Jackson County Program Evaluation Project Year 3, Report 1.pdf

Goal 4Goal 4 is a fifty percent increase in the anticipated year-to-year reduction in the percentage ofparticipating students who believe alcohol is harmful to their health.Status: Currently met. Although the 2008 IYS data did not show the anticipated reduction inperceived risk of harm (the LST comparison group showed no change and TND showed a 0.3percentage point increase), Jackson County GRAA LST and TND data showed greaterincreases in the percentage of participants who believe that alcohol is harmful to their healththan the IYS comparison data. The first, second, and third years of LST showed increases of2.7, 1.9, and 1.2 percentage points, respectively, and TND showed an increase of 0.8.Goal 5Goal 5 is no change or an increase in the percentage of students reporting parental disapprovalof alcohol use.Status: Partially met. Outcomes for the first and second year of LST have met this projectgoal, whereas outcomes for the third year of LST and for TND did not. LST Years 1 and 2showed increases of 0.3 and 3.5 percentage points, respectively. LST Year 3 showed a 5.5percentage point decrease, and TND showed a 1.5 percentage point decrease.Goal 6Goal 6 is a twenty-five percent reduction in the anticipated year-to-year increase in thepercentage of participating students who report that obtaining alcohol is easy or very easy.Status: Currently met. A 9.0 percentage point increase or less in ease of obtaining alcohol isneeded to achieve this goal for LST: The change for LST Year 1 is a 2.6 percentage pointincrease; for LST Year 2, a 2.4 percentage point decrease; and for LST Year 3, a 1.4percentage point increase. A 7.0 percentage point increase or less is needed to achieve thisgoal for TND: the change is a 1.2 percentage point decrease.Goal 7Goal 7 is to demonstrate comprehensive alcohol prevention systems change in JacksonCounty.Status: Completed. All targeted activities were implemented during the first project year andhave continued into the third project year.Goal 8Goal 8 is to demonstrate local capacity to implement/sustain proven alcohol abuse preventionprograms.Status: On schedule. In almost all classrooms, school personnel lead program implementationwith limited support from ASAC prevention specialists.Goal 9Goal 9 is that seventy percent of students receiving substance abuse treatment services willsuccessfully complete their treatment program.Status: Currently met. Through December 31, 2010, 20 out of 27 students successfullycompleted treatment, yielding a 74% success rate.Overall, the project is on schedule and should continue to meet or exceed most project goalsthrough the remainder of Year 3. Of the in-school prevention programs being implemented,LST Year 2 and Year 3 each did not meet one goal, and TND has achieved all of the projectgoals.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Reportii

TABLE OF CONTENTSExecutive SummaryiIntroduction 1Background 1Project Goals 1Outcome Evaluation 2Outcome Evaluation Design and Methodology 2Outcome Data: School-Based Prevention Program 2Process Evaluation 15Process Evaluation Design and Methodology 15Action Plan Analysis 15Process Interviews 26Degree of Achievement of Process Goals 30Degree of Achievement of Counseling Goal 30Conclusion 31AppendicesAppendix 1: Survey Instrument 32Appendix 2: Other Substances Data 39Appendix 3: Project Action Plan 45Appendix 4: CMCA Logic Model 48Appendix 5: Process Interview Summaries – Years 1 & 2 50Appendix 6: School-Based Prevention Program Implementation Data 2008-10 School Years 63Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report

INTRODUCTIONBackgroundIn May 2008, the Maquoketa School District, in partnership with the Andrew, Bellevue,and Preston School Districts, was awarded a three year Grant to Reduce Alcohol Abusefrom the Department of Education. The purpose of this grant is to reduce alcohol useand abuse among secondary school students. Other partners in the grant are: TheArea Substance Abuse Council (ASAC), to provide substance abuse prevention programimplementation, technical assistance and substance abuse counseling; and the IowaConsortium for Substance Abuse Research and Evaluation (Consortium), to conduct theproject evaluation.The Consortium conducts an outcome and process evaluation of the American GothicRevisited – Jackson County Grant to Reduce Alcohol Abuse project. The outcomeevaluation provides information regarding student alcohol use and attitudes aboutalcohol use, collected from pre- and post-tests. The process evaluation analyzes thedevelopment and implementation of the project as well as the degree of achievement ofproject goals and objectives. Tracking sheets, interviews with key informants, and areview of community meeting minutes supply data for the process evaluation.The purpose of this report is to provide feedback to project implementers andstakeholders on the progress of the American Gothic Revisited – Jackson Countyproject. This report presents outcome and process data in relation to the project actionplan and degree of achievement of project goals. This report is intended to documentand analyze project activities in order to provide data that will assist project stakeholdersas they make decisions related to project implementation. This report presents resultsfrom July 1, 2008 through December 31, 2010.Project GoalsThere are nine goals for this project as set forth in the grant proposal. Goals 1 through 6relate to substance abuse prevention program outcomes, Goals 7 and 8 are processgoals, and Goal 9 is a substance abuse counseling goal. Preliminary data for each goalare included in this report. These goals include:1. A 50% reduction in the anticipated year-to-year increase in the percentage ofparticipating students who report alcohol consumption in the past 30-day period;2. A 50% reduction in the anticipated year-to-year increase in the percentage ofparticipating students who report binge drinking in the past 30-day period;3. No change or an increase in the percentage of participating students whodisapprove of alcohol use;4. A 50% increase in the anticipated year-to-year reduction in the percentage ofparticipating students who believe alcohol is harmful to their health;5. No change or an increase in the percentage of students reporting parentaldisapproval of alcohol use;6. A 25% reduction in the anticipated year-to-year increase in the percentage ofparticipating students who report that obtaining alcohol is easy or very easy;7. Demonstrate comprehensive alcohol prevention systems change in JacksonCounty;Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 1

8. Demonstrate local capacity to implement/sustain proven alcohol abuseprevention programs; and9. Seventy percent of students receiving substance abuse treatment services willsuccessfully complete their treatment program.Goals 3 and 5, as originally written, were problematic: Goal 3 was not measurable andGoal 5 was overly ambitious, given students’ reports during the first six months of theproject. The goals were revised and the revisions were approved by the ProjectOversight Committee and U.S. Department of Education in October 2008. The goals asstated above are the revised goals.OUTCOME EVALUATIONOutcome Evaluation Design and MethodologyThe outcome evaluation uses a matched pre- and post-test design. Outcome data arecollected from the youth participating in each of the programs using a survey instrumentcreated for this project that contains questions from the Government Performance andResults Act (GPRA) instrument, the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention’s CoreMeasures, and the Iowa Youth Survey (IYS). The instrument contains questions thatmeasure the project’s six outcome goals: 1) reduce underage alcohol use among youthtargeted by the prevention programs; 2) reduce binge drinking among youth targeted bythe prevention programs; 3) increase the percentage of targeted youth who disapproveof alcohol abuse; 4) increase the percentage of targeted youth who believe that alcoholabuse is harmful to their health; 5) increase the percentage of targeted youth whobelieve their parents disapprove of alcohol use; and 6) reduce the percentage oftargeted youth who believe that it is easy to obtain alcohol in their neighborhood orcommunity. Youth participating in LifeSkills Training (LST) will complete a post-test atthe end of each program year, to allow for data collection and reporting on a timely basisfor the multi-year program. See Appendix 1 on page 32 for a copy of the surveyinstrument.Outcome Data: School-Based Prevention ProgramsOne-thousand fifty-eight youth from the four school districts have completed a pre-testthrough December 31, 2010. The pre-test was administered prior to the first programlesson. Of the 1058 youth, 481 are middle school aged youth participating in LifeSkillsTraining (LST), 521 are high school aged youth participating in Project Towards No DrugAbuse (TND), and 56 are high school aged youth participating in Leadership andResiliency Program (LRP). In addition, 219 middle school students completed a pre-testprior to the first program lesson of the second year of LST, and 98 middle schoolstudents completed a pre-test prior to the first program lesson of the third year of LST.Nine-hundred seventy-four youth from the four school districts have completed a posttest.The post-test was administered after the last program lesson. Of the 974 youth,426 are middle school aged youth who participated in LST, 509 are high school agedyouth who participated in TND, and 39 are high school aged youth who participated inLRP. In addition, 213 middle school aged youth completed a post-test after the lastJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 2

program session of the second year of LST, and 84 students completed a post-test afterthe last program session of the third year of LST.As of December 31, 2010, 968 youth have completed both a pre-test and post-test (a91.5% completion rate). Of these youth, 425 are LST participants (mostly 6 th gradestudents), 504 are TND participants (mostly 9 th and 10 th grade students), and 39 are LRPparticipants (mostly 10 th and 11 th grade students). In addition, 213 students completedboth a pre-test and post-test for the second year of LST, and 84 students completedboth a pre-test and a post-test for the third year of LST. The figures throughout thisreport present outcome data on alcohol use for LST and TND; LRP has an insufficientsample size at this point in the project to report outcomes.The N figures (numbers of participants) listed throughout this report are specific to eachvariable and reflect the number of youth who responded to the survey question at bothpre-test and post-test. The N may be less than the total number of youth who completedboth a pre-test and post-test. This is due to one of three factors: 1) participants mayhave skipped an individual question (either intentionally or unintentionally) on one orboth surveys or selected more than one response; 2) data entry staff may not have beenable to determine which response was selected; or 3) data entry error occurred. Themedian number of days between the pre-test and the post-test was 47 for the first yearof LST (Minimum = 13; Maximum = 127), 98 for TND (Minimum = 46 days; Maximum =125 days), 137 for LRP (Minimum = 69; Maximum = 224); 36 for the second year of LST(Minimum = 25; Maximum = 105); and 34 for the third year of LST (Minimum = 28;Maximum = 68).Outcome data related to alcohol use are provided here. Outcome data related totobacco and marijuana use are provided in Appendix 2 on pages 39 through 44. Figures1 and 2 on pages 5 and 6 compare the pre-test to post-test change in past 30-day use ofalcohol, binge drinking, and perceived risk of harm from alcohol abuse to the averageyearly change in these three measures based on the 2008 Iowa Youth Survey (IYS) datafrom Jackson County, Iowa. (Note: Figures 17 and 18 in Appendix 2 show thesechanges in individual attitudes by program for tobacco and marijuana.) The averageyearly change was calculated by dividing the difference between the use figures for eachgrade by the number of years between grades. This was done using 6 th and 8 th gradeIYS data to provide a reference for LifeSkills Training program outcomes, and using 8 thand 11 th grade IYS data to provide a reference for Project Towards No Drug Abuseoutcomes. These average yearly change figures serve as a realistic point of referencewhen examining the programs rather than comparing to zero, or no change. It is anestimate of the change one might expect to see among youth in Iowa's generalpopulation over the course of one year. Therefore, based on natural progression asreflected in the 2008 Iowa Youth Survey data, past 30-day use of alcohol is estimated toincrease 6.5 percentage points each year for middle school students and 6.3 percentagepoints for high school students. Similarly, binge drinking is estimated to increase 4.5and 7.3 percentage points for middle school and high school students, respectively.Perceived risk of harm from alcohol abuse is estimated to remain unchanged for middleschool students and increase 0.3 percentage points for high school students. Thecomparisons of pre-test to post-test change for past 30-day alcohol use, binge drinking,and perceived risk of harm from alcohol abuse found in Figures 1 and 2 are measures ofproject Goals 1, 2, and 4.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 3

