BlueprintWhat did we

learn?

Limitations

“It was originally intended that the local school sample would act as a comparison group so that the efficacy of the Blueprint programme could be tested. However, analysis during the development of the evaluation concluded that to be able to detect differences between the two samples would require a sample of at least 50 schools. This was considered beyond the scope of the evaluation, both in terms of the resources it would require and what was appropriate for the evaluation of an untested approach.”

Key Findings

• Pupil and Parent Responses• Prevalence, attitudes towards drug use and

drug use norms• Local school data

Pupil and Parent Responses

• Pupils saw the lessons as imparting important information

• Interactive teaching methods were valued by pupils

• Pupils retained good drug knowledge• Parents approve of drug education in schools• Parents who used the materials at home

found them helpful

Prevalence, attitudes towards drug use and drug use norms

• Smoking, drinking and drug use rose in pupils between Year 7 and 10

• Many pupils overestimated the number of their peers who smoked and drank alcohol. Fewer pupils overestimated drug use among their peers.

• Smoking, drinking and drug use became socially more acceptable as pupils grew older. This was particularly true of drinking.

Local School Data

• PSHE was also popular with pupils not in the Blueprint schools– The information imparted was seen as important

by the majority, and the format of lessons seen as engaging

• Pupils were able to demonstrate knowledge of drugs

• Parents approved of PSHE lessons• Prevalence of use rose from Year 7 to Year 10

Learning Points

• Getting parents to participate in the programme through workshops proved difficult – Future programmes could focus on improving this link and less on

media, community and health policy• Evaluation design needs to be more robustly designed to

enable impact measurement– Research should be over a longer period to reflect the ages at

which young people are most likely to be making decisions about using or not using substances

• The programme should have been focused at a younger age group– Programmes should try to intervene before 11 years

Reaction

“I have just completed reading the long awaited “Impact” report of the Home Office’s Blueprint Drug Education project. As then Drug Education Forum Chair and one of the Drug Education Forum representatives on the project’s Advisory Group, I am disappointed, frustrated…”

Eric Carlin

“If there is an upside to this story, it is that Blueprint evaluation has had to be honest and up-front about its limitations. Almost two years late and smuggled out though it may have been, the report suggests that statistical integrity is beginning to count for a bit more inside the Home Office.”

Mark Easton, BBC

We do now know a lot about things like "can you practically give the Blueprint programme in schools" (yes, you can) and "do parents like their children being taught about the risks of drugs" (yes, they do)...This sounds great, but improvements on this kind of "surrogate outcome" are often unrelated to real world benefits...

Ben Goldacre, Guardian