Trial Outcomes & Findings for Enhancing Prevention Capacity With Developmental Assets and Getting to Outcomes (NCT NCT00780338)
NCT ID: NCT00780338
Last Updated: 2015-06-01
Results Overview
Assessed in the Coalition Survey, prevention capacity was defined as efficacy and behaviors of practitioners. GTO efficacy scale is the sum of 10 items using a three-point scale (1="would need a great deal of help to carry out this task", 2="could carry out this task, but would need some help", 3="could carry out this task without any help") asking about activities associated with doing the AGTO 10 steps. The sum was then transformed to be on a 1-100% scale. A percentage point change is equivalent to a .02 change on the original 1-3 scale. A 50-percentage point change would be equivalent to a one-point change on the original 1-3 scale.
COMPLETED
PHASE2
376 participants
Baseline, mid-point (1 year), posttest (2 years)
2015-06-01
Participant Flow
Participants were all the coalition members and program staff from 12 particiapting coalitions in Maine. Coalition members were enrolled at Baseline (just prior to the AGTO intervention) in April 2009.Each coalition nominated up to five prevention programs to participate in the study.
Participant milestones
| Measure |
AGTO Group
Cohort 1: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention first. The AGTO intervention includes three types of assistance which are adapted to fit the needs and priorities of the individuals involved, as well as the inner and outer setting: (1) a manual of text and tools; (2) face-to-face training, and (3) onsite technical assistance (TA). These three types of assistance aim to improve the implementation process for each program. Two full-time, Maine-based staff, one with a master's and one with a bachelor's degree, provided AGTO tools, training, and TA to the intervention coalitions and programs during the two year intervention period. The tools are in the Search Institute-published manual, Getting To Outcomes with Developmental Assets: Ten steps to measuring success in youth programs and communities, which all intervention participants received.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
Control Group
Cohort 2: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention second, after Cohort 1 is done receiving the intervention.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
|---|---|---|
|
Baseline to Mid (1 Year)
STARTED
|
174
|
202
|
|
Baseline to Mid (1 Year)
COMPLETED
|
169
|
164
|
|
Baseline to Mid (1 Year)
NOT COMPLETED
|
5
|
38
|
|
Mid to Post (1 Year; 2 Years in Total)
STARTED
|
169
|
164
|
|
Mid to Post (1 Year; 2 Years in Total)
COMPLETED
|
156
|
159
|
|
Mid to Post (1 Year; 2 Years in Total)
NOT COMPLETED
|
13
|
5
|
Reasons for withdrawal
Withdrawal data not reported
Baseline Characteristics
Enhancing Prevention Capacity With Developmental Assets and Getting to Outcomes
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
AGTO Group
n=174 Participants
Cohort 1: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention first. The AGTO intervention includes three types of assistance which are adapted to fit the needs and priorities of the individuals involved, as well as the inner and outer setting: (1) a manual of text and tools; (2) face-to-face training, and (3) onsite technical assistance (TA). These three types of assistance aim to improve the implementation process for each program. Two full-time, Maine-based staff, one with a master's and one with a bachelor's degree, provided AGTO tools, training, and TA to the intervention coalitions and programs during the two year intervention period. The tools are in the Search Institute-published manual, Getting To Outcomes with Developmental Assets: Ten steps to measuring success in youth programs and communities, which all intervention participants received.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
Control Group
n=202 Participants
Cohort 2: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention second, after Cohort 1 is done receiving the intervention.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
Total
n=376 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Age, Customized
<=18 years
|
0 participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Age, Customized
Between 18 and 65 years
|
174 participants
n=5 Participants
|
202 participants
n=7 Participants
|
376 participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Age, Customized
>=65 years
|
0 participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
125 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
149 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
274 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
49 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
53 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
102 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Region of Enrollment
United States
|
174 participants
n=5 Participants
|
202 participants
n=7 Participants
|
376 participants
n=5 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, mid-point (1 year), posttest (2 years)Population: Despite drop outs, all the data was used.
