Examining the Relationship Between Drug Availability and Students in School

Giovanna HarborCrim 250W

Pennsylvania State UniversityProfessor Laurie

TA: Ian GreenwoodDecember 7, 2012

1

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to focus on the relationship between drug

availability and students in school. The study examines whether students who attend

private schools are more likely to report drug availability at their school than public

school students, students that attend schools that take security measures in the form of

security guards or police are more likely to report drug availability at their school than

schools that don’t take security measures using security guards or police, and students

that participate in after school activities are more likely to report the availability of drugs

at their school than students who do not participate in after school activities. Gender is

also examined in this study. In order to research these relationships, data was used from

the National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2007 (NCVS). The

NCVS sample were students 12-18 years of age who were in primary or secondary

education with the intent on obtaining a high school diploma and had been enrolled in

school six months prior to interviewing. After conducting a Chi-Square analysis results

showed an statistical significance for the relationship between total number of drugs

available in schools and whether or not your school is public or private, and the

relationship between total number of drugs available at your school and whether or not

your school takes safety measures using security officers and or police officers. When

controlling for gender, the relationship between total number of drugs available in

schools and whether or not students participate in school activities, for males there was

an statistical significance but for females there was not a statistical significance. Going

out into the communities and putting an dent in the availability of drugs will help control

some of the drugs that enter schools.

2

Introduction

School for students in today’s time seems to be more of a place that breeds

socially undesirable behavior as opposed to an institution whose responsibility is to foster

productive and responsible citizens. The use and sale of drugs in schools is an increasing

problem and it makes schools a haven for this deviant behavior. When evaluating the use

of drugs among students, private school vs. public schools students and schools with or

without security have to be considered. This topic is important to research because the

use and selling of drugs deters or interferes with a student from their primary focus of

receiving an education as well as perpetuating the development of many other social

skills. The data for this study was taken from the National Crime Victimization Survey:

School Crime Supplement, 2007. In my research I am using this survey to examine the

relationship of drugs availability among students. The potential drug availability ranges

from illegal drug such as cannabis and heroin to legal drugs such as tobacco or

prescription drugs.

Literature Review

Bracey (2010) explains that public schools have changed over the years due to

rising violence. The high security measures that have been taken to control the violence

in public schools have changed the social environments in schools. Bracey (2010)

examines why it is important to get feedback from students in a high-security school

environment. The samples groups for this study are students in Mid-Atlantic schools with

high security: Cole High School and Vista High School. The data in the study was

gathered using a series of interviews, ethnographic research and direct observations of the

students to gather more information for the sample. The study found that, “ students

3

believe their schools to be a safe place and think many of the security strategies their

schools use are unnecessary. Students further express feeling powerless as result of the

manner in which their schools enforce rules and hand down punishments” (Bracey, 2010:

365). This article is applicable to my research because it focuses on school security and

the different measures that schools take to ensure safety in their schools. But more

importantly it talks about the students’ response to school safety issues and are these

extreme measures truly effective. Is having a high security school really controlling

issues such as drugs in school, school violence, etc.? Bracey’s (2010) article gives us

students’ perspectives, which are the people who are directly being affected by

everything going on in these schools.

Schools need ways to control availability of drugs and also ways to stop the other

problems that can be associated with drugs such as violence. The research done by Lowry

et al. (1999) examines, “ if school violence is associated with substance use and

availability of illegal drugs at school…” (Lowry et al. 1999: pg.347). In the study Lowry

et al. (1999) used the 1995 Youth risk Survey, which is an 88- item questionnaire. The

data collected regarded, “ substance use on and off school property, availability of illegal

drugs on school property and social violence-related behaviors and victimizations were

collected among a nationally representative sample of high school students” (Lowry et al.

1999: pg. 348). The stud also revealed that, “ violence and substance use prevention

programs are needed in the urban, suburban and rural communities,” (Lowry et al. 1999:

pg. 350). These prevention programs will help reduce the involvement in violence and

substance use that are school based but community based as well. This article gives

insight into the effect of drug availability and deviant behavior in schools, whether or not

4

students have used drugs and asks students about their knowledge of drug availability in

their schools. The article provides solutions to the issues of drugs and violence in school

as well as programs that can be established to prevent these issues. This article also points

out important issues that many people overlook, the use and sell of drugs is not only

school based but community based as well.

