buddy howell on gangs
DESCRIPTION
On Jan. 13, James C. (Buddy) Howell spoke at UCLA as part of "GANGS: Strategies to Break the Cycle of Violence," a 2010-2011 speaker series at the UCLA School of Public Affairs. The series addresses gang issues—both in Los Angeles and on a national scale—with special focus on current knowledge of gang operations, intervention strategies, effective support services and policy recommendations.Howell worked at the federal Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) in the U.S. Department of Justice for 21 years, mostly as director of research and program development. He was also director, National Institute of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and deputy administrator of OJJDP. He currently is senior research associate with the National Youth Gang Center in Tallahassee, Florida, and special advisor to the Life History Research Program at the University of Pittsburgh. He is an associate editor of the journal Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, and author of the book Juvenile Justice and Youth Violence (Sage), and lead editor of A Sourcebook: Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders (Sage). Some of his more than 70 published works have appeared in Crime & Delinquency, Criminology, the Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, and Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice. Dr. Howell is very active in helping States and localities reform their juvenile justice system and employ evidence-based programs, and in working with these entities in addressing youth gang problems in a balanced approach.TRANSCRIPT
1
James C. (Buddy) HowellNational Gang Center
UCLA School of Public AffairsJanuary 13, 2011
Gang Trends and Solutions
2
Topics:
Gang Activity Patterns, 1996-2009 Starter Gangs & Gang Joining Windows of Opportunity for Prevention The Moving To Opportunity Experiment Implications for Prevention and Intervention
3
National Youth Gang Survey (NYGS) 1996–2001 NYGS Sample (n=3,018)
Police departments serving cities with populations of 25,000 or more (n=1,216) Suburban county police and sheriffs’ departments (n=661) Randomly selected sample of police departments serving cities with populations
between 2,500 and 24,999 (n=398) Randomly selected sample of rural county police and sheriffs’ departments
(n=743) 2002–Current NYGS Sample (n=2,546)
Police departments serving cities with populations of 50,000 or more (n=622) – larger cities
Suburban county police and sheriffs’ departments (n=739) Randomly selected sample of police departments serving cities with populations
between 2,500 and 49,999 (n=693) – smaller cities Randomly selected sample of rural county police and sheriffs’ departments
(n=492)
4
5
6
7
8
Notes: Best fitting model includes six groups with quadratic polynomial functions (BIC = -1892.99)
10
11
12
Chicago Homicide Trends
13
Percent of Chicago Murder Victims of Street Gang Altercations versus Other Events
14
Number of Gang Homicides, LA County & CA, Hispanic Males Ages 10-24 (Tita & Abrahamse, 2010)
15
The Prevention EnterpriseStarter Gangs & Gang Joining
16
Starter Gangs The youngest gangs are formed by small groups of rejected, alienated, and
aggressive children (ages 10-13) The groups of children that form gangs are more likely to attend “difficult
schools” Children who also are alienated from parents are susceptible to delinquent
group formation and participation They begin to identify with each other and they may give themselves a
name They adopt elements of the gang culture, including distinctive clothing,
colors, rituals, regular gatherings, and exclude other children Regular group involvement in illegal activity is the next step Conflict with school officials or other authorities and commitment to a
criminal orientation give the group cohesion
17
Seven Steps to Gang Joining
In elementary school, children hear about gangs. Seeing these gangs at middle school validates them. At school, gangs and other groups have hangout areas. Intergroup conflicts increase in intensity and frequency. The most vulnerable children are alienated and vulnerable. To be isolated is to invite disaster. Casual gang associations occur; bonding begins An initiation (a “baptism”) into the gang; full commitment.
Source: Vigil (1993). “The established gang”
18
Windows of Opportunity
A g e 3
F a m i l y
A g e 6
S c h o o l
A g e 9
P e e r G r o u p
A g e 1 2
I n d i v i d u a lC h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
A g e 1 5
C o m m u n i t y
A g e 1 8
E l e m e n t a r yS c h o o lF a i l u r e
C o n d u c tP r o b l e m s
C h i l dD e l i n q u e n c y
G a n gM e m b e r
S e r i o u s a n dV i o l e n t
D e l i n q u e n c y
P r e v e n t i o n I n t e r v e n t i o n S u p p r e s s i o n
R i s k a n d P r o t e c t i v e F a c t o r s
Source: Howell 2003©
19
The Moving to Opportunity Experiment
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Moving to Opportunity for Fair Housing Demonstration (1995) Housing subsidies were offered to give families in high-
poverty areas, giving them a chance to move to lower-poverty neighborhoods;
As expected, women and girls in the experimental families cited a general sense of safety as their biggest gain.
