Skip to main content

View Diary: Feds Ask, "Did You Have Butt Sex 100 Times?" (Health Series) (74 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  So, what do you all think about the rather (4+ / 0-)

    wonky issue of evaluation? Are you not outraged that Bush corrupted the evaluation process to eliminate good health care programs?

    •  of course, outraged... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TheFatLadySings

      abstinence only programs refused to be evaluated except by in-house evaluators.

      meanwhile teen and unplanned pregnancy rates increase... for lack of science-based evaluations and services.

      not worth doing meaningless evaluations...

      •  GPRA would have shown that these programs (0+ / 0-)

        were not working. GPRA is administered by the program, but to fudge, they would have to answer the questions themselves, rather than administering them.

        In many cases, the one-year follow up GPRA was not administered by the individual who provided treatment, but by another person.

        There are questions built in designed to measure the reliability of the respondent, so if the program is inventing the answers, it might eventually be uncovered.

        And at any rate, one could simply look at the pregnancy data among participants to easily determine that abstinence only programs are ineffective.

        •  you are right about birth data as a measure... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TheFatLadySings

          but vital stats were late and hard to match to the areas where programs were conducted.

          pregnancies would have been very difficult to track - because girls so often drop out of school when they become pregnant.

          We were trying to track outcomes for program participants with pre/post surveys... Even tho' they were "required" for program participants, most abstinence programs would not administer them and state would not enforce.

          We found that comprehensive programs (sex ed with abstinence and protection + youth development components to motivate behavior change) were most effective, abstinence only the least effective.

          •  It's absolutely amazing to me that they refused (0+ / 0-)

            to do the pre and post tests. I'm trying to eliminate pre post testing as the sole measure of program effectiveness in my community because we are finding it doesn't tell us what we need to know.

            Substance abuse prevention providers currently target low to average risk students for low intensity interventions such as teaching refusal skills in the classroom. Problem is, we have one of, if not the highest OD death rates in the country. Learning refusal skills doesn't work if parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles are using drugs. And kids answer the way they think the provider wants to hear if s/he has built a good rapport.

            We are attempting to switch to paying for production of individual outcomes such as fewer than three absences from school in a semester, turned in homework assignments, no disciplinary actions, etc. They are fighting this pretty hard because it will force them to use targeted, intensive interventions.

            All prevention services, in my opinion, should track individual outcomes. Treatment providers are required to track for 1 year after conclusion of service. Why not prevention?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site