qualitative interviews from the field Sebrina L. Doyle , Brian K. - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

qualitative interviews from the field
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

qualitative interviews from the field Sebrina L. Doyle , Brian K. - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

How programs are sustained in the real-world: qualitative interviews from the field Sebrina L. Doyle , Brian K. Bumbarger, Stephanie A. Bradley, and Brittany Rhodes- Cooper The EPISCenter represents a collaborative partnership between the


slide-1
SLIDE 1

The EPISCenter represents a collaborative partnership between the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD), and the Prevention Research Center, College of Health and Human Development, Penn State University. The EPISCenter is funded by PCCD and the Department of Public Welfare. This resource was developed by the EPISCenter through PCCD grant VP-ST-24368.

How programs are sustained in the “real-world”: qualitative interviews from the field

Sebrina L. Doyle, Brian K. Bumbarger, Stephanie A. Bradley, and Brittany Rhodes- Cooper

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Background

  • EPISCenter is an intermediary organization that helps to connect

research, policy, and real-world practice. Funded by the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD) and the Department

  • f Public Welfare.
  • Serve grantees funded by PCCD to implement Evidence-Based

Programs.

  • Annual Survey of Evidence Based Programs (ASEP) began in 2001

as a research project of the Prevention Research Center with these grantees.

  • Extending work done by Tibbits, Bumbarger, Rhodes-Cooper, and
  • ther colleagues on sustainability in Pennsylvania through the ASEP.
slide-3
SLIDE 3

Project description

  • Conducted phone interviews with between 2012 and 2013

with 50 Grantees (31 two-year, 19 four-year) previously funded by PCCD the quarter following their grant funding ending.

  • Asked qualitative and quantitative questions related to

program sustainability.

  • Interested primarily in HOW the program was sustaining

rather than WHETHER it was continuing.

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Sample

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 BBBS SFP 10-14 IYS PATHS ART MTFC LST OBPP

Participating Programs

4 year 2 year

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Program continuation

4% 6% 43% 35% 12%

Closed Unclear Reduced Same Higher

  • 90% of grantees

indicated that their programs would continue at some level.

  • 47% of grantees

indicated no reduction in services.

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Program Reductions

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

# of Participants # of Staff # of components

  • ffered

fidelity or

  • utcome

monitoring supervision participation incentives

Child Tx (N=5) School (N=13) Mentoring (N=14) Family Rx (N=18)

The most common reductions to the program were participant slots, staffing, and components available

slide-7
SLIDE 7

FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Current Funding

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Turned over program PCCD grants Non-Grant sources Donations/Grants

4-Year 2-year

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Government funding sources

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

School-based (N=18) Mentoring (N=14) Child Intervention (N=5) Family Prevention (N=13)

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Other funding sources

5 10 15 20 School-based Mentoring Child Intervention Family Prevention

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Going back to the same funder…

16% 74% 10%

Continuation Expansion Other Program

  • Nineteen respondents

(38% of grantees) interviewed had another grant funded through PCCD

  • The majority of

grantees received grants for expansions either in population type or location

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Turned over program

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 4 year 2 year

26% of grantees indicated turning program over to partner upon completion of grant.

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Interesting findings…

  • Financial sustainability looks different depending on

program type (consistent with Schierer, 2013).

  • Longer grant times my assist programs with embedding

into existing infrastructures.

  • It is possible to turn over non school-based programs to

community partners!

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Interesting findings…

  • Programs that have been turned over to a partner are

difficult to track. They are no longer overseen by a single body (especially in the case of schools) making it very hard to measure sustainability.

  • While programs are funded through the same funder for

expansion, they often “borrow” staff to for continuation of the same program.

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Where do we go from here?

  • Continued tracking of these programs through the Annual

Survey of Evidence-based Programs.

  • Figure out systematic ways to follow up with “turnover”

grantees.

  • Thoughts???
slide-16
SLIDE 16

What is Sustainability?

  • Self-Sufficiency
  • Institutionalization
  • Routinization
  • Continuation
  • Maintenance
  • Endurance
  • Embedding
slide-17
SLIDE 17

THANK YOU!

The EPISCenter represents a collaborative partnership between the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD), and the Prevention Research Center, College of Health and Human Development, Penn State University. The EPISCenter is funded by PCCD and the Department of Public Welfare. This resource was developed by the EPISCenter through PCCD grant VP-ST-24368.

206 Towers Building, University Park, PA 16802 Phone : (814) 863-2568 w Email: EPISCenter@psu.edu www.EPISCenter.org /EPISCenterPSU @EPIS_Center