# Preface
We see it on the nightly news, read about it in the newspaper, hear about it from our children, and witness it firsthand-young people getting in fistfights and shoot-outs in our neighborhoods, in shopping malls, on the playground, and in school. It's disturbing and frightening, both for our nation's youth and for society as a whole.
If you've wanted to do something to stop this violence, then Best Practices of Youth Violence Prevention: A Sourcebook for Community Action is for you. We've pulled together the best practices known for four promising strategies to prevent youth violence, and we've organized them in a way that's easy to follow and use. And because it's often best to get expert advice "straight from the horse's mouth," we've included numerous resources to put you in touch with the people who have implemented these practices and seen the results.
Whether you're part of a grass-roots movement or involved with a large, established organization, you'll find this sourcebook to be a valuable asset to your youth violence prevention effort.

# Introduction
Violence among children and adolescents is a significant public health concern. In 1999, 1 violence claimed the lives of more than 3,200 Americans ages 19 and under-that's an average of 9 deaths per day-making the homicide rate for young people in the United States the highest among developed countries. Homicide is the second leading cause of death among 15-to 19year-olds and the thrid leading cause of death among children ages 10 to 14.
Highly publicized school shootings have sobered communities that may have believed they were immune to youth violence. Once viewed as a problem only in inner-city neighborhoods, youth violence is now perceived as a nationwide crisis, and communities are eager to find ways to stop it.
Experts in youth violence prevention do not have all the answers for solving this public health problem; we must do a lot more research and evaluation. But we know enough to offer the public some insight into what works to prevent violence by children and adolescents. This book-which builds on CDC's 1993 publication The Prevention of Youth Violence: A Framework for Community Action-shares that insight.
We developed this book with input from individuals working to prevent youth violence and from individuals whose positions made them likely to play a role in violence prevention efforts. We interviewed teachers, school administrators, members of community-based organizations, employees and volunteers at social service agencies, health department personnel, program planners and practitioners, and researchers from universities across the country to find out what they would like to see in a sourcebook for preventing violence by children and adolescents. Their responses guided the content and shaped the format of this book.
In addition to gathering information from experts, we conducted an extensive review of the scientific literature on youth violence prevention to collect the most up-to-date information available in the field. This literature review provides the science base on which our recommendations for best practices rest.

# Sourcebook Contents
This sourcebook places at your fingertips the best knowledge available about several strategies designed to prevent youth violence. These strategies are among those with the strongest evidence base for reducing youth violence.
Chapter 1 reviews general principals of intervention planning, implementation, and evaluation. This chapter will be especially helpful to readers who are new to developing prevention efforts. For seasoned program planners, it will be a useful refresher.
Chapter 2, the "meat" of the sourcebook, builds on the experiences of others who have worked to prevent violence by children and adolescents. It discusses in depth the best practices of four key youth prevention strategies and documents the science behind those best practices. Also in Chapter 2, you will find resources for more information about programs that have used these practices. We encourage you to talk with the organizations listed and to review the publications described to find out what worked particularly well and identify potential pitfalls and challenges.
The sourcebook also includes two appendices:
- Appendix A provides a fact sheet on the problem of youth violence. This information will be useful if you need to formulate a convincing appeal for support from organizations and community leaders.
- Appendix B provides an overview of the public health approach, the process by which public health problems are identified and addressed-and the underlying reason for our developing this sourcebook.

# Introduction
Planning, implementing, and evaluating an intervention can be a daunting project, especially for someone who has never been involved in such an effort. However, you can improve your chances of success if you follow certain steps. This chapter gives a brief overview of those steps.
In this chapter, we will explain how-and why-to do the following:
- Describe the problem of youth violence in your community If after reading this chapter, you have questions or concerns about developing an intervention for your community, take a look at the Additional Resources section at the end of the chapter. The publications listed there contain helpful information about such topics as assessing a community's resources and readiness to change, working with diverse populations, and evaluating a program.

# Definitions
You will see the terms strategy, intervention, and program repeated many times throughout this sourcebook. Because these terms may mean slightly different things to people in different professions, we have defined them here so all readers will know how they are used in this publication.

# Strategy:
A general conceptual approach to preventing violence by children and adolescents. For example, home visiting can offer basic training in parenting skills for pregnant teens.
Intervention: A specific set of activities and accompanying materials developed to prevent youth violence and the factors that contribute to it. For example, a school may implement a curriculum and role-playing activities to help students develop conflict-resolution skills.
Program: A grouping of strategies (and, therefore, of various kinds of interventions) designed to prevent youth violence. For example, a community might combine a school-based curriculum with a home-visiting intervention.

# Describe the Problem
Before you can plan an intervention to prevent violence committed by children and adolescents in your community, you need an accurate description of the problem. This description will help you identify who is affected most by the problem and where the problem occurs most frequently so you can better target an intervention. It will guide you in developing realistic objectives for your intervention and will provide a baseline against which to measure progress. You also need a clear definition of the problem to convince lawmakers, community leaders, parents, volunteers, and potential funders that your intervention is necessary.
The information you need to describe the problem can be obtained from several sources. Quantitative data is available from a number of agencies and organizations that collect statistics on youth violence, and you can interview or survey members of your community to get qualitative information (e.g., opinions, attitudes). Regardless of where you get your information, be sure the individuals collecting it are respected and trusted by the community.

# Factual information
Many sources of data exist to help you define the problem of youth violence in your community. Table 1 lists some of those sources. Appendix A at the end of this sourcebook also provides data about youth violence at a national level. Before asking agencies and organizations for information, do a little research.

# Table 1

# Sources of Factual Information about Youth Violence

# At-risk and high-risk children and adolescents
Research has shown that certain factors make children and adolescents more susceptible to developing violent behavior. These factors include an individual's characteristics or behaviors, including a history of aggression; beliefs that support the use of violence; social or cognitive problems; and the use of alcohol or drugs. They also include family and community circumstances such as a parent's use of alcohol or drugs; a lack of parental supervision or discipline; spousal abuse or child abuse; poor emotional attachment between parent and child; access to firearms; and divorce, relocation, or other family disruption. Problems at school, such as chronic discipline problems and associating with peers who are violent, can also put a young person at risk for developing violent behavior (Dahlberg 1998).
Chapter 1 -9  High-risk individuals are those who consistently engage in physical fights to resolve problems, have a criminal record, have a history of inflicting violent injury, have been the victim of violence, have failed or dropped out of school, carry a weapon, belong to a gang, or use drugs. Children and adolescents who move a lot, including children of immigrants or migrant workers, are also considered high risk.
If you choose to target at-risk or high-risk groups, be prepared for special challenges. You may need to enlist outreach workers to locate and engage high-risk youths, many of whom are no longer in school. You may also find it hard to establish trust and receptiveness among these young people.

# Young children (10 years and younger)
Violence is a learned behavior. The values, attitudes, and interpersonal skills acquired early in life play a key role in the development of violent behavior. Because a person's violent or nonviolent tendencies may be set in early childhood, preschooland elementary school-age children are often thought to be ideal participants in interventions that promote nonviolent values and enhance conflict-resolution skills.

# Parents and other family members
Family experiences play a critical role in causing, promoting, or reinforcing violent behavior by children and adolescents. Therefore, it is important to develop interventions targeted to parents, siblings, or the entire family unit. Interventions that involve the family often complement interventions carried out in the schools or other parts of the community.

# Other influential adults
Parents are not the only adults who shape the beliefs and behavior of young people. Individuals such as teachers, coaches, child care providers, and neighbors often influence how a child or adolescent feels about violence. As with interventions targeting family members, interventions that involve other adults in the community may be effective in supporting the interventions that target the young people themselves.

# General population
Social norms affect how violence is portrayed, whether violence by young people is tolerated, and how many resources a community will devote to stopping youth violence. Interventions for the general population can increase knowledge about the magnitude of youth violence in a community, help inform legislation or policies regarding youth violence, and create an environment that fosters and supports other interventions to

# The values, attitudes, and interpersonal skills acquired early in life play a key role in the development of violent behavior.
Chapter 1 -11 prevent violence by young people. However, as with interventions targeting all young people in a community, efforts designed to change the values, attitudes, or behaviors of the entire community are costly. And they may fail to reach those most in need of change.

# Select a Setting
The setting for an intervention is where activities will occur. Select a setting that is convenient and comfortable for participants; ask them where they would like to meet. Also consider the type of intervention you are planning. While many interventions have a logical setting, others-especially those targeting high-risk youth-may be less obvious. You may need to collect additional data about your intended participants to determine where your intervention can be carried out most effectively.

# Set Goals and Objectives
Once you have identified whom you should reach with an intervention and where to reach them, 2 decide what the goal of your intervention will be. Your goal should be a broad statement of what you want to achieve. Then determine the specific things you will need to do to achieve your goal. These are your objectives. Objectives should be measurable and attainable given the resources you have. They should tell who should achieve how much of what, where it should occur, and by when (NCIPC 1993). Table 4 provides an example of a goal and its corresponding objectives.
Objectives are important because they clarify the tasks to be done and provide a means of tracking an intervention's progress.
If you have many objectives, consider grouping them by the type of outcome-health effects such as injuries or deaths; behaviors such as fighting, expulsions, or dropping out of school; or other aspects of the program such as the number of students in a class or the number of newspaper articles published about youth violence. Presenting the objectives this way may make it easier for community leaders, supporters, funders, and others to see what you are trying to achieve.
Keep these important guidelines in mind when developing your goal and objectives:
- Make sure they fit the characteristics and resources of your community.
If you are working with other organizations, get their input to ensure that the goals and objectives of the intervention are consistent with those of each organization. - Do not include objectives to satisfy another organization's research agenda if they are unrelated to your goal. (However, it may be worthwhile to make minor additions to your objectives if doing so will generate substantial resources for your effort.)
Remember, your objectives are not static. Modify them as new information becomes available, as resources change, or as activities proceed faster or more slowly than planned.
2 As discussed previously, you may select your intervention before making a final decision on the setting.

# Objectives clarify the tasks to be done and provide a means of tracking an intervention's progress.
Chapter 1 -13

# Select an Appropriate Intervention
We can teach young people how to avoid violent situations. We can help them develop the skills they need to resolve conflicts without resorting to violence. We can help parents provide a nonviolent home for their children. We can provide young people with mentors who serve as nonviolent role models.
With so many types of interventions, how do you choose? Start by reviewing the characteristics of your community and your intended participants. Also consider the most appropriate settings for your intervention, based on research about the intended participants. And review your goals and objectives. The intervention you choose should best suit all of these factors. It should also be appropriate given your resources.
Build on the experience of others. If you know of interventions that have worked in other communities similar to yours, use them as models for your effort. Chapter 2 of this sourcebook offers many examples of interventions and the best practices for planning and implementing them. Keep in mind, however, that you may need to modify an intervention to make it appropriate to your community.

# Selecting multiple interventions
A single intervention conducted in isolation is not likely to solve the problem of youth violence; too many factors contribute to violent behavior to be addressed by one strategy. The most effective programs include several types of interventions and strategies that complement one another. For example, a mentoring program to help teens avoid gang membership may be complemented by an intervention that offers alternative afterschool activities. Instruction on nonviolent conflict resolution for school children may be complemented by an intervention that teaches families how to foster nonviolence at home. Carefully consider your resources, community support, and level of experience when selecting interventions. And make sure that the interventions you choose fit together well.

# Locate Resources for Your Intervention
Implementing an intervention to prevent violence by young people takes a variety of resources. Funding and other material resources-such as office space, equipment, and supplies-are critical to your effort. But they, alone, do not ensure success. You also need a commitment of time, effort, and support from the members of your community. These resources may come from public or private sources. You can also generate your own resources by organizing fundraisers and other events that publicize your effort.

# Build on the experience of others. If you know of interventions that have worked in other communities similar to yours, use them as models for your effort.
It may be easiest to start with local and state government agencies. If they don't have funds available, they can refer you to other government sources. Contact your local health department, department of housing, human resources or social services agency, department of parks and recreation, and department of education or school board. While few states publish a directory of available funds, many have web sites that tell you whom to contact about potential funding. You might also identify funding sources through personal contacts, such as elected officials. The Public Health Foundation is also a valuable source for funding information. They compile information on program areas that are funded in each state. You can reach the Foundation at www.phf.org or 202-898-5600.
When contacting state and local officials, ask about block grants. Each state receives federal block grants to support activities in four key public health areas: preventive health; maternal and child health; alcohol, drug abuse, and mental health; and primary care. Table 5 provides contacts for information about block grants.
Federal agencies offer other funding in addition to block grants. There are several ways to find these resources. Agencies solicit proposals and grant applications in the Federal Register and the Commerce Business Daily. You can subscribe to these publications through the Government Printing Office by calling 202-512-1800 or visiting their web site at www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs. However, these subscriptions are expensive. You may find it more practical to review these publications in your local library or to access them on the Internet. Research using these two publications will be timeconsuming, regardless of how you access them.
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance is another source of information about federal funding. Published annually, the catalog describes major federal grants and contracts, outlines eligibility requirements, identifies criteria for selection, explains financial details, and provides contact information. Because the information in this publication can become outdated quickly, you should contact each agency before submitting a proposal. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance is available from the Government Printing Office: 202-512-1800 or www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs.
The Additional Resources section of this chapter can also help you locate potential public funding sources. It contains a list of federal agencies with an interest in youth violence prevention, some of which provide grant money. You will need to contact them directly to find out if your intervention is of interest to them and if you meet their criteria.

# Private sources
Private funds come from corporations and other businesses, voluntary organizations, foundations, charitable institutions, churches, and other local establishments. Private organizations are typically more flexible than public agencies in the types of interventions they fund, and they often have less direct involvement in and oversight of the intervention. These organizations may also offer facilities, equipment, and volunteers.
While the process for requesting support tends to be less formal with private entities, you still need to convince their decision makers that your intervention is worthy of their resources. Provide them with data you gathered about youth violence in your community and explain how your intervention will address the problem. Share your goals and objectives. You may also need to show the business or organization how their involvement will benefit them directly (for example, increased visibility if you list them as a sponsor).

# Corporations and businesses
Ask local businesses-including banks and stores-to support your program. They can often provide funds or give you office space, equipment, and other supplies needed for your intervention. U.S. corporations donate a great deal of money each year to help communities address public health issues. Look for a large company with facilities in your area and ask for their financial support.
Voluntary, community service, and religious organizations Community groups or local divisions of state or national voluntary organizations (such as the Child Welfare League of America, Children's Safety Network, National Crime Prevention Council, and KidsPeace) may be willing to donate funds or other materials to your effort. Community service groups such as sororities, fraternities, and associations of retired teachers will often provide volunteers to carry out your intervention. Churches and religious organizations may offer resources such as meeting space for intervention activities.

# Hospitals and other health care facilities
These facilities may have meeting space you can use for intervention activities. Mental health services staff and pediatricians may help you enroll participants by referring patients to your program.

# Local television and radio stations and newspapers
Community media may be willing to provide free publicity for your program, through announcements, interviews, and human interest stories. Local media personalities may also take part in fundraising efforts and other activities.

#Chapter 1
Educational institutions Schools, including local colleges and universities, may be able to provide volunteers for your intervention and help conduct fundraisers. Universities may be willing to help you conduct research and develop your intervention.

# Foundations
A foundation's sole purpose is philanthropic giving. Many foundations are willing to fund programs with good ideas but little experience. They are more likely than public agencies to take a chance on a new intervention. Because foundations may limit the types of interventions they fund or the geographic areas they serve, it is important to find out which foundations support violence prevention interventions. The Foundation Center can help you do that.
The Foundation Center provides detailed information about the interests and restrictions of individual foundations and about the money they have granted. They have four main offices as well as libraries in all 50 states. To locate the nearest Foundation Center library, call 800-424-9836 or visit www.fdncenter.org. You can also find listings of foundations and their areas of interest in your public library.
After identifying a foundation as a potential funding source, write a letter to the foundation that briefly states what you want to do in the community and ask whether the foundation is interested in this type of project. Through this inquiry, you will also find out the process for submitting a grant proposal.

# Involve the Community
Involving the community in planning your intervention will benefit you, the intended participants, and the community as a whole. When community members are asked to help plan and implement the intervention, they develop a sense of ownership. They want the intervention to succeed and are more willing to invest the effort and resources needed to sustain it. Involving the community also makes it easier to obtain the resources and volunteers you need to carry out your intervention.
So what's the best way to involve the community? From the very beginning, enlist organizations and agencies that know about the youth in your community and have an interest in preventing injury and death among young people. Institutions that frequently get involved in efforts to prevent youth violence include schools, churches, parks and recreation centers, businesses, and civic, service, and cultural groups.

# The Foundation
Center: 800-424-9836 www.fdncenter.org

# Coordinating efforts
Once you have commitments from organizations that want to help you develop and implement your intervention, you need to decide what they are going to do and how to keep them working in harmony. Establish a leadership structure that includes members of the community and intended participant groups. Leadership roles may be informal and flexible until your intervention takes shape. However, as activities develop, leaders will be more formally designated, and their responsibilities-as well as those of the others involved in the effort-will be clearly delineated. Documenting the division of duties before an intervention is launched will help prevent duplication of effort and potential "turf wars" between organizations. It will also help you identify organizations that need technical assistance in order to prepare for and carry out their assigned activities.

# Develop Your Activities and Materials
At this point, you have planned many of the key elements of your intervention-who your intended participants are, where you can reach them, what your goals and objectives are, and whom you will work with to achieve them. Now, it's time to develop the activities and materials that your intervention will comprise.
Involving representatives of your intended participant group in this process is crucial. Conduct focus groups and surveys to identify participants' needs, potential barriers, and cultural issues. This input will help you tailor your intervention to meet the needs and preferences of participants.

# Pretesting materials and activities
Before you launch your intervention, test the activities and materials with representatives of your intended participant group. Pretesting will allow you to see whether your materials and activities achieve the desired outcome. It will also reveal any undesired effects. It will help you verify whether messages are accepted and understood by participants and whether the reading level of written materials is appropriate.

# Staff Your Intervention
Once your intervention is developed, you need a staff to implement it. The composition of your staff will depend on several factors. First, think about the activities to be conducted. Some interventions will require a staff with specialized skills or formal education. For example, you may need registered nurses or licensed social workers to perform home visits. You must also consider the needs and preferences of your intended participants. If, for example, you learn that young boys prefer male mentors of the same race and ethnicity, staff your intervention accordingly.
Another big consideration is the resources available for your effort. If your intervention is well-funded, you may be able to hire several paid staff members. On the other hand, if you have limited resources (which is often the case) you will need to enlist volunteers. You may have already identified volunteers when you secured funding and other resources.
Also think about how much time your staff will need to spend working on your intervention. An intervention that involves home visits may require full-time staff members who can visit several homes each day. In contrast, an intervention that involves parenting classes at a community center may need only part-time staffers to teach classes a few evenings a week. In many cases, you may need individuals who can implement your intervention in conjunction with their other job duties. For example, you may ask coaches at the YMCA to implement a violence prevention curriculum during team practices.

# Train Your Staff
Whatever the content of your intervention or the staff you select, everyone involved in implementing the intervention-including the administrative staff and others working behind the scenesmust receive training. This training should inform staff members about the problem of youth violence in your community and teach them how to carry out your intervention's activities. Even professionals who have completed formal education or who have worked on violence prevention efforts before will benefit from training specific to your intervention.

# Training content and schedule
Training content will depend, of course, on your intervention activities and materials, but the following elements are applicable to all staff members and all interventions.
- Communication skills.

# Before training begins
Before you conduct training, assess each staff member's readiness to learn violence prevention skills and implement the activities that compose your intervention. You can do this by measuring the extent to which individuals agree with three statements (Slaby 1998):
- People's violent behavior can be prevented (general beliefs). - Particular interventions can be effective in helping to prevent violence (specific beliefs). - I, myself, can make a difference in helping to prevent violence (personal beliefs).
If you find that members of your staff do not agree with these statements, you will need to start your training session with activities to help individuals overcome their doubts. Providing evidence of successful interventions may help convince your staff that its efforts can, in fact, impact youth violence.

# Implement Your Intervention
You've developed your materials and activities. You've secured resources and personnel. You've trained your staff. Now it's time to implement your intervention.
Implementation will vary greatly from intervention to intervention in terms of duration (how long the intervention lasts), frequency (how many times in a given period activities occur), and intensity (how much material is covered and how much time is spent during each activity). Chapter 2 addresses these issues for each of four strategies for preventing youth violence. With all interventions, however, you will need to supervise and support your staff, maintain a consistent level of participation, and keep the community interested in your intervention. Chapter 2 offers guidance on these matters, as well.

# Monitor Your Intervention
During all phases of your intervention, monitoring the implementation process is essential. Intervention monitoring will let you see if activities are occurring according to your plan. It will also allow you to identify unanticipated problems or barriers.

# With all interventions, you will need to supervise and support your staff, maintain a consistent level of participation, and keep the community interested in your intervention.
Chapter 1 -25
Methods for monitoring interventions will vary (Chapter 2 addresses some issues specific to the four strategies), but at a minimum, intervention monitoring should include the following:
- Measurement of key variables to see if your objectives are being met. For example, if one of your objectives is to implement a schoolwide program to improve students' conflictresolution skills, you might measure how many times in a semester skill-building activities were conducted. You might also measure student attendance during the activities.
Evaluations by intervention staff. This information can tell you whether staff members feel their training prepared them adequately for conducting a particular activity, whether participants seem comfortable with staff members and with the activity, and whether instructions for the activity were clear to participants.
Feedback from participants about the intervention's activities. For example, you might assess whether participants enjoyed a particular activity and how well they understood the materials presented. You might also ask whether participants would change anything about the activity.
Review the data regularly. If you find that an activity is not achieving the outcome you desired, you may need to alter it. If staffers report that they are having a hard time implementing an activity, you may need to provide additional training. If you discover that activities are not being implemented as often as planned or that participation is much lower than anticipated, you may need to reexamine your objectives; perhaps they were overly ambitious for your intervention's time frame or resources. Whatever changes you make-whether to activities, materials, or objectives-be sure to inform all intervention staff members and supporters.

# Evaluate Your Intervention
Throughout your intervention you will monitor progress to make sure you are on track and on schedule. At the end of your intervention, you must do a final (or summative) evaluation to determine how well you achieved your goals and objectives. You'll assess how well you reached your intended participants and whether the outcomes you obtained were what you planned. You'll also compare the costs of the program with the benefits of the program. You may also plan a follow-up study to assess the long-term effects of your efforts.
Many organizations have limited resources and may be tempted to skip evaluation, instead dedicating that money to intervention activities. However, evaluation is a critical step. It will enable you to demonstrate to funders, community leaders, and intervention staff that your efforts were a success. And if your intervention fell short of expectations, evaluation will help you identify what went wrong so you can make necessary changes to the intervention (Thompson and McClintock 1998).
If your organization does not have the expertise needed to evaluate your intervention but has resources to devote to it, you can hire a consultant. If you lack resources for evaluation, partner with a local university that would be willing to design and carry out a scientific evaluation.

# Summary
The steps involved in intervention planning, implementation, and evaluation may seem time-consuming, labor-intensive, even overwhelming. However, by following this systematic process, you will increase the likelihood of your intervention's success and enable others to repeat your intervention in their communities. This chapter discusses the importance of community analysis, the process of assessing and defining needs, opportunities, and resources of a community. It identifies methods for collecting both quantitative and qualitative data, including suggestions for special studies to increase information about selected social groups in a community. Community analysis is a critical first step in shaping the design of an intervention and in tailoring the implementation plan to a community's characteristics.

# Introduction
Youth violence is a complex public health problem with many risk factors, including individual beliefs and behaviors such as early aggression and use of alcohol or other drugs; family characteristics such as spousal abuse and lack of parental supervision; peer and school influences such as associating with delinquent friends; and environmental factors such as access to firearms. This complexity presents many challenges for those who are working to prevent youth violence (Dahlberg 1998).
This chapter discusses four distinct strategies for combating the problem of youth violence and offers for each strategy best practices-the elements and activities of intervention design, planning, and implementation that are recommended on the basis of the best knowledge currently available. Identified through extensive literature reviews and interviews with experts, these best practices will guide you in developing interventions that meet your community's and participants' needs and fit your goals and objectives. They will help you engage the community in your effort, hire and train an intervention staff, and locate resources and partners. They will also help you determine the time frame for your intervention, support and encourage your staff, and keep participants interested and engaged. And they will direct you in monitoring your intervention's progress and evaluating its final outcome.
The goal of this chapter-and of the sourcebook overall-is to share the experiences of others who have implemented interventions to prevent youth violence. In addition to the best practices for each strategy, we have included an Additional Resources section. We encourage you to contact the organizations listed and to review the publications described to learn what works particularly well and what barriers and problems may exist for interventions of interest to you. You may also want to review the studies listed in each strategy's reference section (the first strategy includes references for this introduction).

# A Note about the Best Practices
Ideally, best practices are based on knowledge derived from rigorous evaluations of interventions reported in peer-reviewed literature. However, a number of factors complicate this approach to identifying best practices for youth violence prevention efforts.
First, because the field of research in youth violence prevention is young, few longitudinal and randomized-control studies have been conducted. Second, while studies have evaluated the outcome of interventions, they have not typically evaluated the effectiveness of individual implementation practices. Therefore, the majority of best practices presented in this sourcebook are based on the hands-on, empirical observations of intervention practitioners and evaluators.
Because youth violence is such a high-priority public health concern, and because it may be years until we can report a significant number of science-based best practices, we felt it was important to include in this sourcebook promising intervention practices as well as scientifically proven ones.

# Overview of the Parent-and Family-Based Strategy
Parents' interactions with each other, their behavior toward their children, and their emotional state have been shown to be important predictors of children's violent behavior (Webster-Stratton 1997). Hendrix and Molloy (1990), for example, found that poor interactions between a mother and a child at age 1 year predict behavioral problems and aggression at age 6. Having an emotionally distressed parent at age 4 years has been found to contribute to a child's developing conduct disorders and antisocial behaviors (Buka and Earls 1993). Marital conflict and a lack of communication between parents have also been identified as risk factors for youth violence (Biglan and Taylor 2000;Buka and Earls 1993;Tolan and Guerra 1994).

# Best Practices of Parent-and Family-Based Interventions
While the evidence base for parent and family interventions is growing, there is a need for more evaluation research. Those interventions that have been evaluated have typically not set violence reduction as an outcome measure. More commonly, they have measured reductions in delinquent behaviors, conduct disorders, or drug use, all of which are considered precursors to violence.
Despite the need for more evaluation, however, we have learned many lessons about what works using this strategy. This section offers the best practices of parent-and family-based interventions, combining recommendations by experts with general conclusions found in a review of the literature. We have organized the best practices around the steps involved in planning, implementing, and evaluating an intervention (see Chapter 1 for a review of those steps).

# Identify the Populations You Want to Reach
Parenting interventions are generally more successful if they are implemented with the unique characteristics and needs of the intended participants clearly in mind. Before you develop your intervention, identify the group you want to reach.

# At-risk populations
Substantial research has been devoted to identifying factors within the family unit that put a child at risk for developing violent behaviors. These factors may be related to behaviors and characteristics of either the parents or the child.
Parents' risk factors Some risk factors that parents possess are dramatic and obvious, such as criminal and violent behavior, alcohol and other drug abuse, child abuse, and child neglect. Other, more subtle predictors include harsh or inconsistent discipline, lack of emotional interaction between the parent and child, and lack of parental supervision (Patterson, Reid, and Dishion 1992;Buka and Earls 1993). Many other behaviors, although not related directly to parenting, are also associated with children's violent behavior. Examples include lack of communication between spouses, marital conflict and divorce, parental social isolation, and parental depression or stress (Buka and Earls 1993;Tolan and Guerra 1994).

# Avoid identifying socioeconomic status only as the determinant of risk.
The perception that an intervention targets individuals simply because they are poor is highly stigmatizing.
One study found that poor, single mothers-faced with many challenges and stressors-are at highest risk for developing parenting patterns that can lead to violent behavior by their children (Patterson, Reid, and Dishion 1992). Parents whose first language is not English often exhibit risk factors resulting from acculturation conflicts. And targeting low-income families has been shown to reduce child abuse and neglect (Campbell and Taylor 1996).
Avoid identifying socioeconomic status only as the determinant of risk. The perception that an intervention targets individuals simply because they are poor is highly stigmatizing. Find nonpejorative ways to identify people at different levels of risk.

# Children's risk factors
Research has found that children at risk for violence can be identified by the time they are 3 years old (Olweus 1978).
Factors that put children at risk include living in neighborhoods where violence commonly occurs, witnessing severely violent acts, being a victim of abuse, and associating with "rough" or antisocial peers. Other less obvious factors have also been associated with the development of violent behaviors. These include learning problems, a history of absenteeism from school, and frequent visits to the school counselor. A sudden change in behavior can also signal the beginning of violent tendencies.

# High-risk populations
Some children are considered to be at high risk for developing violent behaviors. These children already exhibit clear behavioral markers of violent activity, including the following:

# Young children (10 years and under)
The effectiveness of parenting interventions seems to increase exponentially when children are very young, before antisocial or aggressive behaviors are fully developed (Webster-Stratton and Hancock 1998;Webster-Stratton and Spitzer 1996). By the time a child reaches adolescence, both the child and the parents are following well-established patterns and are more resistant to long-term change (Patterson, Reid, and Dishion 1992;Taylor and Biglan 1998). And a 14-year-old boy relies much less on his family and is much more susceptible to external influences than a 7-year-old boy (Hendrix and Molloy 1990).

# Expectant parents
The earlier in a child's life a parent-based intervention begins, the greater the likelihood it will be effective. With this fact in mind, you may want to consider targeting parents who are expecting a child. Previous research suggests that intervening with a mother during the latter part of pregnancy and continuing with intervention activities during the first few years of her child's life can significantly reduce the risk of conduct disorder and violence (Olds 1997).

# Consider the Cultural and Demographic Context of Intended Participants
When selecting your intended participants, consider their location, age, life circumstances, ethnicity or race, and needs. Try to select a group of people who live near each other and are alike in key characteristics. By targeting a group that is fairly homogeneous, you can better tailor materials and activities so they are more meaningful to participants.
Selecting a homogeneous group increases the likelihood that participants will form support groups and friendships that extend beyond the environment of the intervention. Such an outcome was achieved by the Houston Parent-Child Development Center, which targeted low-income, Mexican American parents (Johnson 1988).
You can also meet the needs of your participants more effectively when participants are alike. Wood and Baker (1999) developed a questionnaire to examine parent preferences, behaviors, and beliefs toward school-based parent-education programs among 395 low-income, culturally diverse parents from two elementary schools. Results indicated that parents of low socioeconomic status wanted to participate in parenteducation events, but they were less likely than parents with higher levels of education to attend events at school. The greatest barriers to their participation were difficulty in getting time off from work (27%), cost (27%), lack of transportation (21%), and inability to find or afford babysitting (18%).

# Select an Appropriate Setting
The setting for a parenting intervention will likely be a school, community center, church, or other location where a group of people can meet. Make sure your setting is conducive to interactive exercises and discussions.
To reach people who live in remote areas or who have difficulty getting to and from an intervention site, you may need to bring the intervention to them. For example, in remote and rural areas in South East Queensland, Australia, a self-directed intervention delivered by telephone contact and written information was implemented (Connell, Sanders, and Markie-Dadds 1997).
Twenty-four preschool children with problem behaviors and their families were recruited for a randomized, controlled study of the parenting intervention. Participants assigned to the intervention read sections of a book on parenting weekly for 10 weeks, completed tasks in the accompanying workbook, and participated in weekly telephone consultations (lasting up to 30 minutes) with a therapist. Parents were prompted to monitor their own and their child's behavior, set goals for behavior change, select strategies, identify strengths and areas for improvement, and select contingent rewards for themselves and their children. Results indicated that this self-directed, minimal intervention increased parents' perception of competency; reduced dysfunctional parenting practices; reduced disruptive behavior by the child; and significantly reduced mothers' feelings of anxiety, depression, and stress. Improvements in child behavior and parenting practices achieved at the end of the intervention were maintained at follow-up four months later.
Another self-directed intervention is Parenting Adolescents Wisely, a CD-ROM-based program. It was successfully implemented in Appalachia, where participants had little or no computer literacy (Olds 1997). Because the skill-building exercises require no orientation or supervision by staff, they can be conducted at any time, in locations most convenient to participants (Kacir and Gordon 1999). This intervention has also been successful with teen mothers and clinic-referred teens and parents (Lagges 1999;Segal 1995). With no other intervention or support, the rate of problem behaviors for children in the intervention dropped by half at one, three, and six months after their mothers participated in the intervention.

# Involve the Community and Parents in Planning the Intervention
Organizations sponsoring parent-and family-based interventions should participate in developing the intervention. This involvement will help them feel ownership of the intervention so they are more likely to support its objectives, commit to evaluating outcomes, and hold themselves accountable for the impact of the intervention.
Parents also need to participate in the development process. The more active a role parents play in an intervention from its inception, the greater their sense of empowerment and accountability both during and after the intervention. Parents can also provide unique insight to help practitioners more closely tailor the intervention to participants' needs and priorities.

# Set Clear Goals and Objectives for Intervention Outcomes and Implementation
Set clear, specific, observable goals and objectives for each intervention. They will help you evaluate an intervention's effectiveness and give parents and staff a sense of day-to-day accomplishment. Make sure goals and objectives are behaviorbased and outcome-oriented-for example, reducing school truancy by 50 percent or establishing and keeping a weekly family budget. If you are modeling your intervention after one that has been proven effective, use the original intervention's evaluation framework to shape your goals and objectives.
Involve parents in setting objectives. Have them outline, with the practitioner's guidance, what they think their family can achieve and in what time period. Starting this kind of new initiative may seem overwhelming to parents: they are being asked to change the way they parent their child, even the way they conduct their daily affairs. Setting clear, definable goals enhances parents' sense of control and accountability (McMahon et al. 1996).

# Select the Best Intervention for Your Participants and Develop Appropriate Materials
The intervention you select must be appropriate for the ages of the participants' children, the degree of violent behavior or level of risk for such behavior, and participants' cultural characteristics. It must also take into account family dynamics (how members interact with one another), the external environment (e.g., schools, housing), and the family's financial situation.

# If you are modeling your intervention after one that has been proven effective, use the original intervention's evaluation framework to shape your goals and objectives.

# Consider the children's ages
A child's age influences many factors of parenting, from nurturing to discipline. For example, parents of a young child should set limits for their child's behavior, but with an older child, parents may want to negotiate those limits. Therefore, the contents of your intervention will be driven, in part, by the age of the children.

# Young children (ages 10 and under)
Interventions for parents of young children often have the best chance of effecting long-term, positive change because the behavior patterns of both parents and children have not been firmly established; they are still fairly malleable (Taylor and Biglan 1998). When developing an intervention for parents of preschool-and elementary school-age children, include an overview of child development so participants can set realistic, age-appropriate expectations about their children's behavior.
The following are other principles to include in an intervention for parents of young children: The Adolescent Transition Program is one intervention that has been proven effective for families with older children. Designed for parents of middle-school students at risk for substance use, academic failure, and antisocial behavior, this intervention seeks to improve seven classic parenting skills: making neutral requests, using rewards, monitoring, making rules, providing reasonable consequences for rule violations, problem solving, and active listening. Classes are conducted weekly for 12 weeks in groups of eight to 16 parents and follow a skill-based curriculum. In a randomized control trial of the program, which involved 303 families over a four-year period, participants were compared with parents on a three-month waiting list. Parents in the program reported a lower tendency to overreact to their child's behavior, greater diligence in dealing with problem behavior, and less depression. There was also some indication of lower levels of daily antisocial behavior from the child. The more sessions a parent attended (many did not complete the 12week program), the greater the reported improvements in behavior. We should note, however, that this evaluation is limited because it was based on the parents' assessment and interpretation of behavior rather than on objective measures (Irvine, Biglan, Smolkowski, Metzler, et al. 1999;Irvine, Biglan, Smolkowski, and Ary 1999).

# Research has demonstrated the effectiveness of working with
parents who are at increased risk for raising antisocial children. after the birth of a child. These initiatives were designed to help parents manage their children and their lives more effectively and reduce the stress typically experienced by parents in the first few years of a child's life. The interventions offered a range of services: parent counseling, strategies for problem-solving, training in parenting techniques, and help in developing social support systems. Some even covered the children's childcare and healthcare expenses. One example of such an intervention has been offered by the Houston Parent-Child Development Center, which serves as a "parent college" for Mexican American families. Up to eight years after the intervention, children of participating parents had a lower incidence of reported problem behaviors in school than did control children (Johnson 1988).

# Interventions for parents of delinquent children
Many parents of children with serious behavior problems use ineffective disciplinary techniques. For example, parents of delinquent children tend to be inadequately involved in monitoring their child's day-to-day activities, to be inconsistent in applying discipline, and to display marginal levels of involvement in such areas as the child's academic progress (Dishion, Patterson, and Kavanagh 1992;Buka and Earls 1993;Bank et al. 1991). Often, a destructive pattern of "coercive interaction" exists between the child and the parents, characterized by a cycle of the child misbehaving and the parents threatening the child (Patterson, Reid, and Dishion 1992). While this reaction by the parents may be effective in the short-term, it promotes further aggression by the child in the long run. The first step in breaking this cycle is to change the parents' tactics and teach them alternative responses to their child's negative actions.
The coercion model is one intervention that can break this cycle.  (Patterson, Reid, and Dishion 1992).
Another effective intervention for families with chronically delinquent children was developed by the Oregon Social Learning Center (OSLC). In this study, 55 families of boys who had multiple arrest histories and had committed at least one offense deemed "serious" by the court were assigned to either the OSLC parenting-training intervention or to a community treatment group involving 90-minute family-therapy sessions for approximately five months. Parents in the OSLC group were taught to monitor, record, and react to the daily behavior of their boys. Parents and children developed behavior contracts that specified prosocial and antisocial behavior and the positive and negative consequences that would result. Each family received an average of 21.5 hours of therapy and 23.3 hours of phone contact. Families were free to contact intervention staff for "booster shots" of support after the treatment year.
A significant reduction in arrests was achieved for both the intervention and the control group. However, the OSLC treatment produced results more quickly and with one-third less reliance on incarceration. The researchers state that the main outcome of the treatment may have been to help the parents remain actively involved and responsible for the conduct of their boys. We should note that researchers found the clinical work with these families to be extraordinarily difficult, and it took tremendous effort to prevent staff burnout (Bank et al. 1991).

# Parents who abuse their children need to build nurturing skills as alternatives to their abusive parenting behaviors and attitudes.
Interventions for abusive parents Parents who abuse their children need to build nurturing skills as alternatives to their abusive parenting behaviors and attitudes. The initial Nurturing Program for Parents and Children 4 to 12 Years was extensively field-tested with 121 abusive adults and 150 abused children. Significant improvements were found in the attitudes of both parents and children, in personality characteristics of both parents and children, and in patterns of family interaction. Evaluations of subsequent nurturing programs have shown similar results (Bavolek 1996).

# Empower parents
A fundamental principle of effective parenting interventions is empowering parents to deal with their children. Parentsespecially those of delinquent children-tend to feel out of control in many aspects of their lives. They may feel demoralized, frustrated, or depressed by their inability to parent effectively (Dishion, Patterson, and Kavanagh 1992).
Interventions should increase parents' sense of self-control and self-efficacy, giving them confidence in their interactions with their children and making them feel accountable in a positive way for improvements in their children's behavior (Prinz and Miller 1996).
One way to empower parents is to give them information that will help them understand and react appropriately to their children's behavior. Interventions should provide training on how to nurture and communicate effectively with children, negotiate family rules and consequences, praise and reward children for prosocial behavior, and discipline without violence. They should teach parents effective means of punishment, such as "time outs" and loss of privileges, that do not promote aggressive interactions between parent and child.
Another empowering technique is to encourage parents to participate in the problem-solving process (Cunningham 1996). For example, in a collaborative group-therapy model used at the University of Washington Parenting Clinic, the therapist solicits parents' ideas, feelings, and information about their cultural background. In this model, therapists and parents feel joint ownership of solutions and outcomes (Webster-Stratton and Herbert 1994). In Los Ninos Bien Educados, a program targeting Latino American families, participants were asked to define important cultural concepts about parenting. Participants defined what "bien educados" meant to them and recalled the cultural proverbs that were used in their own and their grandparents' homes (Alvy and Rubin 1981).
You can also build in activities to involve and empower parents, to make them feel that they are vital contributors to the intervention. For example, have parents bring refreshments to meetings, have them monitor their family's progress, or enlist participants to lead pep rallies.

# Consider cultural and demographic issues
Some participant groups have cultural beliefs or behaviors that present unique challenges for practitioners. Identify cultural issues up front and design intervention materials to address them. Culturally relevant content promotes a strong sense of group ownership, ethnic identity, community-building, and advancing one's group as a whole (Alvy 1994).
The Effective Black Parenting Program is a cultural adaptation of a generic parenting skill-building intervention called Confident Parenting (Alvy and Rubin 1981). This program reduced parental rejection, improved the quality of family relations, and reduced child behavior problems among African American families living in South Central Los Angeles. Key intervention components, in addition to skill building, included discussions contrasting "traditional" discipline (e.g., punishment, spanking) with "modern" self-discipline (internalized standards of effective behavior); discussion and reinforcement of issues related to "pride in blackness"; and the use of a black achievement perspective to link the life goals the parents had for their children with the abilities and characteristics the children need to achieve them (Myers et al. 1992).
Among some families of low socioeconomic status, parents' low level of education can make traditional communication channels ineffective. To address this challenge, program planners have developed interventions that de-emphasize written materials and verbal teaching methods, opting instead for role-playing and modeling techniques (Knapp and Deluty 1989).

# To achieve longterm effects, interventions must also address the context in which parenting takes place.
For many groups, interactive teaching techniques are most effective. These techniques incorporate not only didactic teaching but methods such as role-playing and problem-solving exercises. However, some parents prefer didactic authority figures and mistrust overly friendly strangers. With these groups, a practitioner would want to begin with a more formal style and ease into interactive teaching methods to avoid being viewed as disrespectful.

# Address environmental and financial concerns
Interventions that focus solely on parents' behavior may not result in changes that parents can sustain in the environment outside the intervention. To achieve long-term effects, interventions must also address the context in which parenting takes place. Today, the most successful interventions have been expanded to help parents improve their "life skills" and help them deal with issues such as social isolation, stress, depression, marital conflict, housing, and money matters. The general principle behind these broad interventions is that parents who are better able to manage everyday life issues will have the physical, psychological, and social resources to parent more effectively.
A variety of interventions integrate parenting life skills. One of the most researched, Henggeler's Multisystemic Therapy Program operates on the premise that a family is an interconnected unit in which a series of individuals (parent, child, siblings, extended family members) and external factors (work, school, housing situation) interact with one another to create an ongoing family dynamic (Borduin et al. 1990). Intervention activities are designed for each family on the basis of the family's risk and protective factors.
In a series of randomized control trials, in a variety of settings, the multisystemic approach has been successful. A study in Simpsonville, North Carolina, involved adjudicated youths who had at least one violent offense. After 59 weeks, the youths who received the multisystemic therapy (MST) had significantly fewer arrests (.87 versus 1.52) and fewer weeks incarcerated (5.8 versus 16.2) than youths receiving the usual services. The MSTintervention families also reported improved family cohesion. A study in Columbia, Missouri, compared MST with individual therapy (IT) among 17-year-old multiple offenders and their families. At 5-year follow-up, MST youths were less likely to be arrested again, the families receiving MST reported and showed more positive changes in their overall family environment, and the MST parents showed greater reductions in psychiatric symptoms (Henggeler et al. 1996). MST was also found to be effective in the treatment of adolescent sexual offenders. Youths in the MST group had significantly fewer subsequent arrests for sexual crimes than did youths in the IT group (Borduin et al. 1990).

# Select Staff Appropriate For Your Intervention
With the parent-and family-based strategy, the quality of the relationship between the practitioner and the parent can profoundly affect the outcome of your intervention. Therefore, your staff must be selected with great care, keeping in mind both the needs and desires of participants and the requirements of your intervention. In addition, staff members should live near enough to participants to allow for frequent contact. They must also be available to work during the times that are most convenient to participants, usually during evenings and weekends.
It may be helpful to select staff members who have characteristics like those of participants. For example, you could pair single mothers with staff who are also single mothers or African American participants with staffers of the same race. The Strengthening Families Program finds it effective to match therapists with parents as similar as possible in age, social standing, and cultural background (Kumpfer, Molgaard, and Spoth 1996).
Consider involving alumni of previous interventions to help bridge the gap between the practitioners and parents and to provide parents with support from someone who's "been there." Patterson's Coercion Model, for example, involves parent alumni as mentors to participating parents; the Strengthening Families Program hires parent alumni to support and reassure participants in an attempt to reduce drop-outs (Dishion, Patterson, and Kavanagh 1992;Kumpfer, Molgaard, and Spoth 1996).

# The quality of the relationship between the practitioner and the parent can profoundly affect the outcome of your intervention.

# Train Staff Members
In successful parenting interventions, the practitioner must form a bond of trust, respect, and collaboration with parents (Taylor and Biglan 1998;Johnson 1988;Webster-Stratton and Spitzer 1996;Prinz and Miller 1996). Training for your intervention should prepare staff members to play the role of teacher, supporter, and facilitator.
In addition to teaching your staff how to carry out the activities of your intervention, training should include information about child-rearing principles, participants' values, and other cultural and religious beliefs that may affect how parents interact with their children or with intervention staff. It should also show staff members how to employ an interactive teaching method, engaging participants in group discussions and role playing exercises; this technique is more effective than a formal, didactic style. Provide staffers with a training manual they can refer to throughout the intervention.

# Recruit Families
To recruit participants for your parenting intervention, work with community groups, churches, mental health facilities, law enforcement agencies, and schools in your area. Get involved personally in the recruitment process. Phone or visit parents at home or speak with them in public places, communicating to them that you understand and respect the challenges they face. Consider hiring or assigning administrative or public-relations staff to assist with recruitment. When targeting high-risk families, you may need to enlist the help of a community gatekeeper-for example, a trusted school official, community elder, or minister-to facilitate referrals.
You may need to offer parents incentives to encourage participation, especially if you are targeting at-risk parents. You are, after all, asking them to commit to making profound changes, something parents may not enter into lightly. Think about what would entice parents, such as money, transportation fare (subway, bus, taxi), food, or free childcare. Ask local businesses to contribute products and services that would interest intended participants.

# Implement Your Intervention
How you implement your intervention will depend on many factors, including the activities planned and the participants involved. However, the following principles apply to any parenting intervention:
- Schedule activities at times and locations that are convenient to parents. Offer opportunities for parents to ask questions, offer feedback, and practice the skills taught. - Implement all components of an intervention that has been proven effective. Using only selected components may not produce the results of the original intervention.
It may help to explain the behavioral theories that underlie the parenting techniques being taught. For example, parents are much more likely to persevere in using recommended disciplinary tactics, particularly when they do not result in immediate improvements in their child's behavior, if they have a good overall understanding of the behavioral principles on which the tactics are based.

# Intervention delivery may vary depending on children's ages and families' risk factors
The age of the children in participating families will affect delivery techniques. What works for parents with very young children may not be as effective for parents with older children. When working with high-risk families, it is essential to link parenting interventions to child-based interventions that actively involve the child at risk. The Multisystemic Therapy Program, for instance, develops ongoing strategies and goals for every relevant member of the family. It requires the child to perform certain tasks and follow certain behaviors, and it requires the parent to monitor and reward or discipline the child's actions (Henggeler et al. 1996).

# Use the full range of parent-training activities
The most effective parent-and family-based interventions include a variety of activities, including multi-session classes for small groups, one-day seminars for large groups, video and audiotape training materials, self-instruction activities, and home projects to implement skills.
A number of studies have demonstrated the success of videotape modeling as a mechanism for educating parents and stimulating discussion. While video-based interventions can be effectively self-administered, the best results are obtained when the video is combined with group interactions (Webster-Stratton, Kolpacoff, and Hollinsworth 1988). In five randomized studies with more than 500 families, an intervention incorporating the videotape modeling and parent-group discussions resulted in greater reductions in child conduct problems and more significant improvements in parents' disciplinary approaches and parentchild interactions than did one-on-one parent training, discussion groups without videotape modeling, or videotape modeling without discussion (Webster-Stratton 1996).  Stratton 1996).
The Functional Family Therapy (FFT) model combines assessment, therapy, and education to address dysfunctional communication styles in families with delinquent children (Alexander and Parsons 1982). In the assessment phase, therapists evaluate family behavior patterns and gather information about problem behaviors. The therapy phase is designed to change attitudes, expectations, emotional reactions, and perceptions to reduce blame among family members. The education phase teaches skills in family communication, relationship building, and problem solving; reinforces positive interactions and manages conflict; and teaches parents how to reward and reinforce prosocial behavior.

# Parenting patterns are hard to change-there are no "quick fixes."
In a number of controlled studies, FFT has been shown to modify dysfunctional communication and reduce rates of delinquency among treated youths and their siblings (Barton et al. 1985). Gordon and colleagues (1988) replicated the FFT model in a group of 54 rural, economically disadvantaged juvenile offenders in southeastern Ohio. Half of the group was non-randomly assigned to receive in-home FFT from psychology graduate students. Most of this group had committed multiple serious offenses and had been assigned to family therapy by the court. A control group of 27 lower-risk delinquent youths received only probation services. After 2 1 / 2 years, recidivism rates were 11 percent in the treatment group and 67 percent in the comparison group. A later study that measured changes in the group at the end of an additional 32-month period (after the subjects had become adults) found recidivism rates of 9 percent for misdemeanor and felony offenses in the treatment group and 41 percent in the comparison group (Gordon, Graves, and Arbuthnot 1995).

# Set a realistic time frame for your intervention
Parenting patterns are hard to change-there are no "quick fixes." Expect your intervention to take at least several months. A desirable duration for interventions targeting at-risk families is approximately 22 sessions; 12 sessions is typically appropriate for families not considered at risk.
In most cases, sessions should occur at regular intervals (e.g., weekly or biweekly) and last for no more than two hours. Longer sessions have been successful in some programs, as long as frequent breaks were provided. Formats involving out-ofhome group sessions should be convenient in terms of childcare, transportation, and the availability of food.

# Support intervention staff to prevent burnout
Parent-and family-based interventions can be challenging and emotionally taxing for the intervention staff. It is critical that you provide staffers with support and encouragement. Staff members need coaching and consultation regularly and should be given plenty of opportunities to talk with a supervisor about how well they are meeting the intervention objectives as well as about personal, job-related objectives. Consider hiring staff on a part-time basis or making intervention implementation a component of a full-time position. This may help prevent staff burnout. It is also beneficial to provide staff members with flexible schedules.

# Encourage participants to stay involved
Parent-and family-based interventions can last for many months with results that are subtle and gradual. You will need to maintain participants' interest in your intervention and keep them focused on the long-term goal. In addition to offering incentives like free food, transportation, and childcare, plan events that will entice parents to complete the intervention. For example, hold graduation ceremonies or provide gift certificates as a reward for completion.

# Monitor Progress and the Quality of the Implementation
As your intervention moves along, monitor activities to be sure they are being carried out as planned. This is especially important if you are implementing an evaluated interventionyou need to follow all steps to make sure you achieve the same results.
The following steps will help you determine if your intervention is on track:

# Evaluate Outcomes
From the beginning, consider how to evaluate the outcome of your intervention. Have participants assess changes in their own behavior and that of their children. The intervention staff should also evaluate those changes. You can use a third party to identify changes, as well. For example, review school records of children whose families participated in the intervention to see if rates of delinquent behavior or absenteeism have dropped.

# Expect setbacks
Behavior change does not happen overnight. Long-standing family issues, crises, and disciplinary problems cannot be cured with a single treatment. Set realistic expectations for your intervention and let parents know that obstacles and setbacks will occur along the way (Taylor and Biglan 1998). Informing parents that they will probably face resistance and recurring behavior problems from their children will better prepare them for these difficulties so they can remain committed to the intervention (Prinz and Miller 1996).

# From the beginning, consider how to evaluate the outcome of your intervention.

# Maintain Results After Implementation
Without the guidance and support of intervention staff, participants may find it difficult to keep momentum going after the intervention ends. You can take some steps to maintain the positive results of your intervention after it has been completed. For example:
- Provide a follow-up source for parents to call with questions and concerns. Follow-up activities, conducted several months or more after the original intervention has ended, can also increase the long-term benefits of your effort. These activities can be especially effective when targeting families with young children. Buka and Earls (1993) likened violence prevention strategies to immunization: a "vaccination" at an early age followed by periodic "booster sessions" throughout childhood and adolescence. Scheduling follow-up activities to coincide with difficult developmental periods, such as a child's initial entry into school or transition to a new school (for example, moving from elementary to middle school), can be particularly helpful in addressing behavioral problems. And involving practitioners and staff members from the original intervention can lend continuity to activities.

# Link Parent-and Family-Based Interventions with Other Strategies
While parent-based interventions are among the most effective strategies known thus far for preventing violence by children and adolescents, once children reach school age it is essential to complement this strategy with one that addresses the influence of factors outside the home (Taylor and Biglan 1998;Brestan and Eyberg 1998).
Negative academic and social experiences in school can result in a child's developing violent behavior or associated risk factors.
Evidence has shown that a partnership between parents and the school is more effective than parent-based strategies alone (McMahon et al. 1996;Webster-Stratton 1993;Coleman 1997).
A coordinated effort among parents, teachers, school psychologists, and school nurses can identify problems early so practitioners can intervene with programs to teach problemsolving, develop conflict-resolution skills, and enhance academic skills (Honig 1999;Schweinhart 1999).

# Summary
The

# Additional Resources on Parent-and Family-Based Interventions to PreventYouth Violence
The following intervention summaries have been adapted from information listed on the Strengthening America's Families web site, a project funded by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Further details about the interventions are available at www.strengtheningfamilies.org and from the contact person provided with each description. This listing is provided as a service to readers, but the presence of an intervention on this listing does not imply endorsement by CDC or the Department of Health and Human Services.

# Bethesda Family Services Foundation
This foundation provides comprehensive individual and familycentered treatment to children ages 10 to 18 who were referred by the court as a result of delinquent offenses (referral to the program is in lieu of jail time). The intervention provides treatment for the entire family during nontraditional hours. Youths receive at least six months of treatment, and parents attend meetings and training sessions.

# Families and Schools Together Program
FAST is an intervention for at-risk children and adolescents ages 3 to 14. Its structure gives young people and their parents both a voice and a role in the prevention process. The intervention develops separate support networks for youths and parents, using a multi-family format, and brings them together for family activities.

# Families in Focus
This family skills training intervention is designed to strengthen the family and prevent social and behavioral problems. The intervention was originally designed for high-risk youths ages 8 to 14 but has also been delivered to children of all ages. A Home Learning Guide and Family Profile Questionnaire help direct families to specific activities.

# Home-Based Behavioral Systems Family Therapy
This intervention, based on the Functional Family Therapy model (discussed previously), reaches families with lower educational levels and higher levels of pathology than did the original model. The intervention is delivered in five phases, with increasing involvement of therapists. Its long-range goal is to reduce juvenile delinquency and teen pregnancy.

# Nurturing Parent Programs
There are 13 Nurturing Parenting Programs designed for specific cultures, family dynamics, and children's age groups. The programs build nurturing skills to reduce abusive parenting, juvenile delinquency, alcohol abuse, and teen pregnancy. Parents and children attend separate groups that meet concurrently. Each program has been researched and validated as an effective intervention for the treatment and prevention of child abuse and neglect.
Stephen Bavolek, Ph.D.

# Strengthening Hawaii Families
This intervention, based on cultural values, seeks to prevent problems such as substance abuse and domestic violence. It aims at increasing resiliency in both the community and family. A 14-session curriculum provides tools and a process for families and children 5 to 12 years old to build on existing family strengths.

# Overview of the Home-Visiting Strategy
Violent and criminal behavior, poor mental health, drug use, and poor school performance have been linked to several childhood risk factors, including child abuse and neglect, poverty, a poor relationship with the parent(s), poor physical and mental health, parental drug or alcohol abuse, and child abuse and neglect (Wolfner and Gelles 1993; Oates et al. 1995;Krysik et al. 1997;Norton 1998). By eliminating these risk factors, we can help reduce the aggressive and violent behaviors we see in our schools and communities. Home visiting is one effective strategy to address these factors.
Home-visiting interventions bring community resources to atrisk families in their homes. During home visits, intervention staff provides information, healthcare, psychological support, and other services that participants need to function more effectively as parents. These programs have helped improve maternal health and pregnancy outcomes, increase employment and education among young parents, reduce reliance on welfare, improve children's mental and physical health, reduce childhood injuries, and reduce criminal behavior by young people. This strategy is ideally implemented with families who are expecting or have recently had their first child.

# Best Practices of Home-Visiting Interventions
Although additional research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of home-visiting interventions, several studies have revealed promising findings as well as techniques and principles for planning and implementing these efforts. This section presents the practices identified in those studies, along with recommendations from experts in the field of youth violence prevention.

