Courts have sent the following message …the duty of college is not to
observe student life from a distance, but to use reasonable care to prevent
foreseeable danger in the college community.
- Peter Lake, Stetson University College of Law
Law as Prevention. (2003). Prevention File: Alcohol, Tobacco, and Other
Drugs, 18(2). Higher Education Center for Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse and
Violence Prevention: U.S. Department of Education.
Members of the 2010 Biennial Policy Review Committee:
Dr. Elwyn Lee
Vice Chancellor/Vice President
Student Affairs Division
Diane Murphy
Associate Vice President
Student Affairs Division
Dr. Gail Gillan
Director for Learning
Learning and Assessment Services
Student Affairs Division
Gaylyn Gaddy Maurer
Outreach Counselor, UH Wellness
Learning and Assessment Services
Student Affairs Division
Joan Nelson
Executive Director
Human Resources Department
Administration and Finance Division
Dona Cornell &
Tom Tracy
Legal Affairs and General Counsel
Legal Affairs Division
Melissa Abram &
Myra Conley
Assistant Deans of Students
Student Affairs Division
Javier Hidalgo
Interim Executive Director
Residential Life and Housing
Student Affairs Division
Patrick Daniel
Executive Director
Learning and Assessment Services
Student Affairs Division
Rosemary Grimmett
Executive Director
Research Services
Division of Research
Floyd Robinson
Director
Health Center
Student Affairs Division
Dr. Norma Ngo
Director
Counseling and Psychological Services
Student Affairs Division
Malcolm Davis
Chief of Police
Administration and Finance Division
Dr. William Munson
Assoc VP Student Development/DOS
Student Affairs Division
Part I: Review of the Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention Program
I. History of UH Wellness .............................................................................................................. 4
II. Prevention Infrastructure ............................................................................................................ 5
A. Peer education .................................................................................................................... 5
B. Enforcement ...................................................................................................................... 5
C. Campus Task Force ............................................................................................................ 5
D. Community Coalition......................................................................................................... 6
E. State and National Involvement ......................................................................................... 6
III. Areas of Strategic Intervention ................................................................................................. 6
A. Knowledge, Attitudes, Skills, Self-efficacy, Behavioral Intentions ................................. 6
1. Alcohol Poisoning Information...................................................................................... 6
2. Workshops ..................................................................................................................... 6
B. Indicated Intervention and Treatment ............................................................................... 6
1.CHOICES Program.......................................................................................................... 6
2. MIP Course ..................................................................................................................... 7
3. Marijuana 101 Exit Interviews....................................................................................... 7
4. Referral ........................................................................................................................... 7
C. Environmental Change ....................................................................................................... 7
1. Normative Environment.................................................................................................. 7
a. Academics Over Alcohol ............................................................................................ 7
b. Educated Choices ........................................................................................................ 8
D. Health Protection................................................................................................................ 8
1. Intent and Motivation: Alcohol Group Session (IMAGE) ............................................. 8
a. Small Group Selection ................................................................................................ 8
b. Pre-test ........................................................................................................................ 8
c. Interactive Discussion ................................................................................................. 9
d. Personalized Feedback ................................................................................................ 9
e. Post-Test ...................................................................................................................... 9
f. Follow-Up .................................................................................................................... 9
2. Fresh Start Program ...................................................................................................... 10
IV. Prevention Program Goals & Goal Achievement ................................................................... 10
A. Goal One: To utilize research-based intervention........................................................... 10
1. To initiate innovative programming for students.......................................................... 10
2. To infuse research into intervention modalities ............................................................ 11
B. Goal Two: To provide comprehensive wellness programming ...................................... 11
1.To provide multi-tiered programming by targeting identified substance abusers, high
risk student groups, and the general student population ............................................... 11
2. To decrease underage drinking by students .................................................................. 12
V. Prevalence Rates ...................................................................................................................... 14
A. Campus-wide Survey Data............................................................................................... 14
B. CAPS Student Self-report Data ........................................................................................ 15
C. UHPD Citation Information ............................................................................................. 16
D. Dean of Students Judicial Summary ............................................................................... 17
VI. Evaluation of Prevention Programming: Program Impact ..................................................... 18
1. Campus-Wide Comparison Group .................................................................................... 18
2. IMAGE Cohort Comparison Group.................................................................................. 19
VII. Summary of Prevention Program Strengths and Weaknesses/Challenges ............................ 21
VIII. Recommendations for Revising Prevention Program .......................................................... 22
Part II: Review of the Alcohol and Other Drug Policy
I. Members of the 2010 Biennial Policy Review Committee: ...................................................... 23
II. Policy Review Recommendations ............................................................................................ 24
III. Revised Alcohol and Other Drug Policy (as of May 2010) .................................................... 25
IV. Procedures for Annual Policy Distribution............................................................................. 33
Drug-Free Schools and Campuses Regulations (EDGAR Part 86)
Summary
Biennial Report 2010
Part I: Review of the Alcohol and Other Drug Prevention Program
I. History of UH Prevention
The University of Houston (UH) is a large, urban research university of approximately
37,000 students. It has competitive admissions, a wide array of academic and
professional degree programs, a national research agenda, and a vast number of outreach
programs in service to the community. UH is the largest and only doctoral degreegranting university in the University of Houston System. The university is clearly one of
the most diverse in the nation with representatives in its student body from over 130
countries and with no clear ethnic or racial majority among its population. UH has an
older than average population, many of whom work either part or full time. It is located
within the city of Houston, the fourth largest city in the nation. The University of
Houston is primarily a commuter institution, but is currently moving from 14%
residential housing to closer to 17% residential in fall 2010. As many of the students are
from Houston and the surrounding area, the University of Houston takes seriously its
commitment to serving the greater community.
UH Wellness (UHW), fully institutionalized following a substance abuse prevention
grant from the U.S. Department of Education Fund for the Improvement of Post
Secondary Education (FIPSE) in 1991, provides the alcohol and substance abuse
education and prevention programming for the entire university community. In the years
since being institutionalized, UH Wellness has continued to progress and has developed a
comprehensive approach to alcohol education and prevention based on a multi-tiered,
evidence-based approach to reduce high risk drinking (including underage consumption)
and the negative consequences associated with such behavior. Counseling and
Psychological Services as well as the University Health Center have provided clinical
services to University of Houston students and intervention and referral services for
faculty and staff for substance abuse concerns. They also engage in prevention activities
including an annual alcohol screening and various workshops on campus.
Recognition for the alcohol prevention program established by UHW is documented
by the successful attainment of two Enforcing Underage Drinking Laws grants
administered by the Texas Department of Alcoholic Beverages (TABC). The first, for
academic year 2007-2008, totaled $25,000 and the second, for academic year 2008-2009
totaled $37,000. Additionally, UHW staff have been invited presenters at both the 2007
and 2008 state-wide Texas Alcohol Symposium as well as at the U.S. Department of
Education’s Annual National Meeting on Alcohol and Other Drug and Violence
Prevention in 2006 and 2007. UHW’s primary alcohol prevention program, IMAGE
(Intent and Motivation: Alcohol Group Exercise) has resulted in UHW being the
recipient of a $124,000 U.S. Department of Education Model Program grant in 20082009. Additionally, the National Association of State Alcohol and Drug Abuse Directors
(NASADAD) and the National Prevention Network (NPN) have commended the
University of Houston by bestowing the 2009 National Exemplary Award for Innovative
Substance Abuse Prevention Programs, Practices, and Policies upon the UH Wellness
comprehensive alcohol prevention program.
II. Prevention Infrastructure
It is important to emphasize that the University of Houston’s comprehensive prevention
program has adopted the 3-in1 framework outlined by the NIAAA Task Force (2002) and
the Social Ecological Framework established by the HEC (U.S. Department of Education,
2007) by targeting high-risk students (including first year residents, Greek Life students,
and student athletes), as well as the campus at large and the surrounding community.
