DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

OFF ICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS

BJA NI J OJJDP BJS OVC

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

Shay Bilchik, Administrator

did not like school, and just as many

males as females reported they were leaving school because of personality conflicts with teachers. More males than females dropped out because of school

suspension or expulsion.

The dropout rate among 16- to 24-yearolds who had repeated more than one

grade was 41 percent, compared with 17

percent of those who had repeated only

one grade and 9 percent of those who had

not repeated any grades. Dropout rates

were highest among those who had repeated grades 7, 8, or 9.

Although most dropouts reported

school-related reasons for leaving school,

most female dropouts reported familyrelated reasons. Twenty-one percent of

females and 8 percent of males dropped

out because they became parents.

Twenty-six percent of white female

dropouts reported pregnancy as a motive

The Ripple Effect of

Dropping Out of School

What Do the Statistics Say

About Dropout Rates?

The National Center for Education Statistics reported that in 1992 approximately 381,000 students (4.5 percent of all

high school students) ages 15 to 24

dropped out of grades 10 through 12. In

addition, approximately 3.4 million persons in the United States ages 16 to 24

had not completed high school and were

not currently enrolled in school, a figure

that represents about 11 percent of all

persons in this age group (McMillen et al.,

1993).1

The dropout problem is not confined

to high school. Some 6.8 percent of 1988’s

eighth graders dropped out of school between 1988 and 1990, and another 7.6 percent dropped out of school between 1990

and 1992. Male and female eighth graders

dropped out at comparable rates, but Hispanic and African-American students in

the 1988 eighth grade cohort were more

likely to drop out than white and Asian

students (National Center for Education

Statistics, 1991).

Why Do Young People Drop

Out of School?

Four in ten dropouts said they left high

school because they were failing or they

Keeping Young People in

School: Community

Programs That Work

Sharon Cantelon and Donni LeBoeuf

From the Administrator

A 1992 study by the National Center

for Education Statistics found that 3.4

million young people between the

ages of 16 and 24 dropped out of

school before earning a high school

diploma. What leads to such a

sobering statistic?

The answer is complex. Many children

come to school as composites of the

broken pieces in their lives—divorce,

homelessness, learning disabilities,

and mental illness—and from homes

in which they must become selfsufficient at an early age. Some must

deal with crime, drugs, and gangs in

their neighborhoods; suffer abuse and

neglect from adults; or become

parents while still children themselves.

These problems must be addressed

comprehensively to deliver needed

services. As Attorney General Janet

Reno told the 1994 Communities In

Schools (CIS) National Conference,

“We cannot take just one fragment of

a child’s life and make a difference.

We have to look at the whole of a

child’s life.” When all necessary

systems work together, change can

happen.

This Bulletin highlights dropout

prevention initiatives, with a particular

focus on the CIS initiative and its

evaluation conducted by the Urban

Institute.

Shay Bilchik

Administrator

June 1997
2

academy, an easily identifiable freestanding facility or wing of an existing school,

sponsored largely by an individual corporation or organization.

 Organizational Structure

The CIS model allows flexibility in organizational structure as long as that structure results in services delivered at an

education site in a personalized, accountable, and coordinated manner to at-risk

youth and their families (figure 1). Three

elements are essential, however, to the

establishment of a local CIS program:

◆ A 501(c)(3) tax-exempt corporation

with a board of directors that represents the public and private sectors of

the community and that is chaired by a

member of the private sector.

◆ A management team led by an executive director.

◆ A new education, health, and human

services delivery system that repositions or reassigns the community’s service resources and focuses them on

at-risk students and their families.

The CIS Delivery System

In general, CIS projects are grouped

into three broad categories:

◆ Projects at traditional school sites that

pattern themselves as closely as possible after the normal classroom routine.

opportunities—or even worse—should

they choose a life of delinquency and

crime.

As the Select Committee on Children,

Youth, and Families put it, “The test now

is whether we are motivated to promote

policies that we know can reverse these

alarming trends in the 1990s, or whether we

will enter the 21st century besieged by the

worst effects of our failure” (U.S. House of

Representatives Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families, 1989).

Communities In

Schools: A Collaboration

at Work for Youth

The CIS Model

Formerly known as Cities In Schools,

the Communities In Schools (CIS) network

is a web of local, State, and national partnerships working together to bring at-risk

youth four basics every child needs and

deserves:

◆ A personal one-on-one relationship

with a caring adult.

◆ A safe place to learn and grow.

◆ A marketable skill to use upon

graduation.

◆ A chance to give back to peers and

community.

As statistics have shown, a student’s

“decision” to drop out of school might be

the product of many factors, including

family problems, drug and alcohol abuse,

illiteracy, and teenage pregnancy. Therefore, the entire community, not just the

schools, must take responsibility for preventing youth from dropping out of

school. CIS brings together businesses

and public and private agencies in communities—welfare and health professionals, employment counselors, social workers and recreation leaders, the clergy, and

members of community groups—and puts

them where they’re needed—in the

schools. CIS treats the student and his or

her family in a holistic manner, bringing

together in one place a support system of

caring adults who ensure that the student

has access to the resources that can help

him or her build self-worth and the skills

needed to embark on a more productive

and constructive life.

While most CIS programs take place

inside traditional schools, CIS, Inc., has

pioneered another method of service

delivery that has resulted in the CIS

for dropping out, compared with 31

percent of Hispanic and 34 percent of

African-American female dropouts.

