Families, Youth and Delinquency: the State of Knowledge, and Family-based Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Programs

PDF (540 KB)

ISBN: 978-1-100-11686-0

Table of Contents

Summary

The family, as a learning, discovery and socialization environment, is a key protective factor in the development of children and adolescents. When dysfunctional, it is also regarded as a risk factor for juvenile delinquency.

To better address the relationship between the family, risk factors, protective factors, juvenile delinquency and intervention with vulnerable families, this paper is divided into two main parts.

The first part surveys knowledge about risk and protective factors associated with families. A detailed analysis of risk factors has identified three categories of risk factors in the family environment:

  1. risk factors related to family dynamics and functioning (considered proximal risk factors),
  2. risk factors related to family characteristics, and
  3. risk factors related to the neighbourhood or area where families live.

With regard to protective factors, current knowledge is relatively limited, but documentary research has identified the main protective factors which are related to the family environment. The first part also contains a statistical portrait of Canadian families affected by specific risk factors, and concludes with a brief survey of the situation in Aboriginal communities.

The second part of the paper describes programs that aim to prevent and reduce juvenile delinquency in the family environment. Analysis has shown that three intervention methods are particularly effective with families:

  1. parental training,
  2. family therapy, and
  3. the integrated approach.

Based on research reports, longitudinal studies and evaluation summaries, this research is intended as an initial step in extending scientific knowledge of what are called “vulnerable families” or “at-risk families,” and in making better use of knowledge in order to work more effectively with them.

Chapter 1

Survey of Knowledge of Risk Factors and Protective Factors Associated With Families

It is generally accepted that the risk of developing a life trajectory oriented towards delinquency is influenced by the number of risk factors to which a youth is exposed.Footnote 1 By the same token, it may be suggested that as a youth is surrounded by protective factors, the risks of an orientation towards delinquency are diminished.

Risk Factors

Very briefly, risk factors may be described as characteristics or variables that, when present, make certain individuals more likely than others to adopt behaviours that can cause them harm.Footnote 2

The risk factors related to delinquency are multidimensional in the sense that they are manifested in more than one aspect of the day-to-day lives of individuals. The typology generally accepted by researchers accordingly classifies risk factors on the following basis: individual characteristics, family, school, peers and the community.Footnote 3

It is also accepted that the effects of risk factors vary with age.Footnote 4 For example, in childhood the risk factors that have more of an impact are those that exist within the family; as children grow and become more integrated into their environment, risk factors related to peers, school, neighbourhood and community play a more important part.Footnote 5 Risk factors related to individual characteristics, such as hyperactivity, anxiety and aggressiveness must be taken into consideration at all ages.

Moreover, it must be remembered that delinquent behaviour is acquired over time in conditions that overlap and in situations presenting multiple problems. The interaction and accumulation of risk factors increase the likelihood of acting out,Footnote 6 not only because the effect of risk factors is cumulative, but also because they interact: the effects of one multiply the effects of another, and so on. For example, parental alcohol abuse may generate family conflict, which in turn may increase the risk of problems related to substance abuse.

According to a study by the Social Exclusion Task Force (London), at age 14, the more family risk factors a youth displays, the more likely he or she is to be expelled from school, to be taken in by youth protection services, or to come into contact with the police; the relationship is particularly pronounced in the case of the expulsion from school of youth who present five or more family risk factors.Footnote 7

With regard to risk factors associated with the family environment, a detailed analysis enables us to distinguish between three subcategories:

Table 1—Juvenile Delinquency Risk Factors Associated With the Family According to Age of Children and AdolescentsFootnote 8
Cumulative and interactive effects of risk factors
  6-12 Years 13-17 Years 18 and Older
Family Dynamic and Functioning
  • Poor parental practices
  • Parental and/or siblings criminality
  • Anti-social parents with attitudes that support violence
  • Family conflicts
  • Parents with substance abuse problems
  • Physical abuse and neglect
  • Family violence
  • Poor parental practices
  • Parental and/or siblings criminality
  • Family violence
  • History of poor treatment
Family Characteristics
  • Unstable family income
  • Broken home
  • Family mobility
  • Mental health of parents
  • Young mother
  • Number of children in the family
  • Single parent family
  • Parental past
  • Unstable family income
  • Broken home
  • Family mobility
  • Unstable family income
Area of Residence
  • Poor area
  • Presence of young offenders
  • Poor area
  • Crime in the area
  • Presence of youth gangs
  • Availability of drugs and firearms
  • Poverty
  • Crime
  • Youth gangs
  • Drugs and firearms

Risk Factors Associated With Family Dynamic and Functioning

Current scientific knowledge suggests that risk factors related to family dynamics and functioning are closely associated with delinquency.Footnote 9

Ineffective Parental Behaviour

Bad parenting practices, such as a lack of supervision, over-permissiveness, inconsistent or overly strict discipline, a weak bond of affection and the inability to set clear limits, represent significant risk factors for delinquency,Footnote 10 drug use,Footnote 11 poor academic performance,Footnote 12 and membership in youth gangs.Footnote 13

According to researchers, parental supervision and controlFootnote 14 play a key role in the adoption of delinquent behaviour.Footnote 15 As LeBlanc points out, “supervision is the key variable that catalyses the effect of all the other characteristics of family functioning”.Footnote 16

The longitudinal Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime (ESYTC) identifies seven characteristics of parental conduct and family functioning associated with delinquency in 15 year-olds. The most important are parental supervision, the young person's willingness to communicate with the parents, parent consistency, parent-child conflict and excessive punishment.Footnote 17 The results of the study showed that ineffective parenting at age 13 is an important predictor of delinquency at age 15.Footnote 18

Parental Criminality

Parental criminality is a powerful risk factor for delinquency, according to various studies.Footnote 19

The Pittsburgh and Cambridge longitudinal studies show that the criminality of the father, mother, brother or sister is a good predictor of delinquency in boys. The most important factor remains the criminality of the father: 63% of boys with a father involved in criminal activity are at risk themselves of being involved in such activity, compared to 30% of other boys.Footnote 20

Having older siblings involved in crime is also a risk factor for delinquency; this relationship is less important when the siblings are younger.

