Power Through Choices
The program was developed for use with youth in various out-of-home care settings, such as family foster homes, kinship foster care, residential group homes, transitional living centers, and juvenile justice facilities. The program was evaluated with youth living in residential group homes across Oklahoma, California, and Maryland.
Healthy Teen Network
1501 Saint Paul Street, Suite 124
Baltimore, MD 21202
Email: capacitybuilding@healthyteennetwork.org
Phone: 443-216-1355
Power Through Choices provides a fidelity monitoring checklist and a post-session facilitator feedback form.
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 dosage itself is described in the Notes when available.
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.
For more details about program components, refer to the FAQ page.
Category | Component | Core Component | Component present | Notes | Lesson number(s) / activities where present |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Content | Boundary setting/refusal skills | Yes | Yes (both versions) | Lesson 2 | |
Content | Child development | No | |||
Content | Communication skills | Yes | Yes (both versions) | Lesson 2 | |
Content | Conflict resolution/social problem solving | No | |||
Content | Connections with trusted adults | Yes | Yes (both versions) | Lessons 2,6,7 | |
Content | Cultural values | No | |||
Content | Gender identity | Yes | Yes (current version) | Lesson 3 | |
Content | Gender roles | No | |||
Content | Leadership | No | |||
Content | Normative beliefs | Yes | Yes (both versions) | Lessons 1,2,7,8,9,10 | |
Content | Parenting skills | No | |||
Content | Social competence | Yes | Yes (both versions) | Lesson 2 | |
Content | Social influence/actual vs. perceived social norms | No | |||
Content | Social support/capital | Yes | Yes (both versions) | Lesson 2,6,7,8,9 | |
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) | Lessons 1-9 | |
Delivery mechanism | Method: Artistic expression | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Assessment/survey | Yes | Yes (both versions) | Self-assessment as part of knowledge-building activities; not intended to be submitted for analysis | Lesson 3,5 |
Delivery mechanism | Method: Booster session | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Case management | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Demonstration | Yes | Yes (both versions) | Lessons 2,5,6,7 | |
Delivery mechanism | Method: Discussion/debrief | Yes | Yes (both versions) | All lessons | |
Delivery mechanism | Method: Family session | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Game | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Home visiting | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Homework assignment | Yes | Yes (both versions) | Lesson 6 | |
Delivery mechanism | Method: In-session assignment | Yes | Yes (both versions) | Assignments are not turned in | Lessons 3,5,8,10 |
Delivery mechanism | Method: Introduction | Yes | Yes (both versions) | Lesson 1 | |
Delivery mechanism | Method: Lecture | Yes | Yes (both versions) | All lessons | |
Delivery mechanism | Method: Motivational interviewing | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Music | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Parent-focused activity | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Peer-to-peer | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Public service announcement | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Reading | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Role play/Practice | Yes | Yes (both versions) | Lessons 2,6 | |
Delivery mechanism | Method: Self-guided activity | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Service learning | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Slide show | Yes | Yes (both versions) | Lessons 3,5 | |
Delivery mechanism | Method: Social media | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Spiral learning | Yes | Yes (both versions) | Lessons 2-10 | |
Delivery mechanism | Method: Storytelling | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Text message | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Video | No | |||
Delivery mechanism | Method: Other | No |
Pagination
- Previous page
- Page 2
- Next page
- Make healthy, positive choices related to sexual behavior.
- Build condom and contraceptive knowledge and skills.
- Develop and practice effective communication skills.
- Learn how to access available resources.
- Introduction to PTC: Introduce curriculum, assess participants’ knowledge regarding pregnancy prevention and sex education, and demonstrate role playing.
- Making Choices Clear: Help participants to build assertiveness and communication skills related to sexual activity.
- Adolescent Reproductive Health Basics: Increase knowledge of male and female reproductive anatomy, the process of fertilization and conception, and the menstrual cycle.
- Increasing Contraceptive Knowledge: Increase knowledge about contraceptive methods.
- Understanding STIs and HIV and How to Reduce Your Risk: Increase knowledge and understanding of STI/HIV transmission and prevention.