More than a quarter of those dropping

out of grades 10 through 12 reported jobrelated reasons for withdrawing. Male

dropouts (36 percent) were more likely

than female dropouts (22 percent) to report finding a job as the motive for leaving school (Snyder and Sickmund, 1995).

What Are the Costs of

Dropping Out?

Dropping out of school can have profound effects on a young person’s life. The

relative earnings of high school dropouts

are lower than those for students who complete high school or college. Similarly, high

school dropouts experience more unemployment during their work careers (U.S.

Department of Education, 1993). Young

women who drop out of high school are

more likely to become pregnant at young

ages and more likely to become single parents (McMillen et al., 1993).

 In 1992 the unemployment rate among

those dropping out of school was 11 percent, compared with 7 percent for those

who graduated from high school but did

not attend college. The median income

among dropouts who were employed full

time was only half that of high school

graduates. While the real income (income

adjusted for inflation) of college graduates has increased during the past 20

years, the real income of dropouts has

declined dramatically (Snyder and

Sickmund, 1995).

 These are sobering statistics when

considered in view of the reality of a

workplace that continues to require increased literacy, more education, enhanced technological skills, and the

ability to embark on careers that require

lifelong learning. Without the skills and

training that schooling should provide,

those who do not complete their

education face a lifetime of limited
3

teachers assigned specifically to the CIS

program by the school district. In certain

situations, repositioned health and human services staff assume the primary

leadership role.

The academy model. The CIS academy

model has all the basic elements of the

CIS classroom model but is organized as

an alternative school, where all students

are part of the CIS program. These academies can be “schools within schools,”

located in a separate wing or section of

the school where the CIS students attend

classes together, or can occupy a completely separate building.

A student who meets CIS program eligibility criteria and has parental permission is assigned a case manager who

assesses the student’s needs. The case

manager then contacts the proper agencies to provide the specific services

needed. Through the CIS program, the

young person can receive counseling either individually or as part of a group. If

the CIS program cannot provide a needed

service directly, the student, and sometimes parents and family members, are

referred to an appropriate service agency.

The CIS Network

The foundation of the CIS network consists of the local CIS programs that are

independently incorporated, nonprofit

community-, city-, or countywide publicprivate partnership organizations that

adapt the CIS process to their urban and

rural communities. Several CIS schoolbased projects can be implemented

within a CIS local community program.

State CIS programs, like the local programs, are independently incorporated

and led by their own boards of directors.

Staffed by State management teams, their

mission is to replicate the CIS process as

widely as possible throughout a State and

to secure State-level resources and enhance networking for the individual CIS

communities within the State.

CIS, Inc., with its national headquarters

based in Alexandria, Virginia, is committed to helping communities build a selfsustaining structure to provide these

basics for their youth. CIS, Inc.’s headquarters and five regional offices serve as

an anchor to the CIS network by creating

and supporting local and State CIS programs through, among other things, the

CIS training system. In response to the

day-to-day needs of local programs, training has evolved to a body of standardized

but flexible training practices. The CIS

Training Institute at Lehigh University has

helped spur a proliferation of new local

CIS programs, expanding program growth

from 160 project sites serving 21,000

youth annually in 1989 to 1,025 project

sites serving 262,596 youth and their families at the end of the 1995–96 school year.

CIS Evaluation

Evaluation Design

The Urban Institute (UI), a policy

research organization, conducted an

evaluation of CIS, funded by the U.S.

Department of Education (ED), the U.S.

Department of Labor (DOL), and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency

Prevention (OJJDP). The Federal agencies

supporting the evaluation requested that

UI provide:

◆ Projects in which repositioned health

and human services staff assume the

primary role.

◆ Projects that function as alternative

schools.

The first two categories apply to the

classroom model and the third to the academy model, which are described below.

The classroom model. The CIS classroom model allows students to sign up for

the program as an elective class. Instruction focuses on life-skills education, such

as employment topics, remedial education, and tutoring. CIS classrooms often

involve community volunteers who mentor and tutor students. The classroom

model also can provide inschool activities

such as conflict resolution, violence

abatement, and community service.

Patterned closely after a normal classroom routine, these activities are led by

Legal Assistance

Universities

Civic Groups

Law Enforcement

Volunteers

Employment Services

Recreation

Health Services

Businesses

Project Coordinator

Executive Director

Board of Directors

Admin. Assistant

Agency Coordinator

Figure 1: Needs-Based/Collaborative-Driven Organizational Chart

Student/Family Needs

Human Services

Source: Cities In Schools, Inc. (1995). “Cities in Schools: A History of Partnerships.”
4

Case studies of 10 CIS programs

describe examples of collaborative

partnerships, strategic planning,

effective management practices, case

management, employment training,

substance abuse prevention, mental

health services, crime and violence

prevention, and parental involvement.

Lessons learned from the study of

these programs are as follows:

◆ Community support and multiple

sources of funds are critical to the

success of community programs.

◆ Early and continued strong private sector involvement with the

active involvement of CIS program

staff members in community efforts

is important for generating continued support and awareness.

◆ An involved and trained board is

important for raising resources to

support the program.

◆ A strong, periodic strategic planning process, including determining

the program’s expansion strategy, focus, and criteria for both site selection

and student involvement, supports development of program strategies

closely related to needed services.

◆ Strong top-down support from the

school district and/or principal enables CIS to be more than an “add-on”

social service program and promotes

schoolwide reforms.

