HIV Prevention Conducted by State Education Agencies Fiscal Year 1: March 1, 2008–February 28, 2009 51 education agencies responded [This includes the education agencies from 49 states (all but Utah), Washington, DC, and the Cherokee Nation] A. POLICY Percentage of State HIV Projects That Developed, Had, and Distributed Model Policies, Policy Standards, or Other Policy Materials to Districts or Schools on the Following Topics 33% developed polices for HIV education for students 88% had policies for HIV education for students 69% distributed policies for HIV education for students 20% developed policies for infection control/universal precautions for all school staff 88% had policies for infection control/universal precautions for all school staff 57% distributed policies for infection control/universal precautions for all school staff 18% developed policies for maintaining confidentiality of HIV-infected students and staff 92% had policies for maintaining confidentiality of HIV-infected students and staff 55% distributed policies for maintaining confidentiality of HIV-infected students and staff 18% developed policies for professional development requirements for teachers of HIV education 61% had policies for professional development requirements for teachers of HIV education 37% distributed policies for professional development requirements for teachers of HIV education 10% developed policies for confidential counseling for HIV-infected students 55% had policies for confidential counseling for HIV-infected students 24% distributed policies for confidential counseling for HIV-infected students 18% developed policies for procedures to protect HIV-infected students and staff from discrimination 88% had policies for procedures to protect HIV-infected students and staff from discrimination 47% distributed policies for procedures to protect HIV-infected students and staff from discrimination 16% developed policies for attendance of students with HIV infection 86% had policies for attendance of students with HIV infection 43% developed policies for attendance of students with HIV infection B. CURRICULA AND INSTRUCTION Percentage of state HIV projects that participated in the following activities to help districts or schools with HIV curricula or instruction: 82% provided professional development on exemplary HIV curricula or instruction. 65% provided professional development on any specific HIV prevention education curricula/program for youth. 77% provided individualized technical assistance on HIV curricula or instruction. Percentage of State HIV Projects That Emphasized Each of the Following Topics in Curricula or Instruction 96% emphasized abstinence from sexual intercourse 88% emphasized abstinence from IV drug use 84% emphasized proper and consistent use of condoms among sexually active youth 90% emphasized influencing social norms 88% emphasized reducing number of partners 96% emphasized developing individual and interpersonal skills 98% emphasized the relationship between HIV prevention and other STD prevention or pregnancy prevention 90% emphasized the relationship between HIV prevention and prevention of alcohol or drug use 67% emphasized how to implement universal precautions C. ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE Percentage of State HIV Projects That Participated in Any of the Following Activities to Help Districts or Schools Assess or Measure, at the Classroom Level, Students' Knowledge and Skills Regarding HIV Prevention 26% developemed frameworks or guidelines 67% had frameworks or guidelines 41% distributed frameworks or guidelines 28% provided professional development 39% provided individualized technical assistance D. EXTERNAL COLLABORATION Percentage of State HIV Projects That Collaborated with Each of the Following External Partners State-level health agencies/departments of health: 100% Local– or county-level health agencies/departments of health: 78% State health coalitions or networks: 84% Universities and other institutions of higher education: 82% Youth-serving community organizations: 77% Youth (representing schools or communities): 61% Percentage of State HIV Projects That Described Their Relationship with the State CDC-Sponsored Community Planning Group for HIV Prevention in the Following Manner No one attended the meetings: 12% Attended to observe, but had no formal role: 29% Attended and had voting privileges: 37% Attended and served as a content expert or technical advisor, but had no voting privileges: 29% Attended in other capacity: 6% E. Youth at Disproportionate Risk Percentage of State HIV Projects That Identified the Following Populations of Youth as Being at Disproportionate Risk for HIV Transmission Specific zip codes, counties, or other geographic areas: 49% LGBTQ/Sexual minority youth: 41% Alternative school, incarcerated, or juvenile corrections system youth: 24% Homeless youth: 8% Rural area youth: 6% For further information or assistance, contact the Evaluation Research Team at ert@cdc.gov or via the CDC Web site at http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/evaluation/index.htm.