1. Evidence and Innovation
  2. Teen Pregnancy Prevention Evidence Review
  3. Programs
  4. Draw The Line/Respect The Line - INACTIVE

Draw the Line/Respect the Line - INACTIVE

Inactive Reason
This program is inactive because it has evidence of favorable impacts that is more than 20 years old. It no longer meets the inclusion criteria for the TPPER.
Developers
University of California, San Francisco Center for AIDS Prevention Studies, and ETR.
Program Summary
Draw the Line/Respect the Line promotes abstinence by providing students in grades 6, 7, and 8 with the knowledge and skills to prevent HIV, other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) and pregnancy. Using an interactive approach, this program shows students how to set personal limits and meet challenges to those limits. The grade 6 content features limit setting and refusal skills in a nonsexual context. Grade 7 content examines consequences of unplanned sex, information about STDs, and applying refusal skills in a party context. Grade 8 features practice of refusal skills in dating contexts and a condom demonstration.
Intended Population
The program was designed for and tested with youth in grades 6 to 8.
Program Setting

The program was designed for and evaluated in a classroom-based, school setting.

Contact and Availability Information

Program Contact Information
Email: sales@etr.org
Phone: (800) 321-4407
Website: https://www.etr.org/ebi/programs/draw-the-line/

Training Contact Information 
Kelly Gainor, M.Ed.
ebptraining@etr.org
Website: https://www.etr.org/ebi/programs/draw-the-line/

Sample of Curriculum Available for Review Prior to Purchase
Yes
Languages Available
English, Spanish
Monitoring and Evaluation Tools
Monitoring and evaluation tools available
Yes
Monitoring and evaluation tool usage required
No
Information about available monitoring and evaluation tools (if applicable)

The Draw the Line/Respect the Line program provides pre- and post-tests and fidelity logs for use with youth in grades 6, 7, and 8 to assess the extent to which the program’s core components were implemented with fidelity.

Program Components and Core Components

Last updated in 2024

The data presented on this page reflect responses from the program’s developer or distributor to a program component checklist that asked them to report on the individual components within their TPP program. The same program component checklist was sent to the developer or distributor of every active TPP program with evidence of effectiveness. The program component table provides information on seven types of program components including content, delivery mechanism, dosage, staffing, format, context, and intended population characteristics; whether the component was present or optional in the program; whether the component is considered to be core to the program; and the lesson number or activity where the component can be found in the program. In the drop-down menu below, under “Has component,” there are four options that indicate a component as present in the program: (1) “Yes” indicates that the component is present in at least one version of the program (whether that be the program version that was evaluated, the current version, or both versions); (2) “Yes (both versions)” indicates that the component is present in both the evaluated version of the program and the current version of the program; (3) “Yes (current version)” indicates that the component is present in the current, but not the evaluated, version of the program; and (4) “Yes (evaluated version)” indicates that the component is present in the evaluated version of the program, only. Note that for dosage components, the only possible response option was “Yes”, and the dosage is described in the Notes when available. For more details, refer to the FAQ. Some of the components identified are noted as core components of the evidence-based program, but this does not necessarily mean that these components have been rigorously tested and show evidence of effectiveness. Most often developers denoted components as core based on theory or experience in the field. Click here for the list of evidence-based components.

