B1b SPFSIGIII_IV_V B1b SPFSIGIII_IV_VGLIInfrastructure

ATTACHMENT B1b: SPF SIG III, IV &V GLI Infrastructure

Form Approved

O MB No. XXXX-XXXX

Expiration Date XX/XX/XXXX

Strategic Prevention Framework (SPF)
Grantee Level Instrument (GLI)

INFRASTRUCTURE Survey

SPF SIG COHORTS III, IV & V CROSS-SITE EVALUATION

Date: |___|___| / |___|___| / |___|___|___|___|

Respondent’s Name:

Respondent’s Title/Position:

Respondent’s Organizational Affiliation:

Jurisdiction: ________________

Submission Approval Provided By: ________________

Public reporting burden of this collection of information is estimated to average 1.25 hours per response. Send all comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information to SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer, Room 8-1099, 1 Choke Cherry Road, Rockville, MD 20857. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The control number for this project is 0930-0279.

Information and Directions

The Grantee Level Instruments (GLI) are designed to collect information at the jurisdiction (state, tribe, territory) level. The GLI is designed as two instruments: the Infrastructure Survey and the Implementation Survey. The GLI Infrastructure Survey collects data about the workings of the overall prevention system. The GLI Implementation Survey collects data about the execution of the strategic prevention framework process.

The intent of the GLI Infrastructure survey is to provide a snapshot of the system at the time of the award notice (baseline) and again at the completion of the grant period (follow-up). The purpose of the baseline data collection of the GLI Infrastructure Survey is to gather information about how the overall prevention system was structured and functioned at the time the grant was awarded. The purpose of the follow-up data collection of the GLI Infrastructure Survey is to gather information about how the overall prevention system was structured and functioned 5 years after the grant was awarded. A select number of questions will be asked only at baseline or only at follow-up.

The questions in this survey refer to the overall (jurisdiction level) prevention system, not just the SPF SIG project. The prevention system is defined as “the entire set of agencies, organizations, and persons that contribute to efforts to prevent substance abuse and related problems within the jurisdiction.” Throughout this document, the term “you” refers to the grantee—state, jurisdiction, or tribal entity.

Make sure to read all of the directions and examples. Directions for skipping questions are indicated where appropriate to minimize the time needed to complete the questionnaire. This web-based survey is designed to automatically take you to the appropriate question, but you should still follow the directions closely.

There are several terms used throughout this instrument for which CSAP provides the definitions on the following page.

In addition, if you click below you can access SAMHSA’s prevention glossary.

https://preventionplatform.samhsa.gov/MacroHQ/Glossary2/dssglossary.cfm?sect_id=1&topic_id=99&CFID=2112072&CFTOKEN=48724502

DEFINITION OF TERMS

• Sustainability is the process through which a prevention system becomes a norm and is integrated into ongoing operations. Sustainability is vital to ensuring that prevention values and processes are firmly established, that partnerships are strengthened, and that financial and other resources are secured over the long term.

• Cultural competence is the attainment of knowledge, skills, and attitudes to enable administrators and practitioners to provide for diverse populations. This includes an understanding of that group’s or members’ language, beliefs, norms, and values, as well as socioeconomic and political factors that may have a significant impact on their well-being, and incorporating those variables into programs.

• Jurisdiction refers to the politically or geographically defined area that encompasses the grantee, its sub-recipients, and target population (usually used to describe a state, tribe, or territory).

• Grantee refers to the administrative entity of a jurisdiction (such as the state, tribe, or territory) receiving SPF SIG funds for delivery of substance abuse prevention programs.

• Community refers to the politically or geographically defined area or culturally or epidemiologically defined target population that the grantee chooses for any given prevention intervention.

• Sub-recipients are the entities (usually community based organizations, schools, or coalitions) that receive funds from the grantee (see grantee definition above) to carry out SPF SIG activities or prevention interventions.

• Interventions are funded activities carried out under the auspices of the SPF SIG grant, and target a variety of subpopulations with the objective of improving substance use outcomes.

• Participants are the recipients of the SPF SIG prevention interventions.

• Capacity refers to the various types and levels of resources that an organization or collaborative has at its disposal to meet the implementation demands of specific interventions.

• Region refers for the purposes of this survey to a politically or geographically defined area or district within a jurisdiction that may cross counties or encompass more than one county.

• Fidelity refers to the degree of fit between the developer-defined components of a substance abuse prevention intervention and its actual implementation in a given organizational or community setting.

• Process evaluation focuses on how a program was implemented and operates. It addresses whether the program was implemented and is providing services as intended, assesses the reasons for successful or unsuccessful performance, and provides information for potential replication.

The questions in this survey refer to the overall (jurisdiction) prevention system, not just the SPF SIG project. We are defining the prevention system as “the entire set of agencies, organizations, and persons that contribute to efforts to prevent substance abuse and related problems within the jurisdiction.” As you respond about the prevention system, it may help to think about the lead Alcohol, Tobacco, and Other Drug (ATOD) prevention agency as being at the center of the system.

