Learn About Effective Programs for Preventing Prescription Drug Misuse Among Youth

MODERATOR: -being recorded and will be
available on SAMHSA’s YouTube channel. First on our agenda today,
we have Jane Todey, Dr. Linda Trudeau, and
Eugenia Hamilton-Hartsook. They’re at Iowa
State University’s Partnerships in Prevention
Science Institute. Jane has a master’s degree
in special education. She is program manager
for the PROSPER project. PROSPER promotes school/community/university
partnerships to enhance youth resilience. Jane helps manage the
national PROSPER network and supports field operations
for its research projects. Her earlier career focused on youth
development issues in K-12 education. Linda’s doctorate is in human
development and family studies. She is an associate research scientist. Her research interests include
preventive intervention effects on adolescent and
young adult substance misuse, conduct problems,
and depression symptoms. Eugenia has a master’s in human
development and family studies. She is the Iowa field
coordinator for PROSPER. She also serves as the trainer for
the national PROSPER network. Previously, she developed
and ran university-based extension service programs
to combine focuses on adult education and community development. Let’s hear from them now. EUGENIA: Good afternoon. Welcome. This is Eugenia Hartsook speaking. Today, we’re going to be
talking about the PROSPER model, which is an evidence-based
delivery system for community-based prevention programs. Next slide, please. There are many barriers
to using evidence-based programs at the community level. Literature cites five challenges often: inadequate technical assistance, limited
participation or engagement, poor implementation quality, a failure to
sustain, and limited evaluation supports. Many researchers have dedicated
their lives to finding prevention programs targeted
at youth with a goal of allowing these youth to obtain
positive future outcomes. While there are other options
out there which are well intentioned, evidence-based
programs are the very best options we have
available to address youth issues and build risk
and protective factors. Most communities, however, are wary to
use these programs because the initial, upfront costs may be larger than others
and they don’t have the support, whether structurally or through community
willingness, to participate. Based on the empirical literature,
these five key reasons surfaced. There are others, but we want to focus
in our short time together on how the proper model helps to overcome
these specific challenges. Next. It is our responsibility as members of
PROSPER to work together to find the best solutions to the
problems facing our youth. PROSPER, which stands for PROmoting
School-community-university Partnerships to Enhance Resilience, is
designed to address all these barriers and to deliver
evidence-based programs that make a difference. The PROSPER model can overcome
the barriers communities face through support,
evidence, and experience. PROSPER has been proven to
directly shape families and their youth by reducing
risk factors and increasing protective factors. Through the delivery of
evidence-based programs, PROSPER allows adolescents to
achieve their best futures. Next. Why use PROSPER? PROSPER is a delivery system
that is evidence-based. It has been shown to be
cost effective and has a built-in structure to
support sustainability. It utilizes staff time and effort of local
volunteers to maximize the group efforts. It is based on five core components of
the model that promote positive changes and result in positive outcomes for
youth, families, and communities. It is unique in that it has over 20 years
of research indicating its success. It also has the foundation to provide
continuous support for its programs. While an individual program may be an
ideal fit for community, it cannot achieve the desired outcomes for youth
and families if it doesn’t have the ability to be implemented with quality
to a large percentage of eligible population year after year, or those who are
enthusiastic about making a difference. PROSPER has all of these things, which makes
it the perfect fit for the community. Next. The first component of the PROSPER model is
based on the idea of having team partners. A PROSPER community team
starts with between eight to ten members led by an
extension-based Team Leader and a school-based Co-team Leader. The community volunteers involved as
members of the team often include local mental health agency
representatives, representatives from substance abuse agencies,
parents, and youth. As a team grows and matures, additional
representatives may be added from the business sector, the
government, or other faith-based groups or
juvenile justice officers. Next. PROSPER prides itself on making a
significant impact on youth and their families, and this can only
be attained if youth and their families participate
in the prevention programs. While other community programs typically
get between 1% to 6% of individuals which the program aims to
target, PROSPER has a history of recruiting approximately
17% or more of the eligible population. This not only directly impacts
the individuals enrolled in the program, it indirectly
impacts the youth and families that our participating
families are in contact with. Also, as these youth age they can pass
down the skills they learned to their children, making a snowball effect
throughout the community and society. Next. The second component of the PROSPER
model is its infrastructure. It is a three-tiered model supported
by the PROSPER national network. The first level is the community teams. These community teams are in charge
of organizing community awareness, partnership support, school
connections, implementation, and sustainability of
evidence-based programs. The local teams have networks
that support program implementation in ways
that cannot occur alone. In the middle we see that there’s
the prevention coordinator team. These teams of individuals
work with the community teams to assist them through
technical assistance. The preventive coordinators
help teams avoid problems and solve the ones
that can’t be avoided. They’re the ones that help translate
between research and practice; they also assist with grant
writing, fundraising, and marketing PROSPER efforts
within the community. The next tier we see is a
state management team. The state management team focuses on
research and providing further guidance to both the community and
prevention coordinator teams. These scientists have
content expertise and can design evaluation and
disseminate results. They also help us track
research funding and consult with teams about evaluating
their program impact. As you look at these tiers, you’ll
see that the arrows between them are bi-directional, and that’s because the
PROSPER model believes in information sharing between all levels of the model. The rounding and providing of support to
each of these levels within a state is the PROSPER Partnership Network. This is a team of individuals who
have special expertise in the area of prevention and program implementation. They help guide and support individual
teams to achieving success. Next. As we look at some of the outcomes that
have occurred in PROSPER communities, we can see positive changes occurring in
the perception of school leadership. We also have a similar result
to an increased perception of extension as a result
of PROSPER’s involvement. Research on PROSPER has shown that,
compared to controls, community members and families have a greater
perception of successful school leadership after the
PROSPER programs have been delivered. The tangible results that
school programs have on seventh grade youth lead to the
increased perception that the individuals leading the
school are doing a great job at addressing all levels
of their students’ future wellbeing. Next. JANE: This is Jane; I’ll take
over a few of the slides here. The first component was about teams. The second component is about where the
teams fit into the big infrastructure, and the third component is about how
the teams develop as they grow. The first phase here is organization. Naturally, it’s the phase
where the team’s leader is selected and begins to work
to engage their local school district. They partner with their school district
and select an individual from the school to serve as a co-leader,
so there’s a very strong bond between the team
leader and the school. They target stakeholders
to form a community team, who in turn helps to engage
the entire community. The phase 2 is initial operations,
which focuses on programs. Up to this point, we’ve not said
anything about evidence-based programs yet, but these teams deliver
two focused programs. One is a sixth grade
family-focused program, and the other one is a school-based
program for all seventh graders. I’ll mention more of those in a minute,
