Rural Youth Vaping Coalition: Choosing and Evaluating a Strategy
A rural county of 24,000 residents has one high school, one health clinic, and a 12-month $45,000 state grant to reduce youth vaping. The latest school survey found that 32% of 11th graders reported vaping in the past 30 days, compared with 21% statewide. The coalition includes the school principal, sheriff, clinic nurse, two parents, and a student club advisor. Three proposals are on the table: (A) a single all-school assembly featuring a visiting speaker and slides about nicotine harms; (B) a peer-led social norms campaign combined with consistent enforcement of the existing tobacco-free school policy and cessation referrals; (C) installation of vape detectors in bathrooms. The health department notes that most students overestimate how many of their peers vape. The coalition must choose a strategy and show results within one school year.
1. Using a recognized planning model, explain how the coalition should decide between the three proposals.
Read the worked answer
Use a planning model such as MAP-IT or PRECEDE-PROCEED. First, assess need: 32% versus 21% is a meaningful gap, and the norms data show that students overestimate peer vaping, which is a modifiable predisposing factor. Next, weigh each proposal against evidence, reach, feasibility, equity, and sustainability.
Option A-a one-time assembly-has low dose, may boomerang by dramatizing prevalence, and is unlikely to change behavior. Option C-detectors-raises surveillance and privacy concerns, may displace vaping to other locations, and has limited evidence for reducing use. Option B-peer-led social norms plus policy enforcement and cessation referral-addresses the misperceived norm, the school environment, and access to help. It fits the coalition's partners and the one-year timeline. The sheriff's involvement should focus on policy consistency, not punishment. The coalition should adopt B as the core strategy, keep a small budget for training and communication, and add a brief media-literacy or refusal-skills component. Decide in advance how enforcement will be applied equitably so vulnerable students are not disproportionately cited.
2. Describe the components of the selected intervention and how it would be implemented in the first 90 days.
Read the worked answer
Implementation should begin with a 90-day plan. Weeks 1–2: form a planning team, review the survey data, and draft clear messages that correct the norm-for example, report the actual percentage of students who do not vape. Weeks 3–4: recruit 10–15 peer leaders across grades and clubs; train them in facilitation, confidentiality, and referral. Weeks 5–8: launch the campaign through advisory periods, announcements, social media, posters, and a student-designed pledge; integrate two brief lessons on nicotine addiction and refusal skills. Simultaneously, the principal communicates the tobacco-free policy, trains staff on consistent enforcement, and sets up a confidential referral pathway to the clinic. Weeks 9–12: hold booster activities, collect reach and participation data, and convene the coalition to review early feedback.
Key supports include a scripted curriculum, parent messages in English and Spanish, and a clear rule that peer leaders do not disclose personal use. Avoid a single assembly and shame-based messages. The clinic should offer cessation support without requiring parental notification unless required by law. Document dose, fidelity, and any adaptation.
3. Propose process, impact, and outcome evaluation indicators with a feasible data plan.
Read the worked answer
Process indicators measure whether the plan was delivered: number of peer leaders trained, lessons delivered, campaign reach, policy reminders, referrals made, and fidelity checklist scores. Impact indicators measure short-term changes: perceived peer vaping, knowledge of nicotine harms, refusal self-efficacy, and awareness of cessation resources. Outcome indicators measure behavior: past-30-day vaping on an anonymous school survey, compared with the baseline and the state rate. Add equity checks-response rates by grade and any disparities in enforcement.
Feasibility matters. Use the existing survey window and anonymous coding; do not add a long questionnaire. Analyze percentages with confidence intervals and report limitations, including self-report and a single school year. A comparison school is desirable but may not be available, so a pre/post design with a stable state benchmark is realistic. Set a modest target, such as a 5-percentage-point reduction in past-30-day use and a 10-point improvement in accurate norm perception. Share results with students and parents in plain language.