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 [email protected]
Thank You!