Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentive Grant (SPF SIG) National Cross-Site Evaluation [Restricted Use] (ICPSR 28921)
Principal Investigator(s): United States Department of Health and Human Services. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Center for Substance Abuse Prevention
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, 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 evalua... (more info)
Access Notes
One or more files in this study are not available for download due to special restrictions; consult the restrictions note to learn more. You can apply online for access to the data. Authentication is required to apply for access.
The Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentive Grant (SPF SIG), requires the user complete an online application before access. See the ICPSR restricted data contract portal for information and instructions.
Dataset(s)
WARNING: Because this study has many datasets, the download all files option has been suppressed, and you will need to download one dataset at a time.
Study Description
Citation
United States Department of Health and Human Services. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Center for Substance Abuse Prevention. Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentive Grant (SPF SIG) National Cross-Site Evaluation [Restricted Use]. ICPSR28921-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2012-06-18. doi:10.3886/ICPSR28921.v1
Persistent URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR28921.v1
Export Citation:
- RIS (generic format for RefWorks, EndNote, etc.)
- EndNote XML (EndNote X4.0.1 or higher)
Funding
This survey was funded by:
- United States Department of Health and Human Services. National Institutes of Health. National Institute on Drug Abuse
- United States Department of Health and Human Services. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Scope of Study
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, 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.
Subject Terms: African Americans, alcohol abuse, client characteristics, college students, community participation, community health, community involvement, community service programs, continuing education, counties, crime, delinquent behavior, demographic characteristics, drug dependence, health policy, human services, illigal drugs, intervention, juveniles, labor force, law enforcement, liquor law violations, middle school, Native Americans, needs assessment, organizational structure, outcome evaluation, outreach programs, parents, planning, policies and procedures, pregnancy, program evaluation, public health, race, risk factors, schools, skill development, substance abuse, substance abuse treatment, tobacco use, training, treatment programs, young adults, zip code areas
Smallest Geographic Unit: ZIP code
Geographic Coverage: Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Guam, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Palau, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, United States, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming
Time Period:
- 2005-08--2007-09
- 2006-12-14--2007-08-14
- 2008-09-15--2009-06-30
- 2008-10-15--2009-06-15
- 2006-07-01--2006-09-30
- 2005-12--2007-12
- 2008-01-01--2008-06-30
- 2008-07-01--2008-12-31
- 2009-01-01--2009-06-30
- 2009-07-01--2009-12-31
- 2010-01-01--2010-06-30
- 2005-12--2007-12
- 2008-01-01--2008-06-30
- 2008-07-01--2008-12-31
- 2009-01-01--2009-06-30
- 2009-07-01--2009-12-31
- 2010-01-01--2010-06-30
- 2005-12--2007-12
- 2008-01-01--2008-06-30
- 2008-07-01--2008-12-31
- 2009-01-01--2009-06-30
- 2009-07-01--2009-12-31
- 2010-01-01--2010-06-30
Date of Collection:
- 2005-06--2007-08
- 2006-12-14--2007-08-14
- 2008-09-22--2009-06-30
- 2007-03-27--2008-08-22
- 2008-10-15--2009-06-15
- 2005-01-31--2006-10-31
- 2008-01-01--2008-02-15
- 2008-07-01--2008-08-15
- 2008-12-31--2009-03-15
- 2009-07-01--2009-08-15
- 2009-12-31--2010-02-16
- 2010-06-30--2010-11-16
- 2008-01-01--2008-02-15
- 2008-07-01--2008-08-15
- 2008-12-31--2009-03-15
- 2009-07-01--2009-08-15
- 2009-12-31--2010-02-16
- 2010-06-30--2010-11-16
- 2008-01-01--2008-02-15
- 2008-07-01--2008-08-15
- 2008-12-31--2009-03-15
- 2009-07-01--2009-08-15
- 2009-12-31--2010-02-16
- 2010-06-30--2010-11-16
Unit of Observation: state, community partner, intervention, ZIP code
Universe: The universe for Phase I includes 24 states and 2 terrritories in the United States. Phase II will include all States and two territories in the United States.
Data Types: administrative records data, survey data
Data Collection Notes:
Other contributors include: Robert Orwin, Principal Investigator, Westat; Rebecca M. Buchanan, Westat; John J. Park, Task Order Officer, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administrations (SAMHSA); Augusto Diana, Project Lead, National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA).
Data from the 26 comparison States are not available as part of this collection.
The study design used both quantitative and qualitative data, the latter providing process data and systems outcomes at the state and community levels, as well as context for analyzing National Outcome Measures (NOMs) and other epidemiological outcomes. However, the qualitative data are not available as part of this data collection.
Two rounds of implementation interviews were conducted. The data are not meant to be interpreted longitudinally, however, so the data file contains a combination of data collected at each time
Methodology
Study Design: The cross-site evaluation team implemented a multilevel, multi-method quasi-experimental design. The scope of the evaluation encompasses national, state, and community levels. The design included comparison conditions at both the state- and community-levels.
Sample: States were selected by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), the program funding agency, based on the merits of their applications. States, in turn, selected communities for funding using a wide variety of criteria and processes.
Weight: n/a
Mode of Data Collection: record abstracts, telephone interview, web-based survey
Data Source:
Information from quarterly management and oversight reports was extracted and coded to inform the cross-site evaluation about ongoing activities within each State. These data primarily concern staffing, SEOW/Advisory Council membership, challenges and successes for each SPF step (2004-2006).
State interviews were conducted to assess implementation of the SPF steps, cultural competence, and sustainability (2004-2009).
Members of the cross-site evaluation team coded State Strategic Plans (2005-2007)
Round 1 Interviews were conducted across 7 domains to assess state-level system changes in substance abuse prevention infrastructure and capacity (2003-2007).
Round 2 interviews were conducted across 6 domains to assess state-level system changes in substance abuse prevention infrastructure and capacity (2006-2009).
Community Partners completed the CLI using a Web-based system. Data were collected to evaluate the Community Partners' progress in implementing the SPF framework, expanding their prevention capacity, and selection and implementation of interventions, including EBPPPs. Part I of the survey collected data about each Community Partner's progress through the SPF steps (2007-2010).
Community Partners completed the CLI using a Web-based system. Data were collected to evaluate the Community Partners' progress in implementing the SPF framework, expanding their prevention capacity, and selection and implementation of interventions, including EBPPPs. Part II of the survey collected information about each of the specific intervention being implemented by each Community Partner (2007-2010).
Community Partners completed the CLI using a Web-based system. Data were collected to evaluate the Community Partners' progress in implementing the SPF framework, expanding their prevention capacity, and selection and implementation of interventions, including EBPPPs. The Geographic Area files contain information about the geographical coverage for each intervention (2007-2010).
Extent of Processing: ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection:
- Standardized missing values.
- Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.
Version(s)
Original ICPSR Release: 2012-06-12
Version History:
- 2012-06-21 Removed invalid characters in the labels.
- 2012-06-18 Edited the PI field.
Related Publications
Utilities
Update Notification
Use any of the notification links to add this study to your RSS feed; you will then receive notification if the study is substantively updated.
Metadata Exports
- Citations exports are provided above.
Export Study-level metadata (does not include variable-level metadata)
If you're looking for collection-level metadata rather than an individual metadata record, please visit our Metadata Records page.