Tobacco Sales Compliance Regional Analysis

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Tobacco Sales Compliance Regional Analysis"

Gyles Sharp
5 years ago
Views:

ATTACHMENT 7 2012-2017 Tobacco Sales Regional

1 ATTACHMENT Tobacco Sales Regional Analysis LAKESHORE REGIONAL ENTITY BY REFOCUS, L.L.C.

Tobacco Longitudinal Analysis, 2012-2017 The Lakeshore Regional Entity (LRE) manages Medicaid, Michigan General Fund, and Substance Abuse Treatment Block Grant funding for Behavioral Health services

2 Tobacco Longitudinal Analysis, The Lakeshore Regional Entity (LRE) manages Medicaid, Michigan General Fund, and Substance Abuse Treatment Block Grant funding for Behavioral Health services in a seven county region along the Lake Michigan shoreline in west Michigan. As a part of its mission, LRE supports county level substance abuse prevention coalitions in each of its constituent counties. A part of this support is provided through the No Cigs For Our Kids campaign, which focuses on educating tobacco vendors in the region regarding the importance of with the Youth Tobacco Act. Funding enables the substance abuse prevention coalitions in the region to work with local law enforcement agencies to ensure that tobacco sales do not sell tobacco products to minors. These checks have been occurring in several of the region s counties since 2011 and, over the last three years have occurred in each of the region s seven counties. The purpose of this analysis is to utilize the data that each county has collected through the check process to analyze results, find possible trends, make recommendations for improvements to the check process, and ensure with the Synar Amendment of In July 1992, Congress enacted the Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration Reorganization Act (PL ), which includes an amendment (section 1926) aimed at decreasing youth access to tobacco. This amendment, named for its sponsor, Congressman Mike Synar of Oklahoma, requires states to enact and enforce laws prohibiting the sale or distribution of tobacco products to individuals under the age of 18. States must comply with the Synar Amendment in order to receive their full Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant (SABG) awards. 1 Among other standards, the Synar Regulations require that states conduct annual, unannounced inspections that provide a valid probability sample of tobacco sales outlets accessible to minors. The regulations also require that the non- rate in the state be no more than twenty percent (20%). The analysis was completed by ReFocus, L.L.C. (referred to in this document as the evaluators ) under contract with LRE. In 2016 the evaluators gathered all non-synar (with police involvement) and Synar (without police involvement) check records that could be provided by each county as far into the past as data was available. The evaluators then merged all counties data into a single database that will support ongoing evaluation efforts into the future. It should be noted that several counties collected information about the check results in different formats and the scope of the information collected differed significantly. Thus, the evaluators had to painstakingly work with the data on a cell by cell basis to ensure it was reliably brought into a single database. Following this process, LRE 1 Page 1 of 14 Tobacco Regional Analysis

3 Tobacco Longitudinal Analysis, worked with the evaluators and county coalitions to develop a uniform dataset to be collected at each check. This analysis includes all non-synar checks reported to the evaluators between 2012 and The graph below displays the total count of non-synar checks in the region. The solid blue line displays trends in the actual number of checks completed during the fiscal year. The dotted blue line displays the trend across all years reported. It shows a positive increase over time; however, only 2015 through 2017 include a complete set of data from each county. Lakeshore Region - In Period FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 Count Linear (Count) The graphs below display a more accurate picture of the scope of checks (see Attachment A for county and annual detail). It shows, among reporting counties only, the percent of tobacco sales that were during each year. check activity clearly increased in 2015 and has remained near 50% for the past three years. Lakeshore Region - In Period Tobacco Sales Establishments Checked in % 49.1% 43.0% 24.7% 23.5% 19.1% FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY , 51% 456, 49% Percent Linear (Percent) not Page 2 of 14 Tobacco Regional Analysis