Goal 1Goal 1 calls for a 50% reduction in the anticipated year-to-year increase in thepercentage of participating students who report alcohol consumption during the past 30-days. A 3.25 percentage point increase or less in alcohol consumption is needed toachieve this goal for LST, and a 3.15 percentage point increase or less is needed forTND. Outcomes for years 1 and 3 of LST and the outcomes for TND exceed this goal.The pre-test to post-test change for LST Year 1 is a 0.5 percentage point increase; thechange for LST Year 3 is a 1.2 percentage point increase; and the change for TND is a1.6 percentage point decrease. The outcome for the second year of LST did not meetthe goal, with a 3.3 percentage point increase in past 30-day alcohol use.Goal 2Goal 2 calls for a 50% reduction in the anticipated year-to-year increase in thepercentage of participating students who report binge drinking in the past 30 days. A2.25 percentage point increase or less in binge drinking is needed to achieve this goalfor LST; a 3.65 percentage point increase or less in binge drinking is needed for TND.Outcomes for all three years of LST and for TND exceed this goal. The pre-test to posttestchange for LST Year 1 is a 1.2 percentage point decrease; the change for LST Year2 is a 0.9 percentage point increase; and the change for LST Year 3 is a 1.2 percentagepoint decrease. The change for TND is a 2.6 percentage point decrease.(Goals 1, 2, and 4 are presented together here because their outcomes contain IYScomparison data. The results of Goal 3 are presented on pages 6 and 7 since IYScomparison data are not available for that goal.)Goal 4Goal 4 calls for a 50% increase in the anticipated year-to-year reduction in thepercentage of participating students who believe alcohol is harmful to their health.Achievement of this goal as currently written is not measurable, since the 2008 IYS datadid not show the anticipated reductions in perceived risk of harm. The 2008 IYS had nochange in perceived risk from 6 th to 8 th grade students (the groups used to generate theestimate for LST) and an increase of 0.3 percentage point among 8 th to 11 th gradestudents (the groups used to generate the estimate for TND). However, LST and TNDhad greater increases in the percentage of participants who believe that alcohol isharmful to their health than the IYS comparison data. The first, second, and third yearsof LST showed increases of 2.7, 1.9, and 1.2 percentage points, respectively, and TNDshowed an increase of 0.8 percentage points.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 4

Figure 1. Life Skills Training Outcome Data and 2008 6 th and 8 th Grade Iowa YouthSurvey Data: Past 30-Day Use; Binge Drinking; and Perceived Risk of Harm76543210-1-2LST (Year 1) LST (Year 2) LST (Year 3) 2008 IYSPast 30-Day Use 0.5 3.3 1.2 6.5Binge Drinking -1.2 0.9 -1.2 4.5Perceived Risk of Harm 2.7 1.9 1.2 0.0ChangeChange in the Percentage of Youth Reporting Past 30-DayUse of Alcohol, Binge Drinking, and PerceivedRisk of Harm from Alcohol AbuseNotes: 1 The median number of days between pre- and post-tests was 47 for the first year of LST, 36 for thesecond year, and 34 for the third. IYS data is reported as an annual change estimate.2 Pre-test percentages for LST (Year 1) were: alcohol, 8.6%; binge drinking, 2.4%; and perceived risk ofharm, 92.7%. For LST (Year 2): alcohol, 8.1%; binge drinking, 2.4%; and perceived risk of harm, 93.8%.For LST (Year 3): alcohol, 15.7%; binge drinking, 6.0%; and perceived risk of harm, 92.8%.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 5

Figure 2. Project Towards No Drug Abuse Outcome Data and 2008 8 th and 11 thGrade Iowa Youth Survey Data: Past 30-Day Use; Binge Drinking; and PerceivedRisk of Harm86Change in the Percentage of Youth Reporting Past30-Day Use of Alcohol, Binge Drinking, andRisk of Harm from Alcohol AbuseChange42-4TND2008 IYSPast 30-Day Use -1.6 6.3Binge Drinking -2.6 7.3Perceived Risk of Harm 0.8 0.3Notes: 1 The median number of days between pre- and post-tests was 98 for TND. IYS data is reported asan annual change estimate.2 Pre-test percentages for these items were: alcohol, 34.8%; binge drinking, 19.1%; and perceived risk ofharm, 94.2%.0-2Goal 3Goal 3 is no change or an increase in the percentage of participating students whodisapprove of alcohol use. (Note: There is no equivalent question on the Iowa YouthSurvey, therefore no IYS comparison data is provided for student disapproval of alcoholuse.) Outcomes for LST and for TND have met this goal: both programs showincreases from pre-test to post-test in the percentage of participants who disapprove ofalcohol use. Figure 3 on page 7 shows the percentage of participants at pre-test whodisapprove of near-daily alcohol use by someone their age, and the percentage changefrom pre-test to post-test.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 6

Figure 3. Percentage of Youth Reporting Disapproval of Alcohol UseLifeSkills TrainingFirst Year(N = 417)LifeSkills TrainingSecond Year(N = 211)LifeSkills TrainingThird Year(N = 83)Project TowardsNo Drug Abuse(N = 501)Percentage of youthreporting that theyeither disapprove orstrongly disapproveof someone their agedrinking one or twodrinks of alcoholnearly every day.Pre-TestChangePre-TestChangePre-TestChangePre-TestChange89.69 +2.64 90.52 +0.95 83.13 +2.41 73.25 +3.40Figure 4 on page 8 shows outcomes by program for participants’ attitudes about alcoholuse, presenting the percentages of participants with favorable and unfavorableoutcomes for each program group. (Note: Figures 19 through 22 in Appendix 2 showchange in individual attitudes from the pre-test to the post-test by program for tobaccoand marijuana.) Favorable outcomes mean that attitudes changed in the desireddirection from pre-test to post-test (e.g., respondent did not disapprove of alcohol use atpre-test but disapproved at post-test) or remained the same and were negative towardalcohol use. Unfavorable outcomes mean that attitudes did not change in the desireddirection from pre-test to post-test (i.e., respondent felt alcohol use was a little wrong atpre-test and not wrong at all at post-test) or that the pre-test and post-test responsesremained the same and were positive toward alcohol use.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 7

Figure 4. Participant Attitudes Toward Alcohol UsePercentage of Respondents100908070605040302010Do you disapprove of someone your age drinking one ortwo drinks of alcohol nearly every day?0LST (Year 1) LST (Year 2) LST (Year 3) TNDFavorable 83.9 82.9 77.1 67.5Unfavorable 16.1 17.1 22.9 32.5Figure 5 on page 9 shows outcomes by program for participants’ perceptions of the riskof harm from alcohol use, presenting the percentages of participants with favorable andunfavorable outcomes for each program group. As described above, outcomes wereeither: 1) favorable, meaning that perceived risk changed in the desired direction frompre-test to post-test (e.g., respondent felt alcohol use posed little risk at pre-test butmoderate or great risk at post-test) or remained the same and was negative towardalcohol use; or 2) unfavorable, which means that perceived risk did not change in thedesired direction from pre-test to post-test (i.e., respondent felt alcohol use posedmoderate risk at pre-test but only slight risk at post-test) or that the pre-test and post-testresponses remained the same and were positive toward alcohol use (did not see it asposing much or any risk).Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 8

Figure 5. Participant Perceptions of Risk of Harm from Alcohol UsePercentage of Respondents100908070605040302010Do you disapprove of someone your age drinking one ortwo drinks of alcohol nearly every day?0LST (Year 1) LST (Year 2) LST (Year 3) TNDFavorable 83.9 82.9 77.1 67.5Unfavorable 16.1 17.1 22.9 32.5Goal 5Goal 5 is no change or an increase in the percentage of students reporting parentaldisapproval of alcohol use. Outcomes for the first and second year of LST have met thisproject goal, whereas the third year of LST and TND did not. Figure 6 shows thepercentage of participants at pre-test who report that their parents would disapprove oftheir alcohol use, and the percentage change from pre-test to post-test.Figure 6. Percentage of Youth Reporting Parental Disapproval of Alcohol AbuseLifeSkills TrainingFirst Year(N = 376)LifeSkills TrainingSecond Year(N = 200)LifeSkills TrainingThird Year(N = 73)Project TowardsNo Drug Abuse(N = 459)Pre-TestChangePre-TestChangePre-TestChangePre-TestChangePercentage of youthreporting that theirparents feel it wouldbe wrong or very 95.48 +0.27 a 91.00 +3.50 a 94.52 -5.48 81.70 -1.53wrong for them todrink beer, wine, orhard liquor.a A positive change value indicates the most desirable change for these questions.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 9

Figures 7 and 8 (on page 11) show outcomes for participants’ perceptions of adultattitudes toward their alcohol use, presenting the percentages of participants withfavorable and unfavorable outcomes for each program group. Figure 7 showsparticipants’ perceptions of their parents’ attitudes toward their alcohol use; Figure 8shows participants’ perceptions of the attitudes of other adults in their neighborhood.Favorable outcomes mean that perceptions toward alcohol use grew more negative(e.g., respondents reported that their parents would feel alcohol use was wrong at pretestand very wrong at post-test) or that the pre- and post-test responses remained thesame and were negative toward alcohol use. Unfavorable outcomes mean thatperceptions grew more positive toward alcohol use from pre-test to post-test (i.e.,respondents reported that adults in their neighborhood would feel alcohol use was wrongat pre-test and not wrong at post-test) or that the pre- and post-test responses remainedthe same and were positive toward alcohol use.Figure 7. Participant Perceptions of Parental Attitudes Toward Child’s Use ofAlcohol1009080706050403020100LST (Year 1) LST (Year 2) LST (Year 3) TNDFavorable 89.1 86.0 79.5 69.3Unfavorable 10.9 14.0 20.6 30.7Percentage of RespondentsHow wrong would your parents feel it would befor you to drink beer, wine, or hard liquor?Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 10

Figure 8. Participant Perceptions of Adult Neighbor Attitudes Toward Child’s Useof Alcohol1009080706050403020100LST (Year 1) LST (Year 2) LST (Year 3) TNDFavorable 81.8 80.5 76.1 56.3Unfavorable 18.2 19.5 23.9 43.7Percentage of RespondentsHow wrong would most adults in yourneighborhood and/or community feel it would befor you to drink alcohol?Goal 6Goal 6 is a 25% reduction in the anticipated annual increase in participants who reportthat obtaining alcohol is easy for someone their age. The targets are a 9.0 percentagepoint increase or less in alcohol availability for LST and a 7.0 percentage point increaseor less for TND. Both LST and TND data exceed the projected outcome for this goal.Figure 9 on page 12 and Figure 10 on page 13 present the pre-test to post-testpercentage change in perception of alcohol availability for program participants and theestimated average yearly change based on the 2008 IYS data from Jackson County.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 11

Figure 9. Life Skills Training Outcome Data and 2008 6 th and 8 th Grade Iowa YouthSurvey Data: Perceived Alcohol Availability14121086420-2-4LST (Year 1) LST (Year 2) LST (Year 3) 2008 IYSEase of Getting Alcohol 2.6 -2.4 1.4 12.0ChangeChange in the Percentage of Youth ReportingEase for a Kid Their Age to Get AlcoholNotes: 1 The median number of days between pre- and post-tests was 47 for the first year of LST, 36 for thesecond year, and 34 for the third. IYS data is reported as an annual change estimate.2” Don’t know” responses were combined with missing responses and were not included in the total whencalculating the percentages.3 Pre-test percentages for ease of obtaining alcohol were 21.6% for LST (Year 1), 36.1% for LST (Year 2),and 40.9% for LST (Year 3).Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 12

Figure 10. Project Towards No Drug Abuse Outcome Data and 2008 8 th and 11 thGrade Iowa Youth Survey Data: Perceived Alcohol Availability108Change in the Percentage of Youth ReportingEase for a Kid Their Age to Get AlcoholChange6420-2TND2008 IYSEase of Getting Alcohol -1.2 9.3Notes: 1 The median number of days between pre- and post-tests was 98 for TND. IYS data is reported asan annual change estimate.2 “Don’t know” responses were combined with missing responses and were not included in the total whencalculating the percentages.3 The percent of respondents reporting ease of getting alcohol at pre-test was 75.2% for TND.Figures 11, 12, and 13 on pages 14 and 15 display outcomes for school enjoyment,school performance, and support from an adult at school, presenting the percentages ofparticipants with favorable and unfavorable outcomes for each program group.Favorable outcomes mean that school enjoyment or performance increased (e.g.,respondents enjoyed being in school more at post-test than at pre-test) or that pre-testand post-test responses remained the same and were favorable regarding schoolenjoyment or performance. Unfavorable outcomes mean that school enjoyment orperformance decreased from pre-test to post-test (e.g., respondents tried to do their bestin school less at post-test than at pre-test), or that pre-test and post-test responsesremained the same and were unfavorable regarding school enjoyment or performance.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 13

