Appendix 4
Teen Dating Violence Prevention, Minnesota
FOA CE 09-906 (Core II)
Environmental Scan Report
1. Background
The State Alliance on Healthy Youth Relationships is a coalition of Minnesota organizations
and agencies whose purpose is to enable Minnesota to assess the effectiveness of current programs to
prevent teen dating violence, or more broadly, to promote healthy relationships among youth. The
Alliance seeks to address teen dating violence as a public health issue and to build capacity to
prevent it.
The project is funded by a cooperative agreement with the Minnesota Department of Health
(MDH) from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Minnesota is one of six funded states:
the others are California, Colorado, Florida, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania. Based on population
density required by the funding agency, the target area for the project is the seven-county Twin Cities
Metropolitan area.
In Minnesota, MDH and the Minnesota Coalition for Battered Women (MCBW) coordinate
and staff the project, and a multi-organization Prevention Team provides advice and leadership.
Participants represent the following organizations:
Casa de Esperanza
Domestic Abuse Project
Minnesota Coalition Against Sexual Assault
Minnesota Coalition for Battered Women
Minnesota Department of Education
Minnesota Department of Health, Injury and Violence Prevention Unit
Minnesota Department of Health, Adolescent Health Program
Minnesota Department of Public Safety, Office of Justice Programs
Minnesota Indian Women’s Sexual Assault Center
1
Appendix 4
Teen Dating Violence Prevention, Minnesota
FOA CE 09-906 (Core II)
Minnesota Organization on Adolescent Pregnancy, Parenting and Prevention
Prevent Child Abuse Minnesota
Sexual Offense Services, Ramsey County
Sexual Violence Center, Hennepin County
A Youth Advisory Committee representing youth in a variety of settings and situations will provide
further input to understanding and using the data collected through the environmental scan.
Three scans are required in the project: an environmental scan (this report), a policy scan, and
an evaluation scan. The scans will identify current programs and policies, determine service gaps,
and ascertain the extent to which programs are evaluated and are replicable. Following completion of
the scan, a plan will be developed to enhance teen dating violence prevention and related programs.
It will be shared with prevention programs and policy-making bodies within the defined service area
and statewide.
2. Methods
Minnesota’s environmental scan was conducted in the Twin City Metropolitan Area. The
survey, administered in person and online, began on March 22, 2010 and concluded June 18,
2010. Four types of organizations working with teens were targeted for participation, as follows:
Type of Organization
Community based
organizations (CBO)
Schools (all types
combined)
Local Public Health
Agencies (LPHA)
State Agencies (SA)
# Recruited
155
# Participating
78
Response Rate (%)
50
402
150
37
9
6
67
6
4
67
Online survey respondents directly entered their responses using Vovici software; face-to-face
interview results were collected on paper forms and entered by project staff using Vovici.
2
Appendix 4
Teen Dating Violence Prevention, Minnesota
FOA CE 09-906 (Core II)
Vovici is an enterprise feedback management (EFM) application that supports complex survey
design; the software supports reporting with some statistical analysis. Advanced analysis was
conducted with SAS.
a. Population
The population focus for this environmental scan was the core cities of Minneapolis and
Saint Paul, including seven of the ten largest cities in Minnesota and located in the seven
counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and Washington with a combined
total 2008 population of 2.8 million people. (Minnesota’s other 80 counties have a combined
population of 2.4 million; Minnesota’s total population is 5.2 million). In 2008, there was an
estimated population of 384,358 youth ages 10-19 in the seven-county Twin City Metropolitan
Area.
b. Questionnaire Development
1) Core Questions (Part I , Appendix 1) –developed in conjunction with CDC and other
states;
2) State Alliance Questions (Part II, Appendix 3) – developed in response to a review of
the research literature on TDV and focusing on four risk and protective factors:
mentoring, effects of alcohol consumption; healthy relationships; and gender equity.
3) The instruments were piloted with some of the organizational and community
partners with whom the MDH and MCBW have worked
c. Survey Administration
(1) Four types of organizations were identified: community-based organizations (CBO),
local/county public health agencies (LPHA), state agencies (SA); and schools.
3
Appendix 4
Teen Dating Violence Prevention, Minnesota
FOA CE 09-906 (Core II)
(2) Contact information (email, work phone number, address, etc.) was gathered via the
internet for employees that work at CBO, LPHA & SA where position title indicated
knowledge of the organization’s efforts to address teen dating violence (TDV) or who
appeared to work with youth in some capacity.
(3) The contacts for the youth-serving CBO identified via the internet were cross-referenced
with the membership lists of the United Way of The Greater Twin Cities, Minnesota
Youth Intervention Programs Association (YIPA), and the Office of Justice Programs
(OJP), to ensure that all the major youth-serving CBO located in the Twin Cities Seven
County Metropolitan Area were identified for the environmental scan.