A. GRANTEE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

The first series of questions is about the group or groups that plan and coordinate substance abuse prevention activities in your jurisdiction. Three topic areas will be covered: Leadership Authority, Group Planning, and Decision Making. . (NOTE: AT BASELINE THE QUESTIONS SHOULD BE ANSWERED WITH REGARD TO HOW THE GROUPS WERE STRUCTURED, CARRIED OUT PLANNING, AND MADE DECISIONS AT THE TIME THE SPF SIG GRANT WAS AWARDED)

Leadership Authority

^B,F1. Is there an agency designated by the grantee’s governing body (for example, by the Governor, Legislature, or Tribal Council) to be the lead agency responsible for ATOD prevention?

• Yes

• No (If no, skip to Question 4.)

^B,F2. If yes, please name the agency:

^B,F3. Is the SPF SIG award housed in the designated ATOD prevention agency?

• Yes

• No

4. Which agencies within the grantee’s governing body are responsible for allocating the following funds:

^B,F 4.a. Within the grantee’s governing body, is there an agency responsible for allocating the Prevention Portion of the Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment (SAPT) Block Grant funds? (Select one.):

• Yes. Please state the name of the agency:

• No

• Not applicable. Please state why:

^B,F 4.b. Within the grantee’s governing body, is there an agency responsible for allocating the Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities (SDFSCA) funds? (Select one.):

• Yes. Please state the name of the agency:

• No

• Not applicable. Please state why:

^B,F 4.c. Within the grantee’s governing body, is there an agency responsible for allocating the Governor’s 20% Set Aside of SDFSCA funds? (Select one.):

• Yes. Please state the name of the agency:

• No

• Not applicable. Please state why:

^B,F 4.d. Within the grantee’s governing body, is there an agency responsible for allocating other funds for ATOD prevention, including Tobacco Settlement funds?

• Yes. Please state the name of the agency:

• No

• Not applicable. Please state why:
  
  
  
  

^B,F 5. Is there a line item (or items) in the jurisdiction’s general revenue funds budget for ATOD primary prevention?

• Yes

• No

6. The following questions refer to a lead ATOD prevention agency or body in the grantee’s jurisdiction that has the authority to make programming, policy, or resource allocation decisions for the ATOD prevention system.

^B,F 6.a. Is there a lead ATOD prevention agency or body in the grantee’s jurisdiction that has the authority to make programmatic decisions for the ATOD prevention system specific to the following categories?

6a1. Alcohol:  No  Yes
6a2. Tobacco:  No  Yes
6a3. Illicit Drugs:  No  Yes
6a4. Other:  No  Yes

^B,F 6.b. Is there a lead ATOD prevention agency or body in the grantee’s jurisdiction that has the authority to make policy decisions for the ATOD prevention system specific to the following categories?

6b1. Alcohol:  No  Yes
6b2. Tobacco:  No  Yes
6b3. Illicit Drugs:  No  Yes
6b4. Other:  No  Yes

^B,F 6.c. Is there a lead ATOD prevention agency or body in the grantee’s jurisdiction that has the authority to allocate ATOD prevention resources for the ATOD prevention system specific to the following categories?

6c1. Alcohol:  No  Yes
6c2. Tobacco:  No  Yes
6c3. Illicit Drugs:  No  Yes
6c4. Other:  No  Yes

Group Planning

^B,F 7. Does a group of jurisdiction-level decision makers convene to integrate and/or coordinate ATOD prevention efforts across the entire system in the grantee’s jurisdiction?

• Yes

• No (If no, skip to Question 8.)

^B,F 7.a. Which statement best describes the group’s capacity for engaging in broad-based strategic planning with regard to ATOD prevention issues?

• Members of the prevention planning group generally do not engage in broad-based strategic planning on prevention issues.

• Some members of the planning group occasionally engage in broad-based strategic planning on prevention issues, though such efforts are sporadic.

• Many members of the planning group regularly engage in strategic planning on prevention issues.

^B,F 7.b. Which statement best describes the group’s capacity for collaborating on joint sponsored ATOD prevention initiatives or activities?

• Members of the prevention planning group generally do not collaborate on joint sponsored ATOD prevention initiatives or activities.

• Some members of the planning group occasionally collaborate on joint sponsored ATOD prevention initiatives or activities, though such efforts are sporadic.

• Many members of the planning group regularly collaborate on joint sponsored ATOD prevention initiatives or activities.

^B,F 7.c. Do members discuss and plan for the sustainability of prevention programs, policies, and practices (i.e., generating stakeholder buy-in, maintaining/increasing funding, sustaining desired outcomes, etc.)?

• Yes

• No

^B,F 7.d. How often does this group convene?

• Monthly

• Quarterly

• Annually

• Other (please describe):

^B,F 7.e. Indicate which types of state or jurisdiction-level agencies are represented in the prevention planning group. (Check all that apply.)

• Governor’s Office

• Tribal Entity's Chief/Tribal President's Office

• Public health department

• Mental health agency

• Substance abuse agency

• Juvenile justice agency

• Criminal justice department

• Elder affairs agency

• Department of education

• Faith-based initiative

• Other (please describe):

• Other (please describe):

• Other (please describe):

^B,F 8. Does a group of jurisdiction and community-level stakeholders convene to facilitate the integration of jurisdiction and community ATOD prevention efforts?

• Yes

• No (If no, skip to Question 10 (Baseline) or 9 (Follow-up.)

^B,F 8.a. Which statement best describes the group’s capacity for facilitating the jurisdiction/community collaboration process with regard to ATOD prevention issues?

