1

Improving the Effectiveness of Programs for Youth: 

Two Complementary Paths to Apply Evidence

This brief presents two ways practitioners can use evidence to improve the effectiveness of their programs: 

adopting and installing evidence-based programs (EBPs) and incorporating a core components approach. It 

answers the questions: 

• What are two ways practitioners can use evidence to improve youth programs?

• What is the difference between adopting an EBP and using a core components approach?

• When should I use one or the other, or both, in my organization?

EBPs and core components are complementary approaches, with the same goal of improving outcomes for 

youth and their families, but with important differences.

What are two ways practitioners can use evidence to improve youth programs?

Evidence-Based Programs (EBPs) are supported by high quality experimental or quasiexperimental evidence. They often come with a brand name and an implementation 

manual. Researchers typically identify EBPs by systematically reviewing the evidence 

against a set of research quality standards and providing a rating that signifies the level of

confidence the public should have in the evidence – that is, how confident we should be that

the program really “worked” with the population and in the setting in which it was tested. The results of these 

reviews are often listed on model program registries with a particular focus like youth violence, employment 

training, home visiting, or adolescent pregnancy prevention. Criteria for the designation of “evidence-based” 

vary across systematic reviews and model program registries. Some use meta-analysis to summarize the 

findings of many studies, while others rate findings from individual studies. Practitioners can select EBPs 

designed to impact specific outcomes that fit the best with the participants and settings in which they work.

Core Components are the parts, features, attributes, or characteristics of youth programs 

that research shows are associated with strong outcomes.1 Many components of a program 

can contribute to outcomes, such as the program activities or content, how the services are 

delivered and by whom, the length and frequency of services, and whether and how service 

delivery staff are trained and supervised. While there are different ways to identify core 

components, one way analyzes evidence from a large body of research to identify the components that are 

present in studies with the strongest outcomes. Researchers then translate the components into actionable 

recommendations for program improvement. This approach to core components relies on the availability of a 

large body of well-controlled research that can include both EBPs and unbranded or “home grown” programs. 

EBPs and core components approaches are both working toward the same goal – applying evidence to improve 

outcomes for youth – but use the evidence in different ways.

1 Ferber, T., Wiggins, M. E., & Sileo, A. (2019). Advancing the use of core components of effective programs. Forum for Youth 

Investment.
2

What are the key differences between these two approaches? 

Based on evidence from 

experimental or quasiexperimental studies of 

a particular program model.

Involves implementing a 

program model: a defined 

set of activities with 

implementation protocols 

and procedures designed to 

achieve a specific outcome 

for specific participants.

Based on correlational 

analysis (e.g., meta-analysis) 

of evidence from hundreds 

of experimental or quasiexperimental studies.

Involves implementing or 

adjusting discrete 

practices or elements 

that can be incorporated 

into any program.

Requires fidelity to certain 

prescribed features of the 

program model.

Requires assessment of the 

extent to which existing 

programs are aligned with 

the evidence on core 

components.

Features of the Approach Evidence-Based Programs Core Components Approach

What gets implemented

The underlying evidence

Fidelity of implementation
3

When should you consider using one or the other approach?

Depending on local needs, priorities, and resources, you might use an EBP with a specific set of participants 

or in a particular program area and apply the core components approach to another program area within your 

organization or service delivery system. There is no need to choose one over the other. Both contribute to our 

understanding of how to improve the well-being of youth, their families, and communities. Knowing the different 

purposes of each approach will help inform your decisions about when and how to apply them in your own work. 

Use Evidence-Based Programs When... Use a Core Components Approach When...

• The EBP is a good match for your priority 

population, service delivery setting, staff 

capacity, the outcome(s) you wish to change, 

and the community context.

• You are seeking to scale a program to impact 

a population with which the EBP has shown 

effectiveness. 

• You wish to test whether the EBP is effective 

with populations and settings different than 

those with which it was originally tested, or to 

test an adaptation of the EBP.

• Funders require an EBP from a model program 

registry. 

• You wish to adjust existing programs to align 

with available evidence on the components 

that may have the strongest effect on the 

outcome(s) of interest.

• There is no EBP available that meets the needs 

of your priority population, community context, 

or aligns with available resources. 

• You are developing a new or innovative 

program and making decisions about content, 

length, delivery format, and other key 

elements.

• Funders do not require an EBP but expect an 

‘evidence-informed’ approach. 

Building the evidence base about youth programs is a broad undertaking that includes different ways of using and 

applying evidence. EBPs and core components are complementary approaches that youth-serving organizations 

can use depending on their specific needs. By expanding what is considered evidence-based programming to 

include a core components approach, practitioners can apply evidence in ways that are relatively inexpensive and 

that may open the door to new opportunities to continue learning how best to improve the well-being of youth, 

their families, and communities. 

Evidence for Program Improvement was established by The Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) to develop 

evidence-based practice guidelines for youth programs using a core components approach. Our goal is to better understand 

the characteristics of effective programs for youth and share guidelines about how to make those programs more effective 

with those who design, support, and implement them. Visit our website (https://youth.gov/epi) to learn more about the core 

components approach and to view our practice recommendations. 

This document was prepared by Abt Associates under contract number HHSP233201500069I Order No. HHSP23337013T 

from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. 

Any statements expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Office of the Assistant 

Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.