(4) Identified persons were called to establish that he/she was the most appropriate person to
be interviewed.
(a) If the contact identified him/herself to be the appropriate contact for their
agency/organization, he/she:
i. Was encouraged to set up a date and time of their choice for
MDH/MCBW to visit their site to conduct an in person interview to learn
about their youth programs and services. Contacts were informed that
MDH/MCBW preferred conducting the interview in person so as to allow
for networking and coalition-building in the future.
ii. Was provided with the alternative opportunity to provide responses to the
surveys online if an in-person meeting would not work.
(b) If the contact did not believe he/she was the most appropriate person from his/her
agency/organization to be interviewed, he/she was requested:
i. To provide the most appropriate person’s contact information;
4
Appendix 4
Teen Dating Violence Prevention, Minnesota
FOA CE 09-906 (Core II)
ii. To transfer MDH/MCBW to the most appropriate person’s phone-line;
and
iii. The interview processes described in (4)(a), above, were followed.
(5) Immediately following the telephone conversation (“cold call”):
(a) If the agency/organization agreed to an in-person interview, he/she was sent an
email that contained the date and time of the interview, a brief description of the
project, a copy of the State Alliance Questions (Part II) to be reviewed prior to
the interview, and their assigned survey key along with the link to complete the
Core Questions (Part I). The Core Questions (Part I) were to be completed prior
to the in-person interview because the questions and response items were not
conducive to an in-person interview.
(b) If the agency/organization opted to complete the Core Questions (Part I) and the
State Alliance Questions (Part II) on-line, he/she was sent an email that
contained: a brief description of the project, a detailed description of the steps to
complete the surveys, and their assigned survey key along with the links to
complete the online surveys.
(6) Administration of School Surveys
(a)
Kathy Brothen, an Education Specialist from the Minnesota Department of
Education (MDE) who serves on the Leadership Committee for this project,
provided MDH with a list of all the schools (public, alternative learning centers
(ALC), and charter schools) located in the Twin Cities Seven County
Metropolitan Area.
(b)
The e-mail addresses for the principals were identified via their schools’ websites.
5
(c)
Appendix 4
Teen Dating Violence Prevention, Minnesota
FOA CE 09-906 (Core II)
E-mails were sent to the school principals on March 30, 2010. The e-mails briefly
described the project and requested that the principal provide, via e-mail, the
contact information of a teacher or staff who he/she believed to be most
knowledgeable about his/her school’s efforts to address TDV. The principal was
informed that the identified teacher or staff member would be requested to
complete an online survey regarding their schools’ efforts to address TDV.
(d)
Upon receipt of the teacher’s or staff’s contact information, he/she was sent an email that informed him/her that their principal identified them as being
knowledgeable of their school’s programs and/or policies that address TDV, that
briefly described the project, contained an assigned survey key along with
detailed instructions on how to complete the online survey, the request to
complete the online survey within ten days of receipt of the e-mail, and notified
him/her that they would be sent a $10 Target Gift Card in appreciation for
completing the survey. Based upon the experience and recommendations of the
Leadership Committee, MDH/MCBW agreed to incentivize, using the $10 Target
Gift Cards, teachers/staff to complete the survey to increase the potential for a
high response rate from schools.
(e)
The first round of TDV e-mails were sent to the principals on or around their
spring break. This was discovered due to the out-of-office email notifications
received. Coupled with the read receipts, we learned that many emails were
deleted without being read. Thus, follow-up e-mails were sent to principals on
April 7, 2010 and/or on the principals’ return date to school.
6
(f)
Appendix 4
Teen Dating Violence Prevention, Minnesota
FOA CE 09-906 (Core II)
Unfortunately, some (45/297) principal e-mail addresses were not posted on their
school’s websites. The principal letters previously described were mailed via the
United States Postal Service (USPS) to the principals of these schools. The
principals contacted via e-mail (252) and those contacted via USPS (45) resulted
in a low response rate (38 of 297 or 13%). Twenty (20) of the 38 schools
completed both surveys, three (3) of 38 completed the Core Questions (Part I –
Appendix 1), and 15 of the 38 did not complete either the Core Questions (Part I)
or the MDH Teen Dating Violence Questions (Part II – Appendix 3). The
schools that completed Part I but did not complete Part II and the schools that did
not complete either Part I or II were e-mailed a polite reminder to complete the
online survey. However, the low response rate from the schools prompted the
need to change the methodology for obtaining responses from schools.
