Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01051993 - IO.9 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 1 .0.-9 � ..:L;;:�A Contra FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Y Costa County DATE: January 4 , 1.993 �ti:, -yTa a �•G;;vr P SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DRUG AND ALCOHOL ACTION PLAN IN THE COUNTY AND ON THE EVALUATION OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN AND ON RELATED MATTERS SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1 . Approve the attached evaluation program for the Drug & Alcohol Action Plan which will assist in determining the extent to which the Action Plan has been effective in changing attitudes and behaviors toward the use and abuse of alcohol and other drugs . 2 . Request the ,Health Services Director to plan the agenda for the Countywide Coordinating Committee meeting following the February 6, 1993, "Fun Fest ' 93: A Celebration of Families and Communities". as an opportunity to stop and take stock of what .has happened. in Contra Costa County during the last few years as a result of the Action Plan, what steps have been taken to implement the Action Plan, what activities are currently taking place in the various regions of the County and what is planned for' the future. This meeting should provide an opportunity " for the Coordinating Committee to participate directly in the evaluation process . 3 . Prepare and. forward to the members of the 1993 Internal - Operations Committee a timetable for the evaluation process which identifies when _the evaluation instrument will be released to Action Plan participants, when. the key informants interviews will take place and when progress reports will be made to various groups . 4 . Request the Health Services Director to make a further status report on the Drug and Alcohol Action Plan, evaluation of the Action Plan,, and plans for future meetings of the Coordination Committee and related matters to the 1993 Internal Operations Committee by July 1, 1993 . CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: _X—YES. SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATIONOF COUN TRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE n SIGNATURE(S): R -HRODER SUNNE WRIGHT MCPEAK ACTION OF BOARD ON JCL1LIACt1_y t993 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON HE DATE SHOWN. ATTESTED Contact: PHIL BAT HELOR.CLERK THE BOARD OF cc: See Page 2. SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY DEPUTY I .O.-9 BACKGROUND: Our Committee has been making periodic reports to the Board of Supervisors on the status of the implementation of the Drug and Alcohol Action Plan throughout this year. Our last report was approved by the Board of Supervisors on October 20, 1992 . This is the final report from the 1992 Internal Operations Committee on this subject. On January 4 , 1993 our Committee met with Mark Finucane, Health Services Director;: Chuck Deutschman, Substance Abuse Coordinator; and Jerry Nava, Alcohol Program Administrator, and reviewed the attached report from Mr. Finucane and the attached evaluation outline for the Drug and Alcohol Action Plan. We are pleased with the thorough evaluation outline which has been developed and recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve it. We are, however, asking that the Health Services Director outline when the various elements of the evaluation will be conducted and share that information with the members of the 1993 Internal Operations Committee. We are very pleased with the program which is being developed for the next meeting of the Countywide Coordinating Committee, which is being termed "Fun Fest 193 : A Celebration of Families and Communities" . We hope all of the members of the Board of Supervisors will be able to attend at least some portion of the activities on February 6, 1993 in Richmond. We are asking that the next Countywide Coordinating Committee meeting be planned in such a way that it becomes a part of the evaluation of the Drug and Alcohol Action Plan and as a time for the Coordinating Committee to look back at that has been accomplished since the adoption of the Action Plan and where we plan to go in the future in further implementation of the Action Plan. Finally, we believe that the 1993 Internal Operations Committee should continue to provide oversight to this subject. cc: County Administrator Health Services Director Substance Abuse Coordinator, HSD Alcohol Program Manager, HSD OSAP Project Director, HSD -2- Contra The Board of Supervisors Costa Health Services Department Tom Powers,1st District County Nancy C.Fanden,2nd District OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR Robert I.Schroder,3rd District s --. Sunne Wright McPeak,4th District 9 ;vrf. ` Tom Torlakson,5th District -- Mark Flnucane,Director Administrative Offices Count Administrator '`s 20Allen Street County '� 4oa Martinez,California 94553 Phil Batchelor n•• J�� (415)646-4416 County Administrator q couK ' TO: Supervisor Robert I. Schroder Supervisor Sunne Wrigh McPeak INTERNAL PERATIO COMMITTEE FROM: Mark Finu e Health Services Director SUBJECT: Update on Countywide Drug and Alcohol Action Plan DATE: December 7, 1992 The following is a report