Purpose

To begin a program evaluation process that will support implementation and assess the effect of a variety of truancy reduction projects. It is expected that the results of the evaluation will develop a model to identify the steps communities need to take to implement an effective truancy reduction program. The model will identify target audiences, program components that reflect best practices, and requirements for effective community collaboration that will impact this critical problem.

Background

School has traditionally been a place of learning and growing on many levels: academically, socially, and personally. The American school has been a place where each young person is considered an individual who has much to contribute and much to learn while gaining knowledge, skills, abilities, and confidence to become an active and participating member of society. For many of our Nation's young people, however, school is not such a place. Rather, it is a place where, too often, they feel unwelcome, unsafe, unsuccessful, and unchallenged. Across the country, many young people do not attend school on a regular basis. Many become truant.

Some truants make newspaper headlines for bringing a weapon to school, assaulting a teacher or fellow student, bullying or threatening their classmates, engaging in other violent behavior, or regularly disrupting the school's learning environment. Youth who are not in school and not in the labor force are at high risk of delinquency, crime, and diminished success.

In Adolescents at Risk: Prevalence and Prevention, Dryfoos (1990) identified four behaviors that interfere with adolescents' healthy development-substance use, adolescent pregnancy, juvenile delinquency, and school failure and/or dropping out. She finds that truancy is a factor associated with these behaviors. Findings from the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention's (OJJDP's) longitudinal research on the causes and correlates of delinquency reported that school failure appears more relevant as a risk factor for older respondents, i.e., males 14 to 18 years of age (Huizinga et al.). This relationship between school failure as a risk factor for delinquency should be no surprise since regular school attendance helps to ensure success in school.

Truant behavior among youth younger than 16 has been documented in OJJDP's Juvenile Court Statistics series, which focuses on delinquency cases and formally processed status offense cases (e.g., running away, truancy, ungovernability, curfew violations, and alcohol and tobacco offenses). According to the findings in Offenders in Juvenile Court, 1995, based on Juvenile Court Statistics 1995, the Nation's courts processed 5.2 petitioned status offenses for every 1,000 youth at risk of referral in 1995. The total status offense case rate was 63 percent higher in 1995 than in 1986, with the truancy case rate increasing by 65 percent during that same period. The most common status offense for youth under 16 years old was truancy at 35 percent.

Failure to adequately address the underlying needs of these youth at risk of delinquency and criminal behavior will only prolong and exacerbate risk factors in their lives. Educators, juvenile and family court judges, law enforcement and government officials, community leaders, and parents are seeking interventions, programs, and policies that will effectively mediate these problems. OJJDP, the Safe and Drug-Free Schools Program (SDFSP) in the U.S. Department of Education, and the Executive Office for Weed and Seed (EOWS), Office of Justice Programs (OJP), recognize the need to fill the void that exists in identifying what works to reduce truancy. Although numerous studies of local truancy programs have yielded a combination of qualitative and quantitative results, a national evaluation has not been conducted to provide the field with the knowledge base of effective components and strategies that result in successful truancy reduction programs. The field needs to know what works to reduce truancy in our schools. Furthermore, knowing that schools alone cannot reduce the truancy rate, definitive studies are needed of how multiagency, collaborative demonstration programs can be successful with youth at risk of delinquency and criminal behavior.

In this program announcement for the national evaluation and in the Truancy Reduction Demonstration Program announcement, truancy is defined as being absent from school for some portion of at least 3 school days during a 5-day school week without a legitimate excuse (Huizinga and Jacob-Chien, 1998).

Goals

This evaluation, along with the project being evaluated, is the initial step in a program development process designed to result in a model collaborative truancy reduction program. The goals for this evaluation are to:

	Determine how community collaboration can impact truancy and lead to systemic reform.
	Assist OJJDP in the development of a community collaborative truancy reduction program model and identify the essential elements of that model.

