Evaluation design for a community prevention trial. An environmental approach to reduce alcohol-involved trauma

The Community Prevention Trial was 5-year effort to reduce alcohol-involved injuries and death through a comprehensive program of community awareness and policy activities. The three experimental communities were of approximately 100,000 population each (one in Northern California, one in Southern California, and one in South Carolina). Matched comparison communities were used for each experimental community. This article describes the evaluation approach used in a program that sought to change environmental factors not a specific population or target group. This approach demanded unique evaluation approaches for determining overall community aggregate effects, that is, distal outcomes, as well as changes in key mediating variables, that is, process effects. The problem of trending and lagged effects of community prevention programs are discussed.     

Summing up. Recommendations and experiences for evaluation of community-level prevention programs

This article provides recommendations and observations about evaluation of a locally based prevention project to reduce problems at a total community or aggregate level. The shift from targeting specific individuals or subpopulations to the overall structure and environment of a community is most demanding. Evaluation tools and analysis techniques have lagged behind program development because community-level interventions are not linked to a specific target group who can be separately studied. Thus assumptions about using random assignment and/or comparison communities as means to control for confounding variables are weakened when the unit of analysis is the community itself and dependent measures are subject to trending and the effects of history.     

Net worth and the economic diversity of the elderly

Using data from the 1984 panel of the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), this article examines characteristics of the older population disaggregated by net-worth quintiles. The authors argue that income is not a sufficient measure of economic status for current policy discussions on issues such as changing Medicare co-payments, increasing the taxation of social security benefits, or means-testing under Medicaid. Net worth is a better measure of economic status, particularly for the elderly, because it represents the net value of assets accumulated over the life course. Their results indicate that there is considerable diversity in the economic status of the older population, which is masked by aggregate statistics (such as means and medians) typically used to summarize the economic status of population groups. Stereotypical views of the elderly based on such aggregates result in misdirected policy formulation. In the future, policymakers will need to formulate policies and programs using information on the distributions of income and assets among the older populations rather than relying on statistical aggregates.     

The NTEE classification system: tests of reliability/validity in the field of higher education

An analysis of the field of higher education reveals a surprisingly large number of classification errors within the (US) National Taxonomy of Exempt Entities database. Of the nearly 4,000 non-profit entities coded within the universe of institutions of higher education, we estimate that approximately 60 per cent were incorrectly included (Type II errors). Institutions incorrectly excluded from the higher education universe (Type I errors) represent roughly 10 per cent of the institutions coded correctly. These errors result primarily from assigning codes on the basis of the names of organisations (for example, College Park Towers is classified as a college, when it is in fact a housing complex for senior citizens) and from trying too hard to assign codes in ambiguous situations. The consequences can be significant for the users of these data, and we recommend raising bright warning flags while simultaneously enlisting the help of the entire non-profit sector in improving the classification coding process.The authors are with The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. In addition to our colleagues on the staff of the Foundation, we wish to thank Helmut Anheier, Ted Bozovich, Harvey Dale, Virginia Hodgkinson, Stephen Noga and Christopher Toppe for helpful suggestions.     

How well is debt managed by nonprofits?

Little is known about why nonprofits accrue debt, how much they owe, and whether the funds they borrow are used productively. This article distinguishes between productive, problematic, and deferred debt. Employing a data base representative of 114,726 tax-filing charitable nonprofits in the United States in 1986, it examines the pervasiveness of nonprofit debt and the relation between this debt and nonprofit financial health. The analysis finds that over 70 percent of the nonprofits hold debt, the distribution of this debt is highly concentrated, and the level of debt and leverage varies with asset size and type of activity. Nonprofits with higher leverage and absolute debt levels are financially healthier than those with lower levels. While the analysis does not determine whether financially stronger nonprofits are better able to borrow, the results support the view that borrowing in the nonprofit sector is economically efficient.     

The minds of a medical director

This article is offered in a nod to all those readers who have been exposed to "whole brain" theory, either through the American College of Physician Executives or elsewhere. As managers struggle with balancing the "left brain" and "right brain" aspects of their work, the author says, they might consider exploiting a third area of activity, or inactivity--the "no brain." This center position can be especially effective in dealing with the high-technology aspects of delivering health care.     

Human genetic technology: who shall control?

The biotechnical "revolution" has fast come upon us. It promises to produce both substantial benefits and difficult dilemmas for individuals and society. Despite the growing attention being paid to biotechnology, a major unanswered question is who shall control the development and use of the powerful array of human genetic and reproductive innovations. Should the decisions be left to individual consumers and private industry or should they be made by the government or other social institutions? After briefly reviewing development in human genetics and reproduction and describing trends toward commercialization of them, this article discusses the dilemmas these trends raise for a democratic society. It argues for the urgent need to delineate societal goals and priorities for the future and for technology assessment as early as possible in the developmental process. The article concludes by presenting some examples of the social policy problems now emerging.