158427
Building consensus and promoting data-driven policy in substance abuse prevention: An examination of the SPF SIG in Arkansas
Monday, November 5, 2007: 3:00 PM
Brenda M. Booth, PhD
,
Division of Health Services Research, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR
Sarah E. Frith, MA
,
Division of Health Services Research, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR
Katherine Lincourt, BA
,
Division of Health Services Research, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR
Jo Thompson, MSW
,
Office of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention, Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Behavioral Health Services, Little Rock, AR
Diane Steffick, PhD
,
Division of Health Services Research, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR
Jill Cox, BA
,
Office of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention, Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Behavioral Health Services, Little Rock, AR
Arkansas was approved in 2005 as a Cohort II state for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP) Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentive Grant (SPF-SIG). At the time, Arkansas' various prevention and treatment, law enforcement, and research institutions were working independently on substance abuse issues. The creation of the State Epidemiological Workgroup (SEW) has facilitated inclusion for all relevant stakeholders, and the process of determining SPF SIG priorities has been an exercise in balancing all aspects of substance abuse while promoting data-driven policy in providing effective prevention programs. This paper examines the SEW's effectiveness at building consensus and promoting data-driven policies while providing mandated services to the SPF-SIG We focus on: 1. The relationships between the Arkansas SEW, Advisory Committee, Management Team, and subcommittees, and their interactions in achieving consensus on SPF SIG priorities, 2. A snapshot of substance abuse issues in Arkansas and the processes employed by the SEW in understanding consumption and consequences through supporting documents, which have become effective tools in promoting knowledge of substance abuse in the state, 3. An examination of how the Arkansas SEW dealt with methamphetamine abuse in Arkansas, and how the SEW fostered understanding of data collection issues regarding methamphetamine among various interest groups, and 4. Issues and concerns regarding data collection and analysis and recommendations from the SEW for more accurate and comprehensive reporting of substance consumption and consequences.
Learning Objectives: 1. The relationships between the Arkansas SEW, Advisory Committee, Management Team, and subcommittees, and their interactions in achieving consensus on SPF SIG priorities,
2. A snapshot of substance abuse issues in Arkansas and the processes employed by the SEW in understanding consumption and consequences through supporting documents, which have become effective tools in promoting knowledge of substance abuse in the state,
3. An examination of how the Arkansas SEW dealt with methamphetamine abuse in Arkansas, and how the SEW fostered understanding of data collection issues regarding methamphetamine among various interest groups, and
4. Issues and concerns regarding data collection and analysis and recommendations from the SEW for more accurate and comprehensive reporting of substance consumption and consequences.
Presenting author's disclosure statement:Any relevant financial relationships? No Any institutionally-contracted trials related to this submission?
I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines,
and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed
in my presentation.
|