Objectives

In order to accomplish OJJDP's program development purpose, the evaluation grantee will have to focus on objectives that are formative, helping each site perfect its own program; objectives that-through understanding of each site's implemented program-move OJJDP toward the definition of a collaborative truancy reduction program model; and objectives that relate to the successful implementation of the evaluation itself. The formative objectives of this evaluation are to:

	Help project sites, during the planning phase of the projects, to further identify and document the nature of the truancy problem in their communities, enhance the process of effective truancy reduction planning and collaboration, and incorporate that process in site implementation of the Truancy Reduction Demonstration Program.
	Help the program sites develop or improve their systems for collecting information in order to identify and track truant youth and document the services provided to them.
	Help the sites develop their capability to monitor and evaluate the program.
	Provide guidance and regular feedback to the sites and OJP program monitors, starting as soon as the evaluation grant is awarded, to improve program implementation and avoid identified pitfalls.

There are additional objectives that should lead directly to the development of a program model that might later be the subject of a demonstration program to be tested. These are to:

	Identify factors that contribute to or impede the successful implementation of the program.
	Measure systemic reform resulting from program implementation.

Finally, the following objectives relate to implementation of the evaluation:

	To finalize, within the first 30 days of the award of this evaluation grant, the process evaluation design submitted as part of the application and to document and analyze the planning process, particularly the development of the community collaborative and the implementation of a systemic reform process.
	To assess the feasibility in each site of conducting a study that will measure the impact of the collaborative strategy and individual program interventions on truancy and its risk factors.

Program Strategy

The first step in the program development process is to evaluate activities being undertaken by each of the seven sites participating in the Truancy Reduction Demonstration Program with support from OJJDP, SDFSP, and EOWS.

The proposed evaluation will:

	Document and analyze the process of planning, collaboration, and community mobilization occurring in the Truancy Reduction Demonstration Program sites.
	Inform program staff of performance levels on an ongoing basis.
	Identify, to the extent possible, changes in truancy rates and other short- and long-term outcomes.
	Determine the feasibility of conducting an impact study of the effectiveness of the implemented programs in achieving the goals of this multiagency Truancy Reduction Demonstration Program. Applicants should demonstrate an understanding of the Truancy Reduction Demonstration Program and associated literature. The applicant's proposed program strategy should demonstrate an understanding of the collaborative, community-based activities and systems called for in the program and the methodologies for their evaluation.

Applicants to evaluate the Truancy Reduction Demonstration Program must provide a draft process evaluation design with the application and will then be expected to provide a final design, responsive to OJJDP comments, for OJJDP review and approval within 30 days of award.

Applicants should provide a discussion of research questions they would propose for the process evaluation. Applicants should include, but are not limited to, the following issues in the evaluation:

	What needs are the projects trying to address?
	How do all aspects of each project form a coherent strategy?
	How are truants identified?
	What systems are in place to ensure an accurate count of truants, as defined in the background section?
	What collaborative ties are developed and what purpose do they serve?
	How does each project relate to larger community goals and visions?
	Do youth have opportunities to exercise responsibility for parts of the project? Are there opportunities for young people to make suggestions to improve or modify program activities? How does the program respond?
	How are youth provided with information and access to additional services and supports such as mental, physical, recreational, and cultural services?
	How does the project involve family and peers?
	How is the project sensitive to the cultural diversity of its clients? How do project activities promote cultural awareness?
	What factors influence effective implementation of a truancy reduction program? Special attention should be paid to the problems encountered in implementing the truancy reduction project in collaboration with other programs already under way within the communities.
	What changes, such as changes in attitudes among stakeholder agencies, result from implementation?
	What factors contribute to the institutionalization of a collaborative truancy reduction program within the communities?
	What planning and implementation strategies (for example, coordination, consultation, use of OJP-provided technical assistance) are used at local levels, and what is the effect of their use?

Applicants should provide for a formative approach to the evaluation. This formative approach should include working collaboratively with the sites to develop a logic model showing how project inputs, activities, and outputs are expected to accomplish their goals and objectives. Applicants should explain how they will work with the sites during the planning phase to determine appropriate roles for participants in the collaborative, clarify goals, and set up a data base. The formative aspect of this evaluation should include continual monitoring of the processes and providing feedback to project staff for corrective action.

