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 Time Block 11/29/2005 10:30 AM 11:30 AM 11:30 AM 1:00 PM 1:00 PM 1:30 PM 1:30 PM 2:30 PM 2:30 PM 3:30 PM Orientation/Session I Lunch Session II Team Breakouts Session III 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:30 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:30 PM Time Block 11/30/2005 Review/Session IV Team Breakouts Session V Wrap-up Day 2

Session I Session II Session III Session IV Session V

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

Faculty: Paul Evensen, Lead Training Instructor Community Systems Group, Inc. 866-268-8299 pevensen@communitysystemsgroup.com Kareemah Abdullah, Training Coordinator CADCA National Coalition Institute 800-542-2322 ext. 226 kabdullah@cadca.org Jane Callahan, Facilitator CADCA National Coalition Institute 800-542-2322 ext. 229 jcallahan@cadca.org Eduardo Hernandez, Facilitator CADCA National Coalition Institute 800-542-2322 ext. 222 Carlton Hall, Facilitator CADCA National Coalition Institute 267-257-2976 cjhall30@hotmail.com 1 Gwen Brown, Facilitator Genesis Prevention Coalition 404-522-9690 ext. 222 gwenbrowncp4@aol.com Catherine Brunson, Facilitator Metropolitan Drug Commission 865-588-5550 mkthatcher1@aol.com Deacon Dzierzawski, Facilitator The Community Partnership 419-866-3611 deacon@communityprevention.org Sally Zellers, Facilitator Safe Streets of Topeka 785-266-4604 szellers@safestreets.org

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
2. Assess community needs and resources

The relationship between SAMHSA’s Strategic Prevention Framework and the core competencies*.

1. Create and maintain coalitions and partnerships

3. Analyze problems and goals

A. Assessment
4. Develop a framework or model of change

15. Sustain projects and initiatives.

14. Evaluate initiatives.

B. Capacity
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. 8. Improve organizational mgt. and develop-

11. Advocate for change.

10. Develop interventions.

C. Planning
9. Develop strategic and action plans.

Creating Community Change using the SPF Day 1 Session 1

D. Implementation

© Work Group for Health Promotion and Community Development, University of Kansas. The core competencies identified are intellectual 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 1. Analyzing Information About the Problem, 1. Analyzing Information About the Problem, Framework Goals, and Factors Affecting Them
Goals, and Factors Affecting Them

A. Assessment
12. Documenting Progress and 10. Documenting Progress and Using Feedback Using Feedback 11. Making Outcomes Matter 11. Making Outcomes Matter

2. Establishing Vision and Mission 2. Establishing Vision and Mission

B. Capacity
3. Defining Organizational Structure 3. Defining Organizational Structure and Operating Mechanisms and Operating Mechanisms 4. Assuring Technical Assistance 9. Assuring

E. Evaluation
10. Sustaining the Work 12. Sustaining the Work 9. Implementing Effective 8. Implementing Effective Interventions Interventions

5. Developing Leadership 7. Developing Leadership 6. Arranging Resources for 6. Arranging Resources for Community Mobilization 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 literature review conducted by Dr. Renee Boothroyd, University of Kansas – used with permission.

8. Developing and Using 5. Developing and Using Strategic and Action Plans Strategic and Action Plans

4

Chart 1.5
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)

Review Papers

Multiple Case Studies

Experiential

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, PaineAndrews, & Schultz, 2000

Hogan & Murphey, 2002 (to AECF 10-year report of human services outcomes)

1. A B A C A B A B A A C C ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

Mattessich & Monsey, 1992 (18 studies)

▲ ▲ ▲

2.

3.

4.

▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

5.

6.

Analyzing Information About the Problem or Goals Establishing a Vision and Mission Defining Organizational Structure and Operating Mechanisms Developing a Framework or Model of Change Developing and Using Action Plans Arranging for Community Mobilizers

7.

Developing Leadership

8.

Implementing Effective Interventions

9.

Assuring Technical Assistance

10.

Documenting Progress and Using Feedback

11.

Making Outcomes Matter

12.

Sustaining the Work

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.

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

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.

Mitchell, Florin, & Stephenson, 2002 (experience as evaluators)

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

Creating Community Change using the SPF Day 1 Session 2

Essential Process: Key Elements:

Community Assessment

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? But Why Here?

Problem

Creating Community Change using the SPF Day 2 Session 4

Essential Process: Why?

Develop a Framework or Model of Change

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?

Example Exercise Result:

But why? Marketing But why here? Alcohol industry sponsorship of community events.

Windows of convenience stores are covered with alcohol ads.

The Problem is . . .

Underage Drinking. But why here? Local bars/ clubs sponsor “teen night”. But why? Copying Adult Behaviors. But why here? High school-aged youth attend social events with college students.

12

Creating Community Change using the SPF Day 2 Session 4

But why here?

Example Exercise Result:

But why?

But why here?

The Problem is . . .

. But why here?

13 But why? . But why here?

Creating Community Change using the SPF Day 2 Session 4

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 outcomes 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:

Example Exercise Result:

But why? Marketing But why here? Intervention / Action: Alcohol industry sponsorship of community events.

Windows of convenience stores are covered with alcohol ads.

The Problem is . . .

Underage Drinking. But why here? Local bars/ clubs sponsor “teen night”. But why? Copying Adult Behaviors. But why here? High school-aged youth attend social events with college students. Intervention / Action: Intervention / Action:

16

Creating Community Change using the SPF Day 2 Session 5

But why here? Intervention / Action:

Example Exercise Result:

But why?

But why here? Intervention / Action:

The Problem is . . .

17 But why here? Intervention / Action: But why? Creating Community Change using the SPF Day 2 Session 5 But why here? Intervention / Action:

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

Who Cares?
Process: How we do it Intermediate: What we did Short-Term Outcomes: Results Long-Term Outcomes: Impact Created Data = Instruments Existing Data = Protocol Keep in mind: Decision-making cycles (when) You audience’s interests (what) You audience’s language (how) Balance visual/written presentation K.I.S.S. Seek feedback – “warmer/colder”

What do they care about?

Where is the information?

How will I get it?

How will I share it?

External Audiences: Funders Supporters Community

Internal Audiences: Staff Volunteers Managers Boards Key Partners

Improving Program/Effort Accountability Clear Communication Better project coordination How you can help them . . . Individual Interests/Stories Short/Long-Term Results

AUDIENCE

QUESTION

DATA

METHOD

REPORT

19 Creating Community Change using the SPF Day 2 Session 6

DFC GRPA Core Measures for Alcohol, Tobacco & Marijuana: But why here? Intervention / Action:

• But why?

Average age of onset

Example Exercise Result:

• But why here? Intervention / Action:

Use in past 30 days

Perception of risk

Perception of parental disapproval

The Problem is . . .

20 But why here? Intervention / Action: But why? Creating Community Change using the SPF Day 2 Session 6 But why here? Intervention / Action: