Being an Effective Coalition

using the

Strategic Prevention Framework

Note Taking Guide

 Being an Effective Coalition using the Strategic Prevention Framework
A CADCA Training

Day 1 Day 2
Time Block Time Block
11/29/2005 11/30/2005

10:30 AM 11:30 AM Orientation/Session I 1:00 PM 2:00 PM Review/Session IV

11:30 AM 1:00 PM Lunch 2:00 PM 3:00 PM Team Breakouts
1:00 PM 1:30 PM Session II 3:00 PM 4:30 PM Session V
1:30 PM 2:30 PM Team Breakouts 4:30 PM Wrap-up
2:30 PM 3:30 PM Session III

Session I The Strategic Prevention Framework - "What you need to know, what your team needs to do."
Session II Analyzing problems and goals / Identifying root causes
Session III Logic Models - “The picture on top of the puzzle box.”
Session IV Creating and Selecting Interventions - “The real difference between coalitions and programs.”
Session V Evaluation Basics - “When to fire your evaluator” / Creating and Evaluation Plan

Faculty:

Paul Evensen, Lead Training Instructor Gwen Brown, Facilitator

Community Systems Group, Inc. Genesis Prevention Coalition
866-268-8299 404-522-9690 ext. 222
pevensen@communitysystemsgroup.com gwenbrowncp4@aol.com

Kareemah Abdullah, Training Coordinator Catherine Brunson, Facilitator

CADCA National Coalition Institute Metropolitan Drug Commission
800-542-2322 ext. 226 865-588-5550
kabdullah@cadca.org mkthatcher1@aol.com

Jane Callahan, Facilitator Deacon Dzierzawski, Facilitator

CADCA National Coalition Institute The Community Partnership
800-542-2322 ext. 229 419-866-3611
jcallahan@cadca.org deacon@communityprevention.org

Eduardo Hernandez, Facilitator Sally Zellers, Facilitator

CADCA National Coalition Institute Safe Streets of Topeka
800-542-2322 ext. 222 785-266-4604
szellers@safestreets.org
Carlton Hall, Facilitator
CADCA National Coalition Institute
267-257-2976
cjhall30@hotmail.com

1
 Creating Community Change using the SPF
Day 1
Session 1

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration’s (SAMHSA)

Strategic Prevention Framework

A. Assessment

B. Capacity

E. Evaluation

C. Planning

D. Implementation

2
 Skills Required to Implement the Strategic Prevention Framework
The relationship between SAMHSA’s Strategic Prevention Framework and the core competencies*.

1. Create and maintain coalitions and partnerships 2. Assess community needs and resources

3. Analyze problems and goals

A. Assessment
4. Develop a framework or model of change
15. Sustain projects and initiatives.

B. Capacity
14. Evaluate initiatives.

5. Increase participation and membership

3
E. Evaluation
6. Build leadership
13. Write grant applications for funding.

7.Enhance cultural competence

12. Influencing policy development.
Session 1
Day 1

8. Improve organizational mgt. and develop-

11. Advocate for change.

10. Develop interventions.

C. Planning

9. Develop strategic and action plans.

D. Implementation
Creating Community Change using the SPF

© Work Group for Health Promotion and Community Development, University of Kansas. The core competencies identified are intel-
lectual property of the University of Kansas used by permission through a license agreement with Community Systems Group, Inc.
 Creating Community Change using the SPF
Day 1
Session 1

The Tolstoy Principle:

Best Processes1 for Implementing

the Strategic Prevention
Framework
1. Analyzing Information About the Problem,
1. Analyzing Information About the Problem,
Goals, and Factors Affecting Them
Goals, and Factors Affecting Them

A. Assessment 2. Establishing Vision and Mission

2. Establishing Vision and Mission

12. Documenting Progress and

10. Documenting Progress and B. Capacity
Using Feedback
Using Feedback
3. Defining Organizational Structure
11. Making Outcomes Matter 3. Defining Organizational Structure
11. Making Outcomes Matter and Operating Mechanisms
and Operating Mechanisms

4. Assuring Technical Assistance

E. Evaluation 9. Assuring

5. Developing Leadership
10. Sustaining the Work 7. Developing Leadership
12. Sustaining the Work

9. Implementing Effective 6. Arranging Resources for

8. Implementing Effective 6. Arranging Resources for
Interventions Community Mobilization
Interventions Community Mobilization

C. Planning
D. Implementation 7. Developing a framework or
4. Developing a framework or
model of change
model of change
1
Best processes identified through a
8. Developing and Using literature review conducted by Dr. Renee
5. Developing and Using Boothroyd, University of Kansas – used
Strategic and Action Plans
Strategic and Action Plans with permission.