Assessed in the Coalition Survey, prevention capacity was defined as efficacy and behaviors of practitioners. GTO efficacy scale is the sum of 10 items using a three-point scale (1="would need a great deal of help to carry out this task", 2="could carry out this task, but would need some help", 3="could carry out this task without any help") asking about activities associated with doing the AGTO 10 steps. The sum was then transformed to be on a 1-100% scale. A percentage point change is equivalent to a .02 change on the original 1-3 scale. A 50-percentage point change would be equivalent to a one-point change on the original 1-3 scale.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
AGTO Group
n=174 Participants
Cohort 1: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention first. The AGTO intervention includes three types of assistance which are adapted to fit the needs and priorities of the individuals involved, as well as the inner and outer setting: (1) a manual of text and tools; (2) face-to-face training, and (3) onsite technical assistance (TA). These three types of assistance aim to improve the implementation process for each program. Two full-time, Maine-based staff, one with a master's and one with a bachelor's degree, provided AGTO tools, training, and TA to the intervention coalitions and programs during the two year intervention period. The tools are in the Search Institute-published manual, Getting To Outcomes with Developmental Assets: Ten steps to measuring success in youth programs and communities, which all intervention participants received.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
Control Group
n=202 Participants
Cohort 2: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention second, after Cohort 1 is done receiving the intervention.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
|---|---|---|
|
Prevention Capacity-GTO Efficacy (Intent to Treat)
PRE
|
63.38 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Deviation 2.7
|
59.79 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Deviation 2.64
|
|
Prevention Capacity-GTO Efficacy (Intent to Treat)
MID (1 year)
|
61.37 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Deviation 1.91
|
58.71 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Deviation 1.85
|
|
Prevention Capacity-GTO Efficacy (Intent to Treat)
POST (2 years)
|
59.36 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Deviation 1.65
|
57.63 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Deviation 1.64
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Mid (1 year), Post (2 years)Population: Intent to Treat
This scale is the sum of 11 items with seven-point scales (1="never" to 7="very often") assessing the frequency with which respondents engaged in AGTO activities during the previous 12 months. The sum was then transformed to be on a 1-100% scale. A percentage point change is equivalent to a .06 change on the original 1-7 scale. A 17-percentage point change would be equivalent to a one-point change on the original 1-7 scale.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
AGTO Group
n=174 Participants
Cohort 1: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention first. The AGTO intervention includes three types of assistance which are adapted to fit the needs and priorities of the individuals involved, as well as the inner and outer setting: (1) a manual of text and tools; (2) face-to-face training, and (3) onsite technical assistance (TA). These three types of assistance aim to improve the implementation process for each program. Two full-time, Maine-based staff, one with a master's and one with a bachelor's degree, provided AGTO tools, training, and TA to the intervention coalitions and programs during the two year intervention period. The tools are in the Search Institute-published manual, Getting To Outcomes with Developmental Assets: Ten steps to measuring success in youth programs and communities, which all intervention participants received.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
Control Group
n=202 Participants
Cohort 2: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention second, after Cohort 1 is done receiving the intervention.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
|---|---|---|
|
Prevention Capacity - GTO Behaviors (Intent to Treat)
PRE
|
58.51 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.53
|
53.88 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.48
|
|
Prevention Capacity - GTO Behaviors (Intent to Treat)
MID (1 year)
|
57.17 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 1.75
|
51.75 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 1.69
|
|
Prevention Capacity - GTO Behaviors (Intent to Treat)
POST (2 years)
|
55.82 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 1.44
|
49.62 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 1.40
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Mid (1 year), Post (2 years)Population: Intent to Treat
This scale is the sum of 11 items with seven-point scales (1="never" to 7="very often") assessing the frequency with which respondents engaged in AGTO activities during the previous 12 months. The sum was then transformed to be on a 1-100% scale. A percentage point change is equivalent to a .06 change on the original 1-7 scale. A 17-percentage point change would be equivalent to a one-point change on the original 1-7 scale.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
AGTO Group
n=174 Participants
Cohort 1: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention first. The AGTO intervention includes three types of assistance which are adapted to fit the needs and priorities of the individuals involved, as well as the inner and outer setting: (1) a manual of text and tools; (2) face-to-face training, and (3) onsite technical assistance (TA). These three types of assistance aim to improve the implementation process for each program. Two full-time, Maine-based staff, one with a master's and one with a bachelor's degree, provided AGTO tools, training, and TA to the intervention coalitions and programs during the two year intervention period. The tools are in the Search Institute-published manual, Getting To Outcomes with Developmental Assets: Ten steps to measuring success in youth programs and communities, which all intervention participants received.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
