Violence Prevention: Moving from Evidence to Implementation

• NCJ Number: 243923
• Author(s): Katrina Baum, Ph.D.; Katherine M. Blakeslee; Jacqueline Lloyd, Ph.D.; Anthony Petrosino, Ph.D.
• Date Published: October 2013
• Length: 8 pages
• Agencies: NIJ-Sponsored
• Publication Type: Report (Summary)

Annotation

This paper examines efforts towards the implementation of evidence-based violence prevention programs.

Abstract

This discussion paper from the Institute of Medicine examines efforts towards implementation of evidence-based prevention programs. For over 20 years significant efforts have been made to identify evidence-based violence prevention programs and to make this information available for use by policymakers, service providers, and law enforcement. These efforts include systematic reviews of research and the development of evidence-based registries, as well as use of the Internet for electronic publication of documents to ensure quick and easy access to information by all concerned parties. Despite these efforts, several challenges still exist that prevent the transfer of evidence-based programs into real-world settings, including a lag between knowing when a practice offers success and the eventual successful adoption of the program or practice and the ability to balance faithful implementation of the program or practice with any modifications to the program that may be required in order to meet the specific needs of the community. As a result, the Institute of Medicine has identified three implementation approaches: direct adoption of specific evidence-based prevention programs; adaptation of an existing program to meet community needs; and community-driven implementation. This paper identifies several strategies that are needed for closing the gap between evidence and implementation. These strategies are 1) finding the evidence and proven approaches; 2) making the links between evidence and implementation; 3) adapting evidence-based approaches to new or different contexts; 4) significance of the policy context; 5) sustainability; and 6) resources for research and implementation. References