4
 Chart 1.5 Review Papers Multiple Case Studies Experiential

Literature review conducted by

Dr. Renee Boothroyd. © 2005
University of Kansas. Used by
permission through a license
agreement with Community
Systems Group, Inc.

RECOMMENDATION
Ploeg et al., 1996 (17 comm.
development projects)
Mattessich & Monsey, 1997
(48 studies)
Israel, Schultz, Parker, &
Becker, 1998) (rsch. & exp.)
Sorensen, Emmons, Hunt, &
Johnston, 1998 (cancer and
CHD) (representative trials)
Kreuter, Lezin, & Young,
2000 (68 studies, 6 in-depth)
Roussos & Fawcett, 2000
(34 studies, 252 community
initiatives or partnerships)
Foster-Fishman, Berkowitz,
Lounsbury, Jacobson, &
Allen, 2001 (80 articles)
Merzel & D’Affliti, 2003
(32 studies)
Goodman, Steckler, Hoover,
& Schwartz, 1993
(6 Maine programs)
Florin, Mitchell, &
Stevenson, 1993
(35 coalitions)
Parker, et al., 1998
(empirical analysis of 4
coalitions)
Shortell et al., 2002
(empirical analysis of 25
community partnerships)
Kegler & Wyatt, 2003
(5 neighborhood
partnerships)
Fawcett, Francisco, Paine-
Andrews, & Schultz, 2000
Hogan & Murphey, 2002
(to AECF 10-year report of
human services outcomes)
Mitchell, Florin, &
Stephenson, 2002
(experience as evaluators)

Mattessich & Monsey, 1992

(18 studies)
1. Analyzing Information About
A ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲
the Problem or Goals
2. Establishing a Vision and
B ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲
Mission
3. Defining Organizational
Structure and Operating A ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲
Mechanisms
4. Developing a Framework or
C ▲ ▲ ▲
Model of Change
5. Developing and Using Action
A ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲
Plans
6. Arranging for Community
B ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲
Mobilizers
7. Developing Leadership A ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲
8. Implementing Effective
B ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲
Interventions
9. Assuring Technical Assistance A ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲
10. Documenting Progress and
A ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲
Using Feedback
11. Making Outcomes Matter C ▲ ▲ ▲

12. Sustaining the Work C ▲ ▲ ▲

NOTE: A = Strongly recommended for practice (found in 9 or more sources); B= Recommended for practice (found in 5-8 sources); C = Recommended (with qualifications) for practice (found in 1-4 source
Fawcett, S.B., Francisco, V.T., Paine-Andrews, A., & Schultz, J.A. (2000). A model memorandum of collaboration: A proposal. Public Health Reports, 115, 174-179.
Florin, P., Mitchell, R., & Stevenson, J. (1993). Identifying training and technical assistance needs in community coalitions: A developmental approach. Health Education Research, 8, 417-432.
Foster-Fishman, P.G, Berkowitz, S.L., Lounsbury, D.W., Jacobson, S., & Allen, N.A. (2001). Building collaborative capacity in community coalitions: A review and integrative framework. American Journal of Community Psychology, 29, 241-261.
Goodman, R.M., Steckler, A., Hoover, S., & Schwartz, R. (1993). A critique of contemporary community health promotion approaches: based on a qualitative review of six programs in Maine. American Journal of Health Promotion, 7, 208-220.
Hogan, C., & Murphey, D. (2002). Outcomes: Reframing responsibility for well-being. A report to the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation.
Israel, B.A., Schultz, A.J., Parker, E., & Becker, A.B. (1998). Review of community-based research: Assessing partnership approaches to improve public health. Annual Review of Public Health, 19, 173-202.
Kegler, M.C., & Wyatt, V.H. (2003). A multiple case study of neighborhood partnerships for positive youth development. American Journal of Health Behavior, 27, 156-169.
Kreuter, M.W., Lezin, N.A., & Young, L.A. (2000). Evaluating community-based collaborative mechanisms: Implications for practitioners. Health Promotion Practice, 1, 49-63.
Mattessich, P., & Monsey, B. (1992). Collaboration: What makes it work. A review of research literature on factors influencing successful collaboration. Saint Paul, MN: Amherst H. Wilder Foundation.
Mattessich, P., & Monsey, B. (1997). Community building: What makes it work. A review of factors influencing successful community building. Saint Paul, MN: Amherst H. Wilder Foundation.
Merzel, C., & D'Afflitti, J. (2003). Reconsidering community-based health promotion: Promise, performance, and potential. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 557-574.
Mitchell, R.E., Florin, P., & Stevenson, J.F. (2002). Supporting community-based prevention and health promotion initiatives: Developing effective technical assistance systems. Health Education & Behavior, 29, 620-639.
Parker, E.A., Eng, E., Laraia, B., Ammerman, A., Dodds, J., Margolis, L., et al. (1998). Coalition building for prevention: Lessons learned from the North Carolina community-based public health initiative. Journal of Health Management Practice,
4, 25-36.
Ploeg, J., Dobbins, M., Hayward, S., Ciliska, D., Thomas, H., & Underwood, J. (1996). Effectiveness of community development projects. Retrieved May 16, 2002 from http://web.cche.net/ohcen/groups/hthu/95-5abs.htm.
Roussos, S.T., & Fawcett, S.B. (2000). A review of collaborative partnerships as a strategy for improving community health. Annual Review of Public Health, 21, 369-402.
Shortell, S.M., Zukoski, A.P., Alexander, J.A., Bazzoli, G.J., Conrad, D.A., Hasnain-Wynia, R., et al., (2002). Evaluating partnerships for community health improvement: Tracking the footprints. Journal of Health Politics, Policy, and Law, 27,
49-108.
Sorensen, G., Emmons, K., Hunt, M.K., & Johnston, D. (1998). Implications of the results of community intervention trials. Annual Review of Public Health, 19, 379-416.
 Creating Community Change using the SPF
Day 1
Session 2

