Understanding School Team’s Readiness to Inform the Implementation and Evaluation of the Safe Communities Safe Schools Model Aimed at Reducing School Violence.

Introduction: Researchers from the University of Colorado Boulder Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence (CSPV) are partnering with educators in 46 middle schools to implement the Safe Communities Safe Schools (SCSS) model. This comprehensive model consists of three core program components: partnering with a school-based team, building capacity around using data for decision making, and implementing evidence-based programs including Multi-Tiered Systems of Support. These core components are expected to increase school climate and address the school’s identified malleable risk and protective factors for reducing school violence and other problem behaviors. Key to the model is bridging the gap between research and practice through the development of school-researcher partnerships.

Methods: The American Institutes of Research is evaluating the extent to which the SCSS model is being implemented as designed and using a staggered entry randomized control trial to understand model effectiveness. Researchers combine several data sources to understand the implementation of the model: implementation logs, program fidelity observations, and readiness assessments. T-tests were conducted on the first two years of readiness data to understand school-level capacity and motivation to implement the SCSS model in year 1 as well as changes in school- level capacity and motivation overtime.

Results: Readiness assessment data from the first two years of implementation suggest changes in readiness in the expected direction, with significant increases for leadership support for the SCSS model (t(49) = 2.51, p < .05) and priority to implement the SCSS model (t(49) = 2.35, p < .05). The data also indicate that schools had a champion that supported the SCSS model at onset (Mean=5.65, SD=1.09 for Year 1; Mean=5.87, SD=1.20 for Year 2, on a 1 to 7 scale), school staff believed early on that this model was compatible with the school’s existing values, cultural norms, and past experiences (Mean=6.06, SD=.72 for Year 1, Mean=6.10, SD=.85 for Year 2, on a 1 to 7 scale), and school staff perceived implementation of the SCSS model to be a positive experience (Mean=6.18, SD=.98 for Year 1; Mean=6.17, SD=1.03 for Year 2=).

Conclusion: These results suggest that the model is feasible to implement (from the school’s perspective) and show promising results for improving the school team’s motivation and accessibility to implement a comprehensive framework designed to reduce school violence. Conclusions about three years of readiness data and recommendations for dissemination and implementation science, including how these findings relate to effective implementation processes, will be discussed.