ONDCP Seal



Prevention
   Programs
   Strategies
   Research
   Principles
   Publications
   Resources

Student Drug Testing

Drug-Free Workplace

Drugs & Sports

Drug Prevention News Wire

Community Prevention Listserv

 Skip NavigationPolicyONDCP Mast
Search Contact Podcast Mobile Web Blog ONDCP Mast
ONDCP Web Site About ONDCP News and Public Affairs Policy Drug Facts Publications Related Links
Prevention Treatment Science and Technology Enforcement State and Local International Funding
Start of Main Content
Program Findings Sheet

SMART Leaders (SL)

The Pennsylvania State University

SMART Leaders Participants Show Less Favorable Attitude Towards Marijuana Use

Location
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania; Fort Lauderdale, Florida; Jamestown, New York; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; and North Little Rock, Arkansas

Program sites
Five Boys Clubs in large cities, small towns, and intermediate-sized cities. Three clubs are located in or adjacent to public housing projects.

Target group
High-risk Boys Club members between the ages of 13 and 17. Participants included African-American, White, and Hispanic boys and girls.

Over 27 months, five Boys Clubs offered the 1-year Start SMART program followed by 2 years of the SMART Leaders booster program (Stay SMART + SMART Leaders group); five clubs offered only the 1-year Stay SMART program without the 2-year booster program (Stay SMART Only group); and four clubs offered no prevention program (Control group).

Program objectives

  • Develop, implement, and evaluate a 2-year booster program.

  • Promote less favorable attitudes toward substance use and delay the onset of substance use.

  • Promote less favorable attitudes toward adolescent sexual activity and decrease sexual activity.

  • Increase knowledge about the prevalence and consequences of substance use and early sexual activity.

  • Improve social skills, including peer resistance skills.
Findings
Findings are based on outcome data for Cohort 1 youth who participated in four testing occasions over the 27 months of the program in three groups of Boys Clubs: 54 youth in Stay SMART + SMART Leaders group; 52 youth in the Stay SMART Only group; and 55 youth in the no-program Control group.
  • At both the 15-month and the 27-month posttests, only youth in the Stay SMART + SMART Leaders group showed significantly less approval of alcohol and marijuana use (p < .05), and significantly lower marijuana-related behavior (p < .05) than the Control group.

  • Both the Stay SMART + SMART Leaders group and the Stay SMART Only group showed significantly less cigarette-related behavior, overall drug-related behavior, and greater knowledge concerning alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drug use than the Control group (ps < .05). Both the Stay SMART + SMART Leaders and the Stay SMART Only groups also reported less alcohol-related behavior, more negative attitudes toward adolescent sexual activity, and lower levels of recent sexual activity than the Control group over the 27-month period.

  • For alcohol-, cigarette-, and overall drug-related behavior, only the Stay SMART + SMART Leaders group showed more marginally significant or significant positive effects than the Stay SMART Only group and the Control group at the 27-month posttest, suggesting that a pattern of booster program effects may just have been emerging 2 years after the initial Stay SMART program.
Evaluation design
  • A pretest-posttest nonequivalent groups design, with multiple posttests, was used.

  • All groups were pretested prior to initiation of the Stay SMART program in the two program groups; all groups were posttested at 3, 15, and 27 months after the pretest.
Program interventions
  • The SMART Leaders booster program is a 2-year sequential program designed to reinforce skills and knowledge learned in the Stay SMART program. SMART Leaders consists of five 1-1/2 hour sessions in year 1 and three sessions in year 2.

  • The curriculum-based program uses role-playing, group activities, and discussion to promote social skills, including peer resistance skills, problem-solving and decision-making skills, conservative group norms regarding substance use and early sexual activity, and knowledge of the consequences and prevalence of substance use and teen sexual activity.

SMART Leaders (SL)

Program Description

This 3-year CSAP project (Grant #903) implemented and evaluated the SMART Leaders program, a 2-year sequential booster program to the Stay SMART drug prevention program developed by Boys & Girls Clubs of America. SMART Leaders, a 2-year peer leader program, reinforced the skills and knowledge youth learned in Stay SMART, a small group prevention program for 13- to 15-year-old youth. Stay SMART is one component of SMART Moves, the National Prevention Program of Boys & Girls Clubs of America.

Over 27 months, five Boys & Girls Clubs offered the Stay SMART program followed by the 2-year SMART Leaders booster program; five Boys & Girls Clubs offered only the Stay SMART program (Stay SMART Only group); and four Boys & Girls Clubs served as a no-program control group (Control group). Boys & Girls Clubs were located in the East, South, Midwest, and West and were matched on the basis of the intervention participants’ demographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Participants were racially diverse and included White, African-American, and Hispanic boys and girls who were approximately 13 years of age at pretest.