Essential Process: Community Assessment

Key Elements:

1. ___________________________________________________________

A. _____________________________________________________

B. _____________________________________________________

C. _____________________________________________________

2. ___________________________________________________________

3. ___________________________________________________________

A. _____________________________________________________

B. _____________________________________________________

C. Requirement to do both:

(1.) _____________________________________________

(2.) _____________________________________________

(3.) _____________________________________________

(4.) _____________________________________________

4. ___________________________________________________________

5.____________________________________________________________

A. ____________________________________________________

B. ____________________________________________________

C. ____________________________________________________

D. ____________________________________________________

E. ____________________________________________________

F. ____________________________________________________

6
 Creating Community Change using the SPF
Day 1
Session 2

Problem Statement Worksheet:

(1) Create an effective problem statement.

The problem is . . .

____________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________

Effective or Functional Problem Statements:

A) Identify one issue or problem at a time.

B) Avoid blame.
(e.g. the problem is “young people in our neighborhood do not have enough positive activities” rather
than “the kids in Belmont have nothing to do and are trouble makers.”)

C) Avoid naming specific solutions.

(e.g. the problem is not “we don’t have a youth center” – the problem may be “young people in our
neighborhood are getting into trouble during after-school hours” for which a new youth center may be
one element of an overall solution.)

D) Define the problem by the behaviors and conditions that affect it. Good problem statements frame the
issue as either not enough good conditions / behaviors or too many bad conditions / behaviors.

E) Are specific enough to be measurable.

F) Reflect community concerns as heard during the assessment process.

(2) Chose the best framing.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________

Reframed Problems Often:

(a) Identify the lack of / too little of a POSITIVE condition or behavior.

(e.g. “Not all of our young people are graduating from high school.”)

(b) Identify presence of / too much of a NEGATIVE condition or behavior.

(e.g. “Too many of our young people are dropping out of high school.”)

(c) As both, if different constituencies seem to respond to different framings of the issue.
(e.g. “More families should have food security and no child should go hungry.”)

(3) Return to the community the “answer you heard.”

7
 Creating Community Change using the SPF
Day 1
Session 3

But Why?

The Problem Is….

8
 Creating Community Change using the SPF
Day 1
Session 3

But Why?

Why Here?... Why Here?...

The Problem Is….

Why Here?... Why Here?...

9
 Creating Community Change using the SPF
Day 1
Session 3

But Why? Problem

But Why
Here?
 Creating Community Change using the SPF
Day 2
Session 4

Essential Process: Develop a Framework or Model of Change

Why?

KEY LEARNINGS:

A framework is a structure used to give shape to something.

Like the frame of a house, a framework for a program supports and connects the parts.

A model is the example of how things will work.

Like an architect’s model of a building, a model of change depicts visually how what is done
produces the intended effects.

What does the term logic mean in this context?

For these purposes, “logic” is a sense of how things will work. It describes systems and
relationships among inputs and outputs intended to affect behavior.

What is a logic model?

A logic model presents a picture of how the effort or initiative is supposed to work. It
explains why the strategy is a good solution to the problem at hand and makes an explicit,
often visual, statement of activities and results. It keeps participants moving in the same
direction through common language and points of reference. Finally, as an element of the
work itself, the logic model can energize and rally support by declaring what will be
accomplished, and how.