# Identify the Populations You Want to Reach
Many European countries provide home visits to all families, regardless of risk status. Some advocates have argued that this service should be made available to all families in the United States, as well. But home-visiting interventions are resourceintensive, and few communities have the financial and human resources needed to carry out an effective program on such a large scale. Therefore, targeting select groups for home-visiting services is typically most appropriate. A needs assessment conducted with input from the community will help identify families who could benefit most from a home-visiting intervention. Community leaders should play a key role in this decision, as they are often in a position to direct the allocation of resources.

# Expectant parents and first-time parents
Research suggests that home visiting has the greatest impact when it begins early in the parenting process. Therefore, homevisiting interventions often begin when participants are pregnant and continue through the first few years of the children's lives. Targeting first-time parents seems to be ideal, the rationale being that positive changes will carry over to future pregnancies and children. In addition, research indicates that mothers involved in a home-visiting intervention will likely have fewer unintended pregnancies (Olds and Kitzman 1990).
Olds and colleagues (1998) examined the long-term effects of prenatal and early-childhood home visits on children's antisocial behavior. They found that adolescents whose mothers had been visited by nurses expressed less antisocial behavior and had lower substance-use rates than did adolescents in a comparison group. Adolescents from the study group also reported significantly fewer instances of running away, fewer arrests, fewer convictions and violations of probation, fewer lifetime sex partners, fewer cigarettes smoked per day, and fewer days having consumed alcohol in the six months preceding the study.

# Home visits seem to benefit high-risk families most.
Similar results were achieved by Aronen and Kurkela (1996). They studied the long-term effects of a home-based familycounseling intervention that took place during the first five years of the children's lives. Eighty families experienced 10 home visits per year; another 80 families served as a comparison group. Both groups included low-risk and high-risk families. Each child's mental-health status was assessed at age 15. Adolescents in the intervention families had significantly fewer mental health symptoms on child-behavior checklists filled out by their parents and on the youths' self-reports. The counseling predicted better mental health at year 15 for both high-and lowrisk families.

# High-risk families
Although positive results have been achieved among both highand low-risk families, home visits seem to benefit high-risk families most. One study found that home-visiting interventions produce the greatest benefit when they are focused on single and adolescent parents living in communities with high poverty rates (Olds and Kitzman 1990;Olds et al. 1997). Interventions aimed at poor, unmarried mothers have been shown to improve the maternal life course, reduce the number of months that mothers relied on public assistance and food stamps, reduce behavioral problems associated with alcohol and other drug use, and reduce the number of arrests (Olds et al. 1997). Daro (1993) found that families exhibiting child abuse and neglect responded best to interventions incorporating home visits. One of the most important benefits reported for these families was the concrete assistance that visiting practitioners offered in resolving childcare problems such as discipline and toilet training.
Remember that, although home visits can bring about substantial changes in the long run, they can rarely bring about immediate changes in the environmental, financial, and psychological issues that high-risk families face. Long-term dedication is needed to affect social adversities such as unemployment, poverty, drug abuse, and malnutrition.

# Other groups
Young people who drop out of high school or show poor school engagement are at increased risk of becoming teen parents (Manlove 1998). As discussed previously, young, unwed parents are often at increased risk of developing parenting styles that are associated with the development of youth violence. And given that dropping out of school, poor academic performance, and a general lack of interest in school are, by themselves, risk factors for developing violent behavior, this group is an appropriate target for home visits.
Parents with limited social support are also ideal participants in home-visiting interventions. These parents need help dealing with the stress of parenting and with other life stressors such as financial and marital difficulties or unemployment.

# Generate Support in the Community
You will need a great deal of support from your community-in the form of both financial and human resources-to carry out a home-visiting intervention. To convince community members and leaders that your intervention is worth their time and money, show them how the intervention will meet the community's perceived needs and goals and explain the long-term benefits of early prevention efforts. Here are a few arguments for conducting a home-visiting intervention:
Helping expectant mothers to stop using drugs or alcohol and to eat a better diet will improve the health and development of their babies. - Improving parent-child interactions from the earliest possible time will help prevent abusive disciplinary tactics. - Addressing parents' physical and emotional needs will increase their patience and tolerance, making them better able to nurture their children.
In addition to preventing the risk factors for violence, homevisiting interventions may save communities money down the road. Data on the cost-effectiveness of home visits are limited, and additional studies must be conducted (Barnett 1993), but a few cost analyses have revealed savings in government spending for food stamps and the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program (formerly the Aid to Families with Dependent Children Program).

# Set Clear Goals and Objectives
Setting goals and objectives for home visits must be done on two levels. First, practitioners should identify the desired outcome of the intervention. For example, an overall goal might be to reduce the number of elementary school students who exhibit early warning signs of developing violent behavior, such as withdrawing from classmates and performing poorly in school. Objectives, then, might be to improve the parent-child interactions in families of preschoolers and to help parents develop educational activities to better prepare their children for school.

# The interventions that succeed in helping at-risk families are intensive, comprehensive, and flexible.
On the second level, home visitors must help each family set its own goals and objectives. This will ensure a good balance between the intervention's goals and the family's needs. It will also help parents feel ownership of the intervention because they will be working toward something they feel is important to their family.

# Design the Best Intervention for Your Participants
The activities and materials you develop for your home visits will depend on the characteristics and needs of the participants, your goals and objectives, and the expertise of the home visitors.
Overall, the interventions that succeed in helping at-risk families are intensive, comprehensive, and flexible (Wallach 1994

# For expectant mothers and parents with young babies
In a randomized trial in Elmira, New York (a semi-rural community),  demonstrated the effectiveness of nurse home visits for first-time pregnant teens who were poor or unmarried. The home visits were designed to improve the mothers' health, help them develop effective parenting skills, and improve their financial situation by easing the transition into the work force after their children were born.
The goal was to reduce problems resulting from poor prenatal health, dysfunctional caregiving, and financial difficulties caused by closely spaced pregnancies, lack of education, and inconsistent employment.
The study produced encouraging results. Compared with controls, nurse-visited women experienced greater social support-both from family and friends and from government and community services. They also smoked fewer cigarettes, had better diets, and suffered fewer kidney infections during pregnancy. Through age 2, children born to nurse-visited women were 80 percent less likely to be identified as victims of child abuse or neglect and were seen in hospital emergency departments 56 percent fewer times. Four years after delivery of the first child, the women in the intervention group had 42 percent fewer additional pregnancies and participated in the workforce at a rate 84 percent higher than that of the control group. The cost to the government for this intervention was recovered before the children's fourth birthdays .
A follow-up of the original Elmira study revealed that positive results endure (Olds et al. 1997;. Fifteen years after the initial intervention, data showed a reduction from 90 months to 60 months of recourse to the Aid to Families with Dependent Children Program among low-income, unmarried mothers. The home visitation program was also replicated in Memphis, Tennessee, among a predominantly black population.
Results, although smaller in magnitude, were similar to those obtained in the semi-rural, mostly white community. (Olds et al. 1999;Kitzman et al. 1999).

# For families with evidence of child abuse or maltreatment
Previous research suggests that the incidence of child abuse increases the odds of future delinquency and adult criminality by 40 percent (Widom 1992). A high percentage of juvenile sex offenders may have been victims of childhood violence themselves (Feindler and Becker 1994). Studies and interviews with experts have found home-visiting interventions to be effective in reducing the risk for and incidence of child abuse and maltreatment (Brust, Heins, and Rheinberger 1998;Carnegie Corporation 1994). Wasik and Roberts (1994) conducted a survey of 1,904 homevisiting interventions, 224 of which stated their primary focus was to provide services for abused and neglected children and their families. More than three-quarters of respondents rated three key elements of home visits as being of primary importance-improved parent-coping skills, enhanced parenting skills, and emotional support. Stress management, enhanced child development, and child and family advocacy were also rated as high priorities by more than half of respondents.
A successful home-visiting program aimed at preventing child abuse and neglect is Hawaii's Healthy Start Program, established in 1985 as a demonstration project. It now reaches more than half of Hawaii's at-risk population. This program uses home visits to improve families' coping skills and functioning, promote positive parenting skills, foster healthy parent-child interactions, and promote optimal child development. Results of the initial three-year project were conclusive: not a single case of abuse occurred among the project's 241 high-risk families Pratt 1991, 1993).
The Healthy Start Program offers a systematic approach to preventing child abuse among at-risk infants and toddlers. This approach forms the foundation for programs developed through Healthy Families America (HFA), a partnership of Prevent Child Abuse America (formerly the National Committee to Prevent  (Krysik et al. 1997;Norton 1998). A list of state HFA contacts is included in the Additional Resources section for this strategy.

# Select Staff Appropriate for Your Intervention
Home visits may be conducted by a variety of individualspublic-health or registered nurses, social workers, paraprofessionals, volunteers, and advocates and liaisons. For most home-visiting interventions, however, a health professional or paraprofessional specifically trained to make home visits will be best able to achieve the results desired.
Before you select your staff, develop a framework for your intervention that specifies the job roles and responsibilities of all staff members. Base hiring, training, and supervision on that framework. Be sure to hire staff members whose experience and educational background fit the requirements of your intervention.
For example, if your objectives include improving the health of pregnant women and their babies, nurses will be most appropriate; on the other hand, if your aim is to improve the learning skills of preschoolers in participating families, you may need staff members with a teaching background.

# Nurses
Public health nurses appear to be in a position to detect community problems and trends before other health care providers (Bekemeier 1995). They may be the best choice for your intervention's staff, especially if your intended participants are at-risk pregnant women.
The expertise nurses possess appears to be well accepted and even desired by most expectant parents because their focus is on health-first, that of the pregnant woman and later, that of the baby. In addition, families may feel more at ease in asking for help from a nurse than from social-service professionals or counselors because there is less of a potential stigma associated with nursing assistance. In fact, a pregnant woman's asking for nurse-related assistance may be viewed as a sign of her positive intentions toward her health and that of her baby.
Nurses are also ideal home visitors because:
- they can deliver content that contains a lot of medical information; - they are trained to teach, use good questioning techniques, detect subtle cues, set priorities, and manage cases; - they have an accepted role in the lives of pregnant women that can facilitate early acceptance and trust.

# Paraprofessionals
For some interventions, paraprofessionals-counselors, social workers, and specially trained community volunteers-will be effective home visitors. An intervention implemented as a randomized controlled trial in Denver, Colorado, compared the effectiveness of paraprofessionals and nurses in improving pregnancy outcomes, infant care, and parental life course. Overall, nurses produced a larger and broader range of beneficial effects: improved prenatal health behaviors, improved viability

# Public health nurses may be the best choice for your intervention's staff.
-f the newborn, more effective infant care, increases in the children's language development, and decreased rates of subsequent pregnancy. However, paraprofessionals effected significant changes, as well. The environment of the homes visited by paraprofessional became more conducive to children's development (at 21 months); early postpartum participation in the workforce was achieved by women of low psychological resources; and women had lower rates of subsequent pregnancy.
More studies are needed to determine under what circumstances paraprofessionals trained in home visiting can be most effective.
Researching intended participants can help identify the kinds of paraprofessionals who are most likely to be trusted and accepted by families. With both nurses and paraprofessionals, the beneficial effects of home visits are attributable to the particular program model and to the protocols that guide their visits .

# Staff characteristics
Whether you employ nurses, paraprofessionals, or others, all staff members must be available to conduct home visits when it is most convenient for participants. Since welfare reform, more mothers are working and may only be available on weekends or evenings. Staffers must also be committed to the effort and must get to visits on time, attend every visit, and complete the intervention. To be successful, home-visiting interventions rely on the development of a trusting relationship between the participants and the visitors. Tardiness and inconsistent attendance erode that trust.
The following characteristics are also highly desirable for home visitors:

# Special considerations for home visitors
Because intervention staff will be going into participants' homes and discussing potentially sensitive issues, practitioners must consider several factors when selecting visitors and pairing them with participating families.

# Confidentiality
Staff members must not be allowed to conduct visits in the homes of family members or friends. Participants may be reluctant to share with people they know details about problem behavior (e.g., child abuse, drug use) or concerns about their parenting abilities. All home visitors should sign an agreement of confidentiality to protect the privacy of the participants. However, practitioners should identify emergency circumstances in which home visitors may violate that agreement in order to help the family (e.g., when the health or safety of participants is endangered).

# Male home visitors
Carefully assess the context and sensitivities of the intended participants before selecting men to be home visitors. Some fathers-in particular, single fathers-may be willing to participate in an intervention led by a man. However, other fathers may feel competitive or even hostile toward a male visitor. Many visits are conducted in homes where a father is not present. Single mothers may feel unsafe or uncomfortable with a male visitor. When male visitors are undesirable to your participants, try having them accompany the primary home visitor occasionally as an auxiliary with special expertise.

# Cultural issues
Matching the cultural background of a home visitor with that of the family may or may not be important. The preferences of your intended participants should dictate this decision. Regardless of the cultural background of the home visitor, he or she must portray a neutral orientation toward race, ethnicity, religion, and other cultural factors.

# Train Staff Members
Training that prepares staff members for home-visiting work is essential, regardless of their prior education and experience. Practitioners should determine the core competencies staff will need to meet the intervention's goals and objectives and ask staff members to provide input about their training needs. At a minimum, the training curriculum should cover the following topics:
- - - - - - - - protocol

# Recruit Participants
Participation in home-based interventions must be voluntary. In an ideal world, families would jump at the chance to participate in your intervention. But in reality, you will probably need to engage in intensive outreach to bring families into your program. Families may be reluctant to participate because they:
- feel insulted by the implication that they need help; - view intervention staff as "the establishment"; - fear discovery of illicit activities; - view visits as an invasion of privacy.
Additionally, new mothers may be tired or depressed and may not have the energy to engage. They may also feel they do not have time for visits.

# Implement Your Intervention
Implementing home-visiting interventions poses complex challenges. Home visitors must address a variety of oftenchanging issues related to the families' circumstances. And in many cases, a long time period is required to achieve relatively small changes.

# Match the duration, frequency, and intensity of your intervention with families' needs
How long your intervention continues, how often visits occur, and how long each visit lasts will depend on the families' needs and the goals set for your effort (Brust, Heins, and Rheinberger 1998;Powell 1993). On average, home-visiting interventions last about one year; more intensive programs may run as long as three to five years. Home visits most commonly occur on a weekly basis. Monthly visits are the minimum for families with infants and very young children; for families of older children, quarterly visits may be appropriate if the intervention incorporates other forms of community support. Most visits last between 30 minutes and one hour, but they may run longer (Wasik and Roberts 1994).
The frequency of visits may decrease as families mature in the intervention, are successfully linked to needed services, and master the skills and information set forth in the intervention objectives. If parent-group meetings are part of the intervention, alternate the weeks of home visits with those of group meetings.
Each visit should have a clear structure and set activities. To keep activities on track, focus on long-term goals. At the end of each visit, note progress and discuss how upcoming activities reflect mutual expectations. Creating a "contract" with participants might be useful in determining what should be achieved during each visit. While it's important to form a comfortable relationship with participants, visits should not become social gatherings. Also, the content of visits should not be driven by crises.

# Encourage participants to stay involved
Participants in home-visiting interventions often drop out. They may become discouraged when changes occur very slowly, or they may come to believe that they no longer need the services home visits provide

# Support intervention staff
To help prevent staff burnout, limit the caseloads of homevisiting staffers to no more than 15 families; in some communities, caseloads will be significantly smaller (HFA 1996). Strongly caution staff members against getting involved in family problems they are unqualified to handle. For example, home visitors should not play therapist if participants appear to be suffering from depression or other mental health problems.
Families should be referred to community resources for crisis issues.
During implementation, provide your staff with ongoing opportunities for training and group discussions. Keep lines of communication open so staff members can approach supervisors with concerns or questions at any time. Supervisors should watch staff closely for signs of fatigue, discouragement, and difficulty with implementing activities.

# Monitor Progress and the Quality of Your Intervention
As with any prevention effort, a home-visiting intervention must be monitored to make sure it is on schedule and on track.
Collecting data throughout implementation can help you verify that activities are being carried out as planned and help you identify early problems in delivery that may jeopardize the intervention's success. The following suggestions should help you effectively monitor your effort:
- Supervise intervention staffers closely to make sure they are following the protocol for home visits.

# Evaluate Changes
To determine whether your intervention has met its goals, note changes in participants' behaviors and in family interactions as the intervention progresses. Compare them with baseline data established when implementation began to determine if the intervention resulted in positive outcomes.
Have parents note improvements in their behavior and that of their children and in parent-child interactions. Parents can also evaluate their confidence in parenting and handling conflicts that occur in the home. Home visitors, especially nurses, can assess the health and development of the children, as well as evaluate the behavioral changes they observe. If the children attend school or a childcare program, teachers and caregivers can also provide data about the children's behavior.

# Maintain Results After Implementation
To sustain the positive effects of the intervention, develop a strategic plan to help participants with the transition that occurs when the intervention ends. For example, you might schedule quarterly "boosters" or direct parents to community organizations that can provide support. Consider offering incentives such as diplomas and graduation ceremonies to foster transition.

# Link Home Visits with Other Strategies
Home visits are an effective component of programs seeking to prevent violence by young people, but they may not be sufficient on their own (Weiss 1993). Although more research is needed to test the hypothesis, combining early home-based interventions with school programs and other community efforts may be an effective strategy in preventing violence and other negative health outcomes.

# Summary
Home-visiting interventions improve parenting skills, provide social support to families, recognize and manage behavior problems, and promote child health and development. These types of interventions are likely to have a far greater impact on delinquency and violence than secondary and tertiary prevention programs such as those of the criminal justice system (Rivara and Farrington 1995 A compilation of educational materials for use by home visitors to help prevent unintentional injuries and child abuse and neglect. The focus on preventing abuse and neglect is implicit rather than explicit so parents will not feel as though they are being targeted as potential abusers.

# The Future of Children 1993; 3(3).
The Future of Children 1999; 9(1).

# Health Care Coalition on Violence. A Review of the Research on Home Visiting: A Strategy for Preventing Child Maltreatment. Anoka, Minnesota: Health Care Coalition on Violence, 1998.
A review of 42 home-visiting research articles that describe child maltreatment in the United States and Minnesota, summarize the current research on home visiting, and recommend a future research agenda for home-visiting services. The review concludes that home visiting is an effective strategy for reducing the incidence of and risk for child maltreatment, but it leaves unresolved the components necessary for an effective program and the costs and benefits compared with other interventions.

# Journal of Community Psychology 1997; 25(1).

# Journal of Community Psychology 1998; 26(1).
These issues discuss home visiting exclusively. This article reviews the effectiveness of prospective controlled trials, published between January 1979 and May 1993, aimed at the primary prevention of child physical abuse and neglect.

# MacMillan HL, MacMillan
Interventions were classified into six categories within the broad group of perinatal and early childhood programs. Many of these programs did not show a reduction in physical abuse or neglect; however, there is evidence that extended home visitation can prevent physical abuse and neglect among disadvantaged families. This article describes a 5-year longitudinal study to determine the sustainability of promising effects revealed in earlier studies, including better pregnancy outcomes, improved child care practices, fewer cases of child abuse, less reliance on social services, and a better life for mothers.