Stay SMART (12 sessions; 1-1/2 hours) and SMART Leaders (5 sessions; 1-1/2 hours) are curriculum-based programs that use role-playing, group activities, and discussion to promote social skills, including peer resistance skills, problem-solving and decision-making skills, conservative group norms regarding substance use, and knowledge of the health consequences and prevalence of alcohol, tobacco, and drug use by youth and adults. To progress from Stay SMART to the first and second years of the SMART Leaders booster program, youth were required to participate in 75% of the sessions of each program. The first year of SMART Leaders consisted of sessions on topics including improving self-image, coping with stress, resisting media pressures, and being assertive in pressure situations. The second year of SMART Leaders included several educational/discussion modules on alcohol, tobacco, or illicit drugs. After each year’s small-group sessions, SMART Leaders youth participated in activities such as recruiting other youth for Stay SMART, assisting with prevention program sessions offered to younger Boys & Girls Club members, helping with club activities and events, and/or fundraising. Prevention programs were facilitated by Boys & Girls Club staff members.

The outcome evaluation design tested the effectiveness of the SMART Leaders group (n=54) relative to the Stay SMART Only group (n=52) and the no-program Control group (n=55). Project youth were pretested using a self-report questionnaire prior to initiation of the Stay SMART program and were posttested at 3, 15, and 27 months. Only youth who met the attendance criteria and participated in all four testing occasions were included in the data analysis.

The primary method of data analysis was through Repeated Measures Analysis of Covariance, with condition (SMART Leaders, Stay SMART Only, Control) as the independent variable, scores for the three posttests (at 3, 15, and 27 months) as the levels of the repeated measures factor (i.e., the dependent variable), and the pretest score, gender, age, and race/ethnicity as the covariates.

Results from the self-report questionnaire showed the overall effectiveness of the Stay SMART prevention program, and more particularly the effectiveness of the SMART Leaders booster program, in maintaining and furthering the gains made in the initial Stay SMART program.

SMART Leaders and Stay SMART effects relative to Control group

  • Overall drug use. Across the 27 months, both the SMART Leaders group and the Stay SMART Only group reported significantly less drug-related behavior than the Control group (both ps<.05). (Significant effect of condition, F[2, 122]=3.74, p<.05)

  • Marijuana behavior. Youth in the Control group showed the most marijuana-related behavior of the three groups combining across the three posttests. Both the SMART Leaders group and the Stay SMART Only group showed less marijuana-related behavior than the control group across the 27 months (p<.05 and p<.06, respectively). (Significant effect of condition, F[2, 148]=3.34, p<.05)

  • Alcohol behavior. Combining across posttests, youth in the Stay SMART Only group reported less alcohol- related behavior than the Control group youth (p<.06). A similar, marginally significant effect was found for the SMART Leaders group relative to the Control group (p<.08). (Marginally significant effect of condition, F[2, 137]=2.31, p<.11)

  • Cigarette behavior. Respondents in both the SMART Leaders group and the Stay SMART Only group showed significantly less cigarette-related behavior than those in the Control group (p<.05). Marginally fewer youth in the SMART Leaders group reported recent cigarette use (in the last year) at the 27-month posttest, relative to the Stay SMART Only group (b=.86, p<.12) and the Control group (b=.96, p<.08). (Condition effect approached significance, F[2, 149]=2.16, p<.12)

  • Drug knowledge. Combining across the three posttests, both the SMART Leaders group and the Stay SMART Only group demonstrated significantly more knowledge concerning alcohol, tobacco, and drug use than did the Control group (p<.05 and p<.001, respectively). (Significant effect of condition, F[2, 107]=6.13, p<.005)
SMART Leaders effects relative to Control
  • Marijuana attitudes. The SMART Leaders group diverged from the Stay SMART Only group and the Control group. After each of the booster programs (15- and 27-month posttests), the SMART Leaders group perceived significantly fewer social benefits from smoking marijuana than did youth in the Control group (p<.01 and p<.05, for the 15- and 27-month posttests, respectively) and youth in the Stay SMART Only group (p<.05 and p<.10, respectively). (Condition 5 Time, F[4, 270]=3.78, p<.01)

  • Alcohol attitudes. Over time, the SMART Leaders group came to perceive fewer social benefits from drinking alcoholic beverages, while the Stay SMART Only and the Control group came to perceive more social benefits from drinking. At the 15- and 27-month posttests (after each of the booster programs), youth in the SMART Leaders group perceived significantly fewer social benefits from drinking alcohol than did youth in the Control group (p<.05 and p<.01, respectively). There also was a tendency for the SMART Leaders youth to differ from youth in the Stay SMART Only group at the 15- and 27-month posttests (p<.11 and p<.12, respectively). (Marginally significant Condition 5 Time interaction, F[4, 278]=2.17, p<.10)


Previous | Table of Contents | Next






Last Updated: March 4, 2002