A. Peer education - UH Wellness advises a registered student organization of peer
educators (Cougar Peer Educators, CPE), whose mission is to promote, educate, and
increase awareness of wellness to their peers. CPE students are members of the campus
coalition, and have been involved in the creation of the marketing campaign (described
below), serving as a focus group for various marketing ideas and messages. CPE officers
have been trained to implement the IMAGE program as well as the CHOICES program
(both described below). Additionally, CPE is trained in two programs (One in Four: The
Men’s Program and One in Four: The Women’s Program) that target sexual assault
prevention which often involves the use of alcohol or other drugs.
B. Enforcement - UH Wellness has partnered with the UH Department of Public
Safety (UHDPS) in an effort to increase enforcement of alcohol and drug laws and
policies on campus. As a result, CPE students and Wellness staff have attended roll call
briefings with the UHPD in order to update the officers of ongoing prevention efforts, as
well as to receive input from and insight into the enforcement perspective. In order to
commend UHDPS for their continued support, UH Wellness organized an appreciation
ceremony this academic year (Fall 2009) to recognize the department as a whole, as well
as one officer in particular for efforts at reducing underage drinking. In addition, using
funds from the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission, UH Wellness (in FY 09) funded
additional police officers at key home football games (including homecoming), and at an
annual, high profile 3-day event which brings alumni back to campus.
C. Campus Task Force - UH Wellness chairs the Substance Abuse Prevention
Committee (a separate committee from the Substance Abuse Policy Review Committee),
a standing committee comprised of staff, faculty, and students which reports directly to
the Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs. This campus coalition is responsible for
reviewing and providing recommendations related to the prevention efforts on campus.
Several key campus stakeholders are members including: the Assistant Dean of Students
(the Judicial Officer for all disciplinary cases), the Associate Director for Residential Life
and Housing, the Associate Director for Athletics, a representative from UHDPS, a
representative from Counseling and Psychological Services (CAPS), and an Advisor
from Campus Activities (who maintains responsibility and oversight for Greek Life).
Student representatives include members of the Student Government Association and
officers of the peer educator student group. The committee has been essential in terms of
both implementation of individual components of the prevention program and feedback
on the potential impact, receptivity, and feasibility of future efforts.
Page 5
D. Community Coalition - In an effort to strengthen prevention efforts in the
surrounding Houston community, UH Wellness re-instituted the Houston-Galveston
Consortium in 2000. This community coalition is comprised of prevention personnel
from institutions of higher education in the Houston and Galveston area who discuss
issues related to alcohol and other drug issues as well as overall student wellness. The
Consortium is exploring the possibility of standardizing assessment measures across
member schools in order to initiate research initiatives.
E. State and National Involvement – For two years, UHW not only participated in
the annual Texas College and University Symposium (sponsored by Texas Alcoholic
Beverage Commission and Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention), but
has been an invited presenter. In addition, UH is a member of The Network, the national
consortium of institutions of higher education (IHEs) sponsored by the Department of
Education. Further, UHW presented at the U.S. Department of Education’s Alcohol,
Drug, and Violence Prevention National Meeting in both 2006 and 2008, at the National
Association of State Alcohol and Drug Abuse Directors (NASADAD) conference in
2009, and at the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators (NASPA)
Alcohol and Mental Health Conference in 2010.
III. Areas of Strategic Intervention
A. Knowledge, Attitudes, Skills, Self-efficacy, Behavioral Intentions
1. Alcohol Poisoning Information: In an effort to increase students’ knowledge of the
resources available on campus, and to reduce the likelihood of student inaction in the
case of an alcohol poisoning situation, UH Wellness developed a wallet-sized card for
distribution to the student body. This hard plastic card details alcohol poisoning on one
side using a novel acronym (PUBS; Puking, Unconscious, Breathing, Skin). The other
side of the card lists campus resources and encourages students to call “911” if they see
someone evidencing the alcohol poisoning signs. The UH Department of Public Safety
and the Department of Residential Life and Housing also purchased these cards to
increase dissemination across campus.
2. Workshops: Counseling and Psychological Services (CAPS), University Health
Services, UH Department of Public Safety (UHDPS), and UH Wellness conduct
workshops providing information on alcohol and other drugs to the entire campus
community. These units are also involved in providing information to specific target
groups including athletics, residential life and housing, and Greek Life. The University
Health Center also does the drug testing for student athletes on campus.
B. Indicated Intervention and Treatment
1.CHOICES Program: Using NIAAA’s Tier One strategy of “combining cognitivebehavioral skills with norms clarification & motivational enhancement intervention”, UH
Wellness has established the CHOICES group curriculum as a sanction option to refer
students found to be in violation of campus policies. CHOICES is a brief alcohol
prevention and harm reduction program that uses interactive journaling to provide
Page 6
students with non-judgmental normative, psychological, and biological education about
alcohol consumption. The CHOICES program is the group version of the Alcohol Skills
Training Program (ASTP) which has been well-documented in terms of its efficacy in
impacting college student drinking behavior.
2. MIP Course: UH Wellness staff have been trained and certified by the Texas
Department of State Health Services to administer the Alcohol Education for Minors
program, Minors in Possession (MIP) course. This is a six-hour course including an
alcohol assessment, a required exit exam and individual 30-minute exit interview. It is
the standardized state curricula for any minors who receive an alcohol-related citation,
and is regulated by State Health Services. Topics covered in the course include social
values, advertising, alcohol and young people, alcohol and accidents, laws, youth and
drinking patterns, and decision-making. Upon completion of the Exit Interview, if it is
determined that the student has significant alcohol use or requires additional intervention,
he or she is referred by UH Wellness staff to Counseling and Psychological Services.
3. Marijuana 101 Exit Interviews: The Dean of Students Office and UH Wellness
have arranged to have Marijuana 101, an online intervention related to marijuana and its
effects (as well as personalized feedback), as an option for marijuana violations on
campus. UHW staff provide the exit interview required as part of this intervention.
4. Referral: Individualized clinical work with students falls under the pervue of
Counseling and Psychological Services (CAPS). CAPS may see clients with alcohol and
other drug issues at this on-campus counseling center, or they may refer to local
treatment centers, hospitals, or other care providers for more intensive work with alcohol
and other drug issues. CAPS also offers campus wide screening events including
National Alcohol Screening Day. Additionally, the Dean of Students Office determines
referrals for alcohol and drug violations, often referring students to treatment options
discussed above or to CAPS for clinical assessment and potential treatment or referral.
C. Environmental Change
1. Normative Environment: As mentioned previously, UH Wellness was a participant
in the national Social Norms Marketing Research Project conducted by EDC from 2000
to 2004.
More recently (2007-2009), UHW implemented two social norms marketing campaigns
in an effort to impact the normative environment. The first campaign was marketed
towards underage students, while the second was more generalized and applies to the
larger student body.
a. “Academics Over Alcohol” – Campus-wide survey data has indicated that 91% of
students who reported intentionally making academics a priority over alcohol also
reported having a grade point average (GPA) of 3.0 or above. This was chosen as the
abstinence-supporting norming message, and was evaluated by student focus groups
utilizing peer educators as well as subsequent intercept interviews with students on
campus. With funding from the TABC in 2007 and 2008, promotional items with the
logo, message, and tag line (“Academics Over Alcohol”) were created and distributed
Page 7
including rally towels for Homecoming, posters, advertisements in the campus
newspaper, iPod wraps (“skins”), and license-plate frames. In 2009, campus-wide survey
data indicated that greater exposure to the campaign had a significant impact on alcohol
frequency (F=9.8, p<.001), quantity (F=3.92, p<..02), alcohol-related negative
consequences (F=3.78, p<.02), and upon actually making academics a priority (F=18.30,
p<.001).
b. “Educated Choices” - This campaign was designed as a traditional social norming
campaign to correct misperceptions among the entire student body about campus
drinking norms. Data from the 2006 campus-wide survey indicated that 80% of students
typically drink 0 to 2 drinks per week. Hence, the tag line “UH students are making
Educated Choices” was created. A layered marketing approach was utilized in the
campaign, as teaser posters were disseminated across campus and two weeks later were
replaced with the full logo, tag line, and message. The “0 to 2” drinks per week has held
as a campus norm according to campus-wide surveys in 2009 and 2010, and the norm is
provided as part of the feedback portion of the IMAGE session.