Category Component Core Component Component present Notes Lesson number(s) / activities where present
Content Boundary setting/refusal skills Yes Yes (both versions) Grade 6, Lesson 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, pages 18-24, Lesson 2, pages 37-46, Lesson 3.3/3.4, pages 59-64, Lesson 4, pages 71-79; Grade 7, Lesson 3.3/3.4, pages 47-51, Lesson 4.3/4.4/4.5, pages 67-74, Lesson 6.4, pages 111-112, Lesson 7.3/7.4, pages 135-137; Grade 8 Lesson 4.3/4.4, pages 89-93, Lesson 7.4, pages 151-152
Content Child development No
Content Communication skills No
Content Conflict resolution/social problem solving No
Content Connections with trusted adults Yes Yes (both versions) Family homework in Grade 6, Lesson 1.6, pages 25-26; Lesson 3.4 pages 62-63. Grade 7, Lesson 3.5, pages 52-53.
Content Cultural values No
Content Gender identity No
Content Gender roles No
Content Leadership No
Content Normative beliefs No
Content Parenting skills No
Content Social competence No
Content Social influence/actual vs. perceived social norms No
Content Social support/capital No
Content Identity development No
Content Morals/values No
Content Spirituality No
Content Volunteering/civic engagement No
Content Other
Delivery mechanism Method: Anonymous question box Yes Yes (both versions) Grade 7, Lesson 1.6, page 24, Lesson 7.7, page 138; Grade 8, Lesson 2.5, page 42, Lesson 4.5, pages 94-95, Lesson 6.5, page 123 (specific lessons that feature the question box. Box can be used throughout the curriculum.
Delivery mechanism Method: Artistic expression No
Delivery mechanism Method: Assessment/survey Yes Yes (both versions) Grade 7, Lesson 5.3/5.5, pages 91-92/95-96; Grade 8, Lesson 2.3/2.3, pages 37-41
Delivery mechanism Method: Booster session No Multiple grade level units functioned as "boosters" but not as defined here.
Delivery mechanism Method: Case management No
Delivery mechanism Method: Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) No
Delivery mechanism Method: Demonstration Yes Yes (both versions) Grade 6, Lesson 1.3; Grade 6, Lesson 2.5; Grade 6, Lesson 5.5; Grade 7, Lesson 4.4; Grade 8, Lesson 6.4
Delivery mechanism Method: Discussion/debrief Yes Yes (both versions) Throughout
Delivery mechanism Method: Family session No
Delivery mechanism Method: Game Yes Yes (both versions) Grade 6, Lesson 1.3, pages 18-21; Grade 8, Lesson 2.3/2.3, pages 37-41
Delivery mechanism Method: Home visiting No
Delivery mechanism Method: Homework assignment Yes Yes (both versions) Grade 6, Lesson 1.6, pages 25-26, Lesson 3.4, pages 62-64; Grade 7, Lesson 3.5, pages 52-54, Lesson 5.6, pages 97-98, Grade 8,Lesson 1.4, pages 24-25, Lesson 3.5, page 78, Lesson 4.3, pages 89-91, Lesson 5.4, page 109
Delivery mechanism Method: In-session assignment Yes Yes (both versions) Grade 6, , Lesson 1.4/1.5/1.6, pages 22-27, Lesson 2.6/2.7, pages 44-46, Lesson 3.4, pages 62-63, Lesson 4.4, pages 74-75, Lesson 4.6, page 79, Lesson 5.6/5.7, pages 91-94; Grade 7, Lesson 1.3, page 20, Lesson 1.5, pages 22-23, Lesson 2.3/2.4, pages 35-38, Lesson 3.3/3.4/3.5, pages 47-53, Lesson 4.5/4.6, pages 72-75, Lesson 5.7, page 99, Lesson 6.4/6.5, pages 111-113, Lesson 7.4, pages 136-137, Lesson 7.6, pages 139-140; Grade 8, Lesson 1.4, page 24, Lesson 2.6, page 44, Lesson 3.4, pages 76-77, Lesson 4.4/4.5, pages 92-95, Lesson 5.5, pages 110-111, Lesson 6.5, pages 123-124, Lesson 7.5, pages 153-154
Delivery mechanism Method: Introduction Yes Yes (both versions) Grade 6, Lesson 1.1/1.2, pages 15-17; Grade 7, Lesson 1.1/1.2, pages 17-19; Grade 8, Lesson 1.1, pages 17-18
Delivery mechanism Method: Lecture No
Delivery mechanism Method: Motivational interviewing No
Delivery mechanism Method: Music No
Delivery mechanism Method: Parent-focused activity Yes Yes (both versions) Grade 6, Lesson 1.6, pages 25-26, Lesson 3.4, pages 62-64; Grade 7, Lesson 3.5, pages 52-54
Delivery mechanism Method: Peer-to-peer No
Delivery mechanism Method: Public service announcement No
Delivery mechanism Method: Reading Yes Yes (both versions) Grade 7, Lesson 5.4, pages 93-94, Lesson 6.3, pages 109-110; Grade 8, Lesson 1.2, pages 19-20
Delivery mechanism Method: Role play/Practice Yes Yes (both versions) Grade 6, Lesson 2.6, pages 44-45, Lesson 3.3, pages 59-61, Lesson 4.5, pages 76-78, Lesson 5.6, pages 91-92; Grade 7, Lesson 4.5, pages 72-74, Lesson 6.3/6.4, pages 109-112; Grade 8, Lesson 4.4, pages 92-93
Delivery mechanism Method: Self-guided activity No
Delivery mechanism Method: Service learning No
Delivery mechanism Method: Slide show No Optional PowerPoints available to support instruction as desired
Delivery mechanism Method: Social media No
Delivery mechanism Method: Spiral learning Yes Yes (both versions) How to draw the line: Grade 6, Lesson 3.3, pages 59-61; Grade 7, Lesson 4.5, pages 72-74, Lesson 6.4, pages 111-112, Lesson 7.4, pages 136-137; Grade 8, Lesson 4.3/4.4, pages 89-93. In addition, every lesson starts with a review of the previous lesson.
Delivery mechanism Method: Storytelling Yes Yes (both versions)
Delivery mechanism Method: Text message No
Delivery mechanism Method: Video No
Delivery mechanism Method: Other Yes Yes (both versions) Priming (introduction & plan for day) and closing personal reflections of learning "I learned" statements w/every lesson
Program Objectives
The goal of Draw the Line/Respect the Line is to provide students with knowledge and skills critical to prevent HIV infection, other sexually transmitted disease and pregnancy. All three grade levels focus on setting personal limits and using refusal and other intrapersonal skills to draw and maintain those limits. Lessons also include the importance of respecting others’ personal limits.
Program Content

