In-Depth Interview Master Topic Guide

INSTRUMENT 2

IN-DEPTH INTERVIEW MASTER TOPIC GUIDE

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information collection is 0990-xxxx. The time required to complete this information collection is estimated to average 90 minutes per response, including the time to review instructions, search existing data resources, gather the data needed, and complete and review the information collection. If you have comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or suggestions for improving this form, please write to: U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, OS/OCIO/PRA, 200 Independence Ave., S.W., Suite 336-E, Washington D.C. 20201, Attention: PRA Reports Clearance Officer

SUSTAINABILITY STUDY OF TEEN PREGNANCY PREVENTION PROGRAMS

IN-DEPTH INTERVIEW MASTER TOPIC GUIDE

The Sustainability Study of Teen Pregnancy Prevention Programs will gather detailed information from grantees on (1) whether the program was sustained after the first round of grant funding (2) the programmatic, organizational, and contextual factors affected program sustainability, (3) what methods and strategies were used to sustain the program(s) and (4) the main lessons learned in planning for and sustaining the program(s). Researchers will gather this information through review of grantee documents, the Grantee survey, and two rounds of 90-minute telephone interviews with key respondents such as the program director and/or other staff involved in sustainability planning for a set of selected grantees.

The Master Topic Guide provides a list of topics to be covered in the key respondent telephone interviews. The topics may be tailored to each grantee based on their status (i.e. sustained or not sustained), and their funding stream. Some of the topics listed in this Topic Guide will only be covered in Round 1 of the interviews to clarify or confirm responses from the Grantee survey or information collected during the document review.

Identifying Information [to be completed by Interviewer]:

Grantee Organization Name
Program(s) Funded in 2010
Curriculum Used
Respondent Name
Respondent Phone Number
Date and Time of Call
Interviewer Name
Other Comments

A. Grantee Organization – Rounds 1 and 2, unless otherwise indicated

• Mission of the organization (Round 1)

• Geographic locations, and any expansion or changes since grant period ended

• History of teen pregnancy prevention programs implemented by agency (Round 1)

• Other types of programs and services delivered by agency (Round 1)

• Organizational structure and changes since grant period ended

• Partnerships to support program implementation [confirm based on survey] and any changes since grant period ended

• Funding sources [confirm based on survey] and any changes since grant period ended

• Changes in past and current operating budget (as a result of OAH/CDC grant funds)

• If not implementing agency, relationship with implementing agency or agencies (Round 1)

• Description of implementing agency or agencies (number, type, setting, location, goals, etc)

B. Funded Program(s) – Round 1, unless otherwise indicated

• Names of OAH or CDC-funded program(s)

• Current status of program(s) – Rounds 1 and 2

• Goals of funded program(s) and fit with grantee (and/or implementing agency) mission

• Type of program (evidence-based, new program or service, adaptation)

• Program implementation

• Curriculum name

• Program length

• Number of staff, staff training, supervision, and professional development opportunities

• Sites and setting

• Formal or informal adaptations

• Enrollment, dosage, and retention

• Challenges to program participation

• Overall challenges and successes

• Perceived quality of implementation

• Frontline and administrative staff receptiveness at the start, during, and at the end of programming

• Youth receptiveness to the program

• Program costs (start-up, operations, other expenses)

• Differences in expected and actual costs

• Relationship with, access to, support provided by program developer

• Training on program

• Implementation readiness of program

• Champions of program(s) at grantee organization, implementing agency and/or in community

• Efforts to replicate program(s) (Rounds 1 and 2)

• Outcome of program evaluation (Rounds 1 and 2)

C. Sustainability Planning – Rounds 1 and 2, unless otherwise indicated

• Grantees’ definition and goals for sustainability

• Steps taken during grant period to sustain funded teen pregnancy prevention program(s) (Round 1)

• Steps taken after grant period to sustain funded program(s)

• Requirements of funding program and funders

• Timing of planning for sustainability

• Changes made to funded program(s)’ model, structure, or other aspects for the purpose of sustaining it

• Types of technical assistance received for planning for sustainability

• Which TA was most useful and why; what was not useful and why

• Recommendations for future grantees and funding efforts

• Sources of technical assistance

• Sufficiency of funds from grant to deliver program

• Percentage of program costs (start-up, implementation, evaluation, other) that came from grant

• Funding sources in addition to OAH grant

• Efforts to apply for additional funding

• For programs that were not sustained or that are being delivered by a different organization:

• Reasons for not sustaining program at the same organization

• Factors that affected the decision to not sustain program

• For programs that were sustained:

• Specific strategies that were successful

• Factors that affected grantee’s ability to sustain the program

• Challenges in planning for sustainability

E. Environmental Context for Grantee and/or Implementing Agency – Rounds 1 and 2, unless otherwise indicated

• Political climate and changes since grant period ended

• State laws and requirements and changes since grant period ended

• Engagement with community leaders and stakeholders and changes since grant period ended

• Community receptiveness at the start, during, and at the end of programming

• Historical presence and integration of grantee and program into local community

• Buy-in from key partners and target population, and changes since grant period ended

• Other funding sources in community and any changes after grant period ended

• Other TPP programs or services in community and any changes after grant period ended

F. Lessons Learned for Future Efforts [if not covered in earlier sections] – Rounds 1 and 2, unless otherwise indicated

• Strategies that were key in sustaining programs that remained active (short and long term)

• Perceived organizational, programmatic and environmental factors that played a role in whether or not a program was sustained (short and long-term)

• Main challenges for grantees who were not successful in sustaining funded programs

• Impact of evaluation on sustainability decisions (if applicable)

• Types and timing of support and technical assistance that is critical in ensuring success in the short and long-term

• Recommendations for funding agencies from grantees