# Zero to Three, Home Visiting with Families with Infants and Toddlers 1997; 17(4).
The entire issue is about home visiting. Various authors discuss the benefits and dilemmas of home visiting as a strategy to support families with infants and toddlers. Topics include universal access, intensive outreach to at-risk families, and community development as the ultimate goals. The overarching theme is that home visiting is a powerful tool but it is only the beginning of the work at hand.

# Home-Visiting Programs
You may wish to contact the programs listed below, which have home-visiting components.

# First Steps/Fremont County Family Center
First Steps offers comprehensive child-development and parenting services for families with children from birth to 5 years. The intervention, which operates as part of the Fremont County Family Center, also provides monthly home visits. Play groups are held 4 times a week for children, siblings, and parents.

# Overview of the Social-Cognitive Strategy
Researchers have linked a lack of social problem-solving skills to youth violence (Pepler and Slaby 1994;Baranowski et al. 1997). When children and adolescents are faced with social situations for which they are unprepared emotionally and cognitively, they may respond with aggression or violence.
Many assert that we can improve children's ability to avoid violent situations and solve problems nonviolently by enhancing their social relationships with peers, teaching them how to interpret behavioral cues, and improving their conflict-resolution skills (Nadel et al. 1996).
Social-cognitive interventions strive to equip children with the skills they need to deal effectively with difficult social situations, such as being teased or being the last one picked to join a team. They build on Bandura's social-cognitive theory, which posits that children learn social skills by observing and interacting with parents, adult relatives and friends, teachers, peers, and others in the environment, including media role models (Bandura 1986). Social-cognitive interventions incorporate didactic teaching, modeling, and role-playing to enhance positive social interactions, teach nonviolent methods for resolving conflict, and establish or strengthen nonviolent beliefs in young people.

# Best Practices for a Social-Cognitive Intervention
While evaluations have shown social-cognitive interventions to be effective in the short-term, long-term effectiveness is still unclear. However, even with limited data, we can offer best practices for developing and implementing this type of intervention. The recommendations that follow are based on an extensive literature review and on interviews and surveys conducted with experts in the field of youth violence prevention.

# Identify the Populations You Want to Reach
Social-cognitive interventions are typically aimed at children. The younger participants are when your effort begins, the better your chances of successfully preventing aggressive attitudes and behaviors (Slaby 1998). Ideally, these interventions should reach all young people in a community, not just those with a history of violent behavior. However, if your community is like most, limited resources may prohibit such a large-scale effort. To determine who your intended participants should be, assess the community's needs and the money, time, and human resources available.
If you choose to target both violent and nonviolent children, use caution in planning your intervention activities. While violent children may be positively influenced by nonviolent participants, children with high levels of aggression need special attention. They may not thrive in an intervention intended for a general population. And if the ratio of violent to nonviolent children is too high, the nonviolent children could be negatively influenced.

# Consider the Cultural and Demographic Context of Intended Participants
Social-cognitive interventions must take into account the environment in which participants live and the circumstances they face. Children who exhibit violent behaviors often come from neighborhoods in which risk factors such as poverty, drug or alcohol abuse, and divorce are commonplace. Interventions must address these issues, in addition to teaching social and conflict-resolution skills. They must also be sensitive to the views of individual schools, the school system's administrators, and the community as a whole.

# Select an Appropriate Setting
Most social-cognitive interventions reported in the literature are centered in the schools for practical reasons. Trainers are often already on site, and children gather there for seven to eight hours

# The younger participants are when your effort begins, the better your chances of successfully preventing aggressive attitudes and behaviors.
a day, five days a week. Also, schools can set policies and alter the physical surroundings to minimize risk factors for violence, thus creating a model environment.
However, social-cognitive interventions need not be limited to school settings; they can be conducted wherever children are found in organized groups. Because patterns of violence appear to develop at an early age, researchers suggest that violence prevention efforts begin when children are very young and continue throughout their school years (Kellam et al. 1994;Slaby 1998). Therefore, social-cognitive interventions may ideally be introduced in Head Start programs, preschools, and childcare centers.
Additionally, efforts should be made to reach children who have dropped out of school. This may mean developing interventions to be carried out in community centers, churches, and juvenile detention facilities.

# Involve the Community
Social-cognitive interventions cannot succeed in a vacuum. The surrounding community must be engaged in violence prevention activities that support the school-based effort. In addition, parents and caregivers must reinforce the learning that goes on inside the classroom.

# The school community
The effectiveness of social-cognitive interventions depends largely on a whole-school approach (Aber et al. 1996;Wiist, Jackson, and Jackson 1996;Orpinas et al. 1996). In other words, all members of the school community-from administrators to teachers to students and other school personnel-should have a role.
To achieve such an integrated system, intervention planners should establish a steering committee or core group within the school or school district to coordinate activities. This group should work closely with school principals and other administrators to ensure that the intervention's activities are in line with the school's or district's goals and to increase the commitment level of decision makers (Aber et al. 1996;Wiist, Jackson, and Jackson 1996;Orpinas et al. 1996). Supervisors should also be encouraged to support the professional development and training that teachers and other educators need to effectively implement the intervention and to allow intervention staff extra time to meet project deadlines.

# Parents and others
No matter how intensive and well-conceived school-based interventions are, they will probably not be successful without the approval, cooperation, and support of parents and the community (Powell, Muir-McClain, and Halasyamani 1995).
Practitioners planning a social-cognitive intervention should recruit one or more credible, respected individuals in the school to promote the intervention and find ways for parents, community leaders, and others to participate in developing the intervention's activities and curriculum.

# Set Clear Goals and Objectives for Intervention Outcomes and Implementation
Social-cognitive interventions promote social competence by building communication skills and facilitating peer relationships.
Their general goal is to improve young people's ability to avoid conflict and handle in nonviolent ways any conflict that does arise. Common objectives of social-cognitive interventions include reducing the number of children suspended for violent acts, reducing the number of students referred to school counselors for aggressive behavior, and increasing positive attitudes toward nonviolence. Of course, goals and objectives for individual schools or communities will vary depending on needs and resources.

# Select the Best Intervention for Your Participants and Develop Appropriate Materials
The intervention selected for a given school or school systemand the activities and curriculum that comprise it-will depend largely on participants' ages and whether the goal is to change the behaviors and attitudes of all students or those of aggressive or violent students only. However, all social-cognitive interventions typically address the beliefs and attitudes that support aggressive behavior and teach the following skills (Greene 1998

# Between ages 6 and 12, children's beliefs about aggression and their tendencies to attribute hostile intent to others' actions are developing rapidly.
When developing the curriculum and activities for your intervention, review interventions that have been tried in other schools. Assess whether the practices that made the intervention effective are applicable to your school or community. You may need to customize some components of the intervention, but do so cautiously. Changing significant elements can alter the intervention's effectiveness.
Experts in the field of youth violence prevention have identified the following additional suggestions for developing socialcognitive intervention materials (Aber et al. 1996;Wiist, Jackson, and Jackson 1996;Orpinas et al. 1996;Huesmann, Pierce, and Briggs 1996;Greene 1998):
- Involve teachers and principals from the beginning.

# For the general student population
If a school or community wants to prevent aggressive behavior before it starts or wants to improve the overall attitude toward violence, a social-cognitive intervention that's aimed at all students is one possible strategy. This section describes interventions designed for the general student population.

# Elementary school
Research has shown that between ages 6 and 12, children's beliefs about aggression and their tendencies to attribute hostile intent to others' actions are developing rapidly (Aber et al. 1996). Therefore, several interventions have been developed to target this age group.
The Resolving Conflict Creatively Program (RCCP) is designed to help elementary-school teachers and students learn nonviolent ways of resolving conflicts, prevent involvement with violent situations, and promote intercultural understanding. It has several components, including the following:
- Teachers are trained to incorporate into a traditional curriculum exercises to improve communication, conflict resolution, and intergroup relations.
- Staff developers guide teachers in applying new skills.
Administrators are briefed about the intervention's concepts and how they can support the effort. - Peer models for nonviolent conflict resolution intervene in arguments and disputes on the playground and in the lunchroom.
The RCCP curriculum contains 51 weekly lessons, each lasting 30 to 60 minutes. These lessons or "workshops" focus on active listening, assertiveness, emotional expression, perspective-taking, cooperation, negotiation, problem solving, conflict analysis, and countering expressions of bias. Teachers facilitate role-playing exercises, interviewing, small-group discussion, and brainstorming to achieve a high level of student interaction (Aber et al. 1996).
Evaluation of RCCP has revealed mixed results. The beliefs and thought processes that put students at risk for aggression increased among all students as the school-year progressed. However, when teachers administered many RCCP lessons, students' aggressive attitudes increased much more slowly. When teachers taught only a few RCCP lessons, students experienced a faster increase than average. In addition to the number of lessons taught, the context of the child's life was found to impact the effect of this program. The positive effects resulting from frequent exposure to the RCCP curriculum were weakened among children from high-risk classrooms and neighborhoods (Aber et al. 1998;Roderick 1998).
PeaceBuilders is a school-wide intervention that teaches five principles: praise people, avoid put-downs, seek wise people as advisors and friends, notice and correct hurts we cause, and right wrongs. The program uses nine broad techniques for behavior change (Embry et al. 1996 Initial outcomes over a two-year period showed that exposure to PeaceBuilders significantly increased teacher-rated social competence and student-reported prosocial behavior. Fewer effects were seen for students' aggressive behavior (Flannery et al., unpublished). Additionally, in a separate study assessing whether the program had any impact on visits to the school nurse, the researchers found that nurse visits-including those related to injuries-decreased 12 percent in intervention schools, while they remained static in comparison schools. The rates of injuries related to fighting showed little change in intervention schools, but they increased 56 percent in the comparison schools (Krug et al. 1997).
The PATHS (Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies) Curriculum was developed to help students in kindergarten through fifth grade develop essential skills in emotional literacy, positive peer relations, and problem solving. Teachers blended intervention materials with the regular curriculum, and activities were conducted both in and out of the classroom. Parents were also given materials for use at home to help students generalize the lessons learned in class.
Four clinical trials of PATHS over the past 15 years have demonstrated improvements in social and emotional competencies and reductions in aggression and other risk factors (e.g., depression) across a wide range of elementary school children, including students with special needs. Some improvements were also seen in cognitive skills. These findings were reflected in teacher ratings, student self-reports, child testing and interviewing, and independent ratings by classroom observers (Greenberg et al. 1995;Greenberg and Kusche 1998).

# Second
Step: A Violence Prevention Curriculum was developed to reduce aggression and increase prosocial behavior. Grossman and colleagues (1997) conducted a randomized trial among 790 second-and third-grade students in six matched pairs of urban and suburban elementary schools in Washington state. At both two weeks and six months after the intervention, the researchers found a moderate decrease in physical aggression and an increase in neutral and prosocial behavior in school. There was no measurement of behavior change outside the school setting.
While this intervention appears promising for elementary schools, it has had disappointing effects when implemented in middle schools. In one study, the curriculum led to a decrease in boys' aggressive behaviors, but the results were short-lived (Orpinas et al. 1995). In a second study, the curriculum failed to reduce aggressive behaviors (Orpinas et al. 2000).

# Middle school
Conflict Resolution: A Curriculum for Youth Providers is an intervention for middle-school students. Teachers present five chapters designed to build skills in communication and nonviolent conflict resolution. Students in classes that followed the curriculum reported significantly fewer violent solutions to hypothetical conflict situations than did students in other classes.
The intervention group also reported significant decreases in the actual use of violence. Although the short-term results appear promising, the study used a quasi-experimental design to evaluate the curricula, and the students were not randomly selected. Therefore, interpretations of the results are limited (DuRant et al. 1996).

# High school
The Violence Prevention Project (VPP), which was implemented in three high schools in Boston, involved students in lectures, discussions, and interactive role plays once a week for 10 weeks. Evaluation of the project found that very low suspension rates were maintained among juniors, but these rates were not always significantly different from groups who did not participate in the project. However, in a specialized class with a smaller studentteacher ratio and several services that were not available in the main school system, the project reduced suspension rates by 71 percent. Findings from this project suggest that the VPP can reduce negative school behaviors when other supportive activities and services are provided concurrently (Hausman, Pierce, and Briggs 1996).

# For at-risk and high-risk youth
Aggressive youths tend to have trouble with impulse control, problem solving, anger management, assertiveness, and empathy. Social-cognitive interventions are designed to improve interpersonal and problem-solving skills so these children will be less likely to resort to aggression or to become the target of violence and better able to negotiate mutually beneficial solutions (Slaby et al. 1995).
High-risk youth should participate in interventions that use multiple components-for instance, academic enhancement and relationship building with both peers and adults. A broad, intensive intervention is needed to prevent violence by children with chronic aggressive behavior (Orpinas et al. 1996;Lochman et al. 1993).

# Elementary school
The BrainPower program is an attributional intervention designed to reduce peer-directed aggression among African

# A broad, intensive intervention is needed to prevent violence by children with chronic aggressive behavior.
American and Latino boys. During 60-minute sessions conducted twice weekly for six weeks, students engage in activities designed to reduce their tendencies to attribute hostile intentions in peers following ambiguous negative social interactions (Hudley 1994). A study of the BrainPower intervention was conducted among 384 third-through sixthgrade students in four southern-California elementary schools. The students' behaviors and attitudes were measured for 12 months after the intervention. Boys in the intervention group improved their self-control and made fewer judgments of hostile intent. Although these results diminished over time, the findings suggest that improvements in behavior are related to changes in students' attributions (Hudley et al. 1998 (Lochman, Burch, et al. 1984;Lochman, Lampron, et al. 1989) and reductions in substance use, but not in delinquency (Lochman 1992). The Coping Power Program has a 33-session child-group component and a 16-session parent-group component (Lochman and Welles 1996). Post-intervention and one-year follow-up evaluations showed significant reductions in children's aggression (Lochman, in press).

# Middle school
Positive Adolescent Choices Training (PACT), implemented in Dayton, Ohio, was designed to reach high-risk African American students in seventh and eighth grades. The intervention's principle components include the following Hammond 1995, 1998):
- Social-skills training-expressing anger, frustration, and disappointment constructively; listening and reacting appropriately to criticism or anger of others; and resolving disagreements nonviolently. - Anger-management training-recognizing anger triggers, understanding anger responses, thinking through the consequences of those responses, and using techniques to control anger.
- Education about violence-dispelling myths about violence risks and raising awareness of the dynamics of violence.
Researchers found that youths in the PACT group expressed less physical aggression at school than did students in the control group. This improvement in behavior was observed both during and after the training. They also found that, compared to controls, PACT participants had less involvement with the juvenile court system, fewer violence-related charges, and lower rates of offenses per person (Yung and Hammond 1993).
Responding in Peaceful and Positive Ways (RIPP) is a sixthgrade curriculum that was taught in the Richmond Youth Against Violence Project. It was designed for students with high rates of suspension, low grade-point averages, absenteeism problems, and a history of violent behavior. About 90 percent of the students in the intervention were African American, and many came from low-income, single-parent households in neighborhoods with high rates of crime and drug use. The curriculum-developed from an earlier program based on Prothrow-Stith's model ( 1987) and the Children's Creative Response to Conflict Program (1988)-included 25 50-minute sessions implemented by specialists trained in conflict resolution (Farrell and Meyer 1997). All sessions combined behavioral repetition and mental rehearsal, experiential learning activities, and didactic learning opportunities. Early sessions focused on team building and expanding students' knowledge about nonviolence; later sessions focused on skill building and critical analysis. The skills taught in the sixth grade were reinforced by a school-wide peer-mediation intervention and by seventh-and eighth-grade curricula implemented by teachers (Meyer and Farrell 1998).
Results immediately following the intervention revealed that RIPP participants had significantly fewer disciplinary code violations, carried weapons less often, and were suspended less frequently than controls. Participants also improved their knowledge of intervention material, used their school's mediation program more frequently, and reported fewer injuries from fighting.
In a six-month follow-up study of RIPP, self-report data collected from 169 participants and 184 controls showed significant treatment effects for the frequency of violent behaviors, suppression of aggressive behavior, and knowledge of the intervention material. Impulse control improved significantly among boys, and fewer male students skipped school because of safety concerns. Significant improvement was seen in girls' reported use of nonviolent methods to address hypothetical conflict situations. School disciplinary data from the first semester of the seventh grade showed that RIPP participants had significantly fewer suspensions than the control group (Farrell, Meyer, and White 1998).
The Washington Community Violence Prevention Program offered fifth and seventh graders in high-crime areas of Washington, D.C., a curriculum to highlight the motivation behind aggressive behavior and develop problem-solving skills. The curriculum built on "Viewpoints," a 10-session intervention for violent juvenile offenders to which three sessions were added: one each on drugs and guns, and one to celebrate completion of the intervention (Guerra and Slaby 1990). Students increased their knowledge about risk factors for violence, changed their attitudes toward violence, and increased social skills shown to affect aggressive behavior. These effects were measured only in the short term (Gainer, Webster, and Champion 1993).
Aggressors, Victims, and Bystanders: Thinking and Acting to Prevent Violence is a curricular intervention for middle school students that focuses not only on aggressors, but also on the interrelated roles of victims and bystanders. It is based on the premise that all three players can build the cognitive and social skills needed to resolve problems nonviolently. The curriculum was developed and evaluated in three steps, each involving collaboration among expert advisors, teachers, and students. First, researchers assessed students' cognitive skills, beliefs, and tendency to start a conflict, be a victim, or be a bystander who encourages aggression. Second, a preliminary curriculum was developed, and teachers and students provided feedback on factors such as clarity, relevance, age appropriateness, engagement, and practical utility. Third, the curriculum was evaluated in a study of over 300 high-risk adolescents and a control group. The intervention reduced students' belief that violence is a favorable response to conflict; increased their intent to resolve conflict without aggression, seek relevant information, and avoid conflict; and improved their self-rated behavior, indicating withdrawal of bystander acceptance and encouragement of aggression (Slaby 1998).

# Multi-tier interventions
Interventions designed for the general student population may fail to impact children at high risk for aggression. To address the needs of both the general and high-risk student populations, some practitioners plan interventions with several levels of activities. These multi-tier efforts may combine, for example, a curriculum to be delivered to all students with special smallgroup activities designed for high-risk youth. Some of these interventions also include activities for parents or the entire family.
One example of a multi-tier effort is the Metropolitan Area Child Study (MACS), an eight-year research trial conducted among elementary school students in urban, at-risk communities. Its goal was to change the thought processes and attitudes that are associated with aggressive behavior and to modify the school environment to foster prosocial development. Three components comprised MACS: a general enhancement classroom intervention, the "Yes I Can" curriculum; a small-group intervention for high-risk children; and a family component for the parents or guardians of high-risk children.
The "Yes I Can" curriculum consisted of 40 lessons delivered twice a week for two years (20 per year) by teachers in firstthrough sixth-grade classrooms. In the first year, students were taught self-understanding, relationship of self to others, and moral beliefs in order to motivate students to behave in prosocial ways and decrease their acceptance of aggression in social interactions. Also in the first year, teachers received 30 hours of training to help them model prosocial behaviors in the classroom. Year two introduced the themes of control and prosocial action plans to provide children with the skills needed for daily social interactions. The second year included monthly reviews for teachers to address the issues raised during first-year training and to help them develop plans for dealing with everyday classroom concerns.
The second component of MACS was a more intensive program directed at high-risk students. In addition to following the general enhancement curriculum, high-risk students participated in small-group activities designed to change their aggressive beliefs and attributions and give them opportunities to practice positive reactions to a variety of social situations. The small groups met once a week for 12 weeks in the first year and for 16 weeks in the second year. To increase social interaction, smallgroup participants were designated as leaders for the "Yes I Can" curriculum in the second year. Labeling the small-group activities as "leadership training meetings" helped motivate the high-risk students and improved their social status with peers.

