TY - JOUR
T1 - Fighting back against substance abuse - Are community coalitions winning?
AU - Hallfors, Denise
AU - Cho, Hyunsan
AU - Livert, David
AU - Kadushin, Charles
N1 - Funding Information:
This research was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse. We thank Leonard Saxe, Kim Watson, Emily Reber, Shereen Khatapoush, and Bonita Iritani for their contributions to the process and outcome evaluation of Fighting Back, without which this paper would not have been possible.
PY - 2002/11
Y1 - 2002/11
N2 - Objectives: Federal initiatives continue to provide strong support for community antidrug coalitions, but whether this approach actually reduces substance abuse is not clear. This paper examines the strategies that coalitions in a large national demonstration program (Fighting Back) chose to develop, the degree to which they implemented these strategies, and evidence regarding their effects. Methods: Coalition strategy implementation was coded and ranked for 12 Fighting Back sites. Effect sizes (intervention over time) for outcomes related to substance use, alcohol and other drug treatment, and community/prevention indicators were also ranked by site. Using rank order correlation, three directional hypotheses compared strategy dose to outcomes. Results: None of the hypotheses were supported. Strategies aimed at either youth or community/prevention outcomes showed no effects, while strategies to improve adult-focused outcomes showed significant negative effects over time, compared to matched controls. Coalitions with a more comprehensive array of strategies did not show any superior benefits, and increasing the number of high-dose strategies showed a significant negative effect on overall outcomes. Conclusions: Comprehensive community coalitions are intuitively attractive and politically popular, but the potential for adverse effects must be considered. Efforts to evaluate implementation processes as well as to correlate strategies with theoretically corresponding outcomes are a critical but neglected aspect of prevention research.
AB - Objectives: Federal initiatives continue to provide strong support for community antidrug coalitions, but whether this approach actually reduces substance abuse is not clear. This paper examines the strategies that coalitions in a large national demonstration program (Fighting Back) chose to develop, the degree to which they implemented these strategies, and evidence regarding their effects. Methods: Coalition strategy implementation was coded and ranked for 12 Fighting Back sites. Effect sizes (intervention over time) for outcomes related to substance use, alcohol and other drug treatment, and community/prevention indicators were also ranked by site. Using rank order correlation, three directional hypotheses compared strategy dose to outcomes. Results: None of the hypotheses were supported. Strategies aimed at either youth or community/prevention outcomes showed no effects, while strategies to improve adult-focused outcomes showed significant negative effects over time, compared to matched controls. Coalitions with a more comprehensive array of strategies did not show any superior benefits, and increasing the number of high-dose strategies showed a significant negative effect on overall outcomes. Conclusions: Comprehensive community coalitions are intuitively attractive and politically popular, but the potential for adverse effects must be considered. Efforts to evaluate implementation processes as well as to correlate strategies with theoretically corresponding outcomes are a critical but neglected aspect of prevention research.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036876407&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036876407&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0749-3797(02)00511-1
DO - 10.1016/S0749-3797(02)00511-1
M3 - Article
C2 - 12406477
AN - SCOPUS:0036876407
SN - 0749-3797
VL - 23
SP - 237
EP - 245
JO - American Journal of Preventive Medicine
JF - American Journal of Preventive Medicine
IS - 4
ER -