CONFERENCE REPORT
Turning
Research
into Action
A REPORT FROM THE
SAFE AND DRUG-FREE
SCHOOLS CONFERENCE
By Jill Lewis-Kelly, American Council for Drug Education
I n June, over 500 educators and drug and violence
prevention experts gathered in the nation’s capital
to discuss weeding a very large garden.
This garden is the garden of prevention program-
ming—a garden that has produced a bumper crop of
initiatives, but now needs some careful tending. At the
Safe and Drug-Free Schools Program conference this
past summer, attendees were warned of the overcrowd-
ing of this garden and were given suggestions on how
to tend its needs.
Prevention programming in the schools—as well as
in communities—faces many challenges today. Critical
among these challenges is the issue of funding and
the issue of success, which go hand in hand. But
before facing these challenges, the first question is:
Why drug and violence prevention programming in the
nation’s schools?
Vice President of the United States Al Gore, during
the opening session of the conference, explained it sim-
ply: “The future of our schools equals the future of our
country.” To secure this future, the President and Vice
President declared education to be their number one
priority during this administration. This priority was
set in parameters such as these: every 8-year-old must
be able to read; every 12-year-old must have access to
the Information Superhighway; every 18-year-old must
8 ThE ChALLENgE v7, n3
be able to go to college if he or she so chooses;
and every adult must be able to continue learning for
a lifetime.
If students are to achieve any educational goals, the
schools where this learning takes place need to be envi-
ronments free of obstacles to the learning process. If
students and teachers fear for their physical safety
within the schools, this learning will not occur.
Likewise, if drugs are present and if they become
entangled in the students’ lives, this learning will not
occur. As Gore pointed out, “Because schools are safer,
they are more conducive to both teaching and learn-
ing.” But he warned the fight for the Safe and Drug-
Free Schools Program is not over.
The Department of Education’s Safe and Drug-Free
Schools Program, therefore, hosted a conference this
summer to discuss prevention programming for adoles-
cents and how to turn current research into effective
action. It is the current research that provides the foun-
dation for the job of weeding the garden. General Barry
McCaffrey, Director of the Office of National Drug
Control Policy (ONDCP), explained, “There is no
question in my mind that we’ve got to kill some of the
100 flowers that have bloomed and evaluate drug pre-
vention programs on the basis of scientific findings.”
“We can’t have random activities. We’ve got to have
a purpose. We’ve got to have a framework—some con-
ceptual ladder—to build our drug prevention pro-
grams,” McCaffrey added.
Weeding the garden
To take on the task of weeding this rather large gar-
den of prevention programming, one needs the proper
gardening tools, or in this case, a set of guidelines.
Luckily, within the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and
Communities Act, these guidelines have been spelled
out. They are the four principles of effectiveness—the
four steps that will help ensure success when choosing
a prevention program. These principles insist that a
chosen program:
1. Is based on a thorough assessment of objective data
about the drug and violence problems in the com-
munities served;
2. Can meet measurable goals and objectives;
3. Is based on research and evaluation; and
4. Is evaluated periodically.
 Throughout the conference these
steps were emphasized by plenary
session speakers, and during the
workshop sessions, individual pro-
grams told of how these steps led
to effectiveness.
Needs
1 Assessment
Before choosing from the many
prevention programs that grow in
the field, a school or community
must understand what the spe-
cific problems of its own con-
stituency are. Is the problem
connected to drugs, to violence,
or to both? How does one ascer-
tain this information?
Understanding the national
problem first will help to focus
on an individual local problem.
Dr. Lloyd Johnston, principal
investigator of The Monitoring
the Future study, expertly
described the national problem
of adolescent drug use to the
conference attendees early on in
the three-day event. He report -
ed current statistics from his
study which show an increase
in marijuana, tobacco, and
heroin use among the nation’s
young people.
In order to understand these
increases, Johnson discussed
the relationship of drug use to the
amount of risk that adolescents
associate with drug use and to
whether or not they disapprove of
drug use. While these statistics por-
tray disturbing trends across the
country, to choose the right preven-
tion program, educators must try to
understand these trends within
their own communities.