The use of drugs can change students’ habits and their performance in school.

Monitoring the changes in habits among Italian high school students were explored in a

study done by Molinaro et al. (2011). In the study high school students in Italy were

surveyed. The sample size ranged fromwith a sample size ranging from 15,752 to 41, 365

high school students. The data for my research was obtained from the, “Cross-sectional

European School Survey on Alcohol and Other Drugs (ESPAD). The survey was

performed annually over 11 years (1999-2009) with representative samples of youth

attending high school” Molinaro et al., 2010: 1). The independent, control and dependent

variables was measured in terms of, “prevalence (the proportion of a defined population

who have used a drug once or more in a particular time interval) or in terms of frequency

(how many times of frequency (how many times they used a drug within a defined time

internal” (Molinaro et al., 2010: 2). The major findings and conclusions of this research is

that there is drug use among students in Italy. It was found that cannabis is the most used

drug with heroin being the least used drugs. The study revealed that as far genders

females are less likely than boys to use drugs. This article goes in depth on which drugs

these students are using, from most used drugs to least used drugs. It shows trends of the

drug use throughout the years that the study was performed. The study monitored the

effect of drug use and the changes in the, habits in these high school students. Some

5

examples of these habits could reflect whether or not students were more likely or less

likely to report drug use in their schools, or whether or not drug use could affect if a

student participates in an after school activity.

Another aspect of drugs use that is commonly not recognized as a drug is the use

of tobacco among students. While it may not be recognized as an illegal drug it can cause

the same dangerous side effects and sometimes worse side effects than the drugs that are

illegal. The research done by Gong et al. (2006) studies the prevalence of tobacco use of

students in public and private schools in China. The data in this study was gathered from

a Cross-sectional survey of 2725 public and private schools students. The respondents of

the study were eighth grade public and private school students. The variables in this study

were measured by, “Smoking measures (risk of susceptibility to smoking, smoking onset,

ever smoking, smoking in the past 7 days and past 30 days, established smoking” (Gong

et al. 2006: 118). The research found that private school students were 3-4 times more

likely to be currently smoking tobacco and a, “ heightened risk of smoking onset by age”

(Gong et al. 2006: pg. 120). Though tobacco may not be considered a drug, the act of

students smoking tobacco can be see as deviant behavior, which very well falls under the

same category of drugs. This study compares students from two different types of schools

and uses measures to see which students are more likely to participate in this behavior.

The results of this study very often shock those who are not familiar with the research, it

is often though that private school students are stereotypically the “better” students and

public school students are seen as the “bad” students.

Not only are students participating in the use and abuse of illegal drugs, they are

also abusing drugs that they have permission to have and are using them to cause harm to

6

their bodies. In a study done by Bukstein (2008) he explains that the misuse of

prescription drugs among high school and college students are raising and doctors should

pay more attention to the drugs they prescribe. Bukestein (2008) also says that doctors

should, “ prescribe medications that have low potential for abuse” (Bukestrin 2008: 54).

Bukstein(2008) used a series of surveys to gather their information, the 2006 Monitoring

the Future Survey (MTF), and a survey of a large group of university students. The

respondents in this study are high school and college students. When surveying the

students, Bukestrin (2008) asked the students questions such as which kind of drugs have

they abused that were prescribed by a doctor. The finding in this study were that the,

“Misuse and diversion of prescription medication among high school and college

students is an increasingly common problem” (Burkestrin 2008: 58). This article point

out that prescription drugs are a new form of drugs that are being abused. Not only does

this article talk about high school students, it talks about college students who may have

more access to these drugs and may be less likely than high school students to report the

use or even availability of these drugs on or around campus.

Hypothesis

It important to make sure that schools serve as a safe haven for students. The

availability of drugs in school is associated with many negative outcomes (i.e. violence)

that make it impossible for students to have a safe and enjoyable learning environment,

my hypothesis test for different situations that affect drug availability. Students that

attend private schools are more likely to report use and availability of drugs at school

than students that attend public schools. This hypothesis was disproved by the previous

research I performed. Gong et al. (2006) study disproves that private school students

7

would be more likely to report this deviant behavior. The results of the research

performed by Gong et al. (2006) revealed that private school students were 3-4 times

more likely to be currently smoking tobacco, which is something I did not originally

predict by my hypothesis. The fact that private schools student are more likely engaging

in this behavior, they would probably be less likely to report what is going in their

schools.