• There does not appear to be a process for facilitating a collaborative planning effort between the jurisdiction and communities.

• There has been some coordination between jurisdiction and community planning efforts, but no process for facilitating a collaborative effort has been put in place.

• There is a process for facilitating a collaborative effort between jurisdiction and community planning efforts which is routinely used to coordinate efforts.

^B,F 8.b. How often does this group convene?

• Monthly

• Quarterly

• Annually

• Other (please describe):

^F 9. How did the SPF SIG contribute to the current prevention planning structure?

Decision Making

^B,F 10. Does a group of jurisdiction and community-level stakeholders convene to make major substance abuse prevention-related decisions for the jurisdiction’s prevention system?

• Yes

• No (If no, skip to Question 12 (Baseline) or 11 (Follow-up))

^B,F 10.a. Which statement best describes the group’s capacity for facilitating the use of written guidelines in the decision-making process (e.g., from jurisdiction regulations or strategic plans)?

• There are few or no written guidelines used in the decision making process.

• Written guidelines exist for use in the decision making process but are outdated, used inconsistently, or are ineffective.

• Written guidelines for use in the decision making process exist and are used consistently and effectively.

^B,F 10.b. Which statement best describes the group’s incorporation of input from community stakeholders into the decision-making process (e.g., individuals at the community level or who represent prevention agencies below the jurisdiction level)?

• There is little to no incorporation of input from community stakeholders.

• Incorporation of input from community stakeholders takes place but is inconsistent or modest.

• Input from community stakeholders is consistently and fully incorporated.

^B,F 10.c. Which statement best describes the group’s solicitation of input from the general public for the decision-making process?

• There is little to no solicitation of public input.

• Solicitation of public input takes place, but is inconsistent or modest.

• Solicitation of public input is consistent and effective.

^F 11. How did the SPF SIG contribute to the current decision-making structure in your jurisdiction?

B. PLANNING

This series of questions covers details about strategic planning. Five topic areas will be covered: Documentation of the Strategic Plan, Support for the Strategic Plan, the Impact of the Strategic Plan on the Prevention System, Use of Data to Make Planning Decisions, and the Allocation of Resources. . (NOTE: AT BASELINE THE QUESTIONS SHOULD BE ANSWERED WITH REGARD TO HOW STRATEGIC PLANNING WAS IMPLEMENTED, SUPPORTED, AND ITS IMPACT AND USE OF DATA AT THE TIME THE SPF SIG GRANT WAS AWARDED)

Planning Documents

^B,F 12. Does the prevention system in your jurisdiction have a written strategic plan for substance abuse prevention?

• Yes

• No (if no, skip to Question 22.)

^F12.a. Is this the same as the SPF SIG strategic plan?

• Yes

• No (if no, skip to Question 15.)

^F 13. Does the SPF SIG strategic plan serve as the plan for the entire ATOD prevention system (i.e., all jurisdiction-level stakeholders with prevention missions such as the Department of Education, Department of Juvenile Justice, etc.)?

• Yes

• No

^F 14. Which agencies use the SPF SIG strategic plan for prevention planning? (Check all that apply.)

• Governor’s Office

• Tribal Entity's Chief/Tribal President's or Tribal Governor’s Office

• Public health department

• Mental health agency

• Substance abuse agency

• Juvenile justice agency

• Criminal justice department

• Elder affairs agency

• Department of education

• Faith-based initiative

• Other (please describe):

• Other (please describe):

• Other (please describe):

Level of Support

^B,F 15. Which statement best describes the level of support for the strategic plan among jurisdiction-level leaders and decision makers?

• Few jurisdiction leaders and decision makers appear to be aware of or support the strategic plan for substance abuse prevention.

• Some jurisdiction leaders and decision makers appear to support the strategic plan for substance abuse prevention, but some withhold full support.

• All or nearly all jurisdiction leaders and decision makers strongly support the strategic plan for substance abuse prevention.

^B,F 16. Which statement best describes support for the strategic plan among managers in jurisdiction agencies?

• Few agency program managers appear to be aware of or support the strategic plan for substance abuse prevention.

• Some agency program managers appear to support the strategic plan for substance abuse prevention, but some withhold full support.

• All or nearly all agency program managers strongly support the strategic plan for substance abuse prevention.

^B,F 17. Which statement best describes support for the strategic plan among community leaders and decision makers?

• Few community-level prevention leaders and decision makers appear to be aware of or support the strategic plan for substance abuse prevention.

• Some community-level prevention leaders and decision makers appear to support the strategic plan for substance abuse prevention, but some withhold full support.

• All or nearly all community-level prevention leaders and decision makers strongly support the strategic plan for substance abuse prevention.

^B,F 18. Which statement best describes support for the strategic plan among members of the prevention workforce?

• Few members of the substance abuse prevention workforce appear to be aware of or support the strategic plan for substance abuse prevention.

• Some members of the substance abuse prevention workforce appear to support the strategic plan for substance abuse prevention, but some withhold full support.

• All or nearly all members of the substance abuse prevention workforce strongly support the strategic plan for substance abuse prevention.

Impact of Strategic Plan .

^B,F 19. Which statement best describes the impact of the strategic plan on jurisdiction-level prevention policies?

• There is no evidence that the plan has driven the formulation of prevention policies.