Control Group
n=202 Participants
Cohort 2: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention second, after Cohort 1 is done receiving the intervention.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
|---|---|---|
|
Prevention Capacity - ASSETS GTO Behaviors (Intent to Treat)
PRE
|
40.92 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 3.31
|
38.44 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 3.25
|
|
Prevention Capacity - ASSETS GTO Behaviors (Intent to Treat)
MID (1 year)
|
42.25 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.62
|
38.47 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.57
|
|
Prevention Capacity - ASSETS GTO Behaviors (Intent to Treat)
POST (2 years)
|
43.59 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.4
|
38.5 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.38
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Mid (1 year), Post (2 years)Population: Intent to Treat
This scale is the sum of 11 items with seven-point scales (1="never" to 7="very often") assessing the frequency with which respondents engaged in assets activities during the previous 12 months. The sum was then transformed to be on a 1-100% scale. A percentage point change is equivalent to a .06 change on the original 1-7 scale. A 17-percentage point change would be equivalent to a one-point change on the original 1-7 scale.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
AGTO Group
n=174 Participants
Cohort 1: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention first. The AGTO intervention includes three types of assistance which are adapted to fit the needs and priorities of the individuals involved, as well as the inner and outer setting: (1) a manual of text and tools; (2) face-to-face training, and (3) onsite technical assistance (TA). These three types of assistance aim to improve the implementation process for each program. Two full-time, Maine-based staff, one with a master's and one with a bachelor's degree, provided AGTO tools, training, and TA to the intervention coalitions and programs during the two year intervention period. The tools are in the Search Institute-published manual, Getting To Outcomes with Developmental Assets: Ten steps to measuring success in youth programs and communities, which all intervention participants received.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
Control Group
n=202 Participants
Cohort 2: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention second, after Cohort 1 is done receiving the intervention.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
|---|---|---|
|
Prevention Capacity - ASSETS Behaviors (Intent to Treat)
PRE
|
49.35 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 3.12
|
48.72 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 3.06
|
|
Prevention Capacity - ASSETS Behaviors (Intent to Treat)
MID (1 year)
|
49.64 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.37
|
48.22 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.31
|
|
Prevention Capacity - ASSETS Behaviors (Intent to Treat)
POST (2 years)
|
49.94 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.12
|
47.72 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.1
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, mid (1 year), post (2 years)Population: Despite drop outs, all the data was used.
Assessed in the Coalition Survey, prevention capacity was defined as efficacy and behaviors of practitioners. Assets efficacy scale is the sum of 10 items using a three-point scale (1="would need a great deal of help to carry out this task", 2="could carry out this task, but would need some help", 3="could carry out this task without any help") asking about activities associated with doing the Developmental Assets model. The sum was then transformed to be on a 1-100% scale. A percentage point change is equivalent to a .02 change on the original 1-3 scale. A 50-percentage point change would be equivalent to a one-point change on the original 1-3 scale.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
AGTO Group
n=174 Participants
Cohort 1: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention first. The AGTO intervention includes three types of assistance which are adapted to fit the needs and priorities of the individuals involved, as well as the inner and outer setting: (1) a manual of text and tools; (2) face-to-face training, and (3) onsite technical assistance (TA). These three types of assistance aim to improve the implementation process for each program. Two full-time, Maine-based staff, one with a master's and one with a bachelor's degree, provided AGTO tools, training, and TA to the intervention coalitions and programs during the two year intervention period. The tools are in the Search Institute-published manual, Getting To Outcomes with Developmental Assets: Ten steps to measuring success in youth programs and communities, which all intervention participants received.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
Control Group
n=202 Participants
Cohort 2: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention second, after Cohort 1 is done receiving the intervention.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
|---|---|---|
|
Prevention Capacity-Assets Efficacy (Intent to Treat)
PRE
|
58.95 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Deviation 2.85
|
53.94 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Deviation 2.78
|
|
Prevention Capacity-Assets Efficacy (Intent to Treat)
MID (1 year)
|
60.68 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Deviation 1.96
|
56.55 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Deviation 1.9
|
|
Prevention Capacity-Assets Efficacy (Intent to Treat)
POST (2 years)
|
62.41 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Deviation 1.6
|
59.16 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Deviation 1.59
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: baseline, baseline to mid (1 year), mid to posttest (2 years)Population: Whole programs are rated, not individuals, because programs operate as a unit. These means are presented at the timepoints in which they were collected.
