Promoting Positive Development and Preventing Youth ...

PREPARED BYLarke Nahme Huang

Director of ResearchCenter for Child Health and Mental Health Policy

Georgetown UniversityWashington, DC

andD.J. Ida, Ph.D.

Executive DirectorNational Asian American Pacific Islander Mental Health Association

Denver, Colorado

A SOCIAL ECOLOGYPERSPECTIVE

Promoting PositiveDevelopment and Preventing

Youth Violence and High-Risk Behaviors in

ASIAN AMERICAN/PACIFIC

ISLANDER COMMUNITIES

PREPARED BYLarke Nahme Huang

Director of ResearchCenter for Child Health and Mental Health Policy

Georgetown UniversityWashington, DC

andD.J. Ida, Ph.D.

Executive DirectorNational Asian American Pacific Islander Mental Health Association

Denver, Colorado

SPRING 2004

A SOCIAL ECOLOGYPERSPECTIVE

Promoting PositiveDevelopment and Preventing

Youth Violence and High-Risk Behaviors in

ASIAN AMERICAN/PACIFIC

ISLANDER COMMUNITIES

Supported by Project order # 99M00606501D fromthe Center for Mental Health Services, Substance Abuseand Mental Health Administration in the U.S.Department of Health and Human Services.

This document reflects findings from the researchliterature, the AAPI work group and the authors. Itdoes not necessarily represent official policy orpositions of the funding sources.

Document Available from:Georgetown University Center for Child and Human Development3307 M Street, NW, Suite 401Washington, DC 20007(202) 687-5000(202) 687-1954 FaxAttention: Mary Moreland

Or

National Asian American/Pacific Islander Mental Health Association1215 19th Street, Suite ADenver, CO(303) 298-7910(303) 298-8081 FaxAlso available on the web at: www.naapimha.org

Notice of Non-DiscriminationIn accordance with the requirements of Title VI of the Civil RightsAct of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Section504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and implementing regulationspromulgated under each of these federal statutes, GeorgetownUniversity does not discriminate in its programs, activities, oremployment practices on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex,age, or disability. The statutes and regulations are supervised byRosemary Kilkenny, Special Assistant to the president for AffirmativeAction Programs. Her office is located in Room G-10, Darnall Hall,and her telephone number is 202/687-4798.

A Social Ecology Perspective III

Asian Americans and Pacific Islander Americans are a numerically small butrapidly growing segment of the United States population. They are anextremely diverse population in terms of ethnicity, language, socioeconomic

and educational status, level of acculturation and residency status. Some ethnic groupshave been in the U.S. for multiple generations, others are more recent immigrants andrefugees and part of newly emerging communities. The needs, challenges and strengthsof this population have been sorely overlooked by mainstream services andinstitutions and they have often sought help through alternative pathways, notnecessarily accessing existing services or supports. The needs of AAPI youth havesimilarly received little attention as they have been stereotypically depicted as eitheracademic “whiz kids” or dangerous “gang members.”

In this document we have tried to “fill in the blanks” about this youth population. Wehave attempted to provide a richer understanding of AAPI youth and families, thedevelopmental and social challenges they confront, the inherent strengths within theirculture and communities, and strategies to prevent violence and other high riskbehavior among this population.

We would like to recognize and graciously thank the many knowledgeable and helpfulpeople who made this project possible. First, at the Center for Mental Health Services,Ms Kana Enomoto and Dr. Tiffany Ho provided the vision and leadership for theAsian American and Pacific Islander Mental Health Summit in July 1999 that led tothe recommendation for this project. Mr. Michael English, the director of the Divisionof Knowledge Development and Systems Change and Dr. Anne Mathews-Younes,branch chief of the Special Programs Development Branch, provided the support and“home” for this project. Dr. Malcolm Gordon and Ms Shelly Hara, the projectofficers, gave steady support, guidance and patience, persevering with us through the“long haul.”

The wisdom of a talented working group was essential in helping to define the direction of the project and the importance of a public health and ecological approach. We especially learned from the community leaders who are doing the hard work of meeting the needs of youth and families in their communities, struggling with dauntingobstacles and often with limited financial and human resources. We heard from youthand families. They helped us study risk and protective frameworks and understand thegaps in these frameworks for AAPI youth. The working group reflected the diversityof the AAPI population, as described above, and included federal policy makers,directors of AAPI community-based organizations and national organizations,academic and applied researchers, AAPI ethnic family members and youth,practitioners and community evaluators. Their leadership and guidance was essential.

Acknowledgments

Promoting Positive Development and Preventing Youth Violence and High-Risk Behaviors in Asian American/Pacific Islander Communities

Acknowledgments

IV

As project director, I would like to thank my friend and colleague, Dr. D.J. Ida, for her deep knowledgeand unwavering and enduring commitment to AAPI youth and their families. Finally, I would like tothank my colleagues at Georgetown University Center for Child and Human Development. Ms. SybilGoldman encouraged me to pursue this project and Ms. Marva Benjamin, Dr. Michelle Woodbridge, Ms.Marisa Irvine, Ms. Yumi Lee and Ms. Girlyn Arganza gave invaluable support and assistance. Ms. KyleeBreedlove contributed her usual outstanding design and formatting talent. My colleagues areextraordinary people and I extend my sincere gratitude.

Larke Nahme HuangProject Director, Georgetown University

A Social Ecology Perspective V

Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................................................................iii

Youth Violence: A Community Problem and A Public Health Issue ................................................1

Scope of Youth Violence ............................................................................................................................................2

Asian American Pacific Islander Youth (AAPI) Involved in Violence: A Growing Concern ............................................................................................................5

Juvenile Offenses and Deportation for Foreign-born Asian Americans ........................................5

AAPI Youth Gangs ........................................................................................................................................................6

AAPI Demographic and Social Indicators ..............................................................................................................9

Social Ecology of Youth Development....................................................................................................................13

Positive Youth Development..................................................................................................................................13

Role of Culture in Contemporary Developmental Frameworks ........................................................15

Developmental Tasks and Adaptive Strategies for AAPI Youth ......................................................15Identity and Autonomy ................................................................................................................................15Negotiating Family Dynamics ..................................................................................................................16Biculturalism: An Adaptive Strategy ....................................................................................................16

Developmental Tasks and Adaptive Strategies for AAPI Families ..................................................17Socialization, Emotional Expression, and Kin-Keeping ............................................................17Family Extendedness: An Adaptive Strategy....................................................................................17Cultural Traditions and Worldview: An Adaptive Strategy ....................................................18

Risk and Protective Factors in Youth Development ..................................................................................21

Risk Factors ....................................................................................................................................................................21

AAPI-Specific Risk Factors ....................................................................................................................................22Acculturation Stress ........................................................................................................................................23Reconfigured Family Role Structure ....................................................................................................24Language Difficulties ......................................................................................................................................24Racism ....................................................................................................................................................................25AAPI Risk Factors in the Individual/Peer Domain ......................................................................25AAPI Risk Factors in the Family Domain ........................................................................................26AAPI Risk Factors in the School Domain..........................................................................................26AAPI Risk Factors in the Community Domain..............................................................................27

Protective Factors ........................................................................................................................................................28Social Development Research Group Model ..................................................................................29Forty Developmental Assets Model ......................................................................................................29Healthy Kids Resilience Assessment Model......................................................................................31AAPI Culture-Specific Protective Factors ..........................................................................................31

Table of Contents


Table of Contents

VI

Violence Prevention Strategies for AAPI Youth ............................................................................................33

Prevention Projects in the Individual/Peer Domain..................................................................................34

Social Skills Training ......................................................................................................................................34Assertiveness Training & Social Skill for Youth & Young Adults........................34The Teen Peer Advocate Program (TPAP) ..........................................................................35

Youth Mentoring Programs........................................................................................................................35Project Youth Connect: Asian Youth Mentorship Program......................................36

Prevention Projects in the Family Domain....................................................................................................36The Family Strengthening Program Grantees: Center for Substance Abuse Prevention ..............................................................................................37Strengthening Hawaii Families. Coalition for a Drug-Free Hawaii ..................................37Strengthening Intergenerational & Intercultural Ties in Immigrant Chinese American Families................................................................................37MELD......................................................................................................................................................................38

Prevention Projects in the School Domain ....................................................................................................38The Seattle Social Development Project..............................................................................................39School, Community, and Law Enforcement (SCALE) Project ..............................................40

Prevention Projects in the Community Domain ........................................................................................40

Community Collaborations........................................................................................................................40The East Dallas Community Police & Refugee Affairs Center ..............................42Lao PTA Youth Crime Prevention & Intervention Program ....................................42Southeast Asian Leadership Youth Program(SEAL) ......................................................43PACT: Policy, Action, Collaboration, & Training ..........................................................44

After School Programs ..................................................................................................................................44Asian American LEAD ....................................................................................................................44Southeast Asian Youth & Family Development ..............................................................45

Summary and Conclusions: What Have We Learned and What is Relevant to AAPI Populations? ................................................................................47

References ....................................................................................................................................................................................51

Appendix A: Directory of Violence Prevention Websites with Annotation ..............................59

Appendix B: AAPI Work Group ..................................................................................................................................67

Appendix C: Matrix of Nominated AAPI Youth Development and Violence Prevention Programs........................................................................69

A Social Ecology Perspective 1

Youth Violence: A CommunityProblem and A Public Health Issue

Youth violence is both a communityproblem and a public health issue. In 1997violence claimed the lives of more than

3,700 children under the age of 19, an average of10 deaths per day (Thornton, Craft, Dahlberg,Lynch, & Baer, 2000). In our society, violenceinvolving youth affects all communities. It is nolonger a problem confined to large cities andimpoverished communities; it is growing insuburban and rural communities, and across allsocioeconomic and ethnic/racial groups. While itaffects all communities, minority communities(communities of color) bear a disproportionateshare of death, disability, and violence-relatedsocial disintegration (Cohen & Lang, 1991).

The decade from 1983 to 1993 marked anepidemic of violence throughout the country. Ittook a tremendous toll on young people, theirfamilies and communities. Since the peak of thisepidemic, youth violence, as evidenced in arrestrecords, victimization data, and hospitalemergency room records, has declined. However,the problem has not resolved as reflected byanother indicator of violence—youth’s confidentialreports about their violent behavior. These reportsreveal no change since 1993 in the numbers ofyouth who have committed physically injuriousand potentially lethal behaviors. Arrests foraggravated assault have declined only slightly andin 1999 remained nearly 70 percent higher thanpre-epidemic levels (Brener et al., 1999).

Youth violence is recognized as a public healthconcern. It contributes significantly to morbidityand mortality, and exacts an enormous toll on thehealth and well-being of our society and its healthresource expenditures. A public health approachfocuses more on prevention than rehabilitation. Incontrast to a criminal offender or medical model,this approach looks at youth violence as a multi-

determined behavior, involving numerousantecedents and risk factors. No single etiologycan explain this phenomenon. Rather, acombination of social, cultural, environmental,and individual factors contribute to the incidenceof youth violence (American PsychologicalAssociation, 1993; Children’s Defense Fund,1999). Thus, this model calls for a practical, goal-oriented, community-based strategy for promotingand maintaining the health of a population.

The objective of this paper is to examine modelsof youth violence prevention and the applicabilityof these models to Asian American Pacific Islander(AAPI) youth and their communities. The increasein youth violence, the alarm stimulated by tragicschool-based acts of violence, and the attention ofthe U.S. Congress have resulted in theestablishment of numerous violence preventionprograms. While some of these programs andfederal initiatives have focused on ethnic minorityyouth, most have targeted African American orLatino communities (Wilson-Brewer & Jacklin,1991). Few programs have addressed AAPI youth.

The issue of culture in understanding youthviolence and violence prevention has received littleattention. While policy makers proclaim the needfor “culturally sensitive” programs—acknowledging that one must know Harlem todesign a program for Harlem; must know thebarrios of Texas to work there, must knowChinatown to work in Chinatown—thisperspective is not translated into the design ofprograms (Novello, 1991). Culture is an integraldeterminant of human and community behavior,and its effect on risk or protective factors in youthviolence must be examined (U.S.DHHS, 2001).Cultural factors inherent in AAPI communitiesmay impede, or enhance, the effectiveness ofexisting models of prevention.


Youth Violence: A Community Problem and A Public Health Issue

2

Overview. This paper presents backgroundstatistics on youth violence in general and in theAAPI community in particular. Unfortunately,limited data-collection efforts for AAPIcommunities have resulted in poor tracking ofAAPI youth involvement in violence. In theabsence of national statistics, data from severalstate studies are presented. A brief discussionfollows on development and resiliency for youthof color. Risk and protective frameworks forviolence prevention and examples of mainstreamand AAPI-specific programs are presented. Thepaper concludes with brief recommendations toaddress violence prevention for AAPI youth froma research, policy and program perspective. Thereare three appendices, which include an annotatedlist of websites focusing on youth violenceprevention and AAPI resources, a list of AAPIwork group members for this project, and amatrix of promising programs in AAPI youthdevelopment and violence prevention.

Scope of Youth ViolenceDuring the early to mid 1990’s, youth violenceescalated to epidemic proportions. A majority ofinterpersonal violence was accounted for by youthunder the age of 19. Fagan (1996) noted that since1985: (1) 15- to 19-year-old youths have producedthe highest rates of violent crime, (2) rates ofrobbery and aggravated assault have risensteadily; and (3) the percentage of weaponsinvolved in teen murders has increased from 50percent to 85 percent. The violent crime rateincreased overall by 51.5 percent from 1989 to1993; juveniles accounted for the largest increasein these crimes (Hughes & Hasbrouk, 1996). Therate of youth homicide was twice that of otherindustrialized nations (Howard, Flora, andGriffin, 1999).

Among youth, the rate of nonfatal violentvictimization (including assaults, robberies, andsexual assaults) was nearly three times that ofadults (Sickmund, Snyder, & Poe-Yamagata,1997). During a 1-year period, 39 percent ofyouths reported being in a physical fight and 4percent were treated for fight-related injuries

(Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,1996). Between 1986 and 1995, violent crimecommitted by youth under age 18, which includedmurder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault,rose 67 percent (United States Department ofJustice, 1996).

In spite of these grim statistics, the most recentreports, based on 1997 data, indicate that thejuvenile crime rate has dropped dramatically(Office of Juvenile Justice and DelinquencyPrevention, 1999a). In the mid-1980s, as juvenilecrime began to increase rapidly, many observersand policy makers warned of waves of youthviolence and “superpredators” as the youthpopulation grew (Zimring, 1998). Recent statisticsfor 1995-96 indicate a slight decrease in juvenilecrime, however, including a 9 percent decrease inthe juvenile violent crime arrest rate, a 14 percentreduction in the number of juveniles arrested formurder, an 8 percent reduction in the number ofjuveniles arrested for robbery; a 10 percentreduction in motor vehicle theft; and a 9 percentreduction in weapons-related arrests (Snyder,1997). These declines cannot be attributed tochanges in the youth population; the number ofyouth increased by 1 percent during this period.More likely the declines may be due to positiveand sustained community prevention initiatives(Children’s Defense Fund, 1999). In absoluteterms, however, juvenile violence and crimeremain unacceptably high (Office of JuvenileJustice and Delinquency Prevention, 1998).

Youth at-risk for violent or antisocial behavior arevulnerable to gang recruitment and membership.Gang membership is strongly associated with anincrease in violent behavior, either as victim orperpetrator. Youth gangs have become asignificant public policy issue largely due to thegrowth of gang violence and the proliferation ofyouth gangs throughout the United States,spreading beyond major large cities to smallercities and suburban and rural areas. The findingsfrom a National Youth Gang Survey estimated4,824 jurisdictions throughout the U.S. with activeyouth gangs. Within these jurisdictions were

A Social Ecology Perspective

Youth Violence: A Community Problem and A Public Health Issue

3

30,818 gangs and 846,428 active gang members(Office of Juvenile Justice and DelinquencyPrevention, 1999b). Gang membership isestimated to be on the increase, with the all-girlgang the fastest growing sector of gang culture(Acts Against Violence, 1995).

Most violence occurs in the youths’ communities,although a significant proportion happens inschools at all levels—elementary, junior high, andhigh school, or in the vicinity of schools. A recentnational survey of high school students estimatedthat 10 percent had carried a weapon on schoolproperty in the previous month; 8 percent ofstudents had been threatened or injured with aweapon; 16 percent had participated in a physicalfight; and 35 percent had property stolen or

deliberately damaged in the previous year. Fivepercent of students reported missing at least oneday of school in the previous month because offeeling unsafe in school (Centers for DiseaseControl, 1996). Another national survey ofsecondary school students found that 25 percenthad been a victim of violence at or around school,14 percent were “very worried” or “somewhatworried” about being physically attacked or hurtat school; 20 percent reported their desire tochange schools because of violence; and 25percent felt the school had not taken adequatesteps to prevent violence (Everett & Price, 1995).However, recent trends in violence-relatedbehaviors among high school students showdeclines in fighting and weapon-carrying (Breneret al., 1999.)

Asian American Pacific IslanderYouth Involved in Violence: A Growing Concern


Youth violence is a growing problem inAAPI communities. Arrest statisticspublished by the U.S. Department of

Justice (1990, 1992, 1996) indicate a steadyincrease in arrests for AAPI youth (18 and under)from 1987 to 1995, while arrests of those over 18years were stable in the population at large. Thetypes of offenses contributing to this increase werecrimes against families and children,embezzlement, gambling, robbery, curfewviolations, runaways, and sex offenses. In NewYork City from 1993 to 1996, the number ofAsian youths arrested for major criminal activitiesrose from 399 to 549, a 38 percent increase (NewYork Police Department, 1998). This was asignificant change, given that the city’s Asianpopulation increased only 23 percent and theoverall number of adolescents of all ethnic groupsin the city arrested for major felonies actuallydeclined during this period (New York PoliceDepartment, 1998).

A similar trend was noted in Seattle and thesurrounding King County area, where growingconcern about the increase in youth violence andgang activity involving AAPI youth led to theformation of an Asian Pacific Islander Task Forceon Youth. Findings from the task force(Asian/Pacific Islander Task Force, 1993) indicatedthat gang involvement, criminal activity, youthviolence, and educational problems are prevalentamong AAPI youth, particularly for Filipino,Samoan, and Southeast Asian youth. The criminaljustice system is also receiving more referrals ofAAPI youth. According to the King CountyDepartment of Youth Services, referrals of AAPIyouth have steadily increased each year, from 8 percent of the 1991 referrals to 10 percent in 1992,

and 13 percent in only the first half of 1993.AAPI youth are also increasingly at risk for schoolproblems. More AAPI youth are being suspendedor expelled, performing below grade level, anddropping out of school. Southeast Asian, Filipino,and Samoan middle- and high-school students arethe primary AAPI ethnic groups at risk(Asian/Pacific Islander Task Force, 1993).

An analysis of juvenile arrests in San Franciscoindicated that AAPI’s are underrepresented whencompared to other racial/ethnic populations. Theyare the largest populations but have one of thelowest rates. Disaggregating the data reveals adifferent pattern for particular ethnic groups. Forexample, Samoans and Southeast Asian have ahigher arrest and recidivism rate compared toother minority youth (Le et al., 2001).

Juvenile Offenses and Deportation for Foreign-born Asian AmericansThe need for early intervention and preventionprograms are of particular importance to foreignborn Asian Americans. Consequences for violentor delinquent behavior can be severe and mayresult in deportation if the juvenile is adjudicatedas an adult (Ida & Yang, 2002; Yang, 2002). Intwenty-three states, juveniles can be tried asadults. A major change in deportation laws since1996 rendered offenses that garnered only a oneyear sentence to be subject to deportation. This isa major shift from the laws prior to 1996 thatrequired a sentence of five years or more.

In April, 1996, the Anti-Terrorist and EffectiveDeath Penalty Act broadened the categories forwhat constitutes a deportable offense and in

Promoting Positive Development and Preventing Youth Violence and High-Risk Behaviors in Asian American/Pacific Islander Communities6

Asian American Pacific Islander Youth Involved in Violence: A Growing Concern

September of the same year, the IllegalImmigration Reform and ImmigrationResponsibility Act (IRAIRA) effectively removedthe ability of Immigration and NaturalizationServices (INS) to look at the merits of a case on anindividual basis (Coalition for Juvenile Justice,2004). While most Southeast Asian youth are nowAmerican born, there are a number of foreignborn youth who are currently serving lengthy jailsentences having been tried as adults. The U.S.government can deport any non-citizen to thecountry of origin with the exception of Vietnam,Laos and Cuba. This leaves individuals from thesecountries in legal limbo: the U.S. wants to deportthem, their country of origin will not accept them.In March 2002, the US government signed anagreement with Cambodia that allowsCambodians to be returned to Cambodia. In Juneof 2002, the first Cambodians were deported.Once deported, the likelihood of being reunitedwith family members in the U.S. is virtuallynonexistent. Some who have been deported arestrangers to their country of birth, having come tothe U.S. when they were children. For them, theconsequences are truly a life sentence.

AAPI Youth GangsDespite historically low levels of Asian youths’criminal involvement, recent trends suggestdramatically rising arrest levels for AAPI youth,primarily due to gang-related criminal activity (Leet al., 2001). In recent years, there has been aresurgence of attention to Asian youth gangactivities (Dao, 1992; Lee & Zhan, 1998). Gangsare defined as any denotable group of youngsters(and young adults) who are generally perceived asa distinct aggregation by others in theirneighborhood, recognize themselves as adenotable group, usually with a group name, andhave been involved in a number of delinquentincidents that generate a negative response fromthe community and/or law enforcement agencies(Klein, 1969). In New York City, youth gangactivities around Chinatown have been on the rise(Lee & Zhan, 1998). Vietnamese gang activities inNew York, California, and Texas were reported tobe increasingly dangerous because many members

grew up in post-war Vietnam and witnessed severeatrocities (Hays, 1990; Gross, 1991). It isestimated that AAPI youth constitute five to sixpercent of U.S. gang membership. The highestaverage proportion of AAPI gang members occursin western urban areas where they make up 11percent of the gang population. In other politicaljurisdictions they make up 2-6 percent of gangmembership, greater than their proportion ofthree percent in the overall population. A higheraverage proportion of Asian gang members werereported in large cities (7 percent) and suburbancounties (6 percent) than in small cities and ruralcounties (Office of Juvenile Justice andDelinquency Prevention, 1999).

In 1993, the Seattle Gang Unit identified 23 localAAPI gangs and 400 gang members (Asian/PacificIslander Task Force, 1993). About 200 AAPI gangmembers have spent time in detention. The KingCounty Gang Unit is also seeing more AAPI youthinvolved with gangs at the county level. It isestimated that King County has between 500 and800 active gang members, about half of who areAAPI youth.

According to the 1998 Report on Gang Activity ofthe California Department of Justice Bureau ofInvestigations, there are approximately 25,000Asian street gang members belonging primarily toVietnamese, Cambodian, Laotian and Hmonggangs, varying in size from 5 to 500 members.The average gang member ranges in age from 15to 30 years old. In the city of Westminster inOrange County, CA approximately 17 percent ofall juvenile delinquency and 48 percent of allAsian delinquency offenses involve Asian gangs(U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Juvenile JusticeDelinquency Prevention, 2000.)

Youth without adequate parental supervision andcommunication skills are at risk for ganginvolvement. This is seen often among SoutheastAsian refugees who experience severe economicand educational disadvantage, and more recentimmigrants from China, Hong Kong, and Taiwanwho are either brought to the U.S. by familymembers or are sent as unaccompanied minors.



Many of these youth are often frustrated in theirnew country, experience language difficulties, areforced to attend classes with younger students,perform poorly in school, and are taunted byyouths from other ethnic groups—and evenviewed with disdain by American-born or moreacculturated members of their own group(Cartledge & Feng, 1996). These youth facetremendous pressures related to social adjustmentand academic performance (Cowart & Cowart, 1993).

Some of these youth, forced to survive in a newcountry without adequate supports andsupervision, withdraw from school and join gangsas a means of belonging and socializing. In a studyof Chinese subculture and criminality, Chin (1990)found that Chinese gangs initially began in schoolswhere racial tensions were high and then movedbeyond the schools and into the community,engaging in more criminal behavior. These youthindulged in self-destructive behaviors, such asviolence and substance abuse, to cope with a senseof alienation. As parental authority erodes andconstraints against aggression become lesseffective, and confronted with highunemployment, impoverished conditions, poorhousing, and the stresses of acculturation, gangmembership becomes more appealing (Huang &Ying, 1998). Furthermore, as ethnic traditionsfade and restrictions are relaxed, AAPI youth,harboring feelings of alienation and poor self-concept, become vulnerable to problem behaviors.Similarly Toy (1992a) indicates that the history ofAsian youth gangs is profoundly linked withpatterns of immigration combined with Americansociety’s rejection of its new immigrants.

In a comprehensive study of Chinese youth gangs,Lee (1994) presents the argument that youth joingangs because they are out of options. Due totheir ethnic minority status, limited economicopportunities, and negative experiences withgovernment institutions, Asian youth perceive thatthey have no choice but to join gangs in order tosurvive in this society. Lee documented some ofthe distinctive features of Chinese youth gangs:

• They do not fit the traditional youth gangdefinition because many members are older,ranging in age from 14 to 34 years old.

• The usually discreet nature of Chinese gangsmakes their existence slow to be recognized bythe communities or law enforcement.

• These gangs are often connected to othercriminal organizations abroad and some arecontrolled by a few main tongs (crime families)in the Chinese organized crime network linkedto China or Hong Kong.

• Some Chinese youth gangs originate in Chinaand spread to the U.S. as part of theimmigration process.

• These gangs participate in violence and criminalactivities ranging from youth gangs toorganized-crime.

• The local, national, and international gangcircuits are enmeshed, such that a largerorganization will rotate its members amongdifferent cities in order to bring new faces andconfusion to law enforcement.

• The gang organizational structure is similar totraditional Chinese family structure in itshierarchical rigidity.

• Recruitment into gangs is coercive or linked to friendships.

Compared to established ethnic gangs, manyVietnamese or Chinese-Vietnamese gangs wereoriginally more fluid and difficult to monitor andcontrol (Ranard, 1991). These gangs were referredto as “nomad gangs,” “roving criminals,” and“hasty gangs.” They were highly mobile andloosely organized, traveling from city to city. Withno particular territory, group name, or permanentleader and they were often in a state of flux withnew members joining and dropping out. Thesegangs had a preference for quick-getaway crimessuch as car thefts, store robberies, and homeburglaries, and home invasions. A more recentstudy of Southeast Asian gangs suggests that thesegangs are less fluid now and share similarcharacteristics with more traditional gangs, suchas identifying names, gang insignia, and a definedsocial structure (Hunt, Joe, & Waldorf, 1997).



8

Vietnamese gangs tend to prey on their own ethnicgroups, using their shared cultural knowledge totarget the vulnerabilities of their victims (Ranard,1991). For example, knowing that manyVietnamese distrust banks, keep large amounts ofvaluables and cash at home, and are unwilling tocooperate with law enforcement for fear ofreprisal, these Vietnamese gangs target them forhome invasions involving armed gang membersholding family members hostage until theysurrender their valuables.

In the past two decades Hmong communities havegrown in size, primarily due to secondarymigrations after they were initially dispersedthroughout the U.S. Hmong gangs also haveemerged in these communities, with the gangsmanifesting some of the same social dynamics ofmountaineer Hmong villagers faced with anoutside threat (Westermeyer, Bouafuely-Kersey, &Her, 1997).

In a qualitative interview study with SoutheastAsian gang members in northern California, Huntand colleagues (1997) found that the developmentof gangs is often a protective mechanism createdby adolescents to deal with hostile situations. Therespondents reported that race and ethnicitybecame increasingly important and divisive as theymoved into their teen years, with heightenedphysical and verbal abuse from theircontemporaries who taunted them with racialstereotypes. These youth joined gangs forprotection and a place of refuge from strainedrelations with family, peers, and the community atlarge. Toy (1992b) found that racial and intra-racial tension, cultural barriers, family stress, andprolonged separation and diminished time andattachment to parents fuel the need to form socialties with other Asian youth sharing similar

experiences. Given these conditions, some youthjoin gangs, others select alternative peer groups.Toy (1992b) suggests that the need for protectionand personal security, and the ready presence ofgangs and growing up into gangs contribute togang membership; however, in his study, mostgang members joined as a result of their ownvictimization, being physically assaulted orbattered by individuals, other ethnic groups, orother Asian gangs.

Lee (1994) and Gibbs (1995) summarize some ofthe risk factors that promote gang involvement forethnic minority youth. Individual/peer factorsinclude ethnic minority status leading tocumulative experiences of racism and ensuingfrustration and anger, and a sense of alienationand isolation from the greater community. Familyfactors include intergenerational and interculturalconflict, lack of supervision and monitoring, andparents ill equipped to help youth adjust and copewith a new society and culture. School factorsinclude discriminatory practices, lack ofconnection between the youth and the school, andpoor academic performance. Community factorsinclude lack of preparation to help newcomeryouth adjust to the new culture. Based on anextensive focus group study of African Americanyouth gang members, Gibbs (1995) presents 10major functions provided by gangs: sense of groupidentity, surrogate family, enhanced social status,self-esteem, social structure, social activities,security, social support, source of income, andredirection of anger and aggression.

In constructing violence prevention programs forAAPI youth, it is imperative to understand thesocio-cultural risk factors for joining gangs andthe specific functions served by gang membershipfor AAPI youth.

AAPI Demographic and Social Indicators


Prior to focusing on the risk behaviors ofAAPI youth, it is important to start with anaccurate picture of who Asian American and

Pacific Islanders are. First, the AAPI population isthe fastest growing racial/ethnic population in theUnited States. In 2000, the AAPI population hadincreased to 11.9 million persons or about 4percent of the total U.S. population. This includesAsian alone or in combination with one or moreother races. Using Asian alone, there is a 48percent increase in the population between 1990and 2000. Based on Asian alone or incombination with other races, the increase from1990 to 2000 is 72 percent. In comparison, thetotal population of the U.S. grew by 13 percent inthe same decade (U.S. Census Bureau, 2002.) TheU.S. Census Bureau estimates that the AAPIpopulation will double again to more than 20million persons by the year 2020. The largestAsian ethnic groups and their percent growth ratesfrom 1990 to 2000 were Chinese with a growthrate of 48%, Filipino at 30%, Asian Indian at113%, and Vietnamese at 89%. The largestPacific Island groups are Native Hawaiian andSamoan. Six in ten AAPIs in the U.S. are foreign-born (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2002).

The projected rate of growth of the AAPIjuvenile population (under age 18) exceeds thatof any other group. The Census Bureau estimatesthat between 1995 and 2015, the number of AAPIjuveniles is expected to increase 74 percent,compared to 19 percent for African Americanjuveniles, 17 percent for American Indianjuveniles, 59 percent for Hispanic juveniles, and adecrease of 3 percent for white, non-Hispanicjuveniles (Office of Juvenile Justice andDelinquency Program, 1999). Resources forhealth, human service, education, and youthprograms have not kept up with the needsassociated with this growing population.