from the Health Services Director on the status of the implementation of the Countywide Drug and Alcohol Action Plan, and a report on the evaluation plan for the Action Plan. ♦ FUN FEST '93: A Celebration of Families and Communities Action Plan members and community leaders from across the county have been meeting since April to plan this very special event. The day is targeted for parents and children and willtake place on Saturday, February 6, 1993 at the Richmond convention Center. We are creating something very new and different which is designed to bring concerned citizens, providers, and elected officials together in a non-traditional conference format that includes music, ethnic food, basketball competition, stop-drop-and roll demonstrations, and wandering artists. Allof this will take place in the auditorium where 65 booths will offer health and substance abuse information through interactive game activity. The core of the event lies in the participation of some 100 provider organizations and is sponsored by Substance Abuse Administration with technical assistance from the National Black Alcoholism Council. To increase awareness and participation in the event our Department is sponsoring a contest to encourage citizens of all ages to create an image for the Action Plan. The challenge is to create a song, poem, poster, or rap that describes what it means to have a drug free community. 4500 contest mailers were sent out IO Committee Report -- Page Two recently to churches, schools, service and ethnic organizations, and treatment providers. Prizes include a $500 gift certificate donated by a local service group. Fun Fest '93 has a primary goal of increasing awareness of the Action Plan, to create a day for families free of alcohol and other drugs, and as a mechanism for recruiting other citizens into the Action Plan effort across the county. A comprehensive Marketing Plan is underway to promote the Action Plan which includes a new logo (a "corporate image" - to help people begin to identify the Action Plan in their community); a newsletter which willpromote the Summit and highlight on-going Action Plan activities in each of the five regions; and a county wide contest to "name the Action Plan" through art, essay, poster, etc. Awards for the contest willbe provided at Fun Fest 93. (See Appendix B) ♦ A program highlighting the Law Enforcement Conference (Community Solutions) which gathered Action Plan members and criminal justice professionals was aired on all community access stations on November 26, 1992. ♦ Segments of the Spiritual Alliance conference on Substance Abuse which the Department sponsored for local religious leaders willbe aired in a six part series in January. The series contains presentations from the Rev. Cecil Williams,Father Tom Weston, and other dynamic presentors and offers the community the latest information on issues of addiction, recovery, and the family. ♦ The Department collaborated with Wendel Brunner's office in providing a status `report card' and a fact sheet for media distribution. Since substance abuse is one of the four areas that the Public Health Advisory Board is interested in, the division will continue to work closely with Dr. Brunner's office in creating an increased public awareness of the issues of alcohol and other drug problems. ♦ The Department provided key contacts in the health department and timely information on current trends and issues relating to Women and Addiction: genetic research, treatment issues, and targeting by the alcohol industry. ♦ Health Services Department staff, in concert with two Action Plan regions (Central and West), are finalizing Request for Proposal (RFP) processes for new grant managers to oversee these two segments of the OSAP Community Partnership project. The Center for Human Development was chosen as the new grant manager for Central County. A final decision in West County willbe made very shortly. ♦ The Department continues to take the lead in the statewide effort to change the current alcohol impairment chart distributed by the Department of Motor Vehicles. Permission has been obtained from the state of Pennsylvania. To use their chart IO Committee Report -- Page Three with adaptions. DMV has agreed to make major revisions in their current charts and handbooks such as zero tolerance as the safe driving recommendation, etc. ♦ Action Plan staff are currently surveying all the cities regarding alcohol policies across the County -- (see Appendix Q. Plan is for health Services to compile this information in a report and make it available to across the Action plan community. SELECTED REGIONAL UPDATES: ♦ The recently completed Red Ribbon Week included a number of activities, the highlights of which are detailed in the first Action Plan newsletter. ♦ South County is currently debating the notion of a responsible beverage service (RBS) ordinance for public facilities and events for the Town of Danville. In addition, there is also discussion of building a local RBS coalition in South County regarding issues of responsible hospitality. Health Services Department staff worked on a Responsible Beverage Service proposal to the S.H. Cowell Foundation with South County representatives. If