• The plan has played a role in formulating some but not all substance abuse prevention policies.

• The plan clearly drives all or nearly all prevention policies.

^B,F 20. Which statement best describes the impact of the strategic plan on jurisdiction-level funding for prevention programs?

• There is no evidence that funding for prevention programming is influenced by the plan.

• The plan has played a role in some but not all funding for prevention programming.

• The plan clearly drives all or nearly all funding for prevention programming.

^B,F 21. Which statement best describes the impact of the strategic plan on jurisdiction-level prevention workforce development efforts?

• There is no evidence that the plan has driven prevention workforce development efforts.

• The plan has played a role in formulating some but not all prevention workforce development efforts.

• The plan clearly drives all or nearly all prevention workforce development efforts.

Use of Data

The following questions refer to your jurisdiction’s current use of data for strategic planning for the entire ATOD prevention system.

^B 22. Was your jurisdiction awarded an Epidemiological Outcome Workgroup (EOW) grant prior to receiving the SPF SIG award?

• Yes (specify year=YYYY) _______

• No

^B,F 23. Which statement best describes the way that data are used to identify target populations and to prioritize their needs?

• Data are not typically used to identify target populations or prioritize needs in the target populations.

• Data are used to identify target populations, but not to prioritize needs in the target populations.

• Data are sometimes used to identify target populations and prioritize needs in the target populations.

• Data are used regularly to identify target populations and to prioritize needs in the target populations.

^B,F 24. Which statement best describes the way that data are used to identify and to prioritize needs for building systems capacity?

• Data are not typically used to identify or prioritize needs for building systems capacity.

• Data are used to identify needs for building systems capacity, but are not used to prioritize those needs.

• Data are sometimes used to identify and prioritize needs for building systems capacity.

• Data are used regularly to identify and prioritize needs for building systems capacity.

^B,F 25. Which statement best describes the way that data are used to establish long-term goals and establish action plans to achieve those goals?

• Data are not typically used to establish long-term goals and action plans for achieving those goals.

• Data are used to establish long-term goals and action plans for achieving those goals, but this is not done on a regular basis.

• Data are regularly used to establish long-term goals and action plans for achieving those goals.

^B,F 26. Which statement best describes the way data are used to identify resources to ensure that action plans are adequately implemented to achieve goals?

• Data are not typically used to identify resources to ensure action plans are adequately implemented to achieve goals.

• Data are used to identify resources to ensure action plans are adequately implemented to achieve goals, but this is not done on a regular basis.

• Data are regularly used to identify resources to ensure action plans are adequately implemented to achieve goals.

Resource Allocation

^B,F 27. Other than resources from the SPF SIG, what resources are available for the lead prevention agency to support jurisdiction and community-level strategic planning?

	Not Available	Available at Jurisdiction Level	Available at Community Level	Available at Jurisdiction and Community Level
B,F 27.a. Allocation of staff time				
B,F 27.b. Coverage for travel expenses				
B,F 27.c. Data analysis and summary reports				
B,F 27.d. Outside experts to help with the process				
B,F 27.e. Involvement of jurisdiction-level prevention leaders				
B,F 27.f. Other (please describe):				

^F 28. How did the SPF SIG contribute to the availability and allocation of resources?

^F 29. How did the SPF SIG contribute to the current strategic planning process?

C. DATA SYSTEMS

This group of questions covers information about data systems and available resources and expertise. Four topic areas will be covered: Types of Data Collected and Available, Capacity for Data Management, Procedures for Accessing Data, and Guidelines for Sharing Data. (NOTE: AT BASELINE THE QUESTIONS SHOULD BE ANSWERED WITH REGARD TO HOW DATA WERE USED, COLLECTED, MANAGED AND SHARED AT THE TIME THE SPF SIG GRANT WAS AWARDED)

Types of Data

^B,F 30. What is the lowest level at which alcohol consumption data are collected and available for the following demographic and cultural categories in your jurisdiction?

	Jurisdiction	Region	County	Lower than County	Data Not Available
B,F 30a. Race					
B,F 30b. Ethnicity					
B,F 30c. Gender					
B,F 30d. Age					
B,F 30e. Sexual Orientation					
B,F 30f. Disability					
B,F 30g. Socio-economic class					
B,F 30h. Other (please describe)_______________________					
B,F 30i. Other (please describe)_______________________					

^B,F 31. What is the lowest level at which tobacco consumption data are collected and available for the following demographic and cultural categories in your jurisdiction?

	Jurisdiction	Region	County	Lower than County	Data Not Available
B,F 31a. Race					
B,F 31b. Ethnicity					
B,F 31c. Gender					
B,F 31d. Age					
B,F 31e. Sexual Orientation					
B,F 31f. Disability					
B,F 31g. Socio-economic class					
B,F 31h. Other (please describe)_______________________					
B,F 31i. Other (please describe)_______________________					

^B,F 32. What is the lowest level at which illicit drug consumption data are collected and available for the following demographic and cultural categories in your jurisdiction?

	Jurisdiction	Region	County	Lower than County	Data Not Available
B,F 32a. Race					
B,F 32b. Ethnicity					
B,F 32c. Gender					
B,F 32d. Age					
B,F 32e. Sexual Orientation					
B,F 32f. Disability					
B,F 32g. Socio-economic class					
B,F 32h. Other (please describe)_______________________					
B,F 32i. Other (please describe)________					

^B,F 33. What is the lowest level at which dependence or abuse data are collected and available for the following demographic and cultural categories in your jurisdiction?

	Jurisdiction	Region	County	Lower than County	Data Not Available
B,F 33a. Race					
B,F 33b. Ethnicity					
B,F 33c. Gender					
B,F 33d. Age					
B,F 33e. Sexual Orientation					
B,F 33f. Disability					
B,F 33g. Socio-economic class					
B,F 33h. Other (please describe)_______________________					
B,F 33i. Other (please describe)________					

^B,F 34. What is the lowest level at which educational disruption data are collected and available for the following demographic and cultural categories in your jurisdiction?

	Jurisdiction	Region	County	Lower than County	Data Not Available
B,F 34a. Race					
B,F 34b. Ethnicity					
B,F 34c. Gender					
B,F 34d. Age					
B,F 34e. Sexual Orientation					
B,F 34f. Disability					
B,F 34g. Socio-economic class					
B,F 34h. Other (please describe)_______________________					
B,F 34i. Other (please describe)________					

^B,F 35. What is the lowest level at which risk and protective factor data are collected and available for the following demographic and cultural categories in your jurisdiction?

	Jurisdiction	Region	County	Lower than County	Data Not Available
B,F 35a. Race					
B,F 35b. Ethnicity					
B,F 35c. Gender					
B,F 35d. Age					
B,F 35e. Sexual Orientation					
B,F 35f. Disability					
B,F 35g. Socio-economic class					
B,F 35h. Other (please describe)_______________________					
B,F 35i. Other (please describe)________					

^B,F 36. Which statement best describes the collection and availability of the prevention system’s capacity data (i.e., workforce needs, data collection capacity, cultural competency, coalition capacity/readiness, planning capacity)?

• The jurisdiction manages very little or no data about systems capacity.

• The jurisdiction manages some data about systems capacity, but the data are not very comprehensive.

• The jurisdiction manages a comprehensive set of data about the prevention system’s capacity.

Data Management Capacity

^B,F 37. Which statement best describes the capacity of a jurisdiction-level group (or individual or agency) to collect, organize, and synthesize jurisdiction-level data?

• A data group/individual/agency exists but has not collected jurisdiction-level data.

• A data group/individual/agency exists and has collected data, but has not yet organized jurisdiction-level data to be used in needs assessments or planning.

• A data group/individual/agency has collected, organized and synthesized jurisdiction -level data and maintains this information to use in needs assessments or planning.

• Not applicable (no group/individual/agency exists).

^B,F 38. Which statement best describes jurisdiction-level access to people with expertise in data systems management (whether on staff or through contract)?

• Data systems management needs have not been assessed.

• No staff with data systems expertise have been designated or hired for identified needs.

• At least one staff person with data systems expertise has been assigned or hired, but greater need has been identified.

• Staffing is adequate for all identified data systems management needs.

^F39. How did the SPF SIG contribute to the current level of resources and expertise?

Accessing Data

^B,F 40. Which statement best describes the existing written guidelines for accessing and extracting epidemiological data from data systems?

• No written guidelines exist for data systems or activities for communities with substance abuse prevention funds.

• At least some draft guidelines exist for data systems or activities for communities.

• Detailed written guidelines exist for data systems and activities for communities with substance abuse prevention funds.

• Detailed written guidelines exist for data systems and activities for communities with substance abuse prevention funds and have been distributed to entities applying for prevention funds.

^F41. How did the SPF SIG contribute to the current set of guidelines for accessing and extracting epidemiological data?

Sharing Data

^B,F 42. Which statement best describes how much jurisdiction and community-level prevention stakeholders share epidemiological (epi) data (e.g., population-based data about consequences and consumption)?

• There is little evidence of epi-data sharing by community and jurisdiction-level stakeholders.

• There has been at least one activity or product in which epi-data were shared with community prevention stakeholders, but data sharing is not routine.

• Epi-data are routinely shared by community and jurisdiction-level prevention stakeholders informally or in periodic reports or data transfers.

^B,F 43. Which statement best describes how jurisdiction-level guidance is provided to community stakeholders about how to interpret epidemiological data?

• The jurisdiction does not play a role in providing guidance about how to interpret epi-data.

• There is evidence that the jurisdiction has engaged in some activities that provide guidance to community stakeholders about interpreting epi-data, but guidance is not routine.

• The jurisdiction provides substantial and continuing guidance to community stakeholders about interpreting epi-data.

^B,F 44. Which statement best describes how jurisdiction-level and community-level prevention stakeholders share data on ATOD prevention system capacity in your jurisdiction?

• There is no evidence of system capacity data sharing by community and jurisdiction- level stakeholders.

• There has been at least one activity or product in which system capacity data were shared with community prevention stakeholders, but data sharing is not routine.

• System capacity data are routinely shared by community and jurisdiction-level prevention stakeholders informally or in periodic reports or data transfers.

^F45. How did the SPF SIG contribute to the current data sharing process?

D. WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

Following are a few questions on workforce development. By workforce, we mean paid staff at the jurisdiction or community level responsible for carrying out ATOD prevention activities, including setting policies, delivering services, providing technical assistance, and conducting evaluations. Topics covered include: Assessment and Monitoring of Workforce Needs and Current Activities. (NOTE: AT BASELINE THE QUESTIONS SHOULD BE ANSWERED WITH REGARD TO PREVENTION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AT THE TIME THE SPF SIG GRANT WAS AWARDED)

Assessment and Monitoring

^B,F 46. How are the adequacy and needs of the workforce assessed (e.g., this might include size or composition of the workforce, the need for training, technical assistance, or continuing education.)?

• There is no process in place to assess the adequacy and needs of the substance abuse prevention workforce at the jurisdiction level.

• There is currently a process in place to assess the adequacy and needs of the workforce; however, the assessment does not take place regularly, and/or uses methods or data that are not ideal.

• There is currently a regularly occurring process in place (at least every two years) to assess the adequacy and needs of the prevention workforce at the jurisdiction level; the assessment is based on timely, accurate data and sound methods.

^B,F 47. Is there currently a written plan for workforce development?

• Yes

• No (If no, skip to Question 50 (baseline) or 49 (follow-up)

^B,F 48. How is the implementation of the plan monitored?

• There is no or limited monitoring of the implementation of the workforce development plan.

• There is a process in place for monitoring the workforce development plan, but the procedures used are not adequate and results are not used to make critical adjustments.

• There is a process in place for monitoring the workforce development plan, the procedures are sound, and results are used to make critical adjustments.

^F49. How did the SPF SIG contribute to the current workforce development plan and monitoring its implementation? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Activities

Please indicate which of the following workforce development activities have taken place during the last year in your jurisdiction. NOTE: REMEMBER THAT AT BASELINE YOU WILL ANSWER QUESTIONS RETROSPECTIVE TO THE BEGINNING OF THE GRANT (I.E., DURING THE PAST YEAR REFERS TO THE YEAR PRIOR TO WHEN THE SPF SIG GRANT WAS AWARDED IN YOUR JURISDICTION.)

^B,F 50. Were ATOD prevention curricula implemented in institutions of higher education (community colleges and colleges/universities)?

• Yes

• No

^B,F 51. Were there opportunities for continuing professional education (CPE’s)?

• Yes

• No

^B,F 52. Were formal mechanisms in place for career advancement in ATOD prevention (e.g., did certification lead to higher salaries and positions)?

• Yes

• No

^B,F 53. Were there formal coaching or mentoring programs for ATOD personnel?

• Yes

• No

^B,F 54. Were there formal mechanisms for developing prevention leaders (e.g., conference and training sessions specifically aimed at leadership development)?

• Yes

• No

^B,F 55. Were there formal mechanisms in place to increase the diversity of the prevention workforce?

• Yes

• No

^B,F 56. Were there formal mechanisms in place to build evaluation capacity in the prevention workforce (e.g., training opportunities to learn evaluation concepts and skills)?

• Yes

• No

^B,F 57. Were there formal steps taken to reduce turnover among the prevention workforce, including salary adjustments?

• Yes

• No

^B,F 58. Were there formal opportunities for multidisciplinary cross-training (e.g., workshops between substance abuse, health, mental health, education)?

• Yes

• No

^B,F 59. Were there formal mechanisms in place to enhance the cultural competence of the ATOD prevention workforce?

• Yes

• No

E. EVIDENCE-BASED PROGRAMS, POLICIES, AND PRACTICES (EBPPP)

This section covers questions about the implementation of evidence-based programs, policies, and practices in your jurisdiction. Topics covered include: Criteria for Defining EBPPPs and Use of EBPPPs. . (NOTE: AT BASELINE THE QUESTIONS SHOULD BE ANSWERED WITH REGARD TO HOW EBPPP WERE DEFINED AND USED AT THE TIME THE SPF SIG GRANT WAS AWARDED)

Knowledge of Criterion

^B,F 60. Which statement best describes the degree to which criteria for defining EBPPPs are consistent across agencies in your jurisdiction?

• There are no or limited criteria for defining evidence-based programs across agencies in this jurisdiction.

• Some criteria for defining evidence-based programs are shared among agencies, but they are not consistent across agencies in this jurisdiction.

• Criteria for defining evidence-based programs are used to ensure consistency and compatibility across agencies in this jurisdiction.

^B,F 61. Which statement best describes how information on the criteria for evidence-based programs, policies, and practices is disseminated to the ATOD prevention workforce?

• Information on the criteria is generally not available

• Information on the criteria is accessible or made available on request.

• Information on the criteria is actively disseminated by the lead prevention agency through traditional and innovative channels (e.g., conferences specifically on evidence-based prevention, web-sites, RFP’s).

^F62. How did the SPF SIG contribute to the current set of criteria?

Use of Evidence-Based Programs, Policies and Practices

^B,F 63. Are SAPT block grant recipients required to use a specified percentage of funds on evidence-based programs, policies, and practices?

• Yes

• No (If no, skip to Question 64)

• Not applicable: tribal entity or jurisdiction that does not receive SAPT funds (If N/A, skip to Question 64)

^B,F 63a. What percentage of the funds is required to be spent on evidence-based programs, policies, and practices? %

^B,F 64. Which statement best describes what resources are available from any source to assist program providers in the selection, implementation, and adaptation of evidence-based programs, policies, and practices (e.g., training, technical assistance, and materials)?