Relative to other population groups, the AAPIpopulation is young with an estimated median ageof 31. The age distributions are as follows:

Under 5 years: 7.8%Five to nine years: 7.3%10 to 14 years: 7.8%15 to 19 years: 8.6%

The AAPI population is an extremelyheterogeneous population. The 2000 Censuscategories included 25 Asian ethnic/national groups. Among these groups are distinct languages, dialects, and cultural customs and practices. Themajority of the AAPI population tends to beforeign-born, and, in some communities, such asNew York City, almost four out of five AAPIs areforeign-born. These immigrant families bringtraditions and beliefs from their home countriesthat often conflict with the values and practices ofmainstream U.S. society. The AAPI population hasmuch variability in generation status, with somegroups being well established over multiplegenerations and others representing more recentlyarrived, emerging groups.

Ogbu (1987) puts forth a theory of involuntaryand voluntary minority groups that may beframed as a potential risk factor or socialindicator for poor outcomes. East Asians,including many Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans,represent voluntary groups in that they emigratedto the U.S. by choice with the anticipation ofimproving their lives (Schneider & Lee, 1990). Incontrast, Southeast Asians (Laotians, Cambodians,and Vietnamese), more recent groups, came to theU.S. primarily as refugees and are considered aninvoluntary group (Dao, 1991). A criticaldistinction is that people who choose to emigrateare relatively more psychologically prepared,whereas refugees forced to leave their countriesare usually psychologically and economically



10

unprepared, and encounter more severeadjustment and survival problems (Dao, 1991;Cartledge & Feng, 1996). Insufficient languageskills, barriers of prejudice and racism, poverty,overwhelming uncertainty, and the loss of family,friends, community, country, and social, statusrender survival in a new country extremelydifficult (Rumbaut, 1985). Southeast Asianrefugee parents tended to be culturally andlinguistically less prepared to providepsychological, social, and academic assistance totheir children than voluntary immigrants fromEast Asia. While variability still exists within thesegroups, given the educational and economicdisadvantage of rural Vietnamese, Laotians, andCambodians, the high levels of traumaticexperiences, lack of preparation for resettlementin the U.S., high rates of post-traumatic stresssyndrome within families, and difficulties inacculturation, it is clear that a growing number ofSoutheast Asian American children are at risk fordropping out of school and engaging inmaladaptive behaviors (Dao, 1991).

While not a direct predictor of youth violence andother risk behaviors, poverty is a social indicatorassociated with increased risk of violence.Violence is most prevalent among the poor,regardless of race (APA, 1993). In 1997, thepoverty threshold for a family of four was$16,400. In 1997, juveniles under age 18accounted for 26 percent of the total U.S.population but 40 percent of all persons livingbelow the poverty level. The proportion ofchildren living in poverty varied by race andethnicity. In 1997, the proportion of AAPIjuveniles living in poverty was 20 percent,compared to 37 percent for African American andHispanic juveniles, and 16 percent for whitejuveniles. Between 1988 and 1997, the overallnumber of juveniles living in poverty increased by13 percent. However, the number of AAPI youthliving in poverty increased by 32 percent (Officeof Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,1999). In looking at this data, it is important todisaggregate within ethnic groups. For AAPI, thepercent of families living at the poverty level

varies from 6 percent for Filipinos to as high as 63percent for Hmong (Coalition for Asian AmericanChildren and Their Families, 1999).

The geographic distribution of the AAPIpopulation is uneven across the nation with nearly80 percent residing in 10 states, the largest beingCalifornia with 32 percent of the AAPIpopulation, New York, the second, with nearly 10percent, and Hawaii, the third, with nine percent.Geographic distribution has an impact on theavailability of resources and the design ofprograms. Resources tend to be clustered in areaswith high concentrations of AAPIs. Cities such asLos Angeles, San Francisco, Boston and New Yorkhave large, ethnic specific services, e.g. programsdesigned specifically for Koreans, Chinese orVietnamese. Areas such as Denver and Salt LakeCity tend to have multi-ethnic programs, oftenhaving one Vietnamese clinician for the entireVietnamese population, one Korean for theKoreans, etc.. There remains a large portion of thecountry that has no ethnic specific agencies andmust rely on individual ethnic service providers orinterpreters who are embedded in largercommunity based organizations or mental health centers. Providing services for Hawaii and the other Pacific Islanders is particularly challenging. The distance between islands is a major factor impedingthe ability to provide comprehensive services.

Common to most communities is the shortage ofresources available or targeted to AAPIpopulations. For example, a study of AsianAmericans in New York City begins to present amore complete picture of how this population isfaring. Here, as across the nation, AAPIs arefound on opposite sides of the spectrum. Commonmisconceptions characterize all AAPIs as affluentand highly educated. In reality, AAPIs areextremely variable on social indicators. In NewYork City, AAPIs, the fastest growing segment ofthe population, make up one tenth of the city’spopulation; however, health and human serviceshave failed to keep pace with the specificlinguistic, cultural, and geographical needs of thisgrowing population (Coalition for Asian AmericanChildren and Families, 1999).



11

In terms of social indicators, this study of AAPIsin New York found that 48 percent of AAPIchildren are born into poor or near poor families.In the city’s public high schools, one out of threeAAPI students does not graduate with his or herclass, and one of five students has limited Englishproficiency. Rates of depression are high, andsuicide is the third highest cause of death amongAAPI youth age 15-24. Arrests of AAPI youthhave increased far beyond increases in rates forother youth. The level of poverty among AAPINew Yorkers is obscured by statistics that do notreflect the bimodal incomes found in the diverseAsian community and typical Asian household.AAPIs tend to be concentrated on either end ofincome levels; thus income statistics based onaverages tend to conceal the many families livingin poverty and the many households that ofteninclude multiple wage earners. Per capita incomeis well below that of the white population andmuch closer to that of African Americans. WhileAAPIs are more likely to be employed than otherethnic groups, many work 10- to 12-hour days,six or seven days a week, in labor and serviceindustries where they barely earn minimum wage.Although more than one of six AAPI householdslive in poverty, only one third of those whoappear eligible actually receive public assistance(Coalition for Asian American Children and TheirFamilies, 1999).

AAPI New Yorkers are concentrated in ninecommunity districts that are mostly low tomoderate income. They live in the mostovercrowded housing of any broadly definedethnic or racial group in New York City, withnearly 20 percent of all Asian households in thecity considered overcrowded (Administration forChildren’s Services, 1998).

Substance abuse and involvement in criminalbehavior are closely connected. Alcohol is thedrug most frequently connected with violentbehavior. While AAPI youth as a group have lowrates of substance abuse, there are significantwithin group differences. Although AAPI youth’sabuse of prescription drugs is lowest of all theracial groups, it has more than tripled from 1999to 2000 (NCADI, 2002).

These demographic and social indicators must beaddressed when considering youth developmentand prevention programs for AAPI youth. TheAAPI youth’s educational and developmentalneeds are unique and compounded by the stress ofcultural adaptation, issues of poverty, andintergenerational and acculturation conflict.


Social Ecology of Youth Development

Understanding the process of youthdevelopment is essential to designingprevention programs. Various theories

have examined developmental outcomes, effectivepatterns of adaptation to the environment, and,more recently, development of competence andresilience in favorable and unfavorableenvironments. These approaches have evolvedfrom an exclusive focus on the individual’semotional/social functioning to a more socialecological focus on the youth in relevant, naturallyoccurring settings. This ecological orientationextends beyond individual behavior to encompassfunctional systems both within and betweensettings, and the complex interaction between thedeveloping person and the environment(Bronfenbrenner, 1979). This perspective examineshow the individual develops in interaction withthe immediate social environment and howaspects of the larger social context affect theindividual’s more immediate settings (Garbarino,1982). This framework spawned the concept ofpositive youth development, a key component incontemporary prevention science.

Positive Youth DevelopmentIn the 1990s, a number of key organizationsfocusing on youth—the Carnegie Corporation ofNew York (1995), the U.S. Department of Healthand Human Services (1996), the Consortium onthe School Based Promotion of Social Competence(1994), and the Office of Juvenile Justice andDelinquency Prevention (1995)—promoted apositive youth-development approach. Thisrepresented a paradigm shift in thinking aboutyouth and the prevention of youth problems.Rather than focusing on maladaptive behavior(e.g., academic failure, teen pregnancy, youthviolence, or substance abuse), this perspectivefocuses on positive social change and strategies

that promote positive youth development. Morethan a semantic shift, this change in thinking hasimplications for the way programs and policies aredeveloped, implemented, and evaluated. Focusingsolely on the elimination of problem behaviordoes not provide the adaptive skills required tohelp the person lead a productive life. Theindividual may know what not to do but is stillinadequately prepared to know what he/sheshould do. Most strategies that are used toprevent maladaptive behaviors are in factencouraging positive developmental skills (e.g.,social skills, communication skills, self-awareness,family and community commitment, etc.).

An exclusive focus on the problem detracts fromviewing youth in a holistic, integrated manner thatincludes problems, strengths, hopes, andaspirations. Historically, this approach is represented by theories emphasizing predetermined organismic bases of development, as in attachmenttheory (Bowlby, 1969), ethological theory (e.g.,Lorenz, 1965), behavioral genetics (e.g., Plomin,1986), psychoanalytic theory (e.g., S. Freud,1954), neo-psychoanalytic theory (e.g., A. Freud,1969; Erikson, 1968), or environmental,reductionistic and mechanistic bases of behaviorchange (e.g., Bijou & Baer, 1961; Gewirtz &Stingle, 1968). A few theories stressed theinteraction between organismic and environmentalsources of development (e.g., Piaget, 1950, 1970),but for the most part, there were two differentsources of development and the individual and theenvironment were seen as separate.

Current empirical work on human developmentuses more dynamic, systems models to understandthe trajectory of change across the life span(Lerner, 1998). This framework is relevant to thedevelopment of ethnic and racially diverse youth,in that it emphasizes the cultural factors in


Social Ecology of Youth Development

14

different ethnic communities and the impact onyouth development (Parker, Sussman, Crippens,Scholl & Elder, 1996). Previous developmentaltheory had minimal, if any, focus on ethnicminority children and the specific cultural factorsthat contribute to their development.

Thus, in contemporary theory, the essentialprocess of development involves changingrelations between the developing youth and his orher changing context (Lerner, 1998). The youth’sintra-individual characteristics (e.g., physiologicalstatus, cognition, personality, temperament, andethnicity) are connected to his or her behavioraland social context, functioning, and development.The inner and outer worlds of the youth are

dynamically interactive. The main focus is on therelations between individuals and their settings,rather than on understanding or changing solelythe individual or the context. In terms ofintervention, the emphasis would be on positivelyaltering the relations between youth and theirsettings, not just the youth or the setting. Forexample, understanding and striving for thehealthy development of youth may requireexamining the effects of maternal employment,parental illness, single parenting, temperamentalstyles, community-based youth programs, schoolstructure, neighborhood resources, peer groupnorms, and economic resources (CarnegieCorporation of New York, 1995; Lerner &Castellino, 1998).


Role of Culture in ContemporaryDevelopmental Frameworks

Contemporary developmental theory extendsbeyond the individual to encompassfunctional systems and diverse settings.

This approach represents a useful framework forunderstanding the development of culturallydiverse youth. By focusing on the interactionbetween the youth and the setting, positive youthdevelopment and ecological theories are poised totake into account the role of race, ethnicity, andculture (Harrison, Wilson, Pine, Chan, & Buriel, 1990).

AAPI youth and their families negotiate a differentset of developmental challenges and tasks. Thesechallenges give rise to adaptive strategies,socialization goals, and developmental outcomesfor these youth that may be distinct from youthbelonging to the dominant culture. Thesedevelopmental challenges are generated by culturaldifferences, which may lead to clashes in values,behaviors, and attitudes, and by “minority”status, which is potentially devaluing and stressproducing. As AAPI youth and their familiesnegotiate the usual developmental tasks, thecultural overlay and acculturation and generationstatus add complexity to these tasks.

The next section presents several examples ofdevelopmental tasks and challenges, and adaptivestrategies for AAPI youth and families andsupporting empirical literature. This informationis used to identify risk and protective factors inviolence-prevention models.

Developmental Tasks and Adaptive Strategies for AAPI YouthThe developmental progression for AAPI youth isnot dissimilar to other mainstream and culturallydiverse youth. However, the role of culture, the attributions associated with “minority” status, and

the level of acculturation of the family contributeto the increased complexity and challenges ofthese normative tasks. The methods of adaptationand mastery of these socio-developmentalchallenges are often culturally-based.

Identity and AutonomyIdentity development is a more complex task forculturally diverse youth. Commitment to an ethnicidentity is considered an important factorcontributing to positive adjustment, ego identity,and self-esteem among culturally diverseadolescents and young adults, especially thosefrom minority status groups in the U.S. (Phinney,1992; Phinney & Havira, 1992). AAPI families,peer groups, schools, and communities potentiallycontribute to this by teaching these youth aboutthe strengths of their cultural heritage. Rosenthaland Feldman (1992) suggest that a warm familyenvironment, consisting of explicit rules, control,and encouragement of autonomy, predicted ethnicpride but not ethnic knowledge. Ethnic behaviorand knowledge are expected to be influenced byspecific parent practices. Okano and Spilka (1972)highlight that parents actively serving as ethnicrole models for their second- or third-generationadolescents do not significantly account for ethnicidentification. This suggests that other entities,such as peer groups, teachers, religious groups, orcommunity groups, may play a significant role inpromoting healthy ethnic identity. Unfortunately,little research has examined the impact of theseinteractions on formation of ethnic identity(Serafica, 1990).

Empirical investigations of identity and self-concept formation among AAPI youth addressissues of morality, alienation, body image, socialrelationships, and group identity are dominant(Hall, 1995; Leong & Chou, 1994; Serafica,1990). AAPI youth rate high on issues of morality,


Role of Culture in Contemporary Developmental Frameworks

16

but lower on measures of social relationships,attitudes toward physical appearance, and groupidentity. The developmental task for AAPI youthis not merely to develop a sense of identity andassociated autonomy and competence, but to dothis within the context of maintaining closerelationships with the family. Available literatureindicates that AAPI parents tend to be more restrictive of their children’s independence in social activities and occupational choices (Yao, 1985) but foster early independence in the academic area (Lin & Fu, 1990) compared to Caucasian Americanparents. Differences related to acculturation also exist, with more acculturated Chinese and Japanese American parents less restrictive and moreencouraging of behavioral autonomy than theirless acculturated AAPI counterparts (Uba, 1994).

The empirical literature has documented largeremotional and communication gaps between AAPIadolescents and parents, compared to CaucasianAmerican youth, which seem to interfere with theprocess of identity and self-concept formation(Han, 1985; Nguyen and Williams, 1989). Theseintergenerational gaps are attributed to differentialacculturation rates and limited proficiency in theAsian language among the youth and limitedproficiency in English among the parents andolder generations (Yee, Huang & Lew, 1998; Uba,1994). In a study of Korean American adolescents,Han (1985) noted that these adolescents disclosedthe most to their same-sex peers in comparison toCaucasian American adolescents, who disclosedmore to their mothers.

The process of immigration or resettlement forAAPI youth may exacerbate normaldevelopmental struggles with identity, self-concept,and generation conflicts with parents (Ho, 1992).AAPI youth often encounter conflicting socialnorms between their ethnic communities andmainstream American society, whilesimultaneously vulnerable to changing socialnorms within their own families (Uba, 1994).They are actively exploring roles and behaviors ofthe American culture, redefining their values andself-concepts, and renegotiating social and familyroles and relationships (Huang, 1989; Ida 2002).

Negotiating Family DynamicsThe developmental task of forging an identity andacquiring a sense of autonomy is particularlychallenging in the context of Asian family normsof filial obedience and family interdependence,coupled with mainstream societal goals of verbalassertiveness, individualism, and independence(Nagata, 1989). Newer-generation parents,whether immigrants or refugees, commonly instilla desire for maintenance of language andtraditions in their children; however, due to theirown resettlement and adjustment stresses, theyconfront social, psychological, and economicobstacles that impede this objective. Adolescent-parent conflicts in these families are exacerbatedby disruption of roles and parent-child rolereversal (Ho, 1987; Uba, 1995; Ida, 2002, Lee,1997). Due to feelings of helplessness andfrustration, these parents often display a bimodalresponse, either increasing discipline in an attemptto restore traditional family roles or removingthemselves from the task of supervision andmonitoring. This internal and intergenerationalconflict might manifest in its extreme forms asyouth gang involvement, substance use, anddelinquency (Furuto & Murase, 1992).

Biculturalism: An Adaptive StrategyCulturally diverse groups in the U.S. go through aprocess of acculturation driven by thejuxtaposition of two or more autonomouscultures. For communities of color, this has beenproblematic because of the devaluing of theirethnic culture by the dominant culture. A strategyfor adapting to this cultural clash has been abicultural orientation. The bicultural person learnsto function optimally in more than one culturalcontext and to switch repertoires of behaviorappropriately and adaptively as indicated by thesituation (Laosa, 1977; Szapocznik & Kurtines,1980; Szapocznik & Kurtines, 1993; Huang,1994, Ida, 2002). Studies of this strategy haveindicated the dual existence of public and privatedomains of culturally diverse individuals andfamilies, and a bicultural adaptation that uniquelycombines aspects of the mainstream and ethniccultures. Acculturation may change the way



17

individual family members interact and presentthemselves to outside groups, but internal familydynamics remain mostly intact. Tamura (1994)indicated that Nisei (second generation Japaneseor the first generation born in the United States)may be more direct, aggressive, and individualisticin public or among Caucasian Americans, but verytraditional, group consensus-focused, and subtle incommunication style at home or among Japanesefriends. The behavior among AAPI individualsmay be determined by the context and contributeto a bicultural orientation. Gim-Chung (1994)notes that in most models of acculturation andethnic identity, biculturalism is the desiredadaptation. Biculturalism implies that theindividual is invested in one or more cultureswithout judging any one culture as superior.

Developmental Tasks andAdaptive Strategies for AAPI FamiliesCulture is a strong determinant of the structureand roles of families. For AAPI families, thecultural underpinning often determines the familytasks and functions and how these are to becarried out. The strategies for addressing thesefamily developmental tasks reflect the culture andgenerational status of the family.

Socialization, Emotional Expression, and Kin-KeepingSocial, emotional, and kin-keeping tasks arecritical functions of AAPI families. Thedevelopment of social skills and the fulfillment ofkin-keeping tasks for survival, maintenance, andsocialization of AAPI family members is adevelopmental task for these families throughoutthe life course. These “adaptive strategies” arecultural patterns—behaviors, not personalitydynamics—that promote survival and well-beingof the community, families, and individualmembers of the group and are passed down fromone generation to the next (DeVos, 1982;Harrison, Wilson, Pine, Chan, & Buriel, 1990).These strategies include family extendedness,biculturalism, and ancestral world views.

Family Extendedness: An Adaptive StrategyFamily extendedness is an adaptive strategy andtypical family structure in many culturally diversecommunities. For AAPI communities, theextended family is a problem-solving and stress-coping system that adapts and commits familyresources to normal developmental tasks and crisissituations. The family resources may encompasstangible contributions such as material support,income, child care, household assistance, andintangible help, such as expressive interaction,emotional support, counseling, instruction, andsocial regulation (Harrison, Wilson, Pine, Chan,& Buriel, 1990). This proximal contact provides a family with a sense of group and personal identities,behavioral rules, roles and responsibilities, andemotional affiliations and attachments(Gibson,1972; Gibbs & Huang, 1998).

The traditional AAPI family is characterized bywell-defined, unilaterally organized, hierarchical,and highly interdependent roles within a cohesivepatriarchal vertical structure. Prescribed roles andrelationships emphasize subordination andinterdependence, the virtue of filial piety and theavoidance of loss of face (Tseng, 1973; Lee,1997). The primary importance of the kinshiprelationship supersedes development of ties toother groups, organizations, or individuals. Familyinteraction patterns and socializing principlesconvey avoidance of personal confrontations toproduce smooth interpersonal relationships(Agbayani-Siewert & Revilla, 1995; Yee &Hennessey, 1982).

Pacific Islanders share many similar family valueswith Asian families; however, the manifestation ofthese values varies across Pacific Islander families.The Hawaiian extended family, central toHawaiian culture, is a matriarchal structure,which highly values and indulges their children. Itpromotes interdependence and increasedopportunities for children to exercise adult rolesas part of their family duties. Sibling cooperationand conflict avoidance with adults are encouragedas primary coping strategies (Gall more, Boggs, &



18

Jordan, 1974). All family socialization practicesreinforce the value of affiliations, and the mature,successful Hawaiian person is one who canaccurately perceive and attend to another person’sneeds without being asked (Shook, 1985). Theaffiliative nature of interpersonal relations is acentral theme in Hawaiian identity andsocialization (Ito, 1985).

In a study of the largest overseas community ofSamoans living in southern California, Shu (1985-86) found that the Samoan kinship system hasretained extended family features such astemporary financial and material support to newimmigrants from the homeland. Nearly 88 percentof the interviewees desired to have elderly relativeslive in the same household. Chain migration ofyoung relatives was very high, with 42 percent ofrespondents having kin in the same household.Kin provided living accommodations and helpedwith employment referral. The presence of kinwas a social support, but also increased financialand social stress for the Samoans because theyoften lacked the resources to help extended familywith economic and financial assistance, and nearlyone third of the respondents lived below thepoverty level (Janes, 1990).

A survey study of 490 second- and third-generation Japanese Americans in California from1979 to 1990 found a persistence of traditionalsocial relationships across the generations (Fujita& O’Brien, 1991). Involvement with Japanesevoluntary associations, such as tanomoshi(rotating credit associations) reinforced iemoto(cultural origin of the household). Thisreinforcement of the mutually dependenthierarchical relationships in the Japanesecommunity and family served to buffer againstassaults from the outside community andstrengthened ethnic solidarity and cultural values.

As an adaptive strategy, reliance on the extendedfamily has led to a greater sense ofinterdependence, a greater focus on group goals,and less emphasis on individuality and individualneeds. With increased acculturation, however, theextended family may be experienced as a strength

for some members, but as a restriction onautonomy for others.

Cultural Traditions and Worldview: An Adaptive StrategyMainstream American culture is dominated by thebelief in the importance of the individual, heraldedin the concept of “rugged individualism.” Thesocial order is predicated on encouragement andrecognition of individual achievements,accomplishments, and power with the emphasison self-fulfillment and self-development. Incontrast, the worldview of many communities ofcolor is one of collectivism. The fluidity ofboundaries between self- and non-self interests isbased on a more inclusive concept of the person asattached to families, households, communities,and the group (Hsu, 1981; Sampson, 1988).

The salience of this cultural worldview is reflectedin the spiritual, religious, and philosophicalorientations in contemporary ethnic communities.For AAPIs, the traditional cultural orientationsand values are deeply rooted in the doctrines andphilosophies of Buddhism, Confucianism, andTaoism, each offering a prescription for living thatemphasizes selected virtues and adherence tocodes of behavior. For example, in Confucianthought, harmony is the core of existence, and theindividual’s obligation is to sustain harmonywithin the social order (Chan, 1986; Sue & Sue,1990). Filial piety, modesty, and theinterconnectedness of the past, present, and futureare valued. Self-fulfillment and self-developmentare expressed through interpersonal relationshipsthat define and enhance a social group, againreflecting the focus on harmony in Confucianteachings (Yamamoto, Silva, Ferrari, & Nukariya,1997). In general, Asian worldviews emphasizeinterdependence, not only in relation tointegrating the family and the kinship clans, butalso in responding to the community. Thus, AAPIchildren learn early to be sensitive to the impact oftheir thoughts and actions on the group. Theybecome especially aware of the family group,followed by the school group and then work andcommunity groups.



19

Indebtedness and a sense of obligation play asignificant role in maintaining family solidarity,connectedness, and traditions through thegenerations. In a study of Japanese-Americankinship relations, Johnson (1977) concluded thatthe maintenance of kinship relations amongsecond- and third-generation Japanese Americanswas based on an obligatory system rather than onan optional one. Lifelong and ongoing exchangeof services, respect, care, advice and reciprocityincreased the social contact and connectednessamong these families. Children often felt anongoing sense of obligation and indebtedness totheir parents who, in turn, manifest a similarindebtedness to their own parents. Johnson (1977)noted that these values of interdependence,reciprocity and indebtedness were present threegenerations past the first American-borngeneration and served to strengthen these Japanesefamilies in Hawaii.

These cultural traditions and worldview arecritical strategies for AAPI youth and are oftenmaintained, although in modified form, remainingadaptive long after acculturation to Americanlifestyles has occurred. Particularly whenconfronted with racism, discrimination, anddenigrating portrayals of their ethnic group, thesefamilies and their youth have used their culturaltraditions and worldviews as an adaptive strategyfor pathways to achievement, a sense of personalworth, and overcoming societal barriers(Harrison, Wilson, Pine, Chan, & Buriel, 1990).

Understanding the particular developmentalchallenges and the adaptive strategies of AAPIyouth and their families has importantimplications for (1) identifying the vulnerabilitiesthat may contribute to youth involvement inviolence and (2) harnessing the cultural strengthsand adaptive strategies on which to buildprevention programs.


The concepts of risk and protection areessential to public health. A risk factor isanything that raises the probability that an

individual will suffer harm. A protective factor issomething that decreases the potentially injuriouseffect of a risk factor (USDHHS, 2001). Riskfactors predictive of violence are not static. Theirimpact changes depending on when they occur ina young person’s development. A risk factor for ayoung child will not necessarily put an adolescentat risk. For protective factors, there is moreambiguity of definition. Some view protectivefactors as the absence of risk. Others view itcompletely separate from risk. Protective factorsmay also buffer the effects of risk. What are thefactors that precipitate involvement in youthviolence? What are the risk factors and theprotective factors? Why is it that children andadolescents exposed to the same risk factors andenvironments have different developmentaltrajectories, with some engaging in problembehaviors such as substance abuse, delinquency,and violence, and others emerging with betteroutcomes? What is the role of ethnicity, race, and culture in determining these developmentaloutcomes?

Risk FactorsConsistent with a positive youth developmentframework, prevention researchers and plannershave moved toward a “comprehensive” approachfor working with youth (Catalano & Hawkins,1996; Dryfoos, 1994; National Academy ofSciences, 1999). Prevention experts expressdissatisfaction with the pathological, single-problem approach that narrowly focuses on theindividual and on preventing a specific problembehavior. As prevention scientists have remarked,young people who are not drug abusers, drop-

outs, or delinquents may be “problem free”, butstill lack skills, attitudes, and knowledge to beproductive, competent, contributing members ofthe family or community (Weissberg & Greenberg, 1997).

Prevention experts have identified longitudinalpredictors that increase or decrease the likelihoodof problem behaviors, including youth violence, infamilies, schools, peer groups, and neighborhoods,and within the individual. Factors that increasethe likelihood have been referred to as “riskfactors”; those that decrease the likelihood ofviolence are considered “protective factors.”Empirical support for these identified risk andprotective factors has been documented. Forexample, in terms of individual factors,constitutional factors resulting from head injuriesor exposure to toxins in utero or in earlychildhood, poor impulse control, early aggressivebehavior and early initiation of substance use havebeen identified as risk factors for problemdevelopment in adolescence (Hawkins, Catalano,& Miller, 1992; Werner & Smith, 1992; Rutter,1979). Family factors predictive of problembehavior include a family history of crime orsubstance abuse, poor family managementpractices and high levels of family conflict, andlack of a good relationship with a parent (Luthar& Zigler, 1991; Yoshikawa, 1994). In the schoolsetting, academic failure and low commitment toschool have been predictive of adolescentproblems (Maguin & Loeber, 1996). Communityrisk factors associated with youth problemsinclude the community laws and expectationsregarding substance abuse, violence and criminalbehavior and characteristics of the community andneighborhood environment, such as high levels ofcommunity disorganization and poverty(Sampson, Raudenbush & Earlys, 1997).

Risk and Protective Factors in Youth Development

In a review of evidenced-based studies on riskfactors for youth violence, Hawkins (1999), usinga social ecological framework, documented riskfactors in four domains—individual/peer, family,school, and community. These factors arepresented in Table 1.

AAPI-Specific Risk FactorsThe compilation of evidenced-based risk andprotective factors for youth represents a positivetrend toward understanding the multiple factorsthat may contribute to healthy or maladaptiveoutcomes for children. Given the high likelihoodof multiple risks occurring in a child’s life,prevention and intervention efforts will probablybe more effective if they target multiple risks foramelioration and boost multiple protective factors(Masten & Coatsworth, 1998). Unfortunately, fewof these efforts to identify risk and protectivefactors have examined the applicability andrelevance of these frameworks for Asian

American/Pacific Islander youth. Intuitively, itwould be expected that these risk factors havesome predictive value for AAPI youth. However,given the developmental challenges of culturallydiverse youth, are these factors the mostsignificant for AAPI youth? Should theamelioration of these factors be the focus ofprevention efforts in AAPI communities?

The assumption in the literature is that generalrisk factors for youth violence are applicableacross culturally diverse groups. However, inorder to obtain a complete picture of risk forAAPI youth, it is essential to include ethnic-specific risk factors in the general risk framework.Risk factors for AAPI youth are presented in Table2 using Hawkins’s four domains and highlightingfour risk factors that cut across all domains. Nosingle risk factor may result in negative youthbehaviors, but the literature suggests that theadditive influence of multiple risk factors increasesthe probability of problem behaviors, whetherviolence, substance abuse, teen pregnancy or otherrisk behaviors of adolescence.



22

Friends who engage in violenceEarly initiation of violent behaviorConstitutional factors

Family history of violent behaviorFamily management problemsFamily conflictFavorable parental attitudes toward &

involvement in violence

Early & persistent antisocial behaviorAcademic failure beginning in late

elementary schoolLack of commitment of school

Availability of drugsAvailability of firearmsCommunity laws and norms favorable

to drug use, firearms, and crimeMedia portrayals of violenceLow neighborhood attachment and

community disorganizationExtreme economic deprivation

Individual/PeerDomain

Family Domain

School Domain

CommunityDomain

TABLE 1: RISK FACTORS FOR YOUTH VIOLENCEDOMAIN RISK FACTOR

From J. D. Hawkins, Creating Safe Schools andCommunities (Social Development Research Group, 1999).

