1. JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
Breathalyser Initiative Results Analysis
Author Jamie Bamfield / Inspector Ed Brown / Inspector Darren Brooks
JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
RESTRICTED

2. JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
Contents
Title
Slide Number
Introduction 3
Breathalyser Test Results 4
Impact Study - Violent and Sexual Crime 5
Impact Study - Section 27, CAD and Anti-Social Behaviour
Alcohol Harm Initiative - Web Content 6
Twitter Comments 7
JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
RESTRICTED

3. JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
Introduction
Drunkenness is a key factor in offending within the night time economy. It is an offence to serve alcohol to somebody who is drunk. It is also an offence for an individual to be found ‘drunk’ within a licensed premises.
However, these two offences are rarely prosecuted. ‘Drunkenness’ has been a subjective measure.
Licensees have said that ‘pre-loading’ of cheap, supermarket alcohol is a bigger contributory factor towards alcohol related offending than poor management within the premises and any irresponsible sales.
Evidence of intoxication may not be fully apparent when people first arrive at a venue, particularly when they have drunk rapidly just before going out. It is recognised that staff working in this industry are particularly transient and investment in training is likely to have minimal long term effect or be extremely costly.
It was proposed to run an initiative whereby licensed premises in Norwich City Centre were provided with a calibrated alcohol breath test screening device to use on customers at the point of entry.
It was proposed to run this initial pilot initiative from December 1st to December 31st and venues would agree to conduct random breath tests and refuse entry to any person who provided a sample in excess of an agreed figure. We would request that venues record their results for analysis.
If the project proved successful in reducing alcohol related crime and disorder then it would provide an evidence base for applying to the Licensing Authority for problem premises to have the condition added as part of their license. Furthermore, it was hoped that other premises would continue to operate the scheme as a valuable tool in reducing alcohol related crime and disorder.
This would then require the costs to be the responsibility of the licensee rather than the police and become deliverable as a sustainable solution.
JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
RESTRICTED

4. JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
IMPACT STUDY – Breath Testing
KEY FINDINGS
The initiative was carried out during December venues participated although, disappointingly, only 13 provided written results (right). The remaining venues stated that door supervisors were too busy to complete the record sheets although they did claim to actively use the devices.
Chicago's 36
Essence 33
Fluke 28
Loft 49
Mantra 4
Mercy XS 31
New York New York 97
Platinum Lace 70
Qube
Sugar and Spice
128
The Glasshouse 81
Vodka Revolution 13
Waterfront 2
605 records of breath tests administered.
Of those tested 463 (77%) were male and 142 (23%) were female
The average blown in tests was 64ug. (Drink Drive Limit is 35ug)
Males on average blew higher than woman; an average of 66ug for men compared to 57ug for women.
327 people were recorded as being refused entry due to the testing (54%)
60% of males tested were refused entry whereas only 36% of females
The spreadsheet containing all this data can be found here.
Inferences:
Significant volumes of alcohol are consumed prior to entry to licensed premises
Is there significance to why more males were tested than females? Does this suggest that licensed premises are more keen to exclude drunk males?
Recommendations:
More comprehensive analysis would have been possible had all venues recorded results of the initiative as originally agreed.
It would have been beneficial to have the names of persons who failed the screening tests to ascertain whether they went on to commit offences.
Information as to whether persons refused entry went home or sought access to other licensed premises would have been desirable.
JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
RESTRICTED

5. JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
IMPACT STUDY – Violent and Sexual Crime
KEY FINDINGS ONLY
Crime - Crime figures have been obtained using the same methodology that is applied to the two weekly Nightsafe report for the NTE TCG. That methodology can be found here.
There was a 32.6% reduction in offences of violence and sexual violence during the pilot period. There were 29 crimes of violence and sexual offences in 2013 compared to 43 in 2012 and 40 in 2011.
There were only two public order offences recorded in December 2013 compared to 8 during December 2012.
CAD – As the table shows there is no real fluctuation in terms of CAD numbers as a whole or calls for service for anti-social behaviour during the period.
Section 27s – There was only a small increase in the number of Direction to Leave (Section 27 notices) during December over weekends in the Norwich night time economy area (70) As a comparison December last year saw 62 directions given within the same time frame.
Drunk and Disorderly - The pilot scheme saw a significant reduction in the number of persons arrested in the Norwich night time economy for being drunk and disorderly (9). This represents a 66% reduction from November 2013 (22).
Time Period
Number of CADs
ASB CADs
2011
155 36
2012
119 19
2013
125 31
Inferences:
Violence and sexual offences fell significantly during the pilot period aswell as offences for drunk and disorderly. This may be linked to the ‘breathalyser’ initiative discouraging the public from excessive drinking
Recommendations:
Consideration needs to be given to exactly what types of crime this work will impact upon in future so more detailed results analysis can be undertaken.
JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
RESTRICTED

6. JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
SURVEY RESULTS - Quantitative
A survey was sent out following the conclusion of the initiative asking for feedback from the premises involved. Fifteen premises responded. Below is a summary of the quantitative responses. The percentages are of the total respondents of which there were 21.
100% said the breathalyser was easy to use and at least 85% said it was reliable quick and they understood the reading.
100% of door supervisors were happy to use the device and more than 65% said it aided them in identifying people who were drunk.
43% of responders set a limit on entry which was usually between 70ug and 80ug.
62% do not want a prescribed alcohol limited for entry to premises.
At least 75% believed customers were happy to take the test and 65% believe they were then happy with the decision that was made (note that doesn’t account for whether the decision was positive or negative).
70% said the devices helped resolve any conflicts at the door.
More than 85% said the initiative was successful and that it should continue.
80% said it promoted Norwich as a good night out.
95% said it promotes the good partnership working between licensed premises and responsible authorities.
95% said they would recommend it to other premises as a method of combatting alcohol related incidents.
Inferences:
Responses suggested that there was reluctance to endorse an ‘alcohol limit’ for entry to premises. The trade are keen to work in partnership with the police but also have one eye on the future as to what might happen beyond this pilot
Recommendations
The sample size is relatively small. Consider making the survey available to the public and provide ‘links’ the survey on marketing material regarding the scheme if it continues
JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
RESTRICTED

7. JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
SURVEY RESULTS - Qualitative
A survey was sent out following the conclusion of the initiative asking for feedback from the premises involved. Fifteen premises responded. Below is a summary of the qualitative responses. The percentages are of the total respondents of which there were 21.
‘The device was very easy to use. The only thing that could make it better from a Door Supervisor point of view is if we were able to adjust the levels to the FAIL as it did confuse some people when it failed them but we allowed entry as they were only just over the set drink drive limit’
‘The device was used across the spectrum on people who would have been refused entry anyway as they were obviously intoxicated, to those who appeared sober. It gave a good insight into how much people were actually drinking before they arrived at the clubs later in the evening’
‘The device aided the doormen in confirming to the customer that they were intoxicated and also showed a level of vigilance that the club will not accept people who are 'drunk' in the venue.’
‘Did the breathalyser identify anyone to be drunk that we hadn't already identified, no. However, it was a priceless tool in removing the conflict on at point of entry to those that were to be refused entry due to their levels of in-drink’
‘The device helped identify intoxication if we were unsure. Also people quite often asked if the device was used at the venue as they had failed it at a previous venue so we already had a good idea of how much they had drunk. Also the device helped to show customers that they were drunk when they stubbornly refused to accept our judgment, so used the device to prove that they had had too much and they could no longer argue. I think the device helps with my job’.
‘This questionnaire places a lot of emphasis on "within" the venue, however a large proportion of conflict is external to the premises, most certainly at point of admission. With the smoking area located directly outside the premises, if an individual is refused entry there is a proportionate chance that conflict will occur as that individual has an audience. The use of the breathalyser negated ALL conflicts of that nature as customers simply could not argue with a machine. To a degree it removed all variables from the situation and was thoroughly taken advantage of by my team. The entire team at fluke would like to continue to use the breathalyser certainly for the remainder of the year.’
Recommendations
Take feedback from venues to develop a best practice guide as to use of the breathalyser. The pilot operation was inconsistent in determining who would be breathalysed. Without an evidence base there was little motivations for premises to participate.
Could consideration be given to running a test event at a premises to monitor intoxication levels on entry / exit together with officer observation as to the effect on those individuals? This would strengthen the evidence base.
JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
RESTRICTED

8. JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
Alcohol Harm Initiative – Web Content
The initiative was advertised on numerous occasions, and received a good amount of public interest both locally and nationally:
National Media – The initiative received a lot of interest from national newspapers. The Independent had a specific article on the initiative and The Guardian cited it as a potential solution to problems elsewhere in the country. Some club owners in Norwich even stated that the initiative was already being picked up on by patrons who were asking to be tested to show they were sober enough to enter.
Local Media -
Article in the EDP about the injury to a PC recently and suggestions that the initiative may help to lower numbers of violent crime in the NTE in addition to a general article about the initiative and its aims.
Online Media –
The only markedly negative report in relation to the initiative was from It stated that the initiative was trying to police the youth too much and they needed to make mistakes to learn. It closed with the paragraph:
“Like so many other areas of everyday life, our Saturday nights out are in danger of being regulated out of existence. If we continue to try and protect young people from making mistakes and bad decisions how are they ever going to learn, have experiences and grow up? Let’s keep the breathalysers and the busybodies out of our nightlife and let the good times keep rolling - louts and all.”
JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
RESTRICTED

9. JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
Twitter Comments
Period: 30/11/13 – 01/01/14
Activity:
9 tweets
12RTs
3 conversations
30/11 - Tonight and for the whole of December you may be asked to provide a big #DeepBreath to get into a bar in Norwich... (5RT)
01/12 - Lots of people taking a #DeepBreath in the city as they are breathalysed on the way into bars. The 'fish bowl' at home not such a bright idea (1RT)
01/12 - At the end of a busy night in the city... Thanks to those premises trialling the breathalysers... It did seem to resolve any arguments!
13/12 - Preloaded? Remember you may be asked to take a big #DeepBreath  before getting in the bars in Norwich tonight #alcoholharm
14/12 - Blotto? It could be you....chosen to take a #DeepBreath on the club door. Make sure your night doesn't end before it's begun #KnowYourLimits
21/12 -#DeepBreath for some trying to get into clubs and bars in the City. They can't serve you if you're already drunk#itsthelaw
22/12 - Breathalysers in clubs give an indication of your sobriety. It could be you taking a #DeepBreath. Clubs trying to change culture of #alcoholharm
31/12 - Heading out tonight? You may be asked by clubs to blow into a breathalyser before you get in. They can't serve you if you're drunk! #DeepBreath (5RT)
31/12 - Blotto?It could be you...asked to take a breath test tonight on your way into the clubs. It's illegal to serve alcohol to drunks #deepbreath (1RT)
Inferences:
Limited activity on social media meant that there was neglible impact on the operation.
Recommendations
Given the widespread media coverage and national interest (the scheme will be presented at the ACPO Harm Reduction Conference in March 2014), there appears to have been a missed opportunity. Should the scheme continue, further consideration will need to be given to market the initiative more widely / effectively
JOINT PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT
RESTRICTED