gis in prevention, county profiles, series 3 6. risk factors: community risk factors – laws &...

1 GIS in Prevention, County Profiles, Series 3

6. Risk Factors: Community Risk Factors – Laws & Norms

GIS in Prevention County Profiles Series, No. 3

Franklin County, Indiana

Barbara Seitz de Martinez, PhD, MLS, CPP

The Indiana Prevention Resource Center at Indiana University is funded, in part, by a contract with the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration, Division of Mental Health and Addiction, financially supported through HHS/Substance Abuse Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant. The IPRC is operated by the Department of Applied Health Science and The School of Health, Physical Education and Recreation.

THE INDIANA PREVENTION RESOURCE CENTER

GIS in Prevention, County Profiles, Series 3


GIS in Prevention County Profile Series, No. 3

Franklin County, Indiana

Barbara Seitz de Martinez, PhD, MLS, CPP

Project Staff:

Indiana Prevention Resource Center

Opinions expressed herein are those of the authors, and not necessarily those of the Trustees of Indiana University or the Division of Mental Health and Addiction. Indiana University accepts full Responsibility for the content of this publication. ©2005 The Trustees of Indiana University. Permission is extended to reproduce this County Profile for non-profit educational purposes. All other rights reserved.

Ritika Bhawal, MPHSolomon BriggsKyoungsun Heo, MPASrinivasa Konchada



6.6 - 6.15 Archival Risk Factors

Community Risk Factors: Laws & Norms

• Introduction: Community Laws/Norms• HH Spending on Alcohol• HH Spending on Tobacco• Adult Tobacco Behavior• Tobacco Production • Intensity of Inspection (TRIP)• Gambling Locations• Adult Gambling Behaviors• Hoosier Lottery Statistics

Community Risk Factors: Transitions & Mobility

• Crime Statistics: Introduction

• Crime Indices: Main Categories

• Crime Indices: Specific Crimes

• FBI UCR – All Arrests

• FBI UCR – Juvenile Arrests

• Alcohol Related Crashes

• More Alcohol Related Crashes

• Net Migration (Domestic and International)



Introduction: Community Risk Factors

A child’s view of normal is critically impacted by the child’s environment: the sights, sounds, tastes, textures, and smells of the child’s world: “Infants participate, from birth on, in sociocultural activities that are committed to cultural goals and values . . .” (Keller, et al. 2004) If the child grows up seeing drugs and drug use portrayed in a positive manner on local billboards and local television and modeled at home and elsewhere in the child’s community, the presence of drugs (and hence potential availability) and use of drugs easily becomes the child’s norm. In this circumstance logic suggests it would be “norm-al” for the child to have the expectation that later in life he or she, too, for better or worse, may use drugs. As success tends to beget success, and good parenting practices tend to be replicated by the children raised in that environment, so unfortunately, those who are abused are more likely to become abusers, and those raised in a climate of drug use are more likely to become users.

The smell of cigarettes, the feel of icy beer bottles and of delicate wine glasses, song lyrics glamorizing drug use, and the over-use of over-the-counter or prescription medications to eliminate every small discomfort creates a notion of normal that impacts the child’s expectations of human behavior, including his or her own. In some instances, it can be difficult to separate family norms and community norms. Many factors contribute to the creation of community norms, including family traditions, public policies, and law enforcement practices. In general, community norms will be the outcome of the beliefs and practices of all the community’s governmental, educational, social, religious, and business enterprises.

Drug use modeling by adults in a community creates an environment that is more hospitable and encouraging of drug use by youth. This modeling takes place within and outside of the home. Since the statistics don’t separate adults from family settings from other adults, we have included adult behaviors with regard to drugs as a community indicator and simply mention it again in the context of family indicators. Still, clearly, this information from a community has strong implications for family settings as well, since one could assume that a significant number of those adults live in family settings. Each County Profile contains several maps and tables comparing the block groups in a county for the counts and percents of adults who smoke cigarettes or cigars, drink alcohol, or gamble. Where possible, indicator data is given in terms of per household amounts.

