SAMHSA was responsible for providing guidance to States to help them meet the
compliance goals of the Synar Regulation. This assistance began soon after the
statute’s enactment and included a wide range of expert advice and guidance.
Prior to the release of the implementation regulation, SAMHSA worked closely
with the CDC on the development of its Stop the Sale: Prevent the
Addiction guidance document. Intended for two audiences -- professionals in the
fields of tobacco control and public health and State agency staffs implementing
the Synar Regulation -- this document provides detailed information on
comprehensive prevention, education, control, and inspection activities.
SAMHSA developed a series of guidelines for the States to clarify the
implementation requirements, as well as to provide useful resources in support
of their efforts. These guidance documents and implementation protocols helped
codify the best of existing practice and provided each State with the tools
needed to implement the regulation successfully.
Sampling Design Guidelines
States were required to conduct valid probability samples of tobacco outlets in
order to determine each State’s baseline inspection failure or noncompliance
rate. To assist States in the task, SAMHSA developed the Sample Design
Guidance document in summer 1996. This product describes 10 protocols that
all States can follow in designing and implementing a scientifically valid,
random sample of outlets. The document covers all aspects of key sampling
issues, from developing a sampling frame to calculating standard errors and
standard deviations and establishing correct weighting statistics for results.
As States submitted sampling design plans in FFY 1997 SAPT Block Grant
applications, the sampling plans were given an expert review by a consulting
sampling statistician. Changes in sampling designs that were either required or
suggested were communicated to States, and technical assistance was available
for improving the plans.
Tobacco Outlet Inspection Guidelines
Each State is required to conduct random, unannounced inspections in order to
develop an inspection protocol that meets scientific standards and ensures the
safety of youth participants. To assist States in applying uniform, consistent
protocols, SAMHSA developed the Tobacco Outlet Inspection guidance
document in fall 1996 in collaboration with experts from other Federal agencies
such as the CDC, the FDA, and the National Cancer Institute (NCI), as well as
State and local agencies with experience conducting tobacco outlet inspections.
This document details pertinent aspects of involving minors in inspections (such
as age, gender, safety, and liability concerns), best practices for the purchase
attempts (type of tobacco product, location of tobacco in stores, time of day),
and data collection techniques with sample forms.
Inspections Training Video
To further assist State inspection efforts, SAMHSA developed a training video
and trainer’s manual, Teens Taking Action! This 20-minute video
presentation is designed to be the centerpiece of a day-long training for minors
who are to participate as tobacco outlet inspectors. The actors and narrators in
the video are teenagers who have experience in conducting youth tobacco access
inspections. The video appears in two versions: one for States that use a
"consummated buy" protocol, in which the teen attempts to purchase
tobacco and leaves the store with it, if successful, and one for States that use
an "unconsummated buy" protocol, in which the teen interrupts the
purchase attempt after the sale has been rung up by the clerk, claiming
insufficient funds. A 5-minute recruiting and informational video is also being
developed to introduce parents, community leaders, law enforcement personnel,
and merchants to the inspections process. The accompanying guide for adult
trainers features special attention to local protocols and circumstances and a
wide range of suggested role playing and training scenarios.
Enforcement and Change Strategies Guide
While consistent and vigorous enforcement of State youth access laws is believed
to be the primary way to reduce tobacco sales to underage youth and keep rates
of tobacco sales to youth low, research shows that there are a number of
additional strategies that contribute to reducing youth access to tobacco.
SAMHSA developed and published a document titled Strategies for Reducing
Sales of Tobacco Products to Minors in fall 1996, which describes four basic
approaches to reducing youth access. The guide discusses law enforcement
techniques, local and State policy and legislative strategies, media and
community involvement scenarios, and merchant education programs that are
effective adjuncts to enforcement in reducing youth access to and use of tobacco
products.
Synar Regulation Implementation and Enforcement Guide
Another resource document, Enforcement of Tobacco-Sales Laws: Guidance From
Experience in the Field, is now being developed for release in winter 1998.
This new product is a synthesis of expert reviews of all State enforcement plans
along with direct input from more than two dozen States. It outlines major
barriers States have identified in implementing the regulation and the
strategies used to overcome them and includes selected State illustrations. This
document should encourage and enhance State-to-State technical assistance
efforts.
