Methodological challenges in evaluating community partnerships & coalitions: Still crazy after all these years

Journal of Community Psychology

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 339-352

  Gabriel, Roy M ^a  

^a RMC RESEARCH CORPORATION   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034420373     PISSN: 00904392     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6629(200005)28:3<339::AID-JCOP8>3.0.CO;2-9     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Backer, T.E., David, S.L., & Soucy, G. (Eds.). (1995). Reviewing the behavioral science knowledge base on technology transfer. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.
2. Benson, P.L., Scales, P.C., & Roehl Kepartain, E.C. (1998). A fragile foundation: The state of developmental assets among American youth. Minneapolis, MN: Search Institute.
3. Campbell, D.T., & Stanley, J.C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental design for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
4. Center for Substance Abuse Prevention. (1998). Science-based practices in substance abuse prevention: A guide (Working draft). Prepared by the CDM Group, Inc. Chevy Chase, MD.
5. Coie, J.D., Watt, N.F., West, S.G., Hawkins, J.D., Asanow, J.R., Markman, H.J., Ramey, S.L., Shure, M.B., & Long, B. (1993). The science of prevention: A conceptual framework and some directions for a national research program. American Psychologist, 48 (10), 1013-1022.
6. Connell, J.P., Kubisch, A.C., Schorr, L.B., & Weiss, C.H. (1995). New approaches to evaluating community initiatives. Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute.
7. Cook, T.D., & Campbell, D.T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally.
8. Fawcett, S.B., Paine-Andrews, A., Francisco, V.T., Schulz, J.A., Richter, K.P., Lewis, R.K., Harris, K.J., Williams, E.L., Berkley, J.Y., Lopez, C.M., & Fisher, J.L. (1997). Empowering community health initiatives through evaluation. In Fetterman, D.M., Kaftarian, S.J., & Wandersman, A. (Eds.), Empowerment evaluation: Knowledge and tools for self-assessment and accountability. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
9. Fetterman, D.M., Kaftarian, S.J., & Wandersman, A. (1996). Empowerment evaluation: Knowledge and tools for self-assessment and accountability. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
10. Florin, P., Mitchell, R., & Stevenson, J. (1993). Identifying training and technical assistance needs in community coalitions: A developmental approach. Health Education Research: Theory and Practice, 8 (3), 417-432.
11. Gabriel, R.M. (1995). Methods for assessing ATOD and health impacts. Invited presentation at CSAP annual meeting of Community Prevention Coalition Grantees, Washington, D.C.
12. Gabriel, R.M. (1997). Community indicators of substance abuse: Empowering coalition planning and evaluation. Evaluations and Program Planning, 20 (3), 335-344.
13. Goodman, R.M. (2000). Evaluation of community-based health programs: An alternate perspective. In Schneiderman, N., et al., Integrating Behavioral and Social Sciences with Public Health, Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association (In press).
14. Goodman, R.M., & Wandersman, A. (1994). FORECAST: A formative approach to evaluating community coalitions and community-based initiatives. Journal of Community Psychology, (CSAP Special Issue), 6-25.
15. Hansen, W. (1997). Prevention programs: Factors that individually focused programs must address. In CSAP Resource Papers for the Secretary's Youth Substance Abuse Prevention Initiative. Rockville, MD: Center for Substance Abuse Prevention.
16. Hawkins, J.D., Catalano, R.F., & Miller, J.Y. (1992). Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drug problems in adolescence and early adulthood: Implications for substance abuse prevention. Psychological Bulletin 112 (1), 64-105.
17. Join Together. (1999). Results of the fourth national survey on Community efforts to reduce substance abuse and gun violence. Boston, MA.
18. Kaftarian, S.J., & Hansen, W.B. (1994). Improving methodologies for the evaluation of community-based substance abuse prevention programs. Journal of Community Psychology, [Special issue], 3-6.
19. Kim, S., Crutchfield, C., Williams, C., & Hepler, N. (1994). An innovative and unconventional approach to program evaluation in the field of substance abuse prevention: A threshold-gating approach using single system evaluation designs. Journal of Community Psychology, (CSAP Special Issue), 61-78.
20. Kumpfer, K.L., & Johnson, J. (1993). Measurements in prevention: A manual on selecting and using instruments to evaluate prevention programs. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, Technical Report 8. Rockville, MD: Government Printing Office.
21. Lipsey, M.W. (1993). Theory as method: Small theories of treatments. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 57, 5-38.
22. Mitchell, R., Stevenson, J., & Florin, P. (1996). A typology of prevention activities: Journal of Primary Prevention, 16 (4), 413-436.
23. Murray, D.M. (1998). Design and analysis of group randomized trials. New York. Oxford University Press.
24. Murray, D.M., & Wolfinger, R.D. (1994). Analysis issues in the evaluation of community trials: Progress toward solutions in SAS/STAT MIXED. Journal of Community Psychology (CSAP Special Issue), 140-154.
25. National Institute on Drug Abuse. (1997). Preventing drug use among children and adolescents: A research-based guide. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Health.
26. Patton, M. (1997). Toward distinguishing empowerment evaluation and placing it in a larger context. Evaluation Practice, 18 (2), 147-164.
27. Phillips, J.L., & Springer, J.F. (1997). Implementation of community interventions: Lessons learned. In Secretary's youth substance abuse prevention initiative: resource papers. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
28. Rindskopf, D., Sirratt, M., Livert, D., & Saxe, L. (1997). The utility of multilevel models in the evaluation of community-based programs. Unpublished manuscript, City University of New York, Graduate School and University Center.
29. Scheirer, M.A. (1994). Designing and using process evaluation. In J.S. Wholey, H.P. Hatry, & K.E. Newcomer (Eds.), Handbook of practical program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
30. Springer, J.F., & Phillips, J.L. (1994). Policy learning and evaluation design: Lessons from the community partnership demonstration program. Journal of Community Psychology (CSAP Special Issue), 117-134.
31. Stewart, K. (1997). Environmentally oriented alcohol prevention policies for young adults. In CSAP Resource Papers for the Secretary's Youth Substance Abuse Prevention Initiative. Rockville, MD: Center for Substance Abuse Prevention.
32. Stoil, M.J., & Hill, G. (1996). Preventing substance abuse: Interventions that work. New York: Plenum Press.
33. Tobler, N.S., & Stratton, H. (1997). Effectiveness of school-based drug prevention programs: A meta-analyses of the research. Journal of Primary Prevention, 18, 71-128.
34. Wandersman, A. (1998). Comprehensive quality programming: Eight essential strategies for implementing successful programs. Journal of Primary Prevention. 19 (1), 3-30.
35. Wandersman, A., & Goodman, R.M. (1991). Community partnerships for alcohol and other drug abuse prevention. Family Resource Coalition Report, 3, 8-9.
36. Weiss, C.H. (1995). Nothing as practical of good theory: Exploring theory-based evaluation for comprehensive community initiatives for children and families. In J.P. Connell, A.C. Kubisch, L.B. Schorr, & C.H. Weiss (Eds.), New approaches to evaluating community initiatives. Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute.
37. Yin, R.K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
38. Yin, R.K. (1998). Rival explanations as an alternative to reforms as 'experiments'. In L. Bickman (Ed.), Validity and social experimentation: Donald Campbell's legacy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
39. Yin, R.K., Kaftarian, S.J., Yu, P., & Jansen, M.A. (1997). Outcomes from CSAP's community partnership program: Findings from the national cross-site evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 20 (3), 345-355.