Heide Keller, et al., 2004 “The Bio-Culture of Parenting: Evidence from Five Cultural Communities,” Parenting: Science and Practice 4/1 (2004):25-50.



6.6 Household Spending on Alcohol

The following table presents per household spending on alcohol for the year for this county, the state and the nation.

Table 6.6: Per Household Spending on Alcohol (AGS, Consumer Spending 2004, 2005)

Per Household Spending on Alcohol, 2004 est. (AGS, 2005)

Franklin Co. Indiana U.S.

Consumer spending on alcoholic beverages 439 439 460

Spending on Alcohol for Consumption outside the Home 187 188 197

Beer and ale away from home 62 62 65

Wine away from home 29 29 30

Whiskey away from home 47 48 50

Alcohol On Out-Of-Town Trips 49 49 52

Spending on Alcohol for Consumption in the Home 251 250 261

Beer and ale at home 146 145 152

Wine at home 60 60 63

Whiskey and other liquor at home 45 45 46



Map: Spending on Beer/Ale for Home

AGS, Consumer Spending,2004 est., 2005

Indiana Prevention Resource Center



6.7 Household Spending on Tobacco

The following table shows per household spending on tobacco products. To give a better perspective we will compare this figure to household spending on miscellaneous reading materials and personal insurance.

Table 6.7: Per Household Spending on Tobacco Products, Miscellaneous Reading and Personal Insurance (AGS, Consumer Spending 2004, 2005)

Per Household Spending on Tobacco, 2004, est. (AGS, 2005)

County Franklin Co. Indiana U.S.

Per Household Spending on Tobacco Products 433 428 443

Cigarettes 393 388 400

Other Tobacco Products 40 41 44

Per Household Spending on Misc. Reading 244 245 257

Newspapers 109 109 114

Magazines 52 52 54

Books 84 84 88

Personal insurance 526 523 552



6.8 Tobacco Production

Many counties in Indiana produce tobacco. Economic dependence upon tobacco influences community norms regarding smoking. It is therefore important to take into account which counties produce tobacco, the prevalence of production, number of farms producing tobacco, acres in tobacco production, and pounds of tobacco harvested. If the county does not produce tobacco, the rest of this page will be empty.

Table 6.8: Tobacco Production, 2002. Source: Department of Agriculture, 2006. http://www.nass.usda.gov/census/census02/volume1/in/st18_2_023_023.pdf

Tobacco Production, 2002 (Department of Agriculture, 2006)

Franklin Indiana

Farms 73 1282

Rank 2

Acres 210 4034

Rank 2

Pounds 308,640 7,411,634

Rank 2

Farms Irrigated 3 57

Acres Irrigated 3 317



6.9 Youth Access to Tobacco

The IPRC is grateful to Sergeant Poindexter, State Director of the Indiana Tobacco Retailer Inspection Program (TRIP) and to Desiree Goetze, Coordinator of TRIP at the Indiana Prevention Resource Center, and to the staff and police officers of TRIP for all the support they have given to this project.

The IPRC has studied the TRIP data generously made available by the Indiana State Excise Police and has created two additional statistical measurements:

1) for the intensity of inspections (the number of inspections relative to the total number of outlets);

2) for the number of inspections per capita for the population of youth most likely to seek access to tobacco, (i.e., youth ages 10-17).

Intensity of inspection can be viewed as one of many possible indicators of the degree of a county’s involvement in activities to create or maintain a community norm that youth access to tobacco is not tolerated.



6.9 Intensity of Inspection (TRIP)

Table 6.9: Intensity of TRIP Inspections and Related Statistics, Calculations for 2004 Based on Data from the TRIP Program (ATC, Indiana State Excise Police, 2005)

This table presents summary information relevant to the Tobacco Retail Inspection Program (TRIP) and tobacco access for minors. The Intensity of Inspection is one indicator of the degree of determination to establish and maintain a social norm of “no tolerance” for the sale of tobacco to minors and youth access to tobacco. This table also includes rankings of key variables.

