Cited by 55Community Health and DevelopmentEvaluation and Performance AssessmentHealth Policy Implementation Science

Team factors that predict to sustainability indicators for community-based prevention teams

Open access
Perkins, Daniel F., Feinberg, Mark E., Greenberg, Mark T., Johnson, Lesley E., Chilenski, Sarah Meyer, Mincemoyer, Claudia C., Spoth, Richard L.·2011·Evaluation and Program Planning

Abstract

Because they often set out with a guarantee of only short-term funding, many community partnerships will face a threat to their sustainability almost as soon as the first money runs out. Research into the factors that enable some coalitions and partnerships to meet the challenge when others fail is limited. This study begins to fill this gap in our understanding by examining influences on the process of sustainability planning in the context of a collaborative partnership focused on youth development. We report on a longitudinal examination of the quality of planning and attitudes underpinning the sustainability of PROSPER community prevention teams whose members implement evidence-based programs designed to support positive youth development and reduce early substance use and other problem behaviors. The current research concentrates on a particular dimension of partnership effectiveness to establish whether perceptions about team functioning in play at 6 and 18 months predict the quality of sustainability planning at 36 and 48 months. How well teams functioned in the early stages was found to be strongly related to the quality of their later preparations for sustainability. Recruitment and integration of new team members, and the encouragement they subsequently received were also found to be key factors. The results strengthen the argument for providing technical assistance to meet the needs of those who promote prevention partnerships, and they provide longitudinal empirical data to support the hypotheses of other researchers who have similarly found a correlation between effective sustainability and early planning and support.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2010.10.003

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Studies suggest that some factors may be uniquely important for sustaining coalitions, including board/team functioning, data/evaluation resources, and planning for sustainability.

    “Studies suggest that some factors may be uniquely important for sustaining coalitions, including board/team functioning, data/evaluation resources, and planning for sustainability (56, 64, 96, 127, 145).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 42 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Goodman RM 2000 Bridging the gap in effective program implementation: From concept to application Journal of Community Psychology 28 309 321
  2. Spoth RL Redmond C Shin C Greenberg M Clare S Feinberg M 2007 Toward public health benefits from community-university partnerships: PROSPER effectiveness trail results for substance use at 1½ past baseline American Journal of Preventive Medicine

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Perkins, D. F., Feinberg, M. E., Greenberg, M. T., Johnson, L. E., Chilenski, S. M., Mincemoyer, C. C., & Spoth, R. L.
Affiliations
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
  • Iowa State University (US)
Corresponding author
Perkins, Daniel F.
Venue
Evaluation and Program Planning
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-08
Volume
34
Issue
3
Pages
283-291
ISSN
0149-7189 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2032372802
Cited by
55
References
42
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 1
FWCI
5.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Evaluation and Program Planning (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (R01AA014702, AA14702)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA013709, R01DA007029, DA013709)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Community Health and Development
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
Keywords
sustainability planning, team functioning, youth development, evidence-based programs, technical assistance, PROSPER, partnership effectiveness
MeSH terms
Adult, Community Health Services, Cooperative Behavior, Female, Humans, Leadership, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Care Team, Primary Prevention, Residence Characteristics, Statistics as Topic, Universities, Organizational Culture, Program Evaluation, Program Development, Models, Organizational, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review