◆ Good working relationships with the

schools, established by surveying

staff opinions, serving on school management teams, and providing training

and assistance for teachers assigned

to work with CIS, help ensure that the

program operates smoothly.

◆ Integration of services, achieved

through formal agreements that stipulate roles, responsibilities, and

working conditions, is a key factor to

program success.

◆ Joint selection and evaluation of

staff repositioned or assigned to

CIS through agreements by schools

and service agencies to strengthen

the program’s partnerships.

◆ Strong oversight and accountability maintained through a comprehensive records and reporting

system allow directors to plan and

implement program improvements

and to demonstrate effectiveness to

stakeholders.

◆ Ongoing case management is

particularly important to successful

service coordination in locations

where high levels of community

and/or family disorganization exist.

Qualities of Strong CIS Community Programs

◆ A study of the CIS national organization and its replication activities, focusing on the effectiveness of training

and technical assistance.

◆ A study of a representative sample of

CIS sites to assess local implementation of the CIS prototype, the extent to

which local programs are serving the

designated target group of at-risk students, and the effects of local programs on student outcomes.

◆ Case studies of CIS programs selected

for their innovative features, adherence to the CIS model, or other features of interest.

UI examined CIS efforts and results

from the fall of 1991 into early 1994, looking at CIS replication, training and technical assistance, procedures, and local

program components. The assessment of

student outcomes tracked a sample of 659

students who had been enrolled in CIS

during the 1989–90 and 1990–91 school

years, evaluating effectiveness of the

community programs as they were 5

years earlier. By looking back, the study

provided a long-term review of the

program’s effects on educational attainment without having to wait for several

years to track what would happen to

current CIS enrollees. In addition, because

many of the 659 students were no longer

involved in the CIS program, the study

examined the effects during or immediately after enrollment.

Evaluation Methodology

Replication, training, and technical

assistance. The structure and effects of

CIS’s replication, training, and technical

assistance activities were assessed using

several techniques. Interviews were conducted with senior-level CIS headquarters

staff and with staff in five regional and six

State offices. Secondary data analyses

included a review of documents describing the functions, responsibilities, and

communication patterns within the national, regional, and State offices. Site visits to 17 communities provided data on

replication, training, and technical assistance from the perspective of older, more

mature CIS projects. Detailed telephone

discussions were completed with staff of

newly operational programs or programs

undergoing the replication process.

Local program implementation and

outcomes. Data collection activities associated with the evaluation of local programs included the site visits to 17 CIS

programs selected to be representative of

geographical diversity, various program

strategies, and service configurations. CIS

community program and school-based

staff and key affiliates were surveyed and

interviewed to document program strategies and implementation, barriers encountered, and perceived results in terms

of systemic change and client outcomes.

Interviews also were conducted with students enrolled in CIS projects at middle

and high schools and with a small number

of parents. Data on student characteristics and outcomes—primarily school attendance, course grades, and grade point

averages (GPA’s)—were extracted from

CIS project files and school records on

individual participants. Questionnaires

were used to augment these data with

self-reported information on student

profiles, school- and nonschool-related

difficulties and outcomes, and client

satisfaction (tables 1 and 2).

Critical Elements of the CIS

Community Prototype

UI identified the following critical characteristics of the CIS model:

◆ The CIS model is a process that involves how services are provided

rather than the content or domain of

the service (e.g., youth leadership development). There are no prescribed

activities or services that community

programs must offer. CIS community

organizations have the flexibility to

take local needs, resources, and political factors into account.
5

Table 1: Student Assessments of Assistance Provided by CIS

1. Feel better about myself 53.5 36.8 8.2 1.5 48 12.3

2. Improve my health 30.7 48.1 16.4 4.9 86 22.0

3. Get along better with other 36.8 46.9 10.7 5.5 67 17.1

students

4. Get along better with my 39.3 38.9 16.4 5.4 79 20.2

family

5. Reduce drug or alcohol use 39.9 21.3 27.0 11.8 188 48.1

6. Become drug or alcohol free 38.7 28.3 20.9 12.0 179 45.8

7. Improve my attendance at 42.8 39.6 13.1 4.6 88 22.5

school

8. Get better grades 44.6 43.7 9.0 2.4 38 9.7

9. Stop skipping school or 39.8 37.2 16.8 6.2 128 32.7

classes

10. Improve my classroom 35.4 46.9 14.8 3.0 84 21.5

behavior

11. Like school more 36.2 39.0 16.5 8.3 60 15.3

12. Learn job skills 48.6 38.4 9.4 3.6 42 10.7

13. Learn about preventing 50.2 39.1 8.2 2.5 68 17.4

HIV/AIDS

14. Learn about preventing 42.8 40.2 14.0 3.0 87 32.3

substance abuse

15. Talk about my family’s 38.8 36.9 18.3 6.1 91 23.3

problems

16. Talk with someone about 38.7 30.0 25.3 6.0 134 34.3

pregnancy or teen parenting

 “The CIS Program helped

 me...”