TRIP Inspection Data, Franklin Co. (using data for 2004 from IN State Excise Police), ATC 2005

County Name Franklin Indiana

Intensity of Inspection 0.04 1.50

No of Inspections per 1,000 Youth, 10-17 0.35 10.30

Population Age, 10-17 2,878 720,070

Total Population 22,956 6,230,346

Total No. of Tobacco Retail Outlets 28 4938

Total Inspections Completed 1 7416

Failed Inspections 0 981

Percent, Failed Inspections 0.00% 13.23%

Percent, Passed Inspections 100.00% 86.77%

Ranking (1-78) for % Failed Inspections 78

Ranking (1-78) for % Passed Inspections 1



6.10 Gambling Casinos & Race Tracks

The presence of gambling establishments -- like the presence of tobacco and alcohol outlets, billboards and other forms of advertising – provides information on community environment and, because of the relationship between gambling and ATOD use, would appear to be an indicator of risk for ATOD problems in a community. Below is a listing of casinos and horse-racing establishments located in this county. The rest of the page will be blank if there are no casinos or horse-racing establishments in this county.



6.11a Adult Gambling Behavior

Like the modeling of smoking and drinking, gambling by adults sets a tone for youth expectations about what it means to be an adult. This report includes maps and tables detailing gambling behaviors by persons 18 and older. The following tables describe gambling and related leisure activities by persons ages 18 and over. Also included is a ranking for any casino gambling.

Table 6.11a.1: Adult Gambling Behaviors (Casino Gambling) (MRI, Consumer Behavior Lifestyle 2004, 2005)

Adult Gambling Behaviors, 2004 est. (2005) Percent of Households

County Franklin Indiana U.S.

Current Year Estimated Households 9,414 2,465,349 112,708,665

Casino Gambling (Any) 19 19.6 19.5

Atlantic City gambling 2.2 4.2 4.3

Las Vegas gambling 4.6 5.8 6.4

Mississippi Gulf Coast gambling 1.3 1.4 1.3

Reno gambling 1.3 1.2 1.3

Other casino gambling 11.9 9.6 8.7

Rank for Any Casino Gambling 60 27th of 51



Casino Gambling

Source: AGS Consumer Behavior, 2004 (2005)Indiana Prevention Resource Center



6.11b Adult Gambling Behavior

The following table compares the percent of households which engaged in leisure activities related to gambling (playing bingo, playing cards, and attending horseraces) in this county compared to the state and nation.

Table 6.11b.2: Leisure Activities by Household (bingo, playing cards, attending horse races) (MRI, Consumer Behavior Lifestyle 2004, 2005)

Leisure Activities, 2004 est. (2005) Percent of Households

County Franklin Indiana U.S.

Current Year Estimated Households 9,414 2,465,349 112,708,665

Play bingo 3.7 3.5 3.7

Play cards 23.4 21.9 21.3

Attend Horse Races 2.7 3 3



Playing Bingo

Source: AGS Consumer Behavior, 2004 (2005)Indiana Prevention Resource Center



6.11c Gambling: Hoosier Lottery Sales

The following statistics show Hoosier Lottery sales by zip code for this county from the fiscal year.

Table 6.11c: Hoosier Lottery Sales by Zip Code, Fiscal Year 2004 (Hoosier Lottery, 2005)

Hoosier Lottery Sales by Zip Code for Franklin County for Fiscal Year 2004 (Hoosier Lottery)

Zip Code City Scratch Off Draw Pull-Tabs TOTAL

47003 W COLLEGE CORNER $67,531 $421,987 $10,584 $500,102

47012 BROOKVILLE $583,248 $411,438 $39,480 $1,034,166

47024 LAUREL $29,285 $23,882 $840 $54,007

County Totals: $680,064 $857,307 $50,904 $1,588,275

IN Totals: $422,608,706 $291,464,296 $18,897,312 $732,970,314



6.12 Crime Statistics: Introduction

People prefer to reside and businesses prefer to locate where they feel safe to move about, to study and to work. Levels of criminal activity in an area constitute an environmental influence on many aspects of life. People plan their lives taking into account levels of danger associated with activities. How late at night is it safe to be out? on foot? by car? alone? with a group?

