1. Gambling among Minnesota Youth out of the Mainstream: Alternative Schools and Juvenile Corrections Randy Stinchfield, Ph.D. Department of Psychiatry University of Minnesota Medical School

2. Acknowledgements  This research was c  This research was conducted with funds from the State of Minnesota to the Northstar Problem Gambling Alliance, Roseville, Minnesota.  This research is part of the mission of Northstar Problem Gambling Alliance to provide current information about gambling and problem gambling in the State of Minnesota  The Minnesota Student Survey data was provided by public school students, alternative school students and youth in juvenile corrections in Minnesota and managed by the Minnesota Student Survey Interagency Team (2010).  Thank you to Cathie Perrault, executive director, and the board of directors of the Northstar Problem Gambling Alliance for their helpful reviews

3. Youth Gambling  We need to have accurate estimates of the prevalence of youth gambling and problem gambling  Most of what we know about youth gambling comes from school surveys and telephone surveys  These methods primarily contact youth enrolled and attending public school; and youth living at home with their parents/guardians  What about gambling by youth who are not in public schools or who are not living at home?  If these youth were included in youth gambling surveys, how would they effect rates of youth gambling and problem gambling?  MSS was administered to youth in Alternative Schools (AS) and Juvenile Corrections (JC)

4. Research Questions   Do more Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections youth gamble than Public School Students?   Do more Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections youth gamble frequently than their Public School peers?   Do more underage Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections youth gamble on legalized games than their Public School peers?   Are more Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections youth gambling now than in the past?   Are more Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections youth gambling frequently now than in the past?   Do more underage Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections youth gamble now, than in the past?   Do more Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections youth have gambling problems than their Public School peers?  How does gambling compare to other risky behaviors in these two youth groups?

5. Commercial Gambling in Minnesota  More than 3,000 lottery retail outlets  More than 3,000 charitable gambling sites  18 tribal casinos  Two racetracks with card rooms  Advertising on television, radio, newspaper, billboards, and at sporting events

6. Three Specific Aims 1. Compare Alternative School, Juvenile Correction, and Public School students on 2010 rates of any gambling, frequent gambling and underage gambling 2. C 2. Compare the three groups on gambling trends over time, from 1992 to 2010, specifically comparing rates of any gambling, frequent gambling, and underage gambling. 3. Compare Alternative School, Juvenile Correction, and Public School students on two problem gambling items, last administered in 2004; and compare rates of endorsement of these two items from 1992 to 2004

7. MSS Gambling Frequency Items  During the last 12 months, how often have you done these activities?  Played cards for money  Bet money on games of personal skill like pool, golf, or bowling  Bet money on sports teams  Bought lottery tickets or scratch offs  Gambled in a casino (added in 1998)  Gambled for money online (added in 2007)  Five point response options are:  Not at all; less than once a month; about once a month; about once a week; daily

8. MSS Two Gambling Problem Items from SOGS-RA (last administered in 2004)  During the last 12 months:  1. Have you ever felt bad about the amount you bet, or about what happens when you bet money?  2. Have you ever felt that you would like to stop betting money but didn’t think you could?  Response options: Yes; No; I don’t bet for money

9. Alternative School, Juvenile Corrections and Public School Samples for 2010 Groups N Alternative Schools 4,105 Juvenile Corrections 522 Public Schools 79,370

10. Alternative School (AS), Juvenile Corrections (JC) and Public School (PS) Samples from 1992 to 2010 YearASJCPS 19922,34444775,859 19953,57385273,939 19983,61699478,582 20013,15271880,912 20043,08372783,774 20072,60755483,318 20104,10552279,370

11. First Specific Aim  Compare Alternative School, Juvenile Correction, and Public School students on 2010 rates of any gambling, frequent gambling and underage gambling

12. Comparison of Boys Alternative School, Juvenile Correction and Public School Students on any Gambling for each game (2010)

13. Comparison of Girls Alternative School, Juvenile Correction and Public School Students on any Gambling for each game (2010)

14. Summary of Comparison of Alternative School, Juvenile Correction and Public School Students on any Gambling  Alternative School and Juvenile Correction boys had similar rates of any gambling as Public School boys  Alternative School and Juvenile Correction girls had higher rates of any gambling than Public School girls

15. Comparison of Boys Alternative School, Juvenile Correction and Public School Students on Frequent (weekly or daily) Gambling for each game (2010)

16. Comparison of Girls Alternative School, Juvenile Correction and Public School Students on Frequent (weekly or daily) Gambling for each game (2010)

17. Summary of Comparison of Alternative School, Juvenile Correction and Public School Students on Frequent Gambling  Alternative School and Juvenile Correction boys and girls had higher rates of frequent gambling than Public School boys and girls and the contrast was most striking for girls  The ratio of Alternative School and Juvenile Correction boys who were frequent gamblers was twice that of Public School boys  The ratio of Alternative School and Juvenile Correction girls who were frequent gamblers ranged from 2 to 6 times that of Public School girls