Acculturation stressReconfigured family role structureLanguage difficultiesRacism

Alienation and isolationDevalued ethnicityLack skills to negotiate different culture

Intercultural/intergenerational conflictLow adult supervisionIsolationLow socioeconomic status

Disconnection between family & schoolSchool system rejectionLimited cultural models and understandingPeer rejection

Unprepared for diverse culturesPoor home-community linkagesLack of cultural-specific institutions

All Domains

Individual/PeerDomain

Family Domain

School Domain

CommunityDomain

TABLE 2: PROPOSED ADDITIONAL RISK FACTORS FOR AAPI YOUTH

DOMAIN RISK FACTOR



23

Acculturation StressAcculturation refers to the degree to which theAAPI youth is socialized to the mainstream orhost culture and how this balances with theculture of family origin. In the family domain,tension and conflict exist due to varyingacculturation levels of family members (Yee,Huang, & Lew, 1998; Lee, 1997). For AAPIyouth, the meaning of being Asian American orbicultural is often associated with mixed valence.Although AAPI communities have resided in theUnited States for several generations, the majorityof the current AAPI population are foreign bornand still in the process of acculturating to the hostsociety. Varying degrees of acculturation in anAAPI family complicate the mastering ofdevelopmental challenges. For example, if theparents are monolingual Chinese, then thebilingual child’s entry into the school systemand associated tasks might be quite different fromthose of an English-speaking, third-generationChinese American family. The task of languageacquisition might be confounded by differentlanguage priorities within the family. Immigrantparents emphasize the native language, whereasmany AAPI youth prefer to speak in the languageof their peer group.

Several empirical studies have linked acculturationand delinquency. Only a few of these studies haveexamined this relationship within the AAPIpopulation, so extrapolation is done from studiesof other ethnic groups. In an observational studyof 21 AAPI youth, James, Kim, and Moore (1997)found that the transition to the Western culturedisrupted the family structure of these children,which in turn was related to the adolescents druguse. The adolescents who used drugs weredescribed as alienated and more nonconforming.

A study of Puerto Rican adolescent males, basedon 1,007 self-report questionnaires, found that theleast acculturated adolescents were more likely toreport using drugs, while the mid-acculturatedyouth were most likely to be involved withinterpersonal violence. Highly acculturated youthreported the least family involvement and the

highest peer involvement. When this highlyacculturated group was divided into immigrantand U.S. born, the former was found to be moreinvolved in interpersonal violence. Similarly, in thelow-acculturated group, the immigrants weremore likely to use drugs than the American-borngroup. In this study, regardless of acculturationlevel, immigrant groups were found to be more atrisk for delinquent behaviors.

A study of Cuban adolescents found that intergenerational acculturation differences between youth and their parents are associated with familydisruptions, which have subsequently been linkedto delinquent behaviors (Szapocznik, Scopetta, &Kurtines (1978). A study by Ascher (1985) ofSoutheast Asian parents and their children, foundthat the larger the gap in acculturation, the morelikely conflicts were to arise.

In a Cambodian sample of 29 adolescent andparent pairs, Lim, Go, and Levenson (1996) foundthat differences in acculturation were not relatedto delinquency. Rather, lower adolescentacculturation scores, single-parent households,and younger age of the adolescent at time of entryto the U.S. were all associated with delinquency.

In the family domain, risk factors associated withviolence involvement have not been empiricallydocumented. However, there is a growingliterature on risk factors for AAPI youthinvolvement in gangs that may be applicable toAAPI youth violence in general. These factorsinclude intercultural conflict, different rates ofacculturation leading to role reversals, lack ofparent supervision and monitoring, and lowersocioeconomic class (Lee, 1994; Kang & Saar,1996). A study of Filipino Americans, who areover-represented in Honolulu gangs, found thatthe parents of these youth had come from ruralareas in the Philippines and were currentlyworking two to three low-paying andnonprofessional jobs, which resulted in their longabsence from the home. Lacking the extendedfamily of their home culture, these youth return toempty homes after school and, for some, the gangbecomes the extended family that provides social



24

interaction, support, and a sense of belonging.While the main reason for joining gangs wasprotection from other gangs, boredom,deprivation of love and attention, poorperformance in school, truancy, lack ofrecreational activities, and problems at homecontributed to the allure of gang membership(Santos, 1997).

Reconfigured Family Role StructureUneven rates of acculturation and the languagefacility of youth as compared to adults leads to areversal of roles in some AAPI families. This altersfamily dynamics and often results in more powerand authority for the youth, and the gradualerosion of parental authority and responsibility(Asian/Pacific Islander Task Force, 1993, Huang,1998; Ida, 2002; Uba, 1995; Lee, 1997). This inturn contributes to family conflict, ineffectiveparental controls, and family confusion.Westermeyer, Bouafuely-Kersey, and Her (1997)note that family factors associated with Hmongyouth gangs are intergenerational conflict,separation of the generations during dailyactivities, and the apparent inability of someHmong parents to serve as role models for asuccessful lifestyle in the United States.

Kim, Kim, and Rue (1997) suggest that delinquentacts, substance abuse, and gang involvement resultfrom the underlying dynamics of intergenerationaltension, alienation between parents andadolescents, and identity conflicts. These dynamicsare not unique to recently immigrated adolescents,but are observed also in second- or third-generation Korean American adolescents.

Language DifficultiesCulture is based on communication. Verbal andnonverbal communication is a critical vehicle ofcultural transmission. The linguistic origins ofAsian languages are considerably diverse, and theymarkedly contrast with the English language. Thepsycholinguistic characteristics of these languages,that is, how they influence thought, and theirassociated verbal/nonverbal communicationpatterns reinforce traditional cultural values.

Consistent with the orientation toward situation-centeredness, role hierarchies, and the primacy ofthe group, Asian languages are very context-bound and role-delineated (Chan, 1998). Asiancultures are high-context cultures, in whichmeaningful information is either in the physicalcontext or internalized in the receiver of theinformation (Hall, 1976). The receiver must haveknowledge of subtle meanings, nonverbal cues,and affect in order to interpret the speaker’sintent. This contrasts notably with the low-context Eurocentric cultures in which informationis conveyed directly through the verbal code, andcommunication is more precise, explicit, andstraightforward (Chan, 1998).

With such marked contrasts in language structureand function, gaining English proficiency isespecially difficult for many AAPI refugees andimmigrants. Lack of English skills, however, placesthem at continued risk of marginality. LimitedEnglish speakers tend to suffer fromunemployment, poor housing, and limitededucational opportunities, and they face poorerprospects for socioeconomic improvement(Yamamoto, Silva, Ferrari, & Nukariya, 1997).

Language barriers remain a problem for manyAAPI populations. About 22 percent of AAPIsbetween 18 and 64 years of age cannotcommunicate in English. More than half of theelderly (53.5 percent of those aged 65 years andolder) cannot converse in English (Yoon andChien, 1995). And in San Francisco, 39 percent ofAAPI youth do not feel sufficiently comfortablewith English to succeed academically (Guillermo,1996). Data from the most recent census is beingdisaggregated and was not available at the time ofthis publication but according to data availablebased on the 1990 census, over two-thirds ofAAPIs with the exception of Japanese, Hawaiian& Guamanian speak a language other thanEnglish. Fifty-nine percent of Hmongs, 54 percentof Cambodians, 51 percent of Laotians, 42percent of Vietnamese, 35 percent of Koreans and34 percent of Chinese are in linguistically isolatedhouseholds. Linguistically isolated is defined as no



25

one over the age of fourteen in the house speaksEnglish very well. (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1990 Census, Social and Economic Characteristics)

It is common for children of all ages to serve asinterpreters for parents who are eithermonolingual or have limited English proficiency.While this can serve an important function byhelping parents communicate outside the family, itcan also have negative consequences for bothparties. Such role reversals may exacerbate analready tenuous situation where there has been ashift in status, placing the parents in a position ofless power and authority. It also places an undueburden on the youth to translate information thatmay be beyond his/her cognitive abilities. Inaddition, the young person may be asked totranslate information that is embarrassing ordeemed a secret by the family, therebyjeopardizing their position in the family. In otherinstances, critical information is not passed on,leaving the parents unaware of the emotional,behavioral, legal or academic problems of theirchildren. This results in missed courtappointments, lack of involvement of treatmentplans, limited interaction with the schools andoverall lack of involvement in critical aspects oftheir children’s lives. It is not a reflection ofdisinterested parents but rather a failure of thesystem to provide appropriate interpreters soparents can be equal partners in the upbringing oftheir children

RacismRacism, operationally defined as beliefs, attitudes,institutional arrangements, and acts that denigrateindividuals or groups because of phenotypiccharacteristics or ethnic group affiliation (Clark,Anderson, Clark, & Willliams, 1999), is an ever-present stressor and risk factor for AAPI youth.Attitudinal and structural or institutional racismcontribute to feelings of inadequacy and self-devaluing, frustration, and anger. Ethnic andracially diverse youth learn early that their ethnicidentity may not be respected in the larger societyand, in fact, may be the target of hostility,antagonism, or exclusion.

Racism is frequently identified by youth as acontributing factor for getting involved with gangsor other delinquent behavior (Ida, 2002). Thesedynamics impinge on the self-esteem and sense ofbelonging of the youth, often resulting in negativeself-image or group identity (Yamamoto, Silva,Ferrari, 1997). Barriers to educational andoccupational opportunities generate frustration incultural minority families, which in turncontributes to family conflict and stress. Clark,Anderson, and Williams (1999) recently put fortha biopsychosocial model for perceived racism(both intergroup and intragroup racism) amongAfrican Americans to investigate systematically thehealth and psychosocial effects of racism. Serafica(1990) and others have demonstrated thatperceived racism affects psychological well-beingamong ethnic minority groups.

Real or perceived prejudice and discrimination canisolate and discourage AAPI youth and theirfamilies from interacting with key institutions,other families, and other youth. Many of theSeattle youth interviewed by the API Task Force(1993) felt they were unfairly treated by schoolpersonnel, policy, security personnel, and thelarger community.

AAPI Risk Factors in the Individual/Peer DomainThe risk and resiliency literature and studies ofprecursors to youth violence involvement haveminimally included AAPI youth. Extrapolatingfrom studies of Asian youth gangs and violenceinvolvement of other ethnic minority groups,alienation and isolation due to cultural differencesis a proposed risk factor. This sense ofdisconnectedness is associated with maladaptivebehaviors, such as substance abuse anddelinquency, and membership in youth gangs. Asecond risk factor is devaluing one’s ethnicityarising from racism, prejudice, and discrimination.This leads to damaged self-confidence and lowself-esteem, which sets the foundation for anger,discontent, and violence (American PsychologicalAssociation, 1993), and internalized oppression.



26

For many AAPI youth, the social skills of theirhome/family culture and of the larger societalculture are not always congruent. Often these youth lack the skills to negotiate culturally different social systems. Given the emphasis on relation-based social order, AAPI youth often develop social behaviors that are socially dependent, authorityoriented, and self-inhibited. In certain situations,these are highly valued social skills. However, interms of social skills and problem behaviors,teachers indicated that their greatest concern forAAPI students was their low assertiveness andinternalizing (Feng & Cartledge, 1996). Theteachers were particularly concerned that thesebehaviors would lead to victimization, minimizetheir opportunities to attain personal or social goals, and result in further isolation and alienation.

AAPI Risk Factors in the Family DomainThe most significant family risk factors areintercultural/intergenerational conflict, lack ofparental supervision, sense of family isolation, andlow socioeconomic status. In the generalpopulation, lack of parental supervision is one ofthe strongest predictors of conduct problems anddelinquency (American Psychological Association,1993). In a study of urban minority youth, betterperceived parental monitoring practices weredirectly associated with less aggression (Griffin,Scheier, Botvin, Diaz, & Miller, 1999). Given thefrequency of parental absence from the home dueto long working hours and multiple jobs for bothparents, this is a risk factor for AAPI families.

Intergenerational/intercultural conflict may be apowerful risk factor for the development ofproblem behaviors, particularly in immigrantAAPI families (Ying, 1999). Migration is oftenmotivated by the desire to provide the childrenwith a better future. When these children begin toexpress dissenting views and make choicesinconsistent with their parents’ desires, immigrantparents feel betrayed and angry (Drachman, Kwon-Ahn, & Paulino, 1996; Ying & Chao, 1996).

AAPI youth report that family relationships areunder stress. Conflicts between the expectations

and values of traditional AAPI cultures andAmerican culture occur constantly. Youth in theSeattle study (Asian/Pacific Islander Task Force,1993) as well as the NAAPIMHA Best PracticesConference (2003) listed discipline, dating, familyresponsibilities, police relations, and the role ofschools as regular topics of disagreement. Thesecontinual clashes make it difficult for AAPIparents to be supportive and consistentlynurturing of their children (Asian/Pacific IslanderTask Force, 1993).

Due to language and cultural and socioeconomicbarriers, AAPI families may be isolated from thelarger society. These families often remaindisconnected from mainstream institutions such asschools, businesses, and social services. When thisisolation extends to ethnic-focused organizations,such as religious or community organizations orlanguage schools, the family lacks social supportand resources to assist the youth in positivelynegotiating the larger society.

An American Psychological Association study(1993) suggests that poverty and its contextual lifecircumstances are major determinants of violence.Violence is most prevalent among theeconomically disadvantaged. Rates of poverty arehigh in communities of color. Twenty percent ofAAPI children grow up in poverty (Office ofJuvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,1999). The socioeconomic inequality of the poor,the overwhelming sense of relative deprivation,and the lack of opportunity to change these lifecircumstances facilitate higher rates of violence(American Psychological Association, 1993).

AAPI Risk Factors in the School DomainA significant risk factor is disconnection betweenfamily and school. Among adolescents, higherlevels of school connectedness were associatedwith lower levels of violence. Strong parent-schoolcollaboration is associated with better schooloutcomes for students (Carnegie Council onAdolescent Development, 1989; Haynes & Comer,1993). For AAPI families, both recent arrivals andlater generations, the link between home and



27

school is often tenuous or nonexistent. AAPIimmigrants often have differing culturalexpectations of school, based on educationaltraditions in their homelands. Teachers mayrepresent the ultimate authority, and thereforeparents have learned not to be involved. Forrefugees from rural, underdeveloped countries,there may have been a lack of schooling andexperience with schools. Limited Englishproficiency may impede involvement with theschool. Immigrant families working heavyschedules in order to make ends meet may havelimited time for school contact. Some immigrantsmay fear involvement with mainstreaminstitutions due to wariness about their immigrantstatus. And traditional school vehicles forpromoting parental involvement (such as PTAs,Back-to-School nights, etc.) may feel bewilderingand unwelcoming to AAPI families (Huang &Gibbs, 1992).

This disconnect between family and school mayextend to the youth’s experience in the school aswell. Many schools are unprepared to welcomeand integrate culturally different students. AAPIstudents may experience these schools asunresponsive and lacking opportunities forattachment. Schools establish their own sense ofculture, their patterns of functioning internally,and their implicit rules for engaging the externalcommunity. Often, little accommodation is madefor students who cannot decipher these rules orunderstand the culture. These students mayexperience a sense of system rejection anddetachment. They fail to attach to faculty, peers,or other aspects of the school. For AAPI youth inmainstream schools, there are few role models andusually limited ethnic-cultural content in thecurriculum or day-to-day operations of the school.A longitudinal, nationwide study of adolescentsfound two key ingredients in successful youth: aconnection with a parent in the home and ameaningful connection with a teacher in theschool (Hallowell, 1999). Successful and resilientstudents growing up in unfavorable andimpoverished environments can identify a teacheror other school staff as a mentor or role model.

Unfortunately, large urban schools are oftenanonymous and alienating. The inability ofteachers and school staff to establish meaningfulconnections with students has become a key safetyissue (Ascher, 1994). Furthermore, schools thatare insensitive to diverse cultures fail to besupportive environments (Dwyer, 1999).

Peer rejection has been associated with ganginvolvement. Conflict between AAPI and otheryouth may arise due to differences in race,ethnicity, religion, language or other sources ofdifference. Rejection occurs in both directionsleading to racial tension among groups. Theunwillingness to accept another other groupfrequently results in turf battles, whether in schoolor in the community. To gain acceptance in a peergroup, AAPI youth may become involved in agang or demonstrate other problem behaviors.AAPI youth must cope with racial/ethnicstereotyping and anti-immigrant attitudes. Theseyouth are often told to “go back to your owncountry,” which suggest that he or she will neverbe fully accepted as American, regardless ofcountry of birth (Coalition for Asian AmericanChildren and Families, 1999). This peer rejectioncontributes to a sense of alienation and rejection.

AAPI Risk Factors in the Community DomainThe inability of the larger society to effectivelyintegrate diverse populations into the communityis seen as a proposed risk factor. Communitiesthat remain closed to these diverse populations areat risk for not being able to provide theappropriate support systems nor interventionstrategies to promote positive outcomes for at riskAAPI youth. They lack an understanding ofeffective outreach, engagement of newpopulations, awareness of need, andunderstanding of different patterns of service andresource utilization. Conversely, AAPI youth andfamilies thrust into a new or unfamiliarenvironment often are unable to comprehend thevalues, regulations, cultural practices,bureaucracies, and institutions that exist in thecommunity. Misunderstandings, conflicts, and



28

cultural clashes may arise, creating more barriers(Kellogg Foundation, 1998; National CrimePrevention Council, 1999).

Sociopolitical as well as cultural barriers alsocontribute to this risk factor. Anti-immigrantsentiment is persistent and sociopolitical responsesin communities are growing, especially in states such as California that receive a significant number of Asian immigrants and refugees. Communities arenot prepared or are unwilling to provide assistance (Toy, 1992a). Employment, housing, social services, and educational services often are lacking. Many of these newcomer groups live in povertywith few economic or social service supports.

Poor linkages between home and community placefamilies and communities at-risk for disruptiveand violent behavior. Fragmented services, lack ofconsistent support, and investment in youth at thecommunity level contribute to problem behaviors(Kellogg Foundation, 1998). Community agenciesoften lack the cultural competence to engageculturally diverse families. They are unaware ofacceptable entry points to AAPI communities.Specific knowledge of certain formal and informalcommunication networks, and established socialrelationships within various AAPI communitiesplay a role in determining how a family willinitially engage with outside services, agencies, orcommunity members. In some communities, suchas the Hmong, identified community leadersusually are consulted in matters involving externalresources. Their counsel, approval, andrecommendations are sought first (Chan, 1998).Thus, indigenous intermediaries who havecredibility within the family or ethnic communitymay be critical for building linkages betweenhome and community.

Many Asian immigrants and refugees entercommunities in the U.S. that lack ethnic andcultural-specific institutions. Consequently, theseindividuals and families lack a sense of “place” orbelonging. The youth lack a place where they havea sense of physical and psychological “safety” andthat provides opportunities for positiveengagement and activities.

AAPI immigrants and refugees often originatefrom countries where the community or the“village” was actively involved in raising thechildren. Established cultural institutions fosteredmeaningful affiliations and traditions for multiplegenerations within families. Migrant AAPI familiesoften lack a sense of cultural identification and thereassurance of their cultural traditions and beliefs.Over time, these transplanted communities workto establish faith-based institutions, languageschools, cultural centers, and other venues tosupport their cultural attachments, traditions, andpractices and a new sense of place and belonging.A study of Vietnamese ethnicity and substanceabuse shows that involvement of youth in theirethnic community has a strong negativecorrelation with drug and alcohol abuse throughlessening the probability that the youth wouldhave substance-abusing friends (Bankston, 1995).

Protective FactorsFor at-risk youth, protective factors decrease thelikelihood of problem behaviors (Catalano,Hawkins, Berglund, Pollard, & Arthur, 1998).Studies that have documented a relationshipbetween risk exposure and problem behaviors alsohave provided evidence of protective factors(Luthar & Zigler, 1991). These studies identify thequalities of the individual or the environment thatare associated with competence or betterpsychosocial functioning following adverseexperiences or circumstance (Masten &Coatsworth, 1998).

Studies of children at risk prompted studies onresilience, seeking to understand why some youthexposed to multiple risk factors managed to avoid negative outcomes (Garmezy, 1985; Werner, 1994). Sources of resilience are identified in the strengthsthat individuals, families, schools, faith-basedleaders and organizations, and communities drawupon to promote healthy outcomes and positivefunctioning (Davis, 1999). Protective factors mightcontribute to resilience either by exerting positiveeffects in direct opposition to the negative effectsof risk factors or by buffering individuals againstthe negative impact of risk factors.

Three clusters of protective factors consistentlyhave been recognized as favoring resilience inyouth: (1) personal predispositions in the child(activity level, social responsiveness, autonomy ininfancy and early childhood; (2) a familyenvironment characterized by cohesion, closeness,and support; and (3) the presence of extrafamilialsources of support, including identification modelsor mentors (Masten & Garmezy, 1985).

Several empirically supported frameworkselaborating on these clusters of protective factorshave been developed. Three frameworks areoutlined here: Social Development ResearchGroup Protective Factors (Hawkins, 1999), SearchInstitute’s Forty Developmental Assets (SearchInstitute, 1997), and Healthy Kids ResilienceAssessment (WestEd, 1999).

Social Development Research Group ModelBased on a decade of research, Hawkins,Catalano, and Miller (1992) use a socialdevelopment strategy in risk-focused prevention.This approach is based on a simple premise: Toprevent problems, it is critical to identify factorsthat increase the risk of that problem occurring,and then find strategies to reduce the risks in waysthat enhance the protective or resiliency factors.They identified risk/protective factors associatedwith five domains of an individual’s life in: family,school, community, peer group and individual.(see Table 3.) Understanding these factors iscritical to developing effective means ofprevention and increasing protection throughoutthe course of youth development.

This framework is the basis for prevention effortsaddressing antisocial behaviors from birth throughadolescence and has generated the CommunitiesThat Care Project (Developmental ResearchPrograms, 1993). This project organizes what hasbeen learned about prevention strategies into acomprehensive, operationalized approach forcommunities, requiring broad vision and manyparticipants. In addition, using strategies thataddress risk factors and enhance protectivefactors, program developers have designed

modules to prevent school failure, drug use, anddelinquency among a wide group of populations.Several of these programs, Preparing for the DrugFree Years and The Incredible Years: Parents,Teachers & Children Training Series, have beenrecognized as exemplary, evidenced-based familystrengthening programs by the Center forSubstance Abuse Prevention and the Office ofJuvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Forty Developmental Assets ModelA second framework focusing on protectivefactors is the Forty Developmental Assets Modeldeveloped by the Search Institute. Based onextensive research, experience, ongoingexamination of the youth development literature,focus groups with youth, and interviews withpractitioners and other experts, the SearchInstitute attempted to identify the essentialbuilding blocks and benchmarks for positiveadolescent development. This formed a strengths-based approach to healthy development.

In 1989, the Search Institute conducted a surveyof 254,000 students in the sixth to twelfth grades.The survey, entitled “The Search Institute Profilesof Student Life: Attitudes and Behavior,” was re-administered in 1996-97 to another 99,462middle-school and high-school students. This



29

Protective FactorPositive social orientationHigh intelligenceSocial/emotional competenciesResilient temperamentGender

Bonding: warm affective relationshipHealthy beliefs and clear standards

for behaviorPro-social opportunities for involvementReinforcement for pro-social involvementCognitive, social, and emotional

competencies and skills

IndividualCharacteristics

Family, School,Peer Group &CommunityEnvironment

TABLE 3: THE SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT RESEARCHGROUP: PROTECTIVE FACTORS

DOMAIN PROTECTIVE FACTOR

From J. D. Hawkins, Creating Safe Schools andCommunities (Social Development Research Group, 1999).



30

second survey encompassed 213 U.S. communitiesin 26 states, with an overrepresentation of whiteyouth from smaller cities and towns. From thesesurveys, resilience and protective factors,categorized as external and internal assets, wereidentified and an assessment tool for schools wasdeveloped (Search Institute, 1997). External assetsfocus on positive experiences that youth receivefrom people and institutions in their lives. Asshown in Table 4, there are four categories of external assets: support, empowerment, boundaries and expectations, and constructive use of time. Internal assets refer to the internalized qualities that guide choices and create a feeling of purpose, focus, and centeredness. Four categories of internalassets include commitment to learning, positivevalues, social competence, and positive identity.

The Search Institute acknowledges that factorssuch as family dynamics, school effectiveness, peerinfluences, support from community adults, valuesdevelopment, and social skills all contribute tohealthy development. Unfortunately, thesedifferent areas of study and intervention typicallyare disconnected from one another. TheDevelopmental Assets approach attempts to pullthese pieces together into a comprehensive visionof what youth need to thrive.

Studies of this model demonstrate its applicabilityto racial/ethnic youth populations. All groupsbenefit similarly from having more of the 40developmental assets, regardless of theirsocioeconomic status. However the importance ofparticular categories of assets varies byrace/ethnicity. This suggests that thedevelopmental assets do not work in the sameways for all youth. For example, the category“constructive use of time” was more stronglycorrelated with school success for AmericanIndian and Asian American youth than for others.African American and Hispanic youth were morelikely than white adults to view adult engagementin the lives of their children outside of theirimmediate family as very important (Sesma andRoehlkepartain, 2003).

Support

Empowerment

Boundaries andExpectations

Constructive useof time

Commitment tolearning

Positive values

Socialcompetencies

Positive identity

• Family support• Positive family communication• Other adult relationships• Caring neighborhood• Caring school climate• Parent involvement in schooling

• Community values youth• Youth as resources• Service to others• Safety

• Family boundaries• School boundaries• Neighborhood boundaries• Adult role modes• Positive peer influence• High expectations

• Creative activities• Youth programs• Religious community• Time at home

• Achievement to learning• School Engagement• Homework• Bonding to school• Reading for pleasure

• Caring• Equality and social justice• Integrity• Honesty• Responsibility• Restraint

• Planning and decision-making• Interpersonal competence• Cultural competence• Resistance skills• Peaceful conflict resolution

• Personal power• Self-esteem• Sense of purpose• Positive view of personal future

ExternalAssets

InternalAssets

TABLE 4: FORTY DEVELOPMENTAL ASSEST MODEL



31

Healthy Kids Resilience Assessment ModelA third framework, the Healthy Kids Resilience Assessment model, consists of six clusters containing21 assets most consistently identified by researchers to be associated with health-risk behaviorprotection and positive youth development. Thisframework distinguishes between two types ofassets: (1) protective factors, often consideredexternal assets, and (2) resilience traits, alsoreferred to as internal assets (WestEd, 1999).

This module is intended to serve as a tool for local and state educational agencies, primarily to be used in California secondary schools to assess and better understand a variety of external and internalresilience constructs associated with positive youthdevelopment. It enables the collection of local andstatewide youth support and resilience data foruse in needs assessment, program planning,program evaluation, and research (Constantineand Berard, 2001). See Table 5.

AAPI Culture-Specific Protective FactorsThe frameworks presented above have not beenempirically-tested on AAPI youth andcommunities. While intuitively it would beexpected that many of the assets or protectivefactors enumerated in the three frameworks wouldbe applicable to AAPI youth, there may bespecific, culturally-based assets that should beexamined for their protective qualities and sourceof resilience.

It has been suggested that one’s culture is a sourceof strength and a possible protective factor forculturally diverse youth (Johnson-Powell,Yamamoto, Wyatt, & Arroyo, 1997). Revisitingthe adaptive strategies presented in an earliersection on the developmental challenges andadaptive strategies for AAPI youth, it is proposedthat these strategies—biculturalism, familyextendedness, and cultural traditions andworldviews—are additional protective factors forAAPI youth that must be incorporated intoprotective factor frameworks (Harrison, Wilson,Pine, Chan, & Buriel, 1990). See Table 6.

From California Healthy Kids Survey: Healthy KidsResilience Assessment, 1999.

Caring relationships with…• Adults in the home• Adults in the school• Adults in the neighborhood• Adults in the community• Peers

High expectations from…• Adults in the home• Adults in the school• Adults in the

neighborhood/community• Pro-social peers

Meaningful participation in…• The home• The school• The community

Caring relationships: Presenceof others in the youth’s lifewho model and supporthealthy development and learning

High expectations: Consistentcommunication of both formal and informal messages that theyouth can and will succeed

Meaningful participation:Involvement of the youth inrelevant, engaging andresponsible activities withopportunities forresponsibility and contribution

TABLE 5: HEALTHY KIDS RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT MODEL

CLUSTER

Protective Factors: Supports and Opportunities(External Assets)

ASSETS

• Cooperation andcommunication skills

• Empathy• Problem-solving skills

• Personal conviction (strong sense of right and wrong andstanding up for those beliefs

• Self-efficacy (belief in one’sown competence)

• Self-awareness (knowing andunderstanding one’s self)

• Optimism• Goals and aspirations• Achievement motivation

Social competence: Ability to communicate effectivelyand demonstrate caring,flexibility, and responsivenessin social situations

Autonomy and sense of self:Sense of personal identity and power

Sense of meaning andpurpose: Knowing that one’slife has coherence and makesa difference

CLUSTER ASSETS

Resilience Traits: Positive Developmental Outcomes(Internal Assets)



32

Ability to negotiate successfully two ormore distinct cultures, valuing variousaspects of each culture, andexperiencing positive outcomes and asense of coherence

Use of multiple family members or kinfor various functions (e.g., social,psychological, economic support;provision of regulatory guidance andsupervision; transmission of culturalvalues, etc.)

Cultural traditions and worldviewsreflect the values, beliefs, and culturalpractices of the group. For AAPIs, thiswould include principles of filial piety,harmony, interdependence,collectivism, saving face, indebtednessand sense of obligation, etc.

Biculturalism

FamilyExtendedness

Cultural Traditionsand Worldviews

TABLE 6: PROPOSED ADDITIONAL PROTECTIVEFACTORS FOR AAPI YOUTH

DESCRIPTIONPROTECTIVE FACTOR


Apositive youth development approachembedded in social ecology and publichealth frameworks places a greater

emphasis on positive outcomes for youth, ondevelopmentally based strategies, and on the roleof families and communities. Current prevention scientists call for a broad focus in preventionefforts, recognizing that problem behaviors, whether substance abuse, delinquency, school drop-out, or violence, often co-occur and share manycommon antecedents. The literature consistentlyidentifies the close relationships among schoolfailure, drop-out, substance abuse, anddelinquency (Elliott, Huizinga, & Menard, 1989;O’Donnell et al., 1995). These problem behaviorsinvolve multiple risk factors and multipledomains. Research suggests prevention programsmust address both risk and protective factors:

• For multiple problems (Elliott, Huizinga, & Menard, 1989)

• Across all social domains in which youth areinvolved (Catalano & Hawkins, 1996)

• At developmentally appropriate periods,understanding normative developmentalchallenges (Catalano et al., Hawkins, Berglund,Pollard, & Arthur, 1998)

• With inclusion of cultural-specific factors andperspectives (Banks, Hogue, & Timberlake,1998; Cartledge & Feng, 1996)

Prevention efforts should target multiple domains(individual, family, peers, school, and community)with the objective of reducing risks andstrengthening protective factors associated withresiliency and reduced likelihood of negativeoutcomes. While there has been an ongoing debatein the field on whether to focus on risk orprotective factors, Pollard, (manuscript underreview) conducted a survey of more than 80,000students exposed to varying levels of risk and

protection to investigate the prevalence of a broadrange of adolescent behavioral outcomes. Thefindings suggest that strengthening assets orprotective factors alone might not be as effectivein promoting positive youth development andreducing problem behaviors as focusing on bothrisk reduction and protective factor enhancement.Building assets or protection among those exposedto high levels of risk might reduce the prevalenceof problem behaviors, but not as much as bothreducing risk exposure and enhancing protection.Thus, prevention and positive youth developmentpolicies and programs should focus on both thereduction of risk and the promotion of protectiveinfluences in multiple social units (Catalano,Hawkins, Berglund, Pollard, & Arthur 1998).These efforts should be appropriate to the child’sstage of development. Risk and protective factorsfor a young child may be very different than thosefor an adolescent.

