final 2013 nys deans list-1

7/28/2019 Final 2013 NYS Deans List-1

1/17

March 2013

2013NEW YORK STATE

DEANS LIST


2/17

2

ACKNOWLEGEMENTS

Tobacco-Free U: 2013New York State Deans Listwas written by Michael Seserman,MPH, RD, Director of Strategic Health Alliances at the American Cancer Society,Eastern Division. Thank you to all of the contributors to the report especially SarahScarpace, Pharm.D., as well as Blair Horner, Jennifer L. Sullivan, Barry Kinlan, Emilija

Postolovska, Breanna Zych, David Bombard II, Laura Burns, Grayam Dorschel, JasonWarchal, Paul McGee, Russ Sciandra, Kim McMahon and Alvaro Carrascal. A specialthanks to the New York State Tobacco-Free Community Partners, Ruth DeRosa of theNYS College Consortia as well as Anne Kearney and Linda Dudman of the New YorkState College Health Association for their assistance with the survey.

For more information about Tobacco-Free U: 2013New York State Deans Listand toaccess the report, visitwww.cancer.org/nynj

To get tips on how to quit smoking, contact the American Cancer Society at 1-800-227-2345 or log ontowww.cancer.org

2013, American Cancer Society, Eastern Division.
http://www.cancer.org/nynjhttp://www.cancer.org/nynjhttp://www.cancer.org/nynjhttp://www.cancer.org/http://www.cancer.org/http://www.cancer.org/http://www.cancer.org/http://www.cancer.org/nynj


3/17

3

Secondhand tobacco smoke is

classified by theEnvironmental Protection

Agency as a Class A

carcinogen, the same as

asbestos, and there is no levelof exposure considered to be

safe.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Smoke-free (SF) or tobacco-free (TF) campus policies are a growing trend across thecountry. A SF campus policy means no smoking is allowed anywhere on college propertyor in college vehicles. In contrast, a TF campus policy prohibits all forms of tobacco use,including smokeless forms anywhere on college property or in college-owned vehicles.

As of January 1, 2013, there are 67 smoke-free or tobacco-free colleges in New York

State, and at least 825 throughout the United States where smoking is not allowedanywhere on the campus. Public and private institutions of higher education are

recognizing the important health and economicbenefits of having a SF/TF campus policy.Secondhand tobacco smoke is classified by theEnvironmental Protection Agency as a Class Acarcinogen, the same as asbestos, and there is nolevel of exposure considered to be safe. Recentevidence suggests that short-term exposure tosecondhand smoke, even outdoors, puts people atrisk, especially those with pre-existing cardiac andpulmonary illness.

In addition to reducing exposure to secondhand smoke, SF/TF campus policies help toreduce the initiation of tobacco use among young people and assist youth and adults whoare trying to quit smoking.

This past year has been a monumental one for tobacco-free campuses in the state. InSeptember, the City University of New York began implementing a tobacco-free policy

on all 23 of its campuses. On June 12, 2012 the State University of New York (SUNY)Board of Trustees passed a resolution to support a Tobacco-Free SUNY policy and thedevelopment of New York State legislation that bans the use of tobacco on grounds andfacilities and in vehicles owned, leased, or controlled by SUNY. If such legislation wasenacted, SUNY would become the largest public university system in the country toadopt a comprehensive tobacco-free policy.

The purpose of this report is to document the prevalence of smoke-free and tobacco-freepolicies at New York State colleges and to encourage the adoption of such policies byrecognizing those colleges that have implemented them.

Major Findings

Forty-eight colleges in New York State receive an A grade for theestablishment of a 100% tobacco-free campus policy (see Appendix). Thesecolleges represent nearly one in four colleges in New York.

One third of all colleges in New York (67) are either smoke-free or tobacco-free.


4/17

4

Almost half ofNew Yorks colleges (47%) have implemented or are in theprocess of enacting either a 100% SF or a TF campus policy.

There has been more than a 30-fold increase in the number of colleges in NewYork State that have adopted SF/TF policies since 2005.

Public campuses in NYSare more likely thanprivates to be SF/TF with38 reporting a policy inplace (46% of publicinstitutions) while 29private colleges (24%) metthe criteria for a SF/TFcampus policy.