Number

Reporting

NonSalience

Percentage of

Total

Respondent

Sample*

Strongly

Agree Agree Disagree

Strongly

Disagree

Percentage Response for Students Who

Rated the Items as Salient Nonsalient Responses

* N = 391 students

Source: S.B. Rossman and E. Morley (1995). “The National Evaluation of Cities In Schools: Executive Summary.”
6

Want to stay in school until graduation 79.2 17.7 2.2 0.8

Less likely to get into trouble with the law 41.5 28.7 17.9 11.9

More likely to do school work on time 38.4 40.4 16.4 4.8

Plan to go to college or technical school 64.8 22.3 8.7 4.2

◆ The CIS process has prescribed elements: existing community services

are brought into the schools; services

are integrated and coordinated, rather

than fragmented and duplicative; all

CIS staff, whether brokered or

employed by CIS, are accountable to

the students, families, schools, communities, and each other for establishing and delivering effective services;

and a personal relationship between

the student and a caring adult, a critical component of effective service delivery, is built and maintained.

◆ The program targets at-risk youth and

their families, and community programs are free to determine how these

groups are defined and identified. Over

time, CIS has broadened its focus from

youth who demonstrate a need for intervention to include youth, particularly young children, who may benefit

from preventive efforts.

◆ The community program is structured

as an independent, nonprofit corporation, with a board of directors composed of public and private community

leaders.

◆ The CIS management team is composed of an executive director, an

In 1984, OJJDP provided CIS, Inc.,

with resources to complete and refine

its replication efforts already in

process in a number of cities and to

set up regional offices to expand its

technical assistance capabilities.

Beginning in 1985, the U.S. Departments of Labor, Health and Human

Services, and Education joined with

OJJDP in support of this effort, with

OJJDP as the lead agency. Participating agencies transferred resources to

DOJ, consolidating program administration while ensuring accountability. In

1990 the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) became a partner, and

the U.S. Department of Defense

(DOD)/Department of the Army joined

the partnership in 1994.

Currently OJJDP and DOC, with

OJJDP as the lead agency, are

supporting CIS, Inc.’s implementation

of the Federal Interagency Partnership

initiative. CIS, Inc., tasks include

facilitating Federal agency access to

CIS network products and enhancing

and expanding CIS training capabilities.

Certain initiative tasks reflect OJJDP’s

interest in expanding and enhancing CIS

programs for youth involved in the

juvenile justice system, training community practitioners to replicate CIS programs, and strengthening families. Other

tasks reflect DOC’s focus on introducing

entrepreneurship opportunities to CIS

youth by establishing student-run entrepreneurial activities and supporting

technical assistance. CIS is also helping

to train and organize leaders in a Native

American community in Rapid City,

South Dakota. These tasks also enhance

the ability of CIS, Inc., to integrate and

provide information, resources, and

training to its network and to improve

community collaboration efforts on

behalf of youth and families.

DOD resources for CIS, Inc., were

transferred to OJJDP in 1994 to support

the CIS, Inc., Partnership With the

Department of Defense/Army grant

initiative to help troubled youth. Initiative

objectives include improving local CIS

program access to Army resources,

providing CIS training and resources

to enhance Junior Reserve Officer

Training Corps (JROTC) collaboration

with health and human service

agencies at the local level, and

integrating joint Army/CIS initiatives

into CIS operations at the local, State,

and national levels. Enrolling JROTC

cadets in CIS programs at the same

site allows CIS to provide counseling

and programs on conflict resolution,

health and medical issues, alcohol and

other drug abuse prevention, family

and classroom violence, teen pregnancy, and minority male initiatives.

The objectives also include developing, through local CIS programs, up

to eight partnership academies with

a career focus and social service

delivery, enhancing existing and

future JROTC programs and DODestablished career academies through

CIS training and technical assistance,

and developing collaborations to

improve CIS and JROTC programs.

DOJ Partnerships With CIS

Future Outcomes

Strongly

Agree Agree Disagree

Strongly

Disagree

Table 2: Student Perception of Future Outcomes

Percentage Responses

Source: S.B. Rossman and E. Morley (1995). “The National Evaluation of Cities In Schools: Executive Summary.”
7

agency coordinator/resource coordinator, an administrative assistant, and

the project director for the first project

site. As additional projects are developed, the project directors are to be

repositioned or assigned school staff.

◆ The functions of the community CIS

program include strategic planning,

effective community network and collaboration building, services integration and coordination, fundraising, and

program and project monitoring for

accountability.

Major Findings Regarding

CIS, Inc.’s National Programs

◆ CIS, Inc., has successfully promoted

awareness of its model of social service delivery and provided leadership

and support that led to considerable

expansion of the CIS network. The

evaluation of CIS covers its growth

from 26 community programs and 128

school sites in 1988 to 93 programs

and 612 schools by the end of 1993.

◆ CIS has developed and refined its centralized training and a set of core

courses, a key factor in promoting replication of the CIS model.

◆ CIS has strengthened its organizational

structure by establishing five regional

offices, with potential for a sixth.

◆ New State CIS offices have been established. In 1993 there were eight “operational” CIS States and four more were

in development.

◆ Regional and State offices have contributed to the expansion of community programs through the provision of

training and technical assistance.

◆ The national organization and CIS board

have turned their attention to quality

control issues, establishing a Quality and

Standards Committee in 1993.

Findings on Student

Outcomes

CIS programs serve a target population

of at-risk youth and youth who have already crossed the line into risky behaviors and consequences. Most of these students would be expected to leave school

before graduation. The UI study found the

following:

◆ High proportions of CIS students remain in school or graduate.

◆ Eighty percent of the students who

participated in CIS services during the

1989–90 or 1990–91 school year were

still in school or had graduated 3 years

later, in 1992–93.

◆ The cumulative dropout rate for these

students was 21 percent over 3 years,

or about 7 percent annually.