Each State is responsible for presenting to SAMHSA a baseline violation rate of
tobacco sales to minors in its FFY 1997 SAPT Block Grant application, based on
FFY 1996 work. Each State must also negotiate yearly targets as it progresses
toward a maximum violation rate of 20 percent for compliance with the Synar law.
As mentioned in the preliminary analysis section above, baseline sales rates for
the delayed applicability States will be based on their FFY 1997 tobacco sales
data to be reported in their FFY 1998 block grant applications.
In establishing a uniform strategy, SAMHSA developed a structure for negotiating
interim performance measures (given the block grant funding mechanism) that will
establish achievable targets for each State, provided States put forth a
reasonable effort to comply. Given that there are multiple uses of the SAPT
Block Grant and that the penalty for noncompliance with the Synar Legislation is
placed on the Single State Authority for substance abuse in the States, SAMHSA’s
priority is to support the States in their efforts to reduce sales of tobacco to
youth, rather than to take away prevention and treatment resources.
SAMHSA reviewed the literature to determine reasonable reductions in tobacco
sales to minors violation rates over time (see the section above on pre- and
post-Synar Legislation rates). The analysis shows that before active
enforcement, community violation rates typically begin at approximately 75
percent. With active enforcement, communities were able to reduce their
violation rates approximately 15-20 percentage points
per year, until they reached 40 percent. Other communities that began their
studies with violation rates of approximately 40 percent saw reductions of
approximately 10 percentage points per year after active enforcement began.
Numerous studies demonstrate that violation rates can fall below 15 percent when
coupled with penalties, community education efforts, and merchant education,
except for vending machines, where no single intervention has had the same
dramatic effect on the sales rate. Finally, SAMHSA assumed that as States
approach the 20-percent goal, the size of reductions in violation rates would
diminish by similarly smaller rates.
Using these guidelines, SAMHSA established the following framework for
negotiating the interim performance measures with the States:
States with baseline violation rates above 60 percent would be given approximately 2 years to reduce their rates to 40 percent and approximately 3 years to reduce their rates to 20 percent.
States with baseline violation rates between 45 and 60 percent would be given approximately 1 year to reduce their rates to 40 percent and approximately 3 years to reduce their rates to 20 percent.
States with baseline violation rates between 30 and 40 percent would be given approximately 3 years to reduce their violation rates to 20 percent.
States with baseline violation rates below 30 percent would be given approximately 2 years to reduce their violation rates to 20 percent.
SAMHSA’s intent is to provide the States with targets that are achievable and
fair. In setting these targets, SAMHSA identified a number of obstacles to
meeting the requirements of the rule. The major barriers faced by most States
were the lack of a complete and accurate list of retail outlets (i.e., sampling
frame) and the need to establish uniform inspection protocols. These and other
obstacles have the potential to bias the study results. As States correct these
biases over time, the possibility arises that reported violation rates may
fluctuate as the inspection surveys become more precise. To control for this,
SAMHSA requested detailed sampling design information from the States in order
to negotiate interim performance measures that reflect the research, as well as
the individual State’s limitations.
FFY 1997 Baseline Rates and Negotiated Targets
Summary. As reported in FFY 1997 block grant applications, all required
States have submitted baseline sales rates. These violation rates ranged from
7.2 percent to 72.7 percent. States with the lowest baseline rates were found to
have engaged in significant enforcement activities over a period of several
years prior to implementation of the Synar Legislation.
The median State baseline sales rate for FFY 1997 was 40 percent. Baseline rates
for eight States were above 50 percent. Baseline rates for 11 States were at or
below 30 percent. It should be mentioned again that differences in sample design
methods make it difficult to do cross-State comparisons of baseline rates. (See
figure 2 above and map 1 in the appendix.)
Among the eight Federal jurisdictions covered by the Synar Regulation, baseline
sales rates ranged between 34.6 percent and 95.1 percent. The physical location
and cultural environment of these island areas require that traditional
enforcement and education be adapted and tailored in specific ways for them to
comply with the Synar Regulation requirements. SAMHSA is working to provide this
assistance.