funded, this effort could provide an excellent model for other regions in Contra Costa. Further, in a move that will strengthen alcohol and other drug efforts, the San Ramon CASA is merging with the South County Action Plan steering committee. ♦ East County is working on incorporating the goals of their alcohol availability project in Antioch into the East County Action Plan committee. The findings of this project, which included a focus on DUI,public drinking, and youth drinking, were recently presented to the public in Antioch. East County is also in the process of distributing $6,400 to groups and agencies serving families of Contra Costa. ♦ Central County is in the process of working out their relationship with their new grant manager, and is currently in the process of hiring their coordinator. Central County is also involved in reassessing their program priorities and have established a budget committee to determine a spending plan for the priorities. ♦ Acalanes is involved in a number of youth-oriented efforts, including planning a parent Education Conference in March '93;establishing a newsletter for the region; developing a calendar of youth activities for the year; and planning the second annual fund raiser ("Tee Off for Teens") at Round Hil1C.C. on March 22, 1993. ♦ West County is also in the process of determining a new grant manager. In the meantime, ongoing program efforts include issues of retail alcohol availability and billboard advertising of both alcohol and tobacco. TO Committee Report -- Page Four ACTION PLAN EVALUATION ♦ The attached document (see Appendix A) describes the plan for the Action Plan evaluation. The comments made by the IO Committee in the October 12, 1992 meeting were taken into consideration in the development of this document. ♦ The Proposal has been modified to address and include the specific points included in your outline, "Partnership for a Drug-Free Contra Costa -- Evaluation Program for Action Plan." 1. The evaluation plan willemphasize the following points: ► The evaluation will be conducted with the participation of key decision makers at all levels of the Action Plan process. ► The evaluation will be to both inform and improve the Action Plan effort, as well as to assess outcomes of that effort. ► The evaluation will answer questions in the categories of process, action, and outcome. Specific evaluation questions in these categories are listed in the proposal, and other questions of concern to key decision makers can be added prior to implementation of the evaluation. ► Evaluation methodology will include: a) a survey of Action Plan participants; b) interviews of key informants from Action Plan groups; and c) analysis of available outcome indicators. 1 1� Proposal for Evaluation of the Drug and Alcohol Action Plan Executive Summary I. Overview A. The evaluation will be conducted with the participation of key decision makers at all levels of the Drug and Alcohol Action Plan process, including members of the County-wide Coordinating Committee, Health Services Department staff, members of the I.O. Committee, and members of Action Plan groups at the regional and local levels. B. The evaluation will be designed to be formative--providing information to inform and improve the Drug and Alcohol Action Plan effort. C. The evaluation will also provide summative information--information on outcomes of the Action Plan effort. II. Evaluation Ouestions A. The evaluation will answer questions in the following categories: process (how the Action Plan is implemented); action (what specific actions have been taken as a result of the Action Plan process); and outcome (what changes have occurred as a result of the Action Plan process, especially changes in objective indicators) . Specific evaluation questions are detailed in the attached evaluation proposal. III. Evaluation Methodology and Analysis A. Survey of Action Plan participants: A survey tailed to the Action Plan effort has been drafted drawing on the work of several major research and evaluation efforts. The survey will be finalized with input from Health Services Department staff. Data will be entered onto a data base and analyzed using standard statistical techniques. B. Interviews of key informants from Action Plan groups: semi- structured interviews of representatives of Action Plan groups at the local, regional, and county-wide levels will provide information on goals and objectives set by each group, priorities identified, and objectives accomplished. C. Analysis of outcome indicators: A complete listing of outcome indicator data currently available is included in the attached proposal, as well as a list of additional indicators used in Portland•s Regional Drug Initiative. With the assistance of the CCC and ESD staff, available indicator data will be obtained and analyzed,. and a system will initiated for analyzing these data on an ongoing basis. IV. Reporting A. Progress reports will be regularly made to such groups as the I.O. Committee', the ESD staff, and the CCC. Given the diversity of groups implementing the Action Plan, summary reports will be designed to be useful to each of the specific groups. Revised Proposal for Evaluation of the Drug and Alcohol