survey and the Parent survey, are ongoing, and will be reported in the symposium.

Conclusions: Providing support and incentives for communities to effectively choose, plan, and implement environmental prevention strategies is challenging. Although the majority of intervention communities in the trial pursued and passed SHOs, many of the ordinances deviated from best practices (e.g., they involved criminal rather than civil penalties), several passed the ordinance late in the intervention period, and implementation and enforcement of these laws were often haphazard. Research is needed on how best to partner with local communities to maximize implementation of evidence-based or promising environmental strategies.