D. Health Protection
1. Intent and Motivation: Alcohol Group Session (IMAGE) - The centerpiece of
University of Houston’s alcohol prevention program is the IMAGE intervention. By
incorporating personalized feedback using motivational interviewing techniques (a
recognized Tier I strategy), correction of misperceptions, promotion of self-protective
behaviors, and fostering intention to change, this intervention is a unique combination of
theory and practice. In addressing these issues, the program actually encompasses the
first three areas of strategic intervention as outlined by HEC in the EEP (general
prevention, environmental change, and health protection strategies; U.S. Department of
Education, 2007). The intervention is comprised of the following elements:
a. Cohort Selection: This program is designed to provide cohorts of students with direct
feedback regarding their drinking, their perceptions of their peers’ drinking behavior, and
actual campus drinking patterns. This works best with groups of students who share a
commonality – residence hall floors, athletic teams, fraternities, sororities, and so on – so
that students receive feedback about not only the norms of the campus at large, but also
about their cohort (students to whom they feel connected and similar). By receiving
aggregate data about their group, students are able to internally compare their individual
drinking behavior with that of their cohort, in a non-threatening way. This can be
empowering (if their self-reported drinking is lower than group patterns), eye-opening (if
their self-reported drinking is higher than group patterns), or reinforcing (if their selfreported drinking is similar to group patterns); each of these scenarios is addressed using
Motivational Interviewing28 techniques. Similarly, the group as a whole can compare its
drinking patterns with that of the larger student body. UHW has targeted traditionally
higher-risk groups (including Greek Life fraternities and sororities, student athletes, and
first year residential floors) to implement the intervention to date.
b. Assessment: In order to evaluate whether the program is effective in impacting
student behavior, the researchers utilized a non-equivalent comparison group repeated
measures design.
Page 8
1. Pre-test: Prior to a session, students are asked to complete an anonymous brief
survey which assesses their typical frequency (occasion per month) and quantity (drinks
per week) of alcohol use, as well as perceptions of their peers’ drinking. This data is
compiled and analyzed prior to the session. Students are asked to generate a unique code
on the pre-test (last four numbers of their student identification number and the first three
letters of their last name) such that their responses remain anonymous but can be tracked
across time.
2. Post-Test: Post-tests are administered at the close of each session. In order to
maintain discrete data, students are asked again to supply their unique code. Students are
asked to identify campus frequency and quantity norms (to check for a correction in
perception). Then, students are asked to recall and identify one self-protective behavior
they will implement into their lifestyle. The remaining items measure intent to change,
self-efficacy of changing, outcome expectancies of implementing the behavior, and
perception of obstacles to change.
3. Follow-Up: At 1-month and 6-months following the intervention, a follow-up
assessment is administered to each cohort to identify each participant’s self-reported
frequency and quantity, as well as whether they accurately retained normative
information. These assessments also examine the extent to which students implemented
their chosen self-protective behaviors, the perceived impact of implementing the
behavior, and any obstacles faced. In order to maintain data integrity, students use the
same unique code provided on previous assessments.
c. Interactive Discussion: Once the session itself begins, UHW staff engage the cohort
in a discussion during which students identify examples of high-risk drinking and then
(with the assistance of the facilitator) generate a list of self-protective behaviors. [It is
important to note that UHW defines under-age consumption as a “high-risk behavior,”
and as such, includes an emphasis that underage consumption is illegal and against school
policy (thus is high-risk by definition). Specifically, UHW condones a “no illegal or
high-risk use” message by defining underage drinking as a high-risk behavior, and then
encouraging students to avoid all high-risk behaviors through the use of corresponding
self-protective behaviors, enabling UH to bridge the gap seamlessly between abstinencebased and risk-reduction philosophies of prevention without alienating the audience.]
Included in the discussion of self-protective behaviors are both abstinence-supporting
behaviors (including making academics a priority over alcohol, acting as a designated
driver, and intentionally not drinking so as to make better decisions) and harm-reduction
behaviors (such as limiting the number of drinks consumed, staying hydrated, and eating
food before drinking). Also reviewed in this discussion are alcohol poisoning symptoms
and steps to take in the event of an alcohol emergency; PUBS cards are distributed, as
well.
d. Personalized Feedback: Following this discussion, personalized feedback is given
based upon the cohort’s pre-test responses, as well as normative data from the campuswide survey. In order to visually represent this feedback, the group is shown three
groupings of bottles (either on a PowerPoint slide or printed image). Students are asked
which grouping best represents “the average number of drinks consumed by a typical
student AT THIS SCHOOL in a typical week.” As expected, students typically
overestimate their peers’ use and indicate the grouping with the largest number of bottles.
Page 9
The actual campus norm is then revealed, as well as noting the percentage of UH
students who report not drinking at all in a typical week. Students are then asked which
grouping best represents “the average number of drinks consumed by a typical student IN
THIS GROUP in a week.” Again, as expected, students overestimate their group’s use;
the actual group norm is revealed, again noting the percentage of students in the group
who report not drinking at all in a typical week. Finally, it is explained that the
remaining grouping of bottles (most often the largest) represents this group’s
overestimation of campus drinking behavior. This process is then repeated focusing on
frequency norms.
The strength of the feedback component in IMAGE comes from the processing that
UHW staff facilitate following the revelation of each cohort norm. Although the campuswide normative information is important (specifically for students who are in
precontemplation of changing their drinking behavior), students tend to connect on a
personal-level with cohort-based feedback. Specifically, by learning the drinking
patterns of their cohort, to whom they see themselves as similar, students are able to
compare and evaluate their own drinking patterns.
Additionally, the discussion facilitated by UHW staff centers on how the cohort
norms impact the group as a whole, which is especially powerful if the cohort norms are
higher than campus-wide drinking patterns. Cohorts are asked to describe the potential
risks for the group if they have members who are drinking excessively, and prompting
questions are asked to increase the cognitive dissonance between where the group wants
to be functioning and where they are currently (for example, “What does your group
stand to lose if drinking continues this way?”). The role of the facilitator in this setting is
to promote discussion among the cohort members utilizing Motivational Interviewing28
skills to encourage the group to make connections on their own between drinking patterns
and repercussions, not to be judgmental of the behavior or shaming to the group. Similar
discussions are facilitated when the cohort norms are at or below campus-wide drinking
patterns, and tend to be reinforcing in nature, but still center on how the group sees itself
and how it wants to be perceived by others.
2. Fresh Start Program – University of Houston Wellness staff have been trained by
the American Cancer Society to facilitate the Fresh Start education and prevention
program. Participants in the program are provided information about the impact of
tobacco on the body, options for smoking cessation, physical symptoms of withdrawal
from smoking, as well as the benefits of not smoking. Other topics which are covered are
stress management and nutrition/weight issues.
IV. Prevention Program Goals & Goal Achievement
A. Goal One: To utilize research-based intervention 1. To initiate innovative programming for students
a. Action item: Administer MIP for students (effectiveness measures to include
maintaining annual certification, and an increase by 10% per year in numbers
served until maximum capacity is reached)
Page 10
Progress: From August 2008 to May 20, 2009, a total of 70 participants
have completed the MIP program, while 80 participants completed the
MIP program from 2007 to 2008. Participation has lowered slightly.
There is a new Dean of Students for discipline and contact has been made
to strengthen referrals for this program. Certification by the State has
been continued.
b. Action item: Utilization of small group feedback into alcohol education,
(effectiveness to include increase by 10% for use of peers in providing
programming)
Progress: During Fall 2010 a graduate student and undergraduate intern,
with the assistance of student interns and peer educators facilitated over
50% of the IMAGE sessions.