For a child, the nature of their environment and the behaviors of their family, friends, neighbors, classmates, and community members strongly contribute to the child’s view of the world and of human nature, and to the child’s expectations for his or her own future behaviors and fate. If people close to the child model criminal behaviors or are often victims of the same, the child will likely hold expectations, including fears, of encountering similar future circumstances.

Hence crime statistics are a useful insight into the character of a place and are important to consider in prevention planning. A prevention program needs to be conducted in a safe place and at a time when it is safe for people to attend. The prevention professionals planning the program could consider specific activities designed to confront, enhance, or offer alternatives to norms and role modeling prevalent in the child’s world.

Data about crimes, arrests and convictions is not collected in any one central location in the state of Indiana at this time.



One of the best sources of data available for Indiana at this time is the Crime Risk database published by AGS, who use the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report. Because the level and methods of reporting information to the FBI vary by jurisdiction, information about specific crimes should be viewed as a general indicator rather than for exact precision or exact comparisons.

The AGS Crime Risk Index describes the risk of various types of crime in a given geographic area (e.g., city or state) by comparing the rate of crime in that location to the rate of crime in the nation as a whole. The crime rate for the U.S. is set to 100 for all crimes. Hence a rate of 200 means that the risk of crime in that place is twice as high as for the nation as a whole. (Think of these numbers not as counts of criminal incidents, but as degrees of risk. Hence, an index of 200 means that while the risk of this crime is x per 1000 persons for the nation as a whole, it is 2x per 1000 for the community in question). The following table shows the Crime Indices for Total Crime, Property Crime and Personal Crime. This table shows indices for this county, compared to Indiana and the nation.

6.12a Crime Indices

Table 6.12a: Total Crime, Property Crime, and Personal Crime Indices, 2004. (AGS Crime Risk 2004, 2005)

Crime Indices, 2004 (AGS, 2005, based on FBI UCR)

County Franklin Indiana U.S. IN Rank in US

Total Crime Index 12 93 101 30th of 51

Personal Crime Index 11 74 101 26th of 51

Property Crimes 10 110 102 27th of 51



The following table shows the ranking of this county among Indiana’s 92 counties, and the ranking of Indiana relative to the 50 states and the District of Columbia.

6.12a Crime Indices -- Rankings

Table 6.12a: Total Crime, Property Crime, and Personal Crime Indices, 2004. (AGS Crime Risk 2004, 2005)

Crime Indices, 2004 (AGS, 2005, based on FBI UCR) -- Rankings

Franklin IN Rank in US

Rank Total Crime Index 83 30th of 51

Rank Personal Crime 82 26th of 51

Rank Property Crimes 78 27th of 51



Map: Total Crime IndicesBottom Quarter, Middle Range, Highest Quarter (above 56, above IN & over US)

Above US (7), 101.55-208

Above IN (10), 93.55-208

Top Quarter (22), 56-208

Mid Range (48), 20-56

Lowest Quarter (22), 7-20

AGS, Crime Indices2004 (2005)Indiana Prevention Resource Center



Map: Personal Crime IndicesBottom Quarter; Mid Range (17-42); Top Quarter (above 42, above IN, above US)

Above US (2), 101.55-183

Above IN (6), 74.55-183


Mid Range (46), 17-42





Map: Property Crime IndicesBottom Quarter, Mid Range, Top Quarter (includes over IN & over US)

Above US (9), 101.55-194

Above IN (12), 95.55-194


Mid Range (46), 19-64





6.12b Crime Indices – Specific Crimes

The following table shows the Crime Indices for specific property and personal crimes. The method is to compare the risk in a given location to the general crime risk for the nation as a whole. We see that in the context of the U.S., Indiana is generally safer than other places for risk of robbery, but is more dangerous for risk of murder. See the Appendix Glossary for definitions of these crimes. This table shows indices for this county, compared to Indiana and the nation (which is the point of comparison) and rankings comparing this county to the other 92 counties.