Students who attend schools with security guards or assigned police are more

likely to report the availability of drugs at school than schools without security guards or

assigned police. The research I conducted does not necessarily support or disprove my

hypothesis but gives insight on the issue. Bracey (2010) found that students felt that high-

security school environment was unnecessary and made the students feel powerless. I

expect to support this hypothesis because if the security measures taken are having such

an impact on the students in these schools, they will be more cautious of what they are

doing and less likely to participate in the violence or substance abuse.

My final hypothesis is controlling for gender, students who are involved in after

school activities are more likely to report the availability of drugs at school than students

who are not involved in after school activities. While the study done by Molinaro et al.

(2011) does not specifically control for gender, it did express that girls are less likely than

boys to use drugs. The study focuses on the affect drug use can have on students’ habits

that can be related to students and after school activities. I would support this hypothesis

because I feel that students who participate in these after school activities have less times

on there hands to focus on these deviant behaviors unlike student who have more time on

their hands. As they saying goes, “An idle mind is the Devils playground.”

8

Methods

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS): School Crime Supplement,

2007 was a cross-sectional survey conducted from January, 2007- June, 2007. There were

11, 161 respondents with a 58.3% response rate to a survey that initially was done using a

computer- assisted telephone interviews followed up by a computer-assisted personal

interview, with the unit of analysis being individuals. The survey studied U.S. citizens

12-18 years of age whose households were in the rotating panel. The students were

interviewed 7 times, for six months over a three-year period of time. The survey

population was selected using a simple random sample, with the sampling units being

households and individuals. In the study there were a series of proxy interviews used if

the students were unable to respond. The conditions for the proxy survey were, 12 or 13

year old students who parents refused to have the interviewer speak to the student, a

proxy interview would be conducted with the parent. If the student is between 12-18

years of age and wasn’t present in the household during the time of the interview, the

interview would be conducted with the parent. The last condition for the proxy interview

was if the student was considered physically or mentally disabled the parents could

respond. (National Crime Victimization Survey: School Crime Supplement, 2007)

The purpose of this study was to obtain information about school-related

victimization by gathering specific information about the student school life, personal life

and demographics. The survey begins asking students about their attendance in school

and whether or not they were physically in a school or home schooled. The survey then

proceeds to ask the students about their school using categories such as school name and

location of the school. The survey involves categories about students’ grade level, type of

9

school, bullying in school, school violence, drugs availability in school, family income,

weapons, gangs, and etc.

There are several demographic variables that can represent the respondents as a

whole in this survey, such as race, income, grade in school and whether the area they live

in is considered urban or rural (MSA status). The surveyed population in the NCVS study

reported that 78.8% percent White, 13.9% Black and 7.3% of the respondents associate

their race with something other than Black or White. Grades fifth and under made up

1.3% of the population, sixth grader 9.0% of the population, seventh graders 14.6% of the

population, eighth graders 14.5% of the population, ninth graders 14.2% of the

population, tenth graders 15.5% of the population, eleventh graders 13.7% of the

population, twelfth graders 13.1% of the population and

College/GED/Post-graduate/Other no eligible made up 3.9% of the population. In regards

to if the students live in an rural or urban are the study asked students about their MSA

(Metropolitan Statistical Area) status. 27.2% of students City of (S)(MSA), 55.9% of

students S (MSA) not city and 16.9% of students not S (MSA). Respondents were also

asked about their families’ income level. 2.3% percent of the students involved in this

study came from household incomes that were less than 5,000, 1.2% household incomes

were between 5,000 and 7,499, 1.2% household income were between 7,500 and 9,999,

1.6% household income were between 10,000 and 12,499, 1.8% household income were

between 12,500-14,999, 2.0% household income were between 15,000 and 17, 499, 2.6%

household income were between 17,500 and 19,999, 4.5% household income were

between 20,000 and 24, 999, 4.6% household income were between 25,000 and 29,999,

5.9% household income were between 30,000 and 34,999, 5.6% household income were

10

between 35,000 and 39,999, 9.6% household income were between 40,000 and 49,999,

18.5% household income were between 50,000 and 74,999 and 38.6 of the students

household income was 75,000 or greater.

