-------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------
  **ESEA: Safe and Drug-Free 
  Schools and Communities    
  State Grants**             

  **FY 2006 Program          
  Performance Report**       

  Strategic Goal 3           

  Formula                    

  ESEA, Title IV, Part A-1   

  Document                   
  Year 2006 Appropriation:   
  \$346,500                  

  CFDA                       84.186: Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities_State Grants

                             84.186A: Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities: State and
                             Local Educational Agency Program

                             84.186B: Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities: Governors\'
                             Program
  -------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------

  -------------- --------------------------------------------------------
  **Program      **Develop safe, disciplined, and drug-free learning
  Goal:**        environments**

  -------------- --------------------------------------------------------

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

  ------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------
  ***Objective 1 of 1:***   *To help ensure that schools are safe, disciplined, and
                            drug free by promoting implementation of programs that
                            reflect scientifically-based research.*

  ------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------

  ----------------------- ---------------- ------------------- --------------------------
  **Measure 1.1 of 7:**                                        
  The percentage of                                            
  students in grades 9-12                                      
  who were offered, sold,                                      
  or given an illegal                                          
  drug on school property                                      
  during the past 12                                           
  months.   (Desired                                           
  direction: decrease)                                         

  **Year**                **Target**       **Actual\           **Status**
                                           (or date            
                                           expected)**         

  2001                                     29                  Measure not in place

  2003                    29               29                  Target Met

  2005                    28               25                  Did Better Than Target

  2007                    27               (September 2008)    Pending

  2009                    26               (September 2010)    Pending

  2011                    25               (September 2012)    Pending
  ----------------------- ---------------- ------------------- --------------------------

**Source**. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for
Disease Control, Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS).

**Frequency of Data Collection**. Biennial

**Data Quality**. The following is exerpted from the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention\'s \"Methodology of the Youth Risk Behavior
Surveillance System\" (*MMWR 2004;53*(No. RR-12):\[10\].)\
\
***Data Quality\
**From the inception of YRBSS, CDC has been committed to ensuring that
the data are the highest quality. High quality data begins with high
quality questionnaire items. As described previously, the original
questionnaire was subjected to laboratory and field testing. CDC also
has conducted reliability and validity testing of the 1991 and 1999
versions of the questionnaires. In addition, in 1999, when CDC changed
the YRBS question that assesses race/ethnicity to comply with new
standards established by the Office of Management and Budget (74), CDC
conducted a study to assess the effect of the new race/ethnicity
question on reported race/ethnicity. The study indicated that the
revised wording had only a minimal effect on reported race/ethnicity and
that trend analyses that included white, black, and Hispanic subgroups
were not affected (22). Another aspect of data quality is the level of
nonresponse to questions. For the 2003 national YRBS, nonresponse
attributed to blank responses, invalid responses, out-of-range
responses, and responses that did not meet edit criteria ranged from
0.4% for the question that assesses respondent age to 15.5% for the
question that assesses injurious suicide attempt. For two thirds of all
questions, the nonresponse rate was \<1%. \
\
To further ensure data quality, surveys are administered by using
standardized procedures. To determine how using different procedures can
affect survey results, CDC conducted two methodologic studies. In the
first study, conducted in 2002, CDC examined how varying honesty
appeals,§ the wording of questions, and data-editing protocols --- while
holding population, setting, questionnaire context, and mode of
administration constant --- affected prevalence estimates (75). The
study indicated that different honesty appeals and data-editing
protocols do not have a statistically significant effect on prevalence
estimates. In addition, the study indicated that, although differences
in the wording of questions can create statistically significant
differences in certain prevalence estimates, no particular type of
wording consistently produced higher or lower estimates. \
\
In the second study, conducted in 2004, CDC examined how varying the
mode and setting of survey administration might affect prevalence
estimates. In this study, the standard paper-and pencil method of survey
administration was compared with computer-assisted self-interviewing
(CASI). Researchers determined from previous studies that, in household
settings, adolescents are more likely to report sensitive behaviors when
using CASI than when using paper-and-pencil questionnaires (76,77), but
this effect has not been demonstrated in school settings (78,79). In the
2004 study, CDC also compared whether prevalence estimates varied by
where the questionnaire was administered, in schools or in students'
homes. Researchers who have compared the results of surveys administered
in school versus in household settings typically have determined that
students are more likely to report sensitive behaviors in school-based
settings (21,80,81). However, in these studies, students were not
randomly assigned to setting. In one study in which random assignment to
setting was used, these effects were not observed (82). The CDC study is
the first in which both mode and setting were systematically varied,
while holding constant population, questionnaire context, wording of
questions, and data-editing protocols. This study is also the first one
in which random assignment to condition was used. Results from this
study should be available in 2005.\
\
**Limitations**\
YRBSS has multiple limitations. First, all YRBS data are selfreported,
and the extent of underreporting or overreporting of behaviors cannot be
determined, although measures described in this report demonstrate that
the data are of acceptable quality. Second, the national, state, and
local school-based survey data apply only to youth who attend school
and, therefore, are not representative of all persons in this age group.
Nationwide, of persons aged 16--17 years, approximately 6% were not
enrolled in a high school program and had not completed high school
(83). The NHIS and Youth Risk Behavior Supplement conducted in 1992
demonstrated that out-of-school youth are more likely than youth
attending school to engage in the majority of health-risk behaviors
(84). Third, because local parental permission procedures are observed
in the schoolbased surveys, procedures are not consistent across sites.
However, in a 2004 study, CDC demonstrated that the type of parental
permission typically does not affect prevalence estimates as long as
student response rates remain high (85). Fourth, state-level data are
not available for all 50 states. Fifth, when response rates are
insufficient to permit weighting, state and local data represent only
those students who participated in the survey and are not generalizable
to the entire jurisdiction. Sixth, whereas YRBSS is designed to produce
information to help assess the effect of broad national, state, and
local policies and programs, it was not designed to evaluate the
effectiveness of specific interventions (e.g., a professional
development program, school curriculum, or media campaign). Finally,
YRBSS only addresses behaviors that contribute to the leading causes of
morbidity and mortality among youth and adults. However, despite this
limited scope, school and community interventions should focus not only
on behaviors but also on the determinants of those behaviors.*