but the team begins to implement these programs and get support to have good
participation, as Eugenia was talking about. In phase 3, the team begins to
re-focus on sustainability. Eugenia said earlier that this is kind
of a built-in sustainability system. We do talk about sustainability from the
outset, but at this point when teams have had a little bit of experience
implementing the programs with quality, they begin to turn their attention more
directly to sustainability and begin to focus on maintaining a well functioning
team that’s dedicated to continue to carry out these programs and to find
ways to sustain them financially. The fourth phase continues to focus
on sustaining the PROSPER team that continues long term to deliver
programs year after year after year. Teams work to build new partnerships in
the community, and team members learn how to generate financial
support for ongoing programs. Some of our teams have been
going for ten-plus years. Could I have the next slide, please? This is an example of how teams
have been doing for a while. Some of our teams started implementing
programs in 2002 and 2003. Beginning in 2004 and 2005, you can see
where they started generating their own resources to be able to
sustain these programs. The resources fall into two categories
here: cash-raised, in the dark blue, represents grant funding such as money
from the United Way Foundations or local business industries, individual cash
donations, public school funding that supports a school-based
program, that sort of thing. The in-kind contributions
are shown in lighter blue. They include donations of meeting space,
food for the family meal and childcare for the family program, advertising for
family recruitment, general community awareness, donations of materials,
incentives, printing, that sort of thing. Overall, teams have done an excellent
job in identifying and securing funds over the years and have
increased over time as teams get better and
better at fundraising. The average amount of
total resources generated has been about $23,000
per team annually. Again, we think the success is due, in
part, to the technical assistance and support that each team receives from
the prevention coordinators and state management team in that infrastructure
that Eugenia just shared with us. Next slide, please. We finally get to programs; that’s
also a component of the model. Community teams use programs from PROSPER’s
menu of evidence-based programs. All the programs on this menu are
evidence-based, and they include only the highest-quality programs
with strong research showing positive effects on
youth and their families. Teams work hard to make sure that the
programs are implemented with high quality so communities can achieve
the outcomes they desire. After a program is implemented year after
year using traditional approaches, the quality of the
program tends to twist. In other words, program teachers tend
to omit, add, or shift content and that sort of thing, and that weakens
the program’s potential impact. PROSPER teams measure program fidelity
to make sure that the programs are delivered as intended year after year. The team also works to sustain programs
over time, as we’ve mentioned, rather than letting them fade out or disappear
after funding is gone, as can typically happen when you have a
grant or that type of funding source that has
a time limit on it. They do this by creating partnerships
in their community and integrating this work into existing efforts
by other agencies and groups so that they start to blend
and braid resources. Next slide, please. These are the programs
on the PROSPER menu. There aren’t a lot, but these are some
of the ones that our scientists have chosen as some of the
best universal programs for youth and families
of this age range. There are currently two family
programs used for sixth graders. They’re Guiding Good Choices
and the Strengthening Families Program for
Parents and Youth 10-14. The school programs are
LifeSkills Training, All Stars, and Lion’s Quest
skills for adolescents. These programs are designed
to teach life skills, enhance youth problem-solving
skills, develop resistance skills through practice to
avoid problem behaviors, and foster better communication among
parents and children. I should mention, too, that the PROSPER
scientists continually review the literature to ensure that
these programs on this menu are best suited for
PROSPER communities. If, by chance, subsequent research
indicates that a program may not be as effective as originally thought, the
scientists review all the studies available to decide whether the
program should remain on the menu. Similarly, new programs may
be added from time to time based on current research,
so this is ever-changing. Next slide, please. The final component is ongoing
evaluation, which is difficult sometimes for community groups to
try to do a good job. Besides monitoring fidelity of each
program that’s implemented, the PROSPER Partnership Network scientists
and evaluation experts also measure the quality of
model processes to help the local teams. They collect, interpret, and provide
data back to each team to help the team members identify their own areas of
strength and areas in need of improvement. There’s continuous improvement planning
as part of the team’s focus, and the team leader works with their prevention
coordinator to find ways to improve and find solutions to
challenges as they arise. Next slide, please. There are several measures taken to
evaluate these processes and help teams know that they’re on the right track. Some of the data also helps
teams understand their level of quality program
implementation, how much revenue they’ve generated, and
the numbers of youth and families they’ve reached
over the course of a year. This kind of information helps
teams fundraise and sustain their programs when they
can talk about reach and impact. This can be especially helpful if the
team is new to programming, and it can be reassuring to the team to know that
everything is going as it should be, whether it’s about implement
quality, having enough funding, or having the right
number of families and youth involved. Regardless of the experience
in programming, having that type of data to share
with the community is always helpful in creating and
generating local support. Additionally, PROSPER scientists can use
this data to provide impact information based on the PROSPER study
and the PROSPER research. One more slide, please. Thank you. I wanted to throw this in because it talks
about how PROSPER is cost effective. One example is the Strengthening Families
10-14 program that’s on the menu. You can see that the direct cost per
family in the chart-using the PROSPER model, there’s a low estimate
and a high estimate. The low estimate is $278.56;
the high estimate is $348.25. When you use the model to
implement this program, it costs between those two
numbers, about that much. There’s variability here
because of the community size and the variability
within a specific community. When this same program is implemented
without using the model, the costs for implementation are closer to $851. Just by using the model, not only is the
reach improved as Eugenia talked about recruiting a greater number of families,
but it also represents a 59% to 67% reduction in the cost of this program. Next slide, please. I’m going to turn it over to Dr. Trudeau
to talk about some earlier studies and, specifically, about prescription
drug misuse related to this model. LINDA: Thank you, Jane. I want to present the research results. Our PROSPER project evolved
from earlier projects that we conducted dating
back, actually, to the ’90s. All our projects primarily target
substance misuse, so I’ll be describing and illustrating some of the effects of
our projects primarily on prescription drug misuse in this presentation. Our first project, we
call Project Family. It was begun in 1992 when participants
were in the sixth grade, and I’ll be presenting results through age 25. Project Family was a
randomized controlled trial, meaning we randomly selected
the schools and randomly assigned them to
experimental conditions. We evaluated two different
family-focused interventions: the Iowa Strengthening
Families Programs, which is now called the Strengthening Families
Programs for Parents and Youth 10-14, SFP 10-14; and the other program was PDFY,
which is now called Guiding Good Choices. Of course, we also assigned schools to
a no-intervention control condition. Programs were implemented
with the cooperation and help of the schools and the
county extension personnel. Participants were students and their
parents in 33 small, rural Iowa schools with 15% or more families
eligible for the school lunch program as kind of a proxy
for the poverty level. I’ll be presenting results for the ISFP
intervention versus the no-intervention control condition to be consistent with
the other projects that we’re presenting. Total number of Project