New York State has thelargest number of SF or TFcollege campuses in thecountry.

Recommendations

All colleges should adopt a tobacco-free campus policy to protect the entirecampus community. Colleges should not implicitly support the initiation of a

long-term addiction to tobacco which puts vulnerable young people at risk ofrespiratory infections, chronic diseases, and premature death.

Independent colleges in New York State are lagging behind public colleges inestablishing TF campus policies. The Commission on Independent Colleges andUniversities should highlight the benefits of TF campus policies and support itsmembers to implement TF campus policies.

The Governor and Legislature should boost support for SF/TF campus policies byincreasing funding to the New York State Tobacco Control Program (TCP). TheTCP provides vital educational and cessation services to save lives by reducing

tobacco use and exposure to secondhand smoke.

Three other states, Arkansas, Iowa and Oklahoma,have enacted new laws tomake their respective states campuses TF and SF. The Governor and Legislatureshould ensure that New York State joins this growing list.


5/17

5

In 2011, college age youth in

New York State had a smoking

prevalence rate of 21.6%.

That rate is 58% higher than

the 12.5% smoking rate foundamong New York State high

school students suggesting

that a large number of youthare initiating cigarette use

when they attend New Yorks

colleges.

BACKGROUND

College students at risk

Evidence suggests that if a youth does not begin smoking by the age of 26, it is very

unlikely that he or she will ever smoke.1 Therefore, college campuses are an importanttarget of the tobacco industry due to the number of young adults they can legally reachwith their aggressive marketing. Each year cigarette manufacturers need to addict morethan 400,000 new users in the U.S. to replace those who have died from long-term use oftobacco.

The tobacco industry attempts to take advantage ofcollege age youth, understanding that this period iswhen many long-term lifestyle choices are made andsolidified. This period has been labeled as a dynamictime in the lives of college students.2 Use of tobacco

for the first time and regular use of tobacco has beenseen to increase while in college from freshman tosenior year.3 Not only does that put the 18-24 agegroup at high risk for initiating and strengthening anaddiction to tobacco but it simultaneously endangersnon-smokers on campus from secondhand smoke andcontributes to a costly litter and image problem oncampus.

There have been impressive reductions in the smoking rates among New York States 18-24 age groupa drop by 37% between 2001 and 2009.4 Yet, young adults continue to

have the highest smoking rates of any group. In 2011, college-age youth in New Yorkhad a smoking prevalence rate of 21.6%.5 That rate is 58% higher than the 12.5%smoking rate found among the states high school students

6 suggesting that a largenumber of youth are initiating cigarette use when they attend New Yorks colleges.

A tobacco-free policy ensures that campuses are not unintentionally supporting theinitiation of lifelong tobacco addiction among students as a result of weak smokingpolicies. Studies have found tobacco-free policies to be an effective way to reducetobacco use among college students.7

Hundreds of U.S. colleges and universities have gone smoke-free or

tobacco-free.

Tobacco-free campuses are a growing trend for private and state run colleges across thecountry. There are at least 825completelysmoke-free or tobacco-free campuses in theU.S. Of these campuses, 608have a 100% tobacco-free policy. Three states now requirethat all public colleges and universities be 100% smoke-free including Iowa, whose lawalso covers private colleges.8 Since 2010, the number of SF/TF college policies in theU.S. has nearly doubled. 9


6/17

6

The growing evidence of harm

caused by tobacco use and

secondhand smoke has resulted in

at least 825 smoke-free or

tobacco-free campuses in America.

The tobacco-free campus trend in the U.S.appears correlated with the increase in stateand local clean indoor air legislation, changingsocial norms, and recent scientific studiesdetailing the harmful effects of even short-termexposure to secondhand tobacco smoke.

Secondhand tobacco smoke is classified by the Environmental Protection Agency as aClass A carcinogen, the same as asbestos, with no known safe level of exposure. Recentevidence suggests that short term exposure to secondhand smoke, even outdoors, putspeople at risk, especially those with pre-existing cardiac and pulmonary illness.10Consequently, liability concerns may also be a growing factor associated with institutionsadopting such policies.