Applicants must include a discussion of their process to assess the feasibility of conducting site-specific impact evaluations and cross-site comparisons of impact. This discussion must include an assessment of program goals, measurable impact objectives, data elements and sources for measuring impact, the need for sampling designs and strategies, and a clear statement of how the ability of the demonstration sites to support a rigorous impact evaluation will be determined. The use of the logic model to relate program activities to program outcomes should be part of this process. In addition to developing one overarching logic model, the grantee should assist each site in developing its own logic model to guide program development and measurement.

Products

A final process evaluation design will be presented for OJJDP approval within 30 days of award of the evaluation grant.

At the end of the first 12-month budget period, an interim process evaluation report will be provided. This report will document lessons learned, the collaborative process engaged in, and the evolution of the effort. This report should be presented in a publishable form to allow a Bulletin to be produced.

Eligibility Requirements

OJJDP invites applications from public and private agencies, organizations, institutions, and individuals. Private, for-profit organizations must agree to waive any profit or fee. Joint applications from two or more eligible applicants are welcome; however, one applicant must be clearly indicated as the primary applicant (for correspondence, award, and management purposes) and the others indicated as coapplicants.

Selection Criteria

Applications will be evaluated and rated by a peer review panel according to the selection criteria outlined below.

Problem(s) To Be Addressed (10 points)

Applicants must demonstrate their understanding of the nature, extent, and operational characteristics of the evaluation of multisite programs, particularly those that are community-based and involve interagency collaboration. They should also discuss methodological issues and problems associated with this type of evaluation and proposed solutions for these potential problems. Applicants must discuss how this evaluation will be focused to contribute to a program development process intended eventually to result in a collaborative program model to reduce truancy, which OJJDP could test and disseminate.

In addition, applicants should demonstrate an understanding of programs for juveniles that include schools, social service agencies, and law enforcement. This understanding should encompass rules governing the sharing of information about juveniles.

Goals and Objectives (10 points)

Applicants must define goals and objectives for this evaluation program that are clear, measurable, and attainable. The goals and objectives must contribute to the development of a community collaboration model program for truancy reduction, which could be pilot tested by OJJDP.

Project Design (35 points)

Applicants must present a clear, draft research design for the conduct of a process evaluation. They must present a strategy to assess the feasibility of impact studies in each of the sites. They must also illustrate how they will use their role as evaluator to assist the sites in improving their programs and conducting their own monitoring and evaluation in the future. The design must be sound, feasible, and capable of achieving the objectives set forth in this solicitation.

Applicants should indicate how the proposed evaluation will address multiethnic, multicultural, and gender-specific considerations. The description should convey a clear understanding of those considerations and issues.

Management and Organizational Capability (25 points)

The application should include a discussion of how the grantee will coordinate and manage this multisite evaluation to achieve the evaluation objectives. Applicants' management structure and staffing must be adequate and appropriate for the successful implementation of the project. Applicants must identify responsible individuals, their time commitment, and major tasks. Key staff should have significant experience with multisite evaluations of community-based collaborative initiatives and delinquency prevention programs. Applicants must demonstrate the ability to work effectively with practitioners in resolving design, definition, and data collection and analysis issues and other requirements of the project, and they must provide a role for community and program participation in the evaluation. Staff résumés should be attached as part of the appendixes.

Budget (10 points)

Applicants are to provide a budget that is reasonable, allowable, and cost effective in relationship to the activities proposed.

Appendixes (10 points)

The following should be included in the appendixes:

	Key staff résumés.
	Timeline of major project activities.
	List of evaluations conducted by the applicant demonstrating experience relevant to this proposed evaluation.
	One or two reports of evaluations from the above list.
	List of prior experience conducting evaluations of community collaboratives.

Format

The narrative must not exceed 30 pages in length (excluding forms, assurances, and appendixes) and must be submitted on 8½- by 11-inch paper, double spaced on one side of the paper in a standard 12-point font. These standards are necessary to maintain a fair and uniform standard among all applicants. If the narrative does not conform to these standards, OJJDP will deem the application ineligible for consideration.

Appendixes will not be counted in the 30-page narrative, but they cannot exceed 30 pages in total.