Family participants was 446. To summarize, then, Project Family was a
relatively small study of two different family-focused interventions conducted
in rural Iowa with the cooperation of local schools and county extension. Our next project used the lessons that we
learned to expand our intervention efforts. That project, we called Capable Families and
Youth, or CaFaY, and that began in 1997. I’ll be presenting
results through age 22. CaFaY was also a randomized controlled
study that evaluated the SFP 10-14 family-focused intervention, but in this
study we also implement the school-based LifeSkills Training program. We have three conditions: one condition
was a combined condition; included both SFP 10-14 and the LST program, so both a
family-focused and a school-based program. The other experimental condition was the
LST program alone, and then of course we also had a no-intervention
control condition. During this study, the cooperation and
assistance of the schools and extension was greater than the earlier study. Primarily that was because we trained
the teachers to implement the LST school-based program that was
delivered in the classrooms. This study just went for seventh graders
and their parents enrolled in 36 northeast Iowa schools,
and 20% or more of the families were eligible for
the school lunch program. A larger study than Project Family,
and the total sample size was 1644. Next, I’ll present findings from each
of these studies including the PROSPER study, but we’ll begin
with Project Family. Next slide, please. This graph illustrates Project Family
results from the ISFP intervention on twelfth grade prescription drug misuse. THE ISFP condition is in blue, and
the control condition is in red. The graph represents the
percentage of lifetime prescription drug misuse, with
percentages on the Y axis. All of our graphs and all of the things
I’m going to be presenting today present results for either narcotics
alone or for more general prescription drug misuse,
which includes amphetamines, barbiturates, tranquilizers
in addition to narcotics. In this graph, the general prescription
drug misuse bars are on the left, and the narcotics misuse
bars are on the right. Results indicate a significant
difference between the ISFP intervention and the
control condition for both general prescription drug
misuse and narcotics. To address the public health impact of
these preventive efforts, we calculate a relative reduction rate, or RRR, which
were estimated at 84% for the general prescription drug misuse and
100% for narcotics misuse. To explain the relative reduction rate,
a relative reduction rate of 84% would indicate that if 100 people in a general
population without intervention had misused prescription drugs,
only 16 would have misused in a community that was
offered intervention. In other words, misuse
was reduced by 84%. The next Project Family
graph illustrates results of the ISFP intervention,
which was implemented during middle school on prescription
drug misuse during young adulthood. Next slide, please. This graph illustrates the
effects of the ISFP intervention on prescription drug
misuse at ages 21 and 25. Once again, ISFP is in blue
and control is in red. Beginning at the left side and moving to
the right, we illustrate age 21 general prescription drug misuse, then age 21
narcotic misuse; and next age 25 general misuse and age 25 narcotic misuse. All results are significant at
either the 0.01 or 0.001 level. Relative reduction rate estimates
range between 65% and 93%. Again, describing a little bit about the
relative reduction rate, a 65% relative reduction rate would suggest that if 100
individuals in the general population community had misused prescription
drugs, only 35 would’ve misused in a community that was offered intervention. Also, it’s important to
understand-we talked about this earlier, too-that not all
families in an intervention community will attend the family-focused
intervention programs, although almost everyone attends the school programs, which
we’ll talk about a little bit later. In the Project Family study,
for example, about half of those who were assigned to
the intervention condition actually attended the intervention. However, the analyses were completed
with everyone who was assigned to a condition, whether or not they
attended the intervention. That is in order to
address selection bias. Part of our intervention theory is that
those who attend the intervention, both parents and adolescents,
have an influence over those who do not attend
by their behavior. Just as an example, adolescents
who attend interventions will be more skilled at
refusing substances. They won’t use substances; they won’t be
offering substances to their friends, so they can act as role models. Parents who attend the intervention
will be more likely to set curfews, for example, to talk about substance misuse
with their children, and those acts can also influence the parents
of their children’s friends, even the ones
that didn’t attend. In summary, the Project Family study
implemented family-focused interventions only with the help of schools
and county extensions. We’ll move to our next study, which we
call CaFaY, which also implemented the family-focused interventions,
SFP 10-14, but added the school-based
intervention as well. Next slide, please. These two graphs represent the
CaFaY Project’s preventive intervention effects on
prescription drug misuse at twelfth grade. Again, you may recall that in CaFaY
we evaluated the LifeSkills Training program, or LST, alone and
then also the combined LST program plus the family-focused
SFP 10-14, and we compared them with a
no-intervention control condition. In these graphs, LST only is in blue; LST plus SFP 10-14 is in red;
and control is in green. The results, once again,
describe lifetime general prescription drug misuse,
which includes narcotics, amphetamines, barbiturates,
tranquilizers; and narcotics alone. You can see that we have two
separate graphs displayed. There’s one on the left which represents
the total sample, and the one on the right represents the higher-risk sub-sample,
which was about 20% of the total sample. In the CaFaY Project but
not in the earlier Project Family, stronger results were
found for the higher-risk sub-sample. The higher-risk participants were
defined as those who had initiated the use of two or more gateway
substances before the study began. The gateway substances were
alcohol, cigarettes, and marijuana. The CaFaY project began when
participants were in the seventh grade, rather than
the sixth grade as in Project Family, and many
of the participants had already initiated
gateway substance use. General to higher-risk
participants demonstrated a stronger
intervention effects. For those who had already initiated in
gateway substances, the interventions were especially effective in preventing
later, more serious substance misuse, including prescription drug misuse
compared with the higher-risk controls. The total sample illustrated in the
graph on the left, LST plus SFP 10-14 effects for both general and narcotic
misuse were marginally significant. Results for the higher-risk
sub-sample, however, illustrated on the graph on
the right, were significant. Although the LST-only condition
participants had lower levels of misuse, the results didn’t achieve significance. That would suggest that combining the two
types of preventive interventions is more effective than the
school-based intervention alone. The relative risk rates ranged from 27% for the total sample up to 70%
for the higher-risk sub-sample. The next graph will show
how the CaFaY intervention results continued
into young adulthood. Next slide, please. This slide is pretty busy and pretty
difficult to read, so I’ll give you kind of the general overall understanding
of what this is all about. There’s really a lot of
information here to cover. We’re presenting the results
of the CaFaY study on young adult prescription drug
misuse for the higher-risk participants from age 19 to age 22. This includes both the
general and narcotics only. In terms of the total sample, there
were some significant and marginally significant effects found for the total
sample, but effects for the higher-risk sub-sample were much more
significant for both the intervention
conditions versus control. The graph illustrates lifetime
prescription drug misuse with LST only in blue, LST
plus SFP 10-14 in red, and the control group in green. The reading from left to right, the bars
represent age 19 general prescription drug misuse, then age 19
narcotic misuse, then next age 20 general and narcotic
misuse, and so on through age 22. You can see that the general lifetime
prescription drug misuse increases across time, but for every
occasion both intervention groups higher-risk participants
were significantly less likely to misuse prescription drugs than the
control group higher-risk participants. We don’t know for sure why
