A Word About Methodology

In order to develop an understanding of the factors that are key to coalition effectiveness, Drug Strategies reviewed the published research, including evaluation studies, and talked with leading experts in the field. This phase of the study was conducted by Dr. Zili Sloboda, Senior Research Associate, Institute of Health and Social Policy and Adjunct Research Professor, Department of Sociology, University of Akron, who has many years of experience in prevention research and evaluation. Dr. Sloboda previously served as Director of Epidemiology and Prevention Research at the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Dr. Sloboda began with a comprehensive literature review. She subsequently conducted structured telephone interviews with fifteen nationally recognized prevention experts as well as practitioners.  They were selected because of their publications, their roles within funding organizations, and because they were nominated by a number of other experts in the field. Prior to the interview, each person received a list of nine questions designed to guide the discussion with Dr. Sloboda. The primary purpose of these interviews was to develop informed new perspectives about community coalitions and what factors contribute to their success. A number of important observations emerged from these interviews which will be discussed later in the report. 

Building on Dr. Sloboda’s initial research, Drug Strategies undertook a comprehensivesurvey of anti-drug coalitions in eleven cities where the Knight Foundation’s Community Initiatives Program is concentrated.  These coalitions range from small, highly targeted efforts to large multi-agency partnerships, all with varying degrees of success.  This range is representative of coalitions nationwide. Some have limited impact while others show significant progress.

Drug Strategies developed a survey instrument to send to each coalition in advance of a structured telephone interview. The survey covered various factors, including early history, funding, staffing, evaluation efforts and program goals. In addition, important community members who were not involved directly with the coalitions, including business leaders, clergy, and city and county officials, were interviewed about their assessment of coalition impact. 

For a more detailed understanding, Drug Strategies conducted site visits of seven coalitions located in five different states.  These in-depth studies explored a wide range of issues, including: (1) variations in how coalitions are established and funded, and funding patterns over the last five years to assess their ability to become self sustaining; (2) how coalitions define their objectives, and whether these objectives can be translated into outcome indicators; (3) what process data are collected by coalitions; (4) the extent of local efforts, including partnerships with university researchers, to capture coalition impact on specific indicators; and (5) how coalitions use data to maintain public support, media interest, and financial backing.

Both the mail and telephone surveys were conducted with coalition leaders.  In addition, we talked with community leaders from business, education, law enforcement, government, faith organizations, media and social services.  For the site visits in the field, we conducted structured interviews with thirty coalition directors, staff and coalition members, attended three coalition meetings and toured the target area of the coalition as well as observing coalition activities where possible.  These extensive efforts have provided Drug Strategies with insight into the obstacles and opportunities facing community coalitions.  It also has offered useful lessons in the application of social theory to real world situations.


Introduction | Community Coalitions: A Brief History
A Word About Methodology | Recent Evaluations | A New Perspective
Elements of Effectiveness | Applying Key Elements | Future Directions
Community Anti-Drug Coalitions in Knight Communities | Sources




© Drug Strategies, 2001