2. To infuse research into intervention modalities
a. Action item: Implementation of pre- and post-tests for IMAGE interventions
(effectiveness measure to include 90 % of participants indicating the adoption of a
self protective behavior as indicated on post- tests for the group; effectiveness to
include 90% of participants who identified a self protective behavior indicate
actual implementation of the behavior as reported in one month follow up
assessment)
Progress: When asked to make a statement of intent on post-tests, 96.9%
of IMAGE participants indicated an intention to adopt a self-protective
behavior. At the one-month follow-up period, 93% of participants
indicated having implemented the self-protective behavior they previously
selected (including “slightly” to “very”).
b. Action item: Facilitate completion of campus-wide wellness survey (effectiveness
measures to include return rate that allows for 1,000 participants from population
survey; endorsement of survey by Residential Life and Housing, Athletics, and
Campus Activities to implement smaller group surveys)
Progress: A campus wide survey for 2009 resulted in 4093 surveys that
were useable for the drug and alcohol prevention program. .
Additionally, surveys were given to student athletes, Greek Life, and
residential students such that the drug and alcohol data for these
subpopulations could be utilized.
B. Goal Two: To provide comprehensive wellness programming
1. To provide multi-tiered programming by targeting identified substance abusers,
high risk student groups, and the general student population
a. Action item: Serve as referral clearinghouse for campus departments who interact
with identified substance abusers, including Dean of Student’s Office, Counseling
Page 11
and Psychological Services, and Health Center (effectiveness measure to include
bi-annual updating of community resource list and website search engine)
Progress: The community resource list was updated in summer 2009 and
will be again summer 2010. The UH Wellness search engine, and the
entire UHW website will be updated summer 2010.
b. Action item: Conduct small group social norming (IMAGE) intervention with
high risk student groups, including first-year students, athletes, and Greek-life
students (effectiveness measure to include an increase by 5% in the number of
participants for IMAGE sessions)
Progress: Staff were able to implement the IMAGE intervention at a
higher rate in FY 10 than in prior years. Total participants for IMAGE
for fall and spring is currently 897 and with the two sessions set for later
this spring, that total would exceed 925. Last year’s total was 750.
Additionally, UHW staff will facilitate the IMAGE session for all incoming
freshmen living in the new freshmen housing, Cougar Village in August
2010.
c. Action item: Identify environmental management strategies for the university
(effectiveness to include training of RAs at least once per year on enforcement,
policies, laws, and alcohol poisoning)
Progress: A training was conducted for RAs on alcohol enforcement,
policies, and poisoning during FY09. Training of orientation team leaders
who interact with incoming freshmen was conducted in spring 2009.
2. To decrease drinking by students, with specific measures for underage students as
well as for the general student population, as evidenced by:
a. Action Item: Analyze impact of IMAGE session on frequency and quantity of
alcohol consumption as well as negative consequences from alcohol
consumption (effectiveness: individuals who report attending a session will be
statistically more likely to consume on fewer occasions (frequency), consume
fewer drinks (quantity),and experience fewer negative consequences than their
counterparts who do not attend the sessions as measured at a .05 level of
significance)
Progress: A multiple logistic regression was conducted examining the impact
of session attendance upon drinking less than once a week (target behavior
for frequency). Students who had participated in IMAGE were 1.67 times
more likely than students who did not attend a session to drink less than once
a week (p<.06, eB=1.67, Wald = 3.44). Interestingly, an even stronger effect
was found on UNDERAGE students, with underage students who attended an
IMAGE session being 4.26 times more likely to drink less than once a week
Page 12
than underage students who did not attend a session (p<.01, eB=4.26, Wald =
9.98).
Similarly, a statistically significant impact of session attendance on quantity
of use was found with underage students. Specifically, a multiple logistic
regression was conducted examining the impact of session attendance upon
drinking 2 or fewer drinks per week (target behavior for quantity). Underage
students who participated in IMAGE were 3.30 times more likely to drink 2 or
fewer drinks per week than underage students who had not participated in a
session (p<.01, , eB=3.30, Wald = 6.13 ). The significance upon quantity was
limited only to underage students, however; there was not a statistically
significant impact of session attendance upon quantity in the population as a
whole as evidenced by the logistic regression. However, a Chi Square
analysis was conducted on the existing data comparing reported pre-test and
1-month follow-up frequency and quantity of alcohol use by IMAGE
participants. There was a statistically significant difference (χ2= 102.05,
p<001) between self-reported drinking frequency pre-treatment and one
month-post treatment, as well as a statistically significant difference (χ2=
81.37, p<001) between self-reported drinking quantity pre-treatment and one
month-post treatment. This suggests that the IMAGE session did, in fact,
impact participant frequency and quantity. However, as there is no control
group comparison, the researchers are unable to make causal statements of
impact.
A multiple logistic regression was conducted examining the impact of session
attendance upon alcohol-related negative consequences. Students who had
not participated in an IMAGE session were 1.86 times more likely to
experience negative consequences than students who did attend the session
(p<.02, eB=1.862, Wald = 5.874). Thus, participation in the IMAGE session
has continued to have a statistically significant impact upon negative alcoholrelated consequences. Interestingly, IMAGE session participation had an
even greater impact on UNDERAGE students. Specifically, underage
students who did not attend an IMAGE session were 2.39 times more likely to
experience negative consequences than underage students who did participate
in IMAGE ((p<.02, eB=2.39, Wald = 5.076).
b. Action Item: Assess impact of prevention programming targeting underage
drinking as a high risk behavior (effectiveness measure to include 70% of
underage students at UH indicating that they typically consume zero drinks in a
week, measured on the campus wide survey; effectiveness also to include 75%
of students who attend IMAGE sessions identify an abstinence based self
protective behavior as reported on the post test and on the campus wide survey)
Progress: In the 2009 Campus Wide Survey, 76.6% of underage students
reported that they drink zero drinks per week (782 students out of 1095).
Page 13
Of the underage IMAGE participants, 23.3% identified an abstinencebased self-protective behavior on the post-test that they planned to
implement. Interestingly, data from the 1-month follow-up surveys
indicated that 33.3% of underage IMAGE participants actually
implemented an abstinence-supporting self-protective behavior. Of
those, 91% reported the extent to which they implemented the behavior
from “slightly” to “very.”
c. Action Item: Implementation of pre- and post-tests for IMAGE interventions
(effectiveness measure to include 90 % of participants indicating the adoption of
a self protective behavior as indicated on post- tests for the group; effectiveness
to include 90% of participants who identified a self protective behavior indicate
actual implementation of the behavior as reported in one month follow up
assessment).
Progress: When asked to make a statement of intent on post-tests, 96.9%
of IMAGE participants indicated an intention to adopt a self-protective
behavior. At the one-month follow-up period, 93% of participants
indicated having implemented the self-protective behavior they
previously selected (including “slightly” to “very”).
V. Prevalence Rates
A. Campus-wide Survey Data: A campus wide survey was distributed in 2006, 2008,
and 2010. Following is a comparison summary of that data. As can be seen, most
prevalence remained consistent, with one exception: an increase in the percentage of
underage students who report drinking no alcohol in a typical week.
Substance
Marijuana
Illegal Substances
(other than marijuana)
Prescriptions
(other than as prescribed)
Frequency
Never in the past year
Several times a week to
daily
Never in the past year
Once a week or more
Never in the past year
Once a week or more
Page 14
2006
Data
2008
Data
2010
Data
85%
3%
88%
3%
87%
3%
95%
1%
89%
<1%
95%
<1%
90%
<1%
96%
<1%
90%
1%
Substance
Alcohol
Alcohol (underage
students)
Tobacco

Frequency
2006
Data
2008
Data
2010
Data
Never in the past 30 days
Less than once a week
(includes “never”)
Once a week or more
35%
80%
40%
80%
42%
79%
20%
57%
11%
77%
21%
79%
83%
10%
85%
8%
85%
7.5%
No alcohol in a typical
week
Never in the past 30 days
Once a week or more
This number was incorrectly reported last year; instead of being “once a week
or more” the number which was reported was “more than once a week” or
more – it would have been 23%
B. CAPS Student Self-report Data: Counseling and Psychological Services maintains
a confidential database which includes questions on alcohol and other drugs. Below are
two tables. The first is a summary of their findings for September 1, 2008 to August 31,
2009. The second table is a summary of September 1, 2009 to April 12. 2010
9/1/08-8/31/09 CAPS Intake Data
How well each item
describes the student during
Percentage midpoint
the past two weeks, from
and below (0 to 3 )
not at all (0) to extremely
well (4)
I use drugs more than I
95.8%
should.