Negotiated Interim Rates. In FFY 1997, four States were already at or
below 20 percent, based on data reported in block grant applications.* They are
Florida, Maine, New Hampshire, and Washington. They have all engaged in numerous
activities to facilitate a reduction in rates of tobacco sales to minors,
including significant law enforcement efforts, as well as merchant education,
community support and media advocacy, and policy and regulatory approaches.
By FFY 1999, three more States -- Delaware, Rhode Island, Vermont -- are
targeted to reach the 20-percent goal. Fifteen additional States are targeted to
reach the 20-percent goal by FFY 2000. Based on current targets, all States will
have achieved the 20-percent goal by FFY 2003. Some jurisdictions will
not achieve the 20-percent goal until 2004. Table 1 lists the year each State
will reach this goal. Map 2 in the appendix presents this information for the
States. Achievement of the interim targets and of the final goal of a maximum
20-percent failure rate will depend greatly on the consistency of law
enforcement. SAMHSA has been working carefully with the States and Federal
jurisdictions on key law enforcement activities. These activities include
conducting inspections, facilitating strong interagency collaboration, issuing
citations and other penalties, and training minors as inspectors.
Table 1. When Will States and Jurisdictions Reach the 20-Percent Target?
Note: The FFY in this table refers to the SAPT Block Grant application year in which the results are officially reported. The data reflect retailer compliance requirements met in the previous fiscal year.
Today
(FFY 97 Baseline)
State
20 Percent (FFY)
35.0 %
Alabama
2000
34.3 %
Alaska
2000
56.0 %
Arizona
2001
*
Arkansas
*
29.3 %
California
2000
41.3 %
Colorado
2000
69.7 %
Connecticut
2002
29.3 %
Delaware
1999
42.3 %
District of Columbia
2001
7.2 %
Florida
1997
48.0 %
Georgia
2001
44.5 %
Hawaii
2001
56.2 %
Idaho
2001
43.5 %
Illinois
2001
39.0 %
Indiana
2001
40.1 %
Iowa
2000
63.0 %
Kansas
2002
*
Kentucky
*
72.7 %
Louisiana
2002
16.7 %
Maine
1997
54.3 %
Maryland
2001
30.3 %
Massachusetts
2000
40.7 %
Michigan
2001
30.2 %
Minnesota
2000
40.0 %
Mississippi
2001
40.3 %
Missouri
2000
*
Montana
*
39.0 %
Nebraska
2000
*
Nevada
*
15.7 %
New Hampshire
1997
44.4 %
New Jersey
2001
30.0 %
New Mexico
2000
38.0 %
New York
2000
49.7 %
North Carolina
2002
*
North Dakota
*
34.0 %
Ohio
2000
48.3 %
Oklahoma
2001
*
Oregon
*
55.6 %
Pennsylvania
2001
30.0 %
Rhode Island
1999
35.0 %
South Carolina
2001
31.0 %
South Dakota
2000
62.9 %
Tennessee
2002
*
Texas
*
35.0 %
Utah
2000
27.5 %
Vermont
1999
43.6 %
Virginia
2000
19.8 %
Washington
1997
37.0 %
West Virginia
2000
46.8 %
Wisconsin
2001
42.0 %
Wyoming
2001
46.7 %
American Samoa
2001
60.0 %
Guam
2002
**
Marshall Islands
**
57.9 %
Micronesia
2001
95.1 %
Northern Marianas
2004
90.0 %
Palau
2004
90.7 %
Puerto Rico
2003
34.6 %
Virgin Islands
2000
* Seven states (Arkansas, Kentucky, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota,
Oregon, and Texas) had legislatures that did not meet in 1993 or
1994. Congress granted these states one extra year (delayed
applicability) to develop baseline rates and negotiate targets.
SAMHSA expects that all states will achieve the 20- percent goal by
2003.
** Because of financial difficulties and difficulties in identifying
outlets, the baseline rate for the Marshall Islands is being
revised.
State Inspection Protocols
For many States, the protocol for conducting inspections of retail tobacco
outlets is not prescribed by law. Where State law specifies the inspection
protocol, there is minimal uniformity between States. This lack of uniformity
across States makes determining a national sales rate impossible. The protocols
used by each State, however, must be consistent from year to year in order to
generate results that are comparable over time. Consequently, SAMHSA has worked
closely with the States to ensure that a scientifically valid protocol for
inspections would be employed while remaining within the limits of individual
State laws.
