There are signs that a new tool being developed by the Prevention Research Center at Penn State University will make it possible to establish how well community efforts to solve problems and design prevention services in different parts of the world are working.

The authors of a report in the US journal Public Health Education say there’s also reason to hope that the same inexpensive web-based evaluation tool has a contribution to make to the planning process by bringing a consistent rationale to key factors such as readiness, leadership, membership, faithful implementation and community impact.

Coalitions between community groups and human service professionals who together define a problem and then develop and implement a solution are becoming increasingly popular in the US.

But up to now rigorous evidence of their effectiveness has been limited.

Led by Mark Feinberg, the Penn State authors note four potential reasons for this failing: the sheer difficulty of comparing like with like across non-uniform communities; inherent weaknesses in the strategies coalitions use; lack of funding and resources, and, even where the necessary technical assistance is available, a lack of clear direction and focus.

The Prevention Research Center response has been to produce an assessment model based on an examination of more than 100 Communities That Care project sites in Pennsylvania that enables technical assistance providers to work out community coalition needs in terms of knowledge, skills, and leadership and then to discuss, problem-solve, and develop action plans to address areas of concern.

The validity and reliability of the tool have been established by psychometric analysis: it measures what it says it measures. Its usefulness as a planning instrument has emerged from the evidence about the attention coalitions give to the reports it generates: the process of review feeds seamlessly into subsequent strategic thinking.

What is not yet known, but is under study, is whether planning based on the such feedback leads to better outcomes for children, youth, and families.

The research and the proven usefulness of the Penn State tool may have implication for other community collaborative efforts across the world. For example, the research team says efforts to implement evidence-based interventions in Ireland and in Birmingham could benefit. [See, for example: Ireland leads the prevention action and Try counting on the fingers of one hand – and a gerbil.]

• Summary of "Evaluation and Community Prevention Coalitions: Validation of an Integrated Web-Based/ Technical Assistance Consultant Model” Mark Feinberg, (and others) Public Health Education, February 2008, Vol 35, pp9-21.

[Since December 2006 Communities that Care work in the UK has been an activity of the Rainer charity. It has been implemented in more than 50 locations.]