A structured interview was used to assess the impact of AGTO on prevention practitioners' performance of tasks associated with high-quality prevention. Using the interview responses, a set of ratings were made assessing performance of activities in seven key domains: goals and objectives, best practices, planning, process evaluation, outcome evaluation, continuous quality improvement, and sustainability. The ratings are made on 10 items (or "components") that assess how well each of the above mentioned activities are performed over the last year. Each component has seven response choices, described with specific, observable behaviors, that range from "highly faithful=7" to "highly divergent=1" from ideal performance. The total score is an average of the 10 components, and has the same range as the individual components ("highly faithful=7" to "highly divergent=1" from ideal performance)
Outcome measures
| Measure |
AGTO Group
n=17 Whole programs
Cohort 1: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention first. The AGTO intervention includes three types of assistance which are adapted to fit the needs and priorities of the individuals involved, as well as the inner and outer setting: (1) a manual of text and tools; (2) face-to-face training, and (3) onsite technical assistance (TA). These three types of assistance aim to improve the implementation process for each program. Two full-time, Maine-based staff, one with a master's and one with a bachelor's degree, provided AGTO tools, training, and TA to the intervention coalitions and programs during the two year intervention period. The tools are in the Search Institute-published manual, Getting To Outcomes with Developmental Assets: Ten steps to measuring success in youth programs and communities, which all intervention participants received.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
Control Group
n=15 Whole programs
Cohort 2: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention second, after Cohort 1 is done receiving the intervention.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
|---|---|---|
|
Prevention Performance - Total Score (Descriptive Means)
PRE
|
3.95 units on a scale
Interval 2.78 to 4.94
|
3.95 units on a scale
Interval 3.08 to 4.69
|
|
Prevention Performance - Total Score (Descriptive Means)
MID (1 year)
|
3.81 units on a scale
Interval 3.03 to 4.81
|
3.22 units on a scale
Interval 2.14 to 4.17
|
|
Prevention Performance - Total Score (Descriptive Means)
POST (2 years)
|
3.62 units on a scale
Interval 3.0 to 4.25
|
3.46 units on a scale
Interval 2.67 to 4.0
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Mid (1 year), Post (2 years)This scale is the sum of 11 items with seven-point scales (1="never" to 7="very often") assessing the frequency with which respondents engaged in GTO activities during the previous 12 months. The sum was then transformed to be on a 1-100% scale. A percentage point change is equivalent to a .06 change on the original 1-7 scale. A 17-percentage point change would be equivalent to a one-point change on the original 1-7 scale. Same analysis/measure as the intent to treat, but instead just comparing users of AGTO to non-users within the AGTO assigned group. "Use" was determined by six items added to the Mid and Post Coalition Survey, called the AGTO Participation Index. If individuals received any hours of technical assistance, they received an additional point on the Index. Then, a dichotomous measure was created if a user participated (AGTO Participation Index \>=1) at either Mid or Post.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
AGTO Group
n=91 Participants
Cohort 1: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention first. The AGTO intervention includes three types of assistance which are adapted to fit the needs and priorities of the individuals involved, as well as the inner and outer setting: (1) a manual of text and tools; (2) face-to-face training, and (3) onsite technical assistance (TA). These three types of assistance aim to improve the implementation process for each program. Two full-time, Maine-based staff, one with a master's and one with a bachelor's degree, provided AGTO tools, training, and TA to the intervention coalitions and programs during the two year intervention period. The tools are in the Search Institute-published manual, Getting To Outcomes with Developmental Assets: Ten steps to measuring success in youth programs and communities, which all intervention participants received.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
Control Group
n=83 Participants
Cohort 2: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention second, after Cohort 1 is done receiving the intervention.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
|---|---|---|
|
Prevention Capacity - GTO Behavior - (User v Non-User Analysis)
PRE
|
61.24 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 3.44
|
59.01 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 3.73
|
|
Prevention Capacity - GTO Behavior - (User v Non-User Analysis)