A second request was mailed via USPS on May 4, 2010 to the schools (274) that had not
responded to the initial request made by e-mail or USPS on March 30, 2010 or the second e-mail
reminder sent to the schools described above (6.f.). The principals of these schools were mailed a
modified version of the principal letter and teacher/staff letter described previously, along with
copies of the CDC and MDH survey questions, a note card, and a business reply envelope. The
modified version of the principal letter requested the principal to give the teacher/staff letter, the
CDC and MDH questions, the note card, and the business reply envelope to the teacher/staff who
he/she believed to be most knowledgeable of their school’s programs and/or policies that address
TDV instead of “requesting the principal to send MDH/MCBW said person’s contact
information.” The modified version of the teacher/staff letter provided the teacher/staff person
the option of responding by hard copy and USPS or via the Internet. Regardless of response
7
Appendix 4
Teen Dating Violence Prevention, Minnesota
FOA CE 09-906 (Core II)
method utilized, the teacher/staff members responding were requested to provide their contact
information so that MDH/MCBW could identify partners and direct the gift card appropriately.
This approach improved the response rate from 13% to 37% overall.
The request mailed via USPS on May 4, 2010 also was sent out via USPS on May 10,
2010 to the principals of 105 ALC. This was the first request made to these ALC as they were
inadvertently omitted from the MDE list of schools provided to MDH.
3. Results/Findings
a. Part 1, CDC Core Survey Questions (Appendix 2)
First, we contacted the correct people and organizations. (Or, more accurately, the correct
organizations and individuals responded.) Second, some technical assistance will be needed, in
particular in the evaluation arena. Third, there are very limited relationships between LPHA and
CBO/Schools. Finally, there is an opportunity for MDH to provide a leadership role in building
coalitions amongst disparate groups to prevent TDV.
b. Part II, Minnesota State Alliance Survey Questions (Appendix 4)
Section 1 questions 1-6: population, programs and demographic data
Ethnicity/Culture: The Ethnic/Cultural diversity of the Twin Cities was reflected in the
answers we received in the environmental scan. Fifty-seven percent (57%) of the community
service providers and 39% of schools surveyed responded that they offer services to youth
and families in a culturally specific setting. Several stated that they offer services in language
other than English. Services specific to the African American and Hmong communities were
prevalent and interpretive services in Spanish, Somali and Hmong were also frequently seen
in the survey responses.
8
Appendix 4
Teen Dating Violence Prevention, Minnesota
FOA CE 09-906 (Core II)
Age: As it relates to age groups, most service providers work with a broad age range. Some
providers have specific teen programs but offer service to the entire family while others work
exclusively with adolescents. Several service providers stated that they work with youth and
young adults some offering service up to the age of 25. Although this project seeks to obtain
information about services for 12-18 year olds, several agencies indicated that young adults
need and are benefiting from continued services through their early 20s. As it relates to
schools, the ages were reflective of the grades available at the schools.
Socioeconomics: The public health and State Agencies surveyed stated that they serve all
socioeconomic groups. Of the community based agencies surveyed, 95% stated that they
work with the poor. It should be noted that the data reflect that several community based
programs stated that they are willing to work with youth from any background; however,
most of the youth that come in seeking services come from poor or working class families.
Gender and Gender specific programs: Of the community based programs that were
surveyed, 52% offer gender-specific programs to males and 57% offer gender-specific
programs for girls. Of the schools surveyed, 42% offer female-specific programming and
38% offer male-specific programming. It should also be noted that 3% of the community
based programs and 4% of the schools surveyed offer transgender-specific programming.
Setting: The survey respondents indicate that services are offered in a wide range of settings
including after school programs, neighborhood and community centers, faith based settings
and domestic violence centers.
Section 2 questions 7-8: collaboration history and practice
Collaboration between youth programs and public health agencies:
9
Appendix 4
Teen Dating Violence Prevention, Minnesota
FOA CE 09-906 (Core II)
Many of the Agencies and schools that were surveyed stated that they have no or very
limited collaboration with their local public health agency. Those that did collaborate stated
that they have speakers come to their programs or schools. Several programs stated that they
currently receive funds from the Office of Multi-Cultural and Minority Health to do public
health focused projects. Several programs and schools also indicated that they would like to
have greater collaboration with their local public health departments.
Collaboration between youth programs and other community based programs:
In order to address the needs of the community, CBOs form collaborations amongst
themselves and have been able to form some partnerships with schools, SAs, and LPHAs.
These collaborations are formed mainly for the sharing of resources which can range from
funding, to staff, to curriculum and to space. The CBO collaborations amongst themselves
help to address the lack of resources to meet the needs of their communities. Many of the
schools that responded to the survey stated that they also have strong collaborations with
community agencies; however, their level of collaboration was significantly lower than the
Community based agencies.
