Prevention Science

, 6:305 | Cite as

Results of an Independent Evaluation of Project ALERT Delivered in Schools by Cooperative Extension

  • Tena L. St. Pierre
  • D. Wayne Osgood
  • Claudia C. Mincemoyer
  • D. Lynne Kaltreider
  • Tina J. Kauh
Article

Reported are results of an independent effectiveness study of the Project ALERT drug prevention program implemented in eight Pennsylvania middle schools by outside program leaders employed by Cooperative Extension. In this randomized, 2-cohort longitudinal evaluation, 1,649 seventh-grade students completed a pretest and four waves of posttests over the 2-year program and 1-year follow-up. Project ALERT's effectiveness was tested through a 3-level hierarchical linear model. Analyses failed to yield any positive effects for substance use or mediators for use in the adult or teen-assisted delivery of the curriculum. An extensive set of additional analyses detected no differential program effects by student risk level, gender, school, or level of implementation quality. Potential explanations for outcomes relative to Project ALERT's original effectiveness trial are discussed, as well as implications for future research, including the need to conduct independent effectiveness studies of previously validated programs in a variety of contexts.

KEY WORDS:

substance use prevention evaluation effectiveness study Project ALERT 

REFERENCES

  1. Allison, P. D. (1990). Change scores as dependent variables in regression analysis. Sociological Methodology, 20, 93–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Botvin, G. J., Baker, E., Dusenbury, L., Botvin, E. M., & Diaz, T. (1995). Long-term follow-up results of a randomized drug abuse prevention trial in a White middle-class population. Journal of the American Medical Association, 273(14), 1106–1112.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown, C. H., Berndt, D., Brinales, J. M., Zong, X., & Bhagwat, D. (2000). Evaluating the evidence of effectiveness for preventive interventions: Using a registry system to influence policy through science. Addictive Behaviors, 25(6), 955–964.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Collins, L. M., Murphy, S. A., & Bierman, K. L. (2004). A conceptual framework for adaptive preventive interventions. Prevention Science, 5, 185–196.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Domitrovich, C. E., & Greenberg, M. T. (2000). The study of implementation: Current findings from effective programs that prevent mental disorders in school-aged children. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 11, 193–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. CYFAR (Children, Youth, & Families) Annual Report (2001) (Web Page). Retrieved from http://www.reeusda.gov/4h/cyfar/annual_report.htm.
  7. Dusenbury, L., & Falco, M. (1995). Eleven components of effective drug abuse prevention curricula. Journal of School Health, 65, 420–425.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ellickson, P. L., & Bell, R. M. (1990). Drug prevention in junior high: A multi-site longitudinal test. Science, 247, 1299–1305.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ellickson, P. L., McCaffrey, D. F., Ghosh-Dastidar, G., & Longshore, D. L. (2003). New inroads in preventing adolescent drug use: Results from a large-scale trial of Project ALERT in middle schools. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 1830–1836.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ellickson, P. L., Miller, L., Robyn, A., Wildflower, L. A., & Zellman, G. L. (2000). Project ALERT. Los Angeles, CA: The BEST Foundation for a Drug-Free Tomorrow.Google Scholar
  11. Elliott, D. S., & Mihalic, S. (2004). Issues in disseminating and replicating effective prevention programs. Prevention Science, 5, 47–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Esbensen, F.-A., Osgood, D. W., Taylor, T. J., Peterson, D., & Freng, A. (2001). How great is G.R.E.A.T.?: Results from a longitudinal quasi-experimental design. Criminology and Public Policy, 1, 87–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Greenberg, M. T. (2004). Current and future challenges in school-based prevention: The researcher perspective. Prevention Science, 5, 1–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Hallfors, D. (2004). Findings from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial of “Reconnecting Youth.” Paper presented at the 12th Annual Society for Prevention Research Meeting, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.Google Scholar
  15. Hallfors, D., & Godette, D.(2002). Will the “Principles of Effectiveness” improve prevention practice? Early findings from a diffusion study. Health Education Research, 17, 461–470.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Hallfors, D., Pankratz, M., & Sporer, A. (2001). Drug free schools survey II: Report of results. Chapel Hill, NC: Department of Maternal and Child Health, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina.Google Scholar
  17. Harrington, N. G., Giles, S. M., Hoyle, R. H., Feeney, G. J., & Yungbluth, S. C. (2001). Evaluation of the All Stars character education and problem behavior prevention program: Effects on mediator and outcome variables for middle school students. Health Education and Behavior, 28(5), 533–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2003). Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use, 1975-2003: Volume I, Secondary school students (NIH Publication No. 04-5507). Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.Google Scholar
  19. Kramer, L., Laumann, G., & Brunson, L. (2000). Implementation and diffusion of the Rainbows program in rural communities: Implications for school-based prevention programming. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 11, 37–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mayer, J. P., & Davidson, W. S., II. (2000). Dissemination of innovation as social change. In J. Rappaport & E. Seidman (Eds.), Handbook of community psychology. (pp. 421–438). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.Google Scholar
  21. Miller, P. A. (1988). To our colleagues in the land-grant universities: A statement on the crisis of youth in America. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  22. Molgard, V. K. (1997). The extension service as key mechanism for research and services delivery for prevention of mental health disorders in rural areas. American Journal of Community Psychology, 25(4), 515–543.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Osgood, D. W., & Smith, G. (1995). Applying hierarchical linear modeling to extended longitudinal evaluations: The Boys Town follow-up study. Evaluation Review, 19, 3–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pentz, M. A. (2003). Evidence-based prevention: Characteristics, impact, and future direction. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 35 (Special Suppl.), 143–152.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical Linear Models, (2nd Edn). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  26. Rohrbach, L. A., Graham, J. W., & Hansen, W. B. (1993). Diffusion of a school-based substance abuse prevention program: Predictors of program implementation. Preventive Medicine, 22, 237–260.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Rosenstock, I. M., Strecher, V. J., & Becker, M. H. (1988). Social learning theory and the health belief model. Health Education Quarterly, 15(2), 175–183.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Society for Prevention Research. (2004). Standards of evidence: Criteria for efficacy, effectiveness and dissemination. Falls Church, VA.Google Scholar
  29. St. Pierre, T. L., & Kaltreider, D. L. (2004). Tales of refusal, adoption, and maintenance: Evidence-based substance abuse prevention via school-extension collaborations. American Journal of Evaluation, 25(4), 479–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2003). National Registry of Effective Programs. Retrieved July 26, 2004 from http://www.modelprograms.samhsa.gov/template.cfm?page = nrepbutton.
  31. U.S. Department of Education, Safe and Drug-Free School Program (1998). Notice of final principles of effectiveness. Federal Register, 63(104), 29901–29906.Google Scholar
  32. U.S. Department of Education (2001). Exemplary and promising safe, disciplined and drug free schools program 2001. Retrieved July 26, 2004 from http://www.ed.gov/admins/lead/safety/exemplary01/report_pg3.html.

Copyright information

© Society of Prevention Research 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tena L. St. Pierre
    • 1
    • 4
  • D. Wayne Osgood
    • 2
  • Claudia C. Mincemoyer
    • 1
  • D. Lynne Kaltreider
    • 1
  • Tina J. Kauh
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Agricultural and Extension EducationThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  2. 2.Crime, Law, and Justice Program, Department of SociologyThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  3. 3.Department of Human Development and Family StudiesThe Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  4. 4.325 Agricultural Administration BuildingUniversity ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations