Essentials for Childhood: Preventing ACEs Evaluation and Surveillance Survey

Form Approved
OMB No: xxxx-xxxx
Exp. Date: xx-xx-xxxx
Public Reporting burden of this collection of information is estimated at 1 hours, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. 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. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of
information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to CDC/ATSDR Reports Clearance Officer, 1600 Clifton Road NW, MS D-74, Atlanta, GA 30333; Attn: PRA (xxxxxxxx).

Essentials for Childhood: Preventing ACEs Evaluation and Surveillance Survey
1. Please describe your general responsibilities for Essentials for Childhood (EfC): Preventing
Adverse Childhood Experiences through Data to Action.

2. In which state is your Essentials for Childhood (EfC): Preventing Adverse Childhood
Experiences through Data to Action organization doing work?

3. Is your evaluation role internal to the Essentials for Childhood (EfC): Preventing Adverse
Childhood Experiences through Data to Action recipient organization or external (e.g.,
contractor)?
Internal
External

4. If your role is external, please describe your employer (e.g., contracting agency).

5. 5.What percentage of your time is dedicated to evaluation for Essentials for Childhood
(EfC): Preventing Adverse Childhood Experiences through Data to Action?
0

50

100

6. In what ways did the surveillance capacity assessment (completed in Year 1) inform
surveillance, program, and data to action planning?

7. In what ways did the prevention or program capacity assessment (completed in Year 1)
inform surveillance, program, and data to action planning?

8. In what ways did the surveillance capacity assessment (completed in Year 1) inform
surveillance, program, and data to action planning?

9. In what ways did the data dissemination and data to action plan (completed in Year 1, and
updated annually) inform your surveillance, program, and data to action planning?

10. How would you rate Essentials for Childhood (EfC): Preventing Adverse Childhood
Experiences through Data to Action’s capacity to evaluate ACEs and PCEs surveillance
activities? extremely low
extremely low
moderately low
adequate
moderately difficult
extremely high

11. How would you rate Essentials for Childhood (EfC): Preventing Adverse Childhood
Experiences through Data to Action’s capacity to evaluate ACEs prevention activities?
extremely low
moderately low
adequate
moderately high
extremely high

12. How would you rate Essentials for Childhood (EfC): Preventing Adverse Childhood
Experiences through Data to Action’s capacity to evaluate ACEs and PCEs data to action
activities?
extremely low
moderately low
adequate
moderately high
extremely high

13. Please provide a brief description of your ratings for your evaluation capacity for ACEs
and PCEs surveillance, prevention, and data to action activities.

14. To what extent has Essentials for Childhood (EfC): Preventing Adverse Childhood
Experiences through Data to Action’s made progress (to date) towards building your ACEs
and PCEs surveillance capacity, implementing your selected ACEs prevention strategies, and
using your data to inform programmatic action? Please base your responses on your most
recent evaluation findings.

How has the quality of ACEs and PCEs surveillance changed as a result of the Essentials for
Childhood (EfC): Preventing Adverse Childhood Experiences through Data to Action funding?
Please describe in detail the dimensions in quality of the ACEs and PCEs surveillance system.

15. What has been the ONE greatest facilitator for building your comprehensive ACEs and
PCEs youth-based surveillance and data to action system?

16. What has been the ONE greatest barrier in building your comprehensive ACEs and PCEs
youth-based surveillance and data to action system?

17. How difficult has it has been to add and sustain inclusion of the core ACEs items, and at
least one PCE item, on your selected youth-based surveillance system? Describe any
challenges.

18. What has been the greatest facilitator for adding and sustaining inclusion of the core
ACEs items, and at least one PCE item, on your selected youth-based surveillance system?

19. How difficult it has been to use social determinants of health data to effectively monitor
social and structural inequities that may contribute to inequities in ACEs? Describe any
challenges.

20. What has been the greatest facilitator of using social determinants of health data to
effectively monitor social and structural inequities that may contribute to inequities in ACEs?

21. How have you used synthesized data from across data sources to inform your prevention
strategies?

22. How difficult has it been to identify partnerships to ensure access to and dissemination of
needed data?
Very Easy
Somewhat Easy
Neither Easy or Difficult
Somewhat Difficult
Very Difficult

23. How difficult has it been to maintain partnerships to ensure access to and dissemination
of needed data?
Very Easy
Somewhat Easy
Neither Easy or Difficult
Somewhat Difficult
Very Difficult

24. OPTIONAL RECIPIENTS ONLY: How has use of near-real time syndromic surveillance
data enhanced your surveillance and data to action efforts to monitor indicators of ACEs?

25. OPTIONAL RECIPIENTS ONLY: How has use of linked ACEs and PCEs youth-based
surveillance and social determinants of health data enhanced your capacity to understand
how ACES and PCEs are associated with structural inequities?

26. OPTIONAL RECIPIENTS ONLY: How has use of linked ACEs and PCEs youth-based
surveillance and social determinants of health data enhanced your capacity to allocate
prevention resources to communities with disproportionate need due to structural inequities?

27. To date, what progress has been made reaching populations with high ACE burden with
ACE prevention strategies?
no progress
very little progress
moderate progress
substantial progress

28. Please provide a brief description for your rating for reaching populations with high ACE
burden.

29. Please describe how your organization is measuring the reach of the program to
individuals and settings (including populations with high ACE burden)? Address any
challenges or facilitators affecting this work.

30. How has increased dissemination of ACEs and PCEs data to policymakers, partners, and
the public improved understanding of ACEs, and how to prevent them, in your state?

31. How has increased dissemination of ACEs and PCEs data to policymakers, partners, and
the public improved use of data to inform prevention and intervention efforts in your state?