the higher-risk participants benefit more from the
interventions, but we think, perhaps, both the adolescents
and their parents are just generally more attentive to
intervention messages if they’ve already been exposed
to gateway substances. Especially, you can imagine, for the
parents, if they know that their kids are in trouble they’re going to be more
interested in paying attention during the intervention and more
interested in attending. It’s possible that the
higher-risk kids and their parents really hadn’t
previously been exposed to the intervention’s ideas or skills, and now
during the interactive class sessions they’re encouraged to try them out
and they become more highly skilled. The greater the skill
level, the less likely they are to progress to more
serious substance misuse. Last, I’ll discuss
results from the PROSPER Project, which you’ve
already heard a lot about. It began in 2001 with 28 schools
in Iowa and Pennsylvania. The total sample size was over 10,000. Next slide, please. Wrong one; there we go. This graph presents the PROSPER’s
twelfth grade results. In this graph, the PROSPER
intervention condition is in red, and the control
condition is in blue. PROSPER condition youth demonstrated
significant differences on both general prescription drug misuse
and narcotic drug misuse. Relative reduction rates
were 20% and 21%. Next slide. This line graph represents
the growth in prescription narcotic misuse for
the PROSPER Project. The control condition is
represented by the line that shows the greatest increase
over time compared to the AllStars plus SFT 10-14 condition
represented by the middle line and the LST plus SFP 10-14 condition
represented by the line that shows the lowest
increase across time. To be noted, all the original
PROSPER study schools chose SFP 10-14 as their
family-focused intervention. I should also mention that none of the
programs we evaluated, which were all implemented during middle
school, expressly targeted prescription drug misuse, but
they did address alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana use. We’ve done studies that found that our
program participants have demonstrated lower levels of gateway
substance initiation like alcohol, tobacco, marijuana,
and inhalants, for example. Lower levels of gateway
substance initiation leads to less serious substance
misuse in later adolescence and young adulthood; so by
affecting and improving and changing the level of
substance initiation in early adolescence, we affect
later, more serious use and specifically more serious
prescription drug misuse. We also believe that the relationship
and the skills-the self-efficacy skills-that are taught and practiced in
the program can lead to better decision making and better problem solving. To summarize, all of our
studies have demonstrated effects on non-targeted
prescription drug misuse. Our program’s research began
with Project Family, which was a small study of the
effects of family-focused interventions conducted in communities with
the help of schools and county extensions. Our next study, the CaFaY Project,
built upon Project Family by adding in school-based preventive intervention
program and increasing our cooperative relationship with schools
and county extensions. One problem we found that was that
even though the interventions did show reduced levels of substance
misuse, the communities were not prepared to continue
them once research funding ended. For that reason, we developed and
tested the PROSPER Project, focused on sustainability by emphasizing the role
of community teams, helping them attain funding, and continue with the project
after research funding ended, especially with our technical assistance help. This concludes our presentation, and
I believe we have one more slide. This will give you our
email addresses if you have any specific
questions for any of us. I’ll let you look at
that for a little while, and then we can proceed
to the next slide. FEMALE: PROSPER has been recognized
by several national organizations. The top tier evidence
initiative has recognized PROSPER as being a
near-top-tier program. Top tier is the Coalition
of Evidence-Based Policy that seeks to identify
those social interventions shown in rigorous studies
to produce sizable, sustained benefits to
participants and/or society. The Social Impact Exchange
works collaborating to develop common investment
standards for conducting due diligence, providing
transparent information, and reporting
performance to funders. PROSPER was also identified
by the Blueprints for Healthy Youth
and Development. Blueprints serves as a resource for
governments, foundations, and businesses and other organizations
trying to make informed judgments about their investments
in violence and drug prevention programs. PROSPER was identified as a
promising program on their list. Next slide. For additional information about the
PROSPER model, please visit our website: prosper.ppsi.iastate.edu. We’ll turn the floor over to Ted. MODERATOR: Thank you, ladies, for
that fascinating presentation. My computer just lost connectivity with
the webinar; I hope nobody else’s did. I wanted to just ask you to clarify one
thing before we go any further, which is you had mentioned the Lion’s
Quest as one of the current programs, but when you
mentioned the programs you’d evaluated there was AllStars. Is that a change of name, or
are they different programs? FEMALE: They are different programs. As Jane presented, our
research scientists on staff do put a considerable
amount of effort in maintaining our program
list, and we only put the highest, most rigorously
tested programs on our menus. When the PROSPER model was initially
studied, AllStars was on that list-sorry. Project Alert was on that list,
and Lion’s Quest was not. In the last two years, we have changed and
removed that program and added Lion’s Quest. MODERATOR: Let’s open the
lines for a few questions and comments before we move
to the next presentation. For you listeners, if you want to be
placed in the queue to ask a question, please press *1, or you can type
the question in the chat box. FEMALE: At this time, we have
no questions on the phone, sir. MODERATOR: Let me ask another question
or two and we’ll see if some show up. One question I have is I noticed that
you’ve got much more cost restraints in the families program than
the original program. I know that the original
program matched the cost for family participation
incentives, including food, transportation, and childcare. Have you cut back, therefore, on those
incentives because you found that you were able to get families to
participate with less incentive? Is that how the savings were achieved? FEMALE: In some cases, yes. In other cases, the change in expense
is due to the strengthened community partnerships, where we see
an exchange of resources not in a dollar amount,
but in a supply. FEMALE: It has to do with the in-kind-
FEMALE: Donations from the communities. FEMALE: The folks know the program, they
like the program, they see the value of the program, and they want to
contribute to the program. FEMALE: We still find
there’s a significant value in family incentive
pieces for attendance. FEMALE: Oh, yes. MODERATOR: My recollection
is that in the American Journal of Public Health
article, you also provided some information on the
effects of Project Alert on prescription drug
abuse; is that correct? FEMALE: I don’t believe it was. I don’t have that paper
right in front of me. I can look that up and let you know. MODERATOR: Yeah-no, that’s okay. If you don’t think it
was, your recollection, I’m sure, is more
accurate than mine. FEMALE: Not necessarily;
I’m getting pretty old. [LAUGHTER]. MODERATOR: I’m older. FEMALE: I doubt it. MODERATOR: It looks like we have not had
any other questions show up, so why don’t we move to our
next group of speakers? Our next group of speakers
are Mary Louise Embrey and Rebecca King, representing
the National Association of School Nurses. Mary Louise is currently a substance
abuse prevention consultant to the Association, after serving for six years
as its director of government affairs. She came to the Association after
35 years of federal service. Much of her work in both
the public health service and the Department of Justice
was in public policy, congressional affairs,
and external affairs. She has devoted herself to
advocating for meeting the health needs of students,
preventing drug abuse, and improving child protection. Rebecca has been a Delaware school nurse
for 17 years, was recognized as the 2007 Delaware School Nurse of the Year. A nationally board-certified school
nurse, she presently works in a public K-12 school in Wilmington,
Delaware, and serves on the executive committee of
the National Association. Rebecca’s lengthy list of volunteer
leadership includes work on prescription drug abuse as a 2012
fellow in the Johnson & Johnson School Health
Leadership Institute. Serves as an inaugural board member