MID (1 year)
|
60.82 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.42
|
54.56 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.37
|
|
Prevention Capacity - GTO Behavior - (User v Non-User Analysis)
POST (2 years)
|
60.40 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 1.95
|
50.12 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.09
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Mid (1 year), Post (2 years)Population: "Users" had a AGTO Participation Index \>=1 at either Mid or Post; "Non Users" had a AGTO Participation Index = 0
The GTO efficacy scale is the sum of 10 items using a three-point scale (1="would need a great deal of help to carry out this task", 2="could carry out this task, but would need some help", 3="could carry out this task without any help") asking about activities associated with doing the AGTO 10 steps. The sum was then transformed to be on a 1-100% scale. A percentage point change is equivalent to a .02 change on the original 1-3 scale. A 50-percentage point change would be equivalent to a one-point change on the original 1-3 scale. Same analysis/measure as the intent to treat, but instead just comparing users of AGTO to non-users within the AGTO assigned group. "Use" was determined by six items added to the Mid and Post Coalition Survey, called the AGTO Participation Index. If individuals received any hours of technical assistance, they received an additional point on the Index.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
AGTO Group
n=91 Participants
Cohort 1: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention first. The AGTO intervention includes three types of assistance which are adapted to fit the needs and priorities of the individuals involved, as well as the inner and outer setting: (1) a manual of text and tools; (2) face-to-face training, and (3) onsite technical assistance (TA). These three types of assistance aim to improve the implementation process for each program. Two full-time, Maine-based staff, one with a master's and one with a bachelor's degree, provided AGTO tools, training, and TA to the intervention coalitions and programs during the two year intervention period. The tools are in the Search Institute-published manual, Getting To Outcomes with Developmental Assets: Ten steps to measuring success in youth programs and communities, which all intervention participants received.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
Control Group
n=83 Participants
Cohort 2: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention second, after Cohort 1 is done receiving the intervention.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
|---|---|---|
|
Prevention Capacity - GTO Efficacy (User vs Non-user Analyses)
PRE
|
62.57 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 3.89
|
66.83 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 4.11
|
|
Prevention Capacity - GTO Efficacy (User vs Non-user Analyses)
MID (1 year)
|
62.79 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.85
|
60.18 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.84
|
|
Prevention Capacity - GTO Efficacy (User vs Non-user Analyses)
POST (2 years)
|
63.01 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.40
|
53.54 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.58
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Mid (1 year), Post (2 years)This scale is the sum of 11 items with seven-point scales (1="never" to 7="very often") assessing the frequency with which respondents engaged in AGTO activities during the previous 12 months. The sum was then transformed to be on a 1-100% scale. A percentage point change is equivalent to a .06 change on the original 1-7 scale. A 17-percentage point change would be equivalent to a one-point change on the original 1-7 scale. Same analysis/measure as the intent to treat, but instead just comparing users of AGTO to non-users within the AGTO assigned group. "Use" was determined by six items added to the Mid and Post Coalition Survey, called the AGTO Participation Index. If individuals received any hours of technical assistance, they received an additional point on the Index. Then, a dichotomous measure was created if a user participated (AGTO Participation Index \>=1) at either Mid or Post.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
AGTO Group
n=91 Participants
Cohort 1: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention first. The AGTO intervention includes three types of assistance which are adapted to fit the needs and priorities of the individuals involved, as well as the inner and outer setting: (1) a manual of text and tools; (2) face-to-face training, and (3) onsite technical assistance (TA). These three types of assistance aim to improve the implementation process for each program. Two full-time, Maine-based staff, one with a master's and one with a bachelor's degree, provided AGTO tools, training, and TA to the intervention coalitions and programs during the two year intervention period. The tools are in the Search Institute-published manual, Getting To Outcomes with Developmental Assets: Ten steps to measuring success in youth programs and communities, which all intervention participants received.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
Control Group
n=83 Participants
Cohort 2: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention second, after Cohort 1 is done receiving the intervention.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
|---|---|---|
|
Prevention Capacity - ASSETS GTO BEHAVIORS (User vs Non-user Analyses)
PRE
|
40.7 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 3.85
|
44.29 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 4.05
|
|
Prevention Capacity - ASSETS GTO BEHAVIORS (User vs Non-user Analyses)
MID (1 year)
|
44.86 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.67
|
39.17 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.58
|
|
Prevention Capacity - ASSETS GTO BEHAVIORS (User vs Non-user Analyses)
POST (2 years)
|
49.02 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.09
|
34.04 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.25
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Mid (1 year), Post (2 years)This scale is the sum of 11 items with seven-point scales (1="never" to 7="very often") assessing the frequency with which respondents engaged in assets activities during the previous 12 months. The sum was then transformed to be on a 1-100% scale. A percentage point change is equivalent to a .06 change on the original 1-7 scale. A 17-percentage point change would be equivalent to a one-point change on the original 1-7 scale. Same analysis/measure as the intent to treat, but instead just comparing users of AGTO to non-users within the AGTO assigned group. "Use" was determined by six items added to the Mid and Post Coalition Survey, called the AGTO Participation Index. If individuals received any hours of technical assistance, they received an additional point on the Index. Then, a dichotomous measure was created if a user participated (AGTO Participation Index \>=1) at either Mid or Post.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
AGTO Group
n=91 Participants
Cohort 1: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention first. The AGTO intervention includes three types of assistance which are adapted to fit the needs and priorities of the individuals involved, as well as the inner and outer setting: (1) a manual of text and tools; (2) face-to-face training, and (3) onsite technical assistance (TA). These three types of assistance aim to improve the implementation process for each program. Two full-time, Maine-based staff, one with a master's and one with a bachelor's degree, provided AGTO tools, training, and TA to the intervention coalitions and programs during the two year intervention period. The tools are in the Search Institute-published manual, Getting To Outcomes with Developmental Assets: Ten steps to measuring success in youth programs and communities, which all intervention participants received.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
Control Group
n=83 Participants
Cohort 2: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention second, after Cohort 1 is done receiving the intervention.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
|---|---|---|
|
Prevention Capacity - Assets Behavior - (User v Non-User Analysis)
PRE
|
50.09 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 3.92
|
52.5 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 4.21
|
|
Prevention Capacity - Assets Behavior - (User v Non-User Analysis)
MID (1 year)
|
52.48 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.83
|
47.55 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.82
|
|
Prevention Capacity - Assets Behavior - (User v Non-User Analysis)
POST (2 years)
|
54.86 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.29
|
42.6 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.45
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: Baseline, Mid (1 year), Post (2 years)Population: "Users" had a AGTO Participation Index \>=1 at either Mid or Post; "Non Users" had a AGTO Participation Index = 0
The Assets efficacy scale is the sum of 10 items using a three-point scale (1="would need a great deal of help to carry out this task", 2="could carry out this task, but would need some help", 3="could carry out this task without any help") asking about activities associated with doing assets activities. The sum was then transformed to be on a 1-100% scale. A percentage point change is equivalent to a .02 change on the original 1-3 scale. A 50-percentage point change would be equivalent to a one-point change on the original 1-3 scale. Same analysis/measure as the intent to treat, but instead just comparing users of AGTO to non-users within the AGTO assigned group. "Use" was determined by six items added to the Mid and Post Coalition Survey, called the AGTO Participation Index. If individuals received any hours of technical assistance, they received an additional point on the Index.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
AGTO Group
n=91 Participants
Cohort 1: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention first. The AGTO intervention includes three types of assistance which are adapted to fit the needs and priorities of the individuals involved, as well as the inner and outer setting: (1) a manual of text and tools; (2) face-to-face training, and (3) onsite technical assistance (TA). These three types of assistance aim to improve the implementation process for each program. Two full-time, Maine-based staff, one with a master's and one with a bachelor's degree, provided AGTO tools, training, and TA to the intervention coalitions and programs during the two year intervention period. The tools are in the Search Institute-published manual, Getting To Outcomes with Developmental Assets: Ten steps to measuring success in youth programs and communities, which all intervention participants received.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
Control Group
n=83 Participants
Cohort 2: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention second, after Cohort 1 is done receiving the intervention.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
|---|---|---|
|
Prevention Capacity - Assets Efficacy (User vs Non-user Analyses)
PRE
|
62.61 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 3.9
|
60.46 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 4.01
|
|
Prevention Capacity - Assets Efficacy (User vs Non-user Analyses)
MID (1 year)
|
65.49 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.52
|
57.25 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 2.43
|
|
Prevention Capacity - Assets Efficacy (User vs Non-user Analyses)
POST (2 years)
|
68.38 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 1.75
|
54.05 percentage of the highest possible score
Standard Error 1.96
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: baseline, baseline to mid (1 year), mid to posttest (2 years)Population: Whole programs are rated, not individuals, because programs operate as a unit. Percent change was calculated from Pre to Mid, Mid to Post, PRE to POST.
A structured interview was used to assess the impact of AGTO on prevention practitioners' performance of tasks associated with high-quality prevention. Using the interview responses, a set of ratings were made assessing performance of activities in seven key domains: goals and objectives, best practices, planning, process evaluation, outcome evaluation, continuous quality improvement, and sustainability. The ratings are made on 10 items (or "components") that assess how well each of the above mentioned activities are performed over the last year. Each component has seven response choices, described with specific, observable behaviors, that range from "highly faithful=7" to "highly divergent=1" from ideal performance. The total score is an average of the 10 components, and has the same range as the individual components ("highly faithful=7" to "highly divergent=1" from ideal performance)
Outcome measures
| Measure |
AGTO Group
n=17 Participants
Cohort 1: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention first. The AGTO intervention includes three types of assistance which are adapted to fit the needs and priorities of the individuals involved, as well as the inner and outer setting: (1) a manual of text and tools; (2) face-to-face training, and (3) onsite technical assistance (TA). These three types of assistance aim to improve the implementation process for each program. Two full-time, Maine-based staff, one with a master's and one with a bachelor's degree, provided AGTO tools, training, and TA to the intervention coalitions and programs during the two year intervention period. The tools are in the Search Institute-published manual, Getting To Outcomes with Developmental Assets: Ten steps to measuring success in youth programs and communities, which all intervention participants received.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
Control Group
n=15 Participants
Cohort 2: receives the Assets Getting To Outcomes intervention second, after Cohort 1 is done receiving the intervention.
Assets Getting To Outcomes : Face to Face Training Assets Getting To Outcomes Manuals Technical Assistance
|
|---|---|---|
|
Prevention Performance - Total Score (Percent Change)
PRE to MID
|
-2.77 percent change
Interval -16.95 to 8.99
|
-18.35 percent change
Interval -43.79 to -3.47
|
|
Prevention Performance - Total Score (Percent Change)
MID to POST
|
-3.88 percent change
Interval -22.08 to 4.84
|
12.71 percent change
Interval -4.44 to 66.37
|
|
Prevention Performance - Total Score (Percent Change)
PRE to POST
|
-6.76 percent change
Interval -21.05 to 7.87
|
-11.38 percent change
Interval -29.97 to 9.69
|
Adverse Events
AGTO
Control
Serious adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Other adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Additional Information
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
- Publication restrictions are in place