**Explanation**. This is a long-term measure. Data are collected on a
calendar-year, not a school-year, basis from a nationally representative
sample of students.

  ----------------------- ---------------- ------------------- ---------------------------
  **Measure 1.2 of 7:**                                        
  The percentage of                                            
  students in grades 9-12                                      
  who used marijuana one                                       
  or more times during                                         
  the past 30 days.                                            
    (Desired direction:                                        
  decrease)                                                    

  **Year**                **Target**       **Actual\           **Status**
                                           (or date            
                                           expected)**         

  2001                                     24                  Measure not in place

  2003                                     22                  Measure not in place

  2005                    21               20                  Did Better Than Target

  2007                    19               (September 2008)    Pending

  2009                    18               (September 2010)    Pending

  2011                    17               (September 2011)    Pending
  ----------------------- ---------------- ------------------- ---------------------------

**Source**. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for
Disease Control, Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS).

**Frequency of Data Collection**. Biennial

**Data Quality**. The following is excerpted from the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention\'s \"Methodology of the Youth Risk
Behavior Surveillance System\" (*MMWR 2004;53*(No. RR-12):\[10\].)\
\
***Data Quality\
**From the inception of YRBSS, CDC has been committed to ensuring that
the data are the highest quality. High quality data begins with high
quality questionnaire items. As described previously, the original
questionnaire was subjected to laboratory and field testing. CDC also
has conducted reliability and validity testing of the 1991 and 1999
versions of the questionnaires. In addition, in 1999, when CDC changed
the YRBS question that assesses race/ethnicity to comply with new
standards established by the Office of Management and Budget (74), CDC
conducted a study to assess the effect of the new race/ethnicity
question on reported race/ethnicity. The study indicated that the
revised wording had only a minimal effect on reported race/ethnicity and
that trend analyses that included white, black, and Hispanic subgroups
were not affected (22). Another aspect of data quality is the level of
nonresponse to questions. For the 2003 national YRBS, nonresponse
attributed to blank responses, invalid responses, out-of-range
responses, and responses that did not meet edit criteria ranged from
0.4% for the question that assesses respondent age to 15.5% for the
question that assesses injurious suicide attempt. For two thirds of all
questions, the nonresponse rate was\
\
To further ensure data quality, surveys are administered by using
standardized procedures. To determine how using different procedures can
affect survey results, CDC conducted two methodologic studies. In the
first study, conducted in 2002, CDC examined how varying honesty
appeals,§ the wording of questions, and data-editing protocols --- while
holding population, setting, questionnaire context, and mode of
administration constant --- affected prevalence estimates (75). The
study indicated that different honesty appeals and data-editing
protocols do not have a statistically significant effect on prevalence
estimates. In addition, the study indicated that, although differences
in the wording of questions can create statistically significant
differences in certain prevalence estimates, no particular type of
wording consistently produced higher or lower estimates.\
\
In the second study, conducted in 2004, CDC examined how varying the
mode and setting of survey administration might affect prevalence
estimates. In this study, the standard paper-and pencil method of survey
administration was compared with computer-assisted self-interviewing
(CASI). Researchers determined from previous studies that, in household
settings, adolescents are more likely to report sensitive behaviors when
using CASI than when using paper-and-pencil questionnaires (76,77), but
this effect has not been demonstrated in school settings (78,79). In the