of the grassroots organization atTAcK Addiction, and advocacy for 911 Good
Samaritan (inaudible 46:38) and legislation. Ladies, the floor is yours. MARY LOUISE: Thank you, Ted. This is Mary Louise Embrey, and I really
appreciate the opportunity to highlight a program that has been ingrained in the
school nurse culture and the school culture now for about seven years. If you could advance to the first slide,
you’ll see that during today’s session I want to make sure that this is a
workplace series that people think about the fact that schools, themselves, are
workplaces for many employees and that school nurses are there to attend to not
only the students, but to the faculty and the others that work in schools. They are prevention agents, if you will,
for both employees and students, so we really appreciate being part
of this workplace series. The other piece that we’ll be talking
about during our presentation is that the practical application of
Smart Moves, Smart Choices-the name, of course, was
chosen because of the data that was presented before. There are so many choices that students have
to make-and adults-students in particular. It’s kind of a minute-to-minute
basis when they’re amongst their peers and
in their everyday lives. We try to help them with the tools they
need to make smart choices and smart moves. Because of the data that’s well known
amongst, I’m sure, our listeners and others, the prescription drug abuse has
become such a serious drug abuse trend, we were able to partner with Janssen
Pharmaceuticals-we being the National Association of School Nurses-to develop
a program that would be specific to prescription drug abuse prevention. It is a resource that is available free
of charge, and we’ll get more into that as you advance the slides here. Next slide; thank you. Rebecca-I call her Becky, so
you’ll hear me asking her to chime in as we go along,
because Becky is actually utilizing this program and
has been the catalyst in moving it forward within
her state of Delaware. I do want to mention that because the
National Association represents nurses across the entire country, this program
has had quite a wide distribution. Let’s talk a minute about what schools
are: the hub of the community. When we talk about workplaces, we
want to always reach communities. Schools are in every
community, so schools are an essential part of community,
an essential part of the community partnerships. Within the school we have
students and their families, teachers, and then I want
to make sure that everyone listening to this webinar-if
they don’t already know this term, will hopefully start
using it, which is SISP. That is the Specialized
Instructional Support Personnel. By that, we mean school
nurses; we mean school social workers, school psychologists,
school counselors, etc. These are all people who are
highly specialized in the fields who work in schools,
and they are your typical people who would have the right skills
and educational background to utilize the programs like we offer, especially
when they’re free of charge. It’s a wonderful thing for them to
have a resource in their schools. Also in schools, or course,
are administrators. Oftentimes, in terms of school
discipline and all, the vice principals or the dean
of students or whatever would be also interested in
these kinds of resources. Then you have other school staff who
are not necessarily specialized like I mentioned before, but they’re
people who work in the schools-they’re the attendance
people, the maintenance staff, all of these types of people; school bus drivers and so forth. A school is quite extensive. It has a lot of employees. Before I get to that next piece,
Becky, who am I forgetting in schools? REBECCA: There can be anyone, even your
cafeteria leaders, your custodians, your bus drivers; anybody that comes in
contact with a student is someone that can have an impact and can help
make a difference with a student. MARY LOUISE: Exactly. Moving on, the other piece
here is how schools are significant employers
in the community. Within schools, there’s always a school
culture or a climate that the SISPs are the lead users of preventions resources. I mentioned school nurses address
health needs of students and staff. That’s why they’re significant in the
community, because talk about public health-school nurses are the
public health agent in schools. They’re there for many
reasons-immunizations and we could go on and on and
have a whole other session about what school nurses do, but they
are vitally important to the community as well as to individual schools. Let’s go to the next slide. This is a quote-we could have a quote. You’re going to hear Becky speak,
but this is a quote that I’ve had. A while back when I first
started thinking about how we could get the school
nurses involved in being prevention agents, I guess
it was probably my first year as director of government
affairs with the School Nurses Association when we had Paula
Apa-Hall from Oregon as a board member. I chatted with her to see what was going
on in Oregon, knowing the challenges they have there with legal
ramifications and so forth with drugs. I liked this quote, and it’s actually been
published in the school nurse journal. “Because of our unique position within
the schools,” Paula says, “students trust and confide in school nurses.” That’s something that I think does give
the school nurses an advantage over the other staff when you talk about
disciplinarians and so forth. When you’re talking about the
school nurse, you’re talking about a place where a student
can go behind closed doors; there’s confidentiality to the
utmost, and the school nurses hear more than they want to hear sometimes that comes
out of the mouths of their students. They learn about the misuse
of prescriptions drugs. They learn about that students are
mixing alcohol and stimulants. They come to them high;
they come to them sick to their stomach for a
variety of reasons. This is why we want to gain the help of
the school nurses in prevention, because they understand the physiological
happenings of what’s going on with the students with their various drug use. They also, when they have the right
tools, can help prevent and give them the right messages they need, and they
can also communicate with the parent. Paula also makes the point of the
information on the Internet that, of course, the students always believe it’s
absolutely true if it’s on the Internet. The school nurses can help dispel some
of the things they learn and so forth. Becky, did you want to add
anything to what Paula had said? REBECCA: No. You are correct, Mary Louise. We are uniquely positioned in the schools
and really out there on the front lines. Sometimes we start to see and
hear things before there’s actually trends noted in
the data or in any of the surveys that they’re doing among students
that pertain to drug or substance abuse. Just going back to 2012, when we first
got together our group of nurses in the Red Clay School District in Wilmington,
Delaware, we were actually starting to see some of these things in our schools. We noticed the substance abuse
rising, and then we were able to actually correlate
that when there was the increase in overdose deaths compared to
the deaths from motor vehicle accidents. The data really got the attention of
people, but it was really the school nurses that-we really do
start to see these things before they’re actually
publicly out there. MARY LOUISE: Absolutely; thank you. Let’s move to the next slide. What you’re going to see is some of the
information that-again, those of us in the drug abuse field
certainly know about the 1 in 4 teens abusing
prescription drugs. This particular slide is taken from the
Smart Moves, Smart Choices because as you’re trying to discuss this within
your school communities and with your students and your other personnel, then
you’re having the nice, fancy slides and all the things that go with it. The next slide goes into the drug of
choice among 12- and 13-year-olds. This is simply raising awareness. As we all know, an average
parent doesn’t have these kinds of facts at their
fingertips, so we try to provide the information in a quick and easy way. Of course, we know in the field, but do
parents know that most teens get their hands on prescription drugs right there
from their friends and from their own homes and their own medicine cabinets and
from the grandparents and all of those? Do they know that? We want to make sure through this program
that they have that information. Next slide, please. We tell them about 27% of
teens mistakenly believe that abusing prescription
medicine is safer than abusing illegal street drugs
like cocaine or heroin. Of course, we all know
what the current trend is, that heroin has become
such a serious problem. It definitely is a serious
problem in Delaware. Let’s go to the next slide. Here’s four bullets on how
