Kimberly McCarthy, EPISCenter Prevention Coordinator Grantwriting Training April 25, 2013 Celebration Hall - State College, PA

Transcription

1 Kimberly McCarthy, EPISCenter Prevention Coordinator Grantwriting Training April 25, 2013 Celebration Hall - State College, PA

2 q What is the community need that drove program selection? q How do we expect to change it? q What are our program goals? q How do our goals align with the program research and logic model? q What data will be collected? q How will data be collected and analyzed? q With who and how will the data be shared?

3

4 Implementation & Evaluation Timeline 6 Months 1 Year 6 months - 2 Years 2 5 Years 3-10 Years Assess readiness, mobilize community Assess risk, protection, behavior, & resources Develop Community Action Plan Implement tested, effective prevention programs, policies, and practices Program-Level Measurable Outcomes Changes in participant knowledge, attitudes, skills &/ or behavior Increase our priority protective factors which are: Decrease our priority risk factors which are: Increase in positive youth development Reduction in problem behaviors Years Program implementation fidelity Community-Level Measurable Outcomes Strategic Planning: Always begin with the end in mind

5 Visit the Developer s Website Sample Sources of Program Descriptions and Research: q CSPV BLUEPRINTS FOR HEALTHY YOUTH DEVELOPMENT - q NATIONAL REGISTRY OF EVIDENCE-BASED PROGRAMS AND PRACTICES - q OFFICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS - CRIMESOLUTIONS.GOV -

6

7

8 BRIEF DESCRIPTION: LST is a classroom-based universal prevention program designed to prevent adolescent tobacco, alcohol, marijuana use, and violence. The program contains 30 sessions to be taught over three years (15, 10, and 5 sessions), and violence prevention lessons also are available each year (3, 2, and 2 sessions). Three major program components teach students: (1) personal self-management skills, (2) social skills, and (3) information and resistance skills specifically related to drug use. Skills are taught using instruction, demonstration, feedback, reinforcement, and practice.

9 THEORETICAL FOUNDATION: LST is based on two theoretical foundations that focus on learning, motivation, and behavior change. Social Learning Theory Problem Behavior Theory Explain each theory in 1 sentence. RESEARCH: The LST program has been evaluated in 18 cohorts of students over the past 30 years, with results published in over 32 peer reviewed publications since 1980.

10 OUTCOMES: Shorten This Summary! Short-term effects found in the research studies indicate significant reductions in cigarette smoking (Botvin et al., 1980a; 1980b; 1990; 1997; 2001), alcohol use (Botvin et al., 1990; 1997; 2001a; 2001b), and marijuana use (Botvin et al., 1990; 1997; Spoth et al., 2002). In several of these studies, exposure to the LST curriculum also led to positive shifts in self-efficacy, and anti-drug attitudes and knowledge. Furthermore, the program has positive shortterm effects on delinquency and violence (Botvin et al., 2006). Long-term effects have been found for cigarette smoking (Botvin et al., 1990; 1995; Zollinger et al., 2003), alcohol use (Botvin et al., 1990; 1995; 2001b), and marijuana use (Botvin et al., 1990; 1995).

11 q Theoretical underpinnings or rationale of the program (theory of change) q Detailed picture of how the program causes change Links the program to short and long-term outcomes q Guide for quality implementation and evaluation

12

13 In addition to the evidence of effectiveness, share: Recognitions resources/matrix.pdf Cost Benefits

14

15 Proximal Outcomes: Program Data Distal Outcomes: Community Level Indicators Explain the intended evaluation tools and what they will assess. Examples: q PAYS q Academic Records q Juvenile Justice Rates q Out-of Home Placements

16

17 Extent to which delivery of an intervention adheres to the protocol or program model as originally designed and tested by the program developer

18 If a program is implemented in a manner consistent with the model and the research that produced the recognized outcomes, then it is more likely that those same impacts will be achieved.

19 STRUCTURE FRAMEWORK FOR DELIVERY Appropriate target population Qualifications of staff Training of staff Procedures (e.g. risk management and safety policies) PROCESS THE WAYS SERVICES ARE DELIVERED Content Dosage (length, intensity, duration)

20 Surveying of delivery staff or those receiving services Ratings by experts observations, interviews, video-taping

21 DEMONSTRATE CAPACITY FOR: q Data Collection q Analysis q Quality Monitoring & Feedback q Reporting KNOW THE PROGRAM DEVELOPER S AND FUNDER S EXPECTATIONS!

22 Sharing the program s impact: leads to increased staff investment raises community awareness promotes recruitment and referrals fosters sustainability Maintains the focus on healthy youth development

23 Collaborative board Other potential funders Businesses Legislators The directors of children and youth serving agencies County officials Judges and juvenile probation School district administrators All Potential Funders, In-kind Contributors, & Recruitment & Referral Sources!

24 q Clearly link the evidence of the program s effectiveness to data that reflects your community s needs q Demonstrate an understanding of the program s theory of change and researched impacts q Highlight the program s credibility and cost-effectiveness q Exhibit the capacity to develop strong data collection and analysis systems for reporting outcomes q Demonstrate a plan for communicating outcomes to generate additional support

25 q Funders choose to invest in programs with the expectation that their funding will have an impact on outcomes that align with their mission and goals. q If an agency has previously funded a program, it is important to convey to them that their funding had an impact and that an additional investment will be judiciously used to expand upon existing efforts for even greater good. q If asked to describe challenges or lessons learned, it is important to demonstrate that past barriers have been overcome and that your organization has the ability to identify and remedy current and future problems.

26 EPISCenter 206 Towers Building University Park, PA Phone: (814) Fax: (814) Web: The EPISCenter is a project of the Prevention Research Center, College of Health and Human Development, Penn State University, and is supported by funding from the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency and the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare as a component of the Resource Center for Evidence-Based Programs and Practices.