Figure 11. School Enjoyment1009080706050403020100LST (Year 1) LST (Year 2) LST (Year 3) TNDFavorable 75.8 76.8 81.0 78.1Unfavorable 24.2 23.2 19.1 21.9Percentage of RespondentsThinking back over the past year in school, how oftendid you enjoy being in school?Figure 12. School PerformancePercentage of Respondents1009080706050403020100Thinking back over the past year in school,how often did you try to do your best in school?LST (Year 1) LST (Year 2) LST (Year 3) TNDFavorable 84.9 82.4 83.1 81.1Unfavorable 15.1 17.6 16.9 18.9Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 14

Figure 13. Support from Adult at School1009080706050403020100LST (Year 1) LST (Year 2) LST (Year 3) TNDFavorable 84.0 73.1 79.0 74.8Unfavorable 16.0 26.9 21.0 25.2Percentage of RespondentsThere is at least one adult at school that I could go tofor help with a problem.PROCESS EVALUATIONProcess Evaluation Design and MethodologyThe process evaluation provides insight into the degree of achievement of programgoals. Evaluation methods include: Analysis of the project action plan, committeemeeting participation, and documentation of Communities Mobilizing for Change onAlcohol (CMCA) activities; review of prevention program tracking sheets; processinterviews; and review of counseling data.Process data on the school-based prevention programs are collected using trackingsheets completed by Area Substance Abuse Council (ASAC) Prevention Specialists.One tracking sheet is completed for all LRP groups and another is completed for all LSTand TND groups. These forms are used to monitor program implementation, dosageand fidelity by documenting the type of program, the school where the program isimplemented, the grade level(s) of the youth participating, the number of youthcompleting the pre-test and post-test, the number of lessons implemented and thefrequency of program sessions.Action Plan AnalysisDuring the first project year, project staff followed the Action Plan submitted in the grantproposal. Many of the items in that action plan were directed toward project start-up,Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 15

such as hiring and training staff, and were accomplished during Year 1. Project staff reevaluatedthe Action Plan at the end of Year 1 and elected to use the Logic Model toguide Year 2 and Year 3 actions. See Appendix 2 on page 39 for the Year 1 ProjectAction Plan; see Appendix 3 on page 45 for the Logic Model/Year 2-3 Project ActionPlan. Please note: The inclusion of Reconnecting Youth in the Action Plan was anerror; Reconnecting Youth was never intended to be implemented as part of this project.A progress update for each activity in the action plan is provided below.Project Oversight CommitteeAs set forth in the grant application, the Project Oversight Committee meets quarterly toreview activities, student participation levels, and evaluation data. The Project OversightCommittee also provides feedback, support, and decision-making for projectimplementation. The Project Oversight Committee is comprised of nine membersincluding the four District Superintendents, the Project Coordinator (ASAC), the ProjectAssistant (ASAC), the Assistant Director of Prevention Services (ASAC), two PreventionSpecialists (ASAC), one Substance Abuse Counselor (ASAC), and the Evaluator(Consortium). District Superintendents who are unavailable send a proxy, often aPrincipal, in their stead.The Project Oversight Committee met on August 12 and November 7, 2008; January 31,April 17, June 19, and September 18, 2009; and January 15, April 30, September 16,and December 10, 2010. The majority of members attended the meetings. Duringthese meetings, presentations and discussions occurred regarding: 1) programtrainings; 2) the implementation and sustainability of prevention programs in the schools;3) the number of youth referred to counseling and seen on a regular basis; 4) CMCAimplementation progress; 5) evaluation progress updates; 6) application of preventionfunding; and 7) grant administration issues including budget revisions, submission ofbilling claims, and application for a no-cost extension of some project activities.Program TrainingsInitial trainings for the four research-based prevention programs implemented during thisproject were held within the first six months of the project. The trainings for schoolbasedprevention programs were provided as follows: LifeSkills Training programtraining on September 5, 2008, and August 11, 2009; Leadership and ResiliencyProgram training on September 16-18, 2008, and October 20-22, 2009; and ProjectTowards No Drug Abuse training on September 8 and 9, 2008. A second LifeSkillsTraining program training occurred on August 10, 2010. Figure 14 on page 17 showsthe number of people trained to implement each school-based prevention program bycommunity. Communities Mobilizing for Change on Alcohol training was provided onNovember 3 and 4, 2008, with 22 community members attending.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 16

Figure 14. Number of People Trained in Each Program Through 12/31/10Number of People Trained in Each ProgramSchoolProgramLST TND LRPMaquoketa 2 2 4Andrew 6 2 -Bellevue 7 2 2Preston 3 2 -ASAC/GRAA Staff 4 4 4Project Total 22 12 10Program KeyLST Life Skills TrainingTND Project Towards No Drug AbuseLRP Leadership and Resiliency ProgramCommunities Mobilizing for Change on Alcohol (CMCA)Implementation of CMCA activities remains mostly on schedule. Project staff andcommunity members were trained to implement CMCA in November, 2008, and theCMCA group began meeting that month. Project staff and volunteers conducted 102one-on-one interviews with community members to assess perceptions of alcoholproblems in the county and what should be done about them, and to encourageinvolvement in the community coalition or other CMCA activities. In addition, projectstaff have led a CMCA kick-off event, twenty-two community coalition meetings, fourtown hall meetings, and hosted and participated in numerous community events inseveral towns across Jackson County. The local media have provided extensivecoverage of CMCA events and activities, and the local radio talk show has hostedJackson County GRAA staff and featured project events on numerous occasions.One variance from the project action plan is that a CMCA group was not formed in eachdistrict. Rather, one CMCA group for the entire county was formed, due to the small sizeof some of the districts and a lack of initial interest in the project within some districts.This group was designed to include representatives from across Jackson County, withthe possibility of splitting the group into smaller community groups as the projectprogresses. Despite project staff’s consistent efforts, community member interest incoalition work was slow to develop. However, during the second half of the secondproject year, the coalition began to see an increase in interest and attendance fromparents in the community. In addition, a local acting company, the Peace Pipe Players,began collaborating with the group to enhance events by adding dramatizations.A comprehensive action plan for the county was developed by project staff shortly afterthe CMCA training. This plan was followed during the first project year. During thesecond project year, staff decided to focus on issues and goals outlined in the CMCALogic Model. (See Appendices 3 and 4 on pages 45 through 48 for the Project ActionJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 17

Plan and CMCA Logic Model). The CMCA logic model and action plan target four majorareas: 1) reduce minors’ access to alcohol; 2) change perceptions of the consequencesof alcohol use; 3) modify policies to ensure consistent enforcement; and 4) increaseeducation and change perceptions of underage alcohol use. The coalition beganimplementing actions during the latter half of the first project year, and has continued todo so during the first half of the third project year. Actions taken for each target areainclude:Reduce Minors’ Access to Alcohol• Alcohol Server TrainingsTwo community representatives were trained to teach Training for InterventionProcedures (TIPS) in July 2009. Since then, two alcohol server trainings havebeen held, both of which were for off-site vendors (where alcohol is sold forconsumption off site, such as grocery and convenience stores). A total of 8employees were certified, representing 2 businesses. The participatingbusinesses received a TIPS completion certificate and public recognition througha newspaper article about the training. Project staff contacted other vendorsabout trainings, but there did not appear to be sufficient incentive for them toparticipate.• Alcohol Compliance ChecksProject staff has approached the law enforcement sector about conductingalcohol compliance checks; however, law enforcement staff has not implementedchecks due to time and staffing limitations. The project staff is investigating othersources of funding for compliance checks, including the Enforcing UnderageDrinking Laws (EUDL) program through the Office of Juvenile Justice andDelinquency Prevention (U.S. Department of Justice).• Project SAFER (Safety Assessments for Events Remediation)Two signs were purchased for use at the Jackson County Fairgrounds, whichstate that persons wishing to purchase alcohol must be 21. The intent inpurchasing and displaying these signs is to reduce youth access to alcohol at thefairgrounds.The coalition purchased an ID scanner in November 2009, which is also intendedto help reduce the number of illegal sales to minors at community events. Thescanner has been used at the 2010 Jackson County Fair, Bellevue HeritageDays, Timber City Days, and for two weddings held at the Jackson CountyFairgrounds.• Signs for Alcohol Outlets (Window Clings)In April 2010, coalition members and project staff distributed one hundredwindow clings to alcohol retail outlets throughout Jackson County. These clingsremind patrons that it is illegal to purchase alcohol under the age of 21 and thatIDs will be checked.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 18

• Project Sticker ShockProject Sticker Shock is an activity designed to help reduce sales to minors. Theactivity consists of a group of students entering local alcohol outlets and placingbright stickers on cases of alcohol that remind buyers that purchasing alcohol forminors is against the law. Thirteen students and nine adults implemented ProjectSticker Shock in April 2009. Approximately 1,500 stickers were placed in 17businesses (13 convenience stores and 4 grocery stores) in 7 Jackson Countycommunities. Project Sticker Shock was implemented again in September andOctober of 2009, involving students from Maquoketa and Bellevue High Schools.Change Perception of Consequences of Alcohol Use• Media Campaign: Public Service Announcements (PSA), Letters to the Editor,and Guest ColumnsProject staff created five PSAs that have aired on the local radio stations. TwoPSAs targeted youth at prom and graduation seasons, describing the legal andsocial consequences of alcohol use as a minor. Two PSAs targeted adults,emphasizing the legal and social consequences of providing alcohol to minors.And, one PSA targeted stores and servers that sell alcohol, outlining the legaland social consequences of selling alcohol to minors. This PSA also encouragedestablishments wanting to reduce their dram shop insurance to contact theCMCA Coordinator to arrange alcohol server training. One of the PSAs alsopromoted an upcoming town hall meeting. All PSAs encouraged people tocontact the Area Substance Abuse Council if they are concerned about their ownor others’ drinking.A community member and a prevention specialist wrote articles that werepublished in three community newspapers during Alcohol Awareness Month,addressing alcohol use and the consequences of drinking.• Stickers for Prom Flower Boxes and Graduation Cake BoxesThe coalition distributed flower box inserts to area florists with a messageencouraging students not to drink alcohol on prom night. Similarly, coalitionmembers distributed cake box stickers to local bakeries encouraging studentsnot to drink alcohol at graduation parties.Modify Policies to Ensure Consistent Enforcement• Social Host OrdinanceThe coalition began working to enact a social host ordinance in each communityand in the county. No ordinance has yet been passed but the work continues.To help raise awareness of these efforts, the coalition distributed throughout thecounty 500 tote bags stuffed with flyers about the social host ordinance, thecoalition, and an upcoming town hall meeting.• Minors in Bars Ordinance(See “Social Host Ordinance” above)Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 19