4 Tobacco Longitudinal Analysis, The graph below displays the percent of checks reported per year in the LRE region that failed. While tobacco sales to minors has been below the twenty percent (20%) threshold established by the Synar Amendment since 2012, there was a significant decrease in the percentage of checks that failed in the LRE region in 2017 (7.4%). In 2017, no counties in the LRE region performed above that threshold. 18.0% that failed 16.0% 14.0% 12.9% 14.3% 15.4% 12.0% 1 8.0% 6.0% 8.4% 9.5% 7.4% 4.0% 2.0% FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 Percent Linear (Percent) The graphs below display this same information for each county. 2 Allegan - that failed 2 Kent - that failed 15.0% 1 5.0% 16.2% 13.0% 12.1% 17.8% 15.9% 15.0% 1 5.0% 7.3% 14.4% 16.4% 10.6% FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 FY2012 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 Page 3 of 14 Tobacco Regional Analysis

5 Tobacco Longitudinal Analysis, Lake - that failed 25.0% Mason - that failed 15.0% 1 5.0% 14.4% 12.5% 6.7% % 1 5.0% % 9.1% FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 Muskegon - that failed Oceana - that failed 14.0% 12.0% 1 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 12.3% 5.0% 3.1% FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY % 30.3% 6.9% FY2015 FY2016 FY % 1 5.0% Ottawa - that failed 8.0% 14.4% 9.5% 14.5% 15.1% 3.3% FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 These graphs indicate several key conclusions. First, Allegan County continues to have the highest failure rate in the region. This rate has remained stable over the last two years. Second, Muskegon County s failure rate is at 0% for the second year in a row. Third, failure rates decreased in every county in Page 4 of 14 Tobacco Regional Analysis

The following maps evaluate check failure trends in 2017 on the basis of geographic location. The map to the right is of Allegan County.

First, there appears to be an issue with tobacco sales to minors occurring in and around the city of Allegan.

The map shows a good distribution of checks across the county. One trend is noteworthy: five out of sixteen check failures (31.

6 The following maps evaluate check failure trends in 2017 on the basis of geographic location. The map to the right is of Allegan County. Each star included on the map represents a check failure at that location. Two continuing trends are noteworthy in Allegan County. First, there appears to be an issue with tobacco sales to minors occurring in and around the city of Allegan. Second, there appear to be issues with tobacco sales along the US131 corridor. The Kent County map to the right displays check failures. The map shows a good distribution of checks across the county. One trend is noteworthy: five out of sixteen check failures (31.25%) in Kent County occurred in the community of Comstock Park. Lakeshore Regional Entity Tobacco Longitudinal Analysis, Lake County failures showed no geographic trends in The map of Lake County failures is to the right. Page 5 of 14 Tobacco Regional Analysis

The map to the right shows the geographic distribution of check failures across Mason County.

Lakeshore Regional Entity Tobacco Longitudinal Analysis, 2012-2017 The map to the right displays the

This was the third out of the last six years (2013, 2016, and 2017) that had no failures.

7 The map to the right shows the geographic distribution of check failures across Mason County. The map shows that all failures in the county this year occurred along the U.S. 10 corridor. Lakeshore Regional Entity Tobacco Longitudinal Analysis, The map to the right displays the geographic distribution of tobacco sales failures across Muskegon County in This was the third out of the last six years (2013, 2016, and 2017) that had no failures. The map to the right displays the geographic distribution of tobacco sales failures across Oceana County in It shows two failures across the U.S. 20 corridor. Page 6 of 14 Tobacco Regional Analysis

