100-108 Kirby

Family Planning Perspectives riculum of its kind. It is brief and takes up little class time and, given its focus on postponing sex, has broad appeal to parents and schools. Moreover, an Atlanta-based evaluation of the PSI program implemented in combination with a five-session human sexuality course suggested that the curriculum delayed the initiation of first intercourse.2 However, serious questions have been raised about the quality of the intervention. For example, is the curriculum too modest in length, does it include enough practice in the skills that it attempts to teach, and do the slides or videos that it employs have appeal for young people? Furthermore, two important methodological limitations of the Atlanta evaluation have been noted.3 First, students were not randomly assigned to treatment and control groups: Youths living in one geographic area received the intervention, and they were compared with youths living in other geographic areas who did not receive the program. Thus, while analytic procedures controlled for some background characteristics and the two groups appeared to have been well matched, Douglas Kirby is director of research and Meg Korpi is senior research scientist at ETR Associates, Santa Cruz, Calif.; Richard P. Barth is Hutto Patterson Professor and Helen H. Cagampang is research specialist at the School of Social Welfare, University of California, Berkeley. This research was supported principally by the California Office of Family Planning, with additional support from the Cowell Foundation, the Packard Foundation and the Stuart Foundations. The Impact of the Postponing Sexual Involvement Curriculum Among Youths in California