Model Adolescent Suicide Prevention Program (MASPP)

MASPP is a public health-oriented suicide prevention and intervention program originally developed for a small American Indian tribe in rural New Mexico to target high rates of suicide among its adolescents and young adults. The goals of the program are to reduce the incidence of adolescent suicides and suicide attempts through community education about suicide and related behavioral issues, such as child abuse and neglect, family violence, trauma, and alcohol and substance abuse. As a community-wide initiative, the MASPP incorporates universal, selective, and indicated interventions and emphasizes community involvement, ownership, and culturally framed public health approaches appropriate for an American Indian population.

Central features of the program include formalized surveillance of suicide-related behaviors; a school-based suicide prevention curriculum; community education; enhanced screening and clinical services; and extensive outreach provided through health clinics, social services programs, schools, and community gatherings and events. In addition, neighborhood volunteers of various ages are recruited to serve as "natural helpers." These individuals engage in personal and program advocacy, provide referrals to community mental health services, and offer peer counseling (with guidance from professional mental health staff) to youth who may prefer to seek assistance from trusted laypersons in a less formal setting.

Designation as a "Program with Evidence of Effectiveness"

SPRC designated this intervention as a “program with evidence of effectiveness” based on its inclusion in SAMHSA’s National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices (NREPP).

Outcome(s) Reviewed (Overall Quality of Research Rating-scale of 0 to 4)*

1: Suicide attempts (2.0)
2: Suicide gestures (2.0)

Read more about this program's ratings. 

---------------------

* NREPP changed its review criteria in 2015. This program is a “legacy program,” meaning that it was reviewed under the pre-2015 criteria. The evidence for each outcome was reviewed and scored on a scale of 0-4, with 4 indicating the highest quality of evidence and 0 indicating very poor quality of evidence. The overall rating was based on ratings of six criteria: 1) reliability of measures, 2) validity of measures, 3) intervention fidelity, 4) missing data and attrition, 5) potential confounding variables, and 6) appropriateness of analysis. When considering programs, we recommend (a) assessing whether the specific outcomes achieved by the program are a fit for your needs; and (b) examining the strength of evidence for each outcome.