Table 6.12b: Specific Crimes, Indices (AGS Crime Risk 2004, 2005)

Crime Indices, 2004 (AGS, 2005, based on FBI UCR)

Franklin Indiana US

Personal Crime Index 11 74 101

Murder Index 9 107 100

Rape Index 23 94 101

Robbery Index 5 76 101

Assault Index 15 70 101

Property Crime Index 10 110 102

Burglary Index 15 98 102

Larceny Index 9 109 102

Motor Vehicle Theft Index 5 142 101



6.12b Crime Indices – Specific Crimes – Rankings

The following table shows the ranking of this county among Indiana’s 92 counties, and the ranking of

Indiana relative to the 50 states and the District of Columbia.

Table 6.12b: Specific Crimes, Indices (AGS Crime Risk 2004, 2005)

Crime Indices, 2004 (AGS, 2005, based on FBI UCR) -- Rankings

Franklin IN Rank in US

Rank Personal Crime 82 26th of 51

Rank Murder 77 18th of 51

Rank Rape 73 28th of 51

Rank Robbery 73 25th of 51

Rank Assault 69 29th of 51

Rank Property Crime 78 27th of 51

Rank Burglary 77 21st of 51

Rank Larceny 75 24th of 51

Rank Motor Vehicle Theft 82 7th of 51



6.13a FBI UCR: All Arrests

The following data is from the FBI Uniform Crime Report as published by the University of Virginia Library website. Below are data for all arrests for crimes, including drug arrests, for the indicated year and rankings comparing this county to the other 92 counties.

Table 6.13a: All Arrests, including Drug Arrests, 2003 (FBI Uniform Crime Reports, 2005, from http://www.virginia.edu/library/FBI, September 2005).

FBI UCR All Arrests, 2002:2005 Franklin

Coverage 87.2768

Alcohol-Related Arrests

Liquor Law Violation 74

Driving Under the Influence 74

Drunkenness 33

Drug Possession: 13

Marijuana 9

Opium/Cocaine 1

Other Drug Possession 2

Other Dangerous Narcotic 0

Synthetic Drug Possession 1

FBI UCR All Arrests, 2002:2005 Franklin

Sale/Manufacturing of Drugs 2

Marijuana Sale/Manufacture 1

Opium/Cocaine Sale/Manufacture 1

Synthetic Drug Sale/Manufacture 0

Gambling 0

Sexual Offenses

Prostitution & Communication 0

Sex Offenses 1

Select Behaviors

Disorderly Conduct 10

Runaway Juveniles 5

Weapons Violations 4



6.13b FBI UCR: Juvenile Arrests

Table 6.13b Juvenile Arrests, including Drug Arrests, 2003 (FBI Uniform Crime Reports, 2005, from http://www.virginia.edu/library/FBI, September 2005).

The following data is from the FBI Uniform Crime Report as published by the University of Virginia Library website. Below are data for juvenile arrests for crimes, including drug arrests, for the indicated year and rankings comparing this county to the other 92 counties.