# Incorporate an array of activities and materials in order to hold students' interest and model a variety of ways to prevent or counteract violence.
related to children's antisocial behavior, including inconsistent discipline, low levels of parental monitoring, poor problemsolving skills, defensiveness in family interactions, and a lack of emotional bonding (Huesmann et al. 1996).
The results of this multi-level intervention were mixed. In schools with moderate resources, significant decreases in aggression were found among second-and third-grade students who received the most intensive intervention. However, in schools that had limited resources to devote to the intervention, aggression actually increased after the intervention, even when all three components were implemented. Among children in fifth and sixth grades, aggression increased after receiving general and small-group training, regardless of the school's resource level. These results indicate that a program like that tested in MACS can effectively decrease aggression if begun early and implemented in schools with adequate resources, but negative unintended effects may result when such an intervention is implemented among older students or in schools with limited means (Huesmann 2000).

# Diverse activities and materials
Social-cognitive interventions should incorporate an array of activities and materials in order to hold students' interest and model a variety of ways to prevent or counteract violence. Multimedia formats, specifically computer-based interventions, can greatly enhance classroom instruction techniques because they provide flexibility and can spark interest among resistant students (Bosworth et al. 1996). The multimedia approach can adjust the intervention to students' responses, provide students control over the choice of information and sequence of materials, offer one-on-one anonymous interaction between the student and computer, and provide an attractive game-like atmosphere.
One multimedia example is SMART Team (formerly SMART Talk), a computer-based intervention for young adolescents that uses games, simulations, cartoons, animation, and interactive interviews to teach new ways of resolving conflict without violence. Computer characters act as role models who demonstrate anger management, dispute resolution, and perspective-taking to give adolescents strategies for conflict resolution and mediation (Bosworth et al. 1996). The intervention is composed of six modules that may be used in any order without losing continuity or impact.
SMART Team was pilot tested with 102 seventh-grade students in a small-city middle school for a four-week period. The results showed significant increases in knowledge about conflict management and about behavior that escalates conflict; increases in self-reported prosocial behavior and intentions to use nonviolent strategies; and decreases in self-reported discipline problems at home, at school, and in the community. However, there was no difference in the students' confidence in handling conflict situations using nonviolent strategies (Bosworth, Espelage, and DuBay 1998).
The intervention was subsequently implemented in a large school in a major Midwestern metropolis with a diverse socioeconomic population. An evaluation of 516 sixth, seventh, and eighth graders showed that students found the intervention attractive and useful and that the intervention improved students' attitudes toward violence, increased self-awareness, and increased intentions to use nonviolent strategies. However, there were no significant changes in the frequency of aggressive behavior. The findings suggest that multimedia tools may be useful in changing some of the cognitive and psychological factors associated with violence and, therefore, have the potential for changing violent behavior (Bosworth et al. 2000).

# Interventions to address the school setting and social norms
If interventions are to be effective in the school setting, issues about the setting itself must be addressed. Practitioners should include components that promote a nonviolent environment throughout the school. At a minimum, schools should have and enforce policies on safety precautions and student conduct. They should also enact non-punitive methods of control, encourage student involvement in academic and after-school activities, and provide continuous support for staff (Mayer 1995(Mayer , 1999.
A focus on the social context of the schools could help promote social competence and prosocial behavior in children by creating a caring school community (Baker 1998). School psychologists can help assess a school's culture and restructure schools to be more sensitive to social aspects of education, for example, by emphasizing personal responsibility, empathy, and respect for the community.

# Addressing violence in the media
Violence is often glorified or romanticized in the news and entertainment media. This type of media coverage can give young people an unrealistic view of the consequences of violence and lead them to believe that violence is accepted-

# Cultural considerations
Planners and practitioners should carefully review intervention materials and make necessary cultural adaptations for their intended participants. Interventions reaching students living in transient neighborhoods, for example, must address the ethnic and language differences that are found in the community's heterogeneous population (Huesmann et al. 1996).
It may be most effective to provide schools with a core curriculum to which they can add culturally appropriate material without compromising the intervention's effectiveness. Each school should research educational techniques that might work best for their students; no one technique is appropriate for all schools.

# Link social-cognitive interventions with other strategies
Interventions to prevent youth violence should involve multiple segments of children's social experiences and interactions.
Studies have suggested that integrating the components of school-based social-cognitive interventions (e.g., social-skills development) with other types of interventions can improve effectiveness (Goldstein and McGinnis 1998;McGinnis and Goldstein 1998).
The FAST (Families and Schools Together) Track Program is a prime example of blending strategies to prevent youth violence. It combines a social-cognitive curriculum, parent training, and home visits to prevent conduct problems, promote social relations, and improve school performance among elementary school students. It has been implemented in the low-income, high-crime areas of Nashville, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; Durham, North Carolina; and University Park, Pennsylvania (Bierman and Conduct 1996;Dodge and Conduct 1993).
FAST Track is a multi-level program, consisting of universal and selective components. The universal component has a 57-lesson curriculum (the PATHS curriculum-see page 125) to foster universal development of emotional concepts, social understanding, and self-control. In the target communities, it was delivered to all students in 20-to 30-minute lessons, which were taught approximately three times a week (Catalano et al. 1998).
Additional components were administered to high-risk students-
- Parents of high-risk children took part in training groups designed to promote positive family-school relationships and teach nonaggressive parenting skills (e.g., positive reinforcement, use of time outs, improved self-restraint). - Home visits were conducted to foster parents' problemsolving skills, self-efficacy, and coping skills. - High-risk students participated in social-skills training groups.
Children received tutoring in reading.
The at-risk children took part in a friendshipenhancement program called Peer Pairing.
The universal curriculum was applied each year for six yearsfrom first through fifth grade-covering the important developmental transitions of school entry and moving from elementary to middle school. Home visits and tutoring took place weekly in the first-grade year; afterward, these activities occurred as dictated by participants' needs (Bierman and Conduct 1996).
At the completion of the first grade, children's social, emotional, and academic skills increased moderately; peer interactions and social status improved; and disruptive behaviors decreased.
Parents reported decreased use of physical discipline, increased parenting satisfaction, and increased positive involvement with both their children and the school. Additionally, significant effects were seen in observer ratings of the classroom atmosphere, although assessment of classroom functioning varied by the quality of the FAST Track implementation (Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group 1999a, 1999b.

# Coordinating multi-strategy programs
When several strategies are incorporated into a program, you will likely need a diverse implementation staff. Persons best suited to carry out a school-based intervention, for example, may not be qualified to conduct home visits. Select one person or organization to coordinate hiring of staff, keep track of all activities in the various interventions, and monitor staff performance. This will ensure continuity among the interventions and improve the overall effort.

# Select Staff Appropriate for Your Intervention
When staffing a social-cognitive intervention, there are basically three options: 1) teachers deliver the intervention in their classrooms; 2) full-time prevention specialists (who are not Make sure staff members have a strong commitment to nonviolence.
classroom teachers) implement the intervention; or 3) a combination of teachers and other professionals implement it. Each option has advantages and disadvantages, which are discussed below. But regardless of who implements your intervention, make sure staff members have a strong commitment to nonviolence and understand the social and environmental context of participants' lives.

# Teachers as implementers
Having teachers implement a social-cognitive intervention may increase the integration of intervention activities with the regular curriculum. And a teacher-based staff may require little or no additional funding. However, if teachers implement the intervention, students may be reluctant to disclose hostile or sensitive emotions. They may feel there is less confidentiality or fear that an admission of negative or aggressive feelings may result in lower grades or disciplinary action.
Be sure that teachers who participate in the intervention do so voluntarily (Aber et al. 1996;Wiist, Jackson, and Jackson 1996;Orpinas et al. 1996). Some teachers may resent the burden of adding extra activities to their already busy class schedule or be reluctant to spend extra time at school to carry out extracurricular intervention activities. These teachers may not devote the effort needed to make the intervention a success. Limit intervention staff to those teachers who are enthusiastic about the activities and their intended results.
In addition to being willing to devote extra effort to a socialcognitive intervention, teachers must believe that violence can be prevented and that the intervention they are implementing will have an impact (Slaby 1998). When teachers do not believe in violence prevention interventions but implement those interventions anyway, they may inadvertently weaken the intervention's effect or cause it to fail. You can assess individual teacher readiness by having teachers rate their beliefs about violence prevention efficacy at three levels:
- General beliefs-Do you believe that violence is preventable? If a teacher does not believe it is, he or she may misrepresent or ignore prevention messages. - Specific beliefs-To what extent do you believe that prevention strategies and practices can be effective? If a teacher believes that violence is theoretically preventable but does not believe that intervention materials can be useful, he or she may not deliver activities and lessons effectively.
- Personal beliefs-Do you believe that you, personally, can make a difference in helping to prevent violence? A lack of personal efficacy can also limit effectiveness of intervention activities and messages.
You may need to increase readiness by providing evidence that these interventions work and that teachers can have a profound impact on youth violence prevention. For example, presenting a video or case study that shows skeptical teachers who implemented a violence prevention intervention and then noticed positive behavior changes may help convince staffers of their ability and that of the intervention to prevent violence (Slaby 1998).

# Other professionals as implementers
In some cases, such as when after-school activities form a significant portion of an intervention, non-teachers may be the ideal implementers. Even when activities take place during school hours, you may opt to employ a staff specifically to implement your effort. This will reduce much of the burden on teachers.
Of course, one obvious disadvantage of hiring non-teacher staffers is the need for significant funding. Funding will be required for additional salaries or consulting fees. Additional funds may also be required to conduct interviews and background checks for these individuals. This funding may come from the schools themselves or from other sources, such as government grants or community organizations.

# Both teachers and others as implementers
Having both teachers and other professionals implement your intervention may allow you to reap the benefits and minimize the negative elements that both groups of implementers present. A combined staff can also increase the effectiveness of your intervention. A non-teacher staff can lead intervention activities, and teachers can add reinforcing elements to their regular curriculum.

# Train Staff Members
Teachers and others who implement social-cognitive interventions require significant training. Schools and communities must be willing to devote the resources needed for this professional development. In addition to preparing staff members to carry out intervention activities, training should teach them how to do the following (Slaby et al. 1995):

# Having both teachers and other professionals implement your intervention may allow you to reap the benefits and minimize the negative elements that both groups of implementers present.
- Organize the school environment to minimize violence.

# Training duration
Training should begin with at least three days of intensive course work and interactive exercises. But to be effective, training must be continued for as long as the intervention lasts. Ongoing training or consultation does not need to be on site. Follow-up can be through e-mail or videos, for instance. However, we should note that the effectiveness of different methods of followup training has not been determined.

# Recruit Participants
When social-cognitive interventions are incorporated into regular curricula (e.g., a health education curriculum), recruitment is typically not necessary. Students can take part in the intervention simply by attending class regularly. However, if your intervention is targeted to high-risk students, you may need to recruit them to participate in special activities that take place outside of the classroom, such as small-group discussions, peerleadership training, or after-school sessions.

# Implement Your Intervention
The effectiveness of a social-cognitive intervention will depend on many implementation factors, including how often and for how long students are exposed to activities and messages, how well teachers and other intervention staffers are supported, and how interested students remain in the activities.

# Match the intervention's frequency, intensity, and duration with participants' needs
If you are replicating an evaluated intervention, implement it as presented in the research in terms of frequency, intensity, and duration. When implementing a new intervention, the guidance that follows should help.
Students need frequent contact with intervention activities and materials. However, the actual number of contacts will depend on the material, the age or developmental readiness of participants, and the time needed to practice skills. Older students are better able to digest more information in one sitting. Elementary school students, because of their short attention spans, may need small "doses" of content.

# Social-cognitive interventions take a long time to effect changes.
A single curriculum with 10 to 15 sessions is likely to be insufficient (Orpinas 1995). Half a school year of violence prevention programming should be a minimum. For the longestterm impact, school districts should consider multi-year models with continuity across years. And for students who come into daily contact with violence outside the school setting, socialcognitive interventions should be a permanent part of school curricula (Slaby 1997).

# Support teachers and other intervention staff

# Encourage participants to stay involved
To keep students interested in the intervention, connect the activities to their goals. Show them how the behaviors they are learning will help them get what they want-improved safety at school and in their neighborhood, greater respect from peers, improved academic performance, and perhaps a larger circle of friends.
Make the intervention fun, and relate it to "real life." Include games and videotape the intervention activities to engage younger children. Use articles from local newspapers or magazines to start discussions about violence. Have students keep a log of violent images they see in the media and nonviolent examples of conflict resolution; use the log to generate class discussions. Ask young participants to share stories that illustrate nonviolent, prosocial behaviors.
Let students know they will receive a tangible reward for completing the intervention. Students-and implementation staff-need a way to publicly acknowledge and celebrate their accomplishments (Aber et al. 1996;Wiist, Jackson, and Jackson 1996;Orpinas et al. 1996).

# To keep students interested in the intervention, connect the activities to their goals.

# Monitor Progress and the Quality of Implementation
Monitoring, which focuses on the process of implementation, is necessary to ensure that your intervention is on track. To determine if your social-cognitive intervention is reaching the intended population and being implemented as planned- Review data routinely throughout implementation so you can correct any problems that might jeopardize the success of your effort.

# Evaluate Outcomes
Evaluation allows you to assess the effectiveness of your intervention and identify any unexpected outcomes. For a socialcognitive intervention, you'll want to answer these questions:
- Did participants' knowledge about and attitudes toward violence change? - Did aggressive and violent behaviors decrease? - Were there any negative unintended effects from the intervention?
To obtain this data, review school records for attendance, truancy, and disciplinary actions. Keep in mind the school district's reporting requirements and the variability across schools in how offenses are reported and recorded. Collect teachers' perceptions of participants' behavior changes and ask students to report changes in their own and in peers' behaviors and attitudes. You can also hire someone who was not involved in the intervention to evaluate students' behaviors; this method may produce the most objective data.

# Maintain Results after Implementation
Interventions to prevent youth violence are never finished. While positive changes are often seen right after an intervention ends, those improvements typically dissipate without reinforcement. Orpinas (1995) observed that self-reported aggressive behavior among students who participated in the Second Step program (discussed on page 125) increased as more time passed from the end of program implementation.
To maintain positive effects, practitioners should provide children and adolescents with reinforcing "booster" activities. Lochman (1992), for example, looked at the effects of a schoolbased anger-coping intervention several years after implementation. Although significant post-implementation results had been reported, there were no effects on delinquency rates or classroom behavior for most participants at the threeyear follow-up. A subset of participants who received booster sessions did maintain positive behavior changes.
Planning and implementing booster activities requires support from teachers, administrators, students, and the community. To achieve this support, share evaluation results with teachers and other school staff so they'll know that they made a difference; involve intervention "alumni" in follow-up efforts; and establish collaborative relationships between the school and community organizations (e.g., health and wellness centers, youth centers, churches).

# Summary
Social-cognitive interventions have been shown to reduce aggressive behavior by youth in the short term. Long-term evaluation, although it has been discussed for years (Coben et al. 1994), continues to be lacking. There are also several limitations to these interventions.
First, some of the more violent youths are not being reached by social-cognitive interventions because they do not attend traditional schools. Second, even with training, teachers and other implementers may vary in their delivery techniques; this variation can affect intervention outcomes. Third, participants may have difficulty translating the new behaviors they learn in school to the "real world." Finally, improvements in behaviors and attitudes that students and teachers report may not be accurate; awareness of desired outcomes may bias responses of both participants and implementers. Other measures, besides self-and teacher reports, must be developed to obtain more objective data.
To maintain positive effects, provide children and adolescents with reinforcing "booster" activities. Focuses on enhancing decision-making skills as one approach toincreasing adolescents' ability to manage interpersonal violenceand examines data from a pilot study for insights aboutadolescents' ability to make decisions in situations ofinterpersonal conflict. Adolescents can be considered fairlyskilled decision makers, and their unique perspective must beconsidered to develop effective intervention programs. Children who display deviant levels of aggression in school have been found to manifest significantly higher rates of juvenile delinquency, poor overall school adjustment, greater-thanaverage rates of school drop out, and higher-than-average rates of referral for clinical mental-health interventions. Attributions may be internal factors for human aggressive behavior.

# Overview of the Mentoring Strategy
Research has shown that the presence of a positive adult role model to supervise and guide a child's behavior is a key protective factor against violence (National Resource Center 1999). The absence of such a role model-whether a parent or other individual-has been linked to a child's risk for drug and alcohol use, sexual promiscuity, aggressive or violent behavior, and inability to maintain stable employment later in life (Beier et al. 2000;Walker and Freedman 1996).
Mentoring-the pairing of a young person with a volunteer who acts as a supportive, nonjudgmental role model-has been touted by many as an excellent means of providing a child or adolescent with a positive adult influence when such an influence does not otherwise exist (Council 1996;Brewer et al. 1995). Evidence has shown that mentoring can significantly improve school attendance and performance, reduce violent behavior, decrease the likelihood of drug use, and improve relationships with friends and parents (Sipe 1996). And the Council on Crime in America (1997) identified mentoring as one of three interlocking crime-prevention strategies (the other two-monitoring and ministering 1 -also provide adult contact).
1 Monitoring provides community-based adult supervision of young people who have been in trouble with the law. Ministering means mobilizing and empowering caring adults, through churches, to assume responsibility for the well-being of children in their neighborhoods.

# Best Practices of Mentoring Interventions
Many states and cities, community organizations, fraternities and sororities, professional associations, and schools have launched mentoring efforts in the past decade or two. Anecdotal information from these endeavors has indicated that mentoring can be effective in reducing negative behaviors and associated risk factors. However, structured evaluation of mentoring interventions has only recently begun. And although violence prevention is one of many positive results that can come from the relationships formed through mentoring, few interventions have focused on that outcome specifically. Some researchers note that reliable data about how and why mentoring works is still being developed, but some commonsense wisdom about the best practices for both mentors and programs has emerged (Freedman 1993). Those practices, gleaned from an extensive literature review and consultation with experts in the field of youth violence prevention, are presented here.