2004 study, CDC also compared whether prevalence estimates varied by
where the questionnaire was administered, in schools or in students'
homes. Researchers who have compared the results of surveys administered
in school versus in household settings typically have determined that
students are more likely to report sensitive behaviors in school-based
settings (21,80,81). However, in these studies, students were not
randomly assigned to setting. In one study in which random assignment to
setting was used, these effects were not observed (82). The CDC study is
the first in which both mode and setting were systematically varied,
while holding constant population, questionnaire context, wording of
questions, and data-editing protocols. This study is also the first one
in which random assignment to condition was used. Results from this
study should be available in 2005.\
\
**Limitations**\
YRBSS has multiple limitations. First, all YRBS data are self-reported,
and the extent of underreporting or overreporting of behaviors cannot be
determined, although measures described in this report demonstrate that
the data are of acceptable quality. Second, the national, state, and
local school-based survey data apply only to youth who attend school
and, therefore, are not representative of all persons in this age group.
Nationwide, of persons aged 16--17 years, approximately 6% were not
enrolled in a high school program and had not completed high school
(83). The NHIS and Youth Risk Behavior Supplement conducted in 1992
demonstrated that out-of-school youth are more likely than youth
attending school to engage in the majority of health-risk behaviors
(84). Third, because local parental permission procedures are observed
in the school-based surveys, procedures are not consistent across sites.
However, in a 2004 study, CDC demonstrated that the type of parental
permission typically does not affect prevalence estimates as long as
student response rates remain high (85). Fourth, state-level data are
not available for all 50 states. Fifth, when response rates are
insufficient to permit weighting, state and local data represent only
those students who participated in the survey and are not generalizable
to the entire jurisdiction. Sixth, whereas YRBSS is designed to produce
information to help assess the effect of broad national, state, and
local policies and programs, it was not designed to evaluate the
effectiveness of specific interventions (e.g., a professional
development program, school curriculum, or media campaign). Finally,
YRBSS only addresses behaviors that contribute to the leading causes of
morbidity and mortality among youth and adults. However, despite this
limited scope, school and community interventions should focus not only
on behaviors but also on the determinants of those behaviors.*

**Explanation**. Data are collected on a calendar-year, not a
school-year, basis from a nationally representative sample of students.

  ----------------------- ---------------- ------------------- --------------------------
  **Measure 1.3 of 7:**                                        
  The percentage of                                            
  students in grades 9-12                                      
  who had five or more                                         
  drinks of alcohol in a                                       
  row (that is, within a                                       
  couple of hours) one or                                      
  more times during the                                        
  past 30 days.                                                
    (Desired direction:                                        
  decrease)                                                    

  **Year**                **Target**       **Actual\           **Status**
                                           (or date            
                                           expected)**         

  2001                                     30                  Measure not in place

  2003                                     28                  Measure not in place

  2005                    27               26                  Did Better Than Target

  2007                    26               (September 2008)    Pending

  2009                    25               (September 2010)    Pending

  2011                    24               (September 2012)    Pending
  ----------------------- ---------------- ------------------- --------------------------

**Source**. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for
Disease Control, Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS).

**Frequency of Data Collection**. Biennial

**Data Quality**. The following is excerpted from the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention\'s \"Methodology of the Youth Risk
Behavior Surveillance System\" (*MMWR 2004;53*(No. RR-12):\[10\].)\
\
***Data Quality**\
From the inception of YRBSS, CDC has been committed to ensuring that the
data are the highest quality. High quality data begins with high quality
questionnaire items. As described previously, the original questionnaire
was subjected to laboratory and field testing. CDC also has conducted
reliability and validity testing of the 1991 and 1999 versions of the
questionnaires. In addition, in 1999, when CDC changed the YRBS question
that assesses race/ethnicity to comply with new standards established by
the Office of Management and Budget (74), CDC conducted a study to
assess the effect of the new race/ethnicity question on reported
race/ethnicity. The study indicated that the revised wording had only a
minimal effect on reported race/ethnicity and that trend analyses that
included white, black, and Hispanic subgroups were not affected (22).
Another aspect of data quality is the level of nonresponse to questions.
For the 2003 national YRBS, nonresponse attributed to blank responses,
invalid responses, out-of-range responses, and responses that did not
meet edit criteria ranged from 0.4% for the question that assesses
respondent age to 15.5% for the question that assesses injurious suicide
attempt. For two thirds of all questions, the nonresponse rate was\
\
To further ensure data quality, surveys are administered by using
standardized procedures. To determine how using different procedures can
affect survey results, CDC conducted two methodologic studies. In the
first study, conducted in 2002, CDC examined how varying honesty
appeals,§ the wording of questions, and data-editing protocols --- while
holding population, setting, questionnaire context, and mode of
administration constant --- affected prevalence estimates (75). The
study indicated that different honesty appeals and data-editing
protocols do not have a statistically significant effect on prevalence
estimates. In addition, the study indicated that, although differences
in the wording of questions can create statistically significant
differences in certain prevalence estimates, no particular type of
wording consistently produced higher or lower estimates.\
\
In the second study, conducted in 2004, CDC examined how varying the
mode and setting of survey administration might affect prevalence
estimates. In this study, the standard paper-and pencil method of survey
administration was compared with computer-assisted self-interviewing
(CASI). Researchers determined from previous studies that, in household
settings, adolescents are more likely to report sensitive behaviors when
using CASI than when using paper-and-pencil questionnaires (76,77), but
this effect has not been demonstrated in school settings (78,79). In the
2004 study, CDC also compared whether prevalence estimates varied by
where the questionnaire was administered, in schools or in students'
homes. Researchers who have compared the results of surveys administered
in school versus in household settings typically have determined that
students are more likely to report sensitive behaviors in school-based
settings (21,80,81). However, in these studies, students were not
randomly assigned to setting. In one study in which random assignment to
setting was used, these effects were not observed (82). The CDC study is
the first in which both mode and setting were systematically varied,
while holding constant population, questionnaire context, wording of
questions, and data-editing protocols. This study is also the first one
in which random assignment to condition was used. Results from this
study should be available in 2005.\
\
**Limitations**\
YRBSS has multiple limitations. First, all YRBS data are self-reported,
and the extent of underreporting or overreporting of behaviors cannot be
determined, although measures described in this report demonstrate that
the data are of acceptable quality. Second, the national, state, and
local school-based survey data apply only to youth who attend school
and, therefore, are not representative of all persons in this age group.
Nationwide, of persons aged 16--17 years, approximately 6% were not
enrolled in a high school program and had not completed high school
(83). The NHIS and Youth Risk Behavior Supplement conducted in 1992
demonstrated that out-of-school youth are more likely than youth
attending school to engage in the majority of health-risk behaviors
(84). Third, because local parental permission procedures are observed
in the school-based surveys, procedures are not consistent across sites.
However, in a 2004 study, CDC demonstrated that the type of parental
permission typically does not affect prevalence estimates as long as
student response rates remain high (85). Fourth, state-level data are
not available for all 50 states. Fifth, when response rates are
insufficient to permit weighting, state and local data represent only
those students who participated in the survey and are not generalizable
to the entire jurisdiction. Sixth, whereas YRBSS is designed to produce
information to help assess the effect of broad national, state, and
local policies and programs, it was not designed to evaluate the
effectiveness of specific interventions (e.g., a professional
development program, school curriculum, or media campaign). Finally,
YRBSS only addresses behaviors that contribute to the leading causes of
morbidity and mortality among youth and adults. However, despite this
limited scope, school and community interventions should focus not only
on behaviors but also on the determinants of those behaviors.*

**Explanation**. Data are collected on a calendar-year, not a
school-year, basis from a nationally representative sample of students.

  ----------------------- ---------------- ------------------- --------------------------
  **Measure 1.4 of 7:**                                        
  The percentage of                                            
  students in grades 9-12                                      
  who were in a physical                                       
  fight on school                                              
  property one or more                                         
  times during the past                                        
  12 months.   (Desired                                        
  direction: decrease)                                         

  **Year**                **Target**       **Actual\           **Status**
                                           (or date            
                                           expected)**         

  1999                    14               Undefined           Pending

  2001                    12               13                  Did Not Meet Target

  2003                    12               13                  Did Not Meet Target

  2005                    12               14                  Did Not Meet Target

  2007                    12               (September 2008)    Pending

  2009                    11               (September 2010)    Pending

  2011                    11               (September 2012)    Pending
  ----------------------- ---------------- ------------------- --------------------------

**Source**. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for
Disease Control, Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS).

**Frequency of Data Collection**. Other

**Data Quality**. The following is excerpted from the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention\'s \"Methodology of the Youth Risk
Behavior Surveillance System\" (*MMWR 2004;53*(No. RR-12):\[10\].)\
\
***Data Quality\
**From the inception of YRBSS, CDC has been committed to ensuring that
the data are the highest quality. High quality data begins with high
quality questionnaire items. As described previously, the original
questionnaire was subjected to laboratory and field testing. CDC also
has conducted reliability and validity testing of the 1991 and 1999
versions of the questionnaires. In addition, in 1999, when CDC changed
the YRBS question that assesses race/ethnicity to comply with new
standards established by the Office of Management and Budget (74), CDC
conducted a study to assess the effect of the new race/ethnicity
question on reported race/ethnicity. The study indicated that the
revised wording had only a minimal effect on reported race/ethnicity and
that trend analyses that included white, black, and Hispanic subgroups
were not affected (22). Another aspect of data quality is the level of
nonresponse to questions. For the 2003 national YRBS, nonresponse
attributed to blank responses, invalid responses, out-of-range
responses, and responses that did not meet edit criteria ranged from
0.4% for the question that assesses respondent age to 15.5% for the
question that assesses injurious suicide attempt. For two thirds of all
questions, the nonresponse rate was\
\
To further ensure data quality, surveys are administered by using
standardized procedures. To determine how using different procedures can
affect survey results, CDC conducted two methodologic studies. In the
first study, conducted in 2002, CDC examined how varying honesty
appeals,§ the wording of questions, and data-editing protocols --- while
holding population, setting, questionnaire context, and mode of
administration constant --- affected prevalence estimates (75). The
study indicated that different honesty appeals and data-editing
protocols do not have a statistically significant effect on prevalence
estimates. In addition, the study indicated that, although differences
in the wording of questions can create statistically significant
differences in certain prevalence estimates, no particular type of
wording consistently produced higher or lower estimates.\
\
In the second study, conducted in 2004, CDC examined how varying the
mode and setting of survey administration might affect prevalence
estimates. In this study, the standard paper-and pencil method of survey
administration was compared with computer-assisted self-interviewing
(CASI). Researchers determined from previous studies that, in household
settings, adolescents are more likely to report sensitive behaviors when
using CASI than when using paper-and-pencil questionnaires (76,77), but
this effect has not been demonstrated in school settings (78,79). In the
2004 study, CDC also compared whether prevalence estimates varied by
where the questionnaire was administered, in schools or in students'
homes. Researchers who have compared the results of surveys administered
in school versus in household settings typically have determined that
students are more likely to report sensitive behaviors in school-based
settings (21,80,81). However, in these studies, students were not
randomly assigned to setting. In one study in which random assignment to
setting was used, these effects were not observed (82). The CDC study is
the first in which both mode and setting were systematically varied,
while holding constant population, questionnaire context, wording of
questions, and data-editing protocols. This study is also the first one
in which random assignment to condition was used. Results from this
study should be available in 2005.\
\
**Limitations**\
YRBSS has multiple limitations. First, all YRBS data are self-reported,
and the extent of underreporting or overreporting of behaviors cannot be
determined, although measures described in this report demonstrate that
the data are of acceptable quality. Second, the national, state, and
local school-based survey data apply only to youth who attend school
and, therefore, are not representative of all persons in this age group.
Nationwide, of persons aged 16--17 years, approximately 6% were not
enrolled in a high school program and had not completed high school
(83). The NHIS and Youth Risk Behavior Supplement conducted in 1992
demonstrated that out-of-school youth are more likely than youth
attending school to engage in the majority of health-risk behaviors
(84). Third, because local parental permission procedures are observed
in the school-based surveys, procedures are not consistent across sites.
However, in a 2004 study, CDC demonstrated that the type of parental
permission typically does not affect prevalence estimates as long as
student response rates remain high (85). Fourth, state-level data are
not available for all 50 states. Fifth, when response rates are
insufficient to permit weighting, state and local data represent only
those students who participated in the survey and are not generalizable
to the entire jurisdiction. Sixth, whereas YRBSS is designed to produce
information to help assess the effect of broad national, state, and
local policies and programs, it was not designed to evaluate the
effectiveness of specific interventions (e.g., a professional
development program, school curriculum, or media campaign). Finally,
YRBSS only addresses behaviors that contribute to the leading causes of
morbidity and mortality among youth and adults. However, despite this
limited scope, school and community interventions should focus not only
on behaviors but also on the determinants of those behaviors.*

**Explanation**. Data are collected on a calendar-year, not a
school-year, basis from a nationally representative sample of students.

  ----------------------- ---------------- ------------------- --------------------------
  **Measure 1.5 of 7:**                                        
  The percentage of                                            
  students in grades 9-12                                      
  who carried a weapon                                         
  such as a gun, knife,                                        
  or club on school                                            
  property one or more                                         
  times during the past                                        
  30 days.   (Desired                                          
  direction: decrease)                                         

  **Year**                **Target**       **Actual\           **Status**
                                           (or date            
                                           expected)**         

  2001                                     6                   Measure not in place

  2003                                     6                   Measure not in place

  2005                    5                7                   Did Not Meet Target

  2007                    5                (September 2008)    Pending

  2009                    4                (September 2010)    Pending

  2011                    4                (September 2012)    Pending
  ----------------------- ---------------- ------------------- --------------------------

**Source**. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for
Disease Control, Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS).

**Frequency of Data Collection**. Biennial

**Data Quality**. The following is excerpted from the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention\'s \"Methodology of the Youth Risk
Behavior Surveillance System\" (*MMWR 2004;53*(No. RR-12):\[10\].)\
\
***Data Quality\
**From the inception of YRBSS, CDC has been committed to ensuring that
the data are the highest quality. High quality data begins with high
quality questionnaire items. As described previously, the original
questionnaire was subjected to laboratory and field testing. CDC also
has conducted reliability and validity testing of the 1991 and 1999
versions of the questionnaires. In addition, in 1999, when CDC changed
the YRBS question that assesses race/ethnicity to comply with new
standards established by the Office of Management and Budget (74), CDC
conducted a study to assess the effect of the new race/ethnicity
question on reported race/ethnicity. The study indicated that the
revised wording had only a minimal effect on reported race/ethnicity and
that trend analyses that included white, black, and Hispanic subgroups
were not affected (22). Another aspect of data quality is the level of
nonresponse to questions. For the 2003 national YRBS, nonresponse
attributed to blank responses, invalid responses, out-of-range
responses, and responses that did not meet edit criteria ranged from
0.4% for the question that assesses respondent age to 15.5% for the
question that assesses injurious suicide attempt. For two thirds of all
questions, the nonresponse rate was \<5%, and for 11% of all questions,
the nonresponse rate was \<1%.\
\
To further ensure data quality, surveys are administered by using
standardized procedures. To determine how using different procedures can
affect survey results, CDC conducted two methodologic studies. In the
first study, conducted in 2002, CDC examined how varying honesty
appeals,§ the wording of questions, and data-editing protocols --- while
holding population, setting, questionnaire context, and mode of
administration constant --- affected prevalence estimates (75). The
study indicated that different honesty appeals and data-editing
protocols do not have a statistically significant effect on prevalence
estimates. In addition, the study indicated that, although differences
in the wording of questions can create statistically significant
differences in certain prevalence estimates, no particular type of
wording consistently produced higher or lower estimates.\
\
In the second study, conducted in 2004, CDC examined how varying the
mode and setting of survey administration might affect prevalence
estimates. In this study, the standard paper-and pencil method of survey
administration was compared with computer-assisted self-interviewing
(CASI). Researchers determined from previous studies that, in household
settings, adolescents are more likely to report sensitive behaviors when
using CASI than when using paper-and-pencil questionnaires (76,77), but
this effect has not been demonstrated in school settings (78,79). In the
2004 study, CDC also compared whether prevalence estimates varied by
where the questionnaire was administered, in schools or in students'
homes. Researchers who have compared the results of surveys administered
in school versus in household settings typically have determined that
students are more likely to report sensitive behaviors in school-based
settings (21,80,81). However, in these studies, students were not
randomly assigned to setting. In one study in which random assignment to
setting was used, these effects were not observed (82). The CDC study is
the first in which both mode and setting were systematically varied,
while holding constant population, questionnaire context, wording of
questions, and data-editing protocols. This study is also the first one
