Computer file

Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentive Grant (SPF SIG) National Cross-Site Evaluation [Restricted Use]

Available as
Online
Summary

The Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentive Grant (SPF SIG) National Cross-Site Evaluation was conducted to evaluate the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)'s SPF SIG initiative, wh...

The Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentive Grant (SPF SIG) National Cross-Site Evaluation was conducted to evaluate the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP)'s SPF SIG initiative, which sought to: (1) prevent the onset and reduce the progression of substance abuse, including childhood and underage drinking; (2) reduce substance abuse-related problems in communities; and (3) build prevention capacity and infrastructure at the state and community levels. This cross-site evaluation included the 21 states and territories CSAP funded in FY2004 (Cohort 1) and an additional 5 States funded in Cohort 2 in FY2005 that were funded for up to 5 years to implement the SPF. The SPF is a five-step prevention planning model that requires states to: (1) conduct a statewide needs assessment, including the establishment of a State Epidemiological and Outcomes Workgroup (SEOW); (2) mobilize and build state and community capacity to address needs; (3) develop a statewide strategic plan for prevention; (4) implement evidence-based prevention, policies, and practices (EBPPP) to meet state and community needs; and (5) monitor and evaluate the implementation of their SPF SIG project. Under contract to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) with funding provided by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), Westat, in collaboration with the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation (PIRE) and The MayaTech Corporation, implemented a multilevel, multi-method quasi-experimental design to evaluate SPF SIG's impact. The scope of the evaluation encompassed national, state, and community levels. The design included comparison conditions at both the state and community levels. These data represent Phase I of the restricted use data release and contains extensive data on state-level implementation, community-level implementation, and state-level infrastructure, as well as other reference elements. A subsequent release (Phase II) will include state- and community-level outcomes, as well as data on community-level implementation, community-level implementation fidelity, state-level sustainability, and mediating variables.Cf: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR28921.v2

Details

Subjects

  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
  • Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research

Content Types

Additional Information