In addition to reducing exposure to secondhand smoke, the understanding thatinstitutional policies play an important role in developing lifelong behaviors may be animportant driver. Evidence suggests that SF/TF campus policies reduce the initiation oftobacco use among young people and assists those who are trying to quit smoking and

avoid relapse.11

The adoption of tobacco-free college campus policies may also be facilitated by theincreased focus of large employers on worksite wellness initiatives to reduce spiralinghealthcare costs. Studies indicate that businesses experience substantially higherhealthcare costs and lower rates of productivity as a result of tobacco use amongemployees.12 The CDC estimates that each smoking employee costs companies at least$4,500 more per year compared to non-smoking workers in healthcare expenses and lostproductivity.13 A tobacco-free policy on college campuses may also lead to reductions inupper respiratory infections and other tobacco-related illnesses, lower rates of smokingamong employees, lower maintenance and cleaning costs, decreased risk of fires, a more

attractive campus and work environment, and reduced insurance rates.14

History of College Tobacco Control in New York State

Over the past decade, there have been various grassroots efforts in New York State toenhance tobacco-related policies in the college setting. In 2001, the American CancerSociety (ACS) initiated a two-year project called the New York State College AllianceAgainst Tobacco which worked with many campuses across the state to change tobacco-related policies. At that time the major focus was to make dormitories smoke-free. Laterthat year ACS conducted a survey of all colleges in NYS regarding their smokingpolicies. The survey suggested that no colleges had a SF/TF campus policy in place.

By 2005, there were only two colleges in central New York with a smoke-free propertypolicy: a small private school and a state medical school and hospital. A state law wasenacted in 2008 mandating that all dormitories at public and private colleges becompletely smoke-free.15 Over the years many tobacco free community partners orcoalitions around the state encouraged and supported advocates in colleges who wantedto protect themselves and others from secondhand smoke. In 2009, the New York StateTobacco Control Program began funding an initiative called Colleges for Change (C4C).Seven contractors were funded to work with college students to promote tobacco-freenorms and policies. ACS and C4C created the NYS Colleges Tobacco-free Initiative


7/17

7

(CTFI) in 2010 to collaboratively promote tobacco-free campus policies across the state.Unfortunately the C4C program was terminated in 2011 due to budget cuts to the Statetobacco control program. Nonetheless, CTFI in partnership with the NYS Tobacco FreeCommunity Partners and the National Center for Tobacco Policy have continued tosupport many colleges in their efforts to clear the air on college campuses.

RESULTS

Statewide Findings: 67 colleges have adopted smoke-free or tobacco-freepolicies and 29 colleges are preparing to implement the policy.

In New York State, there are 204 colleges and universities; 82 public and 122 private.ACS was able to acquire data on more than 98% of schools. Sixty-seven colleges (33%)have adopted a completely smoke-free or tobacco-free campus policy (Table 1) while 29colleges (14%) were in-progress or preparing to implement the policy in the nearfuture. Overall 96 out of 204 or 47% of college campuses were either SF/TF or

progressing towards a SF/TF policy. Of the 67 colleges in New York that have SF/TFcampus policies, 48 are TF and 19 are SF.

Public campuses in NYSwere more likely thanprivates to be SF/TF with 38reporting a policy in place(46% of public institutions)while 29 private colleges(24%) met the criteria for aSF/TF campus policy.

The data indicate that NewYorks public colleges are

more likely to be in theprocess of establishing anew SF/TF policy than theirprivate or independentcollege counterparts.Overall, 17% of public colleges compared to 12% of private colleges reported having anactive tobacco committee working on enacting a SF/TF policy. This is important to notebecause there are 45% more private colleges in the state than there are public schools.

With 100% of CUNY schools already TF and the SUNY Board of Trustees recentlyvoting in support of legislation requiring a system-wide TF policy by 2014, the trendportends that the majority of private colleges will stand alone as the last bastion ofcolleges that allow and support tobacco use on campuses in the state.


8/17

8

Table 1: Number and Percentages of Colleges with Tobacco-Free orSmoke-Free Policies, By Type

Publicly-funded institutions of higher education include the SUNY system of 59campuses and CUNY which has 23 separate campuses. SUNY schools reported that 15or 25% of campuses had enacted smoke-free or tobacco-free policies. CUNY schoolshad 100% of their campuses designated as TF as a result of implementing a system-widepolicy at the beginning of the current academic year (Table 2).