Evidenced-based prevention efforts targeting AAPIyouth across multiple domains are lacking.Consequently, little large-scale empirical data existto indicate what works and what doesn’t work forthis population, from a social ecology or publichealth perspective. However, two sources of dataare beginning to address this question. First,numerous smaller studies, targeting one or twodomains, have promise. Most of these studies arecommunity-based interventions with an evaluationcomponent that attempts to assess impact andgenerate lessons learned. In most cases thesecommunity-based organizations have beenestablished to serve AAPI populations. A secondsource of prevention data on AAPI is morelimited. A number of larger-scale studies ofprevention efforts have included AAPI youth intheir sample. However, the percentage of AAPIyouth included is usually small (ranging from 1 to16 percent). Often because of this small sub

Violence Prevention Strategies for AAPI Youth



34

sample, data are not disaggregated by ethnicity,making it difficult to discern relevance andeffectiveness for AAPI participants.

Thus, we have little empirical data about whatworks in prevention for AAPI youth. Currentapproaches may be adaptations of existingevidence-based models of prevention. or “home-grown” programs designed to address acommunity need and not specifically linked toevidenced-based models. To date, this is the state-of-the-art for AAPI youth. In the followingdiscussion, examples of both types of programsare presented below. They are grouped accordingto their targeted domain: individual, family,school, or community. In a related study, Huangand colleagues (2004) provide a more in-depthanalysis of promising approaches for AAPI youthprograms. (Appendix C contains a matrix ofnominated promising programs for AAPI youthdevelopment and violence prevention.)

Promotion and PreventionProjects in the Individual/PeerDomainIn the individual domain the leading preventionefforts have been mentoring and social skillstraining. Social skills have focused on such topicsas anger management, decision-making, and lifeskills planning strategies. Mentoring builds on therelationship between the individual youth and acaring adult. Both of these types of individual-focused prevention efforts have generated someempirical evidence for effectiveness, however, thesedata have only rarely included AAPI youth.

Social Skills TrainingMost prevention projects that focus on theindividual provide clinical treatment or socialskills training. Interventions emphasizing socialskills training, using peer role models, behavioralrehearsal, and psychodrama, have evidencedsuccess in reducing violent interactions amongadolescents (Hammond, 1990). The ViolencePrevention Project of the Health PromotionProgram for Urban Youth, a nationally recognized

program, involves a 10-session education programthat provides descriptive information on the risksof violence and homicide, alternative conflictresolution techniques and a nonviolent classroomatmosphere (Prothrow-Stith, Spivak, & Hausman,1987). Although the importance of social skills ormental health interventions for AAPIs is oftenacknowledged in the literature, there are fewexamples of social skill instruction with AAPIyouth. Cartledge and Feng (1996) suggest thatAAPI youth, particularly recent immigrants, areespecially in need of social skills intervention.Leung (1988) supporting this view, suggests thatsocial skill instruction should be of major concernin the education of minority students in general,and AAPI students in particular, because alearner’s cognitive, affective, and physicalconditions are inextricably related. AAPI studentswho experience stress and anxiety due to minoritystatus and acculturation difficulties areparticularly vulnerable to problem behaviors.

■ Assertiveness Training and Social Skills forAAPI Youth and Young Adults (Cartledge and Feng, 1996)Cultural norms are a significant factor indetermining the effectiveness of social skilltraining (Cartledge & Feng, 1996). In a study ofassertiveness training for AAPI older adolescentsand young adults, major considerations in thistraining were cultural norms, a bicultural model,cultural values, group composition, and trainerbackground (Fukuyama & Coleman, 1992).Cultural norms most likely to influence thedegree of assertiveness were deference toauthority, interpersonal harmony, modesty, andavoidance of public shame. These norms,incorporated into the training, made it a moreculturally appropriate, bicultural rather thanmonocultural, training. In a bicultural training,the social skill is viewed in a situation-specificcontext, and the trainee is encouraged to drawon the value systems of both cultures and actaccording to the demands of the situation.Bicultural training presents the value systems asequal and helps the trainee analyze culturalvalues and social situations and respond



35

appropriately and in accord with their ownbelief systems. There was no evaluation oroutcome data component to this study.

■ The Teen Peer Advocate Program (TPAP)(Asian Counseling & Referral Service (ACRS)Seattle, WA)TPAP is a school and community-based programthat recruits and trains high school age youngwomen to educate and advocate for their peersaround issues of dating violence, sexual assaultand domestic violence. The goals of TPAP are:1. To create effective services for teenage APIyoung women who experience dating/domesticviolence, sexual assault and/or communityviolence. 2, To educate youth, teens, parents,school administrators, and other communitystakeholders about dating/domestic violence andpromote collaborative efforts to address theissue among teens of color.

TPAP has two components: (1) API YoungWomen’s Empowerment Groups; and (2) APADVICE (Asian Pacific Americans AgainstDating Violence Involving CommunityEducation). Empowerment groups meet weeklyand are facilitated by an ACRS mental healthcounselor. Many of the participants aresurvivors of dating violence or sexual assault.AP ADVICE recruits and trains teenage youngwomen as advocates to provide outreach,education and referrals to youth and othercommunity members. Teen peer advocatesreceive 40 hours of training every year on issuessuch as dating/domestic violence, gender rolesand oppression, and community resources. More than 100 young women have been trained as teen peer advocates. They have conducted outreachand education to more than 2,000 communitymembers. Nearly 100 have participated in theempowerment groups. 87 percent of therespondents reported an increase in knowledgeabout dating violence; 86 percent increased theirknowledge about community resources; 84percent increased their knowledge about culturalissues. In a visit to Seattle in January 2003,Former U.S. Attorney General Janet Renopraised TPAP as a model for the nation.

Youth Mentoring ProgramsMentoring programs are a widely used form ofprevention. These programs address the needs ofat-risk youth by structuring relationships thatwould otherwise be absent. Mentors offer youth aprotective factor to counter risks they face in theirdaily lives. Mentoring addresses risk factors suchas isolation and lack of needed supervision, andmay enhance protective factors such as theopportunity to build a relationship with a caringadult. In a series of epidemiological studies, Rutter(1979; 1987) identified factors that reduce risk fordisorder in children. He stated conclusively thatchildren with “one good relationship” were lesslikely to develop conduct disorder than otherchildren in similar homes whose relationships withboth parents were poor.

Mentoring programs are particularly applicablefor AAPI youth in lower socioeconomiccircumstances. Often these families are unable toprovide adult supervision in the home due to theirlong working hours. Parents, overburdened withacculturation stresses and financial difficulties,lack time to develop a caring relationship with thechild. Interestingly, in a survey of availablementors for the Juvenile Mentoring Program(JUMP) funded by the Office of Juvenile JusticeDelinquency Program (1998), in Cohort I, 4.4percent of the mentors were AAPI; in Cohort II (adifferent group of grantees), 1.2 percent of thementors were AAPIs. In terms of the youth ormentee ethnicity, 1.8 percent in Cohort I and 0.7percent in Cohort II were AAPIs. While theparticipation of AAPI mentors and menteesreflects the location of the grant sites, this statisticalso reveals the greater availability of AAPImentors to mentees, which suggests promise forthis type of intervention in AAPI communities.Perhaps the resources are available and ready tobe linked with the at-risk youth.

A recent review of the research on mentoring programs for adolescents concluded that mentoring has important benefits for the youth (Sipe, 1998).The Big Brothers/Big Sisters (BBBS) evaluationprovided the most conclusive and wide-ranging



36

evidence that one-on-one mentoring alone can reduce the likelihood of initiating drug and alcohol use, decrease aggressive behavior, and decreasetruancy. Youth participating in BBBS reportedmore positive relationships with their friends andtheir parents. These results were sustained forboys and girls across ethnicity and race. BBBS hasbeen selected as an exemplary program by theBlueprints Violence Prevention Project of theCenter for the Study and Prevention of Violence.

Sipe (1998) also concluded in her review that acritical factor in determining successful mentor-mentee matches was the mentor’s focus on firstbuilding trust and becoming a friend to the youth,rather than being overly goal-oriented and tryingimmediately to reform the mentee. Sipe detailedmentor practices associated with more effectiveand less effective mentoring relationships.

OJJDP’s (1998) Report to Congress on theJuvenile Mentoring Program (JUMP), citedviolence prevention as one of the primary projectgoals of their grantees. They also emphasized theneed for a multi-dimensional interventionrequiring that community-based organizations andagencies work together to provide acomprehensive continuum of care for the youththey are serving. JUMP grantees were required toestablish a collaborative relationship with a localeducational agency.

■ Project Youth Connect: Asian YouthMentorship ProgramsUS Dept of Health and Human Services,SAMHSA, Center for Substance AbusePrevention, CSAP, funded fifteen agencies,including four AAPI programs to assess theeffectiveness of mentoring with at-risk youth.The programs were implemented at the AsianPacific Family Center in Rosemead, California;the Asian Association of Salt Lake City, Utah;the Asian Pacific Development Center in Denver,Colorado; and Hmong American Partnership inSt. Paul, Minnesota. The programs examinedthe effectiveness of mentoring on preventing,delaying and/or reducing substance abuse anddelinquent and violent behavior, improving

school bonding and academic performance,improving family bonding and functioning, andimproving life management skills. Mentors werematched with youth received formal training onbecoming a mentor. Youth indicated thatdeveloping healthy relationships with theirmentors and other staff were critical elements ofthe project.

Prevention Projects in the Family DomainPrevention projects in the family domain haveincluded social skills, parenting skills,strengthening parent-child relationships, familyempowerment, and family therapy. Theframework is usually one of educating andempowering parents to become more effectiveparents. The targeted participants are usuallyparents and youth independently and occasionallytogether. For example, the Family StrengtheningProgram (Kumpfer, 1998; Kumpfer, DeMarsh, &Child, 1989) teaches parents better parentingskills and teaches young children problem-solvingand other skills. It then brings families together in weekly meetings and therapeutic play sessions with the objective of enhancing family functioning.This model has resulted in significant reductionsin problem behaviors, poor parenting, and familydysfunction, all risk factors for substance abuse,violence and other problem behaviors.

While the prevention literature is replete withfamily-focused interventions, few of theseprograms have focused on AAPI populations.Programs that focus on the family unit, includingthe extended family, however, will more likely besuccessful in AAPI communities where the familyis under constant stress. Only recently haveresearchers undertaken systematically documentedefforts to intervene with AAPI populations at riskfor problems behaviors such as substance abuse,school drop-out, and violence. These programs arein various stages of development and datacollection, and researchers hope they will soongenerate findings on what works for what AAPI subgroups.



37

■ The Family Strengthening Program Grantees(Substance Abuse and Mental Health ServicesAdministration/Center for Substance AbusePrevention)This federally funded initiative has a number ofgrantees in AAPI communities including SaltLake City, Long Beach, St. Paul, and Denver.The objectives of this program are toprevent/reduce violence among high-risk youth,increase family resilience, decrease familyconflict, and decrease desirability of substanceuse among youth and family members. Eachgrant site has tailored the model to addressproblems and concerns particular to the AAPIsubgroup they serve, and has modified theprocess to be culturally competent andresponsive. Findings from these sites will fill aserious gap in the knowledge base of whatconstitutes effective prevention strategies forAAPI youth and families at risk. The twelve-week curriculum included topics such as familycommunication, rites of passage, traditionalcustoms and values, conflict resolution, violence,depression, suicide, creating a protectiveenvironment, developing empathy, identifyingfamily roles, and becoming involved with thecommunity. Parents were interested in discussingissues around raising children in a Westernizedculture, and conflict and lack of support fromtheir spouses, primarily husbands. Guestspeakers were also brought in on topicsidentified by the parents. In addition to thevarious discussions, the parents and youthparticipated in weekly activities that includedeating together, field trips, youth activities, andgraduation. In an effort to minimize barriers toinvolvement, child care and transportation wereprovided at some of the sites. Given theoverwhelming needs of the community, casemanagement and home visits were alsoprovided. In addition, mental health referralswere made when possible at different agencies.

■ Strengthening Hawaii Families (Coalition for aDrug-Free Hawaii)www.drugfreehawaii.org. This cultural values-based primary prevention program emphasizesvalues clarification, family relationships, and

communication skills to allow parents andchildren to discover and determine forthemselves what works best for them based ontheir values and family vision. A team of fourfacilitators works with groups of 6-10 familieson the importance of connecting with oneanother, practicing family values andmanagement skills, and making healthy lifestylechoices. Families meet once a week for twohours for a 14-week period.

This program has been recognized by theSAMHSA and the Office of Juvenile Justice andDelinquency Prevention as a model familyprogram. Evaluation of the program, conductedat the University of Hawaii, found significantimprovement in family cohesion, familyorganization, and family communication and adecrease in family conflict and parentaldepression (Lacar & King, 2000).

■ Strengthening Intergenerational andIntercultural Ties in Immigrant ChineseAmerican Families (Ying, 1999)This intervention for immigrant Chinese parentsfocuses on Strengthening Intergenerational andIntercultural Ties in Immigrant ChineseAmerican Families (SITICAF). This eight-weekparenting program, that aims to prevent andreduce intergenerational/intercultural conflictand build on the assets of the family, addresses asignificant gap in prevention work. SITICAFaims to bridge the intergenerational andintercultural gap in Chinese Americanimmigrant families by bringing it to the parents’awareness, promoting greater cross-culturalcompetence, promoting better coping with thestresses of cross-cultural parenting, promoting asense of control in parenting, and developingeffective parenting skills, particularly in the areaof communication. This intervention, conductedentirely in Chinese, was tested with 15immigrant Chinese American families. Yingadministered translated instruments pre- andpost-intervention to measure the intervention’simpact on intergenerational relationship, parentlocus of control, parent’s well-being and sense ofcoherence, social desirability, and child’s self-



38

esteem. In spite of the small sample size, severalsignificant findings emerged. There was asignificant increase in parents’ sense ofresponsibility, quality of the intergenerationalrelationship, and sense of coherence. SITICAFwas effective in meeting its targeted goals as wellas increasing the immigrants’ general sense ofcompetence in the U.S. (sense of coherence).This intervention assisted immigrant parents toanticipate and meet the challenge ofintergenerational/intercultural conflict, a criticalrisk factor for AAPI involvement in youthviolence and gangs.

■ MELD (Hoelting, et al.,1996.)This parent education intervention uses peersupport groups to help parents develop skillsand confidence. This program has been adaptedfor families of Southeast Asian descent. MELD’smission is to strengthen families at criticaltransitions in the parenting process by bringingtogether groups of parents who have similarparenting needs, providing them with pertinentinformation, and helping them developsupportive peer groups. The program is basedon a family education and child developmentcurriculum. Formal evaluations have foundMELD to be successful in improving parents’knowledge about meeting the emotional andphysical needs of children, coping with issues ofpersonal development while raising children,and decreasing familial isolation.

Prevention Projects in the School DomainSAMHSA’s Center for Mental Health Services(1999) has compiled an extensive list of about 120evidence-based prevention programs, many fundedor identified by collaborations among different federal agencies, such as the Departments of Health and Human Services, Education, and Justice, andprofessional groups such as the NationalAssociation of School Psychologists. About 65percent of these programs are based in the schooldomain, with target populations ranging frompreschoolers to high school students. Many ofthese interventions include parents and teachers.

These programs are designed to teach social skills,conflict resolution, social competence, engagementin school, bullying prevention, prevention skillsfor teachers, proactive class management, andcooperative learning, or to change schoolcharacteristics, organizational structure, andmanagement approaches. In this extensive list, fewprograms focus on or even include AAPI youthpopulations. A significant number of programstarget African American youth.

In a comprehensive review of school-based violence prevention interventions published between 1993and 1997, Howard, Flora, and Griffin (1999)identified 44 school-based intervention studiesthat included an evaluation. Thirteen of thesestudies had a control group or multiple measuresof the participants over time, approaching a quasi-experimental design. Five of these were elementaryschool interventions. The goals of theseinterventions included increasing social skills,social problem solving, and developing pro-socialbehavior to decrease aggression and violence.These programs each included a significantclassroom component and two programs activelyintegrated parents. The five studies reported somepositive outcomes on behavior.

Of the middle and high school interventionsidentified in the review, the majority focused onAfrican American and Latino youth. Interventiongoals were similar to those reported in theelementary school programs. Parent participationwas included in one middle and one high schoolprogram. As with the elementary schools, none ofthese interventions involved community efforts.Teachers most frequently administeredinterventions. The results of these 13 empiricallytested interventions were mixed. An anti-bullyingprogram and the high school intervention thatincluded efforts beyond the classroom showedrelatively impressive results, with significantdecreases in behavioral outcomes in schoolbullying and suspensions (Hausman, Pierce, &Briggs, 1996; Olweus, 1994). However, thestrongest intervention effects were seen for lowerorder changes in student knowledge, attitudes,and responses to hypothetical situations rather



39

than actual behavior. Most programs, particularly those with only classroom-based curricula, reportedweak results (Howard, Flora, & Griffin, 1999).

Of these 13, three interventions included AAPIyouth in the sample. The Seattle SocialDevelopment Project included a significantproportion of AAPI participants (details presentedbelow). The other two projects had 1 percent and8 percent AAPI participation, and did not conductethnic sub-analyses.

■ The Seattle Social Development Project(O’Donnell, Hawkins, Catalano, Abbott, andDay, 1995)This project included a high-risk sub-sample(based on low socioeconomic status) and ageneral population sample. The high-risk sub-sample was 25 percent (27) AAPI, and thegeneral population sample was 6 percent (31)AAPI. This project aimed to reduce or eliminatethe effects of exposure to risk by developinginterventions that targeted (1) academic failures,(2) low commitment to school, (3) early conductdisorders, (4) family management problems, and(5) involvement with antisocial others. Eachintervention within the project was designed toincrease protective factors while reducing theserisk factors.

This project tested an intervention that combinesmodified teaching practices in mainstreamclassrooms, child social skills training, anddevelopmentally adjusted parent training. Thesestrategies were designed to enhance skills,opportunities, and reinforcements for childrenboth in the classroom and in the family. Thissix-year longitudinal intervention began in firstgrade. It intervened with teachers, students, andparents in both school and home environments.Results indicated that girls from low-incomefamilies in the intervention perceived moreopportunities and reinforcements forinvolvement in the classroom, expressedstronger bonding to school, and weresignificantly less likely to initiate use of tobacco,drugs, and alcohol. Low-income boys showedpositive academic gains, perceived slightly

greater reinforcements in the classroom,exhibited more attachment and commitment toschool, and tended to initiate delinquentbehavior at significantly lower rates than thecontrol group. Their rates of drug use initiationwere not significantly lower. Ethnic differenceswere not reported.

Family bonding, management practices, andinvolvement showed no significant gains. Inpart, this may be due to low attendance inparenting classes. Despite creative recruitmentstrategies, including personal invitations fromteachers, free child care and transportation, andperiodic lotteries, few low-income caretakersparticipated. This is a critical issue for low-income and AAPI (and other ethnic minority)families. More effective methods of engagingthese families need to be developed.

Numerous factors contribute to parents’ lack ofinvolvement in schools and school programs.Some parents feel that schools assign adisproportionate share of the blame foraggressive and violent behavior to families,without understanding critical familial issuesand pressures; others struggle to surviveeconomically in multiple jobs and lack the timeto participate; still others fail to understandwhat is required of them in these preventionprograms. In this sense it is critical that programimplementers develop meaningful parentprograms that reflect the needs of parents, areculturally competent, are conducted at times andlocations convenient to parents, and providetransportation and child care. School-basedprograms could make more effective use ofstrong parent groups and leaders that alreadyexist in communities, and enlist their help inencouraging more active parental involvement inschools (Bullock, Fitzsimons, & Gable, 1996).

This study was reported in detail not onlybecause it is one of the few prevention studies toinclude a significant percentage of AAPI youth,but because it encompasses multiple componentsthat are characteristic of school-basedprevention programs, was a quasi-experimental



40

study, and explored the longitudinal, cumulativeeffects of six years of intervention. This studyhas also been selected as one of the promisingprograms identified by the Blueprints forViolence Prevention Project at the Center for theStudy and Prevention of Violence (Elliott, 1994).

■ School, Community, and Law Enforcement(SCALE) Project (Asian Pacific Family Center,2000; Masuda, 2000)The SCALE Project is a collaborativeprevention, early intervention program involvingschools, law enforcement agencies, communitygroups and the Asian Pacific Family Center, amulti-service center serving the Asiancommunity in the West San Gabriel Valley eastof Los Angeles. The goal is assist Asian youth athigh risk for delinquency by counteracting thesignificant risk factors associated with violence,gang involvement and other antisocial activities.The project targets intermediate school ageAsian immigrant youth and their families. Theproject involves cross-agency collaboration andincludes the following program components: a)a holistic family needs assessment of youthreferred by either school authorities or lawenforcement; b)linkage for youth and theirfamilies to intensive, individualized andcoordinated community resources based on theiridentified needs; c) individual and familycounseling and support using skill-based shortterm counseling focusing on such areas aspositive bicultural identity development,prosocial decision-making, conflict resolution,and, for parents, effective bicultural parenting;d) training and consultation services to schoolsand law enforcement to help increase knowledgeand skills in order to make early identificationand referral of Asian youth at risk fordelinquent behavior; and e) communitycollaborative activities designed to link familycase management efforts, community networkdeveopment and community events in supportof these targeted families.

In 1998-1999, over 1,000 youth and familymembers were served by SCALE. The projecthas been effective in helping youth increase

protection from drugs and gangs and reducesuspensions, expulsions and probationinvolvement. It has helped parents improve theirbicultural communication and discipline skills,built close working relationships with thetargeted schools, established a referral andinformation exchange system with lawenforcement and developed a supportiverelationship between these agencies.

Prevention Projects in the Community DomainThe increase in youth violence, coupled withseveral tragic school shootings, has underscoredthe need to view this as a community problem.Clearly the literature indicates that interventionsin a single social domain—individual, family,school—are not sufficient to address the multiplefactors that contribute to this behavior. Whileschool-based efforts remain the most frequentlocus of intervention, increasingly morecommunity efforts are being mounted.

Community CollaborationsCommunity initiatives are focusing on breakingfamily cycles of violence. Many of theseinterventions provide a range of family servicesand involve collaborative efforts of religious andrecreational organizations; social service, publichousing and health agencies; the businesscommunity; schools; and law enforcementagencies. After-school programs constructivelyengage youth when their families are unavailable,provide them with attention and good rolemodels, and separate them from negativeinfluences on the street (Schwartz, 1996).

Effective anti-gang programs involve collaborationamong police, probation officers, schools, families,and community leaders. They include intensivecommunity, family, and youth educationprograms; alternative youth activities; and a long-term commitment. (Schwartz, 1996). Goldsteinand Huff (1993) have provided exhaustivesummaries of gang interventions. While theserecommendations and interventions are sound, itis critical to ensure that the cultural context of the



41

problem and the cultural appropriateness of theintervention are addressed (Soriano, 1993).Particularly for AAPI gangs, interventionistsshould keep in mind the combination of ethnicminority context, experiences with governmentaland local institutions, and limited economicopportunities (Lee, 1994).

Anti-gang interventions traditionally have focusedon changing the youth’s behavior, attitudes, orvalues through court dispositions such asdiversion, probation, parole, or therapeuticinterventions (Goldstein, 1991). The effectivenessof diversion programs has been limited, in part,due to overcrowded juvenile facilities andrehabilitative programs, and limited staff. Theeffectiveness of these strategies may be evenpoorer for AAPI youths, given the scarcity ofculturally competent professionals and the youthand families’ ignorance of services and lawenforcement institutions (Lee, 1994). In order totake advantage of the limited services andsupports, youth often need an advocate or familymember to navigate this bureaucracy. However,AAPI youth often become involved with gangs orcriminal behavior due to lack of parental andfamily support.

Soriano (1993) provides a framework for culturalsensitivity and gang interventions, citing theimportance of linguistic competence,understanding ethnic-based behavioral andcommunication patterns, and addressing theethnic/cultural background of the program andprofessional staff. Previous experience with AAPIethnic groups and understanding the culturalperspective of the youth gang are important.

Spergel (1989) advocates a multimodal approachtowards gang intervention requiring a variety ofsignificant social supports across different agenciesand community groups. Business and agencies thatcan provide jobs (Corsica, 1993) are critical foryouth focused employment training programs thatprovide legitimate avenues for employment andcareer growth. On a youth survey of services andneeds, the API Task Force on Youth (1993) foundthat the top priority was “help finding a job.”

Experts are highlighting the need for an integrated, collaborative approach to gang and violenceprevention. Weak or nonexistent links amongeducational, juvenile justice, mental health, andchild welfare systems lead to isolated, parallelefforts that fail to address the complexity and multiple determinants of these problems. Providers, parents and family members, and youth need towork collaboratively to identify youth at risk inorder to curb the incidence of gang involvementand violence (Asian/Pacific Islander Task Force,1993; Bullock, Fitzsimons, & Gable, 1996).

A successful community initiative demonstrated inBoston resulted in an 80 percent drop in juvenilehomicide rates between 1990 and 1995, a 65percent decline in juvenile arrest rate for firearms-related assaults in one year, and a 20 percent dropin violent crime in the schools in one year. Keycomponents of this strategy included OperationNight Light that assigned police officers andprobation officers to make regular home, school,and work-site visits to youth on probation, thusproviding for interaction among families, police,and the probation department. The Boston GunProject focused on gang activities to stem the flowof firearms into the city, and the Ten PointCoalition united clergy, with the police, schools,Department of Youth Services, and others todevelop alternatives for youth through a streetministry effort (Children’s Defense Fund, 1999).

AAPI groups around the country have beendeveloping effective collaborations with varioussystems and service providers to prevent youthinvolvement in crime and violence. AAPI refugeegroups have engaged law enforcement officers,business owners, and civic leaders to workcollaboratively for neighborhood improvement,community safety, and economic well being.Refugees have become involved in local groupssuch as neighborhood associations, service clubs,parent-teacher associations, and religiousfellowships in order to increase awareness andunderstanding of the refugees’ interest, concerns,and customs. Most of these are grassrootsprograms with limited documentation, but someprograms have attempted to document



42

systematically the effect of their interventions andthe lessons learned.

■ The East Dallas Community Police andRefugee Affairs Center (National CrimePrevention Council (NCPC), 1999)This program began in 1985 as a unique policestorefront designed to address the complexneeds of the city’s growing Southeast Asianrefugee population. The storefront provided arange of culturally sensitive, multi-lingual socialservice and crime prevention programs aimed atdecreasing crime, enhancing quality of life, andincreasing cooperation between the refugeecommunity and the police. A key component ofthis program were the Vietnamese, Laotian, andCambodian public service officers (PSO),unarmed but uniformed officers, who walkedthe refugee community with a regular, swornpolice officer. These PSOs could relate to thespecific needs of the refugee community, wereable to break down traditional barriers oflanguage and cultural differences, mistrust ofauthorities, ignorance of laws, and fear ofretaliation. This program has been selected bythe Police Foundation as one of the best inner-city crime reduction programs in the nation.

In a partnership among the federal Office ofRefugee Resettlement, the Bureau of JusticeAssistance (U.S. Department of Justice), theNational Crime Prevention Council, and stateand local agencies, the Outreach to NewAmericans project was initiated to buildcollaborations among refugee communities, lawenforcement, and other community agenciestoward the goal of building safer, healthiercommunities. In Powerful Partnerships(National Crime Prevention Council, 1999) 20of these programs are described. Theseexemplary programs were selected because theydemonstrated innovation, replicability,collaboration, law enforcement involvement,relevance, results, and sustainability. Theseprograms demonstrated the following results:

• Decrease in crime and violence

• Decrease in home invasions

• Decrease in number of youths joining gangs

• Increase in reporting of crimes

• Increase in refugee participation in civic activity

• Increase in self-esteem of refugee children,resulting in improved school attendance andperformance

• Increase in number of parents obtainingassistance for parenting issues,intergenerational conflict, and family violence

• Increase in the feeling of safety in the community

Two of the programs involving AAPI refugees arebriefly described below.

■ Lao PTA Youth Crime Prevention andIntervention Program (NCPC, 1999)In 1993, parents, teachers, and the staff of LaoPTA began a Youth Crime Prevention andIntervention Program in response to the growingconcern for the safety and future of Laochildren. The program aims to provideproductive activities and support groups for Laoyouth in the Near North neighborhood ofMinneapolis, Minnesota. Activities are designedto improve English language skills, improveacademic performance, encourage Lao childrento stay in school, and build self-esteem byteaching about heritage, culture, history, andlanguage, and traditional dances.

Two-hour tutorial and study groups meet twicea week at schools, and the Lao PTA, throughvolunteers, helps 215 children with languageskills and homework. Supervised after-schoolrecreational activities include individual andteam sports for 100 boys and girls, computerskills classes for 90 students during the schoolyear and the summer, two peer-support groupsessions each week to improve decision-makingability (ten girls with a female facilitator and 10boys with a male facilitator), instruction in Laotraditional dance once a week for 70 elementaryschool children, band practice each week for 30children at the Lao PTA, and classes for 100youth in Lao history, culture, language, cooking,music, and dance during the school year and thesummer. In addition, the program sponsors three



43

cultural and social gatherings a year for 70 families to celebrate young people’s achievements and to encourage the development of positivefamily relationships. The program also conductsworkshops for 80 parents on the Americanjuvenile justice system, appropriate means ofdiscipline, and parenting skills; the Americansystem of education and parents’ role in their children’s education; and recognizing the warningsigns of gang involvement or substance abuse.

The results of this program include the following:

• Some rival gang members became friends afterthe Lao PTA recruited high-risk teens fromdifferent gangs to participate on their winningsoccer team. Team loyalty replaced gangloyalty, and rival gang members developedfriendships despite their differences.

• The Minneapolis Police Department reporteda decrease in crime and violence within theLao community.

• School officials reported that many youth whowere identified as troublemakers and who arenow involved in the Lao PTA have improvedtheir school performance and behavior.

• School officials reported that an increasingnumber of program participants are dressingin more conventional clothing instead of gang attire.

• Parents reported satisfaction with the resultsof the Lao PTA program because their childrenare not associating with delinquent youth and are having more success in school and in the community.

