All Hands on Deck: How Non-Traditional Partners Evaluated Boating Laws Marla Peters, MHA Washington State Department of Health www.nwcphp.org/hot-topics
The Situation Seafair 2015
Polling Question 1 Have you or your community been affected by incidents of boating-related injury or death? Yes No
Challenges to Safer Water Seafair 2014 We are up against a culture of freedom on water; a tradition of alcohol on board. Marine Law Enforcement Interview
Polling Question 2 To what degree do you or your organization work in injury and violence prevention policy development? Not at all Somewhat Quite a bit It is the main focus
Why Is Public Health Involved? Drowning is preventable. Alcohol is a major factor in boating incidents. Water recreation is part of active living. Before 2013 WA had weak BUI laws.
Our Partnership: American Public Health Association WA Boating Safety Advisory Council Centers for Disease Control and Prevention WA Marine law enforcement officers Safe State Alliance Seattle Children s Hospital Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys WA State Parks and Recreation Commission Boating Safety Program WA State Dept. of Fish and Wildlife
Polling Question 3 What non-traditional partners have you or your organization worked with in injury and violence prevention efforts? Type answer in the chat box.
2013: A New Boating Safety Law BEFORE July 28, 2013 AFTER July 28, 2013 Misdemeanor Gross misdemeanor Up to $1,000 fine and/or 90 days in jail Up to $5,000 fine and/or 365 days in jail No implied consent Implied consent No penalty for refusing voluntary implied consent Did not include marijuana Civil infraction ($2,000 fine) for refusing breath test Marijuana-blood warrant: per se limit 5 nanograms
Evaluating the Law: An Opportunity for the Department of Health Injury and Violence Prevention Center
Planning the Evaluation Frame: Strong policies support strong programs Describe the policy What is the purpose of the policy? What is success? Describe the context What factors could affect the policy? Who will use results and for what? What questions do we answer? Logic model What inputs, activities, and outputs will result in short-term, mid-term, and long-term outcomes?
Using the Tools of Public Health: The Spectrum of Prevention Influencing policy and legislation Changing organizational practices Fostering coalitions and networks Educating providers Promoting community education Strengthening individual knowledge and skills Adapted from the Prevention Institute
BUI Prevention Logic Model Policy Intention Inputs Activities Outputs Outcomes Shortterm Midterm Longterm
Evaluation Goals Understand how the law is being implemented See if revised law acts as a deterrence to BUI Identify what helped and hindered implementing the revised law Determine short-term effectiveness of implied consent and its penalties
Quantitative Data Sources Prosecution summary data Source: Administrative Offices of the Court (AOC) Seafair BUI testing results Source: Washington State Patrol BUI testing, Seafair 2015
BUI Prosecutions 2008-2013 11 8 341 King County prosecutions were mostly at Seafair. 341 17 18 28 Source: 2008-2013 summary data, AOC Only seven counties averaged more than 1 BUI prosecution per year.
The Seafair Factor Year # of Arrests 2009 99 By 2013, the number of Seafair arrests was already beginning to decline. 2010 39 2011 50 2012 53 2013 33 2014 30 2015 15* *preliminary Source: Washington State Patrol
Qualitative Data Sources Marine law enforcement officers Collected data via interviews, Chelan and Phone Chelan MLE Training October 2014 Prosecutors Collected data via survey Seafair 2015
What We Found: Marine Law Enforcement Officer Interviews New Law Successes Positive attitude about law change Most MLEs have had BUI training Challenges Identified BUI citations not common Few MLEs on the water Boaters unwillingness to take breath test Access to BAC testing Time and resources for arrests, court appearances, and vessel impounding
What We Found: Prosecutor Surveys Very small sample (24 out of 450); one third of respondents did not handle BUIs. Prosecutors defer to state law when possible. New Law Successes Challenges Identified 13/24 knew of the law change Lack of familiarity with prosecuting BUIs Lack of familiarity with Seated Standardized Field Sobriety Test (SSFST) Difficulty of getting strong enough evidence Low priority of non-fatal cases Only 6/24 said law change made prosecution easier
Summary of Recommendations Provide more training & resources for prosecutors Judges BUI bench book Training on SSFSTs Make breath test refusals admissible in court Provide more training & resources for MLEs Training on requirements for prosecution Change to vessel impound law Suspend boat registration and MBE card
What We Learned: Policy Evaluation Consider the influence of external factors, i.e. changes in other policies or resources. Share results with stakeholders; discuss next steps. Compare results with evaluations in other states and local jurisdictions.
What We Learned: Partnerships There is great value for public health to work with non-traditional partners think broadly. Use the Spectrum of Prevention to orient non-traditional partners to public health. Use a logic model to help guide the work. Focus focus focus the evaluation questions what do you NEED to know? Think about who needs the information and how best to communicate with them.
More Lessons Learned Look for partners or policy components that may have been missed when the policy was designed. Find dedicated staff time and resources early in the process. Remember that data can be collected (and is needed) from non-public health agencies.
Policy Resources Na$onal Center for Injury Preven$on and Control Policy Evalua$on Briefs www.cdc.gov/injury/about/policy/evalua$on.html American Public Health Associa$on: www.apha.org The Network for Public Health Law: info@networkforphl.org Safe States Alliance (training): www.safestates.org
Acknowledgements This presentation is supported by grant #1U17CE002039-01 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors, and do not represent the views of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Questions?