My research paper focuses on the availability of drugs in schools. Factors such as

whether students attend private schools or attend public schools, schools with security

guards or assigned police and schools without security guards or assigned police; students

involvement in after school activities or students who do not participate in after school

activities and the affect this has on the dependent variable.

In my research gender is used as a control variable, where the respondents reply

to what, “What is your sex?” The NCVS reports that 51.3% of students were male and

48.7% of students were female. Whether or not students attend public or private schools

is an independent variable used in my study. The NCVS asked students, “Is your school

public or private?” 91.8% of the students responded that they went to public school and

8.2% of the students’ responded that they went to private school. Safety measures in

schools are represented in the survey by asking students, “Does your school take student

safety measures: security guards and or police?” 69.0% of students responded that their

school does use these security measures and 31.0% of students reported that their school

does not use these security measures. Student participation in activities were also a

measured used in this surveyed. The study asked students, “During the school year, have

you participated in any of the following activities sponsored by your school?” 33.7% of

the students responded never participating in activities, 33.8% responded participating in

1 activity, 18.9% participated in 2 activities, 8.6% participated in 3 activities, 3.6%

participated in 4 activities, 1.1% participated in 5 activities, .02% participated in 6

11

activities and .01% students participated in 7 activities. The dependent variable used in

my research is the availability and use of drugs in schools. The survey asks students, “It

is possible to get (a list of different drugs) at your school?” In the survey 80.6% of

students says there are no drugs are available at their schools, 6.6% says 1 drug is

available, 3.8% says 2 drugs are available, 2.9% says 3 drugs are available, 2.0% says 4

drugs are available, 1.4% says 5 drugs are available, 7% says 6 drugs are available, 3%

says 7 drugs are available, 6% says 8 drugs are available, 4% says 9 drugs are available,

and 7% says 10 drugs are available at their schools.

For my research, I had to recode two of my variables. I recoded my dependent

and variable and one of my independent variables. My dependent variable that asks, “ Is

it possible to get (a list of different drugs) at your school?” needed to be recoded because

there were so many options to respond to for the questions. In my paper I explore drug

availability using, “ none” (81.4) and compared it to those students who reported the

availability of “1 or more” (18.6). Using this recode it combines all the categories that

were listed as an option in the survey under this question. The independent variable I

recoded asks, “During the school year, have you participated in any of the following

activities sponsored by your school?” This variable needed to be recoded because of the

many options that were listed for this question. I explored total activities students

participated in using, “no activities” (33.7), “1 activity” (33.8), “ 2 activities” (18.9), and

“3 through 7 activities” (13.6).

Findings

Table 1 (see appendix) expresses the relationship between total number of drugs

available at your school and whether or not your school is public or private. Findings

12

show that 79.2% of students who went to public school expressed there was no drug

availability in their schools, while 93.6% of students who went to private schools

expressed that there was no drug availability in there schools. When the students were

asked whether one or more drugs are available in their schools, findings show that 20.8%

of students who attend public schools have 1 or more drugs available. While in private

schools only 6.4% of students responded with 1 or more drugs being available in their

schools. The relationship is statistically significant at the .001 level.

[Table 1 Here]

Table 2 (see appendix) expresses the relationship between total numbers of drugs

available at your school and whether or not your school takes safety measured using

security officers and or police officers. Findings show that 77.7% of student who said that

there school does take security measures report there are no drugs availability in their

schools, while 85.3% of students who said no their schools does not take safety measures

report there is no drug availability in their schools. When students were asked if one or

more drugs were available 22.3% of students who have security measures in their schools

said there are 1 or more drugs available in their schools. While 14.7% of students who

don’t have safety measures in their schools said that 1 or more drugs are available at their

school. The relationship is statistically significant at the .001 level.

[Table 2 Here]

Table 3 (see appendix) expresses the relationship between total number of drugs

available at your school and whether or not you participate in school activities,

controlling for gender. For male students 82.6% reported no drug availability in their

schools, however as the number of activities increased to 3 through 7 the

13

percentages decreased to 71.4%. 17.4% of males who reported 1 or more drugs

available in their schools and as the numbers of activities increased to 3 through 7

the percentages also increased to 28.6%. For female students 82.7% reported no

drug availability, however as the number of activities increased from 3 through 7

the percentages decreased to 78.8%. 17.3% of females reported 1 or more drugs

available in their schools and as the number of activities increased from 3 through 7

the percentages increased to 21.2%. The relationship is statically significant for

males at a .01 level and is not statistically significant for females at .689.