Action Plan November 25, 1992 I. Overview The following design is proposed for the evaluation of the Contra Costa County Drug and Alcohol Action Plan. To be most useful to the County and to Action Plan participants, the evaluation will be both formative and summative. It is suggested that the design be reviewed with key decision- makers, such as .' representatives of the Countywide Coordinating Committee, Health Services Department staff, and members of the I.O.Commi.ttee. These and other designated parties are invited to participate in finalizing the evaluation plan. Since the Action Plan is implemented by diverse groups throughout the five regions of the county, the evaluation will reflect and build on this -diversity. As a community process, key players, decision makers, and potential users of the evaluation work on the Action Plan process at local levels, regional levels, and the county level. The evaluation will focus on generating findings useful to this range of decision makers. Research demonstrates that the active participation of decision makers in the development of evaluation plans greatly increases the usefulness of evaluation -projects.l This involvement ideally begins as the evaluation questions are - formulated, continues as the evaluation -plan and instruments are finalized, and continues throughout the evaluation. A formative evaluation provides information to inform and improve a program or effort. This evaluation process will determine how the Action Plan is implemented by the range of groups throughout the county, ways these groups are working well, ways they are not working well, and ways in which the implementation of the Action Plan process can ' be improved. This data will be helpful to the Countywide Coordinating Committee, the Health Services Department, and the Board of. Supervisors as they formulate the best ways to further the Action Plan process. A summatift evaluation provides information on outcomes or overall effectiveness. This evaluation will provide information about iPatton, Michael Quinn. Utilization-Focused Evaluation. Sage Publications, Inc. , Beverly Hills, 1978. 1 outcomes and the overall effectiveness of the Action Plan. The evaluation will examine changes in available objective drug and alcohol indicator data for the county. In addition, it will explore the extent to which changes in indicator data are related to Action Plan activities. The evaluation will explore what about the Action Plan process did and did not contribute to observable changes in objective indicators. It will measure to what extent participants believe linkages between organizations have changed as a result of the Action Plan process. It will tap the perceptions of Action Plan participants to assess indicators of the following types of outcomes: the impact the Action Plan process has had on community tolerance of drug and alcohol problems; the degree to which the Action Plan process has empowered citizens and the community to take responsibility for alcohol and other drug problems; how the Action Plan process has impacted particular drug and alcohol problems from a community perspective: The evaluation will be conducted by Sheila F. Tarbet, Ph.D. Dr. Tarbet has nearly 20 years of experience in program evaluation, program management and program design in the fields of youth services, mental health, and AOD prevention. She currently is working as a consultant and is assisting the OSAP Community Partnership projects in Contra Costa County and Oakland. Her resume is attached. II. Evaluation Ouestions The evaluation of the Action Plan will answer three kinds of crucial questions which can be put into the categories of process, action, and outcome.2 Process questions are generally concerned with how the Action Plan is being implemented. Action questions are concerned with the specific actions that have been taken as a result of the Action Plan process. Outcome questions are concerned with the changes that have occurred as a result of the Action Plan process. The evaluation will consider relationships among these kinds of 2For the purposes of this proposal, we will continue to use the categories of process, action, and outcome that were used last spring in discussions between the I.O. Committee and the Health Services Department community planning team. It should be noted, however, that evaluators more often use the categories of process, outcome, and impact. In this latter categorization, outcome is similar to action in the first, and impact is similar to outcome. 