• School District Good Conduct Policy Review and RevisionTwo school districts reviewed and updated their good conduct policies. PrestonHigh School’s policy now requires that students are referred to the substanceabuse counselor if a substance use violation occurs. Preston High School alsoinstalled hallway monitoring cameras that were purchased with grant funds, andhas seen a reduction in conduct violations since their installation.Increase Education and Change Perception of Underage Alcohol Use• Public Service Announcements/Media CampaignThe “Got A Minute?” campaign kicked off on June 24, 2009, with a communitypicnic. Messages encouraging parents to eat dinner with their children and talkwith them about the risks of substance use began airing on the radio in June2009.A 30-second PSA, “What’s Lurking in Maquoketa?” aired on the local radiostations prior to the March 2010 Maquoketa Town Hall Meeting. The PSAprovided statistics on Jackson County youths’ perceptions of drinking and easeof obtaining alcohol.The Maquoketa newspaper published a letter to the editor written by the projectcoordinator which promoted the successes of the school-based preventionprograms funded by the grant, and the involvement of school teachers in thoseprograms. Three area newspapers published an article featuring the work of thegrant’s CMCA Coordinator and the community coalition. The Maquoketanewspaper published a 10-page section about Red Ribbon Week that featuredstudents’ descriptions of the reasons they choose to be substance free.• Parent-to-Parent PledgesA Parent-to-Parent Pledge drive was held in August 2009 for the 2009 – 2010School Year. The pledge is for parents to provide an alcohol-free, supervisedenvironment for their children and their children’s friends who visit, and towelcome telephone calls from the parents of their children’s friends. Elevenparents signed the pledge in the initial implementation, which was an insufficientnumber to justify the cost of printing the parent handbooks. Program staff askedthose parents for suggestions of other parents to contact, and a second pledgedrive was held in September 2010. Thirteen additional parents signed pledges.• Alcohol-Free Graduation SignsProject staff is re-evaluating this approach as the signs have not appeared tohave the desired effect in the community. Staff is considering a similar approachin year three, using a different message.• Post-It NotesProject staff and coalition members distributed five thousand Post-It Note packsto parents of middle- and high-school age youth. The notes had lines forJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 20

location, time, contact number, and additional information to help parents have abetter idea of their children’s whereabouts and activities.• Let’s Talk BoxesLet’s Talk boxes are designed for families, to help parents start conversationswith their children on key issues. Each box contains suggestions for startingconversations on various topics including substance use, responsibility, anddecision-making. The project staff has distributed approximately 320 boxes atthree events to date.• Hidden in Plain SightPresenters from St. Joseph’s Mercy Health System in Detroit Michiganconducted a “Hidden in Plain Sight” program at the Maquoketa High School inOctober 2010. The program is designed for parents and centers around a mockteenager’s room that contains evidence of teen substance abuse. Thepresentation consists of a viewing of the room, discussion of the signs in theroom indicating substance use, and distribution of materials containing additionalinformation on what to look for and how to address the issue with one’s child.Twenty-four parents participated. Survey results indicated that parents found theevent very informative and helpful.• X-Treme Leadership ConferenceProject staff planned to host a summer youth conference in 2010, but cancelledplans after learning of a youth leadership conference, the “X-Treme LeadershipConference,” already planned in a neighboring county for October 2010. GRAAproject staff collaborated with the conference coordinators. The GRAA ProjectCoordinator, CMCA Coordinator, and the Prevention Specialist conducted abreak-out session on family communication and introduced the new campaigntheme for 2011: “Be The Wall”. Forty-four youth from Jackson Countyparticipated in the conference (7 from Andrew, 29 from Bellevue, and 8 from EastCentral School Districts), and project funds paid for their transportation to theevent.• Red Ribbon WalkPreston students participated in a Red Ribbon Walk in October 2010 to promoteawareness of issues surrounding youth drinking. Students earned points foreach lap walked, and the class with the most points won a pizza party.• Red Ribbon Christmas TreeThe Jackson County Prevention Coalition and project staff members sponsored aRed Ribbon Tree at the Festival of Trees in Maquoketa to promote informationabout the positive aspects of being alcohol and drug free.• Celebrate With CareProject staff and coalition members distributed hot cocoa packets around thecounty which contained a message encouraging adults to provide positive roleJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 21

modeling regarding alcohol consumption around the holidays. Volunteersdistributed over 300 packets to patrons at a Maquoketa grocery store, and alsodistributed packets to banks across Jackson County.• Communication and Collaboration with Other Community OrganizationsProject staff members have collaborated with several community organizations toprovide education and additional services to youth and adults in Jackson County.The CMCA Coordinator has also become actively involved with CommunityPartnerships for Protecting Children, the Prevention of Child Abuse Coalition,and Jackson County Planners, and has gotten information on substance abuseand available services placed in guides, calendars, and other materialsdisseminated by those organizations.Community Member Recruitment• Project staff met with local groups to introduce CMCA and to discuss upcomingCMCA actions. Thirty-one meetings were held with a variety of groups and clubsincluding, but not limited to, the City Council, Rotary Club, Optimists Club, SchoolBoard, and Chamber of Commerce.• A total of 102 one-on-one interviews with community members were completedduring the first half of the project (8 in Andrew, 19 in Bellevue, 61 in Maquoketa,and 14 in Preston). These interviews included representatives from mostcommunity sectors (see Figure 15 on page 23 for the full list of interviews bycommunity and sector). The sectors with the highest number of interviews arebusiness, faith, and education; the sectors with the fewest interviews includesenior citizens and social services.• Project staff distributed 500 tote bags at grocery stores in Maquoketa, Preston,Bellevue, and Andrew in March 2010. The tote bags contained information aboutthe coalition and an upcoming town hall meeting.• Project staff and coalition members created a webpage in July 2009 entitledCoalition Connections (http://www.coalitionconnections.com/jacksoncoalitions.php),which contains information about the coalition and CMCAactivities.• The CMCA Coordinator and a coalition member set up a Facebook page withinformation on the coalition and recent activities, such as “Hidden in Plain Sight.”• Two community members joined the coalition as a result of the “Hidden in PlainSight” presentation.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 22

Figure 15. One-On-One Interviews by Community and Sector Through 12/31/10One-on-One Interviews by Community and SectorSectorCommunityAndrew Bellevue Maquoketa Preston TotalSenior Citizens 0 0 0 0 0Business 4 7 16 3 30Media 0 1 2 1 4Civic Groups 0 1 5 0 6Government 1 2 6 2 11Faith 0 2 6 3 11Law Enforcement 0 1 4 1 6Youth 1 0 6 0 7Parents/Families 1 3 0 1 5Health CareProviders 0 1 9 0 10Education 1 1 7 3 12Social Services 0 0 0 0 0Unknown 0 0 0 0 0Total 8 19 61 14 102School-Based Prevention ProgramsImplementation of the school-based prevention programs is as follows:• Life Skills Training (LST)The implementation of the LifeSkills Training program is on target with the actionplan. The LST Core Program has been completed with three groups of 6 th gradestudents in the Andrew School District, five groups of 6 th grade students in theBellevue School District, twelve groups of 6 th grade students in the MaquoketaSchool District, and six groups of 7 th grade students in the Preston SchoolDistrict. The 6 th or 7 th grade level is the appropriate target population for the LSTCore Program. Fidelity requires that a minimum of 15 LST lessons beimplemented one to five times per week. LST was implemented with dosagefidelity for all groups.The first year of the LST Booster Program has been completed in several classgroups in all four school districts. With the exception of students who had movedaway, the first year booster lessons were taught to all 7 th graders who hadparticipated in the LST Core Program in 6 th grade in the Andrew, Bellevue, andMaquoketa School Districts, and with all 8 th graders who had participated in theJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 23

Process InterviewsKey informant process interviews were conducted December 3 rd through 14 th , 2010.Interviews were conducted with eight of the nine of the eligible stakeholders. Eligiblepeople included school district superintendents, the project coordinator, the projectassistant, the counselor, and program implementation staff. Interview participants wereprovided with the list of questions prior to the scheduled interview and were given asmuch time as they thought they needed to prepare for them. Interviews were conductedby telephone and lasted between 10 and 40 minutes. Participation was voluntary andthere were no anticipated risks associated with interview completion. Interviewparticipants were cooperative and provided constructive feedback regarding the project.Responses were kept confidential using the following methods: 1) data collected fromthe interviews is reported in aggregate form without any identifying information; 2) notesare kept in a locked file cabinet in a locked office until this report is finalized, then allwritten notes are destroyed; and 3) electronic reports are maintained on a securedatabase and all individual responses are destroyed once this report is finalized.Responses to each question were synthesized and are provided below. Summaries ofprevious interviews may be found in Appendix 5, pages 50 through 62.1. What successes have you observed or experienced during the first half of theJackson County Alcohol Abuse Prevention/Reduction Project?• The success most frequently cited during this round of interviews was that ofthe school-based prevention programs. The LifeSkills Training program wasmost frequently cited as a success. Respondents also indicated that thestudents seem to be taking the programs and the surveys more seriously,and that the Leadership and Resiliency Program students greatly enjoy theservice projects.• The second most frequently cited success was that community awarenessand parental involvement in the project has increased. Parents are becomingactively involved in the coalition and are making positive contributions to thecommunity education/outreach efforts.• A few respondents cited the increased success of the counseling servicesthis year: Use of the services has increased, and all of the schools have nowreferred students for services. School personnel also indicated that it is ahelpful resource and should be continued.2. What problems have you encountered so far in the project? How did you dealwith these problems, or what solutions did you come up with to overcome theseproblems?• Several respondents indicated that the main problems continue to be denialthat underage alcohol use is a problem and the lack of involvement on thepart of community members, in spite of project staff’s best efforts. However,respondents also indicated that community involvement in project activities isstarting to increase.• Other problems reported include: 1) few counseling referrals, which wasaddressed through meetings with personnel at each school at the beginningJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 26

of the school year and implementing school staff’s suggestions for methodsof advertising the service; 2) the Project Towards No Drug Abuse programnot fitting with one school’s philosophy, which was addressed by the schooldeciding not to continue the program beyond the project period; and 3)inadequacy of the training and technical assistance for CommunitiesMobilizing for Change on Alcohol, which was addressed by implementingactivities that were appropriate for and met the needs of individualcommunities.• Some respondents reported that there have been issues related to lack ofcommitment and reliability with some project and school staff members. Theissue with the project staff person was addressed by the supervisor, whospoke with that staff person and a school staff member who monitors thatperson’s schedule at the school. This problem appears to be resolved. Theproblem with the school staff person is currently being addressed: TheProject Coordinator spoke with the project staff person who co-teaches withthe school staff member, and the project staff person will outline clearexpectations in class for both students and co-teachers, and will also speakto the school staff person individually.3. a.) What CMCA actions have had the greatest success?• Most respondents identified Hidden in Plain Sight as the most successfulCMCA action thus far. These respondents noted that Hidden in Plain Sightwas well attended and garnered positive feedback from participants.• A few respondents indicated that Sticker Shock had the greatest success,with one noting that the involvement of the Leadership and ResiliencyProgram students had a positive influence on those students.• Additional successes mentioned were the overall increase in communityinvolvement in activities and the coalition, and the new social marketingcampaign involving students.b.) Have any CMCA actions not met your expectations?• Most respondents did not identify any actions that did not meet expectations,but mentioned two planned events that did not occur: 1) Shoulder-to-Shoulder, a parent training event that fell through due to issues on the part ofthe training organization; and, 2) the summer leadership conference, whichproject staff decided to forgo in lieu of a fall youth conference being hosted ina nearby county. Project staff presented a workshop on familycommunication at the conference, and project funds paid transportation costsfor Jackson County youth to attend that event.• One respondent reported that the police remain too busy and under-funded toperform compliance checks. Project staff is looking into additional sources offunding for this.c.) What other actions would you like to implement as part of CMCA?Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 27