Draw the Line/Respect the Line is a three-year curriculum, that focuses on changing functional knowledge, attitudes and beliefs, social norms, skills, and parent-child communication.

Sixth Grade (5 Lessons):

  • Functional knowledge; attitudes and behaviors; social norms regarding the concept of limits; and how to respect limits.
  • Refusal skills and skills that encourage respecting limits.
  • Parent-child communication, including discussion of cultural and family values and pressure situations for young people.

Seventh Grade (7 Lessons):

  • Functional knowledge and social norms regarding signs and situations that could lead to sex; emotional and social consequences of having sex versus not having sex; pressure situations teens face around sex; and facts about STD.
  • Attitudes and beliefs that foster positive attitudes toward not having sex and drawing the line.
  • Skills, including refusal skills and inter- as well as intra-personal skills to get out of risky situations that may lead to sex.
  • Parent-child communication, including discussion of intentions to avoid having sex and getting out of risky situations.

Eighth Grade (7 Lessons):

  • Functional knowledge of facts about HIV and other STDs; proper steps of condom use; situations that could make it difficult to stick with personal limits; and behaviors that increase the risk of HIV.
  • Attitudes and beliefs that foster positive attitudes toward not having sex; important reasons for sticking with personal limits; and overcoming barriers to sticking with limits.
  • Norms regarding choosing not to have sex; using condoms and other protection if having sex; and having and respecting limits.
  • Skills, including refusal skills, condom use skills and intra-personal skills to stick with limits.
  • Parent-child communication, including discussion of HIV and its impact on those who are affected by HIV.

Draw the Line/Respect the Line is based on several social psychological theories, particularly Social Inoculation Theory and Social Cognitive Theory. The curriculum is based on numerous principles, including:

  • Not having sex is the healthiest sexual limit for students in middle school.
  • Students can set sexual limits.
  • Students can be motivated to maintain their limits.
  • Students will encounter challenges to maintain their limits.
  • Students can overcome challenges to their limits.
  • Students who respect the limits of others will be less coercive.
  • Each student has unique needs; and condom use is essential protection for those who are sexually active

The program logic model can be found on ETR's website: http://www.etr.org/ebi/programs/draw-the-line/

Program Methods
The program is delivered through role play, mini-lectures, brainstorming, games, small group work, an anonymous question box, videos, and guest speakers.
Program Structure and Timeline

The program is delivered in nineteen 45-minute sessions, over 3 years. In sixth grade there are 5 lessons, and in seventh and eighth grade there are 7 lessons each. The lessons should be taught in sequence.

Ideally, classes are taught 2-3 times per week. The ideal group size ranges from 10 to 35 youth.

Staffing
The curriculum can be used by either classroom teachers or community-based educators.
Staff Training

It is highly recommended that educators who plan to teach Draw the Line/Respect the Line receive professional development to prepare them to effectively implement the curriculum with its intended target group.

Training on Draw the Line/Respect the Line is available through ETR’s Professional Learning Services. Training options include:

  1. Three-day Training of Educators (TOE)—the learning process includes pre-work, skill-based instruction and post-training follow-up support.
  2. Four-day Training of Trainers (TOT)—available for seasoned trainers who have experience in delivering the intervention. Completion entitles participants to use ETR’s research-based training designs to conduct TOEs for their organization or designated affiliate group. TOT attendees who have completed the four-day TOT are eligible to attend a condensed TOT course on additional EBIs.
Program Materials and Resources

Core intervention materials include a teacher guide (English only) for each grade and student workbooks (English and Spanish).

