Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education

“Creating a sustainable program for long-term success” was the focus of Washington’s 2000 strategic plan. In 2002, this theme was still evident. While Washington was faced with some difficult challenges, the foundation had been laid to continue to improve and expand its tobacco control program. The program benefited from a supportive leadership, ample funding, a health conscious public, and an improving tobacco control network.

For this evaluation, preventing youth initiation and promoting cessation were identified as the top two program goals for FY 2002. Partners agreed with these priorities, emphasizing the importance of demonstrating to the Legislature that the program was affecting prevalence rates. Minor changes to the list were suggested: broadening the definition of youth to include 18-24 year olds due to the targeting of this group by the tobacco industry; and including cessation for pregnant women as a sub-goal of promoting cessation. The statewide quit line was generally viewed as a successful activity, partly due to good promotion and continued evaluation.

The partners identified the following strengths and challenges of Washington’s program: • The dedication and experience of the tobacco control professionals and advocates was identified as a major strength of the program, with recognition specifically given to the DOH program staff. • The timely development of a detailed strategic state plan that continued to provide guidance beyond the first year of the program was viewed as a strength. • The very existence of a tobacco control network was identified as a positive factor. However, the lack of cohesiveness among partners was seen as a challenge. • While some thought that the current funding level of the program was a positive factor, most felt that more funding was needed to reach the CDC minimum funding level. • Major political challenges were the state budget crisis and the securitization of future MSA funds. • The lack of capacity/infrastructure at the local and state levels also impeded the implementation of tobacco control activities