• Lao youth reported feeling better aboutthemselves, their families, and school thanthey did one year prior.

• Staff members observed that participatingyouth handle conflicts and stressful situationsmore effectively.

■ Southeast Asian Leadership Youth Program(SEAL) (NCPC, 1999)In the effort to become “Americanized”, Hmongyouth adopt American cultural values, practices,and ideals. Confronted with the pressure to fit

in with their peers, many find group support ingangs. In 1988, the LaCrosse, Wisconsin areaHmong Mutual Assistance Association (HMAA)developed SEAL to empower and educaterefugee youth. The objectives were to preventhigh school dropout, continue higher educationor training, and become self-sufficient membersof the community. Components of the programincluded one-to-one meetings with HMAA staff to form relationships with adults who are positive role models; classes of 15-20 student twice aweek devoted to classroom instruction andtutoring in independent living skills andleadership development, and tutoring on schoolwork and homework; a third class focused on community activities and projects or social events to enhance development of students’ social skills. SEAL participants also serve on the Multicultural Youth Council, whose mission is to reduce racism and prejudice through nonviolent educationalefforts. Results from this program include:

• More than 300 youth have participated in SEAL.

• Of the gang members participating in SEAL, 5percent have broken off all connections withthe gang, which included changing theirfriends, not engaging in criminal activity, anddressing differently. Ninety-five percent havestopped involvement in criminal activity.

• Ninety-eight percent of SEAL participantsgraduate from high school.

• Approximately 88 percent pursue highereducation or training.

• SEAL won an award from the NationalAssociation of Counties in 1991 as a highlyeffective, culturally sensitive, and cost-effectiveprogram meeting the needs of at-risk youth.

• Southeast Asian community members nowrealize the need to provide parent training onpreventing and resolving their children’sbehavioral problems.

• Many youth are court ordered to attend SEAL because the program helps them resolve problemsand provides a needed support structure.

• The Multicultural Youth Council has increasedawareness of diverse social issues in themainstream community.



44

This program provides important lessons oninvolving difficult-to-engage parents from culturesthat believe the responsibility of raising childrenrests with family elders, not community programs.

■ PACT: Policy, Action, Collaboration, andTraining Violence Prevention Project(Benjamin, 1995)PACT is a federally funded collaboration amongnine community-based organizations workingwith the Health Department in Contra CostaCounty, California, an ethnically diverse regionwith pockets of severe poverty. The preventionproject is an interdisciplinary public healthprogram focusing on the prevention of violence, childhood injury, and chronic disease. The project applies a systems-wide approach to coordinateand further develop existing community efforts.Instead of duplicating efforts, coalitions areformed to facilitate the development of commonstrategies, thus conserving resources, sharingownership, avoiding program duplication, andachieving broad educational and policyobjectives. Participating PACT agenciesrepresent African American, Latino, Laotian,and Caucasian communities.

The components of this program include directservices to youth and families withinparticipating agencies; violence preventionleadership training with a multicultural group ofyouth ages 12-18; community events, forums,and conferences to promote violence preventionand cultural awareness themes; presentations byyouth and staff to community and schoolgroups; networking with other agencies andorganizations; joint policy developmentinvolving agencies, schools, and elected andappointed city and county officials; and youthactivities including training retreats, discussiongroups, cultural and educational field trips, andthe creation of plays, newsletters, and videoswith violence prevention themes.

After School ProgramsThere has been renewed interest in after-schoolprograms as a strategy to reduce the involvement

of youth in risky behaviors. FBI statistics indicatethat 47 percent of violent juvenile crimes occur onweekdays between 2:00 pm and 8:00 pm (Larner,Zippiroli, & Behrman, 1999). After-schoolprograms encompass a heterogeneous mix ofprograms designed to meet a range of objectives.Some programs seek to promote learning andenrichment, while others are designed to protectyouth from dangers, risky experimentation, andunsupervised time. Others promote new interests,relationship building with caring adults, andacademic and social support. To build asustainable system of after-school options,designers of these programs must consider theinterests of its major constituencies: parents,youth, and policy makers. Parents seeksupervision and enrichment; policy makers seekprevention of crime, substance abuse, teenpregnancy, and promotion of school achievement.In contrast, youth desire time to buildrelationships and a sense of autonomy andcompetence. To meet these various goals, after-school programs must not only enhanceprevention and reduce problem behaviors, butalso must be appealing to youth.

AAPI community-based organizations areincreasingly involved in after-school programs.The components of these programs often includetutoring, life skills training in small groups,opportunities to learn about and gain appreciationfor one’s culture of origin, discussion groups,leadership training, and conflict resolution. Todate, there is limited evaluation data thatsystematically documents the effectiveness of theseindividual programs. While anecdotal evidencepoints to the positive impact of these programs onyouth and families, the need for evidenced-baseddocumentation remains. As a result, theseorganizations are designing more systematictracking methods and evaluation components.

■ Asian American LEAD (Dang, 1999;www.aalead.org)This organization provides youth and familysupport services to Vietnamese refugee familiesin a Washington, DC neighborhood. Themission of this organization is to provide



45

concrete services to refugee and immigrantfamilies as they adapt to American society;bridge gaps between generations, whilepromoting cultural identity; enhance educationalopportunities and achievement for AsianAmerican youth and adults; and foster a senseof responsibility, self-reliance, entrepreneurship,and community leadership. The youth programincludes an after-school program that focuses onenhancing educational achievement, improvingsocial competence, and increasing self-esteem.AALEAD addresses these goals through avariety of activities, including tutoring,monitoring of homework and class assignments,training in test-taking skills, leadership training,opportunities for peer and adult socialinteraction, and participation in cultural andcommunity events. Baseline measures andtracking of academic, social, and personalindicators are conducted.

Selected accomplishments in the past year include:

• Sixty mentors provided services to more than70 children.

• Thirty youth participated in a Cultural ArtsProject for five weeks over the summer thatconnected them with two neighboring ethnicgroups, Latinos and African Americans. Thisproject involved a poetry workshop,workshops on Mexican culture and dance,song-writing workshops, and painting anddrawing murals.

• Thirty youth participated in a leadership-training program in which they organized andimplemented a public event.

• Families engaged in their children’s educationby regularly attending individual quarterlymeetings between staff and parents ofparticipating youth. One hundred percent ofthe parents fulfilled this request.

• Ongoing training was provided for thebicultural/bilingual staff.

■ Southeast Asian Youth and FamilyDevelopment (NCPC, 1999)In 1992 in Providence, Rhode Island, the Mayor’s Council on Drug and Alcohol Abuse created the

Southeast Asian Youth and Family Development(SAYFD) project to bring crime, gang, and drugprevention efforts for Southeast Asian youthinto one collaborative, citywide effort. Thisproject was initiated in response to alarmingnumbers of school drop-outs and increasinggang membership, and a need to improve thequality of life for refugee youth and families.This project continues to provide an after-schoolprogram of mentoring and tutoring, a SummerAcademy where high school credits can beearned, and a Gangs to Clubs program. The program focuses on both the needs and strengths of at-risk refugee youth by fostering self-esteem,pride, and a sense of belonging and by providingpositive choices and alternatives to youth gangs.

This program works collaboratively with theschool system and the police department. Publicschool teachers often participate in the SummerAcademy, and police officers may sponsor andparticipate in club activities. About 140 at-risk middle school students meet in clubs or in mentorrelationships, and in life skills training sessions.

A 1996 SAYFD evaluation indicated manyimprovements in the lives of the participatingyouth and in the community:

• Of the refugee population surveyed in 1993more than half indicated that the gangproblem was very serious; in 1996 this portiondeclined to 14 percent.

• In 1993, more than half the refugeepopulation surveyed indicated that there wasan increase in weapons carried by SoutheastAsian youth in schools; this proportiondeclined to 10 percent in 1996.

• Asian gang violence came to a halt. The policedepartment organized athletic competitionswith active participation—playing, competing,and talking—among gang members.

• Most Southeast Asians surveyed felt it safe towalk in their neighborhood during the dayand most felt safe at night. They believed theirneighborhood conditions would continue to improve.


There are Significant Gaps in DataCollection and Reporting.This literature review revealed glaring omissionsin the study of youth violence in AAPIcommunities. While some federal programs arebeginning to collect demographic, incidence, andinvolvement data, these efforts do notsystematically or consistently include AAPIs.While AAPIs comprise a small percentage of theoverall national population, their patterns ofhousehold residence and their bimodaldistribution on social indicators often obscures thefact that many youth and families in thispopulation are at high risk for problem behaviors.For example, AAPI incomes tend to concentrateon either end of the income spectrum. Thusincome averages tend to conceal the many familiesliving in poverty and the larger households thatoften include multiple wage earners. Although themedian income overall is higher than othergroups, there is much disparity among the variousAsian groups. The percentage below the povertylevel varies from 6 percent for Filipinos to as highas 63 percent for Hmong. In order to gain a moreaccurate picture of community needs andresources, better strategies for data collection andanalysis need to be developed.

Strategies for collecting data about AAPI youthneed to consider culturally-appropriatemethodologies that would maximize the validityand reliability of the data. Two strategies aregenerally used to gather information about youthviolence: police reports and youth self-report.Stigma, shame and unfamiliarity with survey andself-report mechanisms may impede access torespondents and diminish accuracy of the data.

Disaggregate the Data—More Than Once!Many of the studies reviewed did not report theethnicity of the target populations. Some studiesindicated participation of ethnic minorities, butdid not identify the groups. In studies where theAAPI population is included, disaggregating thedata by ethnicity would begin to identify whatworks and what doesn’t work for AAPIs.Although, a few studies included a significantAAPI population, their results did not include ananalysis by ethnic/racial breakdown.Disaggregating the data further within the AAPIgroup would be even more meaningful given thebroad diversity within the AAPI population. SomeAAPI groups have been in the U.S. for multiplegenerations, are more acculturated, and havedeveloped a network of supports and resources.Other communities, such as Southeast Asians andPacific Islanders, often referred to as the emerginggroups, have more recently resettled in the U.S.and are confronted with multiple economic,social, health, and psychological stressors withfew community resources or established networksfor support. The risks and protective factors forthese diverse groups may be quite different,requiring different types of interventions.Although disaggregating within the AAPIpopulation may diminish the power of findingsdue to smaller sample sizes, qualitatively, it would provide a more accurate portrayal of the population.

Summary and Conclusions: What Have We Learned and Whatis Relevant to AAPI Populations?


Summary and Conclusions: What Have We Learned and What is Relevant to AAPI Populations?

48

Research on Prevention Practices Needs to be More Inclusive of AAPI Populations.Careful science is fundamental to a public healthapproach to violence prevention. The science baseregarding AAPI youth and prevention of high riskbehaviors is limited. Very few prevention studieshave included AAPI youth. Few of the exemplaryor promising practices of the Blueprints Projectcompiled by the Center for the Study andPrevention of Violence targeted AAPIs. Many ofthe federally funded prevention programs are onlyrecently including this population. The exceptionsto this are some of the Department of Justicecollaborative projects. A greater effort needs to bemade to include vulnerable youth from the diverseAAPI groups in research studies on prevention.This may require new strategies of outreach anddata collection and new collaborations withcritical partners in these communities. Moreresearch is needed to confirm the efficacy ofevidence-based preventions for racial and ethnicgroups, in particular, AAPI youth. The lack ofethnic-specific analyses signifies a gap inknowledge. The science base should alsodetermine the efficacy of ethnic- or culture-specificinterventions for AAPI youth and theireffectiveness in real-world settings.

Models of Risk and Protective FactorsNeed to Include Cultural Factors.Comprehensive models of risk and resiliency havebeen developed for the general population. Giventhe cultural differences and developmental andecological challenges specific to AAPI populations,these models would be more relevant for AAPIswith the inclusion of culture-related risk andprotective factors. Current models omit criticalvariables. The risk and protective factors for AAPIyouth proposed in this paper must be testedsystematically. These factors do not replace, butrather supplement, the previously delineatedfactors and potentially enhance the relevance ofthese frameworks for AAPIs. While these factorswere derived from the literature on minority youthdevelopment, some concurrent validity exists for

these factors in that they are consistentlyaddressed in AAPI community-based preventionprograms. Adding factors such as acculturation,help seeking behaviors, stigma, ethnic identity,racism and spirituality may facilitate betterunderstanding of protective factors for AAPIyouth.

Studies are Needed to Test theApplicability of Existing Risk andResiliency Models.Factors have been identified that compromise thedevelopment of children and lead to high-riskbehaviors. Potentially protective conditions havealso been identified. A critical question is: Do riskfactors that have been identified as sources ofvulnerability for U.S.-born children in U.S.-bornfamilies similarly affect AAPI families, andparticularly AAPI immigrant families? In terms ofprotective factors, are children in AAPI familiesinsulated from risk by the same factors that havebeen identified for non-AAPI youth? There is littleempirical information to clarify whether thedynamics of risk and protective factors operatesimilarly across groups (National ResearchCouncil, 1998) although a recent study suggeststhat “developmental assets” while essential acrossall ethnic groups, operate differently for differentgroups in terms of protection from risk (Sesmaand Roehlkepartain, 2003).

Build Programs That Aim to Reduce RiskFactors and Enhance Protective Factors.Approaches to prevention that aim to reduce riskfactors while enhancing protective factors aremore likely to be the most effective forms ofprevention (Institute of Medicine, 1994). TheAAPI community-based programs, through acombination of strategies, addressed risk andprotective factors. After-school programsinvolving tutoring, social skills, ethnic heritageclasses, and cultural activities countered devaluedethnic identity, isolation, and lack of biculturalskills. Parent education groups addressedintercultural conflict and isolation; mentoringprograms countered low supervision. Engagement



49

in the community, whether through collaborationswith law enforcement, PTA, civic or sportsgroups, made the AAPI community more visibleand provided opportunities to develop home-community linkages and educate and expandawareness of the AAPI culture to the mainstreamcommunity.

Effective Violence Prevention EffortsTarget Multiple Domains.While domain-specific intervention efforts have animpact on the identified behaviors and problems,comprehensive, community-based programs thatfoster connections across domains may havegreater and more sustained effects. Programs thataddress both the youth and the families, or theschool and law enforcement, seem to foster moreconnections and address more risk and protectivefactors. A single intervention conducted inisolation is unlikely to solve youth violence; toomany factors contribute to violent behavior to beaddressed by one strategy (Thornton, Craft,Dahlberg, Lynch, & Baer, 2000.)

Violence Prevention Programs Need to Collaborate with Natural Supports, Cultural Leaders andCommunity Coalitions.Most research has shown that race and ethnicityhave little to do with predicting an individual’stendency to engage in violent behavior. However,these factors have everything to do with how acommunity responds to an intervention(Thornton, Craft, Dahlberg, Lynch, & Baer,2000). Thus, cultural informants, natural supportsystems, and cultural community leaders will beinstrumental in developing programs that fit theneeds and enhance the outcomes for theircommunities. The community-based AAPIprograms that had an impact on youth developedstrong collaborations between the community, theschool, and law enforcement. Outreach andengagement efforts by ethnic community groupsbuilt important connections between families andmainstream community groups or agencies. Thisseemed to be a critical component in the

community violence prevention projects.Recruitment strategies needed to draw uponnaturally existing social networks or structuresserving the ethnic population. A two-year Seattle-based study found that churches and friends weremost effective in recruiting Samoan youth andfamilies (Harachi, Catalano, & Hawkins,1997).The mainstream organizations learned how towork with different cultures. They learned toidentify or be responsive to communitygatekeepers, acknowledging their potential liaisonrole and establishing mutually beneficial workingrelationships. Increased cultural understandingand strategies for culturally competentintervention eventually were reflected in theirprograms, policies, and practices.

Effects of Violence Prevention EffortsTake Time to Emerge.Quasi-experimental studies of violence preventionprograms underscore the need for long-termcommitment to the program and long-termfollow-up. Prevention is difficult to measure andtrack. Initial evaluations may show no gains. Insome studies, it took two or more years for anymeasurable effects to appear. Additionally,community-based programs often require lengthydevelopment phases to build collaboration andimplement a program. While much in today’sworld is focused on “real time” reporting, theimpact of prevention may take considerablylonger to emerge. Sustaining a preventionprogram, its funding and political will is difficultwithout supporting data, concrete results and costsavings. Gaining political and community buy-in,“for the long haul” may require newcollaborations and innovative strategies forreporting results.

Engage the Community.In order to obtain community buy-in and sense ofownership, it is critical to involve the communityin the early planning stages and implementation ofan intervention. This may be particularly true forracial or ethnic populations that often aremistrustful of outsiders and externally imposed



50

interventions. Additionally, involving thecommunity may facilitate access and obtainingresources, volunteers, and personnel for the intervention.

In conclusion, this review is a beginning sketch ofthe issues for AAPI youth and their communities.Considerably more work needs to be done tobetter meet the needs of this population, to buildon its cultural strengths and to ensure positiveoutcomes for its youth and families.


Acts Against Violence. (1995). A guide to action:National campaign to reduce youth violence. NewYork: Educational Resources Center.

Administration for Children’s Services. (1998). Earlychildhood capacity by school district. Agency for ChildDevelopment. New York: Author.

Agbayani-Siewert, P., & Revilla, L. (1995). Filipino Americans. In Pyong GapMin (Ed.), AsianAmericans: Contemporary trends and issues. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

American Psychological Association. (1993). Violenceand youth: Psychology’s response. Volume I. Summaryreport of the APA commission on violence and youth.Washington, DC: Author.

Arthur, M. W., Hawkins, J. D., Pollard, J. A., Catalano, R. F., & Baglioni, A. J. (2002). Measuring risk and protective factors for substance use, delinquency, and other adolescent problem behaviors: The communities that careyouth survey. Evaluation Review; not currently available.

Ascher, C. (1989). Southeast Asian adolescents: Identityand adjustment. Washington, DC: EducationalResource Information Service.

Ascher, C. (1994). Gaining control of violence in theschools: A view from the field. ERIC Digest No. 100.ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education, Washington,DC: National Education Association, Center for theRevitalization of Urban Education.

Asian Pacific Family Center. (2000). School,Community, and Law Enforcement (SCALE) project:Brief program description. Rosemead, CA: author.

Asian/Pacific Islander Task Force on Youth. (1993).Executive summary of a framework for meeting theneeds of at-risk Asian/Pacific Islander youth. KingCounty, WA: Author.

Banks, R., Hogue, A., & Timberlake, T. (1998). AnAfrocentric approach to group social skills trainingwith inner-city African American adolescents. Journalof Negro Education, 65, 414-423.

Bankston, C. (1995). Vietnamese ethnicity andadolescent substance abuse: Evidence for a community-level approach. Deviant Behavior, 16(1), pp. 59-80.

Benjamin, M. (1995). Effective collaboration as the keyto understanding and reducing youth violence.Washington, DC: Georgetown University ChildDevelopment Center, National Technical AssistanceCenter for Children’s Mental Health.

Bijou, S., & Baer, D. (1961). Child development: Asystematic and empirical theory. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Blumstein A., & Wallman, J. (Eds.). (2000). The crime drop in America. New York, NY: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss. Vol. 1.attachment. New York: Basic Books.

Brener, N., Thomas, S., Krug, E., & Lowry, R. (1999).Recent trends in violence-related behaviors among highschool students in the United States. Journal of theAmerican Medical Association, 282, 440-446.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of humandevelopment: Experiments by nature and design.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bullock, L., Fitzsimons, A., & Gable, R. (1996).Combating youth violence: An “all hands-on deck”approach to making schools safe again. PreventingSchool Failure, 41, 34-41.

Butts, J., & Travis, J. (2002). The rise and fall ofAmerican youth violence: 1980 to 2000. Washington,DC: Urban Institute.

Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development. (1989).Turning points: Preparing American youth for the 21stcentury: The report of the task force on education ofyoung adolescents. Washington, DC: CarnegieCorporation.

Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development. (1992).A matter of time: Risk and opportunity in the non-school hours. New York: Carnegie Corporation.

Carnegie Corporation of New York. (1995). Greattransitions: Preparing adolescents for a new century.New York: Carnegie Corporation.

Cartledge, G., & Feng, H. (1996). Asian Americans. InG. Cartledge (Ed.), Cultural diversity and social skillsinstruction: Understanding ethnic and genderdifferences. Champaign, IL: Research Press.

References


References

52

Catalano, R., & Hawkins, J. D. (1996). The socialdevelopment model: A theory of antisocial behavior. InJ. D. Hawkins (Ed.), Delinquency and crime: Currenttheories. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Catalano, R., Hawkins, J. D., Berglund, L., Pollard, J.,& Arthur, M. (1998). Prevention science and positiveyouth development: Competitive or cooperativeframeworks? Paper prepared for InvitationalConference, Health Future of Youth II: Pathways toAdolescent Health. Maternal and Child Health Bureau,Annapolis, MD.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (1996).CDC surveillance summaries, September 27, 1996. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 45, (No. SS-4).

Center for Mental Health Services. (1999, February).CMHS school violence prevention initiative: Matrix ofevidence-based prevention interventions. Washington,DC: Center for Mental Health Services.

Chan, S. (1986). Parents of exceptional Asian children.In M. Kitano & P. Chinn (Eds.), Exceptional Asianchildren and youth. Reston, VA: Council for ExceptionChildren.

Chan, S. (1998). Families with Asian roots. In E. Lynch& M. Hanson (Eds.), Developing cross-culturalcompetence: A guide for working with children andtheir families. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. BrookesPublishing Company.

Children’s Defense Fund. (1999). The state of America’schildren yearbook, 1999. Washington, DC: Author.

Chin, K. (1990). Chinese subculture and criminality.New York: Greenwood.

Clark, R., Anderson, N., Clark, V., & Williams, D.(1999). Racism as a stressor for African Americans: Abiopsychosocial model. American Psychologist, 54,805-816.

Coalition for Asian American children and families.(1999). Half-full or half-empty? Health care, child careand youth programs for Asian American children inNew York City. New York: Author.

Coalition for Juvenile Justice. (2004) Transfer: SendingChildren to Adult Criminal Court. New York: Author.

Cohen, S., & Lang, C. (1990). Applications of theprinciples of community-based programs. Backgroundpaper prepared for Youth Violence in MinorityCommunities: A Forum on Setting the Agenda forPrevention, Atlanta, GA. Newton, MA: EducationDevelopment Center.

Consortium on the School-Based Promotion of SocialCompetence. (1994). Drug and alcohol preventioncurricula. Seattle, WA: Developmental Research and Programs.

Corsica, J. Y. (1993). Employment traininginterventions. In A. Goldstein & C. R. Huff (Eds.), The gang intervention handbook. Champaign, IL:Research Press.

Cowart, M., & Cowart, R. (1993). Southeast Asianrefugee youth and the cycle of violence. NAASPBulletin, pp. 40-45.

Dao, J. (1992, April 1). Asian street gangs emerging as newunderworld. The New York Times, p. B2.

Davis, N. (1999). Resiliency: Status of the research andresearch-based program implications for mental healthpolicy. Center for Mental Health Services, SAMHSA.White Paper.

Developmental Research and Programs. (1993).Communities that care: Risk-focused prevention usingthe social development strategy. Seattle, WA:Developmental Research and Programs.

DeVos, G. (1982). Adaptive strategies in U.S.minorities. In E. Jones & S. Korchin (Eds.) Minoritymental health. New York: Praeger.

Drachman, D., Kwon-Ahn, Y. H., & Paulino, A. (1996,December). Migration and resettlement experiences of Dominican and Korean families. Families in Society: TheJournal of Contemporary Human Services, 626-638.

Dryfoos, J. (1994). Full service schools: A revolution inhealth and social services for children, youth, andfamilies. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Dwyer, K. (1999). Preventing school-communityviolence. Schools in the Middle, 8(4), 12-14, 43.

Elliott, D. (1994). Youth violence: An overview. Boulder,CO: Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence.

Elliott, D., Huizinga, D., & Menard, S. (1989). Multiple problems youth: delinquency, substance abuse, andmental health problems. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Erikson, E. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. NewYork: Norton.

Everett, S., & Price, J. (1995). Students’ perceptions ofviolence in the public schools: The Metlife Survey.Journal of Adolescent Health, 17, 345-352.


References

53

Fagan, J. (1996, May). Recent perspectives on youthviolence. Keynote address to Pacific NorthwestConference on Youth Violence, Seattle, WA.

Feng, H., & Cartledge, G. (1996). Social skillsassessment of inner city Asian, African, and EuropeanAmerican students. School Psychology Review, 25,227-238.

Freud, A. (1969). Adolescence as a developmentaldisturbance. In G. Caplan & S. Lebovier (Eds.),Adolescence. New York: Basic Books.

Freud, S. (1954). Collected works (standard ed.).London: Hogarth Press.

Fujita, S., & O’Brien, D. (1991). Japanese Americanethnicity: The persistence of community. Seattle, WA:University of Washington Press.

Fukuyama, M., & Coleman, N. (1992). A model forbicultural assertion training with Asian-PacificAmerican college students: A pilot study. The Journalfor Specialists in Group Work, 17, 210-217.

Furuto, S., & Murase, K. (1992). Asian Americans inthe future. In S. Furuto, R. Biswas, D. Chung, K.Murase, & F. Ross-Sheriff (Eds.), Social work practicewith Asian Americans. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Gallimore, R., Boggs, J., & Jordan, C. (1974). Culture,behavior and education: A study of HawaiianAmericans. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Garbarino, J. (1982). Sociocultural risk: Dangers tocompetence. In C. Kopp & J. Krakow (Eds.), TheChild: Development in a social context. Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley.

Garmezy, N. (1985). Stress-resistant children: Thesearch for protective factors. In J.E. Stevenson (Ed.),Recent Research in Developmental Psychopathology:Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry Book,Supplement 4, (pp.213-233). Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Gewirtz, J., & Stingle, K. (1968). Learning ofgeneralized imitation as the basis for identification.Psychological Review, 75, 374-397.

Gibbs, J. (1995). Gangs as alternative transitionalstructures: Adaptations to racial and social marginalityin Los Angeles and London. Presented at the AmericanOrthopsychiatric Association, Chicago, IL.

Gibbs, J., & Huang, L. (1998). Children of color:Psychological interventions with culturally diverseyouth. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Gibson, G. (1972). Kin family network: Over-heraldedstructure in past conceptualizations of familyfunctioning. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 34,13-23.

Gim-Chung, R. (1994). Measurement of acculturationand cultural identity: A comparative analysis. Paperpresented at the annual conference of the AmericanPsychological Association, Los Angeles.

Go, C. The Southeast Asian situation: Acculturationand delinquency. From doctoral dissertation, Universityof California, Berkeley.

Goldstein, J. (1991). Delinquent groups: Apsychological perspective. IL: Research Press.

Goldstein, A., & Huff, C. (1993). The gangintervention handbook. IL: Research Press.

Griffin, K., Scheier, L., Botvin, G., Diaz, T., & Miller,N. (1999). Interpersonal aggression in urban minorityyouth: Mediators of perceived neighborhood, peer, andparental influences. Journal of Community Psychology,27, 281-298.

Gross, J. (1991, April 6). Six are killed as 8-hour siegeby gang ends in California. The New York Times, p. A6.

Guillermo, E. (1996, October 4). Pearls of wisdom: Onmodel minorities and immigrant makeovers. AsianWeek, p. 5.

Hall, C. (1995). Asian eyes: Body image and eatingdisorders of Asian and Asian American women. EatingDisorders: The Journal of Treatment and Prevention,3(1), pp. 8-18.

Hall, E. (1976). Beyond culture. Garden City, NY:Anchor.

Hallowell, E. (1999). Connections. New York, NY:Pantheon Books.

Hammond, W. R. (1990). Positive adolescent choicestraining (PACT). Washington, DC: AmericanAssociation of State Colleges and Universities.

Han, Y. K. (1985). Discriminant analysis of self-disclosing behavior and locus of control among KoreanAmerican and Caucasian American adolescents. Pacific/Asian Mental Health Research Review, 4, 20-21.

Harachi, T., Catalano, R., & Hawkins, J. D. (1997).Effective recruitment for parenting programs withethnic minority communities. Child and AdolescentSocial Work Journal, 14(1): 23-39.


References

54

Harrison, A., Wilson, M., Pine, C., Chan, S., & Buriel,R. (1990). Family ecologies of ethnic minority children.Child Development, 61, 347-362.

Hausman, A., Pierce, G., & Briggs, L. (1996).Evaluation of comprehensive violence preventioneducation: Effects on student behavior. Journal ofAdolescent Health, 19, 104-110.

Hawkins, J. D. (1999). Creating safe schools andcommunities. Presentation, CMHS school violenceprevention initiative meeting. Rockville, Maryland.

Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., & Miller, J. Y. (1992).Risk and protective factors for alcohol and other drugproblems in adolescence and early adulthood.Psychological Bulletin, 112, 64-105.

Haynes, N., & Comer J. (1993). The Comer SchoolDevelopment Program: Process, outcomes, and policyimplications. Urban Education, 28, 166-199.

Hays, C. (1990, July 31). Amid gang violence, Chinatowncasts off quiet image. The New York Times, p. B1.

Ho, M. K. (1987). Family therapy with ethnicminorities. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Ho, M. K. (1992). Minority children and adolescents intherapy. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Hoelting, J., Sandell, E., LeTourneau, S., Smerlinder, J.,& Stranik, M. K. (1996). The Meld Experience withParent Groups 9-18. Bulletin of Zero to Three:National Center for Infants, Toddlers and Families.

Howard, K., Flora, J., & Griffin, J. (1999). Violence-prevention programs in schools: State of the scienceand implications for future research. Applied &Preventive Psychology, 8, 197-215.

Howell, J. (Ed.). (1998). Guide for implementing the comprehensive strategy for serious, violent, andchronic juvenile offenders. Washington, DC: U.S.Department of Justice: Office of Juvenile Justice andDelinquency Prevention.

Hsu, F. (1981). Americans and Chinese: Passage todifferences. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.

Huang, L. N. (1989). Southeast Asian refugee childrenand adolescents. In J. Gibbs & L. Huang (Eds.),Children of color: Psychological interventions withminority youth. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Huang, L. N. (1994). An integrative view of identityformation: A model for Asian Americans. In E. Salett& D. Koslow (Eds.), Race, ethnicity, and self: Identityin multicultural perspective. Washington, DC: NationalMulticultural Institutes Publications.

Huang, L., Lee, Y., & Arganza, G. (2004). Promisingprograms for youth development and risk preventionfor Asian American/Pacific Islander youth: Voices fromthe field. Paper prepared for the Center for MentalHealth Services, Substance Abuse and Mental HealthServices Administration, Department of Health andHuman Services, Rockville, MD

Huang, L. N., & Gibbs, J. T. (1992). Partners oradversaries? Home-school collaboration across culture,race, and ethnicity. In S. Christenson & J. Conoley(Eds.), Home school collaboration: Enhancingchildren’s academic and social competence. NationalAssociation of School Psychologists.