I drink alcohol frequently.
Percentage above midpoint
(3 to 4)
88.5%
91.5%
I drink more than I should.
4%
11%
8.3%
Felt the need to
reduce your alcohol
or drug use
Others have
expressed concern
about your alcohol
or drug use.
Received treatment
for alcohol or drug
use
Never
72.3%
79.8%
95.3%
Prior to college
3.5%
2.8%
1.1%
After starting college
12.8%
10%
1.5%
Both
9.1%
5.4%
.6%
If and when student
reports the following
experiences:
Page 15
9/1/09-4/12/10 CAPS Intake Data
How well each item
describes the student during
Percentage midpoint
the past two weeks, from
and below (0 to 3 )
not at all (0) to extremely
well (4):
I use drugs more than I
should.
I drink alcohol frequently.
I drink more than I should.
Percentage above midpoint
(3 to 4)
96.1%
3.5%
92.1%
93.4%
7.6%
6.1%
Felt the need to
reduce your alcohol
or drug use
Others have
expressed concern
about your alcohol
or drug use.
Received treatment
for alcohol or drug
use
Never
70.5%
80.5%
94.1%
Prior to college
3.7%
3.2%
1.0%
After starting college
16.2%
9.2%
2.3%
Both
7.1%
4.9%
.5%
If and when student
reports the following
experiences:
C. UHPD Citation Information: University of Houston Police Department maintains
a database of crime-related activity on campus. Below is a summary of arrests for both
drug and alcohol arrests from calendar years 2008 and 2009. It is important to note that
although UHDPS facilitates the arrest process, there are many points of referral into the
judicial system, including Residential Life and Housing staff, faculty and staff referral,
and of course, the officers themselves.
Nature of the Violation
(Drug-Related)
Possession of Marijuana
Possession of Drug
Paraphernalia
Possession of Controlled
Substance
Smell of Marijuana
Page 16
Number of
Arrests
1/1/08 to
12/31/08
Number of
Arrests
1/1/09 to
3/31/09
54
14
35
6
17
11
10
26
Nature of the Violation
(Alcohol-Related)
Number of
Arrests
1/1/08 to
12/31/08
Number of
Arrests
1/1/09 to
3/31/09
Open Container
Minor in Possession of Alcohol
Furnishing Alcohol to a Minor
3
53
4
0
27
6
D. Dean of Students Judicial Summary: Judicial referrals are made to the Dean of
Students from many areas on campus including UHDPS, Residential Life and Housing,
faculty, and staff. Below is a summary of cases referred to the Dean of Students office
from calendar years 2008-2009 to 2009-2010 (incomplete year at time of reporting)..
Please note that there is likely overlap between the above table from UHDPS and this
data, as most of the police arrests are subsequently referred to the Dean of Students office
for sanctioning.
Nature of the Violation
Manufacture, Distribution, Sale,
Offer for Sale, or Possession of
Controlled Substances or Drug
Paraphernalia
Unauthorized Use of Alcoholic
Beverages
Public Intoxication
Number of
violations
09/01/08 to
08/31/09
Number of
violations
09/01/09 to
05/01/10
21
16 Male
5 Female
11
9 Male
2 Female
42
25 Male
17 Female
15
9 Male
6 Female
36
27 Male
9 Female
13
10 Male
3 Female
Page 17
VI. Evaluation of Prevention Programming: Program Impact
Campus-wide surveys have been implemented by UHW from academic years 2001 to
2004 (Survey of College Alcohol Norms and Behavior, EDC); academic year 2006
(Holistic Life Questionnaire with customized questions, National Wellness Institute); and
a campus specific instrument for each academic year from 2007 to 2010. As such, UHW
has documented data from the most recent surveys (2009 and 2010) as well as data from
one and six month follow-ups of IMAGE participants. The trend data for UH is noted in
the previous section. Additionally, however, UHW has implemented a research driven
alcohol prevention program (IMAGE) with the results reported below:
In the past academic year, UHW utilized a non-equivalent control group repeated
measures design (a quasi-experimental approach) to assess program impact for alcohol
use. Based on the strength of the non-equivalent groups design, UHW evaluated the
effectiveness of IMAGE by conducting analyses that utilized two separate comparison
groups. The first, which was a planned comparison included in the logic model,
compared students who self-identified on the campus-wide survey as IMAGE
participants by providing their unique code (the treatment group) with students who
completed the same campus-wide survey and self-identified as non-IMAGE participants
(the comparison group). The second non-equivalent comparison group was formed
naturally by IMAGE cohort students who completed a pre-test, but never participated in
the IMAGE session, and then later completed a 1-month and/or 6-month follow-up
assessment. Thus, analyses were conducted which compared IMAGE participants (who
completed pre-test, post-test, and 1-month and/or 6-month follow-up assessments) with
student members of the IMAGE cohort groups who were not exposed to the treatment but
completed baseline and follow-up assessments.
1. Campus-wide Survey Comparison Group:
A. Alcohol Frequency - Participation in the IMAGE session was found to be
statistically significant upon frequency of alcohol use based upon campus-wide survey
data. Specifically, students who self-identified on the campus-wide survey as IMAGE
participants (treatment group) were compared to students who self-identified as nonIMAGE participants (comparison group). A binary logistic regression was conducted
examining the impact of session attendance upon drinking less than once a week (target
behavior for frequency). Students who had participated in IMAGE were 1.67 times more
likely than students who did not attend a session to drink less than once a week (p<.06,
eB=1.67, Wald = 3.44). Interestingly, an even stronger effect was found on UNDERAGE
students, with underage students who attended an IMAGE session being 4.26 times more
likely to drink less than once a week (including not drinking at all) than underage
students who did not attend a session (p<.01, eB=4.26, Wald = 9.98). Thus, participation
in IMAGE statistically increased the odds that IMAGE participants would drink less
often than students who did not participate in IMAGE.
Page 18
B. Alcohol Quantity - Similarly, a statistically significant impact of session
attendance on quantity of use with underage students was found, when comparing
IMAGE versus non-IMAGE students using campus-wide survey data. Specifically, a
binary logistic regression was conducted examining the impact of session attendance
upon drinking 2 or fewer drinks per week (target behavior for quantity). Underage
students who participated in IMAGE were 3.30 times more likely to drink 2 or fewer
drinks per week than underage students who had not participated in a session (p<.01,
eB=3.30, Wald = 6.13). (The significance upon quantity was limited only to underage
students, however; there was not a statistically significant impact of session attendance
upon quantity in the population as a whole as evidenced by the logistic regression.)
Additionally, a separate binary logistic regression was conducted examining the impact
of session attendance upon abstinence. Students who participated in IMAGE were 1.53
times more likely to report drinking 0 drinks in a typical week than students who did not
participate in a session (p<.10, eB=1.534, Wald=2.74). Thus, participation in IMAGE
statistically increased the odds that IMAGE participants would drink fewer drinks per
week (including none at all) than students who did not participate in IMAGE.
C. Alcohol-related Negative Consequences – Finally, a statistically significant
impact of session attendance on alcohol-related negative consequences was found, when
comparing IMAGE versus non-IMAGE students using campus-wide survey data. A
binary logistic regression was conducted examining the impact of session attendance
upon alcohol-related negative consequences. Students who had not participated in an
IMAGE session were 1.86 times more likely to experience negative consequences than
students who did attend the session (p<.02, eB=1.862, Wald = 5.874). Again, IMAGE
session participation had an even greater impact on UNDERAGE students. Specifically,
underage students who did not attend an IMAGE session were 2.39 times more likely to
experience negative consequences than underage students who did participate in IMAGE
(p<.02, eB=2.39, Wald = 5.076). Thus, participation in IMAGE statistically increased the
odds that students would experience fewer negative consequences than students who did
not participate in IMAGE.