Public Private Total

Total Colleges 82 122 204

Total Colleges % 40% 60% 100%

Smoke-Free 7 12 19

Smoke-Free % 9% 10% 9%

Tobacco-Free 31 17 48

Tobacco-Free% 38% 14% 24%

SF or TF 38 29 67

SF/TF % 46% 24% 33%

In Progress 14 15 29

in Progress % 17% 12% 14%

Total SF/TF or In Progress 52 44 96

Total SF/TF or In Progress % 63% 36% 47%


9/17

9

Table 2: Tobacco-Free or Smoke-Free Colleges by Affiliation

In addition, 14 SUNY campuses were found to be in progress for developing a tobacco-

free policy. Consequently, 49% of all SUNY campuses are either already SF/TF or in

progress.

Regional Findings: New York City has the highest number of tobacco orsmoke-free colleges, while the Rochester/Finger Lakes region has thehighest percentage of colleges planning to enact a tobacco-free policy.These data also were analyzed by regions in New York State (Table 3). All collegeswere categorized into the following six regions based on the location of the schools maincampus: (1) Greater Capital Region, (2) Southern Tier, (3) Western, (4) Greater NewYork City Metro/lower Hudson Valley (NYC Metro/HV), (5) Rochester/Finger Lakes,and (6) Central/Northern region. NYC Metro/HV has the most colleges at 109 followed

by Central/Northern with 32 and the Capital Region with 22 colleges. Rochester/FingerLakes, Western, and Southern Tier regions have 17, 16 and 8, respectively.

NYC Metro/HV has the highest numberof smoke-free or tobacco-free campuses with 42followed by Central/Northern with 7 colleges. Each of the other regions have between 3and 6 Smoke-free or tobacco-free colleges. NYC Metro/HV also has the highestproportion of colleges that are SF or TF (39%) followed by the Western Region andSouthern Tier with 38%.

Colleges in the process of planning to enact a SF/TF policy (In Progress) varied greatly

by region. As a proportion, the Rochester/Finger Lakes Region has the highest percent of

colleges that are planning to go tobacco-free (35%). The next most active region forfuture implementation is Greater Capital (27%) followed by Central/Northern at 19%.

SUNY Colleges CUNY CollegesPrivate

CollegesTotal

TotalPercent

# % # % # % # %

Total Colleges 59 23 121 204

Smoke-Free 7 12% 0 0 12 10% 19 9%

Tobacco-Free 8 14% 23 100% 17 14% 48 24%

SF or TF 15 25% 23 100% 29 24% 67 33%

In Progress 14 24% 0 100% 15 12% 29 14%

SF/TF ANDIn progress

29 49% 23 100% 43 36% 96 47%


10/17

10

Table 3: Smoke Free and Tobacco Free Colleges by New York State Region

In terms of campuses that are SF/TF AND actively planning to enact the policy, GreaterNYC/Hudson Valley has the most colleges in this group with 50 followed by Central-Northern with 13 and the Greater Capital Region with 12 colleges. Fifty-five percent ofall schools in the Greater Capital Region are SF/TF or in progress followed byRochester/Finger Lakes Region with 53% of schools.

GreaterCapital (1) Southern Tier(2) Western (3)

Greater NewYork CityMetro/ LowerHudson Valley

(4)

Rochester/FingerLakes (5)

Central andNorthern(6)

Number ofColleges 22 11% 8 4% 16 8% 109 53% 17 8% 32 16%Smoke-Free 0 0% 1 13% 2 13% 12 11% 1 6% 3 9%Tobacco-Free 6 27% 2 25% 4 25% 30 28% 2 12% 4 13%SF/TF 6 27% 3 38% 6 38% 42 39% 3 18% 7 22%In Progress 6 27% 1 13% 2 13% 8 7% 6 35% 6 19%TOTALSF/TF & InProgress 12 55% 4 50% 8 50% 50 47% 9 53% 13 41%


11/17

11

One third of New York colleges arenow smoke or tobacco-free, a 30-

fold increase since 2005.