According to work by Farrington (2002), 8% of families are responsible for 43% of crime. Similar results were obtained in a study by Roché of juvenile delinquency among 13 to 19 year-olds in France: 5% of families were responsible for 50% of minor offences, 86% of serious offences and 95% of trafficking.Footnote 21

Mistreatment During Childhood and Family Violence

A number of studies have confirmed that very early exposure to physical and psychological violence is a strong predictor of physical violence towards the victim, particularly of subsequent violence against the victim's own partner or children.Footnote 22

Witnessing violence in the home is an important risk factor for aggressiveness and delinquency in young people. According to the results of National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (NLSCY), children aged 6 to 11 who have witnessed violence in the home were twice (2.2 times) as likely to behave aggressively as children who had never witnessed violence.Footnote 23

Mistreatment during childhood is also a risk factor for various problem behaviours. Studies comparing adolescents mistreated in childhood with those who were not, show that more of the former exhibit behavioural problemsFootnote 24 (running away, dropping out of school, early pregnancy), substance abuse problems,Footnote 25 carry weapons, exhibit delinquent behaviour, place themselves in intimidating situationsFootnote 26 and join gangs.Footnote 27

Other studies have also shown that violence experienced at an early age is a factor associated with running away and early departure from the family home, which strongly increases an adolescent's risk of becoming the victim or the perpetrator of various forms of delinquency related to homelessness.Footnote 28

Parental Substance Abuse Footnote 29

The Edinburgh Study of Youth Transitions and Crime (ESYTC) showed that among 15 year-olds, having a parent who uses drugs doubled the risk that they will do so too. On the other hand, young people whose parents drink to excess (21 units a week) are no more likely than other young people to become daily drinkers.Footnote 30

According to the results of the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (NLSCY), peer influence is a stronger risk factor than parental drinking for consumption of alcohol by adolescents.Footnote 31

Risk Factors Associated With Family Characteristics

In our understanding of the links between the family and juvenile delinquency, these risk factors must be interpreted with caution: their negative effects are sometimes derived from other factors present in the family environment, and sometimes from a combination of several risk factors. Taken in isolation, they are less obviously linked to juvenile delinquency than risk factors related to family dynamic and functioning.Footnote 32

One of the most eloquent examples of the special nature of these risk factors is the discussions around the effects of single parenthood in the manifestation of delinquent behaviour in youth. Single parenthood is considered a risk factor because this family structure is often associated with a lack of supervision, a lack of free time spent with the children, financial vulnerability, a poorer neighbourhood, and so on. In fact, because single parenthood can easily lead to financial insecurity and thus to a situation that is difficult and stressful for families, it represents a family characteristic associated with risks for juvenile delinquency.Footnote 33

Wells and Rankin (1991) found that the connection between broken families and juvenile delinquency is variable, depending on the situation: it is weak or non-existent with regard to serious offences (theft, violent behaviour), somewhat stronger with regard to drug use (particularly soft), and significant with regard to "problem behaviours," such as running away, truancy and classroom discipline problems.Footnote 34

The results of the Cambridge study of juvenile delinquent trajectories showed that while boys from broken families are more delinquent than boys from intact families, they are not more delinquent than boys from intact but conflicted families.Footnote 35

Farrington (1995; 2006) suggested that the circumstances in which the family breakdown occur and the post-separation effects are themost important factors to consider when assessing the risk for juvenile delinquency.

Generally, boys who stayed with their mother after a separation had the same rate of delinquency as boys from intact families with a low incidence of conflict, whereas boys who stayed with their father or other relatives had higher rates of delinquency.Footnote 36

With respect to family transitions,Footnote 37 the results of the Rochester study showed clear and statistically significant connections between the number of family transitions, the prevalence of delinquency and drug use. Whereas 64.1% of youth who had never experienced family transition showed signs of delinquency, the rate peaked at 90% for youth who had experienced five family transitions or more. After adjusting for gender, poverty and parental supervision, researchers concluded that a large number of family transitions is significantly linked to higher delinquency and drug use rates.Footnote 38

Risk Factors Associated With Area of Residence

Generally, living in a poorer neighbourhood doubles the risk of delinquency.Footnote 39

A number of risk factors must be considered in relation to the area of residence: the presence of youth gangs and young offenders, the availability of drugs and firearms, neighbourhood crime rates,Footnote 40 poor neighbourhood integration, a high level of disorganization, scarce availability of resources and services, and local poverty.

Sampson (1997) proposed a framework for analysis based on social capital and neighbourhood characteristics: the "social capital/collective efficacy model." According to this model, parental practices are influenced by the social context in which families live. Very poor neighbourhoods characterized by family breakdown and a high rate of residential mobility tended to weaken social networks and exacerbate ineffective parental practices.Footnote 41

Similarly, Smith (2004) noted that family functioning is influenced by the surrounding social context. Parents living in a poor neighbourhood and who have few resources have more difficulty in steering their children clear of deviant and at-risk behaviour.

Thus, young children living in a poor neighbourhood and growing up in a family where parental supervision is deficient are at risk of developing delinquent behaviour in adolescence.Footnote 42

The Situation in Canada: A Statistical Portrait of Risk Factors Associated With Family Dynamic and Functioning

Family Violence and Witnessing Violence in the Home

Mistreatment During Childhood

Parental Supervision and Delinquency

Substance Abuse

The Situation of Families in Aboriginal Communities

There are few studies of the connections between juvenile delinquency in Aboriginal youth and risk factors associated with families; this significantly limits our level of knowledge for the effective prevention of delinquency among young people in such communities.

Among young Aboriginal males, most of the risk factors associated with delinquency are similar to those for non-Aboriginals: a history of criminal behaviour, substance abuse, antisocial attitudes, and association with antisocial peers.Footnote 59 However, we cannot say if risk factors such as "family or spousal problems" or "problems at school or at work" apply in a similar way to Aboriginals and non-Aboriginals; the question requires further research.Footnote 60

With regard to family and spousal violence, the figures show that domestic violence is more common in Aboriginal communities.Footnote 61 In 2004, 21% of Aboriginals said they had experienced some form of physical or sexual violence on the part of a spouse in the five years preceding the survey, compared to 6% of non-Aboriginals.Footnote 62 This translates into a spousal violence rate among Aboriginals that is three times higher than among non-Aboriginals.

With regard to substance abuse and alcoholism in Aboriginal communities, the available statistics rarely make a connection with the family dimensions. The following are some results from the First Nations Regional Longitudinal Health Survey (RHS) 2002-2003:Footnote 63

A study of the connections between family structure and substance abuse problems has been conducted among North American Indians and Inuit (American Indian/Alaska Native - AI-AN).Footnote 64 The results suggest that young people from single-parent families are more likely to smoke tobacco and drink regularly, compared to the young people who live with both parents. The probability of marijuana use is also higher among young people in single-parent families, compared to those who live with their parents. Note in this connection that Aboriginal children and young people are much more likely to be members of a single parent family: in 2001, 35% of Aboriginal children under 15 were living in a single-parent family, twice the proportion of non-Aboriginal children (17%).Footnote 65

Given these results, it is therefore important to continue research into the significance of the family unit as a protective factor for Aboriginal youth. Moreover, as Lonczak H. et al. (2007) note, more detailed studies must be conducted to gain a better understanding of how - family structure aside - parental practices affect substance abuse problems among Aboriginal youth.

Protective Factors

Knowledge of protective factors associated with the family is less extensive than knowledge of risk factors; this places an important limitation on our knowledge for the prevention of juvenile delinquency.

Protective factors inform our understanding of the characteristics and situations that protect youth and steer them away from delinquency.Footnote 66 Protective factors are characteristics or conditions that mitigate risks, enable reduction of the negative impact associated with risk factors and help youth address their situation more successfully.Footnote 67 It may be suggested that protective factors, like risk factors, are cumulative and interactive. For example, the negative effects of growing up in a poor environment can be reduced by the involvement, participation and support of parents.Footnote 68

Table 2 below shows the main protective factors associated with families; most are related to a good family functioning and harmonious family relations. Readers should note that current research on protective factors is not detailed enough to allow distinction between them based on age.

Table 2 — Protective Factors Associated with Family Footnote 79
At Every Age
Family Dynamic and Functioning Family Characteristics Area of Residence
  • Relationship based on family bond
  • Positive support within the family
  • Adequate parental supervision
  • Respect for friends by parents
  • Closeness between parents and children (affection)
  • Consistent disciplinary methods
  • Adequate parental behaviour and practices
  • Parental level of education
  • Financial stability
  • Stability of the family unit
  • Integration of families into the life of the community
  • Relationships established with neighbours
  • School activities involving the family

Chapter 2

Preventing and Reducing the Risks of Juvenile Delinquency by Working With Families

Current knowledge shows that it is possible to reduce the negative effects of certain risk factors, reinforce protective factors and work effectively with youth at risk and vulnerable families. A number of studiesFootnote 80 have shown that those programs targeting risk factors contributing to crime and victimization and promoting protective factors are effective and enable a reduction in the incidence of crime and victimization of as much as 70% in some cases.Footnote 81

The Scientific Approach to Preventing Delinquency

The scientific approach to preventing delinquency involves a way of thinking and acting based on scientifically demonstrated and demonstrable facts. Through careful and reliable evaluations, the use of this approach makes it possible to demonstrate that there are effective ways of preventing crime. Evaluation of the effectiveness of programs relies on the following criteria:

Cost-benefit analyses of programs put in place for youth at risk and their families, show that some programs save taxpayers 7 to 10 times the program cost.Footnote 86 For example, the best programs with a good cost-benefit ratio are Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care (MTFC), where for each dollar invested, the taxpayers save up to $11.60; Multisystemic Therapy (MST), with savings of up to $7.70; and Functional Family Therapy (FFT), with $7.50.Footnote 87

Intervention Strategies: What Works With Families

For programs involving the family, three intervention strategies are considered adequate:

The selection criteria that guided the choice of programsFootnote 1a were as follows:

Parental Training Programs

Programs based on parental education are designed essentially to improve parental responsibility and behaviours. They seek to teach parents to use appropriate discipline techniques, exercise balanced supervision and control, and set clear and consistent limits for children and young people who tend not to follow rules.Footnote 90

Parental training generally takes place in small groups, with only parents present. Training sessions may be held in various locations: schools, community centres, churches, at work or at home. Sessions are led by a therapist.

Objectives

Parental training uses a structured approach designed to:

Parental Training Programs
Title Target Group Targeted Problems and Risk Factors Results and Rating Footnote 91
Preventive Treatment Program Age group:

7-9 years (boys only)

Boys from disadvantaged families who present behavioural problems.

Problems:
  • gang-related activities;
  • delinquency;
  • substance abuse;
  • aggression and violence.
Risk factors:
  • mismanagement of family conflicts;
  • poor parental supervision;
  • use of corporal punishment;
  • inconsistent discipline.
Results:
  • at 12 years old, the boys who participated in this program commit fewer thefts, are less likely to have substance abuse problems and are less involved in fights; and
  • at 15 years old, the boys who participated in this program are less involved with gangs, have fewer substance abuse problems, commit fewer delinquent acts and have fewer friends who had been arrested by the police.Footnote 92Footnote 93
Rating:
  • I: exemplary
  • II: ns (not stated)
Parenting With Love and Limits (PLL)

Also accompanies family therapy

Age group:

10-18 years (girls and boys)

Youth who have committed a first offence/ youth at risk of adopting delinquent behaviour/ dropouts.

Problems:
  • gang-related activities;
  • delinquency;
  • substance abuse;
  • aggression and violence;
  • academic problems.
Risk factors:
  • poor parental supervision;
  • mismanagement of family conflicts;
  • poor family bonds;
  • family violence;
  • siblings with behaviour problems;
  • use of corporal punishment;
  • inconsistent discipline.
Results:
  • in the year following PLL, 85% of youth did not have a substance abuse relapse;
  • compared to a control group, PLL youth reduced their aggressive behaviour, depression and attention deficit problems; and
  • parents of PLL, compared to those of a comparison group, improved communication with their youth.Footnote 94
Rating:
  • I: exemplary
  • II: ns
Focus on Families Age group:

3-14 years (girls and boys)

Targets families in which one parent is on methadone treatment.

Problem:
  • substance abuse.
Risk factors:
  • parents who are involved in criminal activity or who have a criminal history;
  • poor parental supervision;
  • mismanagement of family conflicts;
  • use of corporal punishment;
  • inconsistent discipline;
  • poor family bonds.
Results:

After 12 months of counselling, the Focus on Families parents, compared to a comparison group: Footnote 95

  • reported fewer conflicts;
  • were better able to ensure house rules were obeyed;
  • changed their social circle;
  • reported a 65% reduction in the frequency of heroin use;
  • were six times less likely to use cocaine in the last month.
Rating:
  • I: exemplary
  • II: model

Family Therapy Programs

Family therapy programs follow a multidimensional approach combining parental training session, youth training session and improvement in family dynamics. These programs are generally carried out by qualified therapists in a clinical setting.

