Planning youth violence prevention efforts: decision-making across community sectors

• Published in: Journal of adolescent health 2002-05, Vol.30 (5), p.346-354
• Main Authors: Lutenbacher, Melanie, Cooper, William O, Faccia, Kathleen
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adolescent Behavior - psychology; Adult; Biological and medical sciences; Collaboration; Collaborative prevention strategies; Community Development; Community Health Planning; Community Involvement; Cross-sector collaboration; Decision Making; Female; Focus Groups; Humans; Interprofessional Approach; Male; Medical sciences; Mental health; Middle Aged; Planning; Prevention; Prevention. Health policy. Planification; Preventive programmes; Problem Solving; Program Development; Program planning; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry; Psychopathology. Psychiatry; Residence Characteristics; Social psychiatry. Ethnopsychiatry; United States; USA; Violence; Violence - prevention & control; Young people; Youth; Youth violence; Youth violence prevention
• ISSN: 1054-139X; 1879-1972
• DOI: 10.1016/S1054-139X(02)00345-2

Purpose: To identify practical components of decision-making for youth violence prevention program planning and to identify differences in decision-making across various provider sectors of the community. Methods: Data were collected in seven focus groups ( n = 82) representing seven key sectors of the community involved in youth violence prevention activities (e.g., educators, law enforcement officers, and healthcare providers). Discussion was guided by a series of open-ended questions that we developed. Transcript-based content analysis using NVivo software identified common themes among and across sectors. Results: Similarities and differences in planning and selecting prevention efforts were found across sectors. Educators targeted behaviors that disrupt the school process, while other sectors focused on precursors and concurrent factors of violent behavior and the development of desirable behaviors. Public health and public policy participants underscored outcome measures, benchmarks, and a match between funding and effective programs as essential elements. Youth identified the need for respect from adults and the recognition of positive youth behaviors. All groups noted the lack of a systematic method of considering potential programs, the importance of youth and parental involvement in efforts, the lack of a scientific base for many programs, concerns about exposure to violence, and inappropriate role models in multiple environments. Conclusions: Healthcare providers often participate in the development of youth violence prevention programs. Understanding similarities and differences in focus among key sectors of the community is essential in developing coordinated interdisciplinary approaches.