Huang, L. N., & Ying, Y. (1998). Chinese Americanchildren and adolescents. In J. Gibbs & L. Huang(Eds.), Children of color: Psychological interventionswith culturally diverse youth. San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Huff, C. R. (1993). Gangs and public policy: Macrolevel interventions. In A. Goldstein & C. R. Huff (Eds.), Thegang intervention handbook. IL: Research Press.

Hughes, J., & Hasbrouk, J. (1996). Television violenceimplications for violence prevention. School PsychologyReview, 25, 134-152.

Hunt, G., Joe, K., & Waldorf, D. (1997, May). Cultureand ethnic identity among Southeast Asian gangmembers. Free Inquiry—Special Issue: Gangs, Drugs &Violence 2, 25(1).

Ida, D. J. (1999). Project Youth Connect: Asian youthmentorship program. Denver, CO.

Ida, D. J & Yang, P. (2002) Working with SoutheastAsian children and families. In J. Gibbs & L. Huang(Eds.), Children of color: Psychological interventionswith culturally diverse youth. San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Institute of Medicine. (1994). Reducing risks formental disorder: Frontiers for preventive interventionresearch. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Ito, K. (1985). Affective bonds: Hawaiianinterrelationships of self. In G. White & J. Kirkpatrick(Eds.), Person, self, and experience. Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.


References

55

James, W. H., Kim, G. K., & Moore, D. D. (1997).Examining racial and ethnic differences in Asianadolescent drug use: The contributions of culture,background and lifestyle. Drugs: Education, Preventionand Policy, 4(1):39-51.

Janes, C. (1990). Migration, social changes, and health.Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Johnson-Powell, G., Yamamoto, J., Wyatt, G., &Arroyo, W. (Eds). (1997). Transcultural childdevelopment. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Kang, C., & Saar, M. (1996, January 25). Asian gangsrise strikes a paradox. Los Angeles Times, p.1-3.

Kellogg Foundation. (1998). Safe passages throughadolescence: Communities protecting the health and hopes of youth. Battle Creek, MI: W. K. Kellogg Foundation.

Kim, W. J., Kim, L., & Rue, D. (1997). KoreanAmerican children. In G. Johnson-Powell, J.Yamamoto, G. Wyatt, & W. Arroyo (Eds.),Transcultural child development. New York: JohnWiley & Sons.

Klein, M. (1969). Violence in American juvenile gangs.In D. J. Mulvihill & M. M. Tumid (Eds.), Crimes ofviolence, Vol. 13. Washington, DC: NationalCommission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence.

Kumpher, K., & Alvardo, R. (1998). Effective familystrengthening intervention. U.S. Department of Justice.www.jcjrs.org/pdffiles/171121.pdf

Kumpher, K., DeMarsh, J., & Child, W. (1989). Thestrengthening families program. Salt Lake City, UT:Department of Health Education, University of Utahand Alta Institute.

Lacar, S., & King, J. (2000, January-February).Strengthening Hawaii families. Presentation at NationalTraining Conference on Strengthening America’sFamilies, sponsored by CSAP and Office of JuvenileJustice and Delinquency Program, Washington, DC.

Laosa, L. (1977). Cognitive styles and learning strategiesresearch. Journal of Teacher Education, 28, 26-30.

Larner, M., Zippiroli, L., & Behrman, R. (1999, Fall).When school is out: Analysis and recommendations.The Future of Children, 2, p. 5.

Lee, E. (1997). The Assessment and Treatment of Asian American families. In E. Lee (Ed.), Working withAsian Americans: A guide for clinicians. New York:Guilford Press.

Lee, P. (1994). Out of options: The problems ofChinese youth gangs. Unpublished paper. School ofSocial Welfare, University of California, Berkeley, CA.

Lee, L., & Zhan, G. (1998). Psychosocial status ofchildren and youths. In L. Lee & N. Zane (Eds.),Handbook of Asian American psychology. ThousandOaks: Sage Publications.

Leong, R., & Chou, E. (1994). The role of ethnicidentity and acculturation in the vocational behavior ofAsian Americans: An integrative review. Journal ofVocational Behavior, 44, 155-172.

Leung, E. K. (1988). Cultural and acculturationalcommonalities and diversities among Asian Americans:Identification and programming considerations. In A.Portz & B. Ramirez (Eds.), Schools and the culturallydiverse exceptional student: Promising practices andfuture directions. Reston, VA: ERIC Clearinghouse onHandicapped and Gifted Children.

Lerner, R. (Ed.). (1998). Theoretical models of humandevelopment: Vol. 1. The handbook of childpsychology. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Lerner, R., & Castellino, D. (1998). Contemporarydevelopmental theory and adolescence: Developmentalsystems and applied developmental science.Paper prepared for Health Future of Youth II:Pathways to Adolescent Health. Maternal and ChildHealth Bureau, Annapolis, Maryland.

Lin, C. Y. C., & Fu, V. R. (1990). A comparison ofchild-rearing practices among Chinese, immigrantChinese, and Caucasian-American parents. ChildDevelopment, 61, 429-433.

Lim, K. V., Levenson, M., & Go, C. G. (1999).International Congress of the International Associationfor Cross-Cultural Psychology, 14 Aug. 1998. WesternWashington U, Bellingham WA, US. Acculturation anddelinquency among Cambodian male adolescents inCalifornia. In Lonner, W. J., Dinnel, D. L., Forgays, D.K., & Hayes, S. H. (Eds.), Merging past, present andfuture in cross-cultural psychology. Selected readingsfrom the 14th International congress of the International Association of Cross-Cultural Psychology.Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets and Zeitlinger.

Lorenz, K. (1965). Evolution and modification ofbehavior. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.

Luthar, S., & Zigler, E. (1991). Vulnerability andcompetence: A review of research on resilience inchildhood. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 6(1),6-22.


References

56

Maguin E., & Loeber, R. (1996). Academicperformance and delinquency. In M. Tonry (Ed.),Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 20).Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Masten, A., & Coatsworth, J. D. (1998). Thedevelopment of competence in favorable andunfavorable environments. American Psychologist, 53,205-220.

Masten, A. S., & Garmezy, N. (1985). Risk,vulnerability and protective factors in developmentalpsychopathology. In B. B. Lahey & A. E. Kazdin (Eds.),Advances in clinical child psychology, Vol. 8. NewYork: Plenum Press.

Masuda, G. (2000). Personal communication.

Nagata, D. (1989). Japanese American children andadolescents. In J.Gibbs & L. Huang (Eds.), Children ofcolor: Psychological interventions for minority youth.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

National Crime Prevention Council. (1998). Powerfulpartnerships: Twenty crime prevention strategies thatwork for refugees, law enforcement, and communities.Washington, DC: Author.

National Crime Prevention Council. (1999). When lawand culture collide: Handling conflicts between U.S.laws and refugees’ cultures. Washington, DC: Author.

National Research Council. (1998). From generation togeneration: The health and well-being of children inimmigrant families. Board on Children, Youth, andFamilies, National Research Council-Institute ofMedicine. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

New York Police Department. (1998). Crime andjustice annual report. New York, NY: Office ofManagement and Planning.

Nguyen, N., & Williams, H. (1989). Transition fromEast to West: Vietnamese adolescents and their parents.Journal of the American Academy of Child andAdolescent Psychiatry, 28, 505-515.

Novello, A. (1991). Violence is a greater killer ofchildren than disease. Public Health Reports, 106(3),231-233.

O’Donnell, Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R., Abbott, R.,& Day, L. (1995). Preventing school failure, drug use,and delinquency among low-income children: Long-term intervention in elementary schools. AmericanJournal of Orthopsychiatry, 65(1), 87-100.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,U.S. Department of Justice. (1998). Juvenile mentoring program, 1998 report to Congress.Washington, DC: Author.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,U.S. Department of Justice, (1999). Juvenile offendersand victims: 1999 national report. (Compiled by H.Snyder & M. Sickmund, National Center for JuvenileJustice). Washington, DC: Author.

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,U.S. Department of Justice, (1999). 1996 national youth gang survey: Summary. Washington, DC: Author.

Ogbu, J. (1987). Variability in minority schoolperformance: A problem in search of explanation. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 18(4), 312-234.

Okano, Y., & Spilka, B. (1971). Ethnic identity,alienation and achievement orientation in Japanese-American families. Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 2, 273-282.

Olweus, D. (1994). Annotation: Bullying at school:Basic facts and effects of a school based interventionprogram. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatryand Allied Disciplines, 35, 1171-1190.

Parker, V. C., Sussman, S., Crippens, D. L., Scholl, D.,& Elder. (1996). Qualitative development of smokingprevention programming for minority youth. AddictiveBehaviors, 21(4), 521-525.

Phinney, J. (1992). The multigroup ethnic identitymeasures: A new scale for use with diverse groups.Journal of Adolescent Research, 7(2), 156-176.

Phinney, J., & Chavira, V. (1992). Ethnic identity andself-esteem: An exploratory longitudinal study. Journalof Adolescence, 15, 271-281.

Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. NewYork: Harcourt Brace.

Piaget, J. (1970). Piaget’s theory. In P. Mussen (Ed.),Carmichael’s manual of child psychology, I. 703-732.New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Plomin, R. (1986). Development, genetics, andpsychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Pollard, J., Catalano, R. F., Hawkins, J. D., & Arthur,M. (under review). Development of a school-basedsurvey measuring risk and protective factors predictiveof substance abuse in adolescent populations.Unpublished manuscript, Social Development ResearchGroup, University of Washington.


References

57

Prothrow-Stith, D., Spivak, H., & Hausman, A.(1987). The violence prevention project: A publichealth approach. Science, Technology and HumanValues, 12, 67-69.

Ranard, D. (1991). A look at Vietnamese “gangs.” InAmerica: Perspectives on refugee resettlement, No. 10.Refugee Service Center, Center for Applied Linguisticsand Bureau for Refugee Programs, U.S. Department of State.

Rosenthal, D., & Feldman, S. (1992). The relationshipbetween parenting behavior and ethnic identity inChinese-American and Chinese-Australian adolescents.International Journal of Psychology, 27(1), 19-31.

Rumbaut, R. (1985). Mental health and the refugeeexperience: A comparative study of Southeast refugees.In T. C. Owan, B. Bliatout, R. Lin, W. Liu, T. Nguyen,& H. Wong (Eds.), Southeast Asian mental health:Treatment, prevention, services, training, and research.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health andHuman Services.

Rutter, M. (1979). Protective factors in children’sresponses to stress and disadvantage. In M. W. Kent & J. E. Rolf (Eds.), Primary prevention of psychopathology:Vol. 3: Social competence in children (pp. 49-74).Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.

Rutter, J. (1987). Temperament, personality, andpersonality disorder. British Journal of Psychiatry, 150,443-458.

Sampson, E. (1988). The debate on individualism.American Psychologist, 43, 15-22.

Sampson, R., Raudenbush, S., & Earlys, F. (1997).Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study ofcollective efficacy. Science, 277, 918-924.

Santos, R. (1997). Filipino American Children. In G.Johnson-Powell, J. Yamamoto, G. Wyatt, & W. Arroyo(Eds.), Transcultural child development. New York:John Wiley & Sons.

Schwartz, W. (1996). An overview of strategies toreduce school violence. New York, NY: ERICclearinghouse on Urban Education. ERIC/CUE DigestNo. 115.

Schneider, B. & Lee, Y. (1990). A model for academicsuccess: The school and home environment of EastAsian students. Anthropology & Education Quarterly,21, 358-377.

Search Institute. (1997). Forty developmental assets.Minneapolis, MN: Author.

Serafica, F. (1990). Counseling Asian-American parents:A cultural-developmental approach. In F. Serafica, A.Schwebel, R. Russell, P. Isaac, & L. Myers (Eds.),Mental health of ethnic minorities. New York: Praeger.

Shook, E. (1985). Ho’oponono: Contemporary uses ofa Hawaiian problem-solving process. Honolulu, HI:University of Hawaii Press.

Shu, R. (1985-86). Kinship system and migrantadaptation: Samoans of the United States. AmerasiaJournal, 12(1), 23-47.

Sickmund, M., Snyder, H., & Poe-Yamagata, E. (1997). Juvenile offenders and victims: 1997 update on violence. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice andDelinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice.

Sipe, C. L. (1998). Mentoring programs foradolescents: A research summary. Paper prepared forInvitational Conference, Health Futures of Youth II:Pathways to Adolescent Health. Maternal and ChildHealth Bureau, Annapolis, MD.

Snyder, H. (1997). Juvenile arrests 1996. Bulletin.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office ofJuvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Snyder, H., & Sickmund, M. (1999). Juvenile offendersand victims: 1999 national report. Washington, DC:Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Soriano, F. (1993). Cultural sensitivity and gangintervention. In A. Goldstein & C. Huff (Eds.), Thegang intervention handbook. IL: Research Press.

Spergel, I. (1989). Survey of youth gang problems and[rograms in forty-five cities and six states. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Spergel, I. (1995). The youth gang problem: A communityapproach. New York: Oxford University Press.

Sue, D. W., & Sue, D. (1990). Counseling the culturally different: Theory and practice (2d ed.). New York: Wiley.

Szapocznik, J., & Kurtines, W. (1980). Acculturation, biculturalism, and adjustment among Cuban Americans. In A. Padilla (Ed.), Acculturation: theory, models, andsome new findings. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Szapocznik, H., & Kurtines, W. (1993). Familypsychology and cultural diversity. AmericanPsychologist, 48, 400-407.

Tamura, E. (1994). Americanization, acculturation, andethnic identity: The Nisei Generation in Hawaii.Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.


References

58

Thornton, T., Craft, C., Dahlberg, L., Lynch, B., & Baer, K. (2000). Best practices of youth violence prevention:A sourcebook for community action. Atlanta, GA:Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, NationalCenter for Injury Prevention and Control.

Toy, C. (1992a). A short history of Asian gangs in SanFrancisco. Justice Quarterly, 9, 601-619.

Toy, C. (1992b). Coming out to play: Reasons to joinand participate in Asian gangs. The Gang Journal, 1, 1.

Travis, J., & Waul, M. (2002). Reflections on the crime decline: Lessons for the future. Washington, DC:Urban Institute.

Tseng, W. (1973). The development of psychiatricconcepts in traditional Chinese medicine. Archives ofGeneral Psychiatry, 29, 569-575.

Uba, L. (1994). Asian Americans: Personality patterns,identity, and mental health. New York: Guilford.

U.S. Census Bureau: The Asian Population. (2000).Census 2000 brief. Washington, DC: Author.

U.S. Census Bureau: Asian Pacific Islander Health Forum. (1999). Data prepared by the Empowerment ThroughTraining and Technical Assistance (ETTA) Program.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.(1996). Trends in the well-being of America’s childrenand youth: 1996. Washington, DC: Author

U.S. Department of Justice. (1990). Sourcebook ofcriminal justice statistics—1989. Washington, DC:Hindelang Criminal Justice Research Center.



Weissberg, R., & Greenberg, J. (1997). School andcommunity competence-enhancement and preventionprograms. In W. Damon (series Ed.) and I. E. Sigel &K. A. Renninger (Vol. Eds.), Handbook of childpsychology. Vol. 5. Child Psychology in Practice (5thEd). New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Werner, E. E. (1994). Overcoming the odds. Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 15(2), 131-136.

Werner, E. E., & Smith, R. S. (1992). Overcoming theodds: High-risk children from birth to adulthood.Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

WestEd. (1999). The healthy kids resilience assessment.Los Alamitos, CA: WestEd.

Westermeyer, J., Bouafuely-Kersey, M., & Her, C.(1997). Hmong children. In G. Johnson-Powell, J. Yamamoto, G. Wyatt, & W.Arroyo (Eds.), Transculturalchild development. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Wilson-Brewer, R., & Jacklin, B. (1991). Violenceprevention strategies targeted at the general populationof minority youth. Public Health Reports, 106(3), 270-271.

Yamamoto, J., Silva, J., Ferrari, M., & Nukariya, K.(1997). Culture and psychopathology. In G. Johnson-Powell, J. Yamamoto, G. Wyatt, & W. Arroyo (Eds.),Transcultural child development. New York: JohnWiley & Sons.

Yang, I. Press Release May 7, 2002, U.S. CambodianGovernment Plans to Force Refugees Back toCambodia.

Yao, E. (1985). Adjustment needs of Asian immigrantchildren. Elementary School Guidance and Counseling,19, 222-227.

Yee, B., & Hennessey, S. (1982). Pacific/Asian familiesand mental health. In F. Munoz & R. Endo (Eds.),Perspectives on minority group mental health.Washington, DC: University Press of America.

Yee, B., Huang, L., & Lew, A. (1998). Families: Life-span socialization in a cultural context. In L. Lee & N.Zane (Eds.), Handbook of Asian American psychology.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ying, Y. (1999). Strengthening intergenerational/intercultural ties in migrant families: A newintervention for parents. Journal of CommunityPsychology, 27(1), 89-96.

Ying, Y., & Chao, C. (1996). Intergenerationalrelationship in Lu Mien American families. AmerasiaJournal, 22(3), 47-64.

Yoon, E., & Chien, F. (1995). Asian American andPacific Islander health: A paradigm for minority health.Journal of the American Medical Association, 275,736-737.

Yoshikawa, H. (1994). Prevention as cumulativeprotection: Effects of early family support andeducation on chronic delinquency and its risks.Psychological Bulletin, 115, 28-54.

Zimring, F. (1998). American youth violence. NewYork: Oxford University Press.


Appendix A: Directory ofViolence Prevention Websites(with annotation, listed alphabetically)

1998 Annual Report on School Safetywww.ed.gov/pubs/AnnSchoolReport98/index.htmlWebsite allows access to this guide that describesthe nature and extent of crime and violence onschool property and presents information on howschools and communities can work together toprevent and address school violence. An extensivelist of resources and references is also available.

America’s Promise—The Alliance for Youthwww.americaspromise.orgThis website details the work of this organization,led by General Colin Powell, dedicated tomobilizing individuals, groups, and organizationsfrom every part of American life, to build andstrengthen the character and competence of youth.The site also details various related news andevents, and offers information on how to becomemore involved in community activities.

Asian–Nation: The Landscape of Asian Americawww.asian-nation.org/index.shtmlWebsite has three purposes: 1) educate those whowould like to learn more about the AsianAmerican population, 2) provide general andspecific information about different topics andissues that affect the Asian American community,and 3) identify other sources of informationrelated to Asian Americans.

Asian/Pacific Islander Youth ViolencePrevention Centerwww.api-center.orgThe ultimate goal of the API Center is to preventand reduce youth violence among the APIpopulation to position communities to becomeproactive in creating a safe and healthyenvironment for themselves.

Big Brother Big Sisters of Americawww.bbbsa.orgThe website details the work of this organization,which has matched millions of children in needwith caring adult mentors since 1904. Researchshows that children with Big Brothers and BigSisters are less likely to use drugs and alcohol,skip school, and exhibit violent behavior. The sitealso provides information on how to become amentor and other volunteer activities.

Boys and Girls Clubs of Americawww.bgca.orgThe website details the work of this organization,which promotes youth programs and activities.Boys and Girls Clubs of America has a line-up ofmore than 25 national programs areas, includingeducation, the environment, health, the arts,careers, alcohol/drug and pregnancy prevention,gang prevention, leadership development, and athletics. The site also has links to related websites,including a career information center for youth.

Bureau for At-Risk Youthwww.at-risk.comThe website provides information on thisorganization, an educational publisher anddistributor of programs, videos, publications, andproducts for at-risk youth and their caregivers.Started in 1990, the Bureau provides resourcesthat help children, teens, parents, educators, andothers cope with the many vital issues facingtoday’s youth. Areas of concern and publishingactivity include substance abuse, teenage sexualityand pregnancy, violence prevention, conflictresolution, child abuse, self-esteem, and muchmore. The website has an At-risk ResourcesDirectory and links to other related websites.


Appendix A: Directory of Violence Prevention Websites

60

Center for Study and Prevention of Violencewww.colorado.edu/cspv/blueprints/index.htmlThis website summarizes 10 violence preventionprograms that met a very high scientific standardof program effectiveness and describes theseinterventions in a series of “blueprints” thatdescribe the theoretical rationale, the corecomponents of the program as implemented, theevaluation designs and results, and the practicalexperiences programs encountered whileimplementing the program at multiple sites. TheBlueprints for Violence Prevention provide step-by-step instructions that help communities planand implement youth crime and violenceprevention strategies.

Children and Violence, AmericanPsychological Associationwww.apa.org/pi/viol&fam.htmlThis web page offers factual briefs on childrenand violence with topics ranging from childrenand television violence to potential warning signsof violence to raising children to resist violence. Italso allows access to the report: “Violence and theFamily: Report of the APA Presidential Task Forceon Violence and the Family,” and offers links andinformation on how to order related books.

Children, Youth and Families Education andResearch Networkwww.cyfernet.orgThis is the website of the National Children,Youth and Families at Risk Initiative of theCooperative Extension System of the U.S.Department of Agriculture. It provides tools andinformation for working with youth, parents,families, and communities. There is also a chatroom for on-line conferences and youth activities,such as Cyber Camps and virtual 4-H clubs. Apage on violence prevention provides descriptionsof current research articles, intervention tools, andfact sheets, as well as links to related resources.The site also provides information on 3,000community-based State Strengthening programstargeting at-risk youth.

Coming Up Tallerwww.cominguptaller.orgThis website provides detailed information on thisinitiative to focus national attention on, andgarner support for, out-of-school programs thatuse the arts and the humanities to providechildren safe places to go, new learningopportunities, chances to contribute to theircommunity, and ways to take responsibility fortheir own futures. The site also provides resourcelinks to related websites.

Conflict and Violence: Adolescent DirectoryOn-Line (ADOL)www.education.indiana.edu/cas/adol/conflict.htmlThis website is an electronic guide to informationon adolescent issues intended for parents,educators, researchers, health practitioners, andteens. It is a service of the Center for AdolescentStudies at the School of Education at IndianaUniversity.

Creating Safe and Drug-Free Schools: AnAction Guidewww.ncjrs.org/pdffiles/safescho.pdfThis guide outlines action steps for schools,parents, students, and community and businessgroups, and provides information briefs onspecific issues affecting school safety. It alsocontains research and evaluation findings, and alist of resources and additional readings.

Department of Justice National Mentoring Websitewww.nwrel.org/mentoring/index.htmlThis website details the work of this organization,which provides training and technical assistance tomentoring programs through a variety of servicesand conferences. Created and funded by the Officeof Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention(OJJDP), the National Mentoring Center aims tocreate connections between children and caringadults in the community. The site also provideslinks to other related sites and has an extensive listof resources on mentoring.



61

Early Warning, Timely Response: A Guide to Safe Schoolswww.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/OSEP/earlywrn.htmlThis publication offers research-based practicesdesigned to assist schools and communities inidentifying warning signs early and in developingprevention, intervention, and crisis-response plans.

Early Warning, Timely Response: A Guide to Safe Schoolswww.air-dc.org/cecp/guide/default.htmThe website allows access to this guide, whichpresents a brief summary of the research onviolence prevention and intervention, and crisisresponse in schools. It details the early warningsigns that relate to violence and other troublingbehaviors, and the action steps that schoolcommunities can take to prevent violence andother troubling behaviors, to intervene and gethelp for troubled children, and to respond toschool violence when it occurs. It also offers linksto other websites and resources on school safetyand violence prevention.

Fight Crime: Invest in Kidswww.fightcrime.orgThis website provides information on this nationalanti-crime organization led by police chiefs,prosecutors, and crime survivors working todecrease school and youth violence prevention byworking with child-care and after-schoolprograms. The website also provides informationon various reports and evidence on programs andtechniques that prevent crime. There are also electronic links to other crime prevention resources.

Harvard School of Public Health, Division ofPublic Health Practice, Violence PreventionPrograms maintains a web page for ordering“Peace by Piece: A Community Guide forPreventing Violence”www.hsph.harvard.edu/php/VPP/partnerships/order2.htmlThe guide is based on descriptions of exemplaryviolence prevention programs from all over thecountry. Media campaigns, professional education

seminars, adolescent job and life skills training,and gang prevention initiatives are examples ofdifferent components presented in the guide. Thissite is simply an order form for the guide, alongwith e-mail and contact information for thosewanting additional information.

Hmong Homepagewww.hmongnet.orgThis webpage is a collection of resources relatingto Hmong history, culture, and language, andcurrent events. There are also listings of currentevents and announcements, special projects,general information about Hmong people, andelectronic links to further community resources.

Institute on Violence and Destructive Behaviorhttp://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~ivdbThe Institute’s mission is to empower schools andsocial service agencies to address violence anddestructive behavior, at the point of school entryand beyond, in order to ensure safety and tofacilitate the academic achievement and healthysocial development of children and youth. This isa combination of community, campus, and stateefforts to research violence and destructivebehavior among children and youth.

Justice Information Centerwww.ncjrs.orgThe National Criminal Justice Reference Service(NCJRS) is a source of extensive information oncriminal and juvenile justice in the world,providing services to an international communityof policy makers and professionals. NCJRS is acollection of clearinghouses supporting all bureausof the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of JusticePrograms: National Institute of Justice, Office ofJuvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,Bureau of Justice Statistics, Bureau of JusticeAssistance, Office for Victims of Crime, andOffice of Juvenile Prevention Program Offices.



62

KidsCampaigns/Connect for Kidswww.connectforkids.orgThis website, sponsored by the BentonFoundation, a Washington, DC-based foundationfocusing on communications in the public interest,provides information for adults who want to findinformation online that they can use to becomemore involved in the lives of children. The websitehelps people become more active citizens bypromoting activities from volunteering to voting.

Life in a Vietnamese Gangwww.cwis.usc.edu/dept/elab/buidoi/vietgangs.htmlThis website describes a documentary film byNick Rothenberg and Ahrin Mishan that exploresthe life of a Vietnamese refugee and gang member.The film is based on field research begun duringtheir graduate studies at the Center for VisualAnthropology, University of Southern California.“bui doi: life like dust” premiered at the SundanceFilm Festival in 1994, and has gone on to winseven U.S. and international awards. The websitealso provides on-line information on Vietnam andAsia-related topics.

National Alliance for Safe Schoolswww.safeschools.orgThis website provides information on thisorganization that was established to providetraining, technical assistance, and publications toschool districts interested in reducing school-basedcrime and violence. The site offers information ontrainings and workshops conducted by NASS tohelp school administrators—working withstudents, teachers, parents, and support staff toidentify and correct the local issues that may becausing fear and anxiety on the part of studentsand staff. There is also a list of publications andlinks to related sites.

National Association of Town Watchwww.natw.orgThis website offers detailed information onNATW, a nonprofit organization dedicated to thedevelopment and promotion of organized, lawenforcement-affiliated crime and drug preventionprograms. Members include, Neighborhood,

Crime, Community, Town and Block WatchGroups; law enforcement agencies; state andregional crime prevention associations; and avariety of businesses, civic groups, and concernedindividuals working to make their communitiessafer places in which to live and work. Furtherinformation is available on NATW’s annual“National Night Out” program held on the firstTuesday each August, which promotesinvolvement in crime and drug preventionactivities, strengthening police-communityrelations, and encouraging neighborhoodcamaraderie as part of the fight for safer streets.

National Center for Conflict ResolutionEducation Networkwww.nccre.orgThis website details the work of this organizationwhich provides training and technical assistancenationwide to advance the development of conflictresolution education programs in schools, juvenile justice settings and youth service organizations, and community partnership programs. The websiteoffers further information on programs, services,resources, and conference and news updates.

National Center for Education Statisticshttp://nces.ed.govAs part of the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act of 1994, the National Center forEducation Statistics (NCES) is required to collect data to determine the “frequency, seriousness, andincidence of violence in elementary and secondaryschools.” NCES responded to this requirement bycommissioning a survey, the Principal/SchoolDisciplinarian Survey on School Violence, 1996-97, the results of which are detailed in the reportthat can be accessed at this website.

National Council on Crime and Delinquencywww.nccd-crc.orgThe website detail research, publications, conferences, and issues addressed by this nonprofit organization that promotes effective, humane, fair,and economically sound solutions to family, community, and justice problems. NCCD conducts research, promotes reform initiatives, and seeks to



63

work with individuals, public and private organizations, and the media to prevent and reduce crime and delinquency. In 2000, the organizationreceived a CDC grant on AAPI youth violence.

National Crime Prevention Councilhttp://www.ncpc.orgThe website provides information on crimeprevention and stopping school violence forparents, students, teachers, and law enforcementofficials. It also provides links to other websitesand resources that offer more ideas about whatcan be done to stop school violence.

National Mentoring Partnershipwww.mentoring.orgThis website provides detailed information on thisorganization, an advocate for the expansion ofmentoring and a resource for mentors andmentoring initiatives nationwide. The site alsoprovides further information on how to become amentor and has a list of resources, includingprograms, products, and research.

National School Safety Centerwww.nssc1.orgThe National School Safety Center was created bypresidential directive in 1984 to meet the growingneed for additional training and preparation in thearea of school crime and violence prevention.Affiliated with Pepperdine University, NSSC is anonprofit organization whose charge is topromote safe schools—free of crime andviolence—and to help ensure quality education forall America’s children.

National Youth Advocacy Coalitionwww.nyacyouth.orgThis website provides information on thisorganization, which advocates for and with youngpeople who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, ortransgender in an effort to end discriminationagainst these youth and to ensure their physicaland emotional well being. The coalition providesinformation on working to create change at thenational level by working with and supportinglocal community-based work as well. The site also

provides information on regional conferences, a list of publications and other related materials, and abibliography of resources organized by topic area.

National Youth Gang Centerwww.iir.com/nygcThe purpose of the NYGC is to expand andmaintain the body of critical knowledge aboutyouth gangs and effective responses to them. Thecenter assists state and local jurisdictions in thecollection, analysis, and exchange of informationon gang-related demographics, legislation,literature, research, and promising programstrategies. It features statistical data collection andanalysis of gangs, as well as information oncurrent gang-related legislation and promisingprogram strategies. The site also contains gangliterature reviews and the results of the YouthGang Consortium Survey of Gang Programs. TheNYGC provides technical assistance to the Officeof Juvenile Justice and Delinquency PreventionRural Gang Initiative, and the website includesinformation about their approach to working withthese community initiatives. It also coordinatesactivities of the OJJDP Youth Gang Consortium—a group of federal agencies, gang programrepresentatives, and service providers.

National Youth Networkwww.usdoj.gov/kidspage/getinvolvedSponsored by the U.S. Department of Justice, thiswebsite provides young people the opportunity toshare perspectives with other teenagers on issuesrelated to delinquency prevention and juvenilejustice. It also provides information on activities atthe community level, conflict resolution andmediation, volunteer opportunities, and how tobecome a mentor or tutor.

National Youth Violence PreventionResource Centerwww.safeyouth.orgA gateway to resources for professionals, parents, youth, and individuals working to prevent and end violence committed by and against young people.