Award Period

This project will be funded for 3½ years. The initial budget period for this project will be 1 year. Funding after the initial budget period depends on grantee performance, availability of funds, and other criteria established at the time of the award.

Award Amount

Up to $150,000 is available for the initial 1-year budget period.

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number

For this program, the CFDA number, which is required on Standard Form 424, Application for Federal Assistance, is 16.542. This form is included in OJJDP's Application Kit, which can be obtained by calling the Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse at 800-638-8736 or sending an e-mail request to puborder@ncjrs.org. The Application Kit is also available online. (See the Introduction for more contact information.)

Coordination of Federal Efforts

To encourage better coordination among Federal agencies in addressing State and local needs, the U.S. Department of Justice is requesting applicants to provide information on the following: (1) active Federal grant award(s) supporting this or related efforts, including awards from the U.S. Department of Justice; (2) any pending application(s) for Federal funds for this or related efforts; and (3) plans for coordinating any funds described in items (1) or (2) with the funding sought by this application. For each Federal award, applicants must include the program or project title, the Federal grantor agency, the amount of the award, and a brief description of its purpose.

"Related efforts" is defined for these purposes as one of the following:

	Efforts for the same purpose (i.e., the proposed award would supplement, expand, complement, or continue activities funded with other Federal grants).
	Another phase or component of the same program or project (e.g., to implement a planning effort funded by other Federal funds or to provide a substance abuse treatment or education component within a criminal justice project).
	Services of some kind (e.g., technical assistance, research, or evaluation) to the program or project described in the application.

Delivery Instructions

All application packages should be mailed or delivered to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, c/o Juvenile Justice Resource Center, 2277 Research Boulevard, Mail Stop 2K, Rockville, MD 20850; 301-519-5535. Note: In the lower left-hand corner of the envelope, you must clearly write "Evaluation of the Truancy Reduction Demonstration Program."

Due Date

Applicants are responsible for ensuring that the original and five copies of the application package are received by 5 p.m. ET on August 17, 1998.

Contact

For further information, call Eric Peterson at 202-616-3644, or send an e-mail inquiry to eric@ojp.usdoj.gov.

References

California School Boards Association. 1995. Protecting Our Schools: Governing Board Strategies to Combat School Violence. Sacramento, CA: California School Boards Association, p. 1.

Catterall, J. 1987. On the social costs of dropping out of school. The High School Journal 71:4-5.

DeVise, D. 1995. Area schools get tough on truants. Long Beach Press Telegram (October 3), B-1.

Dryfoos, J. 1990. Adolescents At Risk: Prevalence and Prevention. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Huizinga, D., and Jacob-Chien, C. 1998. The contemporaneous co-occurrence of serious and violent juvenile offending and other problem behavior. In Serious & Violent Juvenile Offenders: Risk Factors and Successful Interventions, by R. Loeber and D.P. Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc., p. 57.

Huizinga, D., Loeber, R., and Thornberry, T. 1995. Recent Findings From the Program of Research on the Causes and Correlates of Delinquency. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

National Conference on State Legislatures. 1995 (December). 1995 State Legislative Summary: Children, Youth and Family Issues. Denver, CO: National Conference on State Legislatures, pp.149-154.

Perkins, C.A., Klaus, P.A., Bastian, L., and Cohen, R.L. 1996 (May). Criminal Victimization in The United States, 1993: A National Crime Victimization Survey Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, p. 11.

Sickmund, M. 1997 (December). Offenders in Juvenile Court, 1995. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, pp. 8-9.

Snyder, H.N., and Sickmund, M. 1995 (August). Juvenile Offenders and Victims: A National Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, p. 16.

San Diego Association of Governments. 1996. Drug use among San Diego arrestees. SANDAG Info. Special Issue. San Diego, CA: San Diego Association of Governments.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. Educational Attainment in the United States: March 1993 and 1992. Current Population Reports 1994. Washington, DC: Bureau of the Census, table D.

Wish, E.D., Gray, T.A., and Levine, E.B. 1996. Recent Drug Use in Female Juvenile Detainees: Estimates from Interviews, Urinanalysis, and Hair Analysis. College Park, MD: Center for Substance Abuse Research, University of Maryland, p. 4.