Additional Needs for Implementation
None specified
Fidelity
ETR provides an adaptation kit, grade-specific fidelity logs, and grade-specific Draw the Line/Respect the Line Student Knowledge Surveys that can be administered as a pre-test/post-test, and survey answer keys. These materials can be found here: http://www.etr.org/ebi/programs/draw-the-line/
Technical Assistance and Ongoing Support

ETR provides in-person and web- or phone-based technical assistance before, during and/or after program implementation. TA is tailored to the needs of the site and is designed to support quality assurance, trouble-shoot adaptation issues, and boost implementation.

ETR also provides evaluation support for EBI implementation. Services address process and outcome evaluation and include assistance with evaluation planning, instrument design and development, implementation fidelity, data management and analysis, performance measurement, continuous quality improvement (CQI) protocols, and effective tools and strategies for reporting results.

Allowable Adaptations

In-depth adaptation guidelines and tools are available through ETR at the following link: http://www.etr.org/ebi/programs/draw-the-line/.

Examples of allowable adaptations include implementing the program in a community setting; tailoring role plays to be more relevant to the population; updating statistics with the most current information; and implementing the program with educators who are not the same race/ethnicity or gender as the learners.

Adaptation Guidelines or Kit
Yes
Reviewed Studies
Citation High-Quality Randomized Trial Moderate-Quality Randomized Trial Moderate-Quality Quasi-Experiment Low Study Rating Did Not Meet Eligibility Criteria

Coyle et al. 2004

 		✓
Study Characteristics
Citation Setting Majority Age Group Majority Racial/Ethnic Group Gender Sample Size

Coyle et al. 2004

 		In school: Middle school 13 or younger Hispanic or Latinx of any race Youth of any gender

2829
Study Findings

Evidence by Outcome Domain and Study

Citation Sexual Activity Number of Sexual Partners Contraceptive Use STIs or HIV Pregnancy

Coyle et al. 2004

 		Favorable evidence Potentially favorable evidence n.a. n.a. n.a.
KEY
Evidence Indication
Favorable findings
Two or more favorable impacts and no unfavorable impacts, regardless of null findings
Potentially favorable findings
At least one favorable impact and no unfavorable impacts, regardless of null findings
Indeterminate findings
Uniformly null findings
Conflicting findings
At least one favorable and at least one unfavorable impact, regardless of null findings
Potentially unfavorable findings
At least one unfavorable impact and no favorable impacts, regardless of null findings
Unfavorable findings
Two or more unfavorable impacts and no favorable impacts, regardless of null findings
Note: n.a. indicates the study did not examine any outcome measures within that particular outcome domain, or the study examined outcome measures within that domain but the findings did not meet the review evidence standards.
Detailed Findings
Citation Details

Coyle et al. 2004

The program was evaluated in a cluster randomized controlled trial involving 19 ethnically diverse schools in northern California. Ten schools were randomly selected to implement the Draw the Line/Respect the Line program and nine were randomly selected for a control group that continued their regular school programming. Surveys were administered before the program started in spring of sixth grade (baseline) and then annually in spring of seventh, eighth, and ninth grades.

In the second year of the program in the spring of seventh grade, and again at the end of the program in the spring of eighth grade, boys in the schools implementing the intervention were significantly less likely to report ever having had sexual intercourse and having had sexual intercourse during the previous 12 months. In addition, boys in the intervention group also reported a lower frequency of sexual intercourse and having had fewer partners in the previous 12 months. A year after the program ended in the spring of ninth grade, boys participating in the intervention were significantly less likely to report ever having had sexual intercourse and having had sexual intercourse during the previous 12 months. Program impacts on the frequency of sexual intercourse and number of sexual partners were no longer statistically significant for boys one year after the program ended. The study found no statistically significant program impacts for girls on any of these outcomes for any of the follow-up periods.

The study also examined program impacts on measures of knowledge, attitudes, normative beliefs, self-efficacy, sexual limits, coercive behavior, and unwanted sexual advances. Findings for these outcomes were not considered for the review because they fell outside the scope of the review.

Notes

Some study entries may include more than one citation because each citation examines a different follow-up period from the same study sample, or because each citation examines a different set of outcome measures on the same study sample. A blank cell indicates the study did not examine any outcome measures within the particular outcome domain or the findings for the outcome measures within that domain did not meet the review evidence standards.

Information on evidence of effectiveness is available only for studies that received a high or moderate rating. Read the description of the review process for more information on how these programs are identified.