Family therapy targets two types of families.

First, families in which youth display emotional and behavioural problems (emotional disorders, depression, problems at school and with friends, and so on) but without indications of more serious behaviour (delinquency, crime, early abuse of alcohol and drugs, and so on). This preventive therapy is designed to treat problems before they become more serious.

Second, families in which youth exhibit delinquent behaviour and are clearly identified or diagnosed as such. This type of therapy is designed to rehabilitate and treat youth and their families, reduce the risk of reoffending and prevent more serious delinquency.

Objectives

Regardless of the type of family involved, family therapy programs are designed essentially to:

Family Therapy Programs
Title Target Group Targeted Problems and Risk Factors Results and Rating
Functional Family Therapy (FFT) Age group:

11-18 years (girls and boys)

Youth who present delinquent behaviour/youth currently involved in criminal activities.

Problems:
  • aggression and violence;
  • substance abuse.
Risk factors:
  • poor parental supervision;
  • mismanagement of family conflicts.
Results:
  • compared to traditional justice service for youth, FFT reduces the risk of recidivism by 50% to 60%;Footnote 93a
  • after one year of counselling, the rate of recidivism in youth who participated in the project was 19.8% versus 36% in other youth;Footnote 97
  • compared to traditional probation services for youth, residential treatments; and therapeutic approaches, FFT obtained better results.Footnote 93b
Rating:
  • I: exemplary
  • II: exemplary
Multi-Dimensional Treatment Foster Care (MTFC)

Also considered to be a program that uses an integrated approach

Age group:

11-18 years (girls and boys)

Youth with chronic delinquent behaviour who are at risk of incarceration.

Problems:
  • delinquency;
  • aggression and violence.
Risk factors:
  • poor parental supervision;
  • mismanagement of family conflicts;
  • parents who are involved in criminal activity or who have a criminal history.
Results:
  • after a 12-months follow-up, MTFC youth, compared to youth placed in traditional placement centres, committed fewer offences (an average of 2.6 offences versus 5.4);Footnote 97a
  • after a 12-months follow-up, MTFC boys aged 12 to 17 spent 60% fewer days in prison compared to boys placed in traditional placement centres, used fewer hard drugs, had a lower rate of recidivism and were more likely to return to their families;Footnote 93c
  • after a 24-months follow-up, MTFC youth had better academic integration.Footnote 98
Rating:
  • I: exemplary
  • II: exemplary
Brief Strategic Family Therapy (BSFT) Age group:

8-18 years (girls and boys)

Youth who present or who are at risk of adopting delinquent behaviour.

The therapy also addresses dropouts and youth with substance abuse problems.

Problems:
  • delinquency;
  • substance abuse.
Risk factors:
  • poor parental supervision;
  • mismanagement of family conflicts;
  • poor family bonds;
  • siblings with behaviour problems.
Results:

BSFT is considered an effective treatment to improve behaviour problems, reduce recidivism among young offenders and improve family relations.Footnote 95a

Rating:
  • I: effective
  • II: exemplary
Multi-Dimensional Family Therapy (MDFT) Age group:

11-18 years (girls and boys)

Youth with substance abuse problems and youth who present behaviour problems.

Problems:
  • substance abuse;
  • aggression and violence.
Risk factors:
  • poor parental supervision;
  • mismanagement of family conflicts;
  • use of corporal punishment;
  • inconsistent discipline.
Results:
  • MDFT youth showed more positive changes (45%) than youth in regular group therapy (32%) and youth in multi-family therapy (26%);Footnote 93d
  • after one year, 70% of MDFT youth and 55% of youth who participated in cognitive therapies stopped using drugs;Footnote 95b and
  • MDFT enabled the participating families to improve their functioning and cohesion.Footnote 95c
Rating:
  • I: effective
  • II: exemplary
Positive-Parenting-Program (Triple P)

Also accompanies parental training

Age group:

Youth under 16 years (girls and boys)

Youth with behaviour (or emotional) problems.

Problem:
  • behaviour problems.
Risk factors:
  • mismanagement of family conflicts;
  • depressed parents.
Results:

Compared to families on a waiting list to receive treatment, those who participated in Triple P: Footnote 99

  • reduced behaviour problems in their children; and
  • improved parenting practices and skills.
Rating:
  • I: ns
  • II: ns

Integrated Approach Programs

Integrated approach is based on the principle that a youth and his or her family do not live in isolation. An effective intervention must first, replace the family to its environment; and second, focus on risk factors coming from several areas (for example, community, neighbourhood, school, friends, family and the youth himself or herself); and third, develop an integrated approach that involves participation by a number of key partners: health and social services, education, justice, mental health, substance abuse and so on.

This is a multidimensional approach in which casework is generally coordinated by a case manager. Depending on the project, the case manager works sometimes directly with the family and sometimes in support of caseworkers.

According to a number of US associations, a genuinely integrated approach must essentially satisfy the following criteria:Footnote 100

Objectives

Programs based on an integrated approach are designed to:

Integrated Approach Programs
Title Target Group Targeted Problems and Risk Factors Results and Rating
Multi-Systemic Therapy (MST)

Sometimes classified under family therapy

Age group:

12-17 years (girls and boys)

Youth with chronic violence problems, substance abuse problems and those who are at risk of placement.

Problems:
  • aggression and violence;
  • substance abuse.
Risk factors:
  • mismanagement of family conflicts;
  • poor parental supervision.
Results:
  • the reduction of recidivism rate varied between 25% and 70%;Footnote 97b
  • the reduction in youth placement rates varied between 47% and 64%; Footnote 97c
  • compared to youth who received traditional services, MST youth experienced a significant reduction in criminal activity; Footnote 94a
  • MST is one of the most effective programs for aggressive and antisocial adolescents; Footnote 101
  • compared to youth in traditional placement, MST youth reduced their rate of arrest, self-reported delinquency and the number of assaults against other youth. Footnote 102
Rating:
  • I: exemplary
  • II: exemplary
CASASTART (Striving Together to Achieve Rewarding Tomorrows)

Also known as Children at Risk Also considered to be family therapy

Also considered to be family therapy

Age group:

8-13 years (girls and boys)

Youth at risk of being involved in criminal activities or youth who present substance abuse problems.