Juvenile Arrests, FBI UCR, 2002 (2004) Franklin

Drug Abuse Sale/Manufacture 0

Marijuana Sale/Manufacture 0

Opium/Cocaine Sale/Manufacture 0

Synthetic Drug Sale/Manufacture 0

Drug Abuse Violations - Total 3

Gambling 0

Select Behaviors:

Disorderly Conduct 1

Runaway Juveniles 5

Sex Offenses 0

Weapons Violations 0

Juvenile Arrests, FBI UCR, 2002 (2004) Franklin

Coverage 87.2768

Number of Agencies in County Report Arrests 3

Total Co. Population - Agencies Reporting Arrests

21111

Alcohol-Related Arrests:

Liquor Law Violation 13

Driving Under the Influence 0

Drunkenness 1

Drug Possession (Subtotal) 3

Marijuana Possession 2

Opium/Cocaine Possession 0

Other Drug Possession 0

Other Dangerous Non-Narcotics 0

Synthetic Narcotics Possession 0



6.14 Alcohol-Related Crashes

The Indiana Council on Drugged and Dangerous Driving through the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute publishes crash data for each county. The most recent of data on drivers involved in fatal crashes by blood alcohol content of the driver are included in the following tables:

Table 6.14a.: Drivers Involved in Fatal Crashes by Blood Alcohol Content of the Driver, 2001 (Indiana Criminal Justice Institute, 2003)

Alcohol Related Crashes, FARS, 2004 data (2006)

County FRANKLIN Indiana

BAC 0 (No.) 4 648

BAC 0 (%) 67 68

BAC .01-.07(No.) 0 45

BAC .01-.07(%) 0 5

BAC .08 (No.) 2 254

BAC .08 (%) 33 27

Total Alc-Related Killed (No.) 2 299

Total Alc-Related Killed (%) 33 32

Total Killed (No.) 6 947

Total Killed (%) 100 100



6.14 Alcohol-Related Crashes

The Indiana Council on Drugged and Dangerous Driving through the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute publishes crash data for each county. The following table compares figures for 1994 and 2001 for the estimated percent of alcohol-related fatalities and drivers with BAC 0.08 or greater in fatal crashes.

Franklin County, Alcohol and Fatal Crash Information by Year, Gender and Age, FARS (2005)

Year Gender AgeCat

Fatality Alcohol Positive Crash

Fatality Alcohol Negative

CrashDrinking

DriverDriver Not Drinking

2003 Male Ages 12 thru 17 0 1 0 1

2003 Male Ages 21 thru 29 1 1 0 1

2003 Male Ages 30 thru 34 1 0 1 0

2003 Male Ages 35 thru 54 0 1 0.1 1.9

2003 Female Ages 18 thru 20 0.1 0.9 1 0

2003 Female Ages 21 thru 29 0 1 0 1

2003 Female Ages 35 thru 54 0 1

Table 6.14b: Estimated Percent of Alcohol-Related Fatalities and Drivers with BAC 0.08 or Greater in Fatal Crashes, 2005 (Indiana Criminal Justice Institute) .



6.15 Net Migration

Periods of transition and frequent mobility are risk factors for substance abuse and other problems. Examples include the period of transition from middle school to high school, and from high school to college or work. Moving creates a period of transition and places a person at higher risk, e.g., moving from one neighborhood to another, from place to place or from job to job, or from incarceration to life in the community. For studies of a local neighborhood, the Department of Education web site offers information on retention and drop-out or transfers from neighborhood schools. The IYI web site offers data for the county on graduation rates, drop out rates, etc.

Table 6.15: Net Migration (U.S. Census Bureau, 2005)

Community Risk Factors: Transitions & Migration

An excellent indicator of the “transitions and mobility” indicator is the figure for net migration. Data for domestic and international migration from the U.S. Census Bureau is summarized in the following table.

Transitions

& Mobility

Net Migration, 2003 to 2004 (U.S. Census Bureau, via STATS Indiana, 2006)

Franklin Indiana

Net Domestic Migration (change 2002 to 2003) 25 -3082

Net International Migration (change 2002 to 2003) 1 10841

Natural Increase (Births Minus Deaths ) 25 30062

gis in prevention, county profiles, series 3 6. risk factors: community risk factors – laws &...

Documents

childs community

franklin county

indiana family

substance abuse prevention

trustees of indiana

indiana barbara seitz

childs norm

childs environment