• NEWIP Good Practice Standards
  • Partnership
    • This workgroup is managed by Jellinek Prevention, from Amsterdam. Jellinek Prevention provides mental health & addiction care in Amsterdam. Jellinek offers prevention, care, in & outpatient treatment and rehabilitation for people with psychiatric or addiction problems.´Unity´ is Jellinek´s peer education program, working in Nightlife Settings since 1996 in 6 regions of the Netherlands.

      Partners in this workgroup who contributed to the development of the Good Practice Standards are Floor van Bakkum, Jellinek Prevention (the Netherlands), Katia Duscherer, CePT (Luxembourg), Antonio Iacono, LILA Piacenza (Italy), Jaap Jamin, Jellinek Prevention (the Netherlands), Bart van de Kerckhove, CAW Stimulans Menen (Belgium), Anne-Gaëlle Noclain, Spiritek (France), Judith Noijen, Jellinek Prevention (the Netherlands), Carlos Paulos CePT (Luxembourg), Jochen Schrooten, VAD (Belgium), Jan de Smet, CGG VAGGA (Belgium), Matt Straw and Helen Wiliams, Crew 2000 (Scotland) and Nadia Ziliani, LILA Piacenza (Italy).
  • Context
    • Recreational drug use in nightlife settings has become a common feature in European cities. There have been many interesting responses to this new set of circumstances, problems and needs of the potential consumers of evolving synthetic drugs, especially for those involved in the rave scene.

      Despite the proliferation of harm-reduction interventions in nightlife settings, many academics have questioned the efficacy of the current models and suggest that projects frequently fail because they fail to properly define in their literature what constitutes “good practice” (Walker and Avis, 1999). For example, Shiner (1999, p. 565) states that “Good practice in relation to peer education involves careful consideration of the extent to which the approach used fits the location and the needs and circumstances of the people involved”.

      These days leading institutes, city councils, national governments and the EU demand minimum quality standards for preventive interventions.

      Standards can provide an important quality-management tool for improving the effectiveness and efficiency or harm-reduction programs and services. The EMCDDA has defined quality standards as “generally accepted principles or sets of rules for the best/most appropriate way to implement an intervention. Frequently they refer to structural (formal) aspects of quality assurance, such as environment and staff composition. However they may also refer to process aspects, such as adequacy of content, process of the intervention or evaluation processes” (

      If harm-reduction programs are developed, implemented and evaluated according to best practice principles, they can result in effective health promotion strategies. To do so, they need clearly defined aims, objectives, interventions, strategies and process and outcome indicators to demonstrate their value.

      Prevention practitioners, policymakers and community members involved in Harm reduction and substance-abuse prevention have a responsibility to incorporate the lessons they have learned into their interventions.

      What we must rely on to some extent is indications that tell us the right way to proceed. By using this knowledge and building on it with more evaluations and research, we will be able to provide professionals with the information they need to develop interventions that are based on best practice and, if available, scientific research that supports nightlife professionals in different settings and European countries to create positive, healthy and safe bars, clubs and festivals.
  • Objectives
    • Main objective: To improve field work interventions

      - Improving and standardizing existing interventions reducing synthetic drugs related harm, facilitating their transferability and implementation.

      - Creating Good Practice Standards for
      1. Peer Education interventions in Nightlife Settings
      2. Drug Checking Services
      3. Safer Nightlife Labels and Charters
      4. Serious Games in Nightlife Settings
  • Methodology
    • The EDPQ Standards
      In the development of Good Practice Standards for Peer education, Drug Checking, Safer Nightlife Labels and Charters and Serious Games in Nightlife Settings, we at NEWIP have chosen to work with the standards created by another European project on quality standards that was co-funded by the Executive Agency for Health and Consumers (EAHC), and researched at the Centre for Public Health, John Moores University Liverpool, UK.

      The European Drug Prevention Quality Standards were developed between 2009 and 2011 and published by the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA). These Standards provide the first European framework for the delivery of high-quality drug prevention.

      The EDPQS Standards are available for free to download from the EMCDDA website.

      The NEWIP Good Practice Standards
      The EDPQS Standards, formed the basis for the development of quality standards within the NEWIP project. Prior to the EDPQ Standards, quality standards for Peer Education in Nightlife settings, Safer Nightlife Labels and Charters, Drug Checking and the use of Serious Games in nightlife settings did not exist.

      The development of the NEWIPStandards required the involvement of a wide range of stakeholders from the different interventions to ensure that the four Good Practice Standards are practice-based and gain increased support and acceptability.

      Quality standards and guidelines should be seen within the context in which they were developed. The Good Practice Standards within the NEWIP project are Standards at the intervention level based on harm (risk) reduction. To supplement the EDPQS Standards to the specific contexts of the safer nightlife interventions, the NEWIP workpackage on ‘Standards’, that emerged out of a group of nine stakeholders from six different European countries, started by identifying specific questions, searching for, retrieving and assessing available guidelines, and preparing a working draft of the guidelines. The most relevant items regarding a safer nightlife in Europe are provided in the Standards and in the NEWIP digital library.

      Using the available literature and existing guidelines on how to implement peer education projects in nightlife settings a questionnaire was developed in which different elements were added as items within the questionnaire. To create a set of standards which are practice based, peer education projects working in Europe were asked to complete the questionnaire and 30 projects from 12 different countries participated and completed the questionnaire.

      The collected data gives information on what factors are practice based in Europe and is used to produce the NEWIP Good Practice Standards for Peer Education in Nightlife Settings.

      During meetings, workshops and seminars the these results and draft versions of the standards were discussed. This meant the sharing of best practices and lessons learned, all to work on identifying possible benchmarks and standards which became the foundation of this document.

      The final step was to add all the notes and references, taking into account the literature, the results from the survey, the needs of practitioners and policy makers, and the expert meetings and workshops. The re-write was monitored and approved by experts and partners from each group.

      In summary, a number of processes were gathered that informed the development of the NEWIP Good Practice Standards including:
      A review of academic literature on the different approaches and on Nightlife Settings
      A search for and the retrieval and assessment of available guidelines
      Meetings with experts working on safer nightlife interventions
      A survey of all known existing peer education interventions in the EU
      Meetings with experts on developing standards
      Workshops and brainstorm sessions with project partners involved in (setting up) the interventions
      A Survey of existing interventions on implementation and feasibility of a draft version of the standards.