Comprehensive Reporting of Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention Programs

Cole, Russell

doi:10.2105/ajph.2016.303332

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Each study is another critical piece of evidence adding to the body of evidence to be considered when making decisions about which programs to implement where. See the editorial by Cole,14 in this issue, for discussion of the importance of nonsignificant impact findings.…”

Section: Cultural Shift Needed In Reporting and Publication Biasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program (2010-2015): Synthesis of Impact Findings

Farb

Margolis

2016

Am J Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Cultural Shift Needed In Reporting and Publication Biasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program (2010-2015): Synthesis of Impact Findings

Farb

Margolis

2016

Am J Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…One surprising finding was that most of the Cohort 1 evaluations showed small, nonsignificant impacts on behavioral outcomes (Cole, 2016;Goesling, 2016). One might have assumed that with the ETA support and because grantees were attempting to replicate interventions that had previously shown to be effective, or were testing potentially promising interventions, that many evaluations would show favorable and statistically significant program impacts.…”

Section: Challenges and Lessons Learned From Providing Etamentioning

confidence: 99%

Teen Pregnancy Prevention Evaluation Technical Assistance: A Case Study

Knab

Cole

2020

Eval Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This case study discusses Mathematica’s experience providing large-scale evaluation technical assistance (ETA) to 65 grantees across two cohorts of Teen Pregnancy Prevention (TPP) Program grants. The grantees were required to conduct rigorous evaluations with specific evaluation benchmarks. This case study provides an overview of the TPP grant program, the evaluation requirements, the ETA provider, and other key stakeholders and the ETA provided to the grantees. Finally, it discusses the successes, challenges, and lessons learned from the effort. Conclusion: One important lesson learned is that there are two related evaluation features, strong counterfactuals and insufficient target sample sizes, that funders should attend to prior to selecting awardees because they are not easy to change through ETA. In addition, if focused on particular outcomes (for TPP, the goal was to improve sexual behavior outcomes), the funder should prioritize studies with an opportunity to observe differences in these outcomes across conditions; several TPP grantees served young populations, and sexual behavior outcomes were not observed or were rare, limiting the opportunity to observe impacts. Unless funders are attentive to weaning out evaluations with critical limitations during the funding process, requiring grantees to conduct impact evaluations supported by ETA might unintentionally foster internally valid, yet underpowered studies that show nonsignificant program impacts. The TPP funder was able to overcome some of the limitations of the grantee evaluations by funding additional evidence-building activities, including federally led evaluations and a large meta-analysis of the effort, as part of a broader learning agenda.

show abstract