11
 But why here?
Windows of
convenience stores are
covered with alcohol
But why? ads.
Example Exercise Result:

Marketing

But why here?

Alcohol industry
sponsorship of
community events.
The Problem is . . .

Underage Drinking.

12
But why here?

Local bars/ clubs

sponsor “teen night”.
But why?

Copying Adult
Behaviors.
Session 4
Day 2

But why here?

High school-aged
youth attend social
events with college
students.
Creating Community Change using the SPF
 But why here?

But why?
Example Exercise Result:

But why here?

The Problem is . . .

13
But why here?

But why?

.
Session 4
Day 2

But why here?

Creating Community Change using the SPF
 Creating Community Change using the SPF
Day 2
Session 5

Essential Process: Create or Select Interventions

KEY LEARNINGS:

What is an intervention?

To “intervene” literally means “come between.” An intervention comes between what exists (our
assessment) and where we hope things will be (our goals). Intervention refers to what is done to prevent
or alter a result—the means by which we change behavior and environmental conditions related to a
group’s goals.

What is a comprehensive intervention?

Comprehensive interventions combine multiple components and elements to produce changes and out-
comes valued by the group. It is a “complete package”: a multi-component effort (of programs, policies
and practices) intended to achieve an overall result.

What is a best practice?

Promising or best practices are those that have the potential to effectively address the issues of concern in
your community. They include programs, practices and policies that have worked elsewhere, as judged
by standards of effectiveness, feasibility, and appropriateness to the situation. A practice is a particular
way of doing things, or the activities that interventions use to get the job done.

What is an evidence-based approach?

An evidence-based approach has research information to suggest that it “works” (i.e., the intervention,
and not something else, brought about the observed improvements in related behavior and outcome). A
caution: the “evidence” may be limited or the effects too small to solve the problem or achieve the goal.
Although it may work in one situation, there may be little evidence that it will work in your situation.

14
 Creating Community Change using the SPF
Day 2
Session 5

For each personal or environmental factor insure that you are using all of the available strategies listed. Review
your logic model and check to see if your coalition relies too heavily on just one strategy. Use the table below to
brainstorm additional strategies that might strengthen your coalition’s response to problems in your community.

Intervention Components How can we do this?

1. Provide Information

2. Enhance Skills

3. Provide Support

4. Change Incentives or
Disincentives (Consequences)

5. Reduce Barriers or Enhance

Access

6. Change the Physical Design

of the Environment

7. Modifying Policies and

Broader Systems

15
 But why here? Intervention / Action:
Windows of
convenience stores are
covered with alcohol
But why? ads.
Example Exercise Result:

Marketing

But why here? Intervention / Action:

Alcohol industry
sponsorship of
community events.
The Problem is . . .

Underage Drinking.

16
But why here? Intervention / Action:

Local bars/ clubs

sponsor “teen night”.
But why?

Copying Adult
Behaviors.
Session 5
Day 2

But why here? Intervention / Action:

High school-aged
youth attend social
events with college
students.
Creating Community Change using the SPF
 But why here? Intervention / Action:

But why?
Example Exercise Result:

But why here? Intervention / Action:

The Problem is . . .

17
But why here? Intervention / Action:

But why?
Session 5
Day 2

But why here? Intervention / Action:

Creating Community Change using the SPF
 Creating Community Change using the SPF
Day 2
Session 6

Essential Process: Evaluate the Initiative

Five functions of evaluation:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Five guiding questions for creating and evaluation plan:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

18
 What do they Where is the How will I get How will I
Who Cares?
care about? information? it? share it?
External Audiences: Improving Program/Effort Process: How we do it Existing Data = Keep in mind:
Funders Accountability Protocol Decision-making cycles (when)
Supporters Clear Communication Intermediate: What we did You audience’s interests (what)
Community Better project coordination Created Data = You audience’s language (how)
How you can help them . . . Short-Term Outcomes: Instruments Balance visual/written
Internal Audiences: Individual Interests/Stories Results presentation
Staff Short/Long-Term Results K.I.S.S.
Volunteers Long-Term Outcomes: Seek feedback – “warmer/colder”
Managers Impact
Boards
Key Partners

AUDIENCE QUESTION DATA METHOD REPORT

19
Session 6
Day 2
Creating Community Change using the SPF
 DFC GRPA Core
Measures for Alcohol,
Tobacco & Marijuana: But why here? Intervention / Action:

• Average age of
onset
But why?
• Use in past 30 days
Example Exercise Result:

• Perception of risk
But why here? Intervention / Action:
• Perception of paren-
tal disapproval

The Problem is . . .

20
But why here? Intervention / Action:

But why?
Session 6
Day 2

But why here? Intervention / Action:

Creating Community Change using the SPF