2010 Banner

Return to search form  

Contact emails are provided for one-to-one contact only and may not be used for mass emailing or group solicitations.

Session Title: Evaluating National Substance Abuse Prevention Programs
Multipaper Session 522 to be held in PRESIDIO C on Friday, Nov 12, 9:15 AM to 10:45 AM
Sponsored by the Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health TIG
Chair(s):
Trena Anastasia,  University of Wyoming, tanastas@uwyo.edu
Effects of the Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentives Grant (SPFSIG) on State Prevention Infrastructure in Twenty Six States
Presenter(s):
Robert Orwin, Westat, robertorwin@westat.com
Alan Stein-Seroussi, Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation (PIRE), stein@pire.org
Jessica Edwards, Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation (PIRE), jedwards@pire.org
Ann Landy, Westat, annlandy@westat.com
Abstract: The U.S. Center for Substance Abuse Prevention's Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentives Grant (SPFSIG) is a national public health initiative to prevent substance abuse and its consequences. 26 participating states used a data-driven planning model to allocate resources to 450 communities which in turn launched over 2000 intervention strategies to target prevention priorities in their populations. An additional goal was to build states' prevention capacity and infrastructure to facilitate communities' selection and implementation of intervention strategies. This paper addresses the state infrastructure goal: 1) Was it achieved, and 2) what contextual and implementation factors were associated with success. Results showed significant improvement in most infrastructure domains. Preliminary multivariate analyses showed baseline infrastructure levels to be highly predictive of final levels, but mediating effects of implementation were more ambiguous. Analyses of the reasons for change across domains, and more broadly, the contextual and implementation factors associated with success, are also discussed.
Evaluating Large Scale Technical Assistance Centers: The Case of the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention's Centers for the Application of Prevention Technologies
Presenter(s):
Tom James, University of Oklahoma, tjames@ou.edu
Wayne Harding, Social Science Research and Evaluation, wharding@ssre.com
Abstract: Drug, alcohol, and tobacco use among youth continue to be a major public health concern in most states and communities. In 1997, five regional Centers for the Application of Prevention Technologies (CAPTs) were initiated by SAMHSA’s Center for Substance Abuse Prevention. These regional centers help bridge the gap between research and practice by assisting states and community organizations apply the latest evidenced-based knowledge to prevention policies, programs, and practices. The CAPTs are part of a large federal effort to provide support and assistance to the public and federal grantees through technical assistance centers. Based on the collective experience of the five CAPT evaluators, this paper reports on lessons learned and provides guidelines for designing and implementing evaluations of large scale, federally-supported regional technical assistance centers.
Implementing An Evidence-based Prevention Program Nationally Using A Multi-tier Approach: Helping Youth Stay on Track
Presenter(s):
Melissa Rivera, National Center for Prevention and Research Solutions, mrivera@ncprs.org
Scott Steger, National Center for Prevention and Research Solutions, ssteger@ncprs.org
Abstract: In their quest for an effective drug prevention curriculum, schools and communities nationally have found that the Stay on Track program offers the ability to employ an evidence-based program that is not only effective, but also flexible and culturally appropriate. This session will address the Stay on Track program’s evolution, its adaptability, and the quality measures employed to ensure the efficacy of the curriculum on a national basis. Presenters will outline key components for improved program sustainability and will provide best practices and innovative approaches that have been implemented to enhance programmatic outcomes. Assessment of the impact of unique implementation characteristics, such as those of the students, implementers, and schools, will also be addressed. A snapshot of the multi-tier approach employed throughout the evaluation cycle will be provided.

 Return to Evaluation 2010

Add to Custom Program