Problems:
  • delinquency;
  • substance abuse;
  • aggression and violence;
  • academic problems.
Risk factors:
  • parents who are involved in criminal activity or who have a criminal history;
  • poor parental supervision;
  • mismanagement of family conflicts;
  • poor family bonds;
  • family violence;
  • family instability.
Results:

After one year, youth who participated in CASASTART, compared to youth from a comparison group:Footnote 103

  • had a lower drug use rate (56% versus 63%);
  • sold drugs less frequently (14% versus 24%); and,
  • committed fewer violent crimes (22% versus 27%).
Rating:
  • I: effective
  • II: ns
Wraparound Milwaukee

Also accompanies family therapy

Age group:

13-17 years (girls and boys)

Youth who present emotional and behaviour problems/youth who present mental health needs.

Problems:
  • delinquency;
  • substance abuse;
  • aggression and violence.
Risk factors:
  • parents who are involved in criminal activity or who have a criminal history;
  • poor parental supervision;
  • mismanagement of family conflicts;
  • family violence;
  • siblings with behaviour problems;
  • use of corporal punishment;
  • inconsistent discipline.
Results:
  • pre- and post-test evaluations showed the youth involved in Wraparound reduced their rate of recidivism and improved their performance in school, at home and in the community; and
  • after one year of counselling, there was a decrease in the rate of violent sex offences (from 14% to 2%), offences against property (from 42% to 15%), assaults (from 20% to 5%) and offences involving firearms (from 11% to 3%). Footnote 93e
Rating:
  • I: promising
  • II: ns
All Children Excel (ACE) Age group:

6-15 years (girls and boys)

Youth who present a high risk of chronic delinquency and violence.

Problems:
  • delinquency;
  • aggression and violence;
  • academic problems.
Risk factors:
  • parents who are involved in criminal activity or who have a criminal history;
  • poor parental supervision;
  • mismanagement of family conflicts;
  • poor family bonds;
  • family violence;
  • siblings with behaviour problems;
  • use of corporal punishment;
  • inconsistent discipline.
Results:
  • an evaluation from 1999 to 2003 showed that youth who participated in ACE attended school regularly, were accepted to high school and improved their attitudes and behaviour at school;Footnote 104
  • among youth who present the same level of risk, those who participated in ACE had a lower rate of recidivism (35% versus 57%); and
  • over a period of 4.5 years, 86% of ACE youth did not face new charges.Footnote 105
Rating:
  • I: promising
  • II: ns
SNAP™ Under 12 Outreach Project (ORP)

Also accompanies family therapy and parental training

Age group:

6-12 years (boys only)

Boys who have committed offences or who present serious behaviour problems.

Note: a program for girls, SNAP™ Girls Connection, was established in 1996.

Problems:
  • delinquency;
  • aggression and violence.
Risk factors:
  • poor parental behaviour;
  • poor parental supervision.
Results:

Compared to a control group, SNAP™ participants:Footnote 93f

  • had fewer individual problems (anxiety, depression);
  • improved their social skills (better relations with peers; participation in activities);
  • reduced their rate of aggression and delinquency;
  • 60% of high risk children who participated in ORP did not have a criminal record;
  • showed positive skills after treatment, developed positive ties with teachers, friends and family members and were less likely to associate with "bad friends"; and,
  • parents had less difficulty in relations with their children and were confident that they could adequately supervise their behaviour.
Rating:
  • I: exemplary
  • II: ns

Key Success Factors for Family-Based Programs

The previous results show that it is possible to work effectively with vulnerable families to reduce and prevent the risk of juvenile delinquency.Footnote 106 Following are some of the key success factors in these programs.Footnote 107

A Combination of Intervention Strategies

Program Design and Implementation

Conclusion

As the results presented in this paper suggest, prevention and treatment programs for vulnerable families are effective and should therefore be included in a comprehensive approach and strategy to prevent and reduce delinquency and recidivism for youth at risk.

Since the family is a key factor in a young person's development, it goes without saying that working with those who are at risk by offering integrated, personalized treatment plans, individual or family therapy, or parental education activities, is a casework strategy with proven effectiveness.

However, since the family is at the intersection of a number of living environments - peers, school and neighbourhood, to mention only a few - it must be understood as a system of relations influenced by a number of risk factors and protective factors, generated both by the influence of these living environments and by its internal dynamics and characteristics.

In casework, therefore, there is no absolute truth and no single program that applies to all families at risk. The reality of families at risk ranges over a continuum, and personalized, individualized casework taking into account the specific characteristics of each family enables accurate targeting of the central risk factors that must be addressed, as well as the existing protective factors that must be reinforced.

Such targeted casework must be based on an evaluation of families' needs and circumstances, and a strong and current corpus of scientific knowledge about vulnerable families.

With respect to scientific knowledge, this exploratory research has produced an overall picture of existing knowledge, and in so doing, has brought out the limitations to which research is subject. Better knowledge of protective factors and their role with respect to the age of young people, and better knowledge of the situation in Aboriginal families and effective ways of working with them, are the frontiers on which research should be carried out.

Lastly, suggested avenues for future research could include detailed studies of the costs and benefits of mid- and long-term family-based prevention programs in such areas as justice, health, employability, substance abuse treatment and so on, and longitudinal studies could be developed at the same time on the long-term impact that prevention and treatment programs have on the life trajectory of the children of those who take part in them.

APPENDIX

Program Descriptions

Preventive Treatment Program

"The Preventive Treatment Program was aimed at disruptive kindergarten boys and their parents, with the goal of reducing short- and long-term antisocial behaviour." (OJJDP)

This program, also referred to as the Montreal Prevention Experiment, is for boys aged 7 to 9 identified by teachers as presenting disruptive behaviour in school.

The program objectives are to reduce:

Method

Training for Parents

Training for Boys

Additional Information

Training for Parents

Training for Boys

Evaluation

References

Parenting With Love and Limits (PLL)

"Parenting With Love and Limits® is a parenting education program that integrates the best principles of a structural family therapy approach into a comprehensive program for juvenile delinquent populations." (Brush Dance Clinic)

Parenting with Love and Limits (PLL) is a program that combines group therapy and family therapy. It is for children aged 10 to 18 identified or diagnosed with serious emotional or behavioural problems, drug or alcohol abuse, suicidal ideations, depression or all of these.

The objectives of PLL are to:

Method

Additional Information

Evaluation

References

Focus on Families

"As a result of Focus on Families, parents are expected to have less risk for relapse, to be better skilled to cope with relapse incidents, and to have decreased drug use episodes." (Strengthening America's Families)

Focus on Families is designed for parents with substance abuse problems. It is for families in which one parent is being treated with methadone and who have children ages 3 to 14. It is preferable for the parents to have completed at least 90 days of methadone treatment before the program begins.

The objectives are to:

Method

Additional Information

Evaluation

References

Functional Family Therapy (FFT)

"Functional Family Therapy is a short-term approach designed to engage and motivate youths and families to change negative affect." (OJJDP)

Functional Family Therapy is a family-focused prevention and response project for young people aged 11 to 18 with serious behavioural, drug abuse and violence problems. It has been applied successfully with various ethnic groups and in various social and economic contexts.

FFT is a multi-system prevention program designed to:

Method

Additional Information

Evaluation

References

Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care (MTFC)

"Community foster families are recruited and trained to provide out-of-home placements for juvenile offenders or children at risk for detention." (OJJDP)

MTFC, or Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care, offers an alternative to traditional residential placement, incarceration or hospitalization for young people aged 11 to 18 with chronic problems of violence and delinquency. The young people are placed with an MTFC family for six to nine months and receive intensive treatment. During this time, the young person's original family receives therapy, and the parents receive training as well.

The program is based on the social learning theory, whereby social contexts and daily interactions affect both positive and antisocial behaviours in young people.

The goals of the MTFC program are to:

For the original families, MTFC treatment seeks to:

Method

Additional Information

Evaluation

References

Brief Strategic Family Therapy (BSFT)

"BSFT is based on the assumption that the family - one of the most important and influential systems in the lives of children and adolescents - provides the foundation for child development. As a result, BSFT conceptualizes and intervenes to change youth behavior problems at the family level." (BSFT Web site)

Brief Strategic Family Therapy (BSFT) is designed to prevent and treat behavioural problems in young people aged 8 to 18. It targets young people who display, or are at risk of presenting, behavioural problems, particularly drug use and school abandonment.

The BSFT approach perceives the family as the foundation for child development. The family protects against negative influences, hence the importance of working with the family.

The goals of BSFT are essentially to:

Method

Additional Information

Evaluation

References

Multidimensional Family Therapy (MDFT)

"MDFT targets the known areas of risk associated with adolescent drug abuse and delinquency and enhances those protective factors and processes known to promote successful teen and family development." (Strengthening Families)

Multidimensional Family Therapy is a complete program designed for children aged 11 to 18 with drug use and behavioural problems.

The MDFT approach emphasizes sound functioning for the young person in a number of areas. More specifically, it seeks to change the lifestyle of young people in several areas of life: relations with friends, health, school attendance, and relations with parents.

The program has been applied in various cultural communities, and most of the families treated under the program came from poor neighbourhoods. The young people participating in MDFT are often considered at high risk of demonstrating multiple problems and being involved in activities that can lead them into the youth justice system.

The goals of the program are to:

With regard to the parents, MDFT seeks to facilitate their engagement and involvement, improve communication between them and the child, and alter inappropriate parenting practices. Lastly, for each family, there are two intermediate goals: helping the young people form bonds of affection with their parents, and building positive and lasting relations with peer groups.

Method

Additional Information

Evaluation

References

Positive Parenting Program - Triple P

"Triple P - the Positive Parenting Program - is a unique parenting and family support strategy designed to reduce the prevalence of behavioural and emotional problems in children and adolescents. Triple P is a multi-level system of family intervention, which provides five levels of intervention of increasing strength." (Sanders M., et al.)

Originating in Australia, Triple P is a multi-level system of family intervention designed to prevent and treat emotional and behavioural problems in children and young people aged 16 and younger.

Based on behavioural and developmental theory, Triple P addresses the risk factors related to the development of affective and behavioural problems in children. The emphasis is on support and practical advice for parents.

The goals of Triple P are to:

Method

Additional Information

Evaluation

References

Multisystemic Therapy (MST)

"The underlying premise of MST is that criminal conduct is multi-causal... effective interventions would address multiple factors in youth ecology: individual, family, peer, school and community." (Leschied A.W. & Cunningham A.)

MST is intensive, family-centered treatment designed for youth aged 12 to 18 who are regarded as having serious behavioural problems (chronic violence, abuse problems, delinquency and so on) and at risk of placement.

MST is based on a multi-dimensional intervention approach that targets the risk factors from various sources: individual characteristics, family, school, friends, neighbourhood. MST helps parents treat behavioural problems in their children, divert them from bad associations and promote academic success.

The main goals of MST are to:

Method

Additional Information

Evaluation

References

CASASTART (Striving Together to Achieve Rewarding Tomorrows)

"CASASTART is based on the assumption that, while all preadolescents are vulnerable to experimentation with substances, those who lack effective human and social support are especially vulnerable. It seeks to build resiliency in youths, strengthen families, and make neighborhoods safer for children and their families." (OJJDP)

CASASTART (Striving Together to Achieve Rewarding Tomorrows), also known as Children at Risk (CAR), is a community-, school- and family-based program. It was developed for children aged 8 to 13 who display a high risk of involvement in criminal activity or drug use. The children targeted by the program generally come from poor neighbourhoods.

CASASTART brings together families, caseworkers from healthcare and social services, schools and youth justice institutions. It is designed to provide young people with the support and services they need to become responsible, law-abiding citizens, and create a safe environment for young people and their families by reducing drug-related crimes and offences.

The main goals of CASASTART are to:

Method

To reduce risk factors associated with neighbourhood, family, friends and individual characteristics, the program is based on the following components:

  1. An increased police presence in the community, and more police involvement and participation with young people.
  2. Case management: caseworkers are assigned to a few families at a time (13 to 18), which enables special attention to the individual needs of young people and families.
  3. Youth justice: increased communication between case managers and youth justice departments in order to ensure appropriate planning and supervision for young people subject to a court order.
  4. Family services: caseworkers provide various services for families to increase parental involvement in their children's lives: for example, special programs for parents, advice, organized activities and so on.
  5. After-school and summer activities for young people, including sports and recreation, as well as development and self-control programs.
  6. Education services to reinforce specific skills through individual in-home courses for young people.
  7. Mentoring: group or individual, and designed to promote positive behavioural change in young people.