Age and Gender of Participants. The age of youth participating in
retailer compliance checks ranges primarily from 14 to 17 years, the age range
recommended by SAMHSA (15- and 16-year-olds are considered best practice). A few
States included some 12- and 13-year-olds. States involving minors below age 14
were required to provide justification for this protocol. In most cases,
inspections conducted by minors under 14 were not used to calculate overall
sales rates. In most States, there was a roughly even distribution of male and
female minors involved in inspections. All youth were accompanied by at least
one adult escort. This escort may have been a police officer, government
inspector, adult volunteer, or other local or State government employee. Escorts
witnessed each purchase attempt and documented what occurred during the
transaction for reporting purposes.
Consummated vs. Unconsummated Buys. Inspections under the Synar
Regulation follow either "consummated" or "unconsummated"
buy protocols. (See figure 3 below and map 3 in the appendix. A list of States
that prohibit minors from purchasing, possessing, or using tobacco but allow
them to participate in law enforcement activities is provided in table A4 in the
appendix.)
Inspections that employ the consummated buy protocol allow for the actual
purchase of tobacco products by the youth inspector. That is, the inspection is
considered completed after the youth inspector requests, pays for, and leaves
the retail premises with the tobacco product.
In contrast, inspections that employ the unconsummated buy protocol consist of
minors requesting or attempting to purchase a tobacco product, but once the
product is "rung up" on the cash register or the clerk requests
payment, the minor truthfully states that he or she does not have sufficient
money to pay for the product. The minor then leaves the retail premises. In
cases where the inspection involves a vending machine, the unconsummated buy
protocol involves minors inserting an insufficient amount of money into the
machine, pulling the lever for a tobacco product, and then retrieving the
inserted coins. For inspection purposes, the unconsummated buy protocol allows
for the determination of a willingness to violate the youth access law
or, in the case of vending machines, the ability to purchase tobacco without
interception by the employee responsible for the sale.
The implications of using either the consummated or unconsummated buy protocol
are significantly different. In States where the consummated buy protocol is
employed for Synar Regulation compliance checks there is a potential for the
imposition of penalties, and, in fact, many States follow up with warnings or
citations for violations of the law. In States where the unconsummated buy
protocol is employed, there is some question as to whether a violation of the
law has occurred. Consequently, retailers who demonstrate a willingness to
violate the law may or may not be formally sanctioned.
Minors vs. Youthful-Looking Adults. In an effort to distinguish enforcement of the State youth access law from enforcement of the Synar Regulation, two States, Idaho and Wyoming, employ a consummated buy protocol involving youthful-looking adults as tobacco product purchasers. Since the purchasers are of legal age, this protocol generally allows for only an assessment of retailer practices. The adults (defined as 18 years old and over) who participate in this type of compliance check have been determined by panels of experts (e.g., school teachers, youth workers, etc.) to appear to be within the 14- to 17-year-old age range.
As with inspections that employ an unconsummated buy protocol, in inspections
that involve youthful-looking adults as purchasers, there is some question as to
whether a violation of the law has occurred. Consequently, retailers who sell
tobacco to inspector-purchasers without requesting photo identification of age
may or may not be penalized under State law.
As reported in FFY 1997 State block grant applications, 34 States employed the
consummated buy protocol involving minors during Synar Regulation inspections.
Two States employed the consummated buy protocol with the use of
youthful-looking adults. Fourteen States and the District of Columbia employed
the unconsummated buy protocol. In light of what is permissible under the
respective State laws, most of the delayed applicability States may employ
consummated buy protocols. Several States have recently or are currently
attempting to revise their laws to allow minors to purchase tobacco products
during compliance checks. Consequently, in the future more States will employ
consummated buy protocols during Synar Regulation inspections and other
enforcement actions.
3. Promoting Interagency Collaboration
Central to SAMHSA’s efforts has been the development of active, collaborative
relationships with State and Federal agencies responsible for addressing the
prevention and control of youth tobacco use.