◆ CIS students with serious and moderately severe problems in attendance

and academic performance improved

their performance in these areas.

Although not all programs and students in the study met their stated objectives, 70 percent of students with high

absenteeism prior to participation in CIS

improved their attendance, and 60 percent with low initial grades improved. Of

those students with the lowest grades

(GPA below 1.0), 79 percent raised their

GPA, with an average increase of a full

grade point. The majority of the students

believed they had benefited from CIS and

expressed high levels of satisfaction with

the program.

Evaluation Examples of CIS

Challenges and Responses

CIS, Inc., is challenged to establish and

maintain quality control among its extensive network of autonomous programs.

Recommendations made by the Quality

and Standards Committee are resolving

some of the issues identified with respect

to accountability. During 1995 and early

1996, CIS further centralized its training

staff to ensure more proportional distribution of staff resources and a better

match to community needs. In addition,

multitrack training conferences at five

locations around the country are being

offered in 1997 to bring the training

nearer to all CIS communities.

UI observed that fundraising was an

ongoing challenge for all CIS programs,

not because CIS is unable to demonstrate

its effectiveness but because most funding for nonprofit organizations is directed

toward demonstration programs. In addition, in small communities that have relatively few human service agencies and in

communities where a large proportion of

In-School Programs for At-Risk Youth

Communities In Schools (CIS) Program in Columbia, South Carolina

CIS made a positive difference in the

life of Jermaine. Some middle school

teachers had labeled him a troublemaker because of his aggressive

and confrontational behavior. As he

continued through school, he became

a nonproductive and disinterested

student. Headed for school failure, he

was in desperate need of guidance to

help him turn his life around.

In the middle of his senior year,

Jermaine learned from a friend about

the opportunities available in the CIS

program. He decided that he wanted to

turn his life in a positive direction. He

has since credited the CIS program

with raising his confidence level and

encouraging him to reach out, stretch his

abilities, and express himself. He learned

that having the right attitude about

himself and having a positive attitude

about what he could accomplish could

get him ahead in life. He became excited

about school and his classes because the

CIS teachers linked classroom learning to

daily life experiences. His grades began

to improve as did his attitude and attendance. For the first time in his life, he was

able to talk with teachers about his hopes

and dreams for the future. The teachers,

he felt, really cared and showed it—by

spending the time to listen and guide him

to opportunities available to help him to

succeed. Additionally, he gained a new

respect for himself and others and,

through a conflict resolution program,

learned strategies for avoiding confrontations that can lead to violence.

Through the CIS program, Jermaine

was able to graduate during the

summer. Because of his academic and

personal progress, he earned a Burger

King $3,000 renewable college

scholarship. The CIS program also

helped arrange interviews for a

summer job, and Jermaine secured a

summer job with AT&T that helped with

household expenses for his mother

and younger siblings.
8

the population is in need of services, CIS

programs were unable to secure more

than a few repositioned staff, generally

from only one or two agencies.

A major contributor to preventing

young people from dropping out of

school, CIS, Inc., is committed to expanding its capabilities and building on its

many strengths as it works with communities to provide at-risk youth with a

personal one-on-one relationship with a

caring adult, a safe place to learn and

grow, a marketable skill to use upon

graduation, and a chance to give back to

peers and community. To achieve these

basics, the community must be involved

as a key player in helping children help

themselves toward a brighter future.

Other Programs

Working To Keep Young

People in School

Although the largest, CIS is just one of

many programs that have responded to

the challenge of working with young

people who either are at risk of dropping

out of school or have returned to complete their education after leaving the

school environment. The sampling that

follows reflects the diversity of program

approaches designed to keep young

people in school.

The Associated Marine

Institutes

The Associated Marine Institutes (AMI)

was formed in 1969 when a Florida businessman put some young boys who were

wards of the court to work on his marine

research vessel. As of January 1997 AMI

has established 43 institutes throughout

the United States and in the Cayman Islands, all dedicated to turning troubled

young people’s lives around. AMI’s main

objectives are to encourage further education and develop positive attitudes in

the 14- to 18-year-old boys and girls that

will help them meet their responsibilities,

develop employable skills, and increase

their self-confidence.

AMI offers a range of programs including nonresidential and residential programs for serious, violent, and chronic

offenders; expanded service programs;

and aftercare. Depending on the type of

program and the needs of the young

people, a youth may be involved in a program from 6 months to 18 months. With

the exception of the aftercare program, all

programs require full-time involvement

and are therefore offered in lieu of public

school education. In the aftercare program, AMI personnel work with the

school or job site to provide activities

and/or services after school or work and

on weekends. The extended services program works with youth from 8 a.m. to 9 p.m.

on weekdays and from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on

weekends.

The majority of funding for AMI programs is provided by the local and/or

State juvenile justice agency and the local

department of education in those States

where AMI is being implemented. Most

AMI programs are also enhanced by

private sector donations. AMI tailors each

program to the geographical strengths of

each community, using the ocean, wilderness, rivers, and lakes to develop exciting

curriculums that challenge and motivate

youth to attend. Oceanography, earth sciences, diving, seamanship, aquatics, and

physical, academic, and vocational education are some of the classes found in a

weekly schedule.

 Aftercare coordinators pick up where

the staff of the local AMI leave off. In 1982

the Florida Environmental Institute started

its first aftercare program for serious and

violent offenders. Aftercare is now a vital

part of each institute’s components.

