Prevention Science

, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp 96–105 | Cite as

The Effect of the PROSPER Partnership Model on Cultivating Local Stakeholder Knowledge of Evidence-Based Programs: A Five-Year Longitudinal Study of 28 Communities

  • D. Max Crowley
  • Mark T. Greenberg
  • Mark E. Feinberg
  • Richard L. Spoth
  • Cleve R. Redmond


A substantial challenge in improving public health is how to facilitate the local adoption of evidence-based interventions (EBIs). To do so, an important step is to build local stakeholders’ knowledge and decision-making skills regarding the adoption and implementation of EBIs. One EBI delivery system, called PROSPER (PROmoting School-community-university Partnerships to Enhance Resilience), has effectively mobilized community prevention efforts, implemented prevention programming with quality, and consequently decreased youth substance abuse. While these results are encouraging, another objective is to increase local stakeholder knowledge of best practices for adoption, implementation and evaluation of EBIs. Using a mixed methods approach, we assessed local stakeholder knowledge of these best practices over 5 years, in 28 intervention and control communities. Results indicated that the PROSPER partnership model led to significant increases in expert knowledge regarding the selection, implementation, and evaluation of evidence-based interventions. Findings illustrate the limited programming knowledge possessed by members of local prevention efforts, the difficulty of complete knowledge transfer, and highlight one method for cultivating that knowledge.