SAMHSA has worked directly with all the major Federal and private sector
services and organizations in the tobacco prevention and control movement. All
guidance documents were reviewed and approved by CDC, FDA, and NCI prior to
final editing and distribution. Ideas and materials have been freely shared and
used by agencies. The prior experience of CDC in involving minors in inspections
and with developing sampling designs was incorporated into SAMHSA sampling and
training documents. The FDA is using a modified version of the tobacco outlet
inspection protocols developed by SAMHSA as part of its enforcement efforts.
SAMHSA was a sponsor of the 1997 National Tobacco and Health Conference along
with other Federal and private agencies.
4. Monitoring State Compliance With the Synar Regulation
SAMHSA monitors State activities to comply specifically with the tobacco control
portions of the SAPT Block Grant through a number of initiatives. The agency
performs the following activities:
Provides States with detailed instructions on the information necessary for completing the applications through its guidance materials;
Provides input and review from program staff, ongoing discussion with State agency directors, as well as feedback from experts in the fields of sampling and inspections through its application review structure;
Conducts site visits to assess and review the work performed under the State block grant; and
Evaluates each State’s Synar Regulation implementation activities, suggesting ways to strengthen them.
Legislative Changes Since the Synar Regulation
Preemption. In their FFY 1997 block grant applications, States reported
no new tobacco control laws that preempt local jurisdictions from enacting
tobacco control ordinances that are stricter than those of the States. A
preemption clause bars local ordinances from being more stringent than State
laws. Twenty States currently have preemption clauses in their tobacco access
legislation, as shown in figure 4 and in map 4 in the appendix: Delaware,
Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New
Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota,
Tennessee, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. Preemptive legislation
was introduced during 1996 in several States, usually through an amendment
proposed for new bills on tobacco control. Most of these efforts were
unsuccessful. Five States that blocked preemption clauses are Arizona, Colorado,
Minnesota, Nebraska, and Utah. Preemptive legislation was passed into law only
in Indiana in 1996, when the Governor’s veto was overridden. One State, North
Carolina, excepts vending machines from preemption. In contrast, Oregon preempts
localities from placing greater restrictions on vending machines than the State.
Attempts to repeal preemptive legislation in Wisconsin failed.
State Enforcement Agencies. According to CDC data from April 1992, only
18 States had designated an agency, department, office, or governing body as
responsible for monitoring compliance with tobacco access laws. Since the Synar
Legislation was passed, an agency has been designated in all States either by
State law or gubernatorial appointment. Changes in State legislation reported by
States in their FFY 1997 block grant applications are displayed in the final
section of the appendix.
Licensing Requirements. Licensure laws allow States to develop and
maintain accurate lists of outlets for inspection and enforcement purposes. They
also allow for effective distribution of educational materials to merchants
regarding compliance with the law. As will be discussed in the section on
enforcement issues, several States earmark licensing fees for retailer education
and/or youth access law enforcement.
Statewide Licensing. Prior to the Synar Regulation (1996), 30 States had
some form of State or local licensing for retail tobacco vendors. Data compiled
from the FFY 1997 block grant applications, NCI, and informal telephone
interviews with State directors of Single State Authorities show that this
number has increased to 32, including 3 that mandate local licensing, as shown
in figure 5 below and map 5 in the appendix. Since the passage of the Synar
Legislation and the release of the Synar Regulation, States have increased their
efforts to lower their rates of tobacco sales to youth through legislated
licensing. Table A3, The Synar Regulation -- State Licensing and Enforcement (see
appendix), shows how licensing is being applied in support of tobacco access
laws.
The three States that mandate local issuance of retail tobacco licenses are
Iowa, Nebraska, and Vermont. Vermont details special circumstances under which a
State license must be acquired instead of a local license.
Nineteen States have no current requirements for retail tobacco licensing at the
State level. Hawaii and West Virginia had State licensing laws pending when they
submitted their FFY 1997 block grant applications.
Vending Machine Licensing. Thirty-three States and the District of
Columbia require some form of licensing for tobacco vending machines (see figure
6 and map 6 in the appendix). In Connecticut and North Carolina, tobacco vending
machine licenses are issued to the distributor. Eleven States (Delaware,
Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Rhode
Island, and Texas) and the District of Columbia issue the licenses for groups of
machines. In the remaining 22 States, a license is required for each machine.
