1. Program Objectives and Evaluation Using Healthy Campus 2010: Making It Happen and Logic Models Jim Grizzell, MBA, MA, CHES, F-ACHA

2. Cal Poly Pomona Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Council 2 Introduction  Department of Education Selection Criteria  Measurable Goals and Objectives (10%)  Evaluation Plan (25%)

3. Cal Poly Pomona Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Council 3 Selection Criteria 1.Need for Project - 15 points 2.Significance - 20 points 3.Quality of the Project Design - 30 points 1.The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable. (10 points) 4.Quality of Project Personnel - 10 points 5.Quality of the Project Evaluation - 25 points

4. Cal Poly Pomona Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Council 4 Healthy Campus 2010: Goals  Overarching Goals  Increase quality and years of healthy life  Eliminate health disparities  Substance Abuse Goal  Reduce substance abuse to protect the health, safety, and quality of life for all

5. Cal Poly Pomona Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Council 5 Target Setting Methods  Better than the best  Percent improvement  Total elimination or total coverage  Consistent with national program from Healthy People 2010 Reader’s Guide http://www.healthypeople.gov/document/HTML/Volume1/readersguide.htm Scroll to heading “Targets for Measurable Objectives” near end of the web page.

6. Cal Poly Pomona Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Council 6 Leading Health Indicator Substance Abuse  7-3b2. Increase the proportion of college students who have received information on alcohol and drug abuse prevention.  Baseline 19.1%, 2010 Target 55%  26-11b. Reduce proportion of students engaging in binge drinking.  Baseline 39%, 2010 Target 20%

7. Cal Poly Pomona Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Council 7 Leading Health Indicator Substance Abuse 7-3b2. Increase the proportion of college students who received information from their college about alcohol and other drug use prevention. Targets: Baselines: Target setting method: National: Not applicable College: Better than the best. 188% improvement Our Campus: Better than the best. 161% improvement Data sources: National: Not applicable College: National College Health Assessment, Spring 2000 Our Campus: National College Health Assessment, Spring 2000 NationalDNCCollege19.1%Our Campus21.1% NationalDNCCollege55%Our Campus55%

8. Cal Poly Pomona Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Council 8 Leading Health Indicator Substance Abuse 26-11b. Reduce the proportion of college students engaging in binge drinking of alcoholic beverages. Targets: Baselines: Target setting method: National: Not applicable College: 49% improvement (Better than the best when data are available) Our Campus: Data sources: National: Not applicable College: Monitoring the Future Study, NIH, NIDA, NCHA Our Campus: National College Health Assessment NationalNACollege20%Our Campus15% NationalNACollege39%Our Campus23%

9. Cal Poly Pomona Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Council 9 Leading Health Indicator Substance Abuse Use of alcohol and/or illicit drugs, United States, 1994–98 Source: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Office of the Assistant Secretary. National Household Survey on Drug Abuse. 1994–98. 39% College student binge drinking 20% (2010 Target) 18% College student illicit drug use 8% (2010 Target) 31% College students reporting no alcohol use in past 30 days 15% (2010 Target)

10. Cal Poly Pomona Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Council 10 Department of Education Criteria Program Evaluation  Use a qualified evaluator to  design and implement an evaluation  use process measures  formative  use outcomes-based performance indicators  summative  Evaluator qualifications

11. Cal Poly Pomona Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Council 11 5. Quality of the Project Evaluation (25 points)  Criteria for Methods of Evaluation  10 points  Thorough, feasible, and appropriate  10 points  Objective performance measures  Quantitative and qualitative data  5 points  Performance feedback  Assessment of progress

12. Cal Poly Pomona Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Council 12 Logic Model  Formative (process) measures  Inputs  Assess & document strategies  Summative (outcomes-based) measures  Outcomes  Performance indicators related to behavioral change

13. Cal Poly Pomona Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Council 13 Logic Model  CDC  http://www.cdc.gov/eval/framework.htm http://www.cdc.gov/eval/framework.htm  United Way  http://www.the2professors.com/workshop/Workshop.htm http://www.the2professors.com/workshop/Workshop.htm  http://www.tmfnet.org/PDF/comm_logic_model.doc http://www.tmfnet.org/PDF/comm_logic_model.doc  Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration  http://www.preventiondss.org/ http://www.preventiondss.org/  http://about.preventiondss.org/html/documents/ACETools/AO.p df, pp107-123 http://about.preventiondss.org/html/documents/ACETools/AO.p df

14. Cal Poly Pomona Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Council 14 Logic Model: Measures  Formative (process) measures  Inputs  Activities & Processes  Summative (outcomes- based) measures  Outputs  Short-term  Intermediate  Long-Term

15. Cal Poly Pomona Alcohol and Other Drugs Advisory Council 15