Additional Information

Evaluation

References

Wraparound Milwaukee

"Wraparound Milwaukee is a system of community-based care for families of children with severe emotional, behavioral and mental health needs. This wraparound approach is based on an identification of the services families really need to care for a child with special needs." (OJJDP)

Wraparound Milwaukee is an integrated care system for those aged 13 to 17 who present serious emotional or behavioural problems and require mental health services.

The program emphasizes the development of appropriate care for children and their families by providing integrated mental health, substance abuse and social services.

The program was designed to reduce recourse to institutional care in treatment centres and psychiatric hospitals by providing more services for children and their families.

The program is run by Child and Adolescent Services, Milwaukee County Mental Health Division in Wisconsin.

Method

Care Coordinators:

The Child-and-family Team:

The Mobile Crisis Team:

A Network of Partners:

Additional Information

Evaluation

References

All Children Excel (ACE)

"Deflecting Children from the Path of Violence - Intensive Early Intervention for very young offenders." (Ed Frickson, Project Director)

The ACE (All Children Excel) program is for those aged 6 to 15 who present a high risk of becoming violent and chronic delinquents, who are already involved in delinquency or who are at high risk of being maltreated. ACE seeks to reduce the risk factors and improve the resilience of families and children.

The goals of ACE are to prevent and reduce:

To achieve these goals, the program relies on building positive ties with school, family and friends, improving social skills, and participation in recreational activities.

Method

Additional Information

Evaluation

References

SNAP™ Under 12 Outreach Project (ORP)

"SNAP™ helps children and parents interrupt problematic pathways between thinking and doing, to stop and think before they act and to learn more appropriate ways to calm down."

The SNAP™ (Stop Now and Plan) Under 12 Outreach Project is a program based on an integrated approach for boys aged 6 to 11 in contact with the police, at risk to reoffend, or who display serious behavioural problems. SNAP™ was developed by the Child Development Institute of Ontario, Canada.

ORP is based on social learning and cognitive change and uses a multisystem approach targeting the child, the family and the community.

The goals of the program are to:

Method

The prevention strategy developed by the program involves three steps:

