Applying the Strategic Prevention Framework to Plan

for Prevention Results that Can Be Documented

Coalition Academy WorkshopSeptember 5, 2013

3:00 Overview of the SPF and the first step in planning

for results, developing a Community Logic Model

3:15 Practice developing a Community Logic Model

4:15 Taking the Community Logic Model into a plan for

prevention

Agenda

An intentional process that helps us make informed, data-based decisions about our prevention work

The Strategic Prevention Framework

helps us

◦ understand the substance use problem(s) in our communities.

◦ ◦ identify the risk factors

and protective factors that are related to the substance use problems in our communities.

Assessment

provides the “map” for guiding our prevention efforts for addressing the substance use problems in our communities.

The Prevention Plan

To move from needs assessment to a prevention plan that focuses on results requires a well thought out Theory of Change

STRATEGIES:

Shorter-Term

Outcomes:

Longer-Term

Outcomes:

IMPACTS:

Example:

STRATEGY

Implement a

media campaig

n addressin

g the risks

associated with binge

drinking

SHORTER-TERM

OUTCOME

The message

will be received by 15% of the target

population.

LONGER-TERM

OUTCOME

Survey results

will show an

increase in the target

population’s

perception of risk

associated with binge

drinking

IMPACT

Survey results

will indicate

a decrease in binge drinking among

the target

population

the Community Logic Model.

An essential intermediate step:

Problem Statement

Substance Use

Intervening Variables (Risk and Protective

Factors)

Evidence-Based Prevention Strategies

A tool that helps us

◦ focus on the key learnings from the assessment process and

◦ use these learnings to identify the most effective evidence-based strategies that will form the foundation for our prevention plans.

The Community Logic Model

Overall Theory of Change (Impact):

Community Logic Model Theory of Action Measurable Outcomes

Problem Statement

Intervening Variables Strategies

Inputs: Human/ Material

Resources

Specific Activities for each Strategy

Outputs of Activities

Shorter-Term (2 years)

Longer –Term (5 years)

Substance Use

Context

Ohio’s Strategic Prevention Framework Strategic Plan Map

There are just four parts to the Community Logic Model:

The Community Logic Model

Problem Statement

Substance Use

Intervening Variables (Risk and Protective

Factors)

Evidence-Based Prevention Strategies

details the substance use or community perception issue(s) that the coalition will address and provides information about the magnitude of the problem

responds to an urgent community need

The Problem Statement

articulation of the prevention issue(s) the coalition will address

Problem Statement

The coalition’s priority substance(s) and target populations(s) are clarified in the problem statement, based on data obtained through the needs assessment process.

Example:

The Problem Statement

Young adults, ages 18-25, in Spring Valley report consumption of alcoholic beverages at a significantly

higher rate than the average for the state.

Further articulates the substance use data that supports the problem statement.

Answers questions, who? what? where? and when?

Substance Use

A succinct summary of use of the priority substance in the coalition’s community

Substance Use

Substance Use

The description of substance use by the target population is spelled out with data that supports the problem statement.

Example:

Young adults in Spring Valley who were surveyed in 2011 reported consuming alcoholic beverages an average of seven days in the 30 days prior to the

survey.

identify the conditions in the community that influence the occurrence and magnitude of substance use/misuse.

◦ Risk Factors◦ Protective Factors

can be addressed by prevention strategies.

Intervening Variables

A short list of the most important risk factors for use of the priority substance ◦ The factors that have been shown to be especially

problematic in facilitating or complicating substance use and risk behaviors in the community.

Intervening Variables

May include protective factors that have been shown to be especially helpful in mitigating substance use and risk behaviors in the community.

Intervening Variables

Intervening Variables

Social norms

Perceived risk

Retail availability

Social availability

Promotion Pricing

State policy

Local policy

IHE policy

Enforcement of policy

Programs

Practices

Intervening Variables: Risk Factors

Example: Social norms support approval of alcohol use.

Contributing factor: Parents permit underage drinking; family inclusion at alcohol events

Data source: XYZ survey, 2011

Contributing factor: Drinking, including binge drinking, considered a rite of passage.

Data source: Young adult focus groups, 2012

Contributing factor: Young adults consider drinking as a bonding activity.

Data source: Young adult focus groups, 2012

Intervening Variables: Protective Factors

Example:

Social norms support disapproval of misuse of prescription drugs.