• Two respondents mentioned that they would like to see more informationdisseminated to parents, adults, and youth about the broader effects ofalcohol on youth and their lives.• Respondents also indicated they would like to see the Shoulder-to-Shoulderparent training and additional server trainings implemented.4. Have you attended any local meetings or presentations associated with thisproject? If so, which ones? What worked well? What did not work as well asyou would have liked? How can these be improved upon?• All respondents who have attended local presentations indicated that theevents went well and that while attendance has historically been low, theyhave seen increased attendance at most recent events.• Respondents indicated that the staff is doing a good job of advertising theevents and varying meeting/event times and venues in effort to accommodatemore community members.• Several respondents commented that implementing the suggestions of theparents who have become involved in the activities has worked out very welland that their ideas should continue to be supported and implemented.5. What suggestions do you have for improving the project?• Several respondents recommended continuing to find new ways to connectwith and engage the community. Respondents suggested offering meals atmeetings and using social networking sites.• Several respondents indicated that the funding period should be longer thanthree years. They indicated that three years is not sufficient to establisheffective professional network connections within the communities andchange ingrained mindsets.• Some respondents indicated that obtaining greater buy-in and support ofprevention programming on the part of school staff would improve the project.• Some respondents indicated that they would like to see increasedcommunication regarding certain aspects of the project, including how andwhether items purchased with project funds are currently being used, thestatus of server trainings, and what outreach efforts are being made currentlyin the smaller communities in the county.6. How closely did implementation match the plan? What deviations, if any,occurred? What led to the deviations and what was the impact on the project?(Answered by implementation staff and the project coordinator only.)• Respondents indicated that the project has closely matched the plan otherthan a few deviations with the school-based prevention programming. AsJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 28

mentioned in earlier reports, one school is not implementing LifeSkillsTraining in the 6 th grade, and Project Towards No Drug Abuse is beingimplemented in 9 th grade in two schools and in 10 th grade in another. Thesedeviations occurred in order to accommodate the schools’ needs.• Respondents also reported two deviations that occurred this year withLeadership and Resiliency Program (LRP) implementation. First, BellevueCommunity School District is not implementing LRP this year due to the lossof their trained facilitator and insufficient school staff support for maintainingthe program. Second, LRP is not being implemented with fidelity in one otherschool as there are not two facilitators present for all sessions.7. What activities have been initiated to sustain prevention programming beyondthe grant? (Answered by superintendents, the project assistant, and the projectcoordinator only.)• Respondents indicated that LifeSkills Training will continue in some mannerin three of the schools, being built into the curriculum of other classes.However, the program will be continued in only one grade at one of thoseschools. Project Towards No Drug Abuse will become part of the healthcurriculum in one high school.• Three schools have been unable to find funding to continue the Leadershipand Resiliency Program, and one school is still seeking other funding options.• Several respondents indicated that they are looking into options forcontinuing the counseling services in the schools.8. What activities has the oversight committee undertaken to effect system-widechange? (This question is answered by superintendents, the project assistant,and the project coordinator only.)• Respondents stated that the oversight committee has helped schoolsaddress problems, identify the best ways to use project funds and maintainproject services in the schools, and address barriers. Two system changesthat have occurred are the implementation of Good Conduct Policies and thepurchase and use of security cameras in some schools. One respondentindicated that statistics are showing fewer disciplinary problems since thecameras were put into use.• Respondents also stated that the oversight committee has effected systemwidechange through providing overall support and guidance for the project.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 29

Degree of Achievement of Process GoalsProgress continues to be made on the project’s two process goals: Goal 7, demonstratecomprehensive, county-wide alcohol prevention system change; and Goal 8,demonstrate local capacity to implement and sustain research-based preventionprograms.Goal 7In order to achieve Goal 7, project staff have integrated research-based preventionprograms county-wide at the middle school, high school, and community levels. Thebaseline measure for this goal is limited implementation of research-based preventionprograms. Prior to the start of this project, research-based prevention programs had notbeen implemented with fidelity in any of the participating school districts. This goal hasbeen achieved.Goal 8In order to achieve Goal 8, project staff is implementing all three steps of the project’ssustainability plan 1 . The project is ahead of schedule for this goal. During the firstproject year, the first step of the sustainability plan was implemented. In severalclassrooms, ASAC prevention specialists led program implementation while school staffobserved and were trained in the programs. In the remaining classrooms, school staffwho had previous implementation experience led program implementation with ASACprevention specialists providing technical assistance. During the second project year,the majority of program implementation was lead by school personnel with limitedsupport from ASAC prevention specialists, with the exception of LRP, and this continuesin the third project year.Degree of Achievement of Counseling GoalGoal 9The ninth project goal is a 70% successful completion rate of students receivingsubstance abuse treatment services. Counseling services were provided by a trainedsubstance abuse counselor as part of this project. One counselor served students fromall four school districts. During the first two and one-half years of the project, thecounselor assessed 43 students and provided extended outpatient counseling (EOC) to41 students.This goal has been met. Through December 31, 2010, 27 students were dischargedfrom counseling. Of these 27 students, 20 successfully completed treatment, yielding a74% success rate.1 Step 1: During the first project year, ASAC prevention specialists have the lead role in programimplementation and school staff has an observation/limited teaching role and receive training in theprograms.Step 2: During the second project year, school staff take the lead role and ASAC prevention specialistsprovide technical assistance.Step 3: During the third project year, school staff have the lead role with minimal support from ASACprevention specialists.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 30

CONCLUSIONThe American Gothic Revisited – Jackson County project, a Grant to Reduce AlcoholAbuse from the U.S. Department of Education, has had positive effects within thecounty. Of the six substance abuse prevention program goals, the project is meeting orexceeding the target for four goals in all program groups and exceeding the other twogoals for two and three of the four program groups. Substance abuse preventionprogram outcomes exceed the goals for binge drinking, disapproval of alcohol use,perceived risk of harm from alcohol use, and alcohol availability for all program groups.Program outcomes exceeded the goal for past 30-day alcohol use for LifeSkills TrainingYears 1 and 3, and for Project Towards No Drug Abuse. Program outcomes exceed thegoal for students reporting parental disapproval of alcohol use for LifeSkills TrainingYears 1 and 2.While community coalition (Communities Mobilizing for Change on Alcohol group)development has not occurred as planned due to the small size of some of the districtsand a lower than anticipated level of readiness within some districts, interest andinvolvement in coalition activities and project events is increasing and the project ismeeting the comprehensive alcohol prevention systems change goal.The project is on schedule for the goal of implementing and sustaining proven alcoholabuse prevention programs, and is exceeding the substance abuse counseling goal.Overall, the project is on schedule and it appears that the project will continue to meet orexceed most goals in Year 3.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 31

Appendix 1Survey InstrumentJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 32

Jackson County GRAA SurveyIdentification NumberSurvey TypeMonthDay___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ __________ Program Year 1 Pre-test_______ Program Year 1 Post-test_______ Program Year 2 Pre-test_______ Program Year 2 Post-test_______ Program Year 3 Pre-test_______ Program Year 3 Post-test_______ January_______ February_______ March_______ April_______ May_______ June_______ July_______ August_______ September_______ October_______ November_______ December___ ___Year _______ 2008_______ 2009_______ 2010_______ 2011_______ 2012School DistrictPrevention Program_______ Maquoketa_______ Andrew_______ Bellevue_______ Preston_______ Life Skills Training_______ Project Toward No Drug Abuse_______ Leadership and Resiliency ProgramJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 33

Demographic Characteristics1. What is your current age? _______ 10 or younger_______ 11_______ 12_______ 13_______ 14_______ 15_______ 16_______ 17_______ 18_______ 19 or older2. What grade are you in? _______ 6 th_______ 7 th_______ 8 th_______ 9 th_______ 10 th_______ 11 th_______ 12 th3. Are you a male or female? _______ Male_______ Female4. Which of the following best describesyou?_______ White_______ Arab American_______ Black/African American_______ American Indian/Alaskan Native_______ Asian American_______ Native Hawaiian/Other PacificIslander_______ Hispanic/Latino_______ Other, including mixed ethnicity30-day Use1. On how many occasions during thepast 30 days (if any) have you had atleast one drink of alcohol (glass,bottle or can of beer; glass of wine,liquor or mixed drink)?_______ 0 occasions_______ 1 - 2 occasions_______ 3 - 5 occasions_______ 6 - 9 occasions_______ 10 - 19 occasions_______ 20 - 39 occasions_______ 40 or more occasionsJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 34

2. On how many occasions during thepast 30 days (if any) have you beendrunk or very high from drinkingalcohol?3. How frequently have you smokedcigarettes during the past 30 days?4. How frequently have you usedsmokeless tobacco during the past 30days?5. On how many occasions during thepast 30 days (if any) have you usedmarijuana (grass, pot) or hashish(hash, hash oil)?_______ 0 occasions_______ 1 - 2 occasions_______ 3 - 5 occasions_______ 6 - 9 occasions_______ 10 - 19 occasions_______ 20 - 39 occasions_______ 40 or more occasions_______ Not at all_______ Less than one cigarette per day_______ One to five cigarettes per day_______ About one-half pack per day_______ About one pack per day_______ About one and one-half packs perday_______ Two packs or more per day_______ Not at all_______ Once or twice_______ Once to twice per week_______ Three to five times per week_______ About once a day_______ More than once a day_______ 0 occasions_______ 1 - 2 occasions_______ 3 - 5 occasions_______ 6 - 9 occasions_______ 10 - 19 occasions_______ 20 - 39 occasions_______ 40 or more occasionsBinge Drinking1. On how many occasions during thepast 30 days (if any) have you hadfive or more drinks of alcohol(glasses, bottles or cans of beer;glasses of wine, liquor or mixeddrinks) in a row, that is within acouple of hours?_______ 0 occasions_______ 1 - 2 occasions_______ 3 - 5 occasions_______ 6 - 9 occasions_______ 10 - 19 occasions_______ 20 - 39 occasions_______ 40 or more occasionsJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 35

Attitudes Toward Use1. Do you disapprove of someone yourage drinking one or two drinks ofalcohol (glasses, bottles or cans ofbeer; glasses of wine, liquor or mixeddrinks) nearly every day?2. Do you disapprove of someone yourage drinking five or more drinks ofalcohol once or twice each weekend?3. Do you disapprove of someone yourage smoking one or more packs ofcigarettes per day?4. Do you disapprove of someone yourage using smokeless tobaccoregularly?_______ Strongly disapprove_______ Disapprove_______ Don't disapprove_______ Strongly disapprove_______ Disapprove_______ Don't disapprove_______ Strongly disapprove_______ Disapprove_______ Don't disapprove_______ Strongly disapprove_______ Disapprove_______ Don't disapprove5. Do you disapprove of someone yourage smoking marijuana regularly?_______ Strongly disapprove_______ Disapprove_______ Don't disapprovePerceived Harm/Risk of Use1. How much do you think you riskharming yourself (physically orotherwise) if you drink three or moredrinks of alcohol (glasses, bottles orcans of beer; glasses of wine, liquor ormixed drinks) nearly every day?2. How much do you think you riskharming yourself (physically orotherwise) if you drink five or moredrinks of alcohol once or twice eachweekend?3. How much do you think you riskharming yourself (physically orotherwise) if you smoke cigarettesevery day?_______ Great risk_______ Moderate risk_______ Slight risk_______ No risk_______ Great risk_______ Moderate risk_______ Slight risk_______ No risk_______ Great risk_______ Moderate risk_______ Slight risk_______ No riskJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 36

4. How much do you think you riskharming yourself (physically orotherwise) if you use smokelesstobacco every day?_______ Great risk_______ Moderate risk_______ Slight risk_______ No risk5. How much do you think you riskharming yourself (physically orotherwise) if you smoke marijuanaonce a week?_______ Great risk_______ Moderate risk_______ Slight risk_______ No riskSchool Bonding/Commitment1. Thinking back over the past year inschool, how often did you enjoy beingin school?2. Thinking back over the past year inschool, how often did you try to doyour best in school?3. During the LAST FOUR WEEKS,how many whole days have youmissed because you skipped or cut?4. During the LAST FOUR WEEKS,how many whole days have youmissed for other reasons?_______ Almost always_______ Often_______ Sometimes_______ Seldom_______ Never_______ Almost always_______ Often_______ Sometimes_______ Seldom_______ Never_______ None_______ 1_______ 2_______ 3_______ 4 to 5_______ 6 to 10_______ 11 or more_______ None_______ 1_______ 2_______ 3_______ 4 to 5_______ 6 to 10_______ 11 or more5. My teachers care about me. _______ Strongly agree_______ Agree_______ Disagree_______ Strongly disagreeJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 37