Dr. David Hawkins of the Seattle
Social Development Project,
ThE ChALLENgE v7, n3
explained how to base assessments
on risk and protection factors.
These factors have been proven in
longitudinal studies to greatly
influence adolescent behavior. This
approach to assessments basically
says, “If we want to prevent a prob-
lem before it happens, we need to
know what factors increase risk for
that problem and then reduce those
risk factors.” Conversely, one must
know what factors prevent or pro-
tect against the development of the
problem and increase those protec-
tive factors.
Hawkins, therefore, suggests
assessing a community’s unique
profile of risk and protection. This
allows the school and the commu-
nity to make decisions about where
it should focus its efforts and con-
centrate its resources.
Present at the conference were
representatives from a number of
successful programs. Assessment
of community needs was often the
key to their success. Joseph Carter,
from the Boston Police Depart-
ment, described how his organiza-
tion responded to widespread fear
caused by an alarming number of
youthful homicides that occurred
in Boston during the late 1980s and
early 1990s. By studying data on
the victims, the Department was
able to develop a victim profile.
But it took a high level of collabo-
ration before police were fully able
to understand what they were up
against. Only by working with the
Probation Department and a net-
work of community leaders was it
possible to define the problem of
youthful violence in Boston.
In Denver, collaboration was
also key to understanding the
problem. There, the Asian
Pacific Center for Human
Development conducted a vari-
ety of focus groups that includ-
ed students, parents, school rep-
resentatives, and evaluators
before creating an after-school
program for at-risk youths.
But not all successful pro-
grams have started with a col-
laborative assessment phase.
Azim Khamisa told the confer-
ence spoke about starting the
Tariq Khamisa Foundation,
dedicated to creating safer com-
munities by curbing youthful
violence and promoting person-
al responsibility, after his son,
Tariq was killed two years ago.
Tariq’s assailant was 14 years old.
Khamisa brings the foundation’s
program of Violence Impact
Forums into local schools to help
promote healing and to reduce the
traumatic effects of violence.
For most programs represented
at the conference, the critical first
step in bringing drug and violence
prevention into the schools has
been understanding the local situa-
tion. As D.J. Ida, from the Asian
9
CONFERENCE REPORT
Pacific Center for Human
Development in Denver, said about
her focus groups, it’s where one
can learn what others see as the
problems and what are the causes
of those problems.
Measurable
2 Goals &
Objectives
Determining community needs
provides the basis for selecting pre-
vention programs. Schools must
ensure that the programs they
choose to implement are designed
to respond to the needs they have
identified, and they should consid-
er only programs that have measur-
able goals and objectives.
The Community That Cares pro-
gram, developed by Dr. Hawkins,
provides a process making it possi-
ble to select prevention programs
by first defining program goals.
Once risk and protective factors
have been identified, a set of
outcome-based planning tools are
used to identify desired medium-
and long-term outcomes. These, in
10
turn, establish the goals that drive
selection of appropriate programs.
Most participants at the confer-
ence described their programs in
terms of goals and objectives.
Phyllis Ellickson of Rand
Corporation, developer of Project
ALERT, spoke broadly about
increasing student motivation to
resist drugs and developing skills
of resistance. She offered as one
objective, helping young people
acquire reasons not to use drugs
by, for example, challenging cer-
tain normative beliefs about drugs
and encouraging adolescents to
believe they are capable of resist -
ing drugs. For the goal of develop-
ing resistance skills, Project
ALERT helps kids identify pres-
sures that might encourage them to
use drugs and learn ways to counter
these pressures.
Project STAR also emphasizes
the development of drug resistance
skills as a program goal, but makes
a point to include goals and objec-
tives for the community as well.
“It’s important when developing or
choosing an effective program that
it includes community-level objec-
tives and activities that are time-
lined and easy-to-use with existing
resources,” Mary Ann Pentz,
developer of Project STAR, report-
ed. One of this program’s goals is
to encourage non-drug use and
reinforce non-drug social norms
and expectations in the community.
In Boston, where the overriding
goal was to reduce youth homi-
cides, the police commissioner
developed 16 community teams
involving more than 400 people.