 After attending a program appropriate

for his or her needs, each participant is

placed in school, a job, or the armed forces.

AMI staff monitor the youth for 3 years after

they graduate from the program to offer

assistance and compile statistics on their

progress. Based on AMI statistical data verified by the local and/or State department of

education, department of corrections, and

the juvenile justice agency, more than 70

percent of the youth who attend AMI programs were successful in not being convicted of any crimes within the 3 years following their AMI experience.

The CIS Program in Georgia Juvenile Detention Centers

Since 1992, CIS of Georgia has

trained teachers, changed students’

behavior, and brought mentors and

human service providers to young

people who came into contact with

the juvenile justice system. CIS

brought its program to the State’s

youth development campuses (detention centers where youth 11 to 18

years of age are incarcerated) and to

“community schools,” which serve as

transition sites for juveniles leaving the

juvenile justice system. In 1995, CIS

helped more than 150 of these young

people learn to set goals, improve

communication and study skills,

succeed in a team environment, and

engage in community service.

For Rodney, the CIS program changed

his life. While in the DeKalb County

juvenile detention center, Rodney attended a CIS personal development

seminar that motivated him to decide that

change was possible in his life. He also

got the message that change would only

happen through his efforts. Impressed by

the dynamic presentation of the CIS

volunteer who delivered the seminar,

Rodney also turned to this individual as a

mentor. The CIS volunteer became a

confidant whom Rodney could trust and

talk with about his desire to change his

life. Rodney no longer felt alone and now

had someone who would work with him to

overcome past mistakes and help him

learn to make positive decisions in his

life. Rodney’s attitude about the school

classroom was significantly altered.

From a place with dusty old books

that held no interest for him, school

became a place with ideas and activities that required daily effort and

hard work on his part in order to fully

participate. While Rodney was in a

community school, he realized that he

must work hard each day to succeed

and stay crime free. After graduating

from high school, Rodney obtained a

good job and is working with his CIS

mentor to decide whether to go on to

college or a trade school.
9

In September 1993 President Clinton

and Attorney General Reno visited the

Pinellas Marine Institute in St. Petersburg, Florida. In a nationally televised

program where he announced the proposed Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (passed in 1994), the President said, “These programs are giving

young people a chance to take their future back, a chance to understand that

there is good inside them.”

For further information, contact:

Associated Marine Institutes

5915 Benjamin Center Drive

Tampa, FL 33634

813–887–3300

Families and Schools

Together

Families and Schools Together (FAST)

is a program that involves parents in

circles of support so they can more easily

help their children succeed.

FAST’s goals are to:

◆ Prevent the at-risk child from experiencing school failure.

◆ Enhance family functioning.

◆ Prevent alcohol and other drug abuse

in the family.

◆ Reduce the stress that parents and

children experience from daily life

situations.

FAST’s values and structure are based

on carefully selected therapy, child psychiatry, group work, and stress and social

support studies. The core component,

“Special Play,” involves coaching parents

in one-on-one, nonjudgmental, nondirective play therapy with the at-risk child.

Parents continue Special Play daily at

home. This technique was adapted for

multifamily usage from an individualized

approach developed at the University of

Washington Department of Psychiatry and

identified by National Institute for Mental

Health studies as successful in quickly altering interactional behaviors. Therefore,

program results are predictable.

Whole families participate by joining

together for eight weekly sessions of

carefully orchestrated, enjoyable,

research-based activities. Following these

sessions, they participate for 2 years in

monthly family self-help support meetings called FASTWORKS.

Results after the 8-week sessions show

statistically significant improvement in

classroom and home behaviors, selfesteem of the children, family closeness,

and parent involvement in school and a

reduction in social isolation. For example,

students show a 20-percent to 25-percent

increase in attention span and a similar

decrease in conduct disorder. Followup

studies show the changes are maintained.

FAST also leads to greater parent selfsufficiency and involvement in school.

FAST improves student behavior and supports family strengthening through a welldefined collaboration among parents, the

school, a local mental health agency, and a

local substance abuse provider.

FAST cites six reasons for the

program’s success. First, its strategies

are research based. Second, as a prevention strategy for children ages 4 to 9, the

program provides early identification of

at-risk behavior. Third, school-based

screening is provided through teacher

identification of at-risk children for referral to FAST. Fourth, through collaboration, schools, parents, and community

agency professionals work as a nonhierarchical team to plan, carry out, and

evaluate the local FAST program. Fifth,

total family involvement is achieved

when parents and siblings join with atrisk children at FAST sessions. Sixth, parents are supported and empowered as

the primary prevention agents for their

children through fun, structured activities, while forming a strong social network with the other 8 to 12 families in

their FAST sessions.

FAST was started in 1988 by Lynn

McDonald, Ph.D., and Family Service of

Madison, Wisconsin, a nonprofit mental

health agency. It became a statewide program in Wisconsin in 1990, supported in

local school districts with $1 million in

annual State funding. FAST was selected

by Family Service America, an international nonprofit organization, for national

replication in 1993, with major support

from the DeWitt-Wallace Reader’s Digest

Fund. By 1995, with additional support

from the Metropolitan Life Foundation

and the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation,

FAST was operating in more than 200 locations in 24 States. Today, major funding

sources for FAST as a family support

strategy include community development

block grants; county and State family

support funds, departments of social services, and departments of mental health;

local community foundations; and the

United Way of America. FAST has been

recognized by numerous national honors

and awards, including recognition by

the U.S. Department of Education, the

U.S. Department of Health and Human

Services, OJJDP, Harvard University,

the United Way, and the Family Resource

Coalition.

