1. Teen Pregnancy Prevention Evidence Review
  2. Programs
  3. Assisting In Rehabilitating Kids (ARK) - INACTIVE

Assisting in Rehabilitating Kids (ARK) - INACTIVE

Inactive Reason
This program is inactive because it is not currently available for implementation.
Developers
Janet St. Lawrence, Ph.D.
Program Summary
Assisting in Rehabilitating Kids (ARK) is an intervention for substance dependent youth designed to increase abstinence and safer sex practices, and reduce risky sex behaviors. The intervention is delivered in small groups after the participants' initial detoxification in the drug treatment facilities. Delivery methods include games, group discusion, lectures, practice, and training. ARK is adapted from the Becoming a Responsible Teen (BART) program.
Intended Population
The program was designed for and evaluated with substance dependent adolescents.
Program Setting

The program was evaluated in residential treatment facilities.

Contact and Availability Information
Dr. Janet St. Lawrence
Mississippi State University, Meridian
1000 Highway 19 North
Meridian, MS 39308
Email: jlawrence@meridian.msstate.edu
Not Available for Implementation.
Sample of Curriculum Available for Review Prior to Purchase
No
Languages Available
English
Program Components and Core Components

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.

Program component data is not available.

Program Objectives
The goal of ARK is to prevent HIV and other STIs among substance dependent youth by increasing abstinence and safer sex behaviors.
Program Methods
The program is delivered through group discussion, games, lectures, practice, and training.
Program Structure and Timeline
The program is delivered in twelve 90-minute sessions with small groups of participants.
Adaptation Guidelines or Kit
No
Reviewed Studies
Citation High-Quality Randomized Trial Moderate-Quality Randomized Trial Moderate-Quality Quasi-Experiment Low Study Rating Did Not Meet Eligibility Criteria

St. Lawrence et al. 2002
Study Characteristics
Citation Setting Majority Age Group Majority Racial/Ethnic Group Gender Sample Size

St. Lawrence et al. 2002

 		Specialized setting 14 to 17 White Male and female youth

161
Study Findings

Evidence by Outcome Domain and Study

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

St. Lawrence et al. 2002

 		Favorable evidence Potentially favorable evidence Favorable evidence 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

St. Lawrence et al. 2002

The program was evaluated in a cluster randomized controlled trial involving substance-dependent adolescents recruited from two residential drug treatment facilities in Mississippi. Eight groups of adolescents were recruited for the study on a rolling basis over a three-year period from 1995 to 1998. Each group was randomly assigned to one of three conditions: (1) a treatment group that received the full ARK intervention, (2) an alternative treatment group that received the first 11 sessions of ARK but not the 12th session on motivation, or (3) a control group that received a standard health education curriculum. Study data were collected with surveys administered before the intervention (baseline), immediately after the intervention ended, and 6 and 12 months after the intervention ended.

The study found that immediately after the four-week intervention ended, adolescents participating in the intervention were significantly more likely to report being abstinent, having fewer sexual partners and fewer occasions of unprotected vaginal intercourse, and having more occasions of condom-protected intercourse. Six months after the intervention ended, program impacts on abstinence, unprotected vaginal intercourse, and condom-protected intercourse remained statistically significant. Program impacts on the number of sexual partners were no longer statistically significant. Twelve months after the intervention ended, program impacts on abstinence, unprotected vaginal intercourse, and condom-protected intercourse remained statistically significant. Program impacts on the number of sexual partners were not statistically significant.

The study also examined program impacts on the percentage of intercourse occasions that were condom protected. Findings for this outcome were not considered for the review because they did not meet the review evidence standards. Specifically, the outcome was measured for a subgroup of youth defined by sexual activity at follow up. Additionally, the study examined program impacts on measures of AIDS knowledge, attitudes toward condoms and HIV prevention, self-efficacy, perceived risk, skill acquisition, and substance use. Findings for these outcomes were not considered for the review because the outcomes 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.

Language directly from the program model developer or authors.