DISCUSSION

Over the past several years, numerous colleges in New York State have establishedpolicies that curb tobacco use and protect students and staff from secondhand smoke.

This report indicates that 67, or one out of three colleges have implemented a smoke-freeor tobacco-free campus policy. In the past seven years New York State has seen morethan a 30-fold increase in SF/TF campus policies. That trend appears to have acceleratedin the past two years. Even more dramatic isthe change in the number of colleges that areexpecting to go TF on their campus in the nearfuture. Currently 47% of all colleges in NYSare either already SF/TF or actively working ongetting there. These data also suggest that 62% of all colleges in the state will likely beSF/TF within the next few years when SUNY implements an expected system-widetobacco-free campus policy that will impact an additional 30 campuses.

The disparity between public and private institutions implementing SF/TF policies issignificant and growing. At present 46% of public institutions have a SF/TF policy inplace compared to 24% for the independent or private colleges (a 23 percentage pointdifference). That gap will increase in the near future given that a higher proportion ofpublic schools are in the pipeline to go tobacco-free compared to the privates (17% vs.12%).

On a regional basis, the SF/TF trend appears to be occurring in a fairly uniform way. Allmajor regions have between 41% and 55% of campuses either already SF/TF or inprogress suggesting a broad-based and consistent trend.

More than twice as many campuses have a tobacco-free policy (no tobacco productsallowed) compared to schools that simply prohibit smoking. Moreover, far moretobacco-free campus policies have been established in the past two years compared to SFpolicies. The trend towards tobacco-free suggests the desire to treat tobacco productsconsistently since all tobacco products are addictive and harmful. Colleges may alsowant to avoid potentially driving students to use more smokeless tobacco and avoid theneed to amend a smoke-free policy in the future to add all forms of tobacco. A tobacco-free policy is prudent given national statistics show a 33% increase in the sale of moistsnuff between 2000 and 2007. In addition, young adults (18- to 24-year-olds) are twotimes more likely to use smokeless products than those 26 years of age or older.1

The rapid pace of tobacco-free policy adoption in New York prompts the question aboutwhat factors may be driving the strong trend in the state. The work of many tobaccocontrol advocates and students over the past decade probably laid the groundwork formany of the changes. Statewide policy changes such as clean indoor air laws, tobaccotax increases, and tobacco self-service display bans have helped to reduce smoking ratesin all age groups, especially among youth.16 Other factors include significant changes insocietal norms for smoking and the benefit of having local tobacco-free models. In themid to late 2000s, many hospitals in NYS, some with medical schools, adopted tobacco-


12/17

12

With 67 colleges now

prohibiting smoking or

banning all tobacco products,New York State represents the

largest uptake of voluntary

smoke-free and tobacco-free

campus policies in thecountry.

free grounds policies. In NYS, the smoking rate among high school students has declinedby more than 50% in the past decade16so the opposition to a tobacco-free policy has beendiminished while supporters may feel more empowered to promote it.

With 67 colleges now prohibiting smoking or banning all tobacco products, New YorkState represents the largest uptake of voluntary SF/TF campus policies in the country.9

Moreover, when the SUNY system implements their expected tobacco-free policy in2014 it will be the largest network of campuses inthe U.S. to implement a tobacco-free campus rule.

With so many colleges choosing to voluntarily maketheir campuses SF/TF, the NYS legislature shouldenact legislation requiring all college campuses tobe TF or SF, as three other states (Iowa, Arkansas,and Oklahoma) have done.