These teams included clergy, busi-
ness leaders, labor officials, and
elected officials, as well as police.
The teams were charged with
developing a strategic plan to
change police orientation and give
the department a neighborhood
focus. It was up to the teams to set
out the goals and objectives to real-
ize the desired outcome.
Research-based
3
Programs
“Turning Research into Action”
was the theme of this summer’s
conference and research-based pro-
grams were in the limelight.
“The history of prevention in the
area of substance abuse and delin-
quency does not have a strong
record,” Dr. Hawkins told the gath-
ering. General McCaffrey of
ONDCP stressed the need to
change previous ways of thinking
about prevention. “One of our first
challenges today is to try to replace
ideology and polemics with
science and well-thought-out
medical and social-based conclu-
sions,” he said.
Dr. Gilbert Botvin, developer of
Life Skills Training, agreed. “We
know the causes of drug abuse and
how to prevent it, and therefore
there’s no excuse for developing
ThE ChALLENgE v7, n3
prevention programs that are based
largely on ideology and intuition.
It’s time to move to approaches
based on sound science.”
Discussing research on risk and
protective factors, Dr. Hawkins
explained that a lot has been
learned in the last 20 years about
what factors contribute to making
young people both more and less
vulnerable to substance abuse and
violence. Factors within schools
(i.e., failure to ensure academic
success of all children), within
families (i.e., failure to set clear
expectations for children), and for
individuals and peer groups (i.e.,
initiating undesirable behavior at
early ages) all contribute to risk.
Protective factors include pro-
moting healthy beliefs and clear
standards of behavior for young
people and making it possible for
young people to develop bonds
with adults or groups in communi-
ties and schools. Providing oppor-
tunities for active involvement,
teaching the skills that are needed
to be successful, and having a con-
sistent system of recognition are
the three conditions that must be
present if a young person is to
develop a healthy bond with an
adult or a group. This will increase
the protection that guards the
young person from violence and
substance abuse.
Many programs at the confer-
ence have developed strategies to
limit risk factors and enhance pro-
tective factors. These included:
The Seattle Social Development
Project, Communities that Care,
FAST, Life Skills Training, Project
STAR, Strengthening Families,
Project Family, Reconnecting
Youth, and Project ALERT.
Much research in recent years
has focused on the fundamentals of
ThE ChALLENgE v7, n3
effective prevention programming,
and much discussion during the
three days of the conference dealt
with these findings.
Mathea Falco, President of Drug
Strategies, Incorporated developed
a list of key components for effec-
tive programs after she reviewed
the 47 programs described in her
book, Making the Grade: A Guide
to School Drug Prevention
Programs. But she has plenty of
company. A number of conference
participants presented their own
lists of fundamental elements
for effective prevention programs.
And Falco noted, “More and more
lists are springing up all over.
It’s good (to have so many),
because this may lead us to operat-
ing standards.”
Certain fundamentals appear on
the vast majority of these lists,
indicating significant consensus
about what good prevention
programs should be doing.
They should:
n Target known risk and protective
factors;
n Teach drug resistance skills, per-
sonal skills, and social skills;
n Emphasize interactive teaching
methods;
n Provide age appropriate infor-
mation; and
n Use a comprehensive, multi-
component approach.
“The research is finally here!”
conference presenters exclaimed.
After 20 years, prevention experts
now know what works and what
doesn’t work; they know what
causes the problems and what
solutions are available. And educa-
tors now have the information and
tools available to use this research
to implement good prevention
programs in their schools.
Evaluate
4 Programs
With needs assessed, programs
based on sound research and mea-
surable goals determined, it’s time
to discover whether or not every-
thing is working. A program must
be evaluated periodically in order
to measure its success.
D.J. Ida recommends including
an evaluation team right at the
beginning of program design or
during a needs assessment. She
found that having evaluators there
at the start avoided a “we versus
they” situation between the pro-
gram designer and the evaluators,
and before long they were all ask-
ing the same questions. Whether or
not evaluation is involved in the
process from the beginning, it must
be conducted in a periodic manner
once the program is implemented
in order to understand if the pro-
gram is meeting its desired goals
and objectives.