[Table 3 Here]

Discussion and Conclusion

My researched focused on three different hypotheses all testing the same

dependent variable about drug availability to students in schools using three different

independent variables. In my first hypothesis I researched whether or not, “Students that

attend private schools are more likely to report use and availability of drugs at school

than students that attend public schools”. After doing a Chi-Square test, this hypothesis is

supported at a .001 level. For public schools it was found that 79.2% of students reported

no drug availability while 20.8% reported one or more drugs available to them in school.

For private schools it was found that 96.3% of students reported no drug availability

while 6.4% of students reported one or more drugs available to them in school. From

these results it may show a trend that because public schools do have more availability to

one or more drugs in their schools as opposed to private schools students they would be

less likely to report it, but the study done by Gong et al. (2006) wouldn’t support these

findings. Gong et al. (2006) in their study found that private school students were 3-4

14

times more likely to be currently smoking tobacco. Even though tobacco isn’t a drug it is

still a deviant behavior, which fits in the category of drugs. So from this study it could be

concluded that since private school students are participating in this deviant behavior

more they would be less likely to report it.

In my next hypothesis I researched, “Students who attend schools with security

guards or assigned police are more likely to report the availability of drugs at school than

schools without security guards or assigned police.” After running a Chi-Square test the

findings show that this relationship is statistically significant at a .001 level. This data

reveals that 22.3% of student reported that their school has security guards and or

assigned police and that there is drug availability while 14.7% of students reported that

their school does not have security guards and or police and there is drug availability in

their schools. Based off these findings it shows that the use of security guards presence

does have somewhat of an effect of the availability of drugs in the schools. Research

done by Bracey (2010) has proved that the security measures in schools are effective and

that the students in the schools have taken notice to all the extreme measures that are

being put in place to make sure the schools are a safer place. Even though the students

felt that there schools were already safe and that all of the extra safety precautions were

unnecessary, it’s important to hear that the students do take notice to what’s going on in

their schools as far as safety whether they feel it’s unnecessary or not. With the students

being so aware of all the safety measures put in place they may be less likely to

participate in this deviant behaviors since they know that there schools security measures

are strict.

15

My final hypothesis is controlling for gender, students who are involved in after

school activities are more likely to report the availability of drugs at school than students

who are not involved in after school activities. After performing a Chi-Square test my

findings for males were statistically significant at a .01 level whereas for females it was

not statistically significant at .689. The data revealed that for males 17.4% who

participated in 1 or more activities there was drug availability in their school. It also

showed that there was a positive correlation between drug availability and activities. As

the activities increases from 3 through 7 so did the drug availability in the schools. For

females it showed that 17.3% who participated in 1 or more activities there was drug

availability in their schools. Just as in the finding for males as the activities increased

from 3 through 7 for females so did the drug availability in their schools. I found it

surprising after running the Chi-Square test that the relationship between school activities

and drug availability in schools were only significant for males but not females since for

both male and females as the activities increased so did the drug availability. Molinaro et

al. (2011) proved that outcome is possible. In the research done by Molinaro et al. (2011)

it found that for gender females are less likely than boys to use drugs.

Based on the research I have performed there appears to be numerous

opportunities to implement policies that can potentially decrease the presence, availabitly

and use of drugs among students in schools. As a result of performing this research and in

particular in Lowry et al. (1999) study. There are two things that struck me as significant

in identifying ways to control availability of drugs in schools: (1) Minimizing drug

availability and use needs to be a collaboration between schools and the community

shouldn’t only be school based but it needs to be community and (2) “Violence and

16

substance use prevention programs are need in the urban, suburban and rural

communities.” I believe that if drug availability in the communities can be controlled it

may help control what’s being brought into the schools. I agree with what Lowry et al.

(1999) suggested, start building and implementing violence and substance prevention

programs, educate students in school and in their communities as well. Implement these

programs and make them mandatory in all communities not just communities that have

high drug rates.