The trend in SF/TF college campuses is the latest,

but perhaps one of the most salient steps toward a tobacco-free society. Collegesrepresent what has been called the latest battleground in the tobacco wars. New York hasbeen very successful at delaying smoking initiation among high school age children. Yet,young adults are now major targets for the tobacco industry who count on attracting newlegal customers as early as possible to replace customers who have died or quit. SF/TFpolicies provide fewer opportunities for youth to become addicted, essentially weakeningthe tobacco industrys recruitment strategy. Tobacco use restrictions also helpdenormalize the behavior, further attenuating the impact of aggressive marketing bytobacco manufacturers and retailers.2

With such a robust trend, it is unfortunate that the state has cut nearly 50% from its

tobacco control program budget in recent years. Institutions of higher education need agreat deal of guidance, support, and access to resources to transition to a tobacco-freeenvironment. Consider the increased needs for training staff, purchasing signage, andproviding consultation to enhance or create cessation services on campus and improveaccess to cessation pharmacotherapy treatments. A 2011 report by the NYS TobaccoControl Program shows that the 18-24 age group has the highest smoking rate amongadults but uses effective cessation treatment options like counseling and medications theleast.17 All of these services, especially those pertaining to the college setting, have beencut or eliminated recently. Meanwhile, the state takes in more than $2.5 billion each yearfrom tobacco settlement and tobacco taxes but spends just 2 cents on the dollar to helppeople quit, reduce secondhand smoke exposure, and assisting institutions like colleges to

become tobacco-free.18

Cost-saving initiatives like tobacco control should be expandedto reduce healthcare costs and boost worker productivity.


13/17

13

Next year, the American CancerSocietys Tobacco-Free U: New

York State Deans Listwill rank

all colleges' and universities'tobacco policies using thecriteria listed in Appendix B.

METHODS

The American Cancer Society developed a survey to gather information on collegecampuses tobacco policies in New York State. The initial surveys took place betweenJuly 2010 and July 2011. Contact was made via phone to specific departments on collegecampuses. These departments included residential life, health/wellness services, and

student affairs. If a targeted college representative was not available, a voice messagewas left detailing the process and explaining the purpose of the call. Follow up e-mailsand calls were made accordingly to increase participation and acquire accurateinformation. Any information not received from a campus contact was gathered viaonline student handbooks found on official college websites. Collecting data from studenthandbooks also helped to clarify answers from college representatives and, in some cases,were used as the primary source of information if a response from a college was neverreceived. Also, a web-based version of the survey was developed via Survey Monkeyfor college contacts that preferred to answer online.

The second and third rounds of data collection focused on follow-up of previous answers

to describe progress toward the establishment of a tobacco-free policy and to validateprevious findings. Updates were made to the initial college data between September andDecember 2012 using a combination of online surveys completed by college healthservices or counseling staff on each campus, calls to college contacts, and input fromlocal tobacco control community partners and ACS staff who work locally with thosecampuses.

ACS inquired about each campus policy related to tobacco. Questions included:

(1) current policy regarding tobacco use on campus,(2) the policy on the use of tobacco products in any college owned multi-unit

housing,(3) the process and participation in changing current tobacco policy, and(4) whether tobacco sales on campus and tobacco industry sponsorship of eventsis allowed.

This report focuses on SF/TF policies. A college was deemed smoke-free if a collegepolicy stated that smoking was not allowed anywhere on property owned by the college.

If smoking and using any other tobacco productswere prohibited anywhere on college property theschool was considered tobacco-free.For the purpose of this analysis, it was assumed

that colleges without available data permit tobaccouse in outdoor areas since that is the most commonstatus and the minimum standard imposed by statelaw. Additionally, any college that reported

having an active group sanctioned by the administration to discuss strengthening theirtobacco policy was assumed to be in-progress of establishing a SF/TF policy on theirgrounds. Also was assumed that all online student handbooks referenced for datacollection were up to date at the time of data collection.


14/17

14

Grading Criteria

This 2013 report identifies colleges in New York State that have a 100% tobacco freepolicy on its campus as of January 1, 2013. Colleges and universities meeting thatstandard are reported at the end of the report (Appendix A).

Next year, the American Cancer Societys Tobacco-Free U: New York State Deans Listwill rank all colleges' and universities' tobacco policies with the criteria listed inAppendix B.

Limitations

This report has some limitations. First, the data collected were largely self-reported bycollege staff. It is possible that some interviewees or respondents may have providedinaccurate information. However, when possible, the information was validated usingother means such as an online student handbook or an individual in the tobacco control

community who works with that particular school. Second, there may have been someinconsistencies between how data were collected and recorded. Finally, institutionalchanges seem to be happening quickly and a policy change process could have beeninitiated in some colleges after being interviewed. Yet, that is not probable since theAmerican Cancer Society works closely with the NYS Tobacco-free Community Partnerswho would likely be involved or at least hear about the policy change effort.