64

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention at the U.S. Department of Justicewww.ojjdp.ncjrs.orgThis website provides information on this federalagency and describes its work in promoting itsmission to provide national leadership,coordination, and resources to develop,implement, and support effective methods toprevent juvenile victimization and respondappropriately to juvenile delinquency. OJJDPworks with prevention programs and the juvenilejustice system to protect the public safety, holdjuvenile offenders accountable, and providetreatment and rehabilitative services based on theneeds of each individual juvenile. It also providesinformation on grants and funding, resources,programs, publications, and a calendar of events.

Oregon Social Learning Centerwww.oslc.org/links.htmlThis center maintains a large website rich inresources and links. This site features extensiveinformation on the observation researchtechniques that have been developed by the center,including a “coder” program that can bedownloaded and utilized in coding observationresearch. Technical assistance is not availablebeyond the extensive information provided on thewebsite. The site also provides information onvarious therapeutic approaches to working withchildren with antisocial behavior and theirfamilies. Links are provided to the Society forPrevention Research and the Early CareerPreventionists Network.

Partnerships Against Violence Networkwww.pavnet.orgPAVNET Online is a “virtual library” ofinformation about violence and youth-at-risk,representing data from seven different federalagencies. It is a one-stop, searchable, informationresource to help reduce redundancy in informationmanagement and provide access to informationfor States and local communities.

PAXwww.paxusa.orgPAX is a not-for-profit organization dedicated toreducing gun violence. Through communicationsand media strategies, PAX works to increasepublic awareness about gun violence. Visitors can also connect to other websites of anti-gunviolence organizations working at the local andnational levels.

Preventing Youth Hate Crime: A Manual forSchools and Communitieswww.ed.gov/pubs/HateCrime/start.htmlThis website provides schools and communitieswith programs and resources that can be used inpreventing youth hate crime and hate-motivatedbehavior.

Rock the Votewww.rockthevote.orgThis website provides information on this nationalorganization dedicated to promoting freedom ofexpression and helping young people effect change in the civic and political lives of their communities.The website links to related websites.

Safe and Drug-Free Schools Program at theU.S. Department of Educationwww.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SDFSThis website details the SDFS Program, the federalgovernment’s primary vehicle for reducing drug,alcohol, and tobacco use, and violence, througheducation and prevention activities in our nation’sschools. The site provides program updates andinformation on model programs, grants, andresearch. The website also links to other related sites.



65

Safe and Drug Free Schoolswww.oeri2.ed.gov/offices/oese/sdfs/idex.htmlThis website provides information on modelprograms to reduce substance abuse and violencethrough education and prevention activities in thepublic schools. It also provides information ongrant opportunities, which are provided primarilyto state governments, but are also given to publicand private nonprofit organizations. The websitealso contains information on research,publications and links to related sites.

Safe, Drug-Free, and Effective Schools forAll Students: What Workshttp://cecp.air.org/resources/safe&drug_free/main.htmlThis website allows access to the report “Safe,Drug-Free, and Effective Schools for All Students:What Works!” this report represents an evaluationof programs formulated under the Safe and Drug-Free Schools Act. The goal of the project was tolearn about schools that managed to reducediscipline problems and improve the learning andbehavior of all students, including those withdisabilities. This report describes three site visitsconducted by a research team accompanied byexpert panels.

Substance Abuse and Mental HealthServices Administration: UnderstandingYouth Violence: Ethnic Minority and Cultural Issueshttp://www.samhsa.gov/grants/content/2002/YouthViolence/ethnic.htm

Save the Childrenwww.savethechildren.org/mentorsThis website provides detailed information onSave the Children’s campaign to help meet theurgent need for mentors in the lives of children inthe United States. The site also provides furtherinformation on how to become a mentor andother volunteer activities.

School Violence Prevention, Center forMental Health Services (CMHS)http://www.mentalhealth.samhsa.gov/schoolviolence/This website provides information on schoolviolence activities at CMHS such as the SchoolViolence Prevention Initiative, resilience, andadvice on parents and families “After a Disaster.”The site highlights some exemplary/promisingprograms in the area of enhancing resilience andoffers links to various websites on school violenceprevention.

The Search Institutewww.search-institute.orgThis research-based site seeks to communicatechild and adolescent research findings toprofessionals, parents, policy makers, and thegeneral public. The organization providespublications, training, and other services andresources through the website. Information isavailable on state and national initiatives to buildpositive youth and communities through an assets-based approach. The site also features a bulletinboard, newsletter, and conference information.

SHiNEwww.shine.com/index.cfmThe SHINE Anti-Violence Network is a student-led group that empowers students to becomeactive participants in the campaign for solutionsto school violence. Through the network, studentscommunicate on-line about the issues affectingthem today, initiate community-based programsand activities in their neighborhoods, organizementoring and peer mediation programs, andlearn about conflict resolution, angermanagement, and mediation.



66

Strengthening Families Program 10-14www.strengtheningfamilies.org/html/programs_1999/14_SFP10-14.htmlThis website details information about thisprevention program based on research findingssupported by NIDA, OJJDP, and DOE. Theprogram is designed for parents or caregivers andtheir youth ages 10-14. Seven sessions plusboosters are designed to help parents build ontheir strengths in showing support and settinglimits; help youth develop skills in handling peerpressure and building positive futures, and helpfamilies grow together. has been scientificallyevaluated in a randomized, controlled design with442 families through Project Family at theInstitute for Social and Behavior Research at IowaState University. Data analysis indicates positiveresults for both parents and youth..

Surgeon General’s Report on Youth Violencehttp://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/youthviolence

U.S. Census Bureau Home Pagewww.census.govThe website details this government organizationwith various links to data and maps of all types. It provides information on the latest economicindicators, publications, and links to other related websites.

Virginia Youth Violence Projecthttp://youthviolence.edschool.virginia.eduThis website identifies effective methods andpolicies for youth violence prevention, especiallyin school settings. Summarizes research on theunderstanding and reduction of violent behaviorfor educators, psychologists, and other colleaguesin the social, legal, and human servicesprofessions. It offers information on business andcommunity joint ventures on preventing violence,and highlights what works in preventing youthviolence. Readers interested in scientific evidencecan turn to several extensive, quantitativeevaluations of literature and a report thatoverviews prevention strategies found to reducejuvenile violence.

Youth Crime Watch of Americawww.ycwa.orgThis website provides detailed information on thisorganization that sponsors hundreds of school andcommunity programs throughout the UnitedStates to assist youth in actively reducing crimeand drug use in their schools and communities.The website provides information on successfulstrategies, upcoming events and conferences,training information, and links to related websites.

Youth Service Americawww.servenet.orgYSA is a resource center committed to increasingthe quantity and quality of opportunities foryoung Americans to serve locally, nationally, orglobally. The website provides youth serviceorganizations and the media with information andresearch on best practices, resources, andopportunities in the youth service field. The siteprovides further information on volunteeringactivities, an extensive list of resources, a calendarof events, employment opportunities, fundingresources, contests and awards, and research andsurveys.

Youth Resourcewww.youthresource.comThis webpage is a resource for gay and lesbianyouth that provides information on current events,chat rooms, list servs, high school and campuslinks, and other networking tools. There is also anextensive library on lesbian, gay, bisexual, andtransexual youth topics.


Amando Cablas

Sonia Chessen

Sandy Dang

Douglas Dodge

Kana Enomoto

Nancy Gannon

Terry Gock

Tracy Harachi

Tiffany Ho

D.J. Ida

Jeannette Johnson

David Kakeshiba

David Moy

Patricia Mrazek

Nhai Nguyen

Howard Phengsomphone

Larry Sullivan

Bouy Te

Deborah Toth-Dennis

Nghia Tran

Tien Tran

KaYing Yang

Lucas Yang

Appendix B: AAPI Work Group Members


Appendix C: Matrix ofNominated AAPI YouthDevelopment and ViolencePrevention ProgramsPrograms listed alphabetically by state and city.

LEG

EN

D F

OR

RIS

K L

EV

EL:

U=

Uni

vers

al P

reve

ntiv

e M

easu

re

S=

Sel

ectiv

e Pr

even

tive

Mea

sure

I

= In

dica

ted

Prev

entiv

e M

easu

re

PR

OG

RA

MST

RA

TEG

IES:

C

OM

PO

NEN

TS

& C

UR

RIC

ULU

MFO

CU

S O

FP

RO

GR

AM

CR

OSS

-SY

STEM

CO

LLA

BO

RA

TIO

NTA

RG

ETG

RO

UP

RIS

KLE

VEL

(U,S

,I)

PR

OG

RA

MEV

ALU

AT

ION

(TO

OLS

)FU

ND

ING

Nei

ghbo

rhoo

d A

fter

-Sch

ool

Aca

dem

y (N

ASA

) P

rogr

amPa

n As

ian

Com

mun

ity A

llian

ceCe

nter

940

S. C

rayc

roft

Roa

dTu

cson

, AZ

857

11D

orot

hy L

ew, P

roje

ctC

oord

inat

or52

0-51

2-01

44

Stre

ngth

enin

gIn

terg

ener

atio

nal T

ies

inM

igra

nt F

amili

esU

nive

rsity

of C

alifo

rnia

Scho

ol o

f Soc

ial W

elfa

reB

erke

ley,

CA

947

20Y

u-W

en Y

ing

510-

643-

6672

510-

643-

6126

(fa

x)yw

ying

10@

socr

ates

.ber

kele

y.ed

u

Gan

g A

war

enes

s P

roje

ctKo

rean

You

th &

Com

mun

ity C

ente

r68

0 S.

Wilt

on P

lace

Los

Ang

eles

, CA

Cha

rles

Cha

ng21

3-36

5-74

0021

3-38

3-12

80 (

fax)

chas

chan

g@ky

ccla

.org

ww

w.k

yccl

a.or

g

Sear

ch t

o In

volv

e P

ilipi

noA

mer

ican

s32

00 W

. Tem

ple

Stre

etL

os A

ngel

es, C

A 9

0026

Joel

Jac

into

213-

382-

4151

213-

382-

7445

(fa

x)jja

cint

o@si

pa.a

pane

t.or

gw

ww

.apa

net.

org/

~sip

a

•Pr

ovid

es r

esou

rces

, suc

h as

com

pute

rs,

rese

arch

mat

eria

ls, a

nd t

echn

ical

assi

stan

ce t

o pa

rtic

ipan

ts

•In

divi

dual

tut

orin

g an

d se

lf-s

tudy

cour

ses

avai

labl

e to

dev

elop

and

impr

ove

basi

c sk

ills

in E

nglis

h,re

adin

g, m

ath,

sci

ence

, soc

ial s

tudi

es

•D

rop

out

prev

enti

on p

rogr

am

•8-

wee

k pa

rent

ing

prog

ram

•C

urri

culu

m t

o ad

dres

sin

terg

ener

atio

nal/i

nter

cult

ural

con

flic

tbe

twee

n pa

rent

s an

d yo

uth

inim

mig

rant

fam

ilies

•In

clud

es I

nstr

ucto

r’s M

anua

l

•G

ang

Aw

aren

ess

Pro

ject

mat

ches

form

er g

ang

mem

ber

and

com

mun

ity

men

tor

for

gang

-inv

olve

d yo

uth.

Cur

ricu

lum

incl

udes

:

•L

eade

rshi

p de

velo

pmen

t

•C

omm

unit

y pr

ojec

ts

•Jo

b tr

aini

ng

•M

ulti

ethn

ic Y

outh

Lea

ders

hip

Col

labo

rati

vetr

ains

eth

nic

yout

h fo

rco

mm

unit

y ad

voca

cy a

nd le

ader

ship

•K

orea

n A

mer

ican

You

th L

eade

rshi

pP

rogr

am

•G

ang

dive

rsio

n pr

ogra

m w

ith

job

trai

ning

and

pro

-soc

ial a

ctiv

itie

s

•Y

outh

adv

ocac

y in

dea

ling

wit

hsc

hool

s, p

aren

ts, c

rim

inal

just

ice;

•Y

outh

Cou

ncil:

you

th-

driv

en,

lead

ersh

ip d

evel

opm

ent.

Indi

vidu

al

Fam

ily

Indi

vidu

al

Indi

vidu

al

Uni

vers

ity,

Loc

alG

over

nmen

t,C

omm

unit

y,Sc

hool

s

Uni

vers

ity,

Com

mun

ity

Cen

ters

Com

mun

ity-

base

d So

cial

Serv

ice

Age

ncie

s

Ele

men

tary

thro

ugh

Hig

hSc

hool

Asi

anst

uden

ts

Imm

igra

ntpa

rent

s

Gan

g-in

volv

edan

d at

-ris

kyo

uth

Subs

tanc

eab

use,

gan

g-in

volv

ed, a

ndat

-ris

kFi

lipin

o yo

uth

U S S S I S I

Mon

itor

ed b

yC

ity

of T

ucso

n.R

epor

t nu

mbe

rof

hou

rsw

orki

ng w

ith

stud

ents

and

acad

emic

outc

omes

.

Pre-

Post

Tes

ts

Inte

r-ge

nera

tion

alR

elat

ions

hip

Scal

e

Com

mun

ity

Dev

elop

men

tB

lock

Gra

nt

Gra

nts;

Foun

dati

on;

Cor

pora

teD

onat

ions

L.A

. Cit

yC

rim

inal

Ju

stic

e Pl

anni

ngO

ffic

e;L

.A. C

ount

yPr

obat

ion

Off

ice;

L.A

. Cit

yC

omm

unit

yD

evel

opm

ent

Dep

artm

ent

AR

IZO

NA

CA

LIF

OR

NIA

Appendix C: Matrix of Nominated AAPI Youth Development and Violence Prevention Programs


LEG

EN

D F

OR

RIS

K L

EV

EL:

U=

Uni

vers

al P

reve

ntiv

e M

easu

re

S=

Sel

ectiv

e Pr

even

tive

Mea

sure

I

= In

dica

ted

Prev

entiv

e M

easu

re

PR

OG

RA

MST

RA

TEG

IES:

C

OM

PO

NEN

TS

& C

UR

RIC

ULU

MFO

CU

S O

FP

RO

GR

AM

CR

OSS

-SY

STEM

CO

LLA

BO

RA

TIO

NTA

RG

ETG

RO

UP

RIS

KLE

VEL

(U,S

,I)

PR

OG

RA

MEV

ALU

AT

ION

(TO

OLS

)FU

ND

ING

Roo

seve

lt F

amily

Ser

vice

sAs

ian

Com

mun

ity M

enta

l H

ealth

Ser

vices

310

Eig

hth

Stre

et, S

uite

201

Oak

land

, CA

946

07Su

san

Ono

, Pro

ject

Dir

ecto

r(5

10)

869-

6095

(510

) 26

8-02

02 (

Fax)

susa

no@

acm

hs.o

rg

Kor

ean

Com

mun

ity

Cen

ter

of t

he E

ast

Bay

4390

Tel

egra

ph A

venu

e, S

uite

FO

akla

nd C

A 9

4609

510-

547-

2662

kcc3

@ix

.net

com

.com

East

Bay

Asi

an Y

outh

Cen

ter

2025

Eas

t 12

th S

tree

tO

akla

nd, C

A 9

4606

Dav

id K

akis

hiba

510-

533-

1092

510-

533-

6825

(fa

x)ju

nji@

ebay

c.or

g

Scho

ol, C

omm

unit

y &

Law

Enfo

rcem

ent

(SC

ALE

)As

ian

Paci

fic F

amily

Cen

ter

9353

Eas

t V

alle

y B

lvd.

Ros

emea

d, C

A 9

1770

Gle

nn M

asud

a62

6-28

7-29

88w

ww

.pac

ific

clin

ics.

org

•Fu

ncti

onal

Fam

ily T

hera

py

(evi

denc

e-ba

sed

prog

ram

) m

odel

to

impr

ove

fam

ily c

omm

unic

atio

n an

dsu

ppor

tive

ness

and

dec

reas

e ne

gati

vity

.D

irec

t se

rvic

e. I

nten

sive

, sho

rt

term

inte

rven

tion

. Ses

sion

s ov

er

3 m

onth

per

iod.

•H

irin

g 4

bilin

gual

the

rapi

sts

trai

ned

in F

FT

•Se

rvic

es t

o be

inte

grat

ed w

ith

the

exis

ting

Roo

seve

lt V

illag

e C

olla

bora

tive

•Su

bsta

nce

Abu

se p

reve

ntio

n

•A

fter

scho

ol m

ento

rs

•L

eade

rshi

p de

velo

pmen

t

•C

ase

man

agem

ent

•A

cade

mic

inst

ruct

ion

•L

eade

rshi

p ed

ucat

ion

•N

etw

orki

ng: e

stab

lishe

s ne

twor

ksam

ong

scho

ols,

law

enf

orce

men

t an

d co

mm

unit

y•

Key

com

pone

nt: d

evel

opin

g cr

oss-

syst

em li

nkag

es a

nd r

elat

ions

hips

inw

rapa

roun

d ap

proa

ch f

or g

ang-

invo

lved

and

at-

risk

you

th•

Cas

e m

anag

emen

t, in

clud

es f

amily

need

s as

sess

men

t, s

kill-

base

din

divi

dual

and

fam

ily c

ouns

elin

g•

Tra

inin

g of

sch

ool p

erso

nnel

and

polic

e of

fice

rs r

egar

ding

men

tal

heal

th, r

isk

beha

vior

s, a

nd

com

mun

ity

colla

bora

tion

Fam

ily

Indi

vidu

al

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Scho

olC

omm

unit

y

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Scho

ols

Law

Enf

orce

men

t,Sc

hool

Sys

tem

,C

omm

unit

y Se

rvic

e Pr

ovid

ers,

You

th a

ndPa

rent

Adv

ocac

ygr

oups

, Ele

cted

Off

icia

ls

Scho

ols,

Prob

atio

n,So

cial

Ser

vice

s,C

ourt

s

Scho

ols,

Pol

ice,

Com

mun

ity

Gro

ups,

Asi

anPa

cifi

c Fa

mily

Cen

ter

60 Y

outh

,ag

es 1

1-18

, at

hig

h ri

skfo

r vi

olen

tbe

havi

or

Prim

arily

AA

PI y

outh

inhi

gh-r

isk

com

mun

itie

s

Mid

dle

scho

olim

mig

rant

yout

h an

dth

eir

fam

ilies

I U S I S I

Proc

ess

and

Out

com

eE

valu

atio

n to

be c

ondu

cted

by A

RC

Ass

ocia

tes.

Surv

eys:

You

th,

Pare

nt, T

each

er;

Ana

lysi

s of

Serv

ice-

Uti

lizat

ion;

Out

com

eIn

dica

tor

Ana

lyse

s:Sc

hool

Perf

orm

ance

, B

ehav

ior,

Soci

alR

elat

ions

hips

Out

com

e D

ata

from

Sch

ools

and

Prob

atio

nD

epar

tmen

t.

Subs

tanc

eA

buse

Men

tal

Hea

lth

Serv

ices

Adm

inis

trat

ion

of F

eder

alD

epar

tmen

t of

Hea

lth

and

Hum

anSe

rvic

es.

L.A

. Cou

nty

Prob

atio

nD

epar

tmen

t;C

alif

orni

aE

ndow

men

t

CA

LIF

OR

NIA



LEG

EN

D F

OR

RIS

K L

EV

EL:

U=

Uni

vers

al P

reve

ntiv

e M

easu

re

S=

Sel

ectiv

e Pr

even

tive

Mea

sure

I

= In

dica

ted

Prev

entiv

e M

easu

re

PR

OG

RA

MST

RA

TEG

IES:

C

OM

PO

NEN

TS

& C

UR

RIC

ULU

MFO

CU

S O

FP

RO

GR

AM

CR

OSS

-SY

STEM

CO

LLA

BO

RA

TIO

NTA

RG

ETG

RO

UP

RIS

KLE

VEL

(U,S

,I)

PR

OG

RA

MEV

ALU

AT

ION

(TO

OLS

)FU

ND

ING

Chi

nato

wn

Wel

lnes

s V

illag

e P

roje

ctN

ICO

S Ch

ines

e H

ealth

Coa

litio

n14

90 M

ason

Str

eet,

3rd

Flo

orSa

n Fr

anci

sco,

CA

941

33K

ent

Woo

415-

788-

6426

415-

788-

0966

Aft

er S

choo

l Col

labo

rati

veP

rogr

am; Y

outh

Cen

ter

Part

ners

hips

; Fu

Yau

Pro

ject

Rich

mon

d Ar

ea M

ulti-

Serv

ices

(RAM

S)36

26 B

albo

a St

reet

San

Fran

cisc

o, C

A 9

4121

Eve

lyn

Lee

415-

668-

5955

415-

668-

0246

(fa

x)R

AM

SIN

C@

aol.c

om

Yout

h in

Det

enti

onH

elpi

ng &

Out

reac

hing

to

Peer

sEv

eryw

here

(H

OPE

) Pr

ogra

m73

0 Po

lk S

tree

t, 4

th F

loor

San

Fran

cisc

o, C

A 9

4109

Lis

a N

akam

ura

415-

292-

3420

ext

.361

lisa@

apiw

elln

ess.

org

Join

s te

ens

and

adul

ts in

par

tner

ship

prog

ram

s:

•C

hina

tow

n T

een

Lea

ders

Pro

gram

:pr

omot

e se

lf a

nd c

ultu

ral a

war

enes

s,co

mm

unic

atio

n, in

terp

erso

nal s

kills

,le

ader

ship

•L

ight

wav

es M

ento

rshi

p

•St

reng

then

ing

Fam

ily R

elat

ions

Pro

ject

: you

th-l

ed p

rogr

am t

o re

duce

conf

lict,

incr

ease

com

mun

icat

ion,

clos

e th

e ge

nera

tion

gap

•C

olla

bora

tion

of

San

Fran

cisc

o St

ate

Uni

vers

ity

and

seve

ral c

omm

unit

y-ba

sed

orga

niza

tion

s fo

cusi

ng o

nyo

uth-

adul

t pa

rtne

rshi

ps a

nd y

outh

deve

lopm

ent

•A

fter

Sch

ool P

artn

ersh

ip P

rogr

amw

ith

elem

enta

ry a

nd m

iddl

e sc

hool

s:ac

adem

ic e

nhan

cem

ent,

pro

blem

-so

lvin

g, s

elf-

empo

wer

men

t, c

ultu

ral

and

arts

enr

ichm

ent

•Y

outh

Cen

ter

Par

tner

ship

s: p

artn

ers

wit

h 3

ethn

ic y

outh

cen

ters

for

men

tal

heal

th, p

reve

ntio

n, a

nd a

ccul

tura

tion

focu

s

•Fu

Yau

: at-

risk

, low

-inc

ome

earl

ych

ildho

od; e

nhan

ce p

aren

t-ch

ildat

tach

men

t an

d te

ache

r-ch

ilden

gage

men

t

•W

eekl

y gr

oup

sess

ions

for

AA

PI y

outh

in ju

veni

le d

eten

tion

.

•In

tens

ive

case

man

agem

ent

•Pe

er e

duca

tion

pro

gram

and

you

thpe

er le

ader

ship

•O

utre

ach

to b

uild

pos

t-re

leas

e su

ppor

tor

to

prov

ide

prev

enti

on f

or n

on-

deta

ined

you

th a

t-ri

sk

•Psy

chos

ocia

l sup

port

, tut

orin

g,re

crea

tion

al a

ctiv

itie

s

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Com

mun

ity

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Scho

olC

omm

unit

y

Indi

vidu

al

Publ

ic H

ealt

h,C

BO

s,

Stat

e U

nive

rsit

y,Pr

ivat

e ag

enci

es,

Bea

con

Cen

ter

Men

tal H

ealt

h,Sc

hool

s,C

hild

Car

eC

ente

rs,

CA

LWO

RK

S,C

omm

unit

yC

ente

rs

Juve

nile

Jus

tice

,D

epar

tmen

t of

Publ

ic H

ealt

h,Sc

hool

s,M

enta

l Hea

lth/

Subs

tanc

e A

buse

agen

cies

,C

BO

s

Hig

h Sc

hool

and

Mid

dle

Scho

ol y

outh

At-

risk

, low

-in

com

e yo

uth

and

fam

ilies

25 s

choo

lsan

d de

velo

p-m

enta

l cen

ters

13-1

8 ye

arol

d A

API

runa

way

s an

dyo

uth

at r

isk

for

juve

nile

delin

quen

cy,

or in

volv

ed in

juve

nile

just

ice

syst

em

U U S I S I

Stat

e H

ealt

han

d H

uman

Serv

ices

;

Cit

y H

uman

Serv

ices

;

Loc

alD

epar

tmen

t of

Publ

ic H

ealt

h;

Cor

pora

te;

Foun

dati

ons

S.F.

Cit

y an

dC

ount

yD

epar

tmen

t of

Publ

ic H

ealt

h;

May

or’s

Off

ice;

Foun

dati

ons;

Cit

y-w

ide

Con

sort

ia

Dep

artm

ent

ofPu

blic

Hea

lth;

S. F

. Cit

y Y

outh

G

uida

nce

Cen

ter

CA

LIF

OR

NIA



LEG

EN

D F

OR

RIS

K L

EV

EL:

U=

Uni

vers

al P

reve

ntiv

e M

easu

re

S=

Sel

ectiv

e Pr

even

tive

Mea

sure

I

= In

dica

ted

Prev

entiv

e M

easu

re

PR

OG

RA

MST

RA

TEG

IES:

C

OM

PO

NEN

TS

& C

UR

RIC

ULU

MFO

CU

S O

FP

RO

GR

AM

CR

OSS

-SY

STEM

CO

LLA

BO

RA

TIO

NTA

RG

ETG

RO

UP

RIS

KLE

VEL

(U,S

,I)

PR

OG

RA

MEV

ALU

AT

ION

(TO

OLS

)FU

ND

ING

Mul

ticu

ltur

al Y

outh

Pro

gram

Asia

n Yo

uth

Cent

er10

0 W

. Cla

ry A

venu

eSa

n G

abri

el, C

A 9

1776

May

To

626-

309-

0622

626-

309-

0717

(fa

x)as

ian_

yout

h_ce

nter

@ya

hoo.

com

Pro

ject

All

STA

RS

Asia

n Am

eric

ans

for

Com

mun

ity In

volve

men

t21

83 T

ully

Roa

dSa

n Jo

se, C

A 9

5122

Man

ny d

ela

Paz

408-

929-

9790

ext

.15

408-

929-

9783

(fa

x)m

anny

.del

apaz

@A

AC

I.or

g

Pro

ject

Bri

dges

Asia

n Am

eric

ans

for

Com

mun

ity In

volve

men

t21

83 T

ully

Roa

dSa

n Jo

se, C

A 9

5122

Man

ny d

ela

Paz

408-

929-

9790

ext

.15

408-

929-

9783

(fa

x)m

anny

.del

apaz

@A

AC

I.or

g

Pro

ject

PLU

SAs

ian

Amer

ican

s fo

r Co

mm

unity

Invo

lvem

ent

2183

Tul

ly R

oad

San

Jose

, CA

951

22M

anny

del

a Pa

z40

8-92

9-97

90 e

xt.1

540

8-92

9-97

83 (

fax)

man

ny.d

elap

az@

AA

CI.

org

You

th v

iole

nce,

cri

me,

and

gan

gpr

even

tion

:

•L

ife

Skill

s &

Att

itud

es G

roup

s

•Pa

rent

ing

Cla

sses

•C

ouns

elin

g

•Tu

tori

ng &

Cul

tura

l Sen

siti

vity

•C

omm

unit

y C

onso

rtiu

m

•R

ecre

atio

n, E

duca

tion

al, C

ultu

ral

Div

ersi

ty A

ctiv

itie

s

•C

omm

unit

y Se

rvic

e

•C

ase

Man

agem

ent

•E

mpl

oym

ent

Tra

inin

g Pr

ogra

m

•Te

en T

heat

er

•A

fter

scho

ol P

rogr

am: f

ocus

es o

nle

ader

ship

, tea

m b

uild

ing,

cul

tura

ldi

vers

ity,

sel

f es

teem

•R

ecre

atio

n P

rogr

am

•P

aren

t Su

ppor

t G

roup

•M

ulti

cult

ural

rec

reat

iona

l aft

er-s

choo

lpr

ogra

m t

o pr

omot

e pr

ide,

pro

vide

ac

adem

ic h

elp

and

deve

lop

soci

al s

kills

•W

eekl

y su

ppor

t gr

oup

focu

sing

on

risk

beh

avio

rs, g

ang

invo

lvem

ent,

and

subs

tanc

e ab

use

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Scho

olC

omm

unit

y

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Indi

vidu

al

Indi

vidu

al

Scho

ols,

Soci

al S

ervi

ces,

Juve

nile

Jus

tice

,H

ealt

h,M

enta

l Hea

lth,

CB

Os,

Par

k &

Rec

reat

ion,

Bus

ines

ses

Eth

nic

Con

sort

ia,

Scho

ols

Scho

ols,

May

or’s

Gan

gPr

even

tion

Tas

kFo

rce,

Pol

ice,

Soci

al S

ervi

ces

Lat

ino

and

Asi

an a

t-ri

sk/h

igh-

risk

yout

h ag

es 5

-20

and

the

irfa

mili

esre

sidi

ng in

the

San

Gab

riel

Val

ley.

3rd,

4th

, 5th

grad

ers

7th,

8th

grad

ers

pare

nts

7th

-12t

hgr

ader

s at

-ris

kfo

r or

invo

lved

inga

ng a

ctiv

itie

s

U S I U S S I

Ext

erna

lE

valu

atio

nB

eing

Con

duct

ed

Stat

eD

epar

tmen

t of

Just

ice

Cit

y;C

ount

y

Cit

y;C

ount

y

Cit

y, P

ark

and

Rec

reat

ion

CA

LIF

OR

NIA



LEG

EN

D F

OR

RIS

K L

EV

EL:

U=

Uni

vers

al P

reve

ntiv

e M

easu

re

S=

Sel

ectiv

e Pr

even

tive

Mea

sure

I

= In

dica

ted

Prev

entiv

e M

easu

re

PR

OG

RA

MST

RA

TEG

IES:

C

OM

PO

NEN

TS

& C

UR

RIC

ULU

MFO

CU

S O

FP

RO

GR

AM

CR

OSS

-SY

STEM

CO

LLA

BO

RA

TIO

NTA

RG

ETG

RO

UP

RIS

KLE

VEL

(U,S

,I)

PR

OG

RA

MEV

ALU

AT

ION

(TO

OLS

)FU

ND

ING

Pro

ject

AC

EAs

ian

Amer

ican

s fo

r Co

mm

unity

Invo

lvem

ent

2183

Tul

ly R

oad

San

Jose

, CA

951

22M

anny

del

a Pa

z40

8-92

9-97

90 e

xt.1

540

8-92

9-97

83 (

fax)

man

ny.d

elap

az@

AA

CI.

org

Pro

ject

Cro

ssro

ads

Asia

n Am

eric

an R

ecov

ery

Serv

ices

, Inc

.13

70 T

ully

Roa

d, S

uite

501

San

Jose

, CA

951

22N

aom

i Nak

ano-

Mat

sum

oto

408-

271-

3900

408-

271-

3909

(fa

x)nn

nm@

aars

-inc

.org

ww

w.a

ars-

inc.

org

Pro

ject

Sis

ter

to S

iste

rAs

ian

Amer

ican

Rec

over

ySe

rvic

es, I

nc.