SMSC-Smart Moves, Smart Choices-helps prevent
prescription drug use. How does it? By understanding the data trends, by
having these multiple ways to raise community awareness, and the
easy-to-use research-based resources that we’ve
mentioned previously. To have the evidence-based
programs implemented in schools is not
always that easy. This program was definitely
research-based in the way all the resources
were developed-all the information-using government-approved
sites and so forth. We are not at the point where we have
the evidence-based on this program, and we would love to have help
with getting that studied, because many people now are
using it because it is very user-friendly. Of course, the fourth bullet there: prevention works. I think SAMHSA will
definitely agree with that. Next slide, please. What we’re going to do
now is talk a little bit about the real specifics
of the materials. Of course, I don’t know how many people
on this call have gone to the website for Smart Moves, Smart Choices, but
you’ll see it’s very user-friendly. There have actually been a number of
phases-I like to call Smart Moves, Smart Choices not necessarily
a program but an initiative because it
does have a lot of legs. Initially, I mentioned it was about
seven years ago that we got it started, and we had the help of a professional
curriculum developer that was targeted just at that time to middle
and high school students. A series of very short videos-five
minutes each-were developed, and they were done, actually, with the help of
[Neil Lair News Group 1:01:18] and done in a very fast-moving news
format for young people. It was called dotMedic. That was the very first phase,
and it’s still available online. Everything is downloadable. One of my things that I insisted upon,
and I’d like Becky to comment on this, was that there be a parent piece
as part of our materials, so that was done originally
and we’ve had parent assemblies and nighttime
meetings and so forth, many of which I’ve attended over
the years and conducted. Becky, do you want to mention something
about the original videos and the use that you’ve had with them in the schools,
or some of your nurse colleagues? REBECCA: Yeah. The videos are really
great, easy pieces to use. They’re short; they can be
shown in a variety of formats. They can be used by a health
teacher in a classroom. We’ve also used them and
shown them at parent forums. You can just have a laptop sitting-I’ve done
displays at my middle school open house. When the parents come
up, I have all of this literature and the materials
out for them to view. There’s a lot of really creative ways
that you can use the different materials. The video clips, especially, I
think, help to start discussions. If an instructor-I know one of our
high school teachers uses them. She’ll show the video clip and
then introduce discussion and try to stimulate the
teens to talk about the different types of abuse and misuse. I really think it’s crucial, and I think
Smart Moves does a wonderful job of this, is helping understand
misuse versus abuse. Teens really do need to know
that misuse is not taking a medicine as it’s prescribed
to you or if it’s not prescribed to you, and it really
does help to differentiate that. The materials really do help stimulate
discussion, no matter what group you’re using it in-if you’re using it
with teens or at a parent forum. MARY LOUISE: Very good. The other set of videos that we were
then able to do in the second phase was we got involved with Dr. Drew Pinsky. Of course, the students
that we brought him to in person in California were
absolutely thrilled. You talk about a big name
that will perk their attention, and that
definitely did the trick. REBECCA: Yeah, all the kids know who Dr. Drew is. MARY LOUISE: Right. Everyone knew who Dr. Drew is. We did an assembly in-a
very large assembly. We did a couple of schools and let the
students participate with Dr. Drew. Of course, we had the school nurse
there, we had the school principal, we had a person who is in
recovery who was in the original videos-a couple
years younger at that time. He came to tell his story and, of course,
the students got a lot out of that. We professionally captured that assembly
into short vignettes, if you will, and that is part of the kit that we use
on Smart Moves, Smart Choices. I’m really hoping that by
getting the word out through this webinar that more
people will take a look. Of course, we also have a lot of print
material that can be downloaded and printed out, different school assembly
flyers; we have all of the tools on how to conduct a school assembly,
how to get the people there-the typical tried and
true forms of doing that. Of course, knowing your
audience is always number one. We have school assembly speaker notes. We also-all the researchers on this call
will be happy to know that we did do student pre-tests and student post-tests
as well as an educator survey. That’s when people order
the kit online-we know who ordered it and we expect them
to fill out these materials and send them back so we can have a
starting base for future research. That said, those of us coming through
the second phase, and what we have now is a third phase going on
that we’re very excited about, which is the
addition of two new pieces. I want Becky to chime in when I
tell you what one of them was. Having been in prevention many years
myself, I know from experience that starting earlier with the messages in
age-appropriate ways is so very important. Janssen Pharmaceuticals,
our partner in this, did agree to let us add
materials for elementary. Becky, I know you were a proponent of that
because you work in an elementary school. Could you tell us about
those elementary materials? REBECCA: I think these
elementary materials are really great, and we did see a
definite need for that. If you look at the data, the
students are starting much younger. A 12-year-old student, we’re talking
that’s a fifth grade student. The new materials and the new program
for elementary students is called Start Smart, which again, I think
is a really great name. They are workbooks and
worksheets that are broken down into age groups;
there’s K-2 and then 3-5. All of the materials are
really age appropriate, sort of in an
animated-type fashion. There are medication safety handouts,
too, that can go home for families. When I teach this in my school with my
students, I try to make them the teacher so that they take the message
home to their parents about putting medications
up and away in safe areas. I like the design of
them-very simple messages on these handouts and
in these workbooks. I think they’re very easy to use. Teachers could use them in
the classroom, any of the health teachers, and again,
the school nurses if they have time to get out and into the
classroom and do some lessons. FEMALE: Yes; thank you, Becky. That’s a good description. You can see it there on the screen, too. We’re just very excited about it,
because I think that many researchers will agree that the age of awareness of
various drugs, legal and illegal, has become younger and younger, so the messages
need to be started earlier and earlier. By the time a child is in middle school,
so many opinions have been formed. Very excited that we have the
elementary school tools. The other exciting piece that-let’s
advance to the next slide before I tell you about the other exciting piece,
and you’ll see two quotes there. I mentioned Dr. Drew before. Dr. Drew said in the assembly something
that all of us in the drug abuse field have heard: “The scariest thing I ever
hear a parent say about drug abuse is, ‘Not my kid.'” That is
a scary thing, because parents tend to
think, “Not my kid.” My little quote there says that “They
never think that it’s going to be them-” the kids. “Parents sometimes think their kids
may get into trouble with drugs.” First they might say, “Not
my kid,” Then they think, “Well, maybe they could get
in trouble with drugs.” “But kids never think that they are going
to be the ones who become an addict.” That’s the kind of thing that we have
to kind of really work with them on. The nurses have been so helpful because
they understand addiction and they understand that switch that can go off,
and they can explain that and the brain research and all of these things. I think that young people today are
receptive to listening to the facts, and that’s what we’re trying to
give them in this program. Let’s go to the next slide so I can tell
you about the other exciting piece in our third phase of Smart
Moves, Smart Choices. You see it there on the left; it’s an
animated story and it’s called Choices. It’s under five minutes,
but it has-it’s a great story; again, a wonderful
conversation starter. It’s about serious decisions
and pressures facing teens, including whether or
not to abuse prescription drugs. Of course, we had it
previewed by a number of groups of students
before it was finalized. Even though it’s short, it took quite a