	No or Limited Resources	Some Resources but not adequate	Substantial Resources
B,F 64a. Selection			
B,F 64b. Implementation			
B,F 64c. Adaptation			

^F65. How did the SPF SIG contribute to the current use of evidence-based programs, policies, and practices?

F. CULTURAL COMPETENCE

This section covers questions about diverse populations addressed in your jurisdictions prevention system. Topics covered include: Policies and Resources. (NOTE: AT BASELINE THE QUESTIONS SHOULD BE ANSWERED WITH REGARD TO HOW CULTURAL COMPETENCE WAS ADDRESSED AT THE TIME THE SPF SIG GRANT WAS AWARDED)

Policies

^B,F 66. Is there a written plan for addressing cultural competence in the ATOD prevention system in your jurisdiction?

• Yes

• No

^B,F 67. Are there written formal polices on culturally competent ATOD Prevention in your jurisdiction?

• Yes

• No (If no, skip to Question 71 (baseline) or 70 (follow-up))

^B,F 68. Which statement best describes the degree to which policies on culturally competent prevention are monitored?

• The jurisdiction does not monitor the implementation of cultural competence policies.

• The jurisdiction monitors the implementation of cultural competence policies, but monitoring is inconsistent.

• The jurisdiction consistently monitors implementation of cultural competence policies.

^B,F 69. Which statement best describes the degree to which non-compliance with the policies are addressed— that is, does the jurisdiction enforce its policies on cultural competence?

• The jurisdiction does not enforce the implementation of cultural competence policies.

• The jurisdiction enforces the implementation of cultural competence policies, but enforcement is inconsistent.

• The jurisdiction consistently enforces implementation of cultural competence policies.

^F70. How did the SPF SIG contribute to the current plan and policies addressing cultural competence?

Support and Resources

^B,F 71. Are there requirements to ensure culturally and linguistically competent programs, policies, and practices, including the use of culturally appropriate prevention materials, at the community level?

• Yes

• No

^B,F 72. Which statement best describes what resources are available from any source to assist program providers in the selection, implementation, and adaptation of culturally and linguistically competent programs, policies and practices (e.g., technical assistance and materials)?

	No or Limited Resources	Some Resources but not adequate	Substantial Resources
B,F 72a. Selection			
B,F 72b. Implementation			
B,F 72c. Adaptation			

^B,F 73. Are there systematic processes for assessing inclusiveness and cultural appropriateness of prevention materials at the community level?

• Yes

• No

^F74. How did the SPF SIG contribute to the current supports for culturally appropriate strategies?

G. EVALUATION AND MONITORING

This series of questions covers details about the evaluation and monitoring of the prevention system in your jurisdiction. The five specific topic areas addressed are: Available Resources and Expertise, Expectations, Data Sharing, Use of Data Reports, and Data-Driven Decision Making. (NOTE: AT BASELINE THE QUESTIONS SHOULD BE ANSWERED WITH REGARD TO EVALUATION AND MONITORING PRACTICES AT THE TIME THE SPF SIG GRANT WAS AWARDED)

Resources and Expertise

^B,F 75. Which statement best describes the availability of evaluation expertise (for example, on staff or under contracts with academic institutions, private research organizations, etc.) for the jurisdiction’s ATOD prevention efforts relative to its needs for prevention evaluation (i.e. other than in connection with the SPF SIG project)?

• No evaluation expertise has been identified as being available to jurisdiction prevention efforts.

• Some evaluation expertise is available to jurisdiction prevention efforts, but greater need for evaluation resources exists.

• The jurisdiction has working or contractual relationships with evaluation experts who can provide prevention evaluation services, but little regular use of evaluation expertise can be documented.

• The jurisdiction has working or contractual relationships with evaluation experts who play a significant role in prevention evaluation efforts.

^F76. How did the SPF SIG contribute to the resources available for evaluation and monitoring (outside of the SPF SIG)?

Expectations

^B,F 77.a. Does the jurisdiction provide guidelines for the kinds of evaluation (e.g. outcome evaluation, process evaluation, fidelity monitoring) required of ATOD prevention funded communities, other than in connection with the SPF SIG project?

• Yes

• No (If no, skip to Question 78)

^B,F 77.b. Which statement(s) best describe the jurisdiction’s guidelines for the kinds of evaluation (e.g. outcome evaluation, process evaluation, or fidelity monitoring) required of ATOD prevention funded communities, other than in connection with the SPF SIG project? (Check all the apply)

• Evaluation guidelines require that communities include an outcome evaluation component (i.e., systematic assessment of the results or effectiveness of a program or activity) to identify the results of a program’s effort.

• Evaluation guidelines require that communities include a fidelity monitoring component (i.e., assessment of the degree of fit between the developer-defined components of a substance abuse prevention intervention and its actual implementation in a given organizational or community setting) to determine the rigor with which an intervention adheres to the developer's model.

• Evaluation guidelines require that communities include a process evaluation component (i.e., assessment of how a program was implemented and operates) to assess reasons for successful or unsuccessful performance, and provide information for potential replication.

^B,F 78. Which statement best describes the support in your jurisdiction for the use of SAPT block grant funds at the community level for evaluation and monitoring?

• The jurisdiction does not allow the use of block grant funds for community evaluation and monitoring.

• The jurisdiction allows the use of block grant funds for community evaluation and monitoring.

• The jurisdiction supports and actively promotes the use of block grant funds for community evaluation and monitoring.

• Not applicable: Tribal entity or jurisdiction does not have a SAPT grant.

Data Sharing

^B,F 79. Which statement best describes the sharing of evaluation data between jurisdiction and community-level prevention stakeholders?

• There is no evidence of evaluation data being shared by jurisdiction and community- level prevention stakeholders.

• There have been some instances of evaluation data being shared by jurisdiction and community-level prevention stakeholders, but this is not done routinely.

• Evaluation data are routinely shared by jurisdiction and community-level prevention stakeholders.

^B,F 80. Which statement best describes the collaboration between jurisdiction and community entities on data elements and collection methods?

• There is no evidence of jurisdiction and community-level collaboration on determining which data elements and/or data collection methods should be collected for evaluation purposes.

• Jurisdiction and community-level entities collaborate on determining evaluation data elements and/or data collection methods, but collaboration is not systematic or comprehensive.

• Jurisdiction and community-level entities collaborate on determining evaluation data elements and/or data collection methods in a systematic and comprehensive way.

^B,F 81. Which statement best describes the collaboration between jurisdiction and community- level entities on developing evaluation report templates?

• There is no evidence of jurisdiction and community-level collaboration on developing evaluation report templates.

• Jurisdiction and community-level entities collaborate on developing evaluation report templates, but collaboration is not systematic or comprehensive.

• Jurisdiction and community-level entities have collaborated on developing evaluation report templates in a systematic and comprehensive way.

^F82. How did the SPF SIG contribute to the current evaluation and reporting expectations?

Data Reports

^B,F 83. Other than reports required by funding agencies, how often does the lead prevention agency issue evaluation reports on ATOD prevention impact for the jurisdiction’s stakeholders? That is, reports that provide information about populations served, the programs, policies, and practices implemented, and the outcomes associated with those activities. (Note: this does not include SPF SIG reports.)

• N/A—no reports issued.(Skip to Question 88 Baseline or 87 Follow-up)

• Annually

• Every 2 years

• Every 3 years

• Every 4–5 years

• Other (please describe):

^B,F 84. Who are the target audiences for the reports? (Check all that apply.)

• Policy Makers

• Prevention Providers

• Schools

• Social Service Agencies

• General Public

• Other (please describe):

^F85. How did the SPF SIG contribute to the current status of evaluation reports and guidance?

Data Driven Decision Making

^B,F 86. Which statement best describes the ways that the jurisdiction’s ATOD prevention system uses evaluation data to monitor system performance (e.g., for strategic planning, lobbying the legislature for continued or increased funding, helping providers make necessary adjustments in implementation, etc.)?

• There is no evidence that the system in this jurisdiction has used evaluation data to review the prevention system’s performance relative to its goals and objectives.

• The jurisdiction uses evaluation data to monitor system performance, but the monitoring process is sporadic.

• The jurisdiction uses evaluation data routinely (at least every two years) to review the prevention system’s performance relative to its goals and objectives.

^B,F 87. How often are evaluation data reviewed to mark progress on set goals and objectives?

• N/A (data not used)

• Annually

• Every 2 years

• Every 3 years

• Every 4–5 years

• Other (specify):

^F88. How did the SPF SIG contribute to the current use of evaluation data?

H. SUSTAINABILITY

Sustainability is the process through which a prevention system becomes a norm and is integrated into ongoing operations. Sustainability is vital to ensuring that prevention values and processes are firmly established, that partnerships are strengthened, and that financial and other resources are secured over the long term. . (NOTE: AT BASELINE THE QUESTIONS SHOULD BE ANSWERED WITH REGARD TO SUSTAINABILITY AT THE TIME THE SPF SIG GRANT WAS AWARDED)

^B,F 89. In what areas have sustainability efforts been made by the jurisdiction to sustain the current prevention system? (Check all that apply.)

• Building workforce capacity

• Diversifying funding streams

• Fostering community involvement and ownership

• Building public awareness

• Seeking additional federal funds

• Other (please describe):

• Not applicable (Sustainability has not been addressed)

I. EXTERNAL EVENTS

This question is about external events that may have occurred in your jurisdiction recently. These could be things like significant changes in prevention funding sources or levels, new legislation, economic changes, or even natural disasters. . NOTE: REMEMBER THAT AT BASELINE YOU WILL ANSWER QUESTIONS RETROSPECTIVE TO THE BEGINNING OF THE GRANT (I.E., DURING THE PAST 12 MONTHS REFERS TO THE YEAR PRIOR TO WHEN THE SPF SIG GRANT WAS AWARDED IN YOUR JURISDICTION.

^B,F 90. Indicate how each event that occurred in the past 12 months either impacted or may impact your jurisdiction’s ATOD prevention activities.

	Mostly Positive Impact	Mixed; Positive and Negative Impact	Mostly Negative Impact	NA/ Event did not occur
B,F 90a. Changes in prevention funding sources or levels				
B,F 90b. Changes in jurisdiction leadership				
B,F 90c. New legislation				
B,F 90d. Economic-related changes				
B,F 90e. Natural disasters				
B,F 90f. Tragedies or losses in the community or tribe				
B,F 90g. Other (please describe):				

ATTACHMENT B1b: Page 1