Learning Objectives: Identify three alternatives for structuring a statewide tobacco control program. Assess the comparative advantages and risks of each in advocating for program funds at the legislature, managing programs efficiently, and evaluating program outcomes.
Abstract: Vermont, Indiana, and Ohio each structured its statewide comprehensive tobacco control program quite differently from the traditional model. In Vermont, while most of the program funds are appropriated to the Departments of Health and Education, the legislature also created a board with a broad range of statutory responsibilities, including independent evaluation of the program. Indiana created an independent state agency, accountable to their board, for the entire comprehensive program. The program in Ohio is located in a foundation outside of state government, scheduled to receive over a billion dollars of MSA funds over ten years for their endowment. The purpose of this workshop is to analyze the impact of each type of structure on the efficiency and effectiveness of these statewide programs. Panelists will address three areas of impact: legislative advocacy, program management, and program evaluation. Discussion will follow, comparing the advantages and challenges of each structure. The discussion will also assess whether there are variations on these structures which offer similar benefits. The primary target audience for this session is those in the process of designing or advocating for funding of a comprehensive program. They will learn how to assess the advantages and risks of establishing similar structures in their states. Others will be able to identify the potential benefits of expanding or restructuring existing oversight or advisory entities.
02nationalconf.ppt (96.0 kb)
Back to Impact of Structure on Program Advocacy, Management, and Evaluation Programs in Vermont, Indiana, and Ohio
Back to Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs or Combined Strategies
Back to The 2002 National Conference on Tobacco or Health