For more information, contact:

FAST: Families and Schools Together

Family Service America

11700 West Lake Park Drive

Milwaukee, WI 53224–3099

800–221–3726

Jobs for Ohio’s Graduates

Jobs for Ohio’s Graduates (JOG) is a

statewide program operated under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Education,

Division of Vocational and Career Education, through local nonprofit agencies and

in cooperation with local school systems.

JOG is modeled after a nonprofit national

program called Jobs for America’s Graduates (JAG). Its mission is to identify students who are at greatest risk of dropping

out of school before graduation and provide

them with a support system that not only

keeps these young people in school but

also helps them adjust to the transition

from school to work after graduation.

JOG’s goals are to improve the employability skills and knowledge of the participants and impart job readiness skills that

employers believe are fundamental to

success, including personal motivation,

ability to work in a group, and communication skills. JOG is designed to provide a

structured set of services that build on

one another and continue for 18 months
10

to ensure that the goals of the program

will be met. Services include:

◆ Group and individualized instruction

in an integrated series of 30 employment competency areas.

◆ Opportunities to undertake social and

civic responsibilities, build leadership

skills, learn how to work in a group

setting, and become active in a student club or association.

◆ Job development and placement assistance for all graduates.

◆ Sustained followup services for participants and employers during a yearlong followup period.

Through these services, JOG works to

increase the rate of successful transition

into the labor force.

JOG expects to serve 9,000 seniors from

243 high schools and 199 districts in the

1996–97 school year. Launched in the 1986–

87 school year, JOG has achieved a graduation rate in excess of 91 percent. More than

80 percent of students identified as at risk

when they entered JOG are on the job, in

the military, or in post-secondary education 12 months following graduation. Eighty

percent of those working are in full-time

placement. This is accomplished at a cost

of less than $1,000 per student, $750 of

which comes from State funds. The remainder of the funding comes from a combination of private and Federal sources.

For more information, contact:

Jobs for Ohio’s Graduates

65 South Front Street

Room 912

Columbus, OH 43215–4183

614–466–5718

Mat-Su Alternative School

Judged to be one of the top alternative

schools in the Nation, Mat-Su Alternative

School (MSAS) is a community partnership

success story in Wasilla, Alaska. The school

has worked closely since its inception in

1988 with businesses and both government

and nonprofit agencies to provide at-risk

youth with the academic and vocational

skills needed to make the successful transition from school to work.

 Students at MSAS must be at least 16

years old, be unable to meet their class’

graduation requirements, and be dropouts from one of the five participating

high schools during the previous semester. Among Mat-Su’s student body are

teen parents, adjudicated youth, special

education students, and self-supporting

students. Girls who are pregnant or have

babies can enroll at any age.

Approximately 250 former dropouts

have graduated from Mat-Su since its beginning, when 5 students moved into one

end of a portable classroom in the

Wasilla High School parking lot. In June

1995, students and staff moved to a

20,000-square-foot, newly converted garage large enough to handle 200 students

and featuring 3 integrated learning systems, Internet access, and interactive

television communication.

Mat-Su is a Tier I school for acceptance of graduates into the military.

Graduates have gone on to colleges and

vocational schools and have earned

places on the dean’s list at the University

of Alaska. Students continue their employment after graduation.

Honors and acclaim have come to

both school and staff. Mat-Su was chosen

as one of five sites in the Nation to take

part in a 3-year study to identify characteristics of successful alternative schools

for adjudicated youth.2

MSAS networks with 150 business owners to provide job sites. School staff and

students often meet with such groups as

the local Chamber of Commerce and the

Elks, Lions, Moose, and Rotary clubs to

solicit volunteers and job-placement support for the school. In an area with an unemployment rate of 17.9 percent, Mat-Su

students have 100-percent job placement.

Sixty-one local and State agencies provide such services as shelter, food, clothing, medical and psychological help; jobplacement; career information; and

financial planning. The school maintains

a food and clothing bank; a toy checkout

library; and a daycare center, which also

serves as a laboratory for teen parents;

and employs a case manager for teen parents and a full-time nurse for all students.

Classes are offered year-round, with

the school open from 7 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

weekdays. Student schedules are coordinated with their work schedules. Students may earn high school credits via

computerized integrated learning systems, individualized studies, small

classes, and cooperative work experience.

Unique requirements are the successful

completion of the Life Skills/Parenting

and the World of Work curriculums.

All students are required to complete

district graduation requirements. In addition, they must meet the Federal guidelines

under the Job Training Partnership Act for

preemployment skills and work 15 to 20

hours a week on a job site. Students are

assessed extensively using various interest

and aptitude tests to help identify posthigh school careers and opportunities.3

For more information, contact:

Mat-Su Alternative School

Matanuska-Susitna Borough School

District

1775 West Parks Highway

Wasilla, AK 99654

907–373–7775

Toms River Alternate

Learning Center

The Toms River Alternate Learning

Center has been in operation since 1983

and is a crisis intervention educational

program for 8th- through 10th-graders

who are unable to function in a traditional school environment. Students exhibit chronic absenteeism, tardiness,

insufficient communication or computational skills, and poor self-concepts manifested through inappropriate behavior

patterns. This New Jersey State Department of Education “Star” school was

selected from among 600 schools in the

State as one of 10 schools that provide

exemplary services to students who need

extra help and attention. The school has

also been designated as one of the top

five programs in the Nation in the category of Special Needs Programs in

Redbook magazine’s “America’s Best

Schools Project.” Center goals include:

◆ Providing educational opportunities to

students experiencing frustration and

continued failure in their traditional

schools.

