An introduction to the Safe Schools/Healthy Students Initiative
The Safe Schools/Healthy Students (SS/HS) Initiative offers a unique opportunity to conduct large-scale, multisite, multilevel program evaluation in the context of a federal environment that places many requirements and constraints on how the grants are conducted and managed. Federal programs stress performance-based outcomes, valid and reliable data, addressing important problems, ensuring efficiency and fiscal responsibility, reducing burden on federal staff and grantees, and developing and disseminating useful solutions and recommendations. MANILA Consulting Group, Inc., (MANILA), in partnership with Battelle Centers for Public Health Research and Evaluation (Battelle) and RMC Research Corporation (RMC), has been conducting the SS/HS national cross-site evaluation, which involves the coordinated efforts of federal Project Officers, local education agencies, technical assistance providers, communication specialists, and national and local evaluators across a diverse set of socioeconomic and cultural contexts. To date, the national cross-site evaluation has provided data indicating that the SS/HS Initiative is, in fact, meeting these goals. Findings revealed that fewer students reported they had experienced violence and fewer students reported they had witnessed violence. Fully 96 percent of school staff said SS/HS had improved school safety. There was a 263 percent increase in the number of students who received school-based mental health services and a 519 percent increase in those receiving community-based mental health services. In addition, more than 80 percent of school staff reported that they saw reductions in alcohol and other drug use among their students. These encouraging results stress the need for ongoing coordination at all levels of the Initiative to continue to ensure safer schools and healthier students. This article provides an overview of the initiative and introduces four articles in this special issue.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 35 (2012)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:35:y:2012:i:2:p:269-272. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.