To summarize the campus-wide survey comparison group results, IMAGE was
found statistically significant in impacting alcohol frequency, quantity and negative
consequences; this clear indication of the success of IMAGE directly demonstrates the
impact of the intervention upon student drinking behavior when comparing IMAGE
participants with non-participants.
2. IMAGE Cohort Comparison Group:
A. Non-equivalent group considerations – As mentioned above, the natural
comparison group was formed by cohort students who completed a pre-test, but never
participated in the IMAGE session, then later completed a 1-month and/or 6-month
follow-up assessment. A selection bias threat to internal validity existed since the
comparison group was not randomly assigned and potentially self-selected out of the
treatment session, however a Chi Square analysis established a lack of significant
difference between comparison and treatment group. By establishing that the cohort
comparison group was not significantly different from IMAGE participants on these key
variables, researchers were able to minimize the selection bias threat to internal validity
Page 19
and proceed with analyses comparing their similar cohort counterparts who did not
participate in IMAGE.
B. Univariate relationships - Prior to conducting the analysis, responses were
collapsed into binary categories in order to maintain adequate cell sizes for the procedure.
Then, to examine the univariate relationships, Chi-Square analyses were executed
comparing the IMAGE sample’s self-reported frequency and quantity to that of the
comparison group.
A statistically significant reduction was found between pre-test and 6-month
alcohol quantity for IMAGE participants (χ2= 15.93, p<.001), while the comparison
group reported only slight quantity reductions (χ2= 2.83, p=.092). Thus, participation in
IMAGE resulted in stronger reductions in quantity of use for participants than for nonparticipants.
At the pre-test time point there was no statistical difference between the IMAGE
sample and the comparison group in terms of frequency (χ2= 2.14, p=.199). However,
the IMAGE sample increased their on target behavior (drinking less than once a week)
following the intervention, while the comparison sample decreased drinking at the on
target level (see Chart 1). This represents the strongest evidence that the treatment had a
causal effect in a quasi-experimental design, as the most common threats to internal
validity (including selection maturation, selection regression, selection bias, history, and
testing) do not apply as evidenced by the treatment group’s improvement and the
comparison group’s deterioration. Thus, although statements of causation are more often
associated with randomized experimental designs, results such as these when found in
quasi-experimental designs indicate the strongest possible likelihood that the treatment
(IMAGE) actually caused the subsequent change in behavior.
90
% On Target for Frequency
Chart 1.
85
80
IMAGE
75
Comparison
70
65
Pre‐test
6‐Month
To summarize, then, participation in IMAGE had a statistically significant impact
upon reductions in both frequency and quantity in the univariate sense which were
maintained 6 months post-treatment, and comparisons indicate that participation in
IMAGE resulted in the changes seen in the treatment group across time.
C. Multivariate effects - In order to examine multivariate effects, a repeated
measures binary logistic regression (Generalized Estimating Equations, GEE, analysis)
Page 20
was conducted examining the impact of gender, session attendance, and extent of selfprotective behavior implementation upon 6-month alcohol frequency resulting in further
confirmation of statistical significance of the impact of IMAGE. Specifically, IMAGE
sample participants were 2.73 times more likely to drink on target (less than once a
week) than the comparison cohort group which did not participate in IMAGE
(QICC=233.70, Wald =2.805, p<.10, eB=2.73). At the multivariate level the impact of
session attendance on alcohol quantity was non-significant.
Thus, based on these results, participation in the IMAGE program clearly resulted
in significantly reduced frequency and quantity by participants, because comparable
cohort students who did not participate in the program did not experience such changes in
behavior.
VII. Summary of Prevention Program Strengths and
Weaknesses/Challenges
The strength of the prevention program at the University of Houston continues to be
based on its use of NIAAA strategies, the comprehensive and collaborative nature of the
approach, and its evidence based, research driven interventions.
The University of Houston has built a strong internal network between departments and
among professional staff on campus in an effort to promote substance abuse prevention
on campus. Representatives from UH Wellness, Counseling and Psychological Services,
UH Health Center, Residential Life and Housing, the Department of Athletics, Campus
Activities, UH Department of Public Safety as well as faculty and student representation
meet regularly as part of the Substance Abuse Prevention Committee. Higher
administration is also involved in this network as a result of meetings of the Substance
Abuse Policy Review Committee. Additionally student organizations, primarily Cougar
Peer Educators (CPE), are involved in prevention programming and activities on the UH
campus. They are actively involved in the prevention activities of UH Wellness and they
develop and implement their own programming on campus and in the community.
Finally, UH Wellness collaborates with area consortiums focused on substance abuse
prevention.
Secondarily, UH Wellness, the unit which focuses much of its effort on substance abuse
prevention, not only utilizes programs that are based on the most current research and
theory related to prevention, but also documents its effectiveness in a variety of ways.
The campus wide survey, along with pre and post tests and follow up assessments
administered as part of the alcohol abuse prevention program, have allowed us to collect
data on quantity and frequency of use as well as associated negative consequences. The
data also suggests a relationship between the alcohol intervention and these constructs.
The most challenging aspect of the UH prevention effort comes from the difficulty in
reaching all students, given we are a large urban institution of 37,000 students. It is also
difficult to impact local servers of alcohol and/or advertising of alcohol to the campus
community. UH is located in a large urban community, with close to 200 bars and
restaurants serving alcohol within a five mile radius of campus. These establishments can
Page 21
advertise through the campus newspaper. The very nature of being located within such a
large community makes environmental impacts in this area more difficult.
Challenges will increase as the university moves toward more residential housing.
However, the university has been proactive in that UHW has been meeting regularly with
the staff of the new freshman housing (Cougar Village) opening next fall. UHW has
been requested to implement the IMAGE program for all students residing in the new
freshman housing facility. Additionally, conversations continue as there has been an
increase in implementation of IMAGE for Greek Life students and, as of this semester,
each athletic team will have participated as cohort groups in the IMAGE intervention
within the past three years.
VIII. Recommendations for Revising Prevention Program
The prevention program at the University of Houston has made great progress in the past
few years. We have data which demonstrates positive trends on campus and we have
strengthened our collaborative efforts. In terms of recommendations, the Substance
Abuse Prevention Committee has made several recommendations which are under
consideration. First, the committee has supported the presentation of the IMAGE
program during orientation for undergraduate students. Although orientation is located
within a new division this year, conversations with the new orientation staff have been
initiated. Second, the committee has recommended the use of a case manager to follow
more complex cases related to alcohol and other drugs on campus. A committee has been
established to review students who may fall into this category. UH Wellness is also
exploring options for drug prevention efforts that offer an opportunity to evaluate
outcomes in these areas to the same extent as they are able to do with alcohol prevention.
Page 22
Drug-Free Schools and Campuses Regulations (EDGAR Part 86)
Summary
Biennial Report 2010
Part II: Review of the Alcohol and Other Drug Policy
I. Members of the 2010 Biennial Policy Review Committee:
Dr. Elwyn Lee
Vice Chancellor/Vice President
Student Affairs Division
Diane Murphy
Associate Vice President
Student Affairs Division
Dr. Gail Gillan
Director for Learning
Learning and Assessment Services
Student Affairs Division
Gaylyn Gaddy Maurer
Outreach Counselor, UH Wellness
Learning and Assessment Services
Student Affairs Division
Joan Nelson
Executive Director
Human Resources Department
Administration and Finance Division
Dona Cornell &
Tom Tracy
Legal Affairs and General Counsel
Legal Affairs Division
Melissa Abram &
Myra Conley
Assistant Deans of Students
Student Affairs Division
Javier Hidalgo
Interim Executive Director
Residential Life and Housing
Student Affairs Division
Patrick Daniel
Executive Director
Learning and Assessment Services
Student Affairs Division
Rosemary Grimmett
Executive Director
Research Services
Division of Research
Floyd Robinson
Director
Health Center
Student Affairs Division
Dr. Norma Ngo
Director
Counseling and Psychological Services
Student Affairs Division
Malcolm Davis
Chief of Police
Administration and Finance Division
Dr. William Munson
Assoc VP Student Development/DOS
Student Affairs Division
Page 23
II. Policy Review Recommendations
The Policy Review process was efficient and there was representation from departments
within student affairs, human resources, grants and contracts, and legal counsel to the
university.
