- Consider the Evidence
-
State and local agencies make informed decisions by taking into account contextual evidence, experiential evidence and the best available research evidence:
- Contextual evidence addresses whether a strategy is useful, feasible to implement, and accepted by a particular community.
- Experiential evidence uses professional insight, understanding, skill, and expertise that is accumulated over time.
- Research evidence enables practitioners to determine whether a prevention policy, practice or program achieves the outcomes it aims to and in the way it intends.
Look for Understanding Evidence in Resources.
CDC’s Resources for Action present information indicating that these strategies and approaches are effective, based on impacts on violence outcomes or risk and protective factors for violence. Contextual and experiential evidence are also important to consider when selecting strategies and approaches.
See how Salinas, CA, brought together public health and an existing community coalition to develop a framework for selecting and implementing youth violence prevention strategies.
Strategies & Approaches: Selecting a Mix Where You Can Make a Difference
Strategies & Approaches
Selecting a Mix Where You Can Make a Difference
BEST FIT
PROGRAMS, POLICIES, OR PRACTICES
Relevant?
Appropriate?
Effective?
Accordion:
- Select a Mix of Strategies that Address Priority Risk and Protective Factors
-
The strategies you select should be aligned with the data in your community. Think about which factors may put your target population or community at greater risk for violence. What factors may protect or buffer this risk? In the planning phase, your group prioritized risk and protective factors to address first. Selecting strategies that target these factors is key to producing real and lasting change.
Many strategies presented in CDC’s Resources for Action address multiple forms of violence:
Strategy Child Abuse and Neglect Intimate Partner Violence Sexual Violence Suicide Youth Violence Strengthen economic supports Promote social norms that protect against violence Create protective environments Provide quality care and education early in life Teach skills Engage influential adults and peers Lessen harms Consider these questions when selecting strategies:
- How will this strategy directly address or impact one or more of the priority factors for violence?
- How do these strategies align with others you have in place? Does this strategy enhance or reinforce existing activities? Does this strategy build on community assets and strengths?
- Which strategies does the community strongly support? Is it culturally relevant for this population? Is this strategy appropriate for our community?
See strategy selection criteria for Los Angeles County.
For additional questions to guide your selection of strategies, approaches, and programs/practices and policies go to:Example Action Step
A planning group working on suicide prevention prioritized three risk and protective factors associated with violence that span the societal, community, and individual levels of the social-ecological model. After discussing the questions for selecting strategies, the group identified three strategies within the Resource for Action to address the factors.
Prioritized Factors
- Skills in solving problems with peers and handling academic and other pressures (individual level)
- High rates of unemployment and economic instability (community level)
- Access to mental health and substance abuse services particularly in rural areas (society level)
Strategies
- Teach Coping and Problem Solving Skills
- Strengthen economic supports
- Strengthen Access and Delivery of Suicide Care
- Identify a Set of Approaches that Work Together to Advance the Selected Strategies
-
It is important to identify a set of approaches that can work together in order to have a population-level impact on violence, since any approach in isolation only goes so far. Work with other sectors to help ensure that the approaches are addressing risk and protective factors across the social-ecological model—society, community, relationship and individual. The approaches you identify should fit with your setting and agency characteristics.
Consider these questions when identifying a set of approaches:
- What evidence suggests this approach is likely to produce desired outcomes?
- Get input from the community affected. Tailoring policies, practices and programs may be necessary to address diverse groups.
- Look for information about Health Impact Assessments in Selection Resources.
- Get input from the community affected. Tailoring policies, practices and programs may be necessary to address diverse groups.
- Are you, the community, and your partners able to implement and sustain this approach along with the others you are considering?
- What underlying contextual factors could affect the results? What barriers might arise and how might you overcome them?
See how Boston used planning data to select specific youth violence prevention projects. See the approaches Louisville used in the Shawnee neighborhood.
For more on the approaches described in the Resources for Action, look for:Example Action Step
After discussing the questions for identifying a set of approaches, the planning group reviewed the approaches within the three strategies. They identified five approaches to advance the three selected strategies. The group prioritized approaches that addressed different levels of the social ecological model and focused on prioritized risk and protective factors. The group also included actions that were feasible within in the immediate future and actions that required more sector involvement.
Prioritized Factors
- Skills in solving problems with peers and handling academic and other pressures (individual level)
- High rates of unemployment and economic instability (community level)
- Access to mental health and substance abuse services particularly in rural areas (society level)
Strategies
- Teach coping and problem solving skills
- Strengthen economic supports
- Strengthen access and delivery of suicide care
Approaches
- Social-emotional learning programs AND Parenting skill and family relationship programs
- Strengthen household financial security AND Housing stabilization policies
- Reduce provider shortages in underserved areas
- What evidence suggests this approach is likely to produce desired outcomes?
- Choose the Policies, Practices and Programs that Support the Identified Approaches
-
As a practitioner, you may be in the best position to work with community members on the best combination of policies, practices, and programs. These should be based on the best available evidence.
Consider these questions when choosing policies, practices, and programs:
- What evidence suggests that this policy, practice, or program is effective and likely to advance one or more of the approaches and strategies you identified?
- Is this policy, practice, or program relevant and a good fit for your community and context? Adapting policies, practices, and programs may be necessary to address diverse groups.
- Does this policy, practice, or program add to or reinforce the other approaches and strategies you identified? Think about practical considerations, such as the cost of implementation, and the structure and culture of the organizations carrying out the work.
- What are possible barriers to full implementation, enforcement and benefit for populations most affected by violence and other health inequities? Well-designed policies, practices, and programs can address the barriers or unintended consequences for populations most affected by violence and other health inequities.
For more on the policies, practices and programs described in the Resources for Action, look for:
In Selection Tools, look for:Worksheet 3. Assessing Fit for Programs and Community and Societal Approaches
For guidance on adapting policies, practices and programs,Example Action Step
After identifying the approaches, the group went through a process for selecting specific policies, practices, and programs within each approach. This included looking at the best available evidence to support potential options, talking with practitioners in the field, and considering how the various options could potentially reinforce each other. The planning group chose to implement a mix of several policies, practices, and programs to support the identified approaches.