32. To what extent has Essentials for Childhood (EfC): Preventing Adverse Childhood
Experiences through Data to Action’s made progress (to date) in the following short-term
outcomes? Please base your responses on your most recent interim evaluation findings.
Not Yet
Measured

Objective 1.1.
Increased capacity
to create, use, and
disseminate data
from a
comprehensive ACEs
and PCEs
surveillance system
Objective 1.2.
Increased state level
collection of ACEs
and PCEs data
through youth-based
surveillance
Objective 1.3.
Increased capacity
to collect data on the

No Progress

Very Little
Progress

Moderate
Progress

Substantial
Progress

social determinants
of health
Objective 1.4.
Increased access to
ACEs and PCEs, risk
and protective
factor, and social
determinants of
health data to inform
prevention
strategies and
identify inequities
Objective 2.1.
Increased partner
awareness of
existing state
prevention
strategies and
approaches that
address ACEs
Objective 2.2.
Increased
coordination and
collaboration
between state
agencies and other
sectors
Objective 2.2a.
Increased
coordination and
collaboration
between local
agencies and other
sectors*
Objective 2.3.
Increased capacity
to implement
comprehensive ACEs
prevention
strategies at the
state level
Objective 2.3a.
Increased capacity
to implement
comprehensive ACEs
prevention
strategies at the
local level*
Objective 3.1.
Increased
understanding of
state surveillance
and prevention
capacity related to
ACEs and PCEs
Objective 3.2.
Increased capacity
to use ACEs and
PCEs surveillance

and evaluation data
to identify and tailor
ACEs prevention
strategies, including
to improve health
equity, and the social
determinants of
health
Objective 3.3.
Increased data
dissemination on
ACEs and PCEs to
state partners,
policy-makers, and
the public
Objective 3.3a.
Increased data
dissemination on
ACEs and PCEs to
local* partners,
policy-makers, and
the public
Objective 3.4.
Increased
knowledge about the
effectiveness of
ACEs prevention
strategies to
improve health and
wellbeing, and
reduce inequities

33. Please provide a brief explanation of any notable responses to the previous question.

34. To what extent has Essentials for Childhood (EfC): Preventing Adverse Childhood
Experiences through Data to Action made progress (to date) in the following intermediate
outcomes? Please base your responses on your most recent interim evaluation findings.
Not Yet
Measured

Objective 1.5.
Increased state-level
monitoring of trends
in ACEs and PCEs
over time, and use of
data from youth
populations
Objective 1.6.
Increased use of
data on health
inequities and the
social determinants
of health to
contextualize risk

No Progress

Very Little
Progress

Moderate
Progress

Substantial
Progress

factors for ACEs,
and reduce
inequities
Objective 1.7.
Increased
sustainability of a
comprehensive ACEs
and PCEs
surveillance system
that informs tailored
prevention
strategies
Objective 2.4.
Increased uptake
and implementation
of comprehensive
ACEs prevention
strategies at the
state level
Objective 2.4a.
Increased uptake
and implementation
of comprehensive
ACEs prevention
strategies at the
local level*
Objective 2.5.
Increased reach of
prevention
strategies, with a
focus on
communities with
disproportionate
needs due to social
determinants of
health
Objective 2.6.
Increased evidence
for population-based
approaches to
prevent ACEs
prevention
strategies
Objective 3.5.
Increased use and
translation[AK(1] of
surveillance and
evaluation data to
inform tailored
prevention strategy
implementation to
reduce ACEs and
improve health
equity and the social
determinants of
health
Objective 3.6.
Increased partner
response to the
burden of ACEs and

PCEs in their state,
and public
awareness of
societal factors that
lead to safe, stable,
and nurturing
relationships and
environments

35. Please provide a brief explanation of any notable responses to the previous question.

36. As of today, how would you describe your program’s evaluation activities
A little behind
Slowly gearing up
On track
Full steam ahead

37. What challenges have affected your evaluation progress to date?

38. What has facilitated your evaluation progress to date?

39. To what extent have you used your surveillance and evaluation data?
Not at all
A little
Somewhat
A great deal

40. Which types of technical assistance and support from the CDC and technical assistance
partners have been useful to you?

41. How could technical assistance and support from CDC and technical assistance partners
be improved?

42. If you have any additional comments on evaluation, please provide them here.

43. Sustainability
This section covers efforts to sustain improvements in ACE surveillance beyond the timeline
of the Essentials for Childhood (EfC): Preventing Adverse Childhood Experiences through
Data to Action cooperative agreement.
How are you planning to sustain the implementation of ACE prevention strategies following
the conclusion of Essentials for Childhood (EfC): ): Preventing Adverse Childhood
Experiences through Data to Action funding?

44. How are you planning to sustain the use of ACEs and PCEs data to inform prevention
strategy action following the conclusion of Essentials for Childhood (EfC): Preventing Adverse
Childhood Experiences through Data to Action funding?

45. How are you planning to sustain the surveillance system following the conclusion of
Essentials for Childhood (EfC): Preventing Adverse Childhood Experiences through Data to
Action funding? Specifically, describe any plans to sustain inclusion of ACEs and PCEs items
in youth-based surveillance efforts.

46. How are you planning to sustain the surveillance system following the conclusion of
Essentials for Childhood (EfC): Preventing Adverse Childhood Experiences through Data to
Action funding? Specifically, describe any plans to sustain dissemination of data to various
audiences.

47. How has sustainability planning involved discussions with collaborators and data
partners? What perceptions and values do these partners have on sustainability?

48. Is there anything you have not described yet that you would like to add?