Additional Information

Evaluation

References

References

Notes

  1. 11a Shader, 2003.
  2. 2 Ibid.
  3. 3 Hill et al., 2001; Thornberry et al. 1998, 2004.
  4. 4 Hoeve et al., 2007; Wasserman et al., 2003; Farrington and Welsh, 1999.
  5. 5 Loeber, Farrington and Petechuk, 2003; Wasserman et al., 2003; Lawrence et al., 2001.
  6. 6 Loeber et al. 1998.
  7. 7 Cabinet Office, Social Exclusion Task Force, 2007, p. 5.
  8. 8 McVie and Holmes, 2005; Welsh and Farrington, 2007; Leblanc, 1999; Lacourse et al., 2006; Thornberry, Huizinga, and Loeber, 2004; Wyrick & Howell, 2004; Farrington et al., 2006; Loeber, Farrington and Petechuk, 2003; Hoeve et al., 2007; Claes et al., 2005; Shader, 2003; Wasserman and Seracini, 2001; Wasserman et al., 2003; Éthier et al., 2006, 2007.
  9. 9 See in particular, McVie and Holmes, 2005; Loeber, Farrington and Petechuk, 2003; Mucchielli, 2000.
  10. 10 Wasserman & Seracini, 2001.
  11. 11 Smith, 2004-a; McVie and Holmes, 2005.
  12. 12 Claes et al., 2005.
  13. 13 Thornberry et al.,1998, 2004.
  14. 14 Generally, "supervision" refers to the control parents exercise over their children's outings, associations, schoolwork, recreational activities, and their knowledge of whether they smoke or use drugs, and so on. Mucchielli, 2000.
  15. 15 Ibid.
  16. 16 LeBlanc, 1988, pp. 161 and 163, quoted by Mucchielli, 2000.
  17. 17 Smith, 2004-a.
  18. 18 Smith, 2004-a; McVie and Holmes, 2005.
  19. 19 Farrington et al., 2006; Loeber et al., 1998.
  20. 20 The problem of intergenerational crime has been associated with numerous risk factors and stressors such as lack of supervision, placements, multiple relocations, poor parental attitudes, embarrassment, isolation and the stigma due to incarceration of the parents. (Children of Offenders, unpublished paper).
  21. 21 Dossier from Le Front nouveau de Belgique [The new front in Belgium], 2002.
  22. 22 According to social learning theory, children who are victims or witnesses of family violence have a greater probability as adults of reproducing the family pattern they grew up in. (Hotton, 2003).
  23. 23 Ibid.
  24. 24 Shader, 2003.
  25. 25 Mayer, M., C. Lavergne, and R. Baraldi, 2004.
  26. 26 Lansford, J., et al. 2007.
  27. 27 Thompson and Braaten-Antrim, 1998.
  28. 28 Kaufman and Widom, 1999.
  29. 29 For a better understanding of transmission and the intergenerational consequences of drug use, special attention will have to be paid to the results of the Seattle Social Development Projects - Intergenerational Project (SSDP-TIP).
  30. 30 McVie and Holmes, 2005.
  31. 31 Hotton and Haans, 2004.
  32. 32 Mucchielli, 2000.
  33. 33 According to L. Mucchielli, the relationship between delinquency and single-parent families is often the result of a twofold stigma. It first appears as the result of prejudice, whereby a single parent is considered less able to raise and control children correctly than an apparently united stable family. Second, broken families and juvenile delinquents generally come from underprivileged environments, in which case their relationship is merely the effect of social and economic circumstances (Mucchielli, 2000).
  34. 34 Ibid.
  35. 35 Farrington et al., 2006.
  36. 36 Ibid.
  37. 37 Family transition refers to a set of events associated with change: for example, in family structure (divorce, remarriage) or in family mobility (moves).
  38. 38 As researchers point out, prevention programs must take into account the fact that young people experiencing family transition are more likely to have difficulty in managing their emotions. It is therefore important to improve young people's abilities and skills in controlling their emotions better during such times (Thornberry et al. 1999).
  39. 39 Browning and Loeber, 1999.
  40. 40 We should point out for information that works on geocoding in order to break down crime data over a given territory is an important source of information for describing neighbourhoods that have high crime rates. In Canada, analysis of the distribution of crime by neighbourhood characteristics has been carried out in three cities: Regina, Montreal and Winnipeg. In this connection, see Fitzgerald, R., M. Wisener and J. Savoie. 2004, Neighbourhood Characteristics and the Distribution of Crime in Winnipeg. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics; Wallace, M., M. Wisener and K. Collins. 2006. Neighbourhood Characteristics and the Distribution of Crime in Regina. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics; and Savoie, J., F. Bédard and K. Collins. 2006. Neighbourhood Characteristics and the Distribution of Crime on the Island of Montreal. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics.
  41. 41 Turner M., J. Hartman and D. Bishop, 2007.
  42. 42 Lauritsen, J., 2003.
  43. 43 The terms "children" (enfants) and "youths" (jeunes) include those under 18. The term enfants designates those under 12, whereas jeunes means those from 12 to 17. (Ogrodnik , 2007; 24)
  44. 44 Ibid.
  45. 45 Ibid.
  46. 46 Ibid.
  47. 47 Canadian Council on Social Development, 2007.
  48. 48 Taylor-Butts A., 2007.
  49. 49 Ibid.
  50. 50 Trocmé et al., 2005.
  51. 51 Ibid.
  52. 52 Ogrodnik, 2006.
  53. 53 Mayer et al., 2004.
  54. 54 Savoie, 2007.
  55. 55 Ibid.
  56. 56 Ibid.
  57. 57 Adlaf, E.M., Begin, P., and Sawka, E. (2005). The Canadian Addiction Survey describes the prevalence, incidence and use of alcohol and other drugs among Canadians aged 15 or over.
  58. 58 Heavy use means five glasses of an alcoholic beverage or more on one occasion for men, and four or more for women (Ibid).
  59. 59 Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada, 2006.
  60. 60 Ibid.
  61. 61 Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, 2001.
  62. 62 Brozozowski, J.-A., A. Taylor-Butts and S. Johnson, 2006.
  63. 63 First Nations Centre, 2006
  64. 64 Lonczak et al., 2007.
  65. 65 Brozozowski, J.-A., A. Taylor-Butts and S. Johnson, 2006.
  66. 66 Shader, M., 2003.
  67. 67 Shader, 2003; Lawrence et al., 2001.
  68. 68 Ibid.
  69. 69 Claes et al., 2005.
  70. 70 Kumpfer and Alvarado., 1998.
  71. 71 Shader, 2003; Lawrence et al., 2001; Claes et al., 2005.
  72. 72 Claes et al., 2005.
  73. 73 Browning et al. 1999.
  74. 74 McVie, S. and L. Holmes. 2005.
  75. 75 Lauritsen, 2003.
  76. 76 Turner M., J. Hartman and D. Bishop., 2007.
  77. 77 Sampson et al., 1997; Slee et al., 2006.
  78. 78 Smith, 2006.
  79. 79 Smith, 2004-a.
  80. 80 Sherman et al., 2002; Hastings et al., 2007.
  81. 81 Hastings et al., 2007.
  82. 82 Mihalic et al., 2001.
  83. 83 Ibid.
  84. 84 Welsh and Farrington, 2007a, 2007b; Farrington and Welsh, 2003; Sherman et al., 2002.
  85. 85 Welsh, 2007.
  86. 86 Greenwood, 2004.
  87. 87 Ibid.
  88. 88 Accordingly, primary prevention programs - those that address families and youth without considering the individual risks they face - were not included in the study.
  89. 89 To avoid redundancy, protective factors associated with families were not included in the tables, since essentially it is the same ones that constantly recur: improved parenting techniques, parent involvement in family life, positive family relations, reinforcement of family affection, family stability and the organization of family activities in which children and parents can participate together.
  90. 90 Kumpfer and Alvarado, 1998.
  91. 91 Explanation of program rating levels:
    1. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) - Model Programs Guide (MPG)
      • Exemplary: program with a high degree of fidelity that demonstrates robust empirical findings, a reputable conceptual framework and an evaluation design of the highest quality (experimental).
      • Effective: a program with sufficient fidelity that demonstrates adequate empirical findings, uses a sound conceptual framework and an evaluation design of high quality (quasi-experimental).
      • Promising: program demonstrates promising empirical findings, uses a reasonable conceptual framework but requires more thorough evaluation; the evaluation is based only on pre- and post-test measurements.
    2. II. Strengthening America's Families Project
      • Exemplary: program that has an evaluation of the highest quality, presents positive results and has been replicated several times.
      • Model: program that has been thoroughly evaluated but seldom replicated.
      • Promising: program that requires other research or uses non-experimental evaluation methods; results seem promising but need to be confirmed with more rigorous evaluation methods.
  92. 92 Farrington D. & B. Welsh. 1999. Delinquency Prevention Using Family-Based Interventions.
  93. 9393a93b93c93d93e93f OJJDP - Model Programs Guide. Available from: www.dsgonline.com
  94. 9494a Community Guide to Helping America's Youth. Available from: www.helpingamericasyouth.gov/
  95. 9595a95b95c Strengthening America's Families, Effective Family Programs for Prevention of Delinquency. Available from: www.strengtheningfamilies.org/
  96. 96 Krug et al., 2002.
  97. 9797a97b97c Mihalic, S. et al. 2001. Blueprints for Violence Prevention. US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
  98. 98 Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence. Blueprints for Violence Prevention, Available from: www.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints/
  99. 99 Guide to Effective Programs for Children and Youth. Available from: www.childtrends.org/Lifecourse/programs/TripleP-PositiveParentingProgram.htm
  100. 100 Burns and Goldman, 1999, OJJDP - MPG.
  101. 101 Elliott et al., 1998.
  102. 102 Henggeler, et al., 1997.
  103. 103 Promising Practices Network on Children, Families and Communities. Available from: www.promisingpractices.net/default.asp
  104. 104 Ed Frickson, Ramsey County, All Children Excel.
  105. 105 Reinhardt, 2007.
  106. 106 With regard to programs that operate to a limited extent (evaluation of results and methods), information currently available on these programs was not sufficient to provide explanations.
  107. 107 These are taken from the series of OJJDP bulletins: Effective Family Strengthening Interventions.
  108. 108 Kumpfer et al., 1998.
  109. 109 Ibid.
  110. 110 The feeling of belonging to the school community being considered an important protective factor against delinquency (Sprott et al., 2005).
Date modified: