No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

The purpose of this research was to determine if one program funded by the Virginia Tobacco Settlement Foundation produces a more effective result in increasing student knowledge about the harmful effects of tobacco use than another program. Of particular interest is whether there is a difference in effectiveness based on the environment or settings in which these programs are presented. According to the CDC (2006), approximately 4,000 people between the ages of 12 to 17 will initiate smoking. In Virginia, a tobacco-growing state, there are 88,500 high school smokers. The health costs to Virginia are approximately 2.08 billion dollars per year with an estimated cost of 2.42 billion (Campaign for Tobacco-free Kids, n.d.). By providing the VTSF an analysis of their programs, they will be better equipped at making an informed decision on which programs to support financially. The research questions that were posed are: 1) is there a difference between school-based programs, faith-based programs, and community-based programs in increasing knowledge about tobacco's harmful effects? 2) is there a difference between programs in increasing knowledge and the location in which they are presented, urban versus rural?, and 3) is there a difference between programs implemented in middle schools in increasing knowledge about tobacco? From the focused analysis, the following conclusions can be drawn: 1) given the current evaluation and reporting process of the VTSF, no determination of whether there is a difference between program settings in increasing knowledge can be made, 2) in addition, no determination can be made in regards to whether there is a difference in increasing knowledge in regards to program location-urban versus rural, and 3) no conclusion can be drawn about middle school program effectiveness. What one can conclude is that the evaluation process used by the VTSF needs to be reformed so that a more consistent method is utilized by all parties so that a comparison can be made about the effectiveness of implemented programs. Also, long-term studies on programs need to be conducted since there are so few available. Studies to determine whether knowledge acquisition actually translates into behavior change also need to be performed. The key to tobacco prevention and cessation must be a multi-faceted approach. Educational programs, anti-tobacco media messages, tobacco taxation, and restriction of tobacco sales are all important in the prevention of tobacco use by the youth of Virginia. Each plays an important piece to the puzzle. / Ph. D.

Yes / The objective of this study is to provide an evidence base concerning the costs and benefits of conflict prevention (CP) activities (defined as those activities undertaken primarily to reduce the risk of conflict), compared with those of engaging after large-scale conflict has begun.

yes / P1. The purpose of the Portfolio Review is to describe the programmes and associated activities that are being evaluated. Since its main purpose is descriptive, it draws heavily on existing official documents as appropriate. It should be noted that Her Majesty¿s Government (HMG) has not previously commissioned a comprehensive overview of the Conflict Prevention Pools (CPPs) from the perspective required for the Evaluation. Though various forms of overview of each of the two CPPs have been prepared, the purposes and therefore the content of these have been different from the purpose at hand. P2. This brief `analytical history¿ of the Conflict Pools will provide an account of how and why the CPP¿s have developed in the way that they have. The Portfolio Review does not aim to provide the analytical framework for meeting the key objectives of the evaluation, as set out in the Terms of Reference (ToRs). This has been done in the Inception Report, and this Portfolio Review should not be read in isolation from the Inception Report. P3. The Portfolio Review provides a description of the CPPs, their funding, their projects, and their administrative processes to a level of detail appropriate to the purposes of the Evaluation and the agreed length of the document. For a document of this length (a planned 20 pages plus annexes) to address a program of more than 600 million operating in some 100 countries, and involving the interests of five separate departments of state in the UK, not to mention significant other stakeholders outside the UK, difficult choices about the scope and detail of material to be included had to be made. As we crystallize our priorities for what to include in the final version of the Portfolio Review, given the constraints of length, we would invite comments as to further material that could be included. P4. The Portfolio Review has involved London-based research, including interviews with officials as well as review of documentary sources. This work has included collection of preliminary information on the perceived strengths and weaknesses of current programming effectiveness and administration. In respect of existing CPP activities, it supplements the Inception Report as a guide to the authors of the case studies. For the Portfolio Review, we interviewed some 25 officials across five departments. The main purpose of interviews in the Portfolio Review stage was to support the effort of getting down on paper, for the first time, a comprehensive description, with an appropriate level of consistency, of all of the purposes, all of the key processes, and all of the activities of the CPPs.

yes / P1. The Conflict Prevention Pools (CPPs) are a joint Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), Ministry of Defence (MOD) and Department for International Development (DFID) mechanism for funding and managing the UK¿s contribution towards violent conflict prevention and reduction. The Africa Conflict Prevention Pool (ACPP) covers sub-Saharan Africa while the Global Conflict Prevention Pool (GCPP) covers the rest of the world. The CPPs were established by Her Majesty¿s Government (HMG) in April 2001, following a government-wide review of UK conflict prevention work in 2000. The rationale behind the CPPs is that by bringing together the interests, resources and expertise of FCO, MOD and DFID, greater effectiveness can be achieved.

yes / Improving the effectiveness of the UK contribution to conflict prevention and management ¿ an assessment of 6 geographical areas and 2 thematic areas of the Conflict Prevention Pools with recommendations for HMG to consider in future strategic planning.