1 / 22

Governor’s Prevention Initiative for Youth: Evaluation

Governor’s Prevention Initiative for Youth: Evaluation. Jane A. Ungemack, Dr.P.H. Evaluator University of Connecticut Health Center. Evaluation. Systematic efforts to collect and use information: Document program implementation Describe target populations/participants

hye
Download Presentation

Governor’s Prevention Initiative for Youth: Evaluation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Governor’s Prevention Initiative for Youth: Evaluation Jane A. Ungemack, Dr.P.H. Evaluator University of Connecticut Health Center

  2. Evaluation • Systematic efforts to collect and use information: • Document program implementation • Describe target populations/participants • Inform and improve program performance • Access program effectiveness • Increase accountability • Increase understanding

  3. Governor’s Prevention Initiative for Youth Long-term Goal: Reduce substance use among adolescents Intermediate Goal: Reduce risk factors and increase protective factors for substance use in the individual, peer, family, school and community domains Target Group: 12-17 year old youth

  4. Evaluation Framework Overview

  5. Evaluation Approach Process evaluation: • documents program implementation and activities Outcome evaluation: • assesses program effects or impacts

  6. Capacity-Building for Evaluation Science-basedapproach Evaluation and assessment as integral parts of the program design • Community-level • Program-level

  7. Evaluation Team Relationship with Grantees • Training and technical assistance • Instruments and administration protocols • Consultation and collaboration • Statewide coordination

  8. Grantee Responsibilities • Develop a program plan based on the logic model • Specify measurable program objectives • Cooperate and collaborate with UConn Evaluation Team • Coordinate community survey • Collect and submit process data • Collect and submit outcome data • Commit time and effort to evaluation activities

  9. Assessing Community-Level Outcomes: CSAP Requirements School survey Use of core substance use, risk and protective factor measures

  10. Community-Level Assessment: School Survey • Mandated • 7th-10th grade students • Representative sample (minimum n=500; 125/grade level) • Year 1 and Year 3 • First administration: February-April, 2000

  11. School Survey • Self-administered during a classroom period • Anonymous and confidential • Parental consents • Sampling, instrument and administration protocols provided by UConn Evaluation Team

  12. School Survey Measures • Demographic characteristics • Lifetime and current use of ATOD • Risk and protective factors • Limited community-specific items

  13. School Survey Grantee responsibilities: • Planning/coordination with UConn Evaluation Team • Planning/coordination with school personnel • Instrument duplication • Data cleaning • Data entry • Analysis

  14. Assessing Program-Level Outcomes: CSAP Requirements • Select a minimum of three programs (for each of three domains) • Measure program outcomes using core measures • Include a sufficient sample size for analysis • Collect pre- and post-test data

  15. Program-Level Evaluation Process evaluation: • Document program implementation and activities Outcome evaluation: • Assess program outcomes

  16. Program-Level Evaluation: Process Evaluation Each program will be responsible for reporting: • Prevention strategies • Types of activities • Dosage • Number served • Participant characteristics (age, gender, race/ethnicity, etc.).

  17. Process Evaluation • Minimum Data Set (MDS) • Instruments, protocols, and training provided by the UConn Evaluation Team

  18. Program-Level Evaluation:Outcome Evaluation • Based on the logic model, identify measurable objectives that you will address in your program • Program objectives should be selected from one or more of the risk/protective factors included in the RFP list of Connecticut Intermediate Outcomes

  19. Outcome Evaluation • UConn Evaluation Team staff will work with each grantee to finalize program-specific objectives and measures • All grantees will be asked to participate in a pre/post-test assessment of age-eligible participants as appropriate

  20. Outcome Evaluation Pre- and Post-Test Assessments • Youth participation will be voluntary • Confidential • Informed consents • Standardized instrument plus optional program-specific items • Minimum sample size = 50

  21. Considerations for Estimating Evaluation Costs • Personnel (.25 FTE minimum recommended) • Computer equipment • Photocopying • Office supplies • Data collection and cleaning • Data entry

  22. Evaluation Themes for the Governor’s Prevention Initiative • Evaluation at all levels • Science-based • Capacity-building • Collaboration • Coordination • Sustainability

More Related