bit of time to get that message straight and make sure that it would resonate
with a majority of young people. I encourage you to take a look at that. It has a supporting discussion guide,
and we do encourage that it be used in health classes, LifeSkills
sessions, parent/teacher meetings, school assemblies,
or any other appropriate school or community event. Becky, did you want to
add anything on Choices? REBECCA: No. I think it’s really good, and it’s a
little bit different format than some of the other pieces in that
this one is animated. Again, it is very short; it’s
about four and a half minutes. I believe high school
students did provide input into the guidance and
development of this story. It really does-I think it helps the
students really think about the impact of their choices, and it is
a good video to show at the start of a health class and
to stimulate discussion. It can also be used in a
variety of other settings, as she said-parent/teacher
meetings, school assemblies, any time of parent forum. I think it’s just a good
way to get kids thinking. Again, I really just cannot stress
enough the need for us to get students to understand the difference between
misuse and abuse, because there is this misperception that taking someone else’s
prescription drug is okay if I only take it once, or it’s okay if I take
my mom’s or my dad’s pill. We really need to dispel that in our
students so that they have a good understanding of what misuse is and how
it can lead to abuse and addiction. MARY LOUISE: We also give the facts that
it’s actually illegal to share your prescription, things like that that
people don’t normally think about. Not only are you doing
something inappropriate and taking a chance, but it’s
also not a legal thing to do. This is kind of where
we’re heading, is to get-we’d like to get some
data on the program. We’d like to spread the word, and we
appreciate SAMHSA allowing us to be part of the webinar to spread the word. We’d like to hear from our research
colleagues on this, and we are happy to answer any questions you might have. I think the next slide also has the
Smart Moves, Smart Choices website. You can get to it through
the school nurses website or just simply type in
smartmovessmartchoices.org. Any questions? MODERATOR: This is Ted. I wanted to ask you if you could explain
a little bit further whether this set of materials are built around
a conceptual framework with respect to risk and
protective factors? MARY LOUISE: The answer is yes. When you look at the curriculum, too,
that I mentioned was in the first phase, it was designed to insert the messages
in the program in science classes, in language arts classes, and
of course health classes. It gives a lot of good assignment pieces and
ideas to those teachers to follow through. Again, the idea of not just introducing
this topic area once or twice a year, but to be used throughout
the school year. Is that an answer to your question? MODERATOR: Yeah, it does. I need somebody to help me. I notice that there are
several unanswered questions, and for some reason when I
click on them on my screen they don’t expand. We have one, I believe,
from Nedra Cook (sp)? We have one from Nicole Bursman (sp)? and one from Ruth Ever (sp)? Could somebody read those questions off
so somebody could answer them, please? MARY LOUISE: I don’t see them. MODERATOR: No, it’s
not you who I’m-yeah. FEMALE: Hi, Ted. MODERATOR: I’m asking my
staff to do that, please. FEMALE: Nedra Cook’s question
is does the definition of technical assistant
apply to RPR in Arkansas? I believe that’s for the
first set of presenters. MODERATOR: Right; yeah. FEMALE: Could you repeat the
question one more time? FEMALE: Her question is
does the definition of technical assistant apply
to RPR in Arkansas? FEMALE: I’m not sure what RPR is. Just so you know, the technical
assistance that’s provided to community teams through that infrastructure
that we showed you, that three-tiered infrastructure, it’s for everyone, and
any state can adopt the model and use the model and become a part
of the PROSPER network. FEMALE: Those individuals that provide
technical assistance, traditionally, have been based in either extension
or substance abuse agencies. They have been identified
because of their experience working in prevention programs,
their knowledge of the research in the prevention area, as well
as their experience and their acting in being very proactive in assisting
communities in the actual implementation. It’s a built-in component of the model. FEMALE: They essentially function like
coaches, but as a component to-we were talking about how we
have community teams and prevention coordinators and
state management teams. It’s all part of the model
but, like I say, it’s available to any state that
wishes to adopt the model. MODERATOR: Do you want to read the next
question out there, please, for me? FEMALE: Ruth Ever posed a question. Her question is our middle school used
to do Guiding Good Choices, but we are concerned now that it is outdated. Do any of you have any opinion on that? FEMALE: I can’t comment on
that particular program, but I can say that the Smart
Moves, Smart Choices program is very current. MODERATOR: Let’s go back
to our other speaker who does have knowledge of Guiding
Good Choices, please. FEMALE: Guiding Good Choices has remained on
our menu because of its focus on families. We, however, have not gotten any
research or reviewed anything that has made any comments regarding how
outdated the materials are. To be quite honest, it’s
probably because the majority of the sites we
work with have selected the Strengthening Families Program
10-14, largely because that program engages youth
throughout the entire seven-session series. FEMALE: Yeah, versus Guiding Good Choices
engages youth in one lesson, I believe. FEMALE: Um-hmm. FEMALE: Correct. MODERATOR: Thank you. Do you have other questions? I can’t quite tell whether
there’s another one or not. I think Nicole Bursman
might be a question. If there are people who
want to ask questions by phone, *1 will
get your hand up. Another question that I have for the
nurse’s program is whether you’re doing anything to ensure the people who adopt
your program are adopting it with fidelity? MARY LOUISE: We certainly
are headed down that path. We have hopes of
getting-we already have a researcher in Delaware who’s
starting to look at it. We’re also using Delaware kind of as a
pilot, if you will, because it is a small state and the governor has made
this a priority and has given some funding to making sure
that Smart Moves, Smart Choices is implemented in
all 19 school districts. That said, we have an opportunity now
to check on the fidelity because the SISPs-I hope everybody remembers the
Specialized Instructional Support Personnel-who will be
using this program in the schools in Delaware will
have some accountability. That would help it, using
the program with fidelity. MODERATOR: About how many school
districts is the program in currently? REBECCA: You have to understand Delaware
is a very small state; we only have 19 districts in all and some
of them are very small. Currently where it’s being piloted is
the Red Clay School District, and we’re one of the largest school
districts in the state. MARY LOUISE: That’s for Delaware. REBECCA: Delaware, yes. MARY LOUISE: For the rest
of the country, I believe that we have sent out-again,
we don’t know for sure how many people have downloaded
throughout the country. You can get a hard copy kit
that has a DVD in it and everything, and flyers and
posters and all of that. For the people that have requested that,
it’s throughout the whole country; I believe every state has had requests. MODERATOR: We do have a question
on the phone; go ahead. FEMALE: Nedra Cook, go ahead. NEDRA: Yes, this is Nedra Cook. Can you hear me? MODERATOR: Yes. NEDRA: My question-I’m in
the state of Arkansas. I had the question regarding
technical assistant. What I was most curious about was, in
your definition of a technical assistant is that they can provide
grant writing for their partners or whoever
they’re working with. My question, does that definition
apply to the state of Arkansas? I just want to be clear, or should I
talk to someone here in Arkansas about the definition of technical assistant? MODERATOR: Let me take that question. I think that they were describing
their PROSPECT [sic] partners and the technical assistance they provided
them as part of their partnership. That was not general technical
assistance for the field. I think that if you’re in a
substance abuse agency, a community-based organization
in Arkansas, that SAMHSA would be able to give you some
technical assistance through the CAPT. The CAPT has representatives assigned
for each state, and I would think that that was probably the most logical place
for you to talk to about technical assistance and what’s available