# Identify the Populations You Want to Reach
Most mentoring efforts target young people at risk for academic and social problems. In a survey of 722 mentoring programs (Sipe and Roder 1999), the majority of interventions were aimed at youths in need of adult role models; often, this status was defined as children from single-parent homes. Other common participant groups were children from low-income families; youths who had been identified as lacking self-esteem or social skills; young victims of abuse or neglect; and young people whose family members abused drugs or alcohol. To determine whom to target in your community, conduct a needs assessment, consider your resources, and consult with local leaders, policy makers, teachers, and community organizations that serve children.
Keep in mind that mentoring may not be viable for the children and adolescents at highest risk, as these populations typically require efforts that begin at a very young age and last for many years (Freedman 1993). Weigh the costs and benefits of engaging children and adolescents with severe behavioral or emotional problems-such as those who have attempted suicide, use drugs, or are in a position to harm themselves or others-in mentoring programs, and determine if other interventions might be more appropriate. Also, because successful mentoring depends on a long-term relationship, avoid targeting young people from whom there is a demonstrated lack of commitment.

# Mentoring interventions can be community-based or site-based.

# Consider the Cultural and Demographic Context of Intended Participants
In most cases, mentors' backgrounds will be significantly different from those of participants in terms of age, lifestyle, ethnicity, and class. Mentoring efforts must take those differences into account and develop activities and techniques for bridging gaps. These interventions must also recognize the power of other influences in the lives of disadvantaged youths, such as poverty, exposure to violence, and lack of parental supervision. For many at-risk young people, mentoring is just a "drop in the bucket."

# Select an Appropriate Setting
Mentoring interventions can be community-based or site-based. The setting should be determined by an intervention's goals, the number of mentors, the number of youths you want to serve, and the types of activities planned.

# Community-based mentoring
In a community-based intervention, there is no set location where sessions must occur; the venue may vary by mentormentee pair and by session. In Sipe and Roder's survey (1999), slightly more than half of the programs were community-based. The majority of these interventions featured one-on-one sessions between mentors and mentees, and many focused on social or recreational activities. Because the location can vary, community-based efforts often include field trips as part of their activities.
Big Brothers/Big Sisters (BB/BS), founded in 1904, is the oldest and best-known community-based mentoring intervention in the United States; it has also been studied most. Its mission is to provide young people with one-on-one relationships that help them develop according to their full potential and become confident, competent, and caring adults. There are more than 500 local BB/BS agencies in all 50 states, serving more than 100,000 youths. Mentor-mentee pairs meet one-on-one for three to five hours each week for at least one year. There are no prescribed activities-they may include taking a walk, watching TV, playing games, attending a movie or sporting event, visiting the library, or just sharing thoughts (Elliott 1997). Public/Private Ventures (P/PV), a nonprofit social-policy development and evaluation firm in Philadelphia, conducted a comparative study of 959 adolescents ages 10 to 16 who applied to BB/BS interventions in 1992 and1993. 2 Half of these adolescents were randomly assigned to a treatment group, for which BB/BS matches were made or attempted; the other half were assigned to waiting lists. In the group matched with mentors, the pairs met about three times a month for an average of 12 months; each session lasted about four hours. The treatment and control groups were compared after 18 months to determine what effect one-on-one mentoring had on adolescents' antisocial activities, academic performance, attitudes and behaviors, relationships with family, relationships with friends, self-concept, and social and cultural enrichment.
The study findings, based on self-report data from baseline and follow-up interviews or on evaluation forms completed by agency staff, revealed that the BB/BS program can have a positive effect. Little Brothers and Little Sisters, especially minority adolescents, were less likely than youths in the control group to hit someone or to start using drugs or alcohol. They also had better school attendance, academic performance, and attitudes, and their relationships with parents and peers were better than those for controls. No statistically significant improvements were found in self-concept or in the number of social and cultural activities that participants took part in (Furano et al. 1993;Roaf, Tierney, and Hunte 1994;Morrow and Styles 1995;Tierney, Grossman, and Resch 1996).

# Site-based mentoring
Site-based interventions have one particular location where all sessions take place. Most site-based efforts are implemented in schools, but they can also occur in workplaces, churches, community centers, detentions centers, and public housing neighborhoods. Group mentoring interventions with targeted activities-such as academic projects and career-or skillbuilding exercises-are more likely to be site-based (Sipe and Roder 1999).

# School-based mentoring
In school-based mentoring interventions, volunteers meet with children for an hour or two, once or twice a week on school grounds. In these efforts, mentors focus primarily on activities that build academic and social skills, but they also involve the children in fun activities.
School-based mentoring programs are fairly new, and it is uncertain whether they work as effectively as "traditional" community-based efforts. But advocates of school-based mentoring have cited several potential advantages, including the following (Herrera 1999):
They may appeal to volunteers who are reluctant or unable to commit to several hours each week, which is often required in a community-based mentoring program.
Intervention staff may be better able to supervise and support mentors because they all meet at the same place.
Teachers and school administrators can also help monitor the intervention's progress.
Participating in a mentoring program may increase a young person's social standing with peers; having a mentor is often perceived as being "cool."
Another possible benefit of school-based programs is a decreased risk of false accusations of improper conduct. These programs are believed by some mentors-especially males-to be safer than community-based interventions because of the close supervision by teachers and administrators. This perception of safety may increase mentors' willingness to be paired with children of the opposite sex; this flexibility may allow schools to match a larger number of students with mentors (Herrera 1999).
One of the better-known school-based interventions is the Norwalk Mentor Program. Its goal is to improve self-esteem, attitudes, and attendance of students at risk for behavior problems and poor academic performance. The intervention's director is employed by the Norwalk public schools. Schoolbased teams of principals, social workers, guidance counselors, teachers, and nurses serve as in-school resources for mentors, and one individual-for example, a principal or social workerhandles administrative details. Volunteer mentors are recruited from local business and industry as well as from community organizations such as municipal agencies, local church groups, retired-teacher organizations, college alumni associations, and fraternal organizations. A liaison between mentors and the school is designated from each participating organization.
Mentors meet with their students on school grounds for at least one hour each week. Activities vary and may include talking, reading, playing a game, and taking part in physical recreation. For mentees in high school, mentoring sessions typically focus on career development, and meetings may occur at mentors' workplaces. Mentors are encouraged to keep in contact with students over the summer. Parents and guardians are invited to a series of evening workshops and luncheons at the school. Every student who completes high school receives a scholarship for post-secondary education, funded by participating companies through the Norwalk Mentor Scholarship Fund.
Evaluations completed by mentors and teachers after the program's first five years indicate that students benefit from the Norwalk program. As a result of mentoring relationships, 87 percent of students improved their school attendance, 92 percent improved self-confidence, and 96 percent showed greater cooperation in class. Almost all mentors (96 percent) described their relationships with students as excellent or good. And more than 90 percent of mentors and students continue their relationship through elementary and middle school years (Weinberger 1992a;1992b). The intervention, which in 1992 had more than 800 mentors, was the winner of the 1993 President's Volunteer Action Award. It has been replicated in a number of other cities in the United States and Canada.

# Institution-based mentoring
Supplementing traditional services with mentoring may be tempting for institutions that serve young people. However, institutions thinking about implementing a mentoring program must make sure they can dedicate adequate resources to operating that component. Existing staff rarely have enough time or preparation to train, supervise, or support mentors. Additionally, mentors' roles within the institution must be clearly defined so both volunteers and caseworkers understand how mentoring efforts fit with the youths' treatment plans (Mecartney, Styles, and Morrow 1994).

# Involve Parents and the Community
Involvement of parents and the community is paramount to the success of mentoring interventions. Parents must accept and support the presence of mentors in their children's lives. And the community plays a key role by providing volunteers and an infrastructure to support the intervention overall.

# Parents' role
In almost all mentoring efforts, parents are involved at some level. Parental involvement may mean signing a consent form for the child's participation, referring the child to a social-services agency or organization, or taking part in activities along with the mentor and child (Sipe and Roder 1999;Herrera 1999).

# Involvement of parents and the community is paramount to the success of mentoring interventions.

# Community Support
In order to get the human and financial resources needed to implement a mentoring intervention, you will need your community's support. You can establish this support by first demonstrating a need for your effort. Data about the problem of youth violence and about the potential benefits of mentoring should convince local leaders and policy makers. Also ask for input when developing the intervention's goals and operational plan; this should increase the community's sense of ownership in the effort (NMWG 1991). If your intervention is school-based, make sure you have the support of administrators and teachers (Herrera 1999).
Project RAISE (Raising Ambition Instills Self-Esteem), one of four components of the Baltimore Mentoring Partnership (BMP), is a good example of a program whose foundation rests on community support. Organizations-such as churches, universities, businesses, and fraternities-are recruited to sponsor RAISE interventions for seven years. They recruit mentors from their ranks and provide various other activities throughout the intervention. The goal of Project RAISE is to decrease the dropout rate and improve the life chances of students in inner-city public schools by improving students' selfesteem and school-related behavior and progress, reducing highrisk behaviors such as substance abuse and teen pregnancy, increasing graduation rates, and encouraging the pursuit of further education or training (Freedman 1993;NIJ 1994).
Evaluations of Project RAISE have revealed mixed results. According to BMP, graduation rates for RAISE students were about twice that of students in similar schools who did not participate in the intervention (NMP 2000). An independent evaluation of Project RAISE, which used comparison groups and statistical tests, found some positive results after two years of implementation: the intervention improved student attendance and report-card grades for English. However, most participants remained far below average for overall academic performance and were at risk of dropping out. Additionally, promotion rates and standardized test scores were not affected among students in the middle grades. The effects, though sizable, were not sufficient to neutralize the academic risks students exhibited upon entering the intervention (McPartland and Nettles 1991).
The researchers found that the RAISE model was much more likely to show positive effects when one-on-one mentoring was strongly implemented. Program success was also affected by variations in how sponsoring organizations implemented the model and by the size and composition of the student group served (McPartland and Nettles 1991).

# Set Clear Goals and Objectives for Intervention Outcomes and Implementation
Mentoring programs are extremely diverse, in terms of both activities and desired outcomes. Therefore, it is critical that these interventions have clearly stated goals and objectives. These objectives will guide planning decisions for such elements as the number of and qualifications for mentors, and they will provide benchmarks to guide implementation and evaluation. Goals should be set on two levels-the intended accomplishments both for the program as a whole and for individual mentoring sessions.

# Intervention goals
In most programs, the over-arching goal is to develop successful relationships between mentors and mentees. In Sipe and Roder's survey (1999), nearly three-quarters of mentoring programs had the general goal of positively impacting the young person's personal development. In many cases, that meant increasing selfesteem, developing positive values, improving conflict-resolution skills, increasing social skills, or improving relationships with family and peers. Other goals identified in that survey were promoting social responsibility and improving school performance, school behavior, and attitudes. About one-fifth of the programs had a goal of decreasing delinquent behavior among participants.

# Individual goals
The goals and objectives of individual mentoring sessions may differ significantly among pairs. Mentors should work with mentees and their families (and teachers, if appropriate) to determine desired accomplishments and the steps necessary to achieve them. Mentors may find it helpful to establish a growth plan for the mentee and to review it periodically, with both the mentee and his or her family. Setting a series of short-term goals can increase a mentee's confidence and keep him or her focused and enthusiastic (NWREL 1998). In a violence prevention program by Self Enhancement, Inc., for instance, mentors help students develop individual success plans at the beginning of the intervention. These plans, which outline what the students hope to achieve during mentoring sessions, are reviewed throughout the school year to make sure sessions are progressing as planned (Gabriel et al. 1996).

# Goals should be set on two levels-the intended accomplishments both for the program as a whole and for individual mentoring sessions.
When setting individuals' goals, keep the following guidance in mind (Freedman 1993;Sipe 1996;Tierney, Grossman, and Resch 1995):
The amount of input a mentee has in setting goals should vary with age-the older the child, the greater the input.
Consider the values and religious beliefs the mentee is exposed to at home-do not try to instill values that may cause conflict between the mentee and his or her family.
Be realistic-mentors can't eliminate all the risk factors young people face, but they can help young people achieve specific goals and learn how to deal effectively with negative situations.
Shift goals as warranted by changes in the mentee's life.

# Select Your Intervention and Develop Appropriate Activities
The variety of activities that can make up a mentoring intervention is nearly infinite. The activities you choose will depend on the intervention's goals, setting (whether communityor site-based), and format (one-on-one versus group); the mentees' needs and characteristics; and the mentors' experience and commitment levels. Table 7 lists some common activities, but it is by no means exhaustive (Sipe and Roder 1999;Herrera 1999).  (Freedman 1993;Sipe 1996):
Make activities fun as well as educational.
Focus on activities that promote mutual exchange, rather than on instruction for the mentee.
Plan activities that offer challenges.
Provide support and encouragement, but do not solve problems for the mentee.

# Intervention format
Most mentoring interventions have a one-on-one format. Usually, this format matches one mentor with one mentee. However, a mentor can also be matched with several mentees with whom he or she meets individually. The most common examples of the multiple one-on-one format are programs in which retired persons meet individually with several children each day of the week (Sipe and Roder 1999). The Friends of the Children program, based in Portland, Oregon, also uses this format. Their mentors-called "friends"-are paired with up to eight children with whom they meet individually several times a week (Woo 1999).

# Make activities fun as well as educational.
Practitioners must carefully balance the desire to achieve high staffing levels with the need to select staff members who are qualified, dedicated, and able to make a long-term commitment.
Mentoring can also be done in a group setting. This format most often matches one mentor with a group of young people. The groups typically include about four or five children, but they can range from two to 20 or 30 youths. Some group programs match two or more mentors with a group of participants. Assigning multiple mentors to a group may have several advantages. It reduces the mentor-to-mentee ratio, allowing for more personal attention for mentees. It allows mentoring programs to reach greater numbers of young people. And it reduces the problems that occur when a mentor is unable to attend a session-if one mentor cannot attend, the group can still meet with the other mentor(s). We should note, however, that very little research has been done on group programs, so we do not know if this format produces effective relationships or if youths derive the same benefits from a group format that they do in a one-on-one program (Sipe and Roder 1999).

# Building on others' experience
Identifying existing interventions on which to model your effort can prevent your having to reinvent the wheel. If you know of a mentoring program that had positive effects, try to replicate it. You may want to tailor an intervention to your community, but be cautious in changing key implementation elements, as you may alter the outcome. The Additional Resources section on page 194 may help you find ideas for your intervention.

# Select Staff Appropriate for Your Intervention
Mentoring interventions typically require a large staff. Many volunteers are needed to serve as mentors, and administrative staff are needed to train and support the mentors. Practitioners must carefully balance the desire to achieve high staffing levels with the need to select staff members who are qualified, dedicated, and able to make a long-term commitment.

# Recruiting staff
Before you recruit volunteers or a paid staff, clearly define the qualifications required for each position. Indicate the skills and characteristics that mentors and other staff members should possess. Put in writing the specific types of activities to be performed and the time commitment expected (NWREL 1998).
The Big Brothers/Big Sisters program, for instance, requires its professional case managers to screen applicants, make and supervise matches, and close matches when eligibility requirements are no longer met or either party can no longer participate fully in the mentoring relationship. They also advise mentors when difficult situations arise (Elliot 1997).
Decide where to look for potential staffers and volunteers. The required qualifications and the intervention's activities will help you determine where the best pool of candidates can be found.  (Sipe 1996).

# Corporate involvement
Ask local businesses and corporations to support your program and help you recruit mentors. One common model of such a corporate partnership is the "adopt-a-school" program in which a business enlists employees as mentors (Herrera 1999). Businesses may also provide facilities for mentoring activities or sponsor field trips. Even if employers do not want to participate directly, they may be willing to give employees time off for mentoring (NMWG 1991). This is a very valuable contribution, as it allows individuals to mentor without affecting their personal or family time. More people may be willing to volunteer under these circumstances.  (Ringwalt et al. 1996).
Results from an evaluation of the SAGE program suggest that it can have a positive effect on violence-related behaviors and other health risk factors. Self-reports of study participants 18 months after the intervention indicated that SAGE participants carried a gun and sold illegal drugs less often than did participants in the second study group (summer jobs and JA only) or the control group. SAGE participants also experienced decreases in heavy drinking and injuring others with a weapon. At 30-month follow-up, positive effects were decreased, as is typical for prevention interventions. The authors note that the results of the study are limited, as decreases in violence and other risk behaviors were not observed at statistically significant levels (Flewelling et al. 1999).
Career Beginnings is another program with corporate involvement. It is a multifaceted school-to-work initiative that targets disadvantaged high-school juniors and seniors who have average academic and attendance records and demonstrate commitment and motivation. Mentors support students in exploring college and career options through educational workshops, career-specific training, and quality summer work experiences. They also help guide students through the college admissions process or through the process of finding full-time employment. A 1990 evaluation of Career Beginnings compared youths who responded to follow-up interviews at one and two years after assignment with either the intervention group or the control group. 3 Researchers found that Career Beginnings participants had a slightly higher rate of attendance than the control group. Intervention participants also had higher levels of college enrollment and higher educational aspirations than nonparticipants receiving comparable amounts of education and job-related services (Cave and Quint 1990;U.S. Dept. of Education 1993).
3 Although youths in the control group did not participate in Career Beginnings, they could receive other services from their schools or communities.

# Older adults as mentors
A survey of more than 700 mentoring programs found that approximately 5 percent recruited older adults and retirees as mentors (Sipe and Roder 1999). Evaluations have suggested that these intergenerational programs can produce positive, satisfying relationships that benefit both the youths and elders (Freedman 1988). A three-year evaluation of Across Ages revealed that a program of classroom instruction and parent workshops was more effective in preventing drug use when combined with intergenerational mentoring than when implemented alone. While both the mentoring and non-mentoring groups were more likely after the intervention to respond appropriately to peers' offers of drugs or alcohol, students in the Across Ages group also had a greater sense of self-worth and well-being and had fewer feelings of sadness and loneliness (LoSciuto et al. 1996;Taylor et al. 1999). Because of its promise for reducing risk factors and promoting protective factors, Across Ages has been selected by the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention as a model to be replicated in several sites across the United States.
Linking Lifetimes is another intergenerational mentoring program developed by Temple University's Center for Intergenerational Learning. A study conducted by Styles and Morrow (1992) examined the relationships that formed between youths and their mentors at four Linking Lifetimes demonstration sites. The mentees in the programs were youth offenders, teen mothers, and youths living in high-risk neighborhoods. They ranged in age from 12 to 17 years; mentors were 55 years and older. Of the 26 pairs studied, 17 were identified as being satisfied with the relationship. Specifically, members of satisfied pairs indicated that they had feelings of attachment, fondness, and commonality with one another; they felt committed to the relationship and wanted it to continue. Additionally, satisfied youths stated that they felt their mentor was a source of support. Satisfied mentors felt appreciated or believed they made a difference in their youths' lives. It is not clear from this study, however, whether the Linking Lifetimes program had an impact on youths' behaviors or attitudes.

# Intergenerational programs can produce positive, satisfying relationships that benefit both the youths and elders.
It takes a special person to be a mentor . . . practitioners must remember that mentoring is not suited for all volunteers.

