Contact DSHS   ||   Privacy

The Evaluation of Strategic Prevention Framework (SPF) State Incentive Grant (SIG)

Washington State’s Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentive Grant (SPF SIG) will build upon the accomplishments of our 1998 State Incentive Grant by incorporating the Strategic Prevention Framework (SPF) into our current prevention efforts. This project will provide the resources necessary to enhance existing assessment processes, improve and operationalize our state’s Substance Abuse Prevention Plan, implement and evaluate evidence-based strategies to address critical needs, and establish reporting procedures that track progress toward preventing substance abuse and its related problems.

A State Epidemiological Workgroup (SEW) will assemble and interpret epidemiological data to identify critical prevention issues for the state, while a Strategic Prevention Framework (SPF) Advisory Council oversees the project. In order to balance epidemiological perspectives with policy and programming realities, a Joint Operations Team (JOT) will be formed from members of both groups to develop criteria that will guide the identification of state priorities, and facilitate the state-wide needs, resource and readiness assessment, gap analysis, and state prioritization process. Once priorities have been identified, state partners will develop a data-driven Comprehensive Strategic Plan that builds upon the existing Substance Abuse Prevention Plan.

Upon approval of Washington State’s Plan, SPF SIG community funding will provide incentives for a minimum of 15 pilot communities to implement the 5-Step SPF process with evidence-based programs targeting the identified state priorities that manifest in their communities. The project will distribute approximately $135,000 per community annually through a competitive bid process, with a minimum of 20% allocated to Reducing Underage Drinking strategies. The process will balance communities chosen to include those in differing stages of readiness, as well as by geography and rural vs. urban status, with special consideration given to those that represent under-served or high-need populations, particularly where cultural issues are a factor.

Return to Research Activities/Reports


Modified: October 17, 2007