2 questions. For example, if specific outcome or action goals are not met, the evaluation's examination of program process should identify factors related to the program's level of success and options for change or modification to increase effectiveness. A. Process: The evaluation will answer process questions about the various Action Plan groups (CCC, Regional Steering Committees, CASA's, etc. ) such as the following: Does each community and school district have a CASA or Drug-Free task force? Do Action Plan groups meet monthly? Do members of local groups participate in the Regional Steering Committee? Does each group establish priority objectives for each year and adopt a budget/work program to achieve the objectives? What sectors of the community are represented in the Action Plan groups? From the perspective of group members, what sectors of the community are under-represented, ov-er-represented, or adequately represented in the Action Plan groups? How do these groups function in the views of their members? Is leadership primarily from elected officials, county , staff, unpaid volunteers, staff of nonprofit organizations? Are groups seen as effective? Why or why not? Is leadership shared in the Action Plan process? Does leadership within Action Plan groups rotate? In the view of group members, what are the biggest achievements of each of these groups? What resources do they need to help achieve their goals? The answers to these questions generated by the evaluation will provide information that is specifically designed to be useful to County decision-makers and Health Services Department staff as they look for ways to support the Action Plan process, support citizen involvement in this process, and make the Action Plan effort as effective as possible. 3 B. Action Evaluation of action will answer the following kinds of questions: To what extent have the goals and objectives of the Action Plan groups been accomplished? - What projects have each of the local, regional, and county-wide Drug and Alcohol Action Plan groups carried out? - What projects are currently being carried out? What projects are currently planned? - What media projects, direct service projects, and special events have been carried out by Action Plan groups? - Have groups reached out to increase community involvement and what have been the results of these efforts? - What actions have been taken to increase public recognition and involvement in the Action Plan? - In what communities have policy related projects been carried out by the Action Plan groups? Where have Action Plan efforts resulted in the enactment of the kegger/party ordinance? How many communities have implemented the designated driver program and achieved a specified level of participation by drinking establishments? Answering these kinds of questions, the evaluation will determine and describe the specific. actions that have been carried out under the Action Plan process. C. Outcome The evaluation will address the question, "What changes have occurred as a result of the Drug and Alcohol Action Plan process?" Examination of alcohol and other drug problem indicator data will be the primary focus of the outcome evaluation effort. Available indicator data will be collected from years prior to the beginning of the Action Plan through the current year as available. In addition to examining the data, the evaluator will work with county staff to institutionalize and systematize data collection and analysis so that an ongoing evaluation process can occur beyond the time frame of the proposed evaluation contract. The evaluation will also explore change in linkages (for example, networking, referrals, sharing resources) that have occurred among 4 participating organizations as a result of Action Plan participation and change in Action Plan participants ' knowledge and beliefs. The evaluation will also measure participants' perceptions of change in a variety of alcohol and other drug related problems. III. Evaluation Methodology The evaluation will use several research methodologies to answer these questions. Survey of Action Plan Participants Members of Action Plan groups at the local, regional, and county- wide levels will be asked to complete a survey tapping their perceptions of the groups they participate in and outcomes they perceive as a result of the Action Plan process. A survey has been developed and is in final draft form. This instrument incorporates questions developed for assessing several community partnerships and other community efforts by such respected organizations as EMT, Associates, Sacramento; Far West Labs, San Francisco; Institute for Scientific Analysis, Alameda; and Boston University School of Public Health. The survey should be finalized with the input of County staff, members of the CCC (several members of the CCC Leadership Cabinet have already volunteered to review evaluation instruments) , and other identified key decision makers. The survey focuses on issues of process within the Action Plan groups. It also includes several measures of participants' perceptions of outcomes of each group's actions and of the Action Plan process as a whole. Distribution of the survey will occur with assistance of the Substance Abuse Division's community planning team. The survey will be presented at meetings of Action Plan groups for a period of 60 to 90 days. Time on the agenda will be requested for the evaluation, and group members will be asked to complete the survey and turn it in by the end of the meeting. It is expected that it 150 to 300 questionnaires will be completed by members of the approximately 16 or more Action Plan groups this way. Interviews of Rey Informants Semi-structured in-person interviews of one to two hours in length will be conducted with key informants identified from each of the relevant local, regional, and county-wide groups. Rey informants will be identified with the