# Criteria for staff and mentors
Mentors provide positive guidance and serve as role models. They act as teachers, confidants, friends, advocates, nurturers, and challengers. They devote many hours to their mentees and form lasting relationships with them. Clearly, it takes a special person to be a mentor, and practitioners must remember that mentoring is not suited for all volunteers. Other roles-such as support staff, tutors, or fundraisers-may be found for volunteers who do not have the qualifications or time needed for mentoring (Freedman 1993).
Although special criteria (to be discussed shortly) must be applied for mentors, all staff members-both volunteers and paid employees-should have the following qualities:

# Screening mentors
There are several ways to find out if a candidate has the qualifications and qualities you desire in a mentor. The most common screening tools are written applications, face-to-face interviews, reference checks (both personal and employment), and criminal background checks (Sipe and Roder 1999). If the mentor will spend time alone with a child, you should also conduct home visits (NMWG 1991). If mentors are going to transport children, their driving records should be checked. And in some school-based programs, mentors must have proof of health requirements, such as a test for tuberculosis (Weinberger 1992b).

# Train Staff and Mentors
The training required for intervention staff members will depend on their roles. For mentors, training content will depend on the activities to be conducted during mentoring sessions and the desired outcome of the overall intervention.

# Training for staff members
The individuals you select to recruit and screen mentors should be trained in how to effectively approach organizations, corporations, and individuals about mentoring, as well as how to interview and screen candidates. Recruiters should also learn how to tactfully turn down interested persons without alienating them. Even though someone is ill-suited for mentoring, he or she may be an ideal candidate for a support position. Staffers selected to support mentors should be trained in maintaining enthusiasm among volunteers, developing creative activities for the youths, and resolving conflicts between volunteers and participants.  (NMWG 1991;Styles and Morrow 1992;Freedman 1993;Gallup 1998;NWREL 1998;Herrera 1999):

# Mentor training
Mentors must be patient and realize that the relationship will be one-sided initially.
Trust. An effective mentoring relationship is built on trust. Keys to gaining the trust of mentees include showing up for meetings and keeping promises. Patience and perseverance. Youths are likely to feel uncomfortable sharing intimate information. Some youths may be reluctant to talk about anything in the beginning. Mentors must be patient and realize that the relationship will be one-sided initially. Communication skills. Mentors must be able to share ideas with youths and suggest alternative behaviors and attitudes without sounding like they are passing judgment. And they must listen intently to mentees, while watching their body language and picking up on other cues that might indicate hidden feelings. Good communication skills will help develop the relationship and set a good example for mentees on how to interact with others. Problem-solving skills. Mentees often face difficult social and academic problems. Mentors should be trained in how to help their young people come up with solutions.
Self-esteem building. One of a mentor's roles is to help the mentee build self-esteem. Teach mentors how to guide their youths in setting initial goals that are attainable quickly and with relative ease. Early accomplishments will help mentees recognize their capabilities and develop pride in their achievements. As the relationship progresses, goals should become increasingly more challenging. - - Developmental stages. Mentors need to know about the developmental stages that children and adolescents go through. This will help them better understand mentees' behaviors and develop age-appropriate activities. Cultural and economic issues. Mentors should be informed about mentees' cultural and economic backgrounds so they can tailor activities to address the challenges mentees face in their families, neighborhoods, and schools. Because no two young people have identical backgrounds, some of this information should be provided to mentors individually when a match is made, rather than in a group training format. Provide mentors with a training manual with a summary of material covered in training sessions, additional resources such as whom to contact for help with difficult situations (e.g., case managers or a program director), and suggestions for activities (e.g., lists of appropriate events and field trips). Also include guidelines on appropriate mentor behavior; procedures for handling emergency situations such as injuries; and policies for confidentiality and liability, which should include mandates for reporting physical or sexual abuse and other life-threatening situations.
Plan supplemental training sessions throughout the intervention and offer mentors retraining as their mentees grow into different developmental stages (for example, when the mentee enters middle or high school).

# Resources for training
Small sponsoring organizations may not be able to provide complete training. Identify sources of technical assistance for training; for example, partner with a larger organization or with a university.

# Recruit Participants
Most mentoring programs are targeted to young people who lack positive adult role models or who have other risk factors for negative behaviors (Sipe and Roder 1999). But how do you find those young people? Sometimes they come to you. The Big Brothers/Big Sisters program, for example, has a waiting list and does not need to recruit. For most other programs, you'll need referrals from teachers or guidance counselors, community organizations that serve children, social service professionals, the local public housing authority, or the criminal justice system. You can also ask parents-through word of mouth or an organized communication campaign-to enroll their children in your program.
It is not enough, however, to simply locate children and adolescents in need. You must also make sure that the youths you recruit are going to be committed to the program. Make sure participants understand what will be expected of them. Also, make sure parents know what their child will be involved in and that they support participation. You can provide this information through-
written statements, interviews, home visits, and phone calls; - orientation meetings that describe the role of the mentor, mentee, and parents;
Emphasize the opportunities for new and exciting experiences that mentoring presents.
- a handbook for families and mentees.

# Provide incentives
Often, the experiences that mentoring relationships offerimproving academic performance, going to a movie, attending a sporting event, or simply having a trusted adult to rely on-are enough to interest young people in a mentoring program. However, if you are having difficulty recruiting intended participants, you may need to offer special incentives. For example, the Kansas City-based Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation offered a monetary incentive to students who participated in Project Choice, a dropout-prevention program implemented in a local high school. If participants-who entered the program as freshmen-remained drug-free, avoided pregnancy, and completed high school on time, they received funds to cover their college tuition (Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation 2000).

# Focus on the positive
Young people may be reluctant to take part in a mentoring program if it is positioned as an intervention or treatment for negative or problem behavior. Practitioners should emphasize the opportunities for new and exciting experiences that mentoring presents (NWREL 1998).

# Implement Your Intervention
The success of a mentoring intervention depends largely on the development of trusting, beneficial relationships between young people and adults (or in some cases, older adolescents). To help foster this type of relationship, practitioners should remember three key principles.
First, both the amount and quality of time are important.
Interactions between mentors and mentees must occur frequently enough to allow relationships to form. And mentors must be attentive to mentees during all interactions so they feel cared for and understood.
Second, sessions should occur regularly and consistently. Having a set schedule can help mentors improve their attendance rates (Tierney and Branch 1992) and give the young people something to look forward to. Sticking to the schedule helps build trust between the mentor and mentee. This point is extremely important-when a mentor misses meetings, the mentee may feel disappointed, angry, or let down (NMWG 1991). In a young person who is already at risk for academic problems, drug use, or violent behavior, these feelings can be highly destructive.
Finally, sessions should be face-to-face whenever possible. Not only does this type of interaction promote closeness, it allows mentors to notice important things about their mentees, such as body language, signs of physical abuse, or aspects of behavior or appearance that may be cause for concern (e.g., symptoms of depression, the appearance of gang-related tattoos, evidence of being in a fight). When circumstances prohibit a face-to-face meeting, mentors should call or write to their mentees, rather than let days or weeks pass without interaction. For example, one mentor in an intergenerational program wrote letters to his mentee while the youth was in a drug-treatment program (Styles and Morrow 1992).

# Match mentors with mentees
The matching of mentors with mentees can be done in a number of ways. Your approach to this process will depend on the intervention's goals and activities and on the preferences of the youths, their parents, and the mentors (Sipe 1996). Whatever criteria you choose, however, put them in writing and apply them uniformly.

# Common interests
Common interests are very important in a mentoring match (NWREL 1998). In fact, more than two-thirds of interventions in one survey matched mentors and participants according to their interests (Sipe and Roder 1999). Project RAISE (Raising Ambition Instills Self-Esteem), for example, has both mentors and students complete surveys to determine areas of interest and expectations; the results of those surveys guide staff in assigning pairs (Freedman 1993). Relationships in which the mentor and mentee agree on the types of activities they want to participate in tend to be most satisfying to both members of the pair (Sipe 1996).

# Gender and race
Some participants-and their parents-may prefer a match with a mentor of the same race or gender. This type of match may make parents and youths feel more comfortable and avoid cultural misunderstandings or misinterpretations (NWREL 1998). However, data have suggested that matching mentors and mentees of different races and genders may also result in satisfying relationships (Sipe 1996). While it is best to honor the preferences of mentees and their parents, practitioners may wish to discuss the potential benefits of a mixed-gender or cross-race match when mentoring activities would be significantly delayed by waiting for a mentor of the same gender or race (Sipe and Put matching criteria in writing and apply them uniformly.
schedules in order for meetings to be regular and consistent.
Natural and random matching Some practitioners let mentors and mentees form natural pairings. Workshops and social events allow mentors and participants to get to know one another and to develop their own matches. Another matching method is random assignment, in which no specific criteria are employed.

# Match the intervention's frequency, duration, and intensity to participants' needs
Mentoring relationships develop through many interactions over a long period of time. Mentors should meet with their youths for an hour or more each week for at least six months, the minimum length of time typically needed to establish a close, trusting relationship (Freedman 1993;Sipe 1996). Sipe and Roder (1999) found that half of the mentoring interventions in their survey required a one-year commitment.
Some mentoring programs require mentors to commit to a much longer relationship. The Friends of the Children program in Portland, Oregon, is a mentoring program that pairs high-risk children with full-time, paid "friends" who commit to relationships that last for a child's entire school career. Friends candidates must be able to meet with their youths on a consistent basis over many years and must have a bachelor's degree and experience working with children. Each candidate undergoes extensive background checks before being gender-matched with up to eight young people. Being a "friend" is viewed as a career. All friends receive benefits, including insurance and a 401(k) plan, and a modest monthly expense account (Hallman 1999).
Friends spend at least four hours each week with their children. Activities range from doing homework to going to the park or sharing dreams and ideas, but the overall goal of the activities is the same for all pairs-to teach problem-solving and conflictresolution skills, honesty, respect for self and others, hard work, and accountability (Friends 1999a(Friends , 1999b.
Friends of the Children is in its seventh year, so final results are still several years off. However, the Northwestern Regional Educational Laboratory has conducted a preliminary assessment of the program, and results are encouraging. Their study found that having a mentoring friend can lead to increased self-esteem, better attitudes, and improved communication skills. Additionally, most participants improved their academic performance. In fact, only 2 percent of participants failed to pass their grade in school. Children in the Friends program also avoided contact with the juvenile justice system, and most

# Mentoring relationships develop through many interactions over a long period of time.
Interventions in which the staff contacts mentors regularly report better quality matches.

# Supervise and support mentors
Sustaining the involvement of mentors is hard work. Mentoring programs must provide ongoing supervision of and support for volunteers to ensure that meetings are taking place regularly and to prevent mentors from becoming discouraged or suffering burnout.
Interventions in which the staff contacts mentors regularly report better quality matches (Sipe 1996). Most programs contact mentors once a month by phone (Sipe and Roder 1999). Some programs institute monthly or bi-monthly support meetings between mentors and staff, during which mentors can address concerns, frustrations, and difficulties. Other programs sponsor events such as picnics, parties, and conferences during which mentors receive gifts of appreciation, are recognized for jobs well done, and share success stories that illustrate how mentors are making a difference in young people's lives (Herrera 1999).
When planning your intervention, develop an infrastructure that can adequately support the mentors. The median ratio of mentors to staff was 20 to 1 in Sipe and Roder's survey (1999). If most of the mentors in your intervention are inexperienced, you may need a larger number of support staff (NWREL 1998).

# Encourage continued participation
The drop-out rate for mentoring interventions is fairly high. Some researchers have estimated that half of the relationships fail (Freedman 1993). Mentors must work to keep participants interested in the mentoring relationship. The following guidance for mentors can increase the likelihood that young people will stick with the program (Styles and Morrow 1993;Sipe 1996):
- Listen to the youths and respect their viewpoints.
Involve mentees in deciding how to spend time together.
Respect mentees' need for privacy; do not push them to share intimate information.
Be available to talk at any time. - necessary, change mentors to meet mentees' Change strategies and goals as mentees get older; if

# Monitor Progress and the Quality of Implementation
As with any intervention, monitoring is necessary to make sure your mentoring intervention is being implemented as planned (NMWG 1991). Establish mechanisms to assess the progress of and satisfaction with relationships. These mechanisms can include-
- asking mentors and mentees to sign in for meetings; - interviewing mentors, mentees, and parents; - having mentors log activities, accomplishments, and concerns.
If you find that a mentor or youth is frequently missing meetings, follow up with that individual to see if there are transportation problems or time conflicts. If a match is not working, even after considerable effort by the mentor and staff, try to reassign both members of the pair (U.S. Dept. of Education 1996).

# Evaluate Outcomes
When the intervention is complete, evaluate whether the overall goals and the goals of individual mentees have been met. Since one goal of any mentoring intervention is to form beneficial relationships, assess the quality of the relationships in your program. Determine how many relationships continued for the duration of the intervention, and ask both mentors and mentees how satisfied they were with their relationships.
Another typical goal of mentoring is to prevent or improve some kind of negative behavior, such as violence, drug use, or poor academic performance. Ask parents and teachers to assess changes in mentees' behaviors; you can also ask the young people themselves to identify any changes in the ways they think or act. Other ways to check the impact of your intervention include assessing dropout rates and checking school detention and suspension records to see if disciplinary actions decreased during the intervention.
Remember to compare the behaviors, attitudes, and academic performance of young people in the mentoring intervention with youths who did not participate in mentoring (i.e., a comparison group) to determine the significance of changes. If, for example, all middle-school students improved school performance and reduced delinquent behaviors during the period of your intervention, you cannot assume that mentoring caused those
To have the greatest impact, mentoring should be part of a concerted effort that involves several strategies.
changes in participants. They may have occurred without the intervention. Conversely, you may find that, although aggressive behaviors remained the same among participants, aggression increased among young people who did not take part in mentoring. Without a comparison group, you would not recognize the stable rate as significant.

# Maintain Results After Implementation
If your intervention achieved positive effects, you will, of course, want to sustain those effects. An important step in maintaining results is providing a supportive transition for mentees. This may be accomplished in a number of ways. Exit interviews between youths and staff, between mentors and staff, and between mentors and youths allow all three groups to discuss the benefits of the program and address concerns about what comes next for the youths. Recognition of mentees' accomplishments-through award ceremonies, banquets, and community or school newsletters-can motivate the young people to continue improving school performance, to avoid drugs or violence, and to seek out other positive relationships with adults.
It's helpful to link youths with other community services and activities, such as scouts and school or church groups, that can help fill any voids created by the end of their mentoring relationships. Assistance should be made available to mentees who have difficulty with the transition (NMWG 1991).
Because some pairings may want to continue their relationship in some capacity after the intervention has ended, practitioners should have in place a policy for future contact. Make sure mentors understand any liability issues that may apply if contact continues outside of the intervention's auspices.

# Link Mentoring with Other Strategies
The young people involved in mentoring interventions typically have several risk factors for adverse behaviors. Mentoring cannot overcome all of them-it is just one influence among many. To have the greatest impact, mentoring should be part of a concerted effort that involves several strategies, such as those discussed in previous sections of this sourcebook (Freedman 1993;Sipe 1996).
The Children at Risk (CAR) Program is a drug-and delinquency-prevention effort that combines strategies to offer comprehensive services for at-risk adolescents. These services include the assignment of case managers to participating families, tutoring and other educational activities, and police collaboration to reduce neighborhood crime. Mentoring is provided to about half of the youths in the program. Preliminary results of an outcome evaluation showed that, compared with a control group, CAR participants had almost half the number of contacts with the police and less than half the number of contacts with juvenile courts. A greater percentage of participants were promoted to the higher grade and had lower rates of chronic absenteeism. A full-scale case-control study is under way in high-risk neighborhoods in five cities to assess the effect of mentoring as well as intensive case management, family services, and educational incentives (Harrell 1996).

# Summary
Although the mentoring strategy appears promising for preventing youth violence and many other problems facing our nation's young people, there is very little scientific data to demonstrate whether, and under what circumstances, it is effective. More rigorous and systematic evaluations are still needed. In addition, research must address several key issues (Sipe 1996).
First, we must develop more effective ways of recruiting and screening mentors. The largest mentoring program-Big Brothers/Big Sisters-supports 75,000 matches nationwide, but it has almost as many young people waiting to be matched. Fewer than half of the adults who inquired about volunteering during a study of Big Brothers/Big Sisters actually applied to be mentors. Of those, only about one-third successfully completed the screening and matching process; for some, the process took months.
Additionally, mentoring efforts have traditionally been targeted to children in the early-to mid-adolescent years. We must determine how to design effective mentoring programs for teens and pre-adolescent children, as well.
Finally, there is little agreement about the financial resources needed to plan and implement a mentoring intervention. The Big Brothers/Big Sisters program estimates that it costs $1,000 to support a match for one year. But that cost may not be representative of all programs-researchers suspect the cost is somewhat less. In order to help communities assess the feasibility of mentoring, we must find a way to accurately estimate the costs of developing, supporting, and evaluating such an intervention.

# Save the Children
In cooperation with the National Mentoring Partnership and with funding from the Department of Justice, Save the Children has developed the National Mentoring Hotline, which houses a database of more than 1,500 mentoring interventions nationwide. An ad campaign, produced in partnership with the Ad Council, was launched in the fall of 1998 to publicize the hotline and attract potential volunteers.

# Youth Violence-A National Problem
Violent injury and death disproportionately affect children, adolescents, and young adults in the United States. Although rates for homicides have dropped in recent years, they are still unacceptably high.

# Fatal violence
Homicide is the second leading cause of death among young people ages 15 to 19. Among African American youths in that age group, homicide is the leading killer. From 1990 to 1999, nearly 34,000 young people ages 18 and younger were victims of homicide. That's an average of about 9 youths killed each day over the last decade.
Just as alarming as the number of young people dying from violence is the number of young people who are committing violent acts. In 1997, 1,700 youths under age 18 were implicated in 1,400 murders. Among the homicide offenders in 2000 whose age was know by authorities, approximately 48% were 24 or younger and 9% were younger than 18.

# Nonfatal violence
Violence does not have to be fatal to greatly affect individuals and communities. Violence-related injuries can leave emotional and physical scars that remain with victims long after the violent event has occurred. The rates of nonfatal victimization for rape, sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault are higher among people under age 25 than among other age groups.
Findings from the 1999 Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS)-which is based on a nationally representative sample of students in grades 9 through 12-reveal that a significant portion of young people are involved in violent behavior. In the 30 days preceding the survey, weapon carrying was reported by 17.3 percent of students; 6.9 percent carried a weapon on school property. In the 12 months preceding the survey, 35.7 percent of students reported having been in a physical fight at least once and 4 percent reported being treated by a doctor or nurse for injuries sustained in a physical fight. Almost 9 percent of students reported being hit, slapped, or physically hurt on purpose by a boyfriend or girlfriend during the previous 12 months.

# Firearms and youth
In 1999, firearm-related homicides were the second leading cause of injury death among 15-to 19-year-olds and the third leading cause of injury death among 10-to 14-year-olds. Nearly 25 percent of all Americans who died from firearm injuries in 1999 were between ages 15 and 24.
In 1999, about 1 in 20 students participating in the YRBS reported carrying a firearm at least once in the 30 days before the survey. Although this figure represents a decline since the 1995 YRBS, it is still troubling.

# Deadly school violence
Preliminary results from a current CDC study indicate that between July 1, 1994, and June 30, 1999, 253 violent deaths occurred on school property, on the way to or from school, or at or on the way to or from a school-sponsored event. The majority of these incidents were homicides involving firearms. These violent deaths occurred in communities of all sizes, locales, income levels, and racial and ethnic make-up.
Preliminary results also show that, while the number of school-associated violent death events has decreased