Prevention validation and accounting platform: a framework for establishing accountability and performance measures of substance abuse prevention programs.

The field of substance abuse prevention has neither an overarching conceptual framework nor a set of shared terminologies for establishing the accountability and performance outcome measures of substance abuse prevention services rendered. Hence, there is a wide gap between what we currently have as data on one hand and information that are required to meet the performance goals and accountability measures set by the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 on the other. The task before us is: How can we establish the accountability and performance measures of substance abuse prevention programs and transform the field of prevention into prevention science? The intent of this volume is to serve that purpose and accelerate the processes of this transformation by identifying the requisite components of the transformation (i.e., theory, methodology, convention on terms, and data) and by introducing an open forum called, Prevention Validation and Accounting (PREVA) Platform. The entire PREVA Platform (for short, the Platform) is designed as an analytic framework, which is formulated by a collectivity of common concepts, terminologies, accounting units, protocols for counting the units, data elements, and operationalizations of various constructs, and other summary measures intended to bring about an efficient and effective measurement of process input, program capacity, process output, performance outcome, and societal impact of substance abuse prevention programs. The measurement units and summary data elements are designed to be measured across time and across jurisdictions, i.e., from local to regional to state to national levels. In the Platform, the process input is captured by two dimensions of time and capital. Time is conceptualized in terms of service delivery time and time spent for research and development. Capital is measured by the monies expended for the delivery of program activities during a fiscal or reporting period. Program capacity is captured by fourteen measurement units, tapping into the dimensions of staff resources and community assets. Staff resources are, in turn, operationalized in terms of staff size, staff certification status, staff turnover rate, and the accreditation status of a provider agency. Community assets are operationalized by the number of community centers accessible to the funded agency, number of formalized teams or antidrug coalitions active in the catchment area, and other social/human services providers with whom the prevention agency has formalized networks. The totality of process output from all sources of program activities is reduced to eighteen classes of measures. These are operationalized by thirty-three summary measures. Some of these include: total count of events facilitated; total number of clients served; average number of clients served per event; clients served by single and multiple program sessions; classification of target population in terms of the severity of risk as defined by the Institute of Medicine; age groups and race/ethnicity of clients served; number of program participants retained by recurring programs; number of clients who have completed the program; penetration rates to the target population; client attrition rates; average referral rates per provider per time interval; referral success rates; and so on. All process output measures specified in the Platform are derived from two broad classes of events classified as either products or services. The collectivity of these measures is expected to present a cost-effective, parsimonious, yet comprehensive picture of the entire spectrum of the process output, i.e., "what came out of the program as program activities". For the measurement of performance outcomes, two types of data are incorporated into the Platform: outcome data from individuals and the behavior (or performance) of social indicators from aggregated data bases. Individual data are used to evaluate the outcome of substance abuse programs

An outcome evaluation of Here's Looking At You 2000.

This study reports outcome evaluation results from a segment of one of the most widely used drug education/prevention programs entitled "Here's Looking At You 2000." HLAY 2000 was offered to the seventh and eighth grade students (n = 463) by regular classroom teachers of Yadkin County Schools located in one of the rural areas in North Carolina. Six schools served as the experimental group while two randomly selected schools served as a control group. The program was implemented during the 1990-91 school year.

An evaluation of prototype school-based peer counseling program.

This study reports short-term outcome evaluation results of a school-based peer counseling (PRC) program as implemented by North Forsyth High School during January 1990-February 1991. The PRC program is evaluated in terms of: 1) the content of the program as evaluated by the PRC trainees; 2) the quality of the PRC instructor as perceived by these trainees; 3) several instrumental objectives deduced from the PRC training program; and 4) the degree to which the program was able to reach other students at North Forsyth during the time the PRC was in operation. In the absence of a control group, the treatment effect of the program is determined in terms of individual growth curve models. Through the multiple evaluation designs employed in this research, it has been learned that a significantly larger proportion of students in the PRC group had more favorable attitude toward the content of the PRC program when compared to the content of what they learned from their regular school curricula. Furthermore, a significantly larger proportion of students in the PRC program reported more favorable attitude toward their instructor than their regular school teachers. The PRC program was able to elicit an improvement of trainee self-esteem (p less than .01) and their social values (p less than .05) between pre and post of the Peer Training Evaluation Instrument. In terms of client access, 18.4 percent of the totality of potential clients at North Forsyth have been reached through sixty-one peer counselors sanctioned by the school.

A short-term outcome evaluation of the "I'm Special" drug abuse prevention program: a revisit using SCAT inventory.

In the previous evaluation of "I'm Special" (ISP) drug abuse prevention/education program, the long-term impact was reported. The current study examines the short-term outcome of the ISP to establish a conceptual link between what has been observed longitudinally to the short-term outcome. The evaluation instrument used is children's Self-Concept Attitudinal (SCAT) Inventory. Subjects are the third grade students in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg public schools located in Charlotte, North Carolina. The evaluation design employed is before and after-measurement without a control group. In the absence of a control group, the treatment effect of the ISP is estimated on the basis of individual growth curve models. Through the study, it has been learned that the ISP was able to generate positive changes along six attitudinal dimensions included in the SCAT Inventory. The six scales have shown close relationships to student performance at school: student-teacher relationship; self-esteem, attitude toward school, basic social values, advanced social values, and the perception of family cohesiveness. Of these, the first four scales have shown statistical significance at the .05 level. It is estimated that the ISP is capable of generating a significant amount of positive attitudinal changes on a short-term basis with a time span of about four months between pre- and posttests. These findings are consistent with the conclusions obtained from the longitudinal study where student alcohol and other drug using behavior and other related student problem behaviors were significantly lower among the ISP recipients than non-recipients of the program.

An outcome evaluation of refusal skills program as a drug abuse prevention strategy.

In recent years successful strategies developed in the antismoking campaign became the basis for widely publicized and federally endorsed antidrug "Just Say No" programs. Similarly, many refusal skills programs have been introduced as a new strategy in adolescent drug abuse prevention. However, none of these programs have been evaluated. While employing a typical refusal skills program entitled "WHOA! A Great Way To Say NO," the effectiveness of the program was examined. Through this outcome evaluation, it has been learned that the program was not able to impact on the "high-risk" attitudinal syndromes that are closely related to student drug involvement. Unexpectedly, a significantly larger proportion of students in the program felt it was more difficult to say "No" at the time of the posttest than during the time of the pretest. This seems to suggest that the program participants became more attentive to the issues surrounding saying "No" or, perhaps, were more sensitized to the whole issue involving saying "No," thereby making it more difficult for them to say "No" during the posttest period.