assistance of Health Services Department staff and group members. Rey informant interviews will provide information on each group's process of setting and prioritizing goals and quantitative, verifiable objectives. Interviews will indicate to what degree 5 each group adopts an annual budget and work program, as well as to what extent its objectives have been accomplished. Interviews will also include selected questions to generate qualitative data on group process that will be important in the interpretation of the survey data. Interviewees will be asked their perceptions of Action Plan outcomes. To increase reliability of interview data, at least two key informants from each group should be interviewed. A total of about 30 interviews are suggested. Analysis of Outcome Indicators The following indicator data is available for Contra Costa County: Law Enforcement-Related Indicators a) Felony narcotics arrests b) Other drug arrests C) DUI arrests . d) Liquor law violation arrests e) Public drunk arrests Source: Calif. Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Criminal Statistics, published annually. Health-Related Indicators f) Number of residents hospitalized with a principal diagnosis related to alcohol or other drugs g) Residents hospitalized with a specific principal diagnosis related to alcohol h) Residents hospitalized with drugs as a principal diagnosis by specific drug Source: Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, ADP i) Number of HIV/AIDS cases that are drug related j ) Number of DDP clients k) Number of County Alcohol Program clients 1) Alcohol and drug involved deaths investigated by coroner' s office Source: Contra Costa County (AIDS program, Alcohol and Drug Programs, Coroner's Division) Motor Vehicle-Related Indicators M) Persons killed in ADI motor vehicle crashes n) Persons injured in ADI motor vehicle crashes 6 Source: CHP The Drug Impact Index used by Portland, Oregon's Regional Drug Initiative will be used as a model as much as possible. Indicator data used in that effort includes the following additional measures: - drug-affected babies: annual births - student alcohol, drug use, last 30 days - juvenile arrests for drug offenses - adult arrests for drug offenses - arrestees testing positive for drugs, adults and juveniles - marijuana plants seized - percent of positives in pre-employment drug tests - percent of small business employers with Employee Assistance Programs - teen alcohol-involved traffic deaths - adult alcohol-involved traffic deaths - annual number of deaths from drug overdoses With the assistance of the County Coordinating Committee and Health Services Department staff, these additional data will be obtained for Contra Costa County if possible. The evaluator will begin to work with HSD staff and the CCC to create a system for analyzing these data at appropriate intervals. IV. Plan for Analysis Survey data will be entered onto a data base to facilitate tabulation and analysis. Paradox has tentatively been chosen as the software for this purpose. Analysis will enable groups to be described individually, regionally, and county wide in terms of the items and indices included in the survey. Where appropriate, cross tabulations will explore the relationship of variables with one another. County staff and Action Plan participants will be invited to participate in the data analysis after preliminary tabulations and cross-tabulations are complete. Interview data will be analyzed using standard qualitative techniques. Categories of responses will emerge from the interviews themselves rather than being pre-identified by the evaluator. Analysis will identify trends and commonalities as well as unique actions, outcomes, and processes. ESD staff will provide input into the analysis of the interview data. Outcome Ndicator data will be analyzed over time, generally by year, and by location. The geographical units of analysis will include cities, regions, and the county as a whole. ESD staff and community members will be invited to participate in the analysis of the indicator data. Input from a broad range of community people 7 and decision makers will be essential in interpreting the indicator data. V. Reporting Results to the Action Plan Community To ensure findings will be meaningful and accessible to those in the Action Plan community, members of the I.O. Committee, the CCC, and regional Action Plan groups will be invited to participate actively in all phases of the evaluation process. Some members of the CCC have already been recruited to provide feedback on the final design of the survey instrument. They or other members of Action Plan groups may be asked to provide input on the final design, on the key informant interview format, and on the identification of outcome indicators. Progress reports on the evaluation will be regularly made to the I.O. Committee, the ESD staff, and the CCC, and summary reports will be presented to these groups for review and acceptance. Again, given the diversity within the county and the large number of groups implementing the Action Plan process in their own communities, summary reports specific to each group will be made available for approval, acceptance, and utilization. 8