through SAMHSA without charge. NEDRA: I sure thank you very much. MODERATOR: The CAPT is housed at
EDC-Education Development Center. NEDRA: Where? MODERATOR: EDC in Boston. If you Google “CAPT and SAMHSA,” it’ll bring
you to a website with contact information. NEDRA: Yes; I sure thank you very much. MODERATOR: You’re welcome. NEDRA: Thank you very much. FEMALE: At this time we have no
further question on the phone. MODERATOR: I want to mention that we
have some new fact sheets available. All of the fact sheets on prescription
drug abuse that we put out and display at our workplace in our name, we also have a
responsibility to serve community groups. All of our fact sheets
are on the West Virginia University Injury Prevention
Resource Center’s website. I’ve left-because this will go up as a
PowerPoint, eventually, and a webinar on the web, I’ve left the address there
but if you just Google “WVU Injury Prevention Resource Center prescription
drug fact sheets,” it’ll bring it up. We’ve just come out with some new
ones-one on pregnancy and prescription drug abuse, because that’s a
big problem at the moment, getting word out to pregnant
women of the dangers; prescription drug misuse
among college students. We’ve been adding to our series about
what happens with prescription opioids. We put out one about mixing drugs,
especially around the elderly; we put out one about the fact that opioids may
worsen pain-that’s called hyperalgesia; we’ve added to our series about
these things get stolen. We already had things like don’t let
them get stolen from your shopping cart; we’ve now got one if you’re showing your
house for an open house, lock up the drugs; if you’re having
a party would you leave your credit cards sitting
out on the table? If you’re getting people to come over
and help you move, remember that these drugs are dangerous for little
kids, as well as having a big street value; that
one’s not quite out yet. We’ve got some coming on
amateur athletics, which talks about don’t get
hooked if you get injured. We’ve got some for nurses about what
they can do if they’re working a medical setting to help move the
setting towards doing better prescription drug
abuse with their patients. Some things about keeping
prescription pads secure; some stuff about medication-assisted
therapy and that that’s not giving drugs to addicts. We’ve got some fact sheets out-new
ones-on insurer strategies for trying to reduce prescription drug
abuse among their members. We’ve got a group coming out
in the next couple months-the ones listed here are all
in formatting to become 508-compatible at the moment, and
then they’ll go up on the web. The employer ones are about running
drug-free workplace programs, expanding your health plan to include prescription
drugs, and return-to-work considerations and prescription drug abuse, and some advice
for EAPs about prescription drug abuse. All of our fact sheets
are available with your organization’s name and
contact information. If you want prescription drug abuse fact
sheets that you can give out and you look on West Virginia’s
website and see some that you like, we’re happy to provide
a PDF master with your organization’s name and
contact information on. If you want that, email [email protected] We also provide free
technical assistance around prescription drug abuse issues,
and the intake for that is [email protected], and I’ve also
listed her phone number here. Many of you probably are already
subscribing to our free weekly update that we do
for SAMHSA on prescription drug abuse and what’s
happening in the literature. If you’re not and you want that, just
email Rekaya and she can get you on the list; or you can email this email
address; I forgot I put it in here. Past issues of that are all archived on
the West Virginia University website; they’re one of our partners,
and they use CDC funding to archive those, which
we greatly appreciate. With that, let me see if there
are any other questions. FEMALE: There’s a question for
the PROSPER representatives. Do you think the SFP home-use DVDs will
be a good component to LifeSkills? Cat Allan (sp? 1:30:00) asks. FEMALE: That is actually
referencing a different program. The PROSPER model only delivers
Strengthening Families Programs 10-14; that is the program that all
of our research is based on. It’s a common occurrence that folks
confuse the Strengthening Families Program with Strengthening Families for
Parents with Adolescents Aged 10-14. FEMALE: Yeah. Very common names, but just so that you
know, the research that we have in the PROSPER model and for the
SFP program that we talked about is all tied into
Iowa State University. If you don’t see a link
with Iowa State University, you know you’ve got a
different program. I can’t speak to the research behind the
other programs, but I would stand solid behind the ones from Iowa State. MODERATOR: I think you’ve got a
couple more there; questions. FEMALE: Eric Pierson (sp? 1:31:21) asks knowing that many teens
get their prescription drugs which they use or abuse from familiar places-I
can’t read the entire question. MODERATOR: Somebody just managed to put
them up better-from familiar places such as medicine cabinets and friends, etc. How strong is the movement in actuality? Are schools and other organizations
making sure that they’re not educating the children but involving the families as
well on the dangers of drug abuse and use? MARY LOUISE: This is Mary Louise Embrey. We’re very cognizant of that issue. You don’t want to give out
too much information, but you have to
know your audience. When you’re talking to parents, know
what the parents’ issues are in advance. This is why it’s so important that
you involve in schools the SISPs. The SISPs-Specialized Instructional
Support Personnel-are the people who deal with the families all
the time-the social workers, the psychologists, the
nurses, the counselors. They know what the situations
are in these communities, and they help tailor the
messages so that you’re not providing information that’s
going to make things worse. Becky, do you have any comment on that? REBECCA: No, I mean, you really do have to know
your community and then work all in conjunction as
a team-all of the support staff within the school
along with administration, and also involving any
local partners, as well. MODERATOR: It’s also
that finding that’s been driving the National
Take-Back campaigns. There are a lot of fact sheets out now
about why to dispose of your medications and how to; we have one
of those available if people want to use it as
part of their programs. I now can see the questions. Sara Feltz (sp) asks, Can you email these coming
soon documents out when they’re available? What we normally do is we put out on the
weekly update a notice when we put out new fact sheets, and people
can then download them. Because fact sheets are PDFs, they tend
to be large, so it’s hard to email them to a bulk of people
unless you want to become known by email systems
as a junk mailer. What we do is we put out the
update in a weekly update. If you’re working in prescription drug
abuse, weekly updates is really helpful because it covers a readable version
of what’s happening in the journal literature, but it also tells you
what’s happening in the news. We always give you, at the top, one or
two feature items, and some people just read those couple items because they’re
the most important things-what we thought were the most important
things for that week. To subscribe to that, just
email [email protected], and that’ll work, or
[email protected] What’s the ETA on the Don’t Get
Hooked resource for amateur athletes? Probably within the next month, I think. It’s already an approved
set of information. I think the other thing, Paula, is
if you wanted to email me your email address or type it in here, Rekaya could
probably send you an advanced copy of that. We’re happy to have input on
whether things meet needs. Great; thank you. FEMALE: Linda Tran (sp) has a question about the Smart Moves, Smart Choices resources. She asks since she’s located in Canada
if the resources can be sent to her? MARY LOUISE: I don’t think that’s a
problem, but I would recommend that-go into the site and try to order it like you
would-there’s prompts on ordering the kit. If for some reason there’s
a problem with getting the kit, then certainly
everything is downloadable. You don’t have to have a
physical kit, so you definitely have access to the materials
through the Internet. MODERATOR: I think maybe we’ve
covered the waterfront. I thank everybody very much for attending,
and hope you found this met your needs. I thank our speakers very much for all
the wonderful information, and I look forward to hearing evaluation results
in the future on the nurses program. Thank you all very much;
have a great day. FEMALE: Thank you. FEMALE: Thank you, Ted. FEMALE: That concludes our call for
today; you may disconnect at this time. Thank you.

Leave a Reply

(*) Required, Your email will not be published