These girls were less likely to use marijuana and to be arrested (violent & property crimes) than control group girls.
20
The Moving to Opportunity Experiment cont’d
Female experimental-group participants reported less harassment from men and boys to engage in sexual behavior, and, as a result, said they were less fearful.
But relocated boys seemed to have not benefited at all, and their behavior worsened in some respects: more behavior problems, more likely to smoke, more likely to be arrested for property crimes, and—perhaps most surprising—were no less likely to be arrested for violent crimes than their counterparts in the control group.
21
The Moving to Opportunity Experiment cont’d
Experimental group girls were able to benefit more from low-poverty neighborhoods than boys; with their mother’s protective support they negotiated peer interactions in pro-social school networks that facilitated acclimation into low-poverty neighborhoods.
Many of the boys maintained “risky ties” to old friends and relatives. In contrast, control group boys who remained behind seemed more adept at avoid neighborhood trouble in more familiar surroundings.
22
How to Build a Continuum of Prevention, Intervention, and Suppression Components
Prevention to reduce gang joining Intervention Teams to remove youths from gangs &
outreach work with at risk youths and gang members In collaboration with Intervention Teams,
Suppression Strategies that involve working with active gang members, and targeting older violent gang members and gangs with arrests and prosecution
23
Prevention Programs and Strategies That Target Risk Factors G.R.E.A.T. Students and G.R.E.A.T. Families (individual &
family) School suspensions: (individual & school) Chronic Truancy Initiative (school) Boys & Girls Clubs Street Smart (individual) Afterschool programs (individual, school & family) Parent & teacher gang awareness training (school & family) Tutoring (school)
24
Intervention Programs and Strategies That Target Risk FactorsFamily therapy and parent training (family & individual)Mentoring (individual, family, school, peer group)Santa Cruz Co. Juv. Hall Neutral Zone (individual, peers)Aggression Replacement Training (individual, peer group)Substance abuse treatment (individual)Mental health treatment (individual)Intervention Team (individual – case management)
25
Gang Programs that Demonstrated Evidence of EffectivenessPrevention:Gang Resistance Education and TrainingMontreal Preventive Treatment Program
Intervention:Aggression Replacement Training Operation New Hope Aggressive Behavioral Control ProgramCeasefire-Chicago
26
Gang Programs that Demonstrated Evidence of Effectiveness cont’dSuppression:Hardcore Gang Investigations Unit Tri-Agency Resource Gang Enforcement TeamOperation Ceasefire-Los Angeles
Comprehensive Model:Comprehensive Gang Prevention, Intervention & SuppressionModel
27
Comprehensive Gang Prevention, Intervention & Suppression Model
Key features of structure in effective implementations in Los Angeles, Chicago, and Richmond, VA
Program Structure: A multi-faceted, involving multi-layered interacting strategies of the steering committee, the lead agency, and an interagency street team (with outreach workers)
28
Comp Gang Model Program Resources Best Practices To Address Community Gang Problems:
OJJDP’s Comprehensive Gang Model (2010) A Guide to Assessing Your Community’s Youth Gang
Problem (2009) OJJDP’s Comprehensive Gang Model: Planning for
Implementation (2009)These pubs and other resources are available at the National Gang Center (www.nationalgangcenter.gov) OJJDP Strategic Planning Tool
29
Conclusions Seriousness of gang activity trumps prevalence. Stability of serious gang problems is reflected in gang
trajectories seen in the NYGS. Despite the recent crime and violence drop, gang
violence remains high in the U.S. Prevention and intervention can be successful if
evidence based practices and services are used. Several comprehensive anti-gang models are effective. Success with gangs and members does not come easy.