In the summer of 1996, the Minnesota D.A.R.E. Advisory Council invited the Minnesota Institute of Public Health to conduct an evaluation to better understand the D.A.R.E. Program as it operates in Minnesota. D.A.R.E. is the most widely used prevention curriculum in the country and is currently in use in more than 80 percent of Minnesota school districts. It was not the intent of this evaluation to measure outcomes of the program in terms of student use of alcohol, tobacco or other drugs. Rather, the focus of this evaluation was to better understand how and why the D.A.R.E. Program impacts participating youth and others in the communities implementing D.A.R.E.
The evaluation was directed by Tom Griffin from the MIPH and conducted by a team of evaluators and prevention professionals, including Anu Sharma, Search Institute, Jean King and Ken Winters from The University of Minnesota, and Becky Sechrist. Case studies conducted in the study were coordinated by Roger Svendsen, Jean Funk and Jerry Jaker.
A variety of data collection strategies was used in order to complete this evaluation. Using multiple approaches increases the likelihood that the limitations of any single strategy will be offset by strengths of other techniques.
Findings from the interviews and surveys affirmed D.A.R.E.’s remarkable popularity and support in communities throughout the state. The evaluation discovered that the positive reactions to D.A.R.E. are not grounded in people’s belief that D.A.R.E. is effective in preventing alcohol tobacco and other drug use. Rather, support is based on the belief that the program’s impact can be seen in improved student perceptions of police, better police understanding of students and improved relationships between police and the community. An example of the depth of support for D.A.R.E. is that 88 percent of the survey respondents agreed with the statement, “Even if there is no scientific evidence that D.A.R.E. works, I would still support it.”
This edition of Impact! includes the Executive Summary of the study. The full report released this summer, reflects findings from an extensive literature review, a survey of 290 persons in communities using D.A.R.E., and interviews and focus groups with 405 persons knowledgeable about D.A.R.E.
Key Findings from Literature Review
1. Recent prevention strategies showing the most promise of demonstrating effectiveness focus on change at multiple levels, including the family, social groups, local communities and broader society.
2. The expected impact of any single prevention pro-gram is likely to be limited and difficult to isolate.
3. The potential of classroom-based prevention, in isolation from other prevention approaches, has been consistently demonstrated to have limited impact on student alcohol and other drug use.
4. School classroom prevention programs have been found to be most effective if they are based on the social influences model for primary prevention.
5. There are a number of methodological factors that have been noted in the research on the effectiveness of D.A.R.E. including:
6. The majority of D.A.R.E. evaluation studies report minimal effects on the objective of preventing the onset or continued use of alcohol or other drugs.
7. Some studies report a positive impact on refusal skills.
8. Most studies report no effect on self-esteem.
9. Some studies report improved relationships between police and students.
10. Some studies report that the symbolic value of police and school working together is a powerful affirmation of traditional values and an important aspect of the program.
Key Findings in Minnesota
1. The vast majority of persons surveyed and interviewed express generally positive feelings about D.A.R.E.
2. The vast majority of respondents believe that D.A.R.E. must be integrated into a more comprehensive set of prevention strategies implemented over time in order to be effective.
3. The most frequently reported benefit of D.A.R.E. is an improved relationship between police and students.
4. An important benefit of D.A.R.E. is the symbolic power of the police coming into the classroom and working cooperatively with teachers to address an important social problem.
5. There are mixed perspectives on the effectiveness of D.A.R.E. in meeting its objective of preventing alcohol and other drug use.
6. A large number of D.A.R.E. graduates recall D.A.R.E. positively and remember specific peer resistance skills taught in the program, but also report not using these skills in real life circumstances.
7. There is general concern that the preventive effects of D.A.R.E. are not long lasting.
8. The most common concern expressed by school staff and community members was the belief that there is not sufficient reinforcement of prevention messages in the school and community.
9. The D.A.R.E. graduation is often noted as a key positive aspect of D.A.R.E.
10. Some parents interviewed believe that participation in D.A.R.E. gives important information to their children and gives them an opportunity to talk with their children about alcohol and other drug use.
11. Law enforcement officials are generally supportive of D.A.R.E., but concurrently raise concerns about its staffing, role and impact.
12. D.A.R.E. training is believed to be effective.
13. The most critical responses about D.A.R.E. were made by chemical health specialists and teachers who report that D.A.R.E. is not flexible, not well integrated with other prevention efforts in the school/district, or minimizes the contribution of other prevention programs.
14. Some parents, community members and professional staff express serious concerns about specific aspects of D.A.R.E.
15. D.A.R.E.’s ability to pro-mote and market is nearly universally acknowledged as effective in creating recognition of D.A.R.E.
16. It is widely believed that it is difficult to evaluate the impact of D.A.R.E.
Recommendations
1. Restate the goals of the program to more accurately reflect the perceived and documented benefits of improved relationships between police and students, as well as the relationships between police and the broader community.
2. Capitalize on the positive community perceptions of D.A.R.E. to support other prevention efforts in the school and community, especially reinforcing strategies used with older students.
3. Increase cooperative planning and program implementation efforts with school and community staff responsible for other prevention programming in the school and community.
4. Expand parent involvement in D.A.R.E.
5. Assist schools and community groups to apply D.A.R.E. marketing and outreach success lessons to their K-12/Community Prevention efforts.
6. Consider and incorporate a less cumbersome process to adapt the curriculum and instructional strategies.
7. Regularly update role-plays used in resistance skills lessons to increase their relevance to students.
The full D.A.R.E. report is available from Judy Drews, Office of the Attorney General, at 612-297-3495. For additional information about the evaluation contact Tom Griffin, director of the evaluation for the MIPH at 612-427-5310 or tgriffin@miph.org.