As I have previously stated there are probably many ways to control drug

availability among students in school, but I don’t think the schools is the only place

where the intervention needs to take place. We need to get at the root, which is in the

communities. It’s important to try and get a handle on drug availability in schools

because its one of many things that are making schools a dangerous place. One of the

many causes of violence in schools are drug related and nothing positive comes from it.

We can not expect students to be able to learn in an environment where they have to

worry about being tempted by their peers to use drugs, or continuous violence in their

schools that makes the environment unsafe and deters students from being able to gain a

proper education.

17

References

Bracy L. Nicole. 2010. “ Student Perceptions of High-Security School Environemts.” SAGE. April 20, 2010. pp. 365-393. Retrieved on October 2, 2012. http://yas.sagepub.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/content/43/1/365.full.pdf

J. Gong, Chen. X, Guo. Q, Zhou. D, Palmer. P. H, Zhang. D, Liu. C, Xia. J, Johnson. C.A. 2006 “Are private school students more likely to smoke than public school students in Chine?” Preventive Medicine. August 2006. 43. pp.117-121. Retrieved October 2, 2012. http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/science/article/pii/S0091743506000995

Lowry, Richard, Lisa R. Cohen, William Modzeleski, Laura Kann, Janet L. Collins, Lloyd J. Kolbe. 1999. “School Violence, Substance Use, and Availability of Illeal Drugs On School Property Among US High Schoool Students.” The Journal of School Health, Nov 1999, 6.9, 9. Retrieved on October 2, 2012http://search.proquest.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/docview/215684780

Molinaro, Sabrina, Valeria Siciliano, Olivia Curzio, Francesca Denoth, Stefano Salvadori, Fabio Mariani. 2011. “Illegal Substance Use among Italian High School Students: Trends over 11 Years (1999-2009).” Plos One. June 10, 2011. 6. pp.1-9. Retrieved October 2, 2012.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3112153/pdf/pone.0020482.pdf

Oscar G. Bukstein. 2008. “Presription Drug Misuse in Youths: Diversion of Prescription Drugs by High School and College Students Is on the Rise.” United Business Media LLC. Jan. 2008. 25. pp. 54, 58-59. Retrieved on October 2, 2012. http://search.proquest.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/docview/204580477

18

Appendix

Table 1. Cross tabulation presenting the relationship between total number of drugs and alcohol and is the respondents school public or private.

IS YOUR SCHOOL PUBLIC OR PRIVATE?

TOTAL

DRUG AVAILABILTY

PUBLIC PRIVATE

NONE COUNT

PERCENT

1781 233

79.2% 93.6%

2014

80.6%1 OR MORE COUNT

PERCENT

469 16

20.8% 6.4%

485

19.4%TOTAL COUNT

PERCENT

2250 249

100.0% 100.0%

2499

100.0%

Table 2. Cross tabulation presenting the relationship between total number of drugs and alcohol and whether or not the respondents school takes safety

measures: security guards and or police officers.

DOES YOUR SCHOOL TAKE STUDENT SAFETY MEASURES: SECURITY GUARDS AND OR POLICE?

TOTAL

DRUG AVAILABILTY

YES NO

NONE COUNT

PERCENT

1238 732

77.7% 85.3%

1970

80.351 OR MORE COUNT

PERCENT

356 126

22.3% 14.7%

492

19.7%TOTAL COUNT

PERCENT

1594 858

100.0% 100.0%

2452

100.0%

19

Table 3. Cross tabulation presenting the relationship between total number of drugs and alcohol and the number of school activities the respondents

participate in. Controlling for Gender.SEX DRUG

AVAILABILTYNO

ACTIVITIES1

ACTIVITY2

ACTIVITIES3 THRU 7

ACTIVITIESTOTAL

MALE NONE 35182.6%

41476.4%

19476.4%

9071.4%

104980.1%

1 OR MORE 7417.4%

9118.0%

6023.6%

3628.6%

26119.9%

TOTAL 425100.0%

505100.0%

254100.0%

126100.0%

1310100.0%

FEMALE NONE 29182.7%

30080.4%

20881.9%

16478.8%

96381.8%

1 OR MORE 6117.3%

7319.6%

4618.1%

4421.2%

22418.9%

TOTAL 352100.00%

373100.0%

254100.0%

208100.0%

1187100.0%

20