8 at Grocery at Convenience at Gas Station at Restaurant at Bar/Lounge at Pharmacy at Bowling Alley at Liquor at Tobacco /Shop at Retail/Dept. Lakeshore Regional Entity Tobacco Longitudinal Analysis, The map to the right displays the geographic distribution of tobacco sales failures across Ottawa County in It shows no trends. The chart below displays information regarding the environmental conditions at the tobacco sales that failed checks in the LRE region by year (see Attachment B for county level data). Two trends are noted. First, the majority of check failures across the years have occurred at gas stations, followed by convenience stores. Few to no failures have occurred at tobacco stores/shops, bowling alleys, or bars/lounges. Second, the percent of check failures that occurred at grocery stores shows an increasing trend over the last five years. FY2017 Allegan % 18.18% 45.45% 9.09% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Kent % 25.00% 62.5% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 6.25% 0.00% Lake % 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Mason % 66.67% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Muskegon 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Oceana % 50.00% 50.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Ottawa % 66.67% 33.33% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% LRE Region % 34.29% 51.43% 2.86% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.86% 0.00% Finally, the evaluation team reviewed 2016 Michigan Profile for Healthy Youth (MiPHY) survey results for participating counties related to the percentage of high school students who reported that it is sort of easy or very easy to get cigarettes. MiPHY is an online, anonymous student questionnaire which is administered every other year throughout the State of Michigan to students of school districts that Page 7 of 14 Tobacco Regional Analysis

9 Tobacco Longitudinal Analysis, volunteer to participate. The last administration occurred during the 2015/2016 school year. The graph below displays MiPHY results in the four counties that participate with the survey compared to participating counties in the LRE region in aggregate and the State of Michigan. It shows that high school students in the LRE region report it is sort of easy or very easy to get cigarettes at a greater rate (although not significant) than in the State of Michigan. Muskegon and Allegan counties youth report that it is sort of easy or very easy to get cigarettes at a greater rate than Kent and Oceana counties youth. MiPHY: Percentage of HS students who reported sort of easy or very easy to get cigarettes 47.30% 45.60% 47.90% 46.44% 45.96% 42.60% Allegan Kent Muskegon Oceana LRE Region (Participating Counties) Michigan Page 8 of 14 Tobacco Regional Analysis

10 Tobacco Longitudinal Analysis, ATTACHMENT A: FY2017 County Population (2010 Census) per 10,000 (Non- Synar) Non-Synar Ave Times Establishments were checks per 10,000 checks that failed Allegan % % Kent % % Lake % % Mason % % Muskegon % Oceana % % Ottawa % % LRE Region % % FY2016 County Population (2010 Census) per 10,000 Ave Times Establishments were checks per 10,000 checks that failed Allegan % % Kent % % Lake % Mason % % Muskegon % Oceana % % Ottawa % % LRE Region % % Page 9 of 14 Tobacco Regional Analysis

11 Tobacco Longitudinal Analysis, FY2015 County Population (2010 Census) per 10,000 Ave Times Establishments were checks per 10,000 checks that failed Allegan % % Kent % % Lake % Mason % % Muskegon % % Oceana % % Ottawa % % LRE Region % % FY2014 County Population (2010 Census) per 10,000 Ave Times Establishments were checks per 10,000 checks that failed Allegan % % Muskegon % % Ottawa % % LRE Region % % FY2013 County Population (2010 Census) per 10,000 Ave Times Establishments were checks per 10,000 checks that failed Allegan % % Muskegon % Ottawa % % LRE Region % % Page 10 of 14 Tobacco Regional Analysis

12 Tobacco Longitudinal Analysis, FY2012 County Population (2010 Census) per 10,000 Ave Times Establishments were checks per 10,000 Kent % % checks that failed Muskegon % % Ottawa % % LRE Region % % Page 11 of 14 Tobacco Regional Analysis

13 FY2016 Of Fails, Count fe at Grocery at Convenience at Gas Station at Restaurant at Bar/Lounge at Pharmacy at Bowling Alley at Liquor at Tobacco /Shop at Retail/Dept. FY2017 at Grocery at Convenience at Gas Station at Restaurant at Bar/Lounge at Pharmacy at Bowling Alley at Liquor at Tobacco /Shop at Retail/Dept. Lakeshore Regional Entity Tobacco Longitudinal Analysis, ATTACHMENT B: Allegan % 18.18% 45.45% 9.09% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Kent % 25.00% 62.50% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 6.25% 0.00% Lake % 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Mason % 66.67% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Muskegon 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Oceana % 50.00% 50.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Ottawa % 66.67% 33.33% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% LRE Region % 34.29% 51.43% 2.86% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.86% 0.00% Allegan % 29.17% 25.00% 20.83% 50.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4.17% 0.00% 0.00% Kent % 89.74% 2.56% 25.64% 46.15% 0.00% 0.00% 10.26% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Lake % 0.00% 0.00% 50.00% 50.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Mason % 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 57.14% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 14.29% 0.00% 0.00% Muskegon 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Oceana % 20.00% 20.00% 20.00% 60.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Ottawa % 56.25% 0.00% 25.00% 62.50% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 6.25% 0.00% 6.25% LRE Region % 55.10% 10.20% 23.47% 52.04% 0.00% 0.00% 4.08% 0.00% 3.06% 0.00% 1.02% Page 12 of 14 Tobacco Regional Analysis