6. I care about my school. _______ Strongly agree_______ Agree_______ Disagree_______ Strongly disagree7. I plan to finish high school. _______ Strongly agree_______ Agree_______ Disagree_______ Strongly disagree8. There is at least one adult at schoolthat I could go to for help with aproblem._______ Strongly agree_______ Agree_______ Disagree_______ Strongly disagree9. At school, my grades are mostly… _______ Excellent_______ Above average_______ Average_______ Below average_______ FailingFamily and Community Bonding1. In my home there are clear rules aboutwhat I can and cannot do.2. In your neighborhood or community,how difficult do you think it would befor a kid your age to get alcoholicbeverages?3. How wrong would most adults in yourneighborhood and/or community feelit would be for you to drink alcohol?4. How wrong would your parents feel itwould be for you to drink beer, wine,or hard liquor?_______ Strongly agree_______ Agree_______ Disagree_______ Strongly disagree_______ Very hard_______ Hard_______ Easy_______ Very easy_______ Don’t know_______ Very wrong_______ Wrong_______ A little wrong_______ Not wrong at all_______ Don’t know_______ Very wrong_______ Wrong_______ A little wrong_______ Not wrong at all_______ Don’t knowJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 38

Appendix 2Other Substances DataJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 39

Tobacco and Marijuana Use by ProgramAs shown in Figure 17, all years of LST had a positive effect on cigarette and marijuanausage. Year 1 and Year 3 show a decrease from pre-test to post-test in the percentageof participants who smoked cigarettes in the past 30 days, and Year 2 shows anincrease of only 0.5 percentage point, which is lower than the 2008 IYS estimate of a 3.5percentage point increase. For past 30-day use of marijuana, there is a 0.2 percentagepoint increase from pre- to post-test for the first year and no change for the second year,both of which are lower than the 2008 IYS estimate of a 2.0 percentage point increase.The third year of LST shows a 3.6 percentage point decrease in past 30-day marijuanause.Figure 17. Life Skills Training Outcome Data and 2008 6 th and 8 th Grade IowaYouth Survey Data: Past 30-Day Use of Cigarettes and Marijuana543210-1-2-3-4-5LST (Year 1) LST (Year 2) LST (Year 3) 2008 IYSCigarettes -0.2 0.5 -2.4 3.5Marijuana 0.2 0.0 -3.6 2.0ChangeChange in the Percentage of Youth Reporting Past 30-DayUse of Cigarettes and MarijuanaNotes: 1 The median number of days between pre- and post-tests was 47 for the first year of LST, 36 for thesecond year, and 34 for the third. IYS data is reported as an annual change estimate.2 A negative value or value lower than the IYS value is a favorable outcome.3 Pre-test percentages for LST (Year 1): cigarettes, 1.6%; and marijuana, 0.5%. For LST (Year 2):cigarettes, 1.4%; and marijuana, 0.9%. For LST (Year 3): cigarettes, 7.1%; and marijuana, 7.2%.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 40

As shown in Figure 18, TND had a positive effect on cigarette use. Specifically, for past30-day use of cigarettes, there is a 2.0 percentage point increase from pre-test to posttest,which is less than the 2008 IYS estimate of a 3.3 percentage point increase.Marijuana use increased by 1.0 percentage points, which is the same as the estimatedchange from the IYS data.Figure 18. Project Towards No Drug Abuse Outcome Data and 20088 th and 11 thGrade Iowa Youth Survey Data: Past 30-Day Use of Cigarettes and Marijuana5Change in the Percentage of Youth Reporting Past 30-Day Use of Cigarettes and Marijuana4Change3210TND2008 IYSCigarettes 2.0 3.3Marijuana 1.0 1.0Notes: 1 The median number of days between pre- and post-tests was 98 for TND. IYS data is reported asan annual change estimate.2 A negative value or value lower than the IYS value is a favorable outcome.3 Pre-test percentages for these items were: cigarettes, 11.8%; marijuana, 6.6%.Attitude and Perceived Risk of Harm from TobaccoFigures 19 and 20 show outcomes for individual attitudes and perceived risk of harmfrom cigarette use by program, presenting the percentages of participants with favorableand unfavorable outcomes for each program group. Favorable outcomes mean thatattitudes changed in the desired direction (grew more negative toward cigarette use,e.g., respondent disapproved of cigarette use at pre-test and strongly disapproved atpost-test), or that the pre- and post-test responses remained the same and werenegative toward cigarette use; unfavorable outcomes mean that attitudes did not changein the desired direction from pre-test to post-test (grew more positive toward cigaretteuse, i.e., respondent felt cigarette use posed moderate risk at pre-test and no risk atpost-test) or that the pre- and post-test responses remained the same and were positivetoward cigarette use.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 41

Figure 19. Attitudes Toward Cigarette Use1009080706050403020100LST (Year 1) LST (Year 2) LST (Year 3) TNDFavorable 90.9 90.7 89.0 79.0Unfavorable 9.1 9.3 11.0 21.0Percentage of RespondentsDo you disapprove of someone your age smoking oneor more packs of cigarettes per day?Figure 20. Perceived Risk of Harm from Cigarette UsePercentage of Respondents1009080706050403020100How much do you think you risk harming yourself if yousmoke cigarettes every day?LST (Year 1) LST (Year 2) LST (Year 3) TNDFavorable 89.4 88.1 79.5 83.6Unfavorable 10.6 11.9 20.5 16.4Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 42

Attitude and Perceived Risk of Harm from MarijuanaFigures 21 and 22 show outcomes for individual attitudes and perceived risk of harmfrom marijuana use by program, presenting the percentages of participants withfavorable and unfavorable outcomes for each program group. Favorable outcomesmean that attitudes changed in the desired direction (grew more negative towardmarijuana use, e.g., respondent disapproved of marijuana use at pre-test and stronglydisapproved at post-test), or that the pre- and post-test responses remained the sameand were negative toward marijuana use; unfavorable outcomes mean that attitudesgrew more positive toward marijuana use from pre-test to post-test (i.e., respondentstrongly disapproved of marijuana use at pre-test and didn’t disapprove at post-test), orthat the pre- and post-test responses remained the same and were positive towardmarijuana use.Figure 21. Attitudes Toward Marijuana Use1009080706050403020100LST (Year 1) LST (Year 2) LST (Year 3) TNDFavorable 92.5 92.0 91.4 75.9Unfavorable 7.6 8.0 8.6 24.1Percentage of RespondentsDo you disapprove of someone your age smokingmarijuana regularly?Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 43

Figure 22. Perceived Risk of Harm from MarijuanaPercentage of Respondents1009080706050403020100How much do you think you risk harming yourself ifyou smoke marijuana once a week?LST (Year 1) LST (Year 2) LST (Year 3) TNDFavorable 88.0 86.0 76.9 73.4Unfavorable 12.0 14.0 23.1 26.7Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 44

Appendix 3Project Action Plan Year 1September 1, 2008 – August 31, 2009Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 45

Program Elements and Action Steps Year 1Se Oc No De Ja Fe Ma Ap My Jn Jl AuTimeline:Advertise/hire Maquoketa, ASAC & Consortium Staff 1 ♦ ♦Form Project Oversight Committee & Meet Quarterly 1 ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦Travel to Grantor TA, Project Director and OSDFSAs scheduled by OSDFSconferences 1, 2CMCA Element Action Steps 2, 3, 5, :Form Local CMACA Committees in each districtIdentify access/systems change priorities; Examples♦ ♦♦♦♦include:♦ Retailer/Server trainings♦ Increase Compliance Checks & Law enforcement♦ Parental commitments to not providing to minors♦ Social marketing campaigns on risks of providing tominors♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦Implement identified CMCA strategies, including one-ononesEvaluate results & modify PY2 action plan♦ ♦LST Elements Action Plan 4, 6 ,Identify middle schools teachers who will teach LifeSkillsObtain Materials & train ASAC Staff and teachers onLSTInitiate LST at middle schools using these modelsEvaluate results & modify PY2 action planIdentify in-service school staff to co-teach in PY2PTNDA Element Action Plan 4, 6 ,Obtain PTNDA materials & Train ASAC staff & TeachersInitiate PTNDA program with 9 th gradersEvaluate results & modify PY2 action planIdentify teachers to co-teach PTNDA in year 2In-service school staff to co-teach PTNDA in Year 2Leadership and Resiliency Program Element Action Plan4, 6 ,Obtain LRP program materials & Train ASAC staff and♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 46

teachersRecruit HS students & initiate LRP programEvaluate results & modify PY2 action planIn-service HS staff to co-facilitate LRP Program in PY 2Reconnecting Youth Element Action Plan 4, 6 ,Obtain RY program materials & Train ASAC staff &teachersRecruit HS students & initiate RY programEvaluate results & modify PY2 action planIn-service HS staff to co-facilitate RY Program in PY 21, 2, 7Evaluation Action PlanMeet with evaluation consultant and finalize evaluation planCollect & analyze process/outcome data with evaluatorShare data with Oversight Committee for review/feedbackDevelop annual project report &modify PY2 action plan♦♦♦♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦♦♦ ♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦ ♦♦♦Responsibility: 1=Proj Director; 2=CMCA Coordinator; 3= Superintendents; 4=School Staff; 5=CMCA Groups; 6=PreventionSpecialists; 7=Consortium♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 47

Appendix 4CMCA Logic ModelProject Action Plan, Years 2 and 3September 1, 2009 – June 30, 2011Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 48

Logic Model – Underage DrinkingTheory of Change: Implementing multiple strategies to address underage drinking will likely delay use and use less.Problem Statement Strategy Activities OutcomesProblem But why? But why here? Short Term Intermediate Long-Term 1Too many ofJacksonCounty’syouth aredrinkingalcohol.51% ofJCSD’s 11 thgraders haveconsumed atleast onedrink in thepast 30days.*42% ofJCSD’s 11 thgraders havedriven amotor vehicleafter usingany amountof alcohol ordrugs in thepast 30days.*Social normstolerate and/orencourageunderagedrinkingBecausealcohol is easyto obtain.Parents & adults condone thebehavior (rite of passage).24% of JCSD’s 11 th gradersreport that their parents viewdrinking alcohol as not wrongat all or a little wrong.*Youth do not think drinkingalcohol is dangerous.19% of JCSD’s 11 th gradersthink that there is no risk orslight risk when drinking 3 ormore alcoholic drinks/day.*Youth report their peerscondone drinking alcohol.64% of JCSD’s 11 th gradersreport that their best friendswould feel that drinkingalcohol is not wrong at all ora little wrong.*Jackson County has a highnumber of bars and retailoutlets that sell alcohol.Jackson County has 94active liquor licenses. **Changingconsequence.Modifypolicies.Changingconsequence.Perceptionchange &IncreaseEducation.Reduceaccess.77% of JCSD’s 11 th gradersSay that alcohol is either easy overy easy to get.** 2005 Iowa Youth Survey, Jackson County Community School Districts.** State of Iowa, Alcoholic Beverages Division.Educate parentsand youth of theconsequenceswhen caughtdrinking alcohol.JCSD’s willconsistentlyenforce theirpolicy on studentscaught drinkingunderage.Develop a socialmarketingcampaigntargeted at youthon the dangers ofunderage alcoholuse.Develop a socialmarketingcampaign toreduceacceptance ofunderage alcoholuse.Offer TIPStraining to allemployees whosell alcohol.Material is writtenand publishedregardingconsequences ofunderagedrinking.Recruit keymembers.Review localprocedures.Recruit youth todevelop socialmarketingcampaign.Develop thecampaign.Recruit youth.Developcampaign.Recruit alcoholvendors toparticipate in theTIPS program.More parents andyouth know theconsequences ofunderage drinking.Develop plan toaddress deficiencies.Implement plan.Evaluate the plan.Make appropriatechanges.Implement campaign.Evaluate campaign.Modify changes asneeded.Implement campaign.Evaluate campaign.Alcohol vendorsrequire alcohol sellersand cashiers tocomplete the TIPStraining.By July 2011, 60% ofJCSD’s 11 th graders willnot have consumed anyalcohol in the past 30days.By July 2011, 90% ofJCSD’s 11 th graders willreport high or moderaterisk when drinkingalcohol.By July 2011, 90% ofJCSD’s 11 th graders willreport that their parentsview underage drinkingas very wrong or wrong.By July 2011, 60% ofJCSD’s 11 th graders willreport that their bestfriends would feel thatdrinking alcohol is verywrong or wrong.By July 2011, 75% ofalcohol vendors willhave wait staff trained inTIPS.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 49