Contributing factor: An overwhelming percentage of young adults report the belief that using prescription drugs in a manner other than as prescribed to them is very harmful.

Data source: XYZ survey, 2011

Identification of evidence-based strategies that relate directly to the identified risk and protective factors

Prevention Strategies

must address a targeted substance use pattern

Prevention Strategies

must tie directly to risk and protective factors identified as intervening variables

Prevention Strategies

Prevention Strategies

Prevention strategies align with the key risk and protective factors and direct resources to the target population

Examples:

Risk Factors Strategies• Community norms support

overall disapproval of alcohol abuse.

• Community norms marketing campaign through social media

• Retail availability for minors and intoxicated persons

• Responsible beverage service training

• Low enforcement of laws regarding retail access to minors and intoxicated persons

• Advocacy for enforcement of laws regarding retail access

Prevention Strategies: Utility

Appropriate for the target population and priority substance

Culturally appropriate

Consider any available information about other settings where the strategy has been deployed and similarities/differences with the target community

Prevention Strategies: Feasibility Cultural feasibility, given the values of the

community Political feasibility for the community and for

the coalition and its partners Community readiness for prevention activities Administrative feasibility for the coalition and

its partners Financial feasibility Availability of resources, including training,

technical assistance, and monitoring or evaluation tools

Target substance: prescription drugs

Community: Spring Valley, a small rural community in SW Ohio

Target population: 18- 25 year olds

Developing a Community Logic Model

10 minutes:

◦ What data might a needs assessment reveal about the use of prescription drugs by 18-25 year olds in Spring Valley?

◦ What “rises to the top” as the most important data that informs our understanding of the problem?

◦ Develop a few (no more than 3) bullet points that describe the prescription drug problem for 18-25 year olds in Spring Valley.

1. Define Substance Use for 18-25 Year-Olds in Spring Valley

Share out from small groups and develop consensus on what defines the prescription drug problem for 18-25 year olds in Spring Valley.

Draft a succinct Problem Statement that captures the most salient issue with 18-25 year old use of prescription drugs. This statement will be the focus of the coalition’s prevention work.

2. Define the Problem

10 minutes:

◦ What data might a needs assessment reveal about potential intervening variables affecting the use of prescription drugs by 18-25 year olds in Spring Valley?

◦ Rate your intervening variables for 1) relationship to the problem and 2) the ability of the coalition to address

◦ Now, determine the most important variables (no more than 3) that affect the problem defined in our draft Problem Statement.

3. Define Intervening Variables(Risk and Protective

Factors)

Last step (10 min.):

◦ Identify one or more strategies the coalition can use to address the prioritized intervening variables.

◦ Consider utility (appropriateness for target population) and feasibility of each strategy.

4. Define Prevention Strategies

Next Steps: Theory of Change

Once strategies have been defined, the coalition can flesh out its theory of change by articulating an outcomes chain – the desired impact as well as long-term and short-term measurable outcomes they expect to obtain.

IMPACT = measurable reduction of consumption in the community

STRATEGIES

Shorter-Term

Outcomes

Longer-Term

Outcomes

IMPACTS

Theory of Change

STRATEGIES:

defined through

the community logic model

process

SHORTER-TERM

OUTCOMES:

direct results of implementing the strategie

s

LONGER-TERM

OUTCOMES:

address the

intervening

variables

IMPACTS:

address the

Problem Statemen

t

Next Steps: Theory of Action The next step is to spell out the coalition’s theory

of action in a program logic model that graphically depicts the coalition’s program theory. Here, the coalition details inputs (resources), specific activities, and outputs of those activities.

Inputs Activities

Outputs

Shorter-Term Outcomes

Longer-Term Outcomes

Impacts

Overall Theory of Change:

Community Logic Model Theory of Action Measurable Outcomes

Problem Statement

Intervening Variables Strategies

Inputs: Human/ Material

Resources

Specific Activities for each Strategy

Outputs of Activities

Shorter-Term (2 years)

Longer –Term (5 years)

Substance Use

Context

Ohio Strategic Prevention Framework Strategic Plan Map

Debbie Zorn, DirectorUniversity of Cincinnati Evaluation Services CenterMember, Ohio SPF-SIG Evaluation TeamDebbie.Zorn@uc.edu513-556-3818

Thank You!