14 FY2014 Of Fails, Count fe at Grocery at Convenience at Gas Station at Restaurant at Bar/Lounge at Pharmacy at Bowling Alley at Liquor at Tobacco /Shop at Retail/Dept. FY2015 Of Fails, Count fe at Grocery at Convenience at Gas Station at Restaurant at Bar/Lounge at Pharmacy at Bowling Alley at Liquor at Tobacco /Shop at Retail/Dept. Lakeshore Regional Entity Tobacco Longitudinal Analysis, Allegan % 30.77% 15.38% 23.08% 61.54% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Kent % 53.85% 10.26% 30.77% 51.28% 0.00% 0.00% 5.13% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Lake % % 0.00% 66.67% 33.33% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Mason % % 30.00% 40.00% 30.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Muskegon % % 0.00% 0.00% % 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Oceana % % 30.00% 50.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 20.00% Ottawa % 66.67% 11.11% 27.78% 61.11% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% LRE Region % 65.63% 14.58% 32.29% 47.92% 0.00% 0.00% 2.08% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.08% Allegan % 17.65% 0.00% 17.65% 82.35% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Kent 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Lake 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Mason 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Muskegon % % 0.00% 20.00% 80.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Oceana 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Ottawa % 63.64% 0.00% 27.27% 72.73% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% LRE Region % 45.45% 0.00% 21.21% 78.79% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Page 13 of 14 Tobacco Regional Analysis

15 FY2012 Of Fails, Count fe at Grocery at Convenience at Gas Station at Restaurant at Bar/Lounge at Pharmacy at Bowling Alley at Liquor at Tobacco /Shop at Retail/Dept. FY2013 Of Fails, Count fe at Grocery at Convenience at Gas Station at Restaurant at Bar/Lounge at Pharmacy at Bowling Alley at Liquor at Tobacco /Shop at Retail/Dept. Lakeshore Regional Entity Tobacco Longitudinal Analysis, Allegan % 26.09% 4.35% 34.78% 60.87% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Kent 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Lake 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Mason 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Muskegon 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Oceana 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Ottawa % 44.12% 2.94% 17.65% 73.53% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.94% 2.94% 0.00% LRE Region % 36.84% 3.51% 24.56% 68.42% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.75% 1.75% 0.00% Allegan 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Kent % % 7.14% 35.71% 35.71% 7.14% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 14.29% 0.00% 0.00% Lake 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Mason 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Muskegon % % 0.00% 33.33% 66.67% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Oceana 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! Ottawa % 44.44% 0.00% 22.22% 44.44% 0.00% 0.00% 11.11% 0.00% 22.22% 0.00% 0.00% LRE Region % 84.38% 3.13% 31.25% 46.88% 3.13% 0.00% 3.13% 0.00% 12.50% 0.00% 0.00% Page 14 of 14 Tobacco Regional Analysis

THREE-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN FOR SUBSTANCE USE DISORDER PREVENTION, TREATMENT AND RECOVERY SERVICES Fiscal Years

THREE-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN FOR SUBSTANCE USE DISORDER PREVENTION, TREATMENT AND RECOVERY SERVICES Fiscal Years 2015-2017 Submitted for August 1, 2014 Lakeshore Regional Partners 376 Apple Ave Muskegon,