Section 3 questions 9-13: prevention capacity and skill development
In an effort to get as much information about current programs and to aid in the
development of a teen dating violence primary prevention state plan, Minnesota included 4
question sets that focus on programs that assist teens in developing skills needed to prevent
teen dating violence. Primary prevention should help teens develop the skills needed to enter
into and sustain healthy relationships that do not involve violence. The programs that were
chosen for this project are mentoring programs, programs that focus on the effects of alcohol
10
Appendix 4
Teen Dating Violence Prevention, Minnesota
FOA CE 09-906 (Core II)
consumption, programs focused on healthy relationship skills, and programs that promote
gender equity.
Mentoring Services:
Of the community based agencies surveyed, 58% stated that they offer some type of
mentoring services. Programs described a range of mentoring styles that included formalized
mentoring relationships, some of which are court ordered. Others indicted that youth may
enter their program for a specific service and develop an informal mentoring relationship
with a case manager or other staff person. Overall, mentoring services appear to be a
significant part of many of the community based programs that were surveyed. Of the
schools surveyed, 39% stated that they offer some type of mentoring service. Several of the
charter and alternative schools offered more structured mentoring programs while public
schools indicated more informal matching of high risk students with school staff for support
during the school day.
Effects of Alcohol Consumption:
Of the community based agencies that were surveyed, 75% of them stated that they offer
services that address the effects of alcohol consumption. The methods used in the delivery of
these services varied. Several agencies stated that they address alcohol consumption as a key
component of their program while others may discuss it when it appears to be an issue with
the youth they are serving. Overall, providers demonstrated that they have an understanding
of the connection between alcohol use among youth and negative behaviors including
violence. Of the schools surveyed, 88% reported that they offer services to inform students
about the effects of alcohol consumption. Most schools indicated that this issue is discussed
in health classes or by way of guest speakers.
11
Appendix 4
Teen Dating Violence Prevention, Minnesota
FOA CE 09-906 (Core II)
Healthy Relationship Programs:
Ninety-four (94%) percent of the community based agencies surveyed responded that
they have programming that focuses on the development of healthy relationship skills such as
conflict resolution and/or anger management. Many agencies stated that they have structured
group activities that focus on these skills as it relates to intimate partner relationships as well
as time spent discussing family relationships and how they interact with their peers in
general. Some programs offer these services through guest speakers or curriculum; however,
most providers indicate that healthy relationships skills are an important part of their
program. Ninety (90%) percent of all the schools surveyed stated that they have
programming that focuses on healthy relationship development. Schools also indicated that
the development of healthy relationships was a priority; they stated that students are taught
these skills through guest presenters, curricula used in health classes and through sessions
with school counselors.
Gender Equity:
Seventy (70%) percent of the community based programs indicated that they have
programs that address gender equity. This question received very vague responses from
service providers. While several stated that they offer these services, only a few of them
stated that they have curricula that addressed gender equity. Several service providers
indicated that gender equity was often paired with cultural and or ethnic perspectives,
especially in programs that serve large immigrant populations. Sixty-four (64%) percent of
schools surveyed indicated that they have programs that address gender equity. The school
responses did indicate that they use curriculum that addresses gender equity; however, it does
12
Appendix 4
Teen Dating Violence Prevention, Minnesota
FOA CE 09-906 (Core II)
appear that service providers and schools could use better guidance on how to address this
issue with the youth whom they serve.
Section 4 questions 13–19: teen dating violence experience, referrals and services
Other programs that address the primary prevention of teen dating violence:
Thirty (30%) percent of the community based programs that were surveyed indicated that
they have other programs that were not mentioned that focus all or a portion of its time
addressing teen dating violence prevention. Twenty-six (26%) percent of the schools
surveyed indicated that they have other programs that had not been mentioned that focus all
or a portion of its time on teen dating violence prevention. These programs had a wide range
and included fatherhood and leadership development programs. Providers demonstrated a
good sense about what skills could assist youth in the prevention of teen dating violence.
Funding for Teen Dating Violence:
Of the community based programs surveyed, 31% indicated that they sought and/or
received funding to work specifically on teen dating violence prevention. Six (6%) percent of
schools surveyed stated that they sought and/or received funding to work specifically on the
issue of teen dating violence.
Past Teen dating Violence programs:
Ten (10) community based programs surveyed indicated that in the past they had teen
dating violence prevention programs that no longer exist. Most agencies indicated that the
program was discontinued due to a lack of funding.
Referrals:
Schools and community based agencies were asked where they would refer youth they
believed were in need of teen dating violence/prevention service. Several responses listed
13
Appendix 4
Teen Dating Violence Prevention, Minnesota
FOA CE 09-906 (Core II)
agencies to which they would refer youth; however, upon contacting those agencies it was
discovered that these agencies do not offer services that address teen dating violence or teen
dating violence prevention. This indicates that school and community based programs could
benefit from access and current information about teen dating violence programs that exist in
their area.
14