Appendix 5Process Evaluation InterviewSummariesJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 50

Year 1 Round 1July 1, 2008 – January 31, 20091. What successes have you observed or experienced during the first six months ofthe Jackson County Alcohol Abuse Prevention/Reduction Project?• Four respondents stated that the project has received positive mediacoverage. Several respondents noted an increase in community awareness ofand more discussions within the community about the underage drinkingproblem. Three respondents stated/indicated that the prevention programshad been implemented quickly and without any problems.2. What problems have you encountered during the first six months of the project?How did you deal with these problems, or what solutions did you come up with toovercome these problems?• Six respondents stated that one problem was a lack of support. Four of theserespondents noted a lack of support from school personnel for programimplementation. Two respondents identified a lack of community support forthe project. Suggested solutions included improving communications,promoting the project and prevention programs, and holding implementationmeetings in each district.• Two respondents stated that LRP did not start as early as planned. Theserespondents stated that training was not provided soon enough and that it tooklonger to identify and recruit student participants. As a result, LRP was notimplemented during the first semester of the first project year as planned.Two respondents identified problems interfacing the prevention programs andschool rules. One stated that school rules required a letter grade be assignedfor the prevention programming, but that it is difficult to assign letter gradeswhen there are no assignments or tests (for instance, how to determine thatsomeone earns an A versus a B). The other respondent indicated he/she haddifficulty finding activities for students to do during survey time who did nothave parental consent to take the survey. One respondent stated thatinclement weather had been a barrier.3. Do you need any technical assistance or clarification related to the project? If yes,please explain your specific needs.• All respondents except for one stated that additional technical assistance wasnot needed. The respondent who reported a need for technical assistanceidentified coalition development and increasing community support for LRP asthe main areas of need. Two respondents noted that project staff has done agood job of disseminating information. One respondent questioned how longsurveys and other grant documents should be saved.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 51

4. What do you think the focus (or goal) of CMCA should be in your community?• Six respondents stated that CMCA needs to affect underage drinking, butmost of these respondents were not sure what form CMCA should take. Tworespondents stated that they were not sure.5. What has this project done for your community?• Five respondents stated that the project has increased community awarenessof the underage drinking problem. Some respondents also noted an increasein community awareness and support for the project. Two respondents statedthat they were either not sure of the impact or that it was too early to noticeany impact on the community. One respondent identified a positive responsefrom school personnel in regards to the counseling component of the project.6. How would you improve the project?• Three respondents stated that more recruitment was needed for CMCA.Three respondents mentioned that more buy-in to the project was neededfrom law enforcement or school personnel. A respondent stated that moreinformation from previous grant recipients would have helped. Anotherrespondent suggested that meetings be held in each school district once asemester to help maintain communication and promote the project.7. How closely did implementation match the plan? What deviations, if any,occurred? What led to the deviations and what was the impact on the project?(Answered by implementation staff and the project coordinator only.)• All respondents stated that, overall, implementation has matched the plan witheach respondent noting at least one deviation. Two respondents stated thatthe first year of LST was being implemented with seventh graders instead ofsixth graders in one district. This was done to better integrate LST into thedistrict. Two respondents identified changes to how LRP was beingimplemented; one stating that LRP was being implemented in two schooldistricts rather than three, and the other noting that LRP did not start until thesecond semester of the first project year. One respondent stated that TNDwas being implemented with tenth graders rather than ninth graders in twodistricts. This change was due to how classes are scheduled in thosedistricts. One respondent stated that the implementation of CMCA has notkept up with the plan because of initial struggles in scheduling meetings andrecruiting members.8. What activities have been initiated to sustain prevention programming beyond thegrant? (Answered by superintendents, the project assistant, and the projectcoordinator only.)• Almost all the respondents identified at least one thing being done to sustainthe project. Some actions undertaken include: embedding programs intoschool plans and classroom curricula; training school personnel andcommunity members to implement the programs; purchasing extra programmaterials; and actively promoting grant activities within the county.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 52

9. What activities has the oversight committee undertaken to effect system-widechange? (Answered by superintendents, the project assistant, and the projectcoordinator only.)• Two respondents stated that nothing had yet been done to effect system-widechange. Other responses included: good conduct policy review and revisions;promote prevention activities and the counseling services; and recruit adiverse and representative group for CMCA.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 53

Year 1 Round 2July 1, 2008 – June 30, 20091. What successes have you observed or experienced during the first year of the JacksonCounty Alcohol Abuse Prevention/Reduction Project?• Four respondents stated that the project has received positive media coverage. Fourrespondents identified the counseling services as a success. These respondentsnoted that the number of referrals increased as the year progressed and more andmore students and school personnel became aware of these services.• Three respondents identified that the prevention programs had been implementedquickly and without any problems. Two respondents stated that strong relationshipshave been formed between project staff and school personnel, as well as with othercommunity groups, during the first project year.2. What problems have you encountered during the first year of the project? How did youdeal with these problems, or what solutions did you come up with to overcome theseproblems?• Four respondents stated that one problem was a lack of support from schoolpersonnel for program implementation. Suggested solutions included improvingcommunications, promoting the project and prevention programs, and holdingimplementation meetings in each district. Two respondents stated that CMCA didnot start as early as planned. These respondents stated that training was notprovided as early as planned, and that recruitment and action planning took longerthan had been anticipated.3. What do you think the focus (or goal) of CMCA should be in your community?• Seven respondents stated that the focus should to reduce underage drinking. Theserespondents provided various suggestions as to how to reduce underage drinking,including: reducing youth access to alcohol; social norm change; educating parents;and increasing community involvement in prevention efforts.4. What CMCA actions have had the greatest success?• Six respondents identified Project Sticker Shock as the most successful CMCAaction. These respondents noted that Project Sticker Shock received positive mediacoverage, increased community awareness that providing alcohol to minors is illegal,was a positive experience for youth participants, and that it was well received byarea businesses.Have any CMCA actions not met your expectations?• Five respondents reported that there were no CMCA actions that did not meet theirexpectations. Two respondents stated that project staff selected and implementedthe CMCA actions they were most interested in; which was not necessarily reflectiveof community or CMCA group needs. One respondent noted that local CMCAgroups were not formed so the CMCA actions implemented during the first projectyear were all county-wide actions.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 54

What other actions would you like to implement as part of CMCA?• A variety of other CMCA actions were identified by the respondents. These actionsinclude: more one-on-one interviews; parent panels on underage drinking; alcoholfreegraduation signs; alcohol server trainings; policy change; either create a CMCAgroup for each of the other three communities or add representatives from othercommunities to the existing CMCA group; and more youth advocacy.5. What has this project done for your community?• Six respondents stated that the project has increased community awareness of theunderage drinking problem. Some respondents also noted an increase in communityawareness and support for the project. One respondent identified an increase instudent awareness of available counseling services.6. How has your community responded to the project?• Seven respondents stated that the response has been positive. One respondentreported that community members were in denial that there was an underagedrinking problem, and that most community members feel that these problems occurin other communities but not their own.7. How closely did implementation match the plan? What deviations, if any, occurred?What led to the deviations and what was the impact on the project? (Answered byimplementation staff and the project coordinator only.)• All respondents stated that implementation has matched the plan pretty closely witheach respondent noting at least one deviation. Two respondents stated that CMCAwas not implemented as planned. These respondents noted that the CMCA trainingwas held much later than planned, which delayed a lot of the CMCA actions duringthe first project year. These respondents also identified the deviation from a CMCAgroup in each district to one county-wide CMCA group.• Two respondents stated that the first year of LST was being implemented withseventh graders instead of sixth graders in one district. This was done to betterintegrate LST into the district. Two respondents reported that TND was beingimplemented with tenth graders rather than ninth graders in two districts. Thischange was due to how classes are scheduled in those districts. One respondentidentified that LRP was being implemented in two school districts rather than three.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 55

8. What activities have been initiated to sustain prevention programming beyond the grant?(Answered by superintendents, the project assistant, and the project coordinator only.)• Almost all the respondents identified at least one thing being done to sustain theproject. Some actions undertaken include: embedding programs into school plansand classroom curricula; training school personnel and community members toimplement the programs; purchasing extra program materials; and developingrelationships with neighboring districts and communities.9. What activities has the oversight committee undertaken to effect system-wide change?(Answered by superintendents, the project assistant, and the project coordinator only.)• Three respondents stated that the oversight committee has reviewed and helped topromote program implementation. Two respondents stated that nothing had yetbeen done to effect system-wide change. A respondent stated that the oversightcommittee shares resources and lessons learned. Another respondent stated thatthe committee re-allocated funds to maximize project impact.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 56

Year 2 Round 1July 1, 2009 – January 31, 20101. What successes have you observed or experienced during the first half of the JacksonCounty Alcohol Abuse Prevention/Reduction Project?• Four respondents stated that community awareness about the project and theunderage drinking issue has increased since the project first began. In addition, tworespondents identified that the project has received positive media coverage.• Three respondents identified the counseling services as a success. Theserespondents noted that the counseling services really seemed to help the youth.Two respondents noted that school personnel assumed responsibility forimplementing the prevention programs earlier than planned, and without anyproblems.2. What problems have you encountered during the first half of the project? How did youdeal with these problems, or what solutions did you come up with to overcome theseproblems?• Four respondents stated that one problem was a lack of community support forCMCA and the project in general. Suggested solutions included more membershipdrives, continued work with media partners to promote our actions, and continue tohold meetings. Three respondents noted that all school personnel are not fullyaware of the services being offered as part of this project. These respondents statedthat project staff should continue meeting with school personnel to inform them of theoptions this grant presents.3. What CMCA actions have had the greatest success?• Five respondents identified Project Sticker Shock as the most successful CMCAaction. These respondents noted that Project Sticker Shock received positive mediacoverage, increased community awareness that providing alcohol to minors is illegal,was a positive experience for youth participants, and that it was well received byarea businesses. Other CMCA actions that were identified as great successesincluded: alcohol server trainings; town hall meetings; and Red Ribbon Weekactivities.Have any CMCA actions not met your expectations?• Five respondents stated that community support for CMCA has been lacking. Theserespondents identified this lack based on low attendance numbers at CMCAmeetings and community events. Three respondents reported that there were noCMCA actions that did not meet their expectations.What other actions would you like to implement as part of CMCA?• A variety of other CMCA actions were identified by the respondents. These actionsinclude: more recruitment efforts; more alcohol server trainings; social marketingcampaign; replace Project Sticker Shock with a project placing stickers (encouragingyouth not to drink) on corsage/boutonniere boxes at prom time; and more clearlyJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 57

defining or describing what actions may be implemented as part of CMCA and thisproject.4. Have you attended any local meetings or presentations associated with this project? Ifso, which ones? What worked well? What did not work as well as you would haveliked? How can these be improved upon?• Seven respondents stated that they had attended at least one meeting, includingCMCA meetings, town hall meetings, Red Ribbon Week presentations, and paneldiscussions. Most of these respondents stated that the meetings themselves wentwell, with one respondent suggesting that agendas be streamlined so as to keepmeetings and presentations within the allotted time frame. All of these respondentsidentified poor attendance as the only barrier, with one also noting that anysubsequent community action was lacking.5. What suggestions do you have for improving the project?• Five respondents stated that more work must be done to increase communitysupport for the project. One of these respondents identified parents and other schoolpersonnel as specific target populations to increase support. Three respondentsnoted that the project has been going well and that nothing else was needed. Onerespondent stated that a project attempting to alter community norms needed morethan three years to achieve any lasting success.6. How closely did implementation match the plan? What deviations, if any, occurred?What led to the deviations and what was the impact on the project? (Answered byimplementation staff and the project coordinator only.)• All respondents stated that implementation has matched the plan pretty closely, withtwo noting at least one deviation. One respondent stated that it has taken longer tocreate the CMCA coalition and to have it up and running. Another respondentidentified that school personnel began implementing programs earlier in the projectthan planned.7. What activities have been initiated to sustain prevention programming beyond the grant?(Answered by superintendents, the project assistant, and the project coordinator only.)• Almost all the respondents identified at least one thing being done to sustain theproject. Some actions undertaken include: embedding programs into school plansand classroom curricula; training school personnel and community members toimplement the programs; and purchasing extra program materials.8. What activities has the oversight committee undertaken to affect system-wide change?(Answered by superintendents, the project assistant, and the project coordinator only.)• Three respondents stated that the oversight committee has not done much yet toeffect system-wide change. One respondent stated that the oversight committeeprovided oversight to the good conduct policy review process. A respondentstated that the oversight committee shares resources and lessons learned.Another respondent stated that the committee worked to ensure that each districtintegrated programming into their curricula.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 58