Pentz of Project STAR described
four ways to evaluate a program.
A program can be evaluated
by measuring:
1. Change in one particular group
(a very weak method of evalua-
tion, according to Pentz);
2. Cross-sectional differences be-
tween two groups;
3. Net group difference or reduc-
tion; or
4. Net program efficiency.
All programs at the conference
described their evaluation proce-
dures, whether there was a control
group or not, and how the data was
11
CONFERENCE REPORT
collected. Some programs ex-
plained that early evaluation of the
program helped them define areas
where the program was weak. This
allowed them to remedy the weak-
ness and make the overall program
more effective.
What does all
National Institute on Drug Abuse,
said, “We have ideologies galore
about drug abuse and addiction, but
we also have scientific data. And
that data tells us that drug use is a
preventable behavior and drug
addiction is a treatable disease.”
There is plenty of evidence that
programs developed and targeted
to support prevention, and that
won’t happen until the country
can see that it works. “Behavior
change is the bottom line. Without
it you can’t really prove success,”
Falco said.
Evaluation, research, and sound
science are the three tools that
need to occupy everyone’s garden-

of this mean?
to prevent these behaviors work. ing shed. With these tools in
Many presenters at the conference hand, weeding the prevention gar-
detailed this evidence. But all this den will be easier than almost
Dr. Botvin hailed the dawn of a has to go one step further. The anyone thought.
new day in prevention; Mathea entire country, not just political
Falco claimed she was delighted leaders and educators, needs
that prevention is
finally having its day
in Washington; but
The American Medical Association reports
everyone from Vice
President Al Gore to
on adolescent health and the importance
the Secretary of
Education, Richard
of protective factors
Adolescents who are emotionally connected such as feelings of warmth, love, and caring
Riley, agreed that the to their families and schools are generally from parents.”
work of creating safe healthier than those who are not, according to
As with previous studies, the researchers
and drug-free schools an article in the September 10 issue of The found high rates of risky behaviors among
is not over. Journal of the American Medical Association adolescents:
(JAMA). n Suicide—10.2% of girls and 7.5% of boys
Research has
This is the AMA’s first report as a result of reported having considered suicide without
taught those in the
the National Longitudinal Study on actually attempting it over the past year,
prevention field a Adolescent Health. AMA researchers found while 5.1% of girls and 2.1% of boys report-
few things. The most that when adolescents feel connected to their ed suicide attempts.
important thing learn- parents and their school, they are less likely n Cigarettes—25.7% of adolescents reported
ed is that violence than other adolescents to: being current smokers, with 10.0% of males
and drug use are pre- n Suffer from emotional distress. and 9.2% of females smoking six or more
ventable behaviors. n Have suicidal thoughts and behaviors. cigarettes per day.
Dr. Prothow-Stith n Use violence. n Alcohol—17.9% of students reported drink-
discussed violence as n Smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol or smoke ing alcohol more than monthly, with 9.9%
a preventable behav- marijuana. drinking at least one day per week.
ior and pointed They also have their first sexual experience n Marijuana—25.2% reported ever having
specifically to pro- later than adolescents who are not connected to smoked marijuana, with 12.7% reporting
grams like the Boston their parents and schools, but researchers that they had smoked at least once during
found no protective effect against pregnancy. the previous month.
Strategy, for reducing
The researchers write: “... The role of par- n Sexual behaviors—Approximately 17% of
youth crime, and
ents and family in shaping the health of ado- 7th and 8th graders and nearly half of 9th
Resolving Conflict through 12 graders indicated that they had
lescents is evident.” They found that perceived
Creatively as pro- high expectations by parents regarding school ever had sexual intercourse.
grams that have achievement was protective against some risky n Pregnancy—Among sexually experienced
records of proven behaviors, while the physical presence of a females aged 15 years and older, 19.8%
success. As for sub- parent in the home reduced the risk of sub- reported having ever been pregnant.
stance use and abuse, stance abuse. However, physical presence
Source: The Journal of the American Medical Association
Dr. Alan Leshner, was less significant in the overall health of
Abstracts.
Director of the adolescents than was parental connectedness,

12 ThE ChALLENgE v7, n3