 |
This Web site is a component of the SAMHSA Health Information Network. |
|
Changing Lives: The Right Program Makes A Difference
Making the Right Choice
As stakeholders in human services well know, the confident presentation, the slick cover, and the enthusiastic pitch don't guarantee an effective program. The perfect program for one community may be totally inappropriate for another.
Fortunately, coalition members don't need to investigate every program that purports to address youth violence prevention in order to select an appropriate intervention for their community. Numerous programs have been evaluated and have been identified as effective. Evidence-based programs can be selected from these lists.
SAMHSA’s youth violence prevention grantees are required to implement programs that are evidence-based. The term “evidence-based” has been used interchangeably with “science-based” and “research-based” and indicates that a program has been shown to be effective in preventing youth violence.
What gives a prevention program an evidence base is an approach that:
- Is guided by several theories of change (See ACTION Pamphlet 4 for more on theories of change): individual change theories (including theories of addiction, risk, and resiliency); intra-and interorganizational change theories; and community change theories (including community organizing, policy change, and public health theories).
- Applies evidence from rigorous evaluation research on prevention practices.
- Follows a process of strategic planning that focuses on integrating thoughtful assessment, design, implementation, and evaluation into every program. (Northeast CAPT, 2001).
Youth Violence: A Report of the Surgeon General (2001) discusses the latest methods of identifying best practices and the scientific standards for determining violence prevention program effectiveness. IT acknowledges that setting rigorous scientific standards limits the number and type of programs considered to be effective. Thus, it is important to understand how a program is categorized as “model,” “promising,” or “does not work.”
A model program is one that:
- was developed in the context of a rigorous experimental design (experimental or quasi-experimental);
- documented significant deterrent effects on violence, serious delinquency, or any risk factor for violence with a large effect size of .30 or greater;
- was replicated with demonstrated effects; and
- had effects that were found to be sustainable.
A promising program is one that:
- was developed in the context of a rigorous experimental design (experimental or quasi-experimental);
- documented significant deterrent effects on violence, serious delinquency,or any risk factor for violence with an effect size of .10 or greater; and
- can document either replication or sustainability of effects.
A program that does not work is one that:
- was developed in the context of a rigorous experimental design (experimental or quasi-experimental) but still was unsuccessful
- showed significant evidence of null or negative effects on violence or known risk factors for violence; and
- through replication gathered a preponderance of evidence suggesting that the program is ineffective or harmful.
The effective programs listed in the Surgeon General’s report are given below for your convenience. Descriptions of the programs may be found in the original report or in the SAMHSA/CMHS booklet What You Need to Know About Youth Violence Prevention.
EFFECTIVE PROGRAMS
Model Programs
Level 1 (Violence Prevention)
Seattle Social Development Project
Prenatal and Infancy Home Visitation by Nurses
Functional Family Therapy
Multisystemic Therapy
Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care
Level 2 (Risk Prevention)
Life Skills Training
The Midwestern Prevention Project
|
Promising Programs
Level 1 (Violence Prevention)
School Transitional Environmental Program
Montreal Longitudinal Study/Preventive Treatment Program
Syracuse Family Development Research Program
Perry Preschool Program
Striving Together to Achieve Rewarding Tomorrows
Intensive Protective Supervision Project
Level 2 (Risk Prevention)
Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies
I Can Problem Solve
Iowa Strengthening Families Program
Preparing for the Drug-Free Years
Linking the Interests of Families and Teachers
Bullying Prevention Program
Good Behavior Game
Parent Child Development Center Programs
Parent-Child Interaction Training
Yale Child Welfare Project
Families and Schools Together
The Incredible Years Series
Preventive Intervention
The Quantum Opportunities Program |
See Youth Violence: A Report of the Surgeon General for progam descriptions.
The collection of effective programs continues to grow, and implementers are advised to keep up with the latest information on these Web sites:
Criteria for measuring whether a program’s trial was effective
are given in Science-Based Practices in Substance Abuse Prevention: A Guide (pp. 11–12) and are presented here:
- Theory—the degree to which the project
findings are based on clear and well-articulated theory, clearly stated
hypotheses, and clear operational relevance.
- Fidelity of interventions—the degree to which
there is clear evidence of high-fidelity implementation and to which
the dosage of the program was sufficient to effect positive change.
(See ACTION 4 for more discussion of fidelity.)
- Sampling strategy and implementation—the
quality of sampling design and implementation and the strength of evidence
concerning sample quality (e.g., data on attrition).
- Measures—the operational relevance and psychometric
quality of measures used in the evaluation and the quality of supporting
evidence.
- Data collection—the quality of implementation
of data collection (e.g., amount of missing data).
- Analysis—the appropriateness and technical
adequacy of techniques of analysis, primarily statistical.
- Plausible threats to validity—the degree
to which the evaluation design and implementation address and eliminate
plausible alternative hypotheses concerning program effects.
- Integrity—the overall level of confidence
the reviewer can place in project findings based on research design
and implementation.
- Utility—the overall usefulness of project
findings for informing prevention theory and practice.
The program you select should use effective strategies. The Surgeon General’s report listed effective strategies according to the level of prevention: primary–for the general population of young people; secondary–for children at high risk of violence; and tertiary–for violent or seriously delinquent youth. These are given below.
EFFECTIVE STRATEGIES
| Primary Prevention: Universal |
Skills training
Behavioral monitoring and reinforcement
Behavioral techniques for classroom management
Building school capacity
Continuous progress programs
Cooperative learning
Positive youth development programs |
| Secondary Prevention: Selected |
Parent training
Home visitation
Compensatory education
Moral reasoning
Social problem solving
Thinking skills |
| Tertiary Prevention: Indicated |
Social perspective taking, role taking
Multimodal interventions
Behavioral interventions
Skills training
Wraparound services |
Previous | TOC | Next
Back to Community Action Pamphlet Menu
|
|