Capacity building Prevention systems Dissemination 


  1. Aarons, G., Sommerfeld, D., Hecht, D., Silovsky, J., & Chaffin, M. (2009). The impact of evidence-based practice implementation and fidelity monitoring on staff turnover. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77, 270–280.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adelman, H., & Taylor, L. (2003). On sustainability of project innovations as systemic change. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 14, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Backer, T., & Rogers, E. (1999). Dissemination best practices workshop briefing paper: State-of-the-art review on dissemination research and dissemination partnership. Encino, CA: NCAP.Google Scholar
  4. Brownson, R., Royer, C., Ewing, R., & McBride, T. (2006). Researchers and policymakers: Travelers in parallel universes. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 3, 164–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Butterfoss, F., Goodman, R., & Wandersman, A. (1993). Community coalitions for prevention and health promotion. Health Education Research, 8, 315–330.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Crowley, M., Jones, D., Greenberg, M., Feinberg., M., & Spoth, D. (2011). Resource consumption of a dissemination model for prevention programs: The PROSPER partnership model. Journal of Adolescent Health. (in press)Google Scholar
  8. Durlak, J. (1998). Why program implementation is important. Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community, 17, 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Durlak, J., & DuPre, E. (2008). A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41, 327–350.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Feinberg, M., Greenberg, M., Osgood, D., Anderson, A., & Babinski, L. (2002). The effects of training community leaders in prevention science. Evaluation and Program Planning, 25, 245–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Feinberg, M., Greenberg, M., & Osgood, D. (2004). Readiness, functioning, and effectiveness in community prevention coalitions. American Journal of Community Psychology, 33, 163–176.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fixsen, D., Naoom, S., Blase, K., Friedman, R., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, National Implementation Research Network.Google Scholar
  13. Flay, B., Biglan, A., Boruch, R., Castro, F., Gottfredson, D., Kellam, S., et al. (2005). Standards of evidence: Criteria for efficacy, effectiveness and dissemination. Prevention Science, 6, 151–175.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Glaser, B. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.Google Scholar
  15. Gomez, B., Greenberg, M., & Feinberg, M. (2005). Sustainability of community coalitions: An evaluation of Communities That Care. Prevention Science, 6, 199–202.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Halfors, D., & Godette, D. (2002). Will the “Principles of Effectiveness” improve prevention practice? Health Education Review, 17, 461–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hawkins, J., Catalano, R., & Arthur, M. (2002). Promoting science-based prevention in communities. Addictive Behaviors, 27, 951–976.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hawkins, D., Oesterle, S., Brown, E., Arthur, M., Abbott, R., Fagan, A., et al. (2009). Results of a type 2 translational research trial to prevent adolescent drug use and delinquency. Archives of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine, 163, 789–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Johnson, K., Hays, C., Center, H., & Daley, C. (2004). Building capacity and sustainable prevention innovations: A sustainability planning model. Evaluation and Program Planning, 27, 135–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Johnson, R., & Onwuegbuzie, A. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33, 14–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Landis, R., & Koch, G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 3, 159–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Littell, R., Milliken, G., Stroup, W., Wolfinger, R., & Schabenberger, O. (2006). SAS for mixed models (2nd ed.). Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
  23. Mihalic, S., Irwin, K., Elliott, D. S., Fagan, A., & Hansen, D. (2001). Blueprints for violence prevention. Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.Google Scholar
  24. Mihalic, S., Irwin, K., Fagan, A., Ballard, D., & Elliott, D. (2004). Successful program implementation: Lessons from Blueprints. Electronic report. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs). Retrieved August 11, 2011, from
  25. Molgaard, V. (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, 515–544.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. O’Connell, M., Boat, T., & Warner, K. (Eds.). (2009). Mental, emotional, and behavioral disorders among young people. Washington, DC: National Academy.Google Scholar
  27. O’Donnell, L., Scattergood, P., Adler, M., San Doval, A., Barker, M., Kelly, J., et al. (2000). The role of technical assistance in the replication of effective HIV interventions. AIDS Education and Prevention, 12, 99–111.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Perkins, D., Feinberg, M., Greenberg, M., Johnson, L., Chilenski, S., Mincemoyer, C., et al. (2011). Team factors that predict to sustainability indicators for community-based prevention teams. Evaluation and Program Planning, 34, 283–291.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pope, C., Ziebland, S., & Mays, N. (2000). Analysing qualitative data. BMJ, 320, 114–116.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Redmond, C., Spoth, R., Shin, C., Schainke, L., Greenberg, M., & Feinberg, M. (2009). Long-term protective factor outcomes of evidence-based interventions implemented by community teams through community-university partnership. Journal of Primary Prevention, 30, 513–530.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Riggs, N., Nakawatase, M., & Pentz, M. (2008). Promoting community coalition functioning: Effects of project STEPP. Prevention Science, 9, 63–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ringwalt, C., Vincus, A., Ennett, S., Hanley, S., Bowling, J., & Rohrbach, L. (2009). The prevalence of evidence-based substance use prevention curricula in U.S. middle schools in 2005. Prevention Science, 10, 33–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Roussos, S., & Fawcett, S. (2000). A review of collaborative partnerships as a strategy for improving community health. Annual Review of Public Health, 21, 369–402.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. SAS Institute Inc. (2004). SAS/STAT 9.1 User’s Guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
  35. Spoth, R., & Greenberg, M. (2005). Toward a comprehensive strategy for effective practitioner-scientist partnerships and larger-scale community benefits. American Journal of Community Psychology, 35, 107–126.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Spoth, R., & Greenberg, M. (2011). Impact challenges in community science-with-practice. American Journal of Community Psychology, 48, 106–119.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Spoth, D., Greenberg, M., Bierman, K., & Redmond, C. (2004). PROSPER community-university partnership model for public education systems. Prevention Science, 5, 31–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Spoth, R., Clair, S., Greenberg, M., Redmond, C., & Shin, C. (2007a). Toward dissemination of evidence-based family interventions. Journal of Family Psychology, 21, 137–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Spoth, R., Guyll, M., Lillehoj, C., Redmond, C., & Greenberg, M. (2007b). PROSPER study of evidence-based intervention implementation quality by community-university partnerships. Journal of Community Psychology, 35, 981–999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Spoth, R., Redmond, C., Shin, C., Greenberg, M., Clair, S., & Feinberg, M. (2007c). Substance use outcomes at 18 months past baseline from the PROSPER community-university partnership trial. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 32, 395–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Spoth, R., Greenberg, M., & Turrisi, R. (2008). Preventive interventions addressing underage drinking. Pediatrics, 121, 311–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Spoth, R., Redmond, C., Clair, S., Shin, C., Greenberg, M., & Feinberg, M. (2011). Preventing substance misuse through community health partnerships and evidence-based interventions. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 4, 440–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1992). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  44. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  45. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration (2011). National Registry of Effective Programs. Retrieved August 11, 2011, from
  46. Wandersman, A., & Florin, P. (2003). Community interventions and effective prevention. American Psychologist, 58, 441–448.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wandersman, A., Duffy, J., Flaspohler, P., Noonan, R., Lubell, K., Stillman, L., et al. (2008). Bridging the gap between prevention research and practice. American Journal of Community Psychology, 37, 171–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Prevention Research 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. Max Crowley
    • 1
  • Mark T. Greenberg
    • 1
  • Mark E. Feinberg
    • 1
  • Richard L. Spoth
    • 2
  • Cleve R. Redmond
    • 2
  1. 1.Pennsylvania State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA
  2. 2.Iowa State UniversityAmesUSA

Personalised recommendations