18. Comparison of Boys Alternative School, Juvenile Correction and Public School Students on Underage Gambling (2010)

19. Comparison of Girls Alternative School, Juvenile Correction and Public School Students on Underage Gambling (2010)

20. Summary of Comparison of Alternative School, Juvenile Correction and Public School Students on Underage Gambling  Alternative School and Juvenile Correction boys and girls had higher rates of underage gambling than Public School boys and girls and the contrast was most striking for girls  The ratio of Alternative School and Juvenile Correction boys who were underage gamblers was twice that of Public School boys  The ratio of Alternative School and Juvenile Correction girls who were underage gamblers ranged from 2 to 6 times that of Public School girls

21. Second Specific Aim: Compare Trends from 1992 to 2010  Compare Alternative School, Juvenile Correction, and Public School students on trends from 1992 to 2010 of any gambling, frequent gambling and underage gambling

22. Percent of Alternative School Boys and Girls Gambling at all and Gambling weekly/daily

23. Summary of Alternative School Student Gambling Trends from 1992 to 2010  There were fewer Alternative School boys and girls gambling in 2010 than were gambling in 1992  Alternative School boys’ gambling declined from 88% in 1992 to 66% in 2010  Alternative School girls’ gambling declined from 68% in 1992 to 42% in 2010  Alternative School boys’ and girls’ frequent gambling rates were relatively stable from 1992 to 2010

24. Any Gambling by Boys and Girls in Alternative School, Juvenile Correction, and Public School from 1992 to 2010

25. Weekly/Daily Gambling by Boys and Girls in Alternative School, Juvenile Correction, and Public School from 1992 to 2010

26. Summary of Comparison of three groups on Gambling 1992 to 2010  Alternative School and Juvenile Correction girls had higher rates of any gambling than Public School girls  Alternative School and Public School boys had higher rates of any gambling than Juvenile Correction boys  All three groups had similar declines in any gambling from 1992 to 2010 for both boys and girls  Juvenile Correction and Alternative School boys had similar rates of frequent gambling and they were higher than Public School boys  Juvenile Correction girls had higher rates of frequent gambling than Alternative School girls who had higher rates than Public School girls  All three groups showed modest declines in rates of frequent gambling for boys and girls from 1992 to 2010

27. Comparison of Underage Gambling by Boys in Alternative Schools (AS), Juvenile Corrections (JC), and Public Schools (PS) from 1992 to 2010

28. Comparison of Underage Gambling by Girls in Alternative Schools (AS), Juvenile Corrections (JC), and Public Schools (PS) from 1992 to 2010

29. Trends in Underage Gambling   Alternative School boys had higher rates of underage lottery play than Juvenile Corrections boys who had higher rates than Public School boys   All three groups showed significant declines in underage lottery from 1992 to 2010   Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections boys had nearly identical rates of underage casino gambling that was higher than Public School boys   All three groups showed relatively stable rates of underage casino gambling from 1998-2010   Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections girls had nearly identical rates of underage lottery play that was higher than Public School girls   All three groups showed significant declines in underage lottery play from 1992 to 2010   Juvenile Corrections girls had higher rates of underage casino gambling than Alternative School girls who had higher rates than Public School girls   All three groups showed relatively stable rates in underage casino play from 1998 to 2010

30. Third Specific Aim: Problem Gambling Items  Compare Alternative School, Juvenile Correction, and Public School students on two problem gambling items, last administered in 2004; and compare rates of endorsement of these two items from 1992 to 2004

31. Comparison of Boys in Alternative Schools, Juvenile Corrections and Public School Students on Problem Gambling Items (2004)

32. Comparison of Girls in Alternative Schools, Juvenile Corrections and Public School Students on Problem Gambling Items (2004)

33. Percent of Problem Gambling Item endorsement by Alternative School Students from 1992 to 2004

34. Summary of Problem Gambling Items  Juvenile Correction youth had the highest rates of endorsing the problem gambling items, followed by Alternative School students, followed by Public School students  Alternative School students showed relatively stable rates of problem gambling item endorsement from 1992 to 2004

35. How does gambling compare to other risky behaviors? Alternative Schools and Juvenile Corrections (2010) any gambling in past year vs. any use of cigarettes, alcohol, marijuana and other drugs in past year

36. Research Questions Revisited with Answers  Yes, but with one exception. In 2010, the order of gambling participation for boys was Alternative School (65.5%), Public School (58.8%) and Juvenile Corrections (54.4%). The order of gambling participation for girls was Alternative School (41.9%), Juvenile Corrections (36.2%), and Public School (31.4%)  Do more Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections youth gamble than Public School Students? Yes, but with one exception. In 2010, the order of gambling participation for boys was Alternative School (65.5%), Public School (58.8%) and Juvenile Corrections (54.4%). The order of gambling participation for girls was Alternative School (41.9%), Juvenile Corrections (36.2%), and Public School (31.4%)   Do more Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections youth gamble frequently than their Public School peers? Yes, in 2010, the order of frequent gambling for boys was Alternative School (23.8%), Juvenile Corrections (23.1%), and Public School (14.6%). The order of frequent gambling for girls was Juvenile Corrections (12.8%), Alternative School (11.3%), and Public School (3.4%)   Do more underage Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections youth gamble on legalized games than their Public School peers? Yes, in 2010, the order of underage gambling for boys was Alternative School (26.2%), Juvenile Corrections (19.8%), and Public School (15.2%). The order of underage gambling for girls was Juvenile Corrections (20%), Alternative School (18.6%), and Public School (7.9%)

37. Research Questions Revisited with Answers   Are more Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections youth gambling now than in the past? No, gambling participation among Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections youth has shown a gradual and consistent decline from 1992 to 2010. For Alternative School boys, gambling declined from 87.8% in 1992 to 65.5% in 2010. For Alternative School girls, gambling declined from 68.4% in 1992 to 41.9% in 2010. For Juvenile Corrections boys, gambling declined from 83.7% in 1992 to 54.4% in 2010. For Juvenile Corrections girls, gambling declined from 71.4% in 1992 to 36.2% in 2010   Are more Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections youth gambling frequently now than in the past? No, rates of frequent gambling were relatively stable with recent declines from 2004 to 2010. For Alternative School boys, frequent gambling declined from 30.9% in 1992 to 23.8% in 2010. For Alternative School girls, frequent gambling declined from 13.5% in 1992 to 11.3% in 2010. For Juvenile Corrections boys, frequent gambling declined from 41.0% in 1992 to 23.1% in 2010. For Juvenile Corrections girls, frequent gambling declined from 19.0% in 1992 to 12.8% in 2010

38. Research Questions Revisited with Answers   Do more underage Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections youth gamble now, than in the past? No, underage lottery play has shown significant declines from 1992 to 2010, while casino and online gambling have remained relatively stable. For Alternative School boys, underage lottery declined from 55.8% in 1992 to 22% in 2010. For Alternative School girls, underage lottery declined from 48.7% in 1992 to 15.6% in 2010. For Juvenile Corrections boys, underage lottery declined from 51.6% in 1992 to 16.1% in 2010. For Juvenile Corrections girls, underage lottery declined from 46.3% in 1992 to 17.2% in 2010   Do more Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections youth have gambling problems than their Public School peers? Yes, Juvenile Corrections youth and Alternative School students had significantly higher endorsement rates of the two gambling problem items than Public School students  How does gambling compare to other risky behaviors? Gambling participation is done at about the same rate as cigarette, alcohol, marijuana and other drug use.

39. Future Research Directions  Explore validity of underage casino gambling, that is, are underage youth gambling in casinos as they report?  Explore why Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections youth have higher rates of gambling than their Public School peers  Explore why fewer Alternative School and Juvenile Corrections youth are gambling now than in the past  Identify variables that may serve as risk and protective factors that will have implications for public awareness and prevention

40. Concerns Identified in this Study   First, there is a small but substantial segment of the Alternative School and Juvenile Correction youth population that are frequent gamblers and these rates are double that of their Public School peers   Second, a significant proportion of underage Alternative School and Juvenile Correction youth report playing the lottery, gambling in casinos, and gambling online and these rates are double that of their Public School peers

41. Recommendations  Alternative School and Juvenile Correction youth gamble, so we need to teach them that if they choose to gamble, they need to follow guidelines about time and money in order to avoid negative consequences of gambling  We also need to teach them as well as parents and teachers about the warning signs of adolescent problem gambling  Some youth only need information to assist them in making informed and healthy decisions about gambling  Some youth who are already over-involved in gambling will require more intensive prevention and intervention efforts  Develop and evaluate youth gambling awareness and prevention programs

42. Final Thoughts   For most adolescents, informal gambling is an infrequent and harmless pastime. However, the risk exists that informal gambling may develop into problem gambling, and therefore, youths require accurate information about the inherent risks of gambling.  The goal is that within the context of easy access to gambling, we will provide resources to youth to assist them in making healthy and informed decisions about their own gambling behavior

43. For more information Contact Randy Stinchfield, Ph.D.: stinc001@umn.edu References: Stinchfield, R. (2011). Gambling among Minnesota Public School Students from 1992 to 2010: Declines in Youth Gambling. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 25(1), 108-117. Stinchfield, R., & Winters, K. C. (2004). Adolescents and young adults. In J. E. Grant & M. N. Potenza (Eds.), Pathological gambling: A clinical guide to treatment (pp. 69-81). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc. Stinchfield, R. (2002). Youth Gambling: How Big a Problem? Psychiatric Annals, 32, 197-202. Stinchfield, R. (2001). A comparison of gambling among Minnesota public school students in 1992, 1995, and 1998. Journal of Gambling Studies, 17, 273-296 Stinchfield, R. (2000). Gambling and correlates of gambling among Minnesota public school students. Journal of Gambling Studies, 16, 153-173. Stinchfield, R., Cassuto, N., Winters, K., & Latimer, W. (1997). Prevalence of gambling among Minnesota Public School Students in 1992 and 1995. Journal of Gambling Studies, 13, 25-48.