in which random assignment to condition was used. Results from this
study should be available in 2005.\
\
**Limitations**\
YRBSS has multiple limitations. First, all YRBS data are self-reported,
and the extent of underreporting or overreporting of behaviors cannot be
determined, although measures described in this report demonstrate that
the data are of acceptable quality. Second, the national, state, and
local school-based survey data apply only to youth who attend school
and, therefore, are not representative of all persons in this age group.
Nationwide, of persons aged 16--17 years, approximately 6% were not
enrolled in a high school program and had not completed high school
(83). The NHIS and Youth Risk Behavior Supplement conducted in 1992
demonstrated that out-of-school youth are more likely than youth
attending school to engage in the majority of health-risk behaviors
(84). Third, because local parental permission procedures are observed
in the school-based surveys, procedures are not consistent across sites.
However, in a 2004 study, CDC demonstrated that the type of parental
permission typically does not affect prevalence estimates as long as
student response rates remain high (85). Fourth, state-level data are
not available for all 50 states. Fifth, when response rates are
insufficient to permit weighting, state and local data represent only
those students who participated in the survey and are not generalizable
to the entire jurisdiction. Sixth, whereas YRBSS is designed to produce
information to help assess the effect of broad national, state, and
local policies and programs, it was not designed to evaluate the
effectiveness of specific interventions (e.g., a professional
development program, school curriculum, or media campaign). Finally,
YRBSS only addresses behaviors that contribute to the leading causes of
morbidity and mortality among youth and adults. However, despite this
limited scope, school and community interventions should focus not only
on behaviors but also on the determinants of those behaviors.*

**Explanation**. Data are collected on a calendar-year, not a
school-year, basis from a nationally representative sample of students.

  ----------------------- ----------------- ------------------- --------------------------
  **Measure 1.6 of 7:**                                         
  The percentage of drug                                        
  and violence prevention                                       
  programs/practices                                            
  supported with Safe and                                       
  Drug-Free Schools and                                         
  Communities State Grant                                       
  funds that are                                                
  research-based.                                               
    (Desired direction:                                         
  increase)                                                     

  **Year**                **Target**        **Actual\           **Status**
                                            (or date            
                                            expected)**         

  2005                    Set a Baseline    (December 2006)     Pending

  2006                    Maintain a                            Pending
                          Baseline                              

  2007                    Maintain a                            Pending
                          Baseline                              
  ----------------------- ----------------- ------------------- --------------------------

**Source**. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Safe and Drug Free
Schools, Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities State Grant Program,
forthcoming evaluation study.

**Frequency of Data Collection**. Annual

  ----------------------- ----------------- ------------------- -------------------------
  **Measure 1.7 of 7:**                                         
  The percentage of Safe                                        
  and Drug-Free Schools                                         
  and Communities State                                         
  Grant funded                                                  
  research-based drug and                                       
  violence prevention                                           
  programs/practices that                                       
  are implemented with                                          
  fidelity.   (Desired                                          
  direction: increase)                                          

  **Year**                **Target**        **Actual\           **Status**
                                            (or date            
                                            expected)**         

  2005                    Set a Baseline    (September 2007)    Pending

  2006                    Maintain a                            Pending
                          Baseline                              

  2007                    Maintain a                            Pending
                          Baseline                              
  ----------------------- ----------------- ------------------- -------------------------

**Source**. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Safe and Drug Free
Schools, Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities State Grant Program,
forthcoming evaluation study.

**Frequency of Data Collection**. Annual