The primary recommendations were as follows:
1. In lieu of specific statistics that change over time, the policy continues to include
a link to the Higher Education Center website which updates these statistics
regularly (this change was made in the 2008 review).
2. Some minor changes in wording were made, but no major policy changes were
made.
3. It was determined that Human Resources and Student Affairs would continue to
co-facilitate this process.
Page 24
III. Revised Alcohol and Other Drug Policy (as of May 2010)
DRUG AND ALCOHOL
ABUSE PREVENTION POLICY
The University of Houston (the “University”) prohibits the unlawful possession, use,
manufacture, or distribution of illicit drugs in the workplace, on the campus, or at any
University activities. Penalties for violation of this policy are indicated below.
The Dangers of Drug or Alcohol Abuse in the Workplace and on the Campus
There are many employed individuals whose job performance and productivity are
adversely affected by their progressive dependence on drugs or alcohol. Much of this
cost is in lost wages, health care expenses, and workers compensation. Additionally, the
impact of drug use and high risk alcohol consumption for college students can not be
overlooked in terms of its cost to the individual students affected and the University. For
specific information related to alcohol and other drug consumption and consequences, go
to the Higher Education Center website at www.higheredcenter.org.
1. Definitions
The following terms are defined for the purposes of this policy and are important for
purposes of expressing the University’s policy on a drug-free workplace:
a. Controlled Substance means a controlled substance in schedules I through V of section
202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812), as further defined by regulations
at 21 CFR 1300.11 through 1300.15, and as defined in the Texas Controlled
Substances Act (Texas Health & Safety Code, 481.001 et seq).
b. Contract means a legal instrument reflecting a relationship between the federal
government and a recipient whenever the principal purpose of the instrument is the
acquisition by purchase, lease, or barter, of property or services for the direct benefit or
use of the federal government; or whenever an executive agency determines in a specific
instance that the use of a type of procurement contract is appropriate.
c. Conviction means finding of guilt (including a plea of
nolo contendere) or imposition of sentence, or both, by any judicial body charged with
the responsibility to determine violations of the federal or state criminal drug statutes.
d. Criminal drug statute means a federal or non-federal criminal statute involving the
manufacture, sale, distribution, dispensation, use, or possession of any controlled
substance.
e. Employee means an individual receiving a salary, wages, other compensation and/or
stipend support from the University.
Page 25
f. Federal agency or agency means any United States executive department, military
department, government corporation, government controlled corporation, or any other
establishment in the executive branch (including the Executive Office of the President),
or any independent regulatory agency.
g. Grant means an award of financial assistance, including a cooperative agreement, in
the form of money, or property in lieu of money, by a federal agency directly to a
grantee. The term grant includes block grant and entitlement grant programs, whether or
not exempted from coverage under the grants management government wide regulation
(“Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State
and Local Governments”). The term does not include technical assistance which
provides services instead of money, or other assistance in the form of loans, loan
guarantees, interest subsidies, insurance, or direct appropriations; or any veterans’
benefits to individuals; i.e., any benefit to veterans, their families, or survivors by virtue
of the service of a veteran in the Armed Forces of the United States.
h. Grantee means a legal entity which applies for or receives a grant or contract directly
from a federal agency.
i. Illicit drug use means the use, manufacture, sale, distribution, dispensation, or
possessionof illegal drugs and the abuse of other drugs and alcohol.
j. Student means an individual registered or enrolled for credit or non-credit in a course or
program offered by the University or any of its units.
k. University activities mean an activity officially sponsored by the University.
l. Workplace means the physical boundaries of the University and facilities owned or
controlled by the University.
2. Philosophy
The unlawful use of drugs or alcohol is inconsistent with the behavior expected of
members of the University community. The University is committed to the development
and maintenance of a drug-free environment on the campus as well as an environment
that prohibits the abuse of other drugs and alcohol and has a drug and alcohol abuse
prevention system in operation, accessible to all members of the University community.
The University is committed to the further expansion of that system and the
dissemination of drug awareness information to the members of the University
community. In addition, the University is committed to enforcing the provisions of the
Drug Free Workplace Act of 1989 and believes that these acts and their implementation
regulations provide a proper framework for the drug and alcohol abuse policies of the
University.
Page 26
3. Health Risks
Outlined below is a listing of drugs of abuse and their health risks taken from the U.S.
Drug Enforcement Administration website. A more complete and detailed accounting
may be found at their website at www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/abuse/chart.htm
Alcohol
Alcohol (beer, wine, or liquor) has a high potential for physical and psychological
dependence as well as resulting in increased tolerance. Possible effects include impaired
memory, slurred speech, drunken behavior, slow onset, vitamin deficiency, and organ
damage. Overdose may result in vomiting, respiratory depression, loss of consciousness,
and possible death. Withdrawal may include trembling, anxiety, insomnia, vitamin
deficiency, confusion, hallucinations, and convulsions.
Females who drink alcohol during pregnancy may give birth to infants with Fetal Alcohol
Syndrome. These infants have irreversible physical abnormalities and mental retardation.
In addition, research indicates that children of alcoholic parents are at greater risk than
other youngsters of becoming alcoholics. Alcohol use is often related to acquaintance
rape and failure to protect oneself from sexually transmitted diseases (STDs).
Additionally, alcohol-related accidents are the number one cause of death in the 16- to
24-year-old age group.
Narcotics
Narcotics (including heroin, morphine, hydrocodone, oxycodone, codeine, and others)
have a high potential for both physical and psychological dependence as well as resulting
in increased tolerance. The possible effects of using narcotics include euphoria,
drowsiness, respiratory depression, constricted pupils, and nausea. Overdose may result
in shallow breathing, clammy skin, convulsions, coma, and death. Withdrawal may
include irritability, tremors, panic, nausea, chills, and sweating.
Other Depressants
Other depressants (including GHB or liquid ecstasy, valium, xanax, ambien, and
barbituates) have a potential for both physical and psychological dependence as well as
resulting in increased tolerance. The possible side effects include slurred speech,
disorientation, appearance of intoxication, and impaired memory. Overdose may result in
shallow respiration, clammy skin, dilated pupils, weak and rapid pulse, coma and
possible death. Withdrawal may include anxiety, insomnia, tremors, delirium,
convulsions, and possible death.
Page 27
Stimulants
Stimulants (including cocaine, methamphetamine, and methylphenidate) have a possible
risk of physical dependence and high risk for psychological dependence. Tolerance can
develop in all stimulants. The possible side effects include increased alertness,
excitation, euphoria, increased pulse rate and blood pressure, insomnia, and decreased
appetite. Overdose may result in agitation, increased body temperature, hallucinations,
convulsions, and possible death. Withdrawal may result in apathy, long periods of sleep,
irritability, depression, and disorientation.
Hallucinogens
Hallucinogens (including MDMA, LSD, Phencyclidine, and others) are less likely to
result in physical dependence, with the exception of phencyclidines and analogs, and vary
in terms of psychological dependence, ranging from none to moderate (MDMA) to high
(phencyclidine and analogs). Tolerance can develop. Possible effects include heightened
senses, teeth grinding, and dehydration (MDMA and analogs) and hallucinations, altered
perception of time and distance in other types of hallucinogens. Overdose may result in
increased body temperature and cardiac arrest for MDMA and more intense episodes for
LSD. Some hallucinogens may result in muscle aches and depression when in
withdrawal (MDMA) or may result in drug seeking behavior.
Cannabis
Cannabis includes marijuana, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), and hashish or hashish oil.
