Urban Versus Rural, and Differing Institutional Homes: How Do These Differing Contexts Affect Implementation of the Evidence2Success Framework?

Introduction. The Evidence2Success framework is an explicit extension of Communities that Care, with the goal of improving relevancy and sustainability for urban areas. This prevention system works to bring public systems and community members together to improve outcomes for youth. Currently, the four implementing sites sites vary from each other in rurality/urbanicity, racial/ethnic composition, and in their “institutional home.” These differences have led to asking: which setting(s) most strongly facilitate success?

Methods. A multifaceted process evaluation with multiple tools, participants, and time points has been conducted. Interviews with community board members and key leaders have been conducted at two time points across two years; participant evaluation surveys and facilitator feedback forms of workshops have occurred; observations of community board meetings have occurred; technical assistance and coaching interactions have been tracked monthly; and implementation progress has been tracked with the Milestones & Benchmarks tool. A combination of quantitative and qualitative analysis strategies have been utilized as statistical power is limited with a site-level n of four. Yet, the repeated measurement strategy across multiple reporters lends credibility to the findings.

Results. Results suggest that some important adjustments may need to be made to improve the likelihood of success in such differing contexts. First, a streamlined model with fewer moving parts may be more effective in rural areas. Second, regardless of the institutional home, preexisting partnerships are more easily activated and successful, compared to partnerships without a strong history. Third, the type of position that the designated Site Coordinator and Finance Lead has seems to be more important than the organizational setting in which they are embedded. Four, regardless of setting, engaging those served by public systems is extremely challenging. Fifth, engaging a region beyond the targeted community is necessary to collect the data needed to make decisions. Lastly, local implementation leads often make good decisions about the adaptations needed to support local success.

Discussion. The Evidence2Success framework seems to be effective in bringing together individuals and organizations at different levels and across different sectors of communities to work together to make data-based decisions about youth programming. Some differences may be important across different types of context, and different institutional homes may be more useful at different stages. Yet, through appropriate training and technical assistance, local implementation leads can often make good decisions regarding adaptations needed to support success in their local context.