◆ Helping students actualize their positive potential, thereby enhancing their

self-esteem.

◆ Meeting the emotional, academic, and

social needs of high-risk students.

◆ Facilitating the assimilation of high-risk

students into active, positive participation in their communities.

The Center uses an individualized,

highly structured program that stresses

one-on-one instruction. The teachers selected have demonstrated compassionate

natures, pedagogical competency, creativity, and strong interpersonal skills.

For more information, contact:

Toms River Alternate Learning Center

1 Drake Lane

South Toms River, NJ 08757

908–505–5770
11

National Dropout

Prevention Center/Network!

The mission of the National Dropout

Prevention Center/Network! is “to reduce

America’s dropout rate by meeting the

needs of youth in at-risk situations

through reshaping school and community environments to ensure that all

youth receive the quality education and

services to which they are entitled.”

Many people across the country are

working diligently to fulfill this mission.

Among a range of opportunities for information and training, the Center/Network!

provides access to FOCUS, a searchable

data base that brings users information on

dropout prevention programs, resource

materials, conferences, organizations, and

consultants.

For further information, contact:

National Dropout Prevention

Center/Network!

205 Martin Street

Clemson University

Clemson, SC 29634–0726

864–656–2599

Summary

Dropping out of school can have profound, long-term effects on a student’s

life. Local, regional, and national organizations, alone or with Federal Government assistance, are making strides to

keep youth in school and support them

through graduation and beyond.

For Further Information

To find out more about programs that

work to keep young people in school, or

for additional materials on this subject,

please contact the following organizations. In addition, many resources are

available on line when searching dropout

prevention, including intervention and

prevention programs and strategies.

Communities In Schools, Inc.

1199 North Fairfax

Suite 300

Alexandria, VA 22314–1436

703–519–8999

703–519–7213 (fax)

http://www.cisnet.org

Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse

P.O Box 6000

Rockville, MD 20849–6000

800–638–8736

301–519–5212 (fax)

http://www.ncjrs.org/ojjhome.htm

E-mail: askncjrs@ncjrs.org

National School Safety Center

4165 Thousand Oaks Boulevard

Suite 290

Westlake Village, CA 91362

805–373–9977

805–373–9277 (fax)

http://nssc1.org

U.S. Department of Education

Safe and Drug-Free Schools Program

600 Independence Avenue SW.

Portals Building

Room 604

Washington, DC 20202–6123

202–260–3954

202–260–7767 (fax)

http://www.ed.gov/DrugFree

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Educational Research and

Improvement (OERI)

National Center for Education

Statistics

555 New Jersey Avenue NW.

Washington, DC 20208–5721

800–424–1616

202–219–1696 (fax)

http://www.ed.gov/NCES

Endnotes

1. Parts of this text were excerpted from

reports submitted to OJJDP by CIS, Inc.

(“Lessons Learned from the Urban

Institute’s National Evaluation of Cities/

Communities In Schools,” 1996, and “Cities In Schools: A History of Partnerships,”

1995), and by S.B. Rossman and E. Morley

(“Highlights of the National Evaluation

of Cities In Schools,” 1995, and “The National Evaluation of Cities In Schools: Executive Summary,” 1995).

2. This study has resulted in a project report for the Adjudicated Youth with Disabilities Transition Project, which may be

obtained by contacting Dr. Richard Pollard at the University of Idaho at 208–364–

4025, or via e-mail at rpollard@uidaho.edu.

3. National School Safety Center (NSSC).

1996. “Mat-Su Alternative: Successful

school-to-work transitions.” School Safety

Update March 1996:5. The above descriptor taken from NSSC has been updated by

principal Peter Burchell, Mat-Su Alternative School, via a telephone conversation.

Bibliography

“America’s Best Schools Project.”

Redbook. April 1996.

Carnegie Corporation of New York. Years

of Promise: A Comprehensive Learning Strategy for America’s Children. New York, NY:

Carnegie Corporation of New York. 1996.

McMillen, M., P. Kaufman, E. GerminoHausken, and D. Bradby. Dropout Rates in

the United States: 1992. Washington, DC:

U.S. Department of Education, National

Center for Education Statistics, NCES 93–

464. 1993.

National Center for Education Statistics. Dropout Rates in the United States:

1990. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of

Education. 1991.

Snyder, H. N., and M. Sickmund. Juvenile Offenders and Victims: A National Report. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile

Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 1995.

U.S. Department of Education. Condition of Education: 1993 (Indicator 32).

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. 1993.

 ———. Condition of Education: 1993

(Indicator 34). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. 1993.

U.S. House of Representatives Select

Committee on Children, Youth, and Families. U.S. Children and Their Families: Current Conditions and Recent Trends. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing

Office. 1989.

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes

the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau

of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of

Justice, and the Office for Victims of Crime.

This Bulletin was prepared by Sharon

Cantelon, Program Manager, Special Emphasis

Division, and Donni LeBoeuf, Senior Program

Manager, OJJDP.
BULK RATE

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

DOJ/OJJDP

Permit No. G–91

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

Washington, DC 20531

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Bulletin NCJ 162783