Three States (Idaho, Ohio, and Wisconsin) make no distinction in licensing
requirements for over-the-counter and vending machine outlets.
States reported various unique applications of vending machine licenses. Among
the applications reported were lifetime licenses, portable licenses that allow
vendors to sublet the license anywhere in the State, special circumstances under
which a distributor may obtain a license while submitting only a list of vending
machine locations, or the requirement that localities must determine whether
license applications may be made for a group or for individual machines.
Vending Machine Restrictions. Previous studies have indicated that
vending machines, as opposed to over-the-counter outlets, are a primary source
of tobacco for minors. Restricting minors'
access to tobacco vending machines -- and enforcing these restrictions -- are
therefore important activities in reducing tobacco sales to minors. The limited
data available prior to the Synar Regulation suggested that barely a third of
the States placed any type of licensing or restriction on the placement or
availability of vending machines. Review of the FFY 1997 SAPT Block Grant
applications showed that less than a year after the release of the Synar
Regulation, more than three-quarters of the States had restricted the placement
of vending machines (see figure 7 below and map 7 in the appendix).
Vending machine restrictions can take various forms, including placing machines
only in locations that are inaccessible to minors, requiring over-the-counter
purchase of tokens to operate machines, using locking devices that require the
assistance of a salesclerk, or requiring machines to be placed within the
line-of-sight of an employee responsible for the sale. Most States with tobacco
vending machine licensing specify the site or location of the machines in the
license.
Some cities in Massachusetts and Minnesota have placed a total ban on tobacco
vending machines. Four States have legislation pending that would place a total
ban on tobacco vending machines (Maryland, Montana, New Hampshire, and
Oklahoma).
Enforcement Issues
The Synar Legislation does not specify the types of enforcement activities a
State must engage in while conducting annual, random retailer inspections. That
is, it does not require that stores found in violation during the yearly random
Synar Regulation survey be penalized, only that enforcement occur. However, many
States report that they combine the survey activity mandated by the Synar
Regulation with traditional law enforcement. For many of these States, this
combination of Synar Regulation surveys with law enforcement forced a
reexamination of a number of issues related to how the youth access law
facilitates or hinders the practical application of the Synar Regulation. For
example, it has been found that law enforcement operations conducted
simultaneously with survey inspections could influence survey results by tipping
off other retailers in the area. Other issues are described below.
Criminal Penalties. Thirty-seven States may impose criminal penalties on
violators of the youth access law, including seven that also permit civil
penalties. (See figure 8 below and map 8 in the appendix.) These criminal
penalties vary among the States and include minor charges (e.g., infraction,
misdemeanor), charges with small or large fines, imprisonment, and sentencing to
"hard labor." In States where criminal penalties are imposed by the
law, there is often resistance to enforcing the law. This resistance may come
from police officers who believe that, in light of more pressing crimes,
enforcement of the youth access law is not a priority. Prosecutors often fail to
prosecute violators because of overburdened court dockets, and judges often fail
to impose penalties because they perceive these penalties to be overly severe.
While the use of peace officers and graduated criminal penalties can facilitate
more support for enforcement, in general, enthusiasm for enforcing youth access
laws with criminal penalties tends to be low.
Civil Penalties. Twenty-one States may impose civil penalties (usually
fines) on violators of the youth access law. This figure includes seven States
that also permit criminal penalties. A civil penalty structure frequently
coincides with authorization of peace officers to enforce the law. Civil
penalties also require administrative rather than court adjudication.
Consequently, there are fewer competing interests involved in the efforts to
enforce the law. The establishment of graduated civil penalties (reserving
harsher penalties or higher fines for repeat offenders) often nullifies most
opposition from those charged with the responsibility of enforcing and applying
the law.
Violator Status: Vendor or Clerk. Most States impose the penalty for
violation of the youth access law against the salesclerk. However, at least 28
States also impose penalties on license holders. When senior retail employees or
license holders can be held responsible for violations of the law, compliance
with the law tends to increase. The reason for this is twofold. Store owners and
managers communicate the need for better compliance with the law, and they often
take action with their salesclerks who violate the law, making clerks more
vigilant.
License Revocation or Suspension. Apart from criminal or civil penalties
that are imposed against individuals, businesses that violate the law can also
be negatively sanctioned. Negative sanctions against businesses generally appear
in the form of license suspension or revocation, often only after several repeat
offenses. Of the 34 States that currently mandate some form of retailer
licensing, 22 permit license suspension or revocation for violations of the
youth access law.
Revenue Allocation: Fees and Fines. In light of the financial costs
incurred in conducting Synar Regulation inspections and traditional law
enforcement, several States earmark all or a portion of the licensing fees,
fines, tobacco tax, or other taxes for retailer education and/or youth access
law enforcement. Such an arrangement ensures that at least some funding is
available each year for enforcement. According to FFY 1997 SAPT Block Grant
applications, nine States allocated some portion of revenues derived from fines,
fees, or taxes for law enforcement activity (Arizona, Florida, Kansas, Kentucky,
Massachusetts, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, and South Carolina).
5. Providing Technical Assistance to the States
As part of the SAMHSA/Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP) Prevention
Technical Assistance and Training to the States contract, activities have been
developed to address States’ needs specific to the Synar Regulation. SAMHSA held
two national technical assistance workshops on implementation of the Synar
Regulation, in February and November 1996. In addition, SAMHSA provides
individualized technical assistance to States on specific issues identified by
the State and the government project officer.
Recently, in order to learn more about potential impediments to States’
implementation of the Synar Regulation, SAMHSA held two additional, small
technical assistance workshops, during which States had the opportunity to
discuss the barriers to enforcement and potential strategies to address them.
The results of these discussions are being integrated into plans for the annual
national meeting, during which issues of concern to all States will be addressed
and States will have the opportunity to share information with each other.
In cases where States require individualized guidance, SAMHSA provides technical
assistance to address issues unique to a given situation. Topics for this kind
of technical assistance have included sampling design, community support and
mobilization, and interagency collaboration. In circumstances where several
States have similar impediments to implementation, SAMHSA plans to provide
multistate technical assistance events, where States can work with each other
and with experts to resolve their issues.
SAMHSA is currently developing an overall strategic plan for technical
assistance on the Synar Regulation in order to continue to translate current
knowledge into technical assistance and application for the reduction of tobacco
sales to minors.
Specific areas of greatest need for technical assistance among States in the
first phase of Synar Regulation implementation were:
Developing accurate and reliable sampling frames (lists of vendors),
Understanding and implementing complex statistical requirements (weighting, standard errors, and standard deviations),
Making the case for stronger laws and enforcement policies,
Incorporating the elements of model merchant education programs, and
SAMHSA is responsible for providing States with knowledge and assistance on
effective strategies for complying with the Synar Regulation, as well as for
analyzing and interpreting the data to advance the field.
Evaluation of the Impact of the Synar Regulation
In addition to analyzing the best enforcement strategies for use in developing
materials and informing the tobacco control debate, SAMHSA intends to use data
from the FFY 1998 State sampling surveys and enforcement strategies, along with
other national youth tobacco use survey data, to compare the implementation of
the Synar Regulation with trends in youth tobacco use.
SimSmoke: Policy Interventions Computer Model
A unique prevention policy tool is in its initial development and eventually
will be able to model the interactive effects of policy interventions on health
consequences. The current version of "SimSmoke," which will be
available for training demonstrations in spring 1998, will model the effects of
various levels of pricing and taxation of tobacco products on health outcomes
for various age and ethnic groups over time. This initial model will also
contain research data to demonstrate the interactive effects on health and
smoking outcomes of policy interventions regarding youth access to tobacco. The
potential of this model as a policy tool for prevention decisionmakers is
extraordinary. It will help prevention professionals determine the simultaneous,
interactive effects of a variety of policy interventions on smoking patterns and
subsequent health outcomes in a way that expert panels or reviews of current
research literature alone cannot.
Additional Topics
Additional areas of potential collaborative work include activities to:
Assess or measure the effects of tobacco control activities on risk factors and problem indicators associated with substance abuse;
Measure the effectiveness of specific enforcement efforts (point-of-purchase, perceived risk, etc.) on minors, especially as they relate to tobacco use; and
Enhance the relationships among various national and State tobacco control activities.
Site Map
Help
Account
Cart
Home