All may result in moderate psychological dependence with THC resulting in physical
dependence. Tolerance can develop in all forms. Possible effects include euphoria,
relaxed inhibitions, increased appetite, and disorientation. Overdose may result in
fatigue, paranoia, and possible psychosis. Withdrawal may occasionally result in
insomnia, hyperactivity, and decreased appetite.
Anabolic Steroids
Anabolic Steroids (including testosterone and others) may result in psychological
dependence. Less is known as to their potential for physical dependence and increased
tolerance levels. Possible effects may include virilization, edema, testicular atrophy,
gymecomastia, acne, and aggressive behavior. Effects of overdose are unknown.
Withdrawal may possibly include depression.
Inhalants
Inhalants (including amyl and butyl nitrite, nitrous oxide, and others) vary in their level
of psychological dependence, with less known about their potential for physical
dependence and tolerance. Possible effects may include flushing, hypotension, and
headache, impaired memory, slurred speech, drunken behavior, slow onset, vitamin
deficiency, and organ damage. Overdose may result in methemoglobinemia, vomiting,
Page 28
respiratory depression, loss of consciousness, and possible death. Withdrawal may result
in agitation, trembling, anxiety, insomnia, vitamin deficiency, confusion, hallucinations,
and convulsions.
4. Penalties for Violation of the Policy
The University policy prohibiting the unlawful possession, use, or distribution of illicit
drugs and/or alcohol on the campus and at University-sponsored events held off campus
protects and supports the employees and students of the University of Houston.
Any employee admitting to or convicted of the unlawful possession, use, or distribution
of illicit drugs and alcohol on the campus or at university sponsored events held off
campus, will be subject to disciplinary action (up to and including termination), may be
referred for prosecution, and may be required to satisfactorily participate in a drug and
alcohol assistance or rehabilitation program, as agreed upon between the employee and
the Department of Human Resources. Further information concerning employee penalties
is available from the Department of Human Resources at 713-743-5770
Any student admitting to or proven to have violated the University of Houston’s Student
Disciplinary Policies and Procedures regarding the unlawful possession, use or
distribution of illicit drugs and alcohol on campus or at university sponsored events (see
Student Disciplinary Policies and Procedures Section) will be subject to disciplinary
action (up to and including expulsion), may be referred for prosecution, and may be
requested to satisfactorily participate in a drug and alcohol assistance or rehabilitation
program. Further information concerning student penalties is available from the Dean of
Students Office at 713-743-5470.
In addition, there are penalties under Texas and federal law. For more information on the
range of penalties, refer to the Dean of Students website at
www.uh.edu/dos/publications/flyers.php.
5. Employee and Student Assistance Programs
The University offers the following drug and alcohol abuse information, counseling,
assistance and services:
Information and Referral
All members of the University community are eligible to consult with the professional
staff of Counseling and Psychological
Services (CAPS) regarding the availability of drug abuse assistance programs. Drug and
alcohol abuse counseling and rehabilitation program referrals are routinely made to
mutual help organizations, private hospitals, public treatment programs, and private drug
treatment practitioners. CAPS also maintains a collection of resource materials pertinent
to issues of drug abuse. In addition, UH Wellness, the campus wide education and
Page 29
prevention program, provides education and prevention on alcohol/drug abuse and related
concerns for the University community and maintains a library of materials on substance
use and abuse.
Individual Counseling
Individuals are seen on a short-term basis for assistance with drug-related problems.
However, it is likely CAPS will make a referral for alcohol and drug dependence. This
service is available to students at no charge. Faculty and staff are able to receive shortterm evaluation and referral for such services.
Group Counseling
There is an Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) chapter which meets on campus periodically.
When unavailable on campus, referrals can be made to local AA or Narcotics
Anonymous (NA) chapter meetings with the Greater Houston Community. This service is
free to University of Houston students, faculty, and staff. You can also call AA
Intergroup at 713-686-6300 to get a referral to an AA group meeting near you.
Psycho-Educational Programs
On a periodic basis, group programs focusing on the development of strengths and skills
related to the effective management of drug related problem areas are offered by
Counseling and Psychological Service and UH Wellness. These programs are open to
University of Houston students, faculty and staff at no charge. UH Wellness offers an
evidence based alcohol education intervention to student groups every semester.
Additionally, a computer interactive program entitled Alcohol 101 Plus is available
through UH Wellness. UH Wellness conducts exit interviews for students who complete
the Marijuana 101 online workshop as a result of a disciplinary referral from the Dean of
Students Office. UH Wellness also offers an approved Alcohol Education Course for
Minors in Possession available to students who receive a court ordered citation or
referrals from the Dean of Students Office or other campus departments.
Mutual Health Groups
Individuals can be assisted in forming groups like Alcoholics Anonymous and Alanon
and information concerning these groups is maintained for dissemination to interested
persons.
Page 30
Houston Council on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse
This community resource offers short-term counseling for anyone affected in any way by
alcohol or other drug abuse. Trained alcohol and drug abuse counselors can help select a
12-step program (AA, Alanon, NA, Cocaine Anonymous (CA), etc.) and/or appropriate
treatment. Their address is 3333 Eastside, 713-520-5502. Further information regarding
these referrals may be secured from University of Houston
Counseling and Psychological Services located in Room 226 of the Student Service
Center, 713-743-5454.
6. Application of Policy
The Drug and Alcohol Abuse Prevention Policy is supported by a drug-free awareness
and alcohol education and prevention program available to the faculty, staff, and students
of the University. Specific compliance and reporting items enumerated below (items b, c,
d, e) are applicable to all persons employed on federal contracts and grants. In support of
this policy, the University:
a. has established a drug-free and alcohol abuse awareness program to inform its faculty,
staff, and students about the dangers of drug and alcohol abuse in the workplace, the
University’s policy of maintaining a drug free workplace and a workplace which
prohibits the illicit use of alcohol, available drug and alcohol counseling, rehabilitation,
and employee assistance programs, and the penalties that may be imposed upon
employees for drug and alcohol abuse violations.
b. will provide each student and employee a copy of this policy. In addition, all faculty,
staff, and students will be notified of this policy through appropriate publications.
c. will notify each university employee and each student that, as a condition of
employment on a federal grant or contract, the person, once so employed, must abide by
the terms of the policy, and must notify his/her supervisor and the Department of Human
Resources of any criminal drug statue conviction for a violation occurring in the
workplace no later than five (5) days after such conviction.
d. will notify the appropriate federal agency within ten (10) days after receiving notice of
criminal drug statute conviction of any university employee engaged in performance of
the grant or contract.
e. will impose sanctions on, or require the satisfactory participation in a drug abuse
assistance or rehabilitation program, by any employee so convicted.
Sanctions imposed on employees for violation of this policy may include suspension,
suspension without pay and termination.
f. will make a good faith effort to continue to maintain an environment that complies with
the Drug-Free Workplace Act 1988 and the Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act
Amendments of 1989.
Page 31
g. will conduct a biennial review of its programs to assess their effectiveness, what
changes need to be made, and to ensure the uniform application of sanctions to
employees and students.
7. Implementation
Implementation of this policy is a joint responsibility of the Department of Human
Resources, the Division of Research, the Police Department, the Office of Financial Aid
and the Division of Student Affairs. Notification of the program, including information
about health risks and sanctions for violation of the policy, will be provided annually to
students and employees. In addition, the University is committed to monitoring and
assessing the effectiveness of this policy and its programs. A biennial review of this
policy will be undertaken to determine its effectiveness and implement changes to the
policy and its programs if they are necessary and to ensure that its disciplinary standards
are consistently enforced.
Page 32
Biennial Review Report 2008
IV. Procedures for Annual Policy Distribution
This policy is distributed to all students (including transfer students) annually via e-mail in the
text of the Student Handbook, as well as in hard copy. It is distributed to all faculty and staff
through the annual required university training. A hard copy is given to new hires during
orientation. The policy is also available through the Dean of Students website and the Human
Resources website.
Page 33