Year 2 Round 2July 1, 2009 – June 14, 20101. What successes have you observed or experienced during the first half of the JacksonCounty Alcohol Abuse Prevention/Reduction Project?• The most frequently cited success was that community and student awareness aboutthe project and underage drinking issues has increased since the project began.Several also commented that the project has received positive media coverage andsupport.• Several respondents indicated that the in-school prevention programs seem to havegone smoothly, that students are engaged for the most part, and that they’ve seennotable improvements particularly in LRP participants.• Several respondents indicated that the provision of counseling services in theschools fills an important need and that while participation is somewhat low,significant gains are seen in the students who are involved in treatment.• A few respondents indicated that parents are starting to become involved in thecoalition.2. What problems have you encountered during the first half of the project? How did youdeal with these problems, or what solutions did you come up with to overcome theseproblems?• A problem frequently mentioned was the lack of community support for CMCA andthe project in general, and that the project is still working on increasing awarenessand education, which is behind where they planned to be at this point. Project staffcontinues to make good use of media coverage. Two upcoming events have beenplanned to help address the problem: Shoulder to Shoulder parent training; and aHidden in Plain Sight presentation, which will be enhanced by involvement of thelocal theater group.• Some respondents also mentioned challenges with school-based preventionprograms. The Leadership and Resiliency Program (LRP) appears to present themost challenges. One school did not implement LRP, as they felt they hadinsufficient support for program implementation and success, and one school didn’timplement LRP until second semester. Some respondents indicated that communitysupport for service activities is lacking, and that teachers seem reluctant to take thelead with this program. Staff and school personnel addressed an apparent lack ofengagement on the part of older Project Towards No Drug Abuse participants byhaving them observe a mock alcohol-related car crash and listen to speakerspersonally affected by alcohol-related accidents. In addition, school staff reductionshave posed challenges to maintaining programs, but schools have reassignedresponsibilities to keep the programs running.• Some respondents also indicated that schools aren’t making full use of the availablecounseling services. The counselor has sent letters to school principals, counselors,and juvenile court staff to remind them to be aware of kids who may need treatment,and additional students were referred for treatment as a result.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 59

3. a.) What CMCA actions have had the greatest success?• Most respondents identified Project Sticker Shock as the most successful CMCAaction. These respondents noted that Project Sticker Shock received positive mediacoverage, increased community awareness that providing alcohol to minors is illegal,was a positive experience for youth participants, and that it was well received byarea businesses.• Respondents also indicated that the most recent town hall meeting was a greatsuccess. It was well-attended, partly attributed to advertising, games played, andprizes offered, including a post-prom prize offered to students returning cardsreceived at the meeting. In addition, respondents saw the community picnic as asuccess, with many teens becoming involved.b.) Have any CMCA actions not met your expectations?• Several respondents stated that community support for CMCA has been lacking.These respondents identified this issue based on low attendance at CMCA meetingsand community events, the limited number of sectors involved in the coalition, andthat project staff seem to do most or all of the work.• Some respondents also mentioned that the Parent-to-Parent sign-up at schoolregistration did not go as well as hoped. Not enough parents signed up to justify theprinting costs of the booklets, so those parents did not receive booklets.c.) What other actions would you like to implement as part of CMCA?• Some respondents indicated they would like to see the Parent-to-Parent programsucceed, and that school registration can be an excellent time for engaging parentsin this and other programs and activities, particularly with more high-profilepromotion, and parental involvement in efforts to recruit their peers during schoolregistration.• Additional possible CMCA actions identified by the respondents included expandingTIPS training to other towns and rural establishments, training for coaches andathletic directors on the effects of alcohol and drug use on athletes, and increasedcoalition ownership of upcoming activities.4. Have you attended any local meetings or presentations associated with this project? Ifso, which ones? What worked well? What did not work as well as you would haveliked? How can these be improved upon?• Seven respondents stated that they had attended at least one meeting, includingCMCA/coalition meetings, town hall meetings, and meetings of other communitycoalitions (such as child abuse prevention and domestic violence coalitions).• Respondents saw prizes and incentives as having led to increased attendance attown hall meetings, but felt that still more parents and community members shouldbe engaged. Suggestions included providing food, such as a full meal, and childcare.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 60

• Some respondents also indicated coalition attendance and involvement is stilllacking. Some parents are beginning to express interest in becoming involved.Some respondents suggested obtaining feedback from community members whoattend one or two meetings but do not return.5. What suggestions do you have for improving the project?• Several respondents indicated that project staff and partners are doing all they can toengage the community, and that these efforts and media exposure should continue.• Some respondents offered suggestions for improvement, including: engaging moreparents in coalition meetings and outreach events; engaging more students byoffering activities that appeal to them and working with the local SADD group;obtaining buy-in from law enforcement; allowing project staff to attend full CADCAtrainings; and updating school-based prevention program materials.6. How closely did implementation match the plan? What deviations, if any, occurred?What led to the deviations and what was the impact on the project? (Answered byimplementation staff and the project coordinator only.)• Most respondents indicated that project implementation is more closely matching theplan this year, with school-based prevention programs and counseling services beingprovided in all districts. One respondent indicated that post-test survey participationwas good.• Respondents noted two areas of deviation from the plan. First, communityinvolvement and readiness for change is not as great as expected. Second, therehave been school-based prevention program deviations, including one school havingone, rather than two, teachers trained; LRP is implemented in two districts ratherthan three; TND is presented in 9 th grade rather than 10 th in some schools due tocurriculum schedule conflicts; and LST is not presented in 6 th grade in one district.7. What activities have been initiated to sustain prevention programming beyond the grant?(Answered by superintendents, the project assistant, and the project coordinator only.)• Almost all the respondents identified at least one thing being done to sustain theproject. Some actions undertaken include: embedding programs into school plansand classroom curricula; training school personnel and community members toimplement the programs; and updating and enforcing school good conduct policies.• A few respondents indicated that LRP likely won’t continue beyond the grant due tothe program’s cost.• Several respondents indicated that they are hoping to find ways to continue providingcounseling services in the schools.8. What activities has the oversight committee undertaken to effect system-wide change?(Answered by superintendents, the project assistant, and the project coordinator only.)• Several respondents stated that the oversight committee itself has not done much toeffect system-wide change, but that the meetings help school personnel get a betterJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 61

picture of how other schools are using the grant and are a good way to get ideas,share collective concerns, and provide support for each other.• A couple respondents said they would like to see more done, including efforts to getstudents referred to the counselor and initiate a training for coaches.Jackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 62

Appendix 6School-Based Prevention ProgramImplementation DataJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 63

School-Based Prevention Program Implementation Data(continued on following page)2008 – 2009 School YearSchool Program Grade and GroupPre-TestCompletedLessonsImplementedPost-TestCompletedAndrew LST –CoreProgramTNDBellevue LST –CoreProgramTND6 th Grade, CohortA10 th Grade,Cohort A6 th Grade, CohortA6 th Grade, CohortB6 th Grade, CohortC9 th Grade, CohortA9 th Grade, CohortB9 th Grade, CohortCYes 20 YesYes 12 YesYes 16 Yes1417Yes 12 YesLRP9 th -12 th Grade,Cohort AYes21 – Process Groups5 – AdventureActivitiesYes3 – CommunityServiceJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 64

School-Based Prevention Program Implementation Data(continued from previous page)2008 – 2009 School YearSchool Program Grade and GroupPre-TestCompletedLessonsImplementedPost-TestCompletedMaquoketa LST –CoreProgramTND6 th Grade, CohortA6 th Grade, CohortB6 th Grade, CohortC6 th Grade, CohortD10 th Grade,Cohort A10 th Grade,Cohort B10 th Grade,Cohort C10 th Grade,Cohort D10 th Grade,Cohort EYes 21 Yes15Yes 9 YesLRP9 th -12 th Grade,Cohort AYes35 – Process Groups4 – AdventureActivitiesYes4 – CommunityServicePreston LST –CoreProgramTND7 th Grade, CohortA7 th Grade, CohortB7 th Grade, CohortC9 th Grade, CohortAYes 19 Yes15Yes 12 YesProgram KeyLST Life Skills Training TND Project Towards No Drug AbuseLRP Leadership and Resiliency ProgramJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 65

School-Based Prevention Program Implementation Data(continued on following page)2009 – 2010 School YearSchool Program Grade and GroupPre-TestCompletedLessonsImplementedPost-TestCompletedAndrewLST – CoreProgram6 th Grade,Cohort AYes 20 YesLST –BoosterProgram FirstYear7 th Grade,Cohort AYes 10 YesBellevueLST – CoreProgram6 th Grade,Cohort AYes 15 YesLST –BoosterProgram FirstYear7 th Grade,Cohort A7 th Grade,Yes 10 YesYes 10 YesCohort BTND8 th Grade,Yes 12 YesCohort ALRP9 th -12 th Grade,Cohort BYes39 – Process Groups6 – AdventureActivitiesYes7– CommunityService ActivitiesMaquoketaLST – CoreProgram6 th Grade,Cohort AYes 16 Yes6 th Grade,Yes 15 YesCohort B6 th Grade,Cohort CYes 15 Yes6 th Grade,Yes 17 YesCohort D6 th Grade,Yes 15 YesCohort EJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 66

School-Based Prevention Program Implementation Data(continued from previous page)2009 – 2010 School YearSchool Program Grade and GroupPre-TestCompletedLessonsImplementedPost-TestCompletedMaquoketa(continued)LST –BoosterProgram FirstYear7 th Grade,Cohort A7 th Grade,Cohort BYes 10 YesYes 10 Yes7 th Grade,Yes 10 YesCohort C7 th Grade,Yes 10 YesCohort D7 th Grade,Yes 10 YesCohort E7 th Grade,Cohort FYes 10 YesTND10 th Grade,Yes 10 YesCohort A10 th Grade,Yes 10 YesCohort B10 th Grade,Yes 10 YesCohort C10 th Grade,Yes 10 YesCohort DLRP9 th -12 th Grade,Cohort AYes36 – ProcessGroupsYes9– AdventureActivities12– CommunityService ActivitiesPrestonLST – CoreProgram7 th Grade,Cohort AYes 19 Yes7 th Grade,Cohort BYes 17 Yes7 th Grade,Yes 17 YesCohort CTND9 th Grade,Yes 12 YesCohort AJackson County GRAA Evaluation Report 67