 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|||||||||||
     |
|||||||||||
        |
|||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
|
Rock In Prevention WORKS!
Iowa State University,
Institute For Social And Behavioral Research The Institute for Social and Behavioral Research, Iowa State University completed a federally funded (SAMHSA - CSAP) research of the Rock In Prevention (RIP) and Rock In Prevention Plus (RIPP) programs. The frequencies and regression analysis identify that both Rock In Prevention Plus (RIPP) and Rock In Prevention (RIP) are effective in reducing substance use and increasing the perception of harm in comparison to the Control Group. Documented scientific evidence shows that both Rock In Prevention and Rock In Prevention Plus are effective in reducing the use of the four targeted substances, alcohol, tobacco, marijuana and inhalants. The study included randomly selected school sites, pretest, posttest and six month follow-up substance use and perception of harm survey instruments (GPRA youth surveys) and control schools. The project offered a universal prevention approach that generated data that has been analyzed individually by risk-factors for each youth using at-risk characteristic indicators in the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) indicators: monthly use, perception of risk, disapproval, intention to use, and age of first use. Each student completed a pretest, posttest, and follow-up survey (six months after the end of the program). The data identifies that the Control group consistently showed increases in use across all four substances and had reduced levels of perception of harm. The students who received either RIP or RIPP had lower levels of 30 day use and higher levels of perception of harm than the Control group showing Rock In Prevention interventions as effective. Iowa State University - Rock in Prevention Research Project Completed December 29, 2005 Overall Purpose of the Research Project: As stated in the Application for Federal Assistance dated 6/17/2003 (Title: “Iowa State University in Ames”), the purpose of the project was to measure the effectiveness of the school-based universal prevention program, Rock in Prevention (RIP), and a revised program entitled, Rock in Prevention Plus (RIPP), in comparison with a Control group (no treatment). The Specific objectives that were accomplished by the research plan are: 1) Determined the effectiveness (compared to a no-treatment control condition) of the two treatments in the prevention, delay of onset, and reduction of substance use by elementary school students and the high school students who helped deliver the program; 2) Measured and documented reductions in substance use and other negative outcomes related to substance use among participants; 3) Determined the effectiveness of the two treatments in decreasing risk factors for substance use and increasing protective factors that delay or prevent substance use; The research was required to utilize the U.S. Department of Human Services Government Performance Review Act Youth Pretest, Posttest and Follow-up survey to measure the aforementioned objectives. The GPRA Youth Survey has been tested on over 200,000 youth across the nation and has been revised based on recommendations from previous research headed by Dr. Stubben. The GPRA Youth Survey is now required of all U.S. Department of Human Services Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration funded programs. Furthermore, the inclusion of a Control (no treatment) group is required in order to conduct scientifically based research rather than a simple evaluation. Only scientific based and approved research will allow programs (including RIPP and RIP) to apply for model or promising program status (described later in this report) with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Department of Education or the U.S. Department of Justice, the major federal funding agencies for substance abuse prevention. Findings: Frequencies were run on all of the GPRA questions and the results are shown in graphs 1-30 in the attached research findings section. Regression analysis was conducted on most of the use and perception of harm variables. The frequencies and regression analysis identify that both RIPP and RIP are effective in reducing substance use and increasing perception of harm in comparison to the Control (no treatment) Group. These research findings offer evidence that RIPP (RIP with a 10 to 12 week curriculum) is the most effective program and will be submitted to the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services for inclusion as a model program under the National Registry of Effective Programs (NREP) in the next year. RIP is second and offers evidence of improved outcomes (decreased or moderate increases in the use of some substances and moderate increases in perception of harm) over the Control Group. RIP will be submitted the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services for NREP promising program status. Both model and promising program status will allow programs who receive federal funds to utilize either RIPP or RIP. Furthermore, the analysis of the Control Group provides evidence that school sites who do not utilize either RIPP or RIP will have higher levels substance use, will not delay or prevent substance use and will have decreased perception of harm over those schools who do utilize either program. It is imperative to provide substance abuse prevention programs among this age group (9 to 13) in order to delay substance use and increase perception of harm. The 2002 Iowa Youth Survey identified that increased use of alcohol, tobacco, inhalants and drugs, and decreased levels of harm perception occur among Iowa's youth from the 6th to the 12th grade.
For Further Information Contact: Dr. Jerry Stubben Iowa State University Institute for Social and Behavioral Research 2625 N. Loop Dr. Suite 500 Ames, IA 50010
|
 |
|
||