- Practice Makes Perfect: Discuss the level of risk associated with various sexual behaviors, use role playing to demonstrate the importance of dual methods, and learn condom use skills.
- Using Resources to Support Your Choices: Discuss ways to improve communication about contraception with foster parents, guardians, and group home staff members; learn how to access local sexual and reproductive health resources.
- Making Choices that Fit Your Lifestyle: Develop a plan for avoiding unwanted pregnancies and STIs, set short- and long-term goals, and identify choices needed to attain goals.
- Creating the Future You Want: Identify planning involved in practicing positive sexual behaviors, outline individual choices involved in sexual decision making, and discuss abstinence as a viable choice.
- Plan + Prepare + Practice = POWER: Reinforce themes and messages of the curriculum.
- When working with young people who may have been victims of sexual abuse or rape, as well as youth who struggle to define appropriate boundaries, it is important for the safety of the youth and of your staff that no adult be left alone with a youth at any time.
- Utilizing a team of two facilitators allows the team to better reflect the potential diversity of the youth being served.
Citation | High-Quality Randomized Trial | Moderate-Quality Randomized Trial | Moderate-Quality Quasi-Experiment | Low Study Rating | Did Not Meet Eligibility Criteria |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Oman et al. 2016 |
✓ | ||||
Covington et al. 2016 Oman et al. 2018 Oman et al. 2016 |
✓ |
Citation | Setting | Majority Age Group | Majority Racial/Ethnic Group | Gender | Sample Size |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Oman et al. 2016 |
n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
Covington et al. 2016 Oman et al. 2018 Oman et al. 2016 |
Residential facility or group home | 14 to 17 | Hispanic or Latinx of any race | Youth of any gender | 885 |
Evidence by Outcome Domain and Study
Citation | Sexual Activity | Number of Sexual Partners | Contraceptive Use | STIs or HIV | Pregnancy |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Oman et al. 2016 |
n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
Covington et al. 2016 Oman et al. 2018 Oman et al. 2016 |
|
|
|
|
|
Citation | Details |
---|---|
Oman et al. 2016 |
This study did not meet the review's screening criteria |
Covington et al. 2016 Oman et al. 2018 Oman et al. 2016 |
The program was evaluated in a cluster randomized controlled trial involving 885 youth recruited from 44 residential group homes in California, Maryland, and Oklahoma. The study randomly assigned clusters of youth to a treatment group receiving the 10 sessions of the POWER Through Choices program or to a control group that did not receive the program but had access to other community and group home services. Data for the study were collected before the program (baseline), immediately after the program, and six and 12 months after the end of the program. This study focused on data collected at the six- and 12-month follow-ups. Six months after the program ended, youth who participated in the program were significantly less likely than youth in the control group to report having had sex without using birth control in the past three months (odds ratio = 0.72 (confidence interval = 0.52 to 0.98); TPPER-calculated effect size = -0.141). The study found that at the six-month follow-up, there were no statistically significant impacts on whether youth had ever been pregnant or gotten someone pregnant. Twelve months after the program ended, youth who participated in the program were significantly less likely to report ever having been pregnant or gotten someone pregnant than youth in the control group (odds ratio = 0.81 (confidence interval = 0.75 to 0.88); TPPER-calculated effect size = -0.124). In addition, the study found that 12 months after the end of the program, the subgroup of female youth who participated in the program were significantly less likely to report ever being pregnant than their counterparts in the control group (odds ratio = 0.66, confidence interval = 0.56 to 0.77); TPPER-calculated effect size = -0.255). At the 12-month follow-up, there were no statistically significant impacts on measures of recent (in the last three months) sexual activity (number of sexual partners, condom and birth control use during recent sexual activity, and being tested and diagnosed with a sexually transmitted infection (STI) in the past 12 months. The study also examined program impacts on measures of knowledge about reproductive anatomy and fertility, HIV and STIs, and methods of protection; attitudes toward safe sex and the use of protection; perceived self-efficacy to avoid unprotected sex; perceived ability to find methods of protection; perceived access to condoms and birth control; and intention to have sex, use a condom, and use birth control in the next year. Findings for these outcomes were not considered for the review because they fell outside the scope of the review. |