15/17

15

APPENDIX A

Colleges in New York State with an A Grade (Tobacco -Free Policy)as of January 1, 2013

Public CollegesBuffalo State CollegeCayuga Community CollegeCorning Community CollegeSUNY CortlandErie County Community CollegeNiagara County Community CollegeUpstate Medical UniversityWestchester Community CollegeBaruch College

Borough of Manhattan CommunityCollegeCity College of New YorkCUNY Graduate CenterCUNY Graduate School of JournalismCUNY School of Professional StudiesHunter CollegeJohn Jay College of Criminal JusticeMacaulay Honors College at CUNYThe New Community College at CUNYCUNY School of Law

LaGuardia Community CollegeQueens CollegeQueensborough Community CollegeYork CollegeBrooklyn CollegeKingsborough Community College

Medgar Evers CollegeNew York City College of TechnologyBronx Community CollegeHostos Community CollegeLehman CollegeCollege of Staten Island

Independent CollegesThe College of Saint RoseCrouse Hospital School of Nursing

Davis CollegeFinger Lakes Health College of NursingLong Island College Hospital ofBrooklyn School of NursingMaria CollegeMarymount Manhattan CollegeMemorial Hospital School of NursingMonroe CollegeNew SchoolNiagara UniversityNyack College

Rensselaer Polytechnic InstituteRoberts Wesleyan CollegeSamaritan Hospital School of NursingThe Sage CollegesTrocaire College


16/17

16

APPENDIX B

2013 Tobacco-Free U: New York State Deans ListTobacco Use Policy Grading Criteria

Next year the American Cancer Society will grade each college campus on their smokingand tobacco use policies by utilizing the following criteria:

A = 100% tobacco-free campus policy (no tobacco use of any kind allowedanywhere on college property and in college vehicles);

B = 100% smoke-free campus policy (no smoking allowed anywhere on collegeproperty and in college vehicles);

C = only allow smoking in specific, limited designated areas such as smoking

huts, parking lots, etc;

Incomplete = campuses that are in the process of establishing smoke-free ortobacco-free policies as evidenced by an active, administration-supported policyimplementation committee;

D = all other campuses with few (if any) outdoor restrictions such as smoke-freebuilding entranceways.


17/17

ENDNOTES

1 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,Preventing Tobacco Use Among Youth and Young Adults: A Report of theSurgeon General, Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,

National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office of Smoking and Health, 2012.2 Colder, Craig R., Flay, Brian R., Segawa, Eisuke, Hedeker, Donald & TERN Members (2008). Trajectories of SmokingAmong Freshmen College Students With Prior Smoking History And Risk For Future Smoking: data from the UniversityProject Tobacco Etiology Research Network (UpTERN) study,Addiction, 109,1534-154. DOI: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02280.3 Clarkin, Patrick F., Tisch, Linda A. & Glicksman, Arvin S. (2008), Socioeconomic Correlates of Current and RegularSmoking Among College Students in Rhode Island,Journal of American College Health, 57(2), 183-190. DOI:10.3200/JACH.57.2.183-190.4 New York State Department of Health, Who Is Quitting in New York: A Decade of Progress Reducing smoking andPromoting Cessation, February, 2011.5 New York State Department of Health. Division of Chronic Disease Prevention, Bureau of Chronic Disease Evaluation andResearch Division of Chronic Disease Prevention. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. 2011.6 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic

Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Youth Risk Behavior Survey. 2011.7 Seo, Chul, Macy, Jonathan T., Torabi, Mohammad R., & Middlestadt, Susan E. (2011). The effect of a smoke-free campuspolicy on college students smoking behaviors and attitudes.Preventive Medicine, 2011 Aug 9.

doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.07.015.8 Statutes retrieved 11/13/12. Arkansas: http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/assembly/2009/R/Acts/Act734.pdf, Oklahoma:https://www.sos.ok.gov/documents/executive/829.pdf, Iowa:http://coolice.legis.iowa.gov/Cool-ICE/default.asp?Category=BillInfo&Service=Billbook&ga=82&hbill=HF22129 American Nonsmokerss Rights Foundation (2012). U.S. Colleges and Universities with Smoke-free Air Policies.ANRF2011 Report, 1-5. Retrieved 10.27.12 fromhttp://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/smoke-freecollegesuniversities.pdf.10Department of Health and Human Services (2006). Surgeon Generals Report States Secondhand Smoke Is a SeriousHealth Hazard. Office of Disease prevention and Health promotion, 21(1), 1-6.11New York State Department of Health, Who Is Quitting in New York: A Decade of Progress Reducing smoking andPromoting Cessation, February, 2011.12

Americans for Nonsmokers Rights (2006). Business Costs in Smoke Filled Environments. Retrieved 10.28.11 fromhttp://no-smoke.org/pdf/businesscosts.pdf.13 Department of Health and Human Services. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Coverage for Tobacco CessationTreatments: Why, What, and How. 1999 estimates adjusted to 2012 using the consumer price index for medical serviceswhich was retrieved from: http://www.bls.gov/data/#priceson 11/1/12.14Americans for Nonsmokers Rights (2006). Business Costs in Smoke Filled Environments. Retrieved 10.28.11 fromhttp://no-smoke.org/pdf/businesscosts.pdf.15American Lung Association (2008). Big Tobacco on Campus: Ending the Addiction. Tobacco Policy Project, 1-24.Retrieved on October 20th, 2011 fromhttp://www.lungusa.org/stop-smoking/tobacco-control-advocacy/reports-resources/tobacco-policy-trend-reports/college-report.pdf.16 New York State Department of Health. Youth Prevention and Adult Smoking in New York State. March 2011. Retrieved11.1.11 fromhttp://www.health.ny.gov/prevention/tobacco_control/docs/2011-03-11_ny_state_brief_report_prevention.pdf.17 New York State Department of Health. Who is Quitting in New York: A Decade of Progress Reducing Smoking and

Promoting Cessation. February 2011.18Sciandra R and Horner B. Up in Smoke: New York Reaps Billions in Revenue While Short Changing Anti -SmokingPrograms, American Cancer Society. 2011.
http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/smokefreecollegesuniversities.pdfhttp://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/smokefreecollegesuniversities.pdfhttp://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/smokefreecollegesuniversities.pdfhttp://no-smoke.org/pdf/businesscosts.pdfhttp://no-smoke.org/pdf/businesscosts.pdfhttp://www.bls.gov/data/#priceshttp://www.bls.gov/data/#priceshttp://no-smoke.org/pdf/businesscosts.pdfhttp://no-smoke.org/pdf/businesscosts.pdfhttp://www.lungusa.org/stop-smoking/tobacco-control-advocacy/reports-resources/tobacco-policy-trend-reports/college-report.pdfhttp://www.lungusa.org/stop-smoking/tobacco-control-advocacy/reports-resources/tobacco-policy-trend-reports/college-report.pdfhttp://www.lungusa.org/stop-smoking/tobacco-control-advocacy/reports-resources/tobacco-policy-trend-reports/college-report.pdfhttp://www.lungusa.org/stop-smoking/tobacco-control-advocacy/reports-resources/tobacco-policy-trend-reports/college-report.pdfhttp://www.health.ny.gov/prevention/tobacco_control/docs/2011-03-11_ny_state_brief_report_prevention.pdfhttp://www.health.ny.gov/prevention/tobacco_control/docs/2011-03-11_ny_state_brief_report_prevention.pdfhttp://www.health.ny.gov/prevention/tobacco_control/docs/2011-03-11_ny_state_brief_report_prevention.pdfhttp://www.lungusa.org/stop-smoking/tobacco-control-advocacy/reports-resources/tobacco-policy-trend-reports/college-report.pdfhttp://www.lungusa.org/stop-smoking/tobacco-control-advocacy/reports-resources/tobacco-policy-trend-reports/college-report.pdfhttp://no-smoke.org/pdf/businesscosts.pdfhttp://www.bls.gov/data/#priceshttp://no-smoke.org/pdf/businesscosts.pdfhttp://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/smokefreecollegesuniversities.pdf

final 2013 nys deans list-1

Documents