1370

Tul

ly R

oad,

Sui

te 5

01Sa

n Jo

se, C

A 9

5122

Nao

mi N

akan

o-M

atsu

mot

o40

8-27

1-39

0040

8-27

1-39

09 (

fax)

nnnm

@aa

rs-i

nc.o

rgw

ww

.aar

s-in

c.or

g

Pro

ject

Rec

onne

ctAs

ian

Amer

ican

Rec

over

y Se

rvic

es, I

nc.

1370

Tul

ly R

oad,

Sui

te 5

01Sa

n Jo

se, C

A 9

5122

Nao

mi N

akan

o-M

atsu

mot

o40

8-27

1-39

0040

8-27

1-39

09 (

fax)

nnnm

@aa

rs-i

nc.o

rgw

ww

.aar

s-in

c.or

g

•Jo

b pr

epar

atio

n, r

efer

ral

and

plac

emen

t

•M

odif

ied

best

tre

atm

ent

prac

tice

s to

deve

lop

cult

ural

ly r

elev

ant

outr

each

and

inte

rven

tion

for

AA

PI t

eens

at

risk

for

subs

tanc

e ab

use

and

othe

r ri

skbe

havi

ors

•C

ultu

rally

rel

evan

t ou

trea

ch,

prev

enti

on a

nd in

terv

enti

on f

or

AA

PI f

emal

e ad

oles

cent

s at

ris

k fo

r su

bsta

nce

abus

e an

d ot

her

high

risk

beh

avio

rs

•C

onfe

renc

e

•Te

en P

regn

ancy

Pre

vent

ion

•O

utpa

tien

t su

bsta

nce

abus

e tr

eatm

ent

prog

ram

mod

ifie

s be

st p

ract

ices

to

deve

lop

cult

ural

ly r

elev

ant

prog

ram

.U

ses

yout

h de

velo

pmen

t (c

halle

nge)

mod

el.

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Indi

vidu

alSc

hool

Com

mun

ity

Indi

vidu

al

Scho

ols,

Juv

enile

Just

ice,

Prob

atio

n,M

enta

l Hea

lth,

Eth

nic-

com

mun

ity

Con

sort

ia

Scho

ols,

Juv

enile

Just

ice,

Prob

atio

n,M

enta

l Hea

lth,

Eth

nic-

com

mun

ity

Con

sort

ia

Scho

ols,

Juv

enile

Just

ice,

Prob

atio

n,M

enta

l Hea

lth,

Eth

nic-

com

mun

ity

Con

sort

ia

You

th a

ges

16-2

1

You

th a

ges

13-2

0

Fem

ale

adol

esce

nts

ages

13-

20

You

th a

ges

13-2

0pr

imar

ilyV

ietn

ames

ean

d Fi

lipin

o;U

.S. b

orn

and

imm

igra

nts

U U S I U S I S I

Cit

y E

valu

ator

Con

sum

erFe

edba

ckSu

rvey

Con

sum

erFe

edba

ckSu

rvey

Cit

y;C

ount

y

Cit

y of

San

Jose

Priv

ate

Don

atio

ns

Stat

e (s

ub-

cont

ract

for

CB

O)

Cou

nty

fund

edD

epar

tmen

ts

of A

lcoh

ol &

Dru

gs

CA

LIF

OR

NIA



LEG

EN

D F

OR

RIS

K L

EV

EL:

U=

Uni

vers

al P

reve

ntiv

e M

easu

re

S=

Sel

ectiv

e Pr

even

tive

Mea

sure

I

= In

dica

ted

Prev

entiv

e M

easu

re

PR

OG

RA

MST

RA

TEG

IES:

C

OM

PO

NEN

TS

& C

UR

RIC

ULU

MFO

CU

S O

FP

RO

GR

AM

CR

OSS

-SY

STEM

CO

LLA

BO

RA

TIO

NTA

RG

ETG

RO

UP

RIS

KLE

VEL

(U,S

,I)

PR

OG

RA

MEV

ALU

AT

ION

(TO

OLS

)FU

ND

ING

Res

tora

tive

Jus

tice

Pro

ject

Asia

n Am

eric

an R

ecov

ery

Serv

ices

, Inc

.13

70 T

ully

Roa

d, S

uite

501

San

Jose

, CA

951

22N

aom

i Nak

ano-

Mat

sum

oto

408-

271-

3900

408-

271-

3909

(fa

x)nn

nm@

aars

-inc

.org

ww

w.a

ars-

inc.

org

Ric

hmon

d/Sa

n Pa

blo

Yout

h P

roje

ctIn

tern

atio

nal I

nstit

ute

of

the

East

Bay

638-

B E

l Por

tal D

rive

San

Pabl

o, C

AY

ang

Xio

ng, P

rogr

amM

anag

er(5

10)

235-

7744

(510

) 23

5-17

44 (

fax)

yxio

ng@

iieb.

org

Com

preh

ensi

ve S

ervi

ces

for

Yout

h an

d Fa

mili

esAs

ian

Paci

fic C

ouns

elin

g &

Trea

tmen

t Ce

nter

of S

anFe

rnan

do V

alle

y59

00 S

epul

veda

Blv

d.V

an N

uys,

CA

914

11So

msr

i Kha

lid81

8-26

7-11

06

Den

ver

Get

AH

EAD

Asia

n Pa

cific

Dev

elop

men

t Ce

nter

1825

Yor

k St

reet

Den

ver,

CO

DJ

Ida

303-

393-

0304

303-

388-

1172

(fa

x)dj

aida

@cs

.com

•C

ultu

rally

rel

evan

t in

terv

enti

on/

dive

rsio

n pr

ogra

m f

or f

irst

tim

e no

n-vi

olen

t yo

uth

offe

nder

s

•Sa

feFu

ture

s: g

ang

inte

rven

tion

•Y

outh

Tog

ethe

r: L

eade

rshi

pde

velo

pmen

t

•A

sian

You

th P

roje

ct: c

ouns

elin

g,m

ento

ring

, and

pre

vent

ion.

•C

urri

culu

m in

clud

esvi

deo/

docu

men

tary

pro

ject

s on

gan

gin

volv

emen

t an

d ot

her

soci

al is

sues

,le

ader

ship

, adv

ocac

y, a

cade

mic

s

•M

enta

l hea

lth

inte

rven

tion

s(i

ndiv

idua

l, gr

oup

and

fam

ily t

hera

py)

for

yout

h in

pro

bati

on; a

lso

prov

ides

tuto

ring

& m

ento

ring

•Se

ekin

g fu

nds

for

gang

pre

vent

ion

•A

fter

scho

ol P

rogr

am

•M

ento

ring

•L

ife

Skill

s

•L

eade

rshi

p D

evel

opm

ent

•Pa

rent

Adv

ocac

y

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Com

mun

ity

Cro

ss-S

yste

m

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Scho

ol

Scho

ols,

Juv

enile

Just

ice,

Prob

atio

n,M

enta

l Hea

lth,

Eth

nic-

com

mun

ity

Con

sort

ia

Prob

atio

n an

dC

ourt

s Sy

stem

,Sc

hool

s, C

BO

s,E

mpl

oym

ent

Age

ncie

s

Men

tal H

ealt

hSc

hool

s

You

th u

nder

18 y

ears

old

Mid

dle

and

Hig

h sc

hool

Stud

ents

s,pr

imar

ilyL

aoti

ans

(Mie

n,K

hmer

)So

me

Lat

ino

yout

h

You

th a

ges

11-1

3Pr

imar

ilyV

ietn

ames

ean

dC

ambo

dian

S I U S I I U S I

Cou

nty

Eva

luat

or

Art

s R

esea

rch

Cur

ricu

lum

,E

xter

nal

Eva

luat

or

CSA

PE

valu

atio

nTo

ols:

Ja

Fam

ily I

ndex

;H

uizi

nga/

Elli

otY

outh

Sel

f-R

epor

tIn

vent

ory

onA

lcoh

ol,

Toba

cco

&O

ther

Dru

gs;

Ros

enbe

rg S

elf-

Est

eem

Sca

le

Cou

nty

Juve

nile

Prob

atio

nD

epar

tmen

t

Stat

e;Fo

unda

tion

s

Fede

ral C

ener

for

Subs

tanc

eA

buse

Prev

enti

on

CA

LIF

OR

NIA

CO

LO

RA

DO



LEG

EN

D F

OR

RIS

K L

EV

EL:

U=

Uni

vers

al P

reve

ntiv

e M

easu

re

S=

Sel

ectiv

e Pr

even

tive

Mea

sure

I

= In

dica

ted

Prev

entiv

e M

easu

re

PR

OG

RA

MST

RA

TEG

IES:

C

OM

PO

NEN

TS

& C

UR

RIC

ULU

MFO

CU

S O

FP

RO

GR

AM

CR

OSS

-SY

STEM

CO

LLA

BO

RA

TIO

NTA

RG

ETG

RO

UP

RIS

KLE

VEL

(U,S

,I)

PR

OG

RA

MEV

ALU

AT

ION

(TO

OLS

)FU

ND

ING

Asi

an A

mer

ican

LEA

D30

45 1

5th

Stre

etW

ashi

ngto

n, D

C 2

0009

Sand

y D

ang

202-

884-

0322

sdan

g@aa

lead

.org

ww

w.a

al.o

rg

Phi

lippi

ne A

mer

ican

Foun

dati

ons

for

Cha

riti

esFi

lipin

o Yo

uth

Com

mitt

ee14

44 N

Str

eet,

NW

Was

hing

ton,

DC

200

07M

ary

Jo M

aral

it20

2-98

6-93

30 (

phon

e)20

2-43

1-56

56 (

fax)

Mag

aral

@ao

l.com

Alp

hare

tta

Yout

h P

rogr

amCe

nter

for P

an A

sian

Com

mun

ity S

ervic

es53

02 B

ufor

d H

wy.

, Sui

te B

-3D

orav

ille,

GA

303

40So

omy

Lee

770-

936-

0969

770-

458-

9377

(fa

x)ka

csca

tl@

aol.c

om

•A

fter

scho

ol P

rogr

am: i

ndiv

idua

lized

acad

emic

cur

ricu

lum

•M

ento

ring

•L

eade

rshi

p D

evel

opm

ent

•Fa

mily

Sup

port

and

Str

engt

heni

ngPr

ogra

m

•Su

mm

er P

rogr

am

•C

ultu

ral T

each

ing

•B

ox T

alks

: You

th-d

evel

oped

net

wor

kan

d di

scus

sion

gro

ups

for

high

sch

ool

yout

h

•Fi

lipin

o A

mer

ican

You

th D

ialo

gue

Con

fere

nce

•C

omm

unit

y L

eade

rshi

p &

Enr

ichm

ent

•A

cade

mic

Tra

ckin

g

•A

rt, M

usic

, Med

ia, C

ultu

re E

vent

•A

fter

scho

ol P

rogr

am

•A

dapt

ed “

Prep

arin

g fo

r D

rug-

Free

Yea

rs”

Cur

ricu

lum

to

AA

PI y

outh

—10

hou

rs o

f A

TO

D in

stru

ctio

n;In

clud

es S

AT

pre

para

tion

cla

sses

;M

odel

ed c

olla

bora

tion

wit

hco

mm

unit

y gr

oups

usi

ng t

he“C

omm

unit

ies

Tha

t C

are”

cur

ricu

lum

from

Sea

ttle

, WA

(20

6-28

6-18

05).

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Scho

olC

omm

unit

y

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Com

mun

ity

Indi

vidu

al

Scho

ols,

Asi

an C

BO

s,L

atin

Am

eric

anY

outh

Cen

ter

Filip

ino

Foun

dati

ons

CB

Os,

Chu

rch,

Fult

onC

olla

bora

tive

Cou

ncil

Init

iati

ve,

Scho

ols

You

th a

ges

7-18

; Par

ents

Filip

ino

Mid

dle

and

Hig

hsc

hool

ers

Som

e co

llege

adul

ts.

Hig

h Sc

hool

stud

ents

,pr

imar

ilyim

mig

rant

Kor

ean

and

Chi

nese

U S I U U

Proc

ess

and

Out

com

eM

easu

res

Pre-

post

Tes

tsSu

inn-

Lew

Acc

ultu

rati

onSc

ale

Surv

eys

from

“Com

mun

itie

sT

hat

Car

e”Pr

even

tion

Prog

ram

Cit

y G

rant

s;Fe

dera

l Off

ice

of R

efug

eeR

eset

tlem

ent

Foun

dati

ons

Cor

pora

tedo

nati

ons

Foun

dati

on;

Priv

ate

Don

ors

Gov

erno

r’sFu

nds;

Cou

nty

DIS

TR

ICT

OF

CO

LU

MB

IA M

ET

RO

PO

LIT

AN

AR

EA

GE

OR

GIA



LEG

EN

D F

OR

RIS

K L

EV

EL:

U=

Uni

vers

al P

reve

ntiv

e M

easu

re

S=

Sel

ectiv

e Pr

even

tive

Mea

sure

I

= In

dica

ted

Prev

entiv

e M

easu

re

PR

OG

RA

MST

RA

TEG

IES:

C

OM

PO

NEN

TS

& C

UR

RIC

ULU

MFO

CU

S O

FP

RO

GR

AM

CR

OSS

-SY

STEM

CO

LLA

BO

RA

TIO

NTA

RG

ETG

RO

UP

RIS

KLE

VEL

(U,S

,I)

PR

OG

RA

MEV

ALU

AT

ION

(TO

OLS

)FU

ND

ING

Peer

Edu

cati

on P

rogr

amSt

ate

of H

awai

iD

epar

tmen

t of

Edu

catio

nD

ivisio

n of

Lea

rner

, Tea

cher

and

Stud

ent

Serv

ices

; Sch

ool R

enew

alBr

anch

189

Lun

alilo

Hom

e R

oad,

2nd

Floo

rH

onol

ulu,

HI

9682

5C

athe

rine

Kaw

amur

a, S

tate

Peer

Edu

cati

on P

rogr

amR

esou

rce

Teac

her

808-

394-

1336

808-

394-

1304

(fa

x)ca

ther

ine_

kaw

amur

a@no

tes.

k12

.hi.u

s

Lei-I

lima

Pro

gram

Coal

ition

for D

rug-

Free

Haw

aii

1130

N. N

imit

z H

wy.

, Su

ite

A-2

59H

onol

ulu,

HI

9681

7C

hery

l Kam

eoko

808-

545-

3228

Ext

.28

808-

545-

2686

(fa

x)cd

fh@

pixi

.com

•Pe

er e

duca

tion

mod

el b

uild

ing

onna

tura

lly e

xist

ing

peer

net

wor

ks.

•In

volv

es s

choo

l/com

mun

ity

acti

viti

es,

peer

sup

port

, cla

ssro

om w

orks

hops

,w

ith

com

preh

ensi

ve a

ppro

ach

toad

oles

cent

hea

lth

prev

enti

on;

•T

rain

s yo

uth

peer

lead

ers

at 2

6se

cond

ary

publ

ic s

choo

ls w

ith

focu

son

AID

S, v

iole

nce

prev

enti

on,

subs

tanc

e ab

use,

sui

cide

, and

pers

onal

/soc

ial s

kills

dev

elop

men

t.

•D

evel

oped

cur

ricu

lum

for

Pee

rE

duca

tion

Pro

gram

•R

educ

e or

pre

vent

sub

stan

ce a

buse

and

high

ris

k be

havi

ors

in g

irls

. Val

ues

and

skill

s-ba

sed

prog

ram

and

men

tori

ng p

rogr

am f

or t

rans

itio

n to

high

sch

ool

•Sc

hool

cre

dit

if t

ake

as a

cla

ss

•“W

elln

ess

Mod

el”-

base

d af

ters

choo

lcl

ub

•D

evel

oped

cur

ricu

lum

tha

t is

val

ues,

skill

s an

d cu

ltur

e ba

sed,

ada

pted

cont

ent

from

Str

engt

heni

ng H

awai

iFa

mili

es t

o fo

cus

on g

irls

; spe

cifi

cge

nder

and

res

ilien

cy is

sues

. Inc

lude

sco

nten

t on

est

ablis

hing

pre

vent

ion

club

s es

peci

ally

for

gir

ls.

•B

ased

in r

ural

are

a.

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Scho

olC

omm

unit

y

Indi

vidu

al

Stat

eD

epar

tmen

ts o

fH

ealt

h an

dE

duca

tion

,C

omm

unit

y,Sc

hool

s

Stat

e O

ffic

e of

You

th S

ervi

ces,

Uni

vers

ity

ofH

awai

i,B

usin

ess:

Cam

pbel

l Est

ate

Mid

dle

and

high

sch

ool

yout

h

7th

and

8th

grad

e gi

rls;

Asi

an-P

acif

icIs

land

er(S

amoa

n,Fi

lipin

o,m

ixed

AA

PIgr

oups

).

U S

Ana

lysi

s of

syst

emat

ical

lyco

llect

edev

alua

tion

dat

aov

er p

ast

11ye

ars,

cond

ucte

d by

Uni

vers

ity

ofH

I; in

clud

esY

outh

Ris

kB

ehav

ior

Surv

ey;

Pre-

post

chan

ges

inkn

owle

dge,

refe

rral

rat

es,

and

chan

ges

inbe

havi

or;

stud

ent

feed

back

on

peer

edu

cato

rs.

Pre-

post

Surv

eys;

CSA

Pm

easu

res.

Incl

ude

Att

enda

nce,

Pare

ntSa

tisf

acti

on,

You

th S

elf-

Est

eem

; Par

ent-

Chi

ldR

elat

ions

hips

;G

ang

Invo

lvem

ent;

Beh

avio

rPr

oble

ms.

Dep

artm

ents

of

Hea

lth

and

Edu

cati

on

Stat

e D

ept

ofH

ealt

h an

dB

lock

Gra

ntth

roug

h C

SAP,

fede

ral D

HH

S

HA

WA

II



PR

OG

RA

MST

RA

TEG

IES:

C

OM

PO

NEN

TS

& C

UR

RIC

ULU

MFO

CU

S O

FP

RO

GR

AM

CR

OSS

-SY

STEM

CO

LLA

BO

RA

TIO

NTA

RG

ETG

RO

UP

RIS

KLE

VEL

(U,S

,I)

PR

OG

RA

MEV

ALU

AT

ION

(TO

OLS

)FU

ND

ING

Stre

ngth

enin

g H

awai

iFa

mili

esCo

aliti

on fo

r a D

rug-

Free

Haw

aii

1130

N. N

imit

z H

wy.

Hon

olul

u, H

I 96

817

Ala

n Sh

inn,

Exe

cuti

veD

irec

tor

808-

545-

3228

808-

545-

2686

(fa

x)cd

fh@

pixi

.net

ww

w.d

rugf

reeh

awai

i.org

Vio

lenc

e P

reve

ntio

nC

onso

rtiu

m (

VC

P)

HI S

tate

Com

miss

ion

on t

heSt

atus

of W

omen

235

S. B

eret

ania

Str

eet,

Rm

407

Hon

olul

u, H

I 96

816

Mar

tha

Ros

s80

8-58

6-57

5880

8-58

6-57

56 (

fax)

Am

eriC

orps

PA

SS P

rogr

am;

SAFE

Pro

ject

Sup

port

ing

Asi

an A

mer

ican

Fam

ilyEm

pow

erm

ent

Asia

n H

uman

Ser

vices

4753

N. B

road

way

, Sui

te 7

00C

hica

go, I

L 6

0640

Liz

Kru

se77

3-72

8-22

3577

3-72

8-47

51 (

fax)

ww

w.a

sian

hum

anse

rvic

es.o

rg

Ref

ugee

You

th P

rogr

amEl

gin

YWCA

Elg

in, I

LA

nn D

e C

ruz

•Fo

urte

en s

essi

on c

ultu

ral v

alue

s-ba

sed

prim

ary

prev

enti

on p

rogr

am t

opr

even

t su

bsta

nce

abus

e, d

omes

tic

viol

ence

, and

gan

g in

volv

emen

t;tr

aine

d fa

cilit

ator

s w

ork

wee

kly

wit

hgr

oups

of

6-10

fam

ilies

.

•C

urri

culu

m in

clud

es li

fe s

kills

,pa

rent

ing,

cul

tura

l con

tinu

ity,

prob

lem

-sol

ving

, ang

er a

nd s

tres

sm

anag

emen

t

•V

CP

brid

ges

Uni

vers

ity

of H

awai

iV

iole

nce

Prev

enti

on c

ours

e in

the

publ

ic s

choo

l sys

tem

to

orde

r in

tegr

ate

viol

ence

pre

vent

ion

skill

s, k

now

ledg

ean

d un

ders

tand

ing

into

cur

ricu

lum

for

K-1

2 gr

ades

. Thi

s is

see

n as

a s

trat

egy

to r

educ

e ph

ysic

al a

nd s

exua

l vio

lenc

ein

the

hom

e, s

choo

l and

com

mun

ity.

Am

eriC

orps

PA

SS P

rogr

am:

•Tu

tori

ng a

nd m

ento

ring

to

rece

ntim

mig

rant

and

ref

ugee

you

th

•D

esig

ning

com

mun

ity

serv

ice

proj

ect

•T

rain

ing

in le

ader

ship

dev

elop

men

t,te

am b

uild

ing,

con

flic

t re

solu

tion

.

•SA

FE P

roje

ct: p

rovi

des

men

tori

ngbe

twee

n A

A c

olle

ge s

tude

nts/

you

ngad

ults

and

at-

risk

you

th t

o pr

even

tpo

or a

cade

mic

per

form

ance

and

ant

i-so

cial

beh

avio

r.

•A

fter

scho

ol P

rogr

am

•Tu

tori

ng

•L

ife

Skill

s W

orks

hop

•C

ultu

ral T

each

ing

Fam

ily

Scho

ol

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Com

mun

ity

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Com

mun

ity

Scho

ols,

Com

mun

ity

Cen

ters

, Pub

licho

usin

g,C

omm

unit

yH

uman

Ser

vice

s

Uni

vers

ity,

Scho

ol S

yste

m

Scho

ols,

Eth

nic

CB

Os

You

th a

ges

5-12

and

the

irfa

mili

es in

high

-ris

kco

mm

unit

ies

You

th a

ges

5-18

, rec

ent

imm

igra

nts

and

refu

gees

You

th A

ges

12-2

1

S S S U S I

Uni

vers

ity

ofH

awai

i Soc

ial

Wel

fare

Eva

luat

ion

and

Res

earc

h U

nit

Eva

luat

ion

repo

rt r

equi

red

by A

mer

iCor

ps

Info

rmal

CSA

P;Fe

dera

lE

duca

tion

Dep

t’s S

afe

&D

rug

Free

Scho

ols;

Fede

ral H

UD

Am

eriC

orps

;

Stat

e, C

ity

fund

s;

Foun

dati

ons;

Don

atio

ns

Uni

ted

Way

;C

ity

HA

WA

II

ILL

INO

IS



LEG

EN

D F

OR

RIS

K L

EV

EL:

U=

Uni

vers

al P

reve

ntiv

e M

easu

re

S=

Sel

ectiv

e Pr

even

tive

Mea

sure

I

= In

dica

ted

Prev

entiv

e M

easu

re

PR

OG

RA

MST

RA

TEG

IES:

C

OM

PO

NEN

TS

& C

UR

RIC

ULU

MFO

CU

S O

FP

RO

GR

AM

CR

OSS

-SY

STEM

CO

LLA

BO

RA

TIO

NTA

RG

ETG

RO

UP

RIS

KLE

VEL

(U,S

,I)

PR

OG

RA

MEV

ALU

AT

ION

(TO

OLS

)FU

ND

ING

Vie

tnam

ese

Yout

h Se

rvic

esCa

thol

ic C

harit

ies

Arch

dioc

ese

of N

ew O

rlean

sIm

mig

ratio

n &

Ref

ugee

Ser

vices

1000

How

ard

Ave

., Su

ite

1200

New

Orl

eans

, LA

701

13-1

916

Dr.

Susa

n W

eish

ar50

4-52

3-37

55 E

xt. 2

606

504-

523-

6962

(fa

x)

Rec

reat

ion/

Yout

h P

rogr

amBo

ston

Chi

nato

wn

Nei

ghbo

rhoo

dCe

nter

885

Was

hing

ton

Stre

etB

osto

n, M

A 0

2111

Ela

ine

Ng

617-

635-

5129

617-

635-

5132

(fa

x)en

g@bc

nc.n

etw

ww

.bcn

c.ne

t

•M

ajor

em

phas

is is

col

labo

rati

on w

ith

pare

nts,

chu

rch

pari

sh,s

choo

ls a

ndot

her

serv

ice

prov

ider

s.

Thr

ee-t

iere

d Pr

ogra

m:

•R

ecre

atio

nal a

ctiv

itie

sat

trac

t at

-ris

kyo

uth

to t

he p

rogr

am,in

clud

es s

port

s,cu

ltur

al e

vent

s, D

rago

n D

ance

tro

upe;

•L

ife

Pla

nnin

g: in

tera

ctiv

e gr

oup

sess

ions

led

by c

ouns

elor

s pr

ovid

ing

valu

es c

lari

fica

tion

and

life

ski

llstr

aini

ng;

•E

duca

tion

al A

ctiv

itie

s: a

cade

mic

com

pute

r-ba

sed

tuto

ring

.Use

PL

AT

O,

an in

divi

dual

ized

com

pute

r tu

tori

ngan

d ed

ucat

iona

l enr

ichm

ent

soft

war

epr

ogra

m.

•R

egul

ar m

eeti

ngs

wit

h pa

rent

s,sc

hool

s, a

nd c

omm

unit

y m

embe

rs.

•A

fter

scho

ol E

nric

hmen

t P

rogr

amw

ith

tuto

ring

, ESL

cla

sses

, aca

dem

ic c

lass

es

•T

utor

ing

Pro

gram

: aca

dem

ic s

kills

,SA

T p

rep,

bili

ngua

l sta

ff.

•Y

OU

LE

AD

: pee

r m

ento

rshi

p an

dyo

uth

lead

ersh

ip s

kills

bui

ldin

g to

addr

ess

high

-ris

k be

havi

ors

(e.g

.vi

olen

ce, A

TO

D)

and

conf

lict

reso

luti

on; p

arti

cipa

nts

plan

and

impl

emen

t re

crea

tion

al a

nded

ucat

iona

l act

ivit

ies

(wor

ksho

ps,

skit

s, p

rese

ntat

ions

) fo

r yo

unge

rpr

ogra

m p

arti

cipa

nts

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Scho

olC

omm

unit

y

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Scho

olC

omm

unit

y

Cat

holic

Cha

riti

esA

rchd

ioce

se o

fN

ew O

rlea

ns,

Vie

tnam

ese

Chu

rch

Pari

sh,

Publ

ic S

choo

ls,

Orl

eans

Par

ish

Juve

nile

Cou

rt,

Ver

saill

es A

rms

Apa

rtm

ent

Com

plex

, Pol

ice.

Scho

ol S

yste

m,

Chi

ld C

are

Serv

ices

, Bos

ton

Com

mun

ity

Cen

ter,

Med

ical

Cen

ter

You

th a

ges

12-1

8 ye

ars

old;

pri

mar

ilyU

.S.-

born

Vie

tnam

ese

and

Lao

.

60%

Imm

igra

ntyo

uth

ages

11-1

8;40

% C

hine

se-

Am

eric

anyo

uth

ages

11-1

8

S I U S

Ann

ual

prog

ram

outc

omes

eval

uati

on f

orD

augh

ters

of

Cha

rity

For

Fede

ral

and

Stat

e gr

ant

requ

irem

ents

.N

atio

nal Y

outh

Ris

k B

ehav

ior

Surv

ey(t

rans

late

d);

Lan

guag

eA

sses

smen

tSc

ales

;Pa

rent

ing

Stre

ss I

ndex

;Pa

rent

ing

Skill

s(c

ultu

rally

adap

ted)

Init

ially

Off

ice

of R

efug

eeR

eset

tlem

ent

now

Dau

ghte

rsof

Cha

rity

Wes

t C

entr

alR

egio

nFo

unda

tion

Stat

e gr

ants

;Fe

dera

l gra

nts;

Foun

dati

on;

Fees

LO

UIS

IAN

A

MA

SSA

CH

USE

TT

S



LEG

EN

D F

OR

RIS

K L

EV

EL:

U=

Uni

vers

al P

reve

ntiv

e M

easu

re

S=

Sel

ectiv

e Pr

even

tive

Mea

sure

I

= In

dica

ted

Prev

entiv

e M

easu

re

PR

OG

RA

MST

RA

TEG

IES:

C

OM

PO

NEN

TS

& C

UR

RIC

ULU

MFO

CU

S O

FP

RO

GR

AM

CR

OSS

-SY

STEM

CO

LLA

BO

RA

TIO

NTA

RG

ETG

RO

UP

RIS

KLE

VEL

(U,S

,I)

PR

OG

RA

MEV

ALU

AT

ION

(TO

OLS

)FU

ND

ING

Lao

Pare

nts

& T

each

ers

Ass

ocia

tion

430

Bry

ant

Ave

nue

Nor

thM

inne

apol

is, M

N 5

5405

Kha

o In

sixi

engm

ay61

2-37

4-24

4761

2-37

4-59

97 (

fax)

Hm

ong

Peac

e Yo

uth

Act

ion

Team

Yout

h Vi

olen

ce P

reve

ntio

nIn

itiat

ive, R

amse

y Co

unty

Part

ners

hip

1558

Cle

ar A

venu

eSt

. Pau

l, M

N 5

5106

Luc

as Y

ang

651-

793-

4089

651-

793-

8080

(fa

x)hl

auya

j@ao

l.com

Hm

ong

Yout

h P

ride

Hm

ong

Amer

ican

Par

tner

ship

1600

Wes

t Uni

vers

ity A

ve.,

#12

St. P

aul,

MN

551

04L

aura

Sch

lick

LaB

lanc

651-

642-

9601

651-

603-

8399

(fa

x)ha

pmai

l@hm

ong.

org

ww

w.h

mon

g.or

g

Pro

ject

You

th C

onne

ctH

mon

g Am

eric

an P

artn

ersh

ip16

00 W

est U

nive

rsity

Ave

., #1

2St

. Pau

l, M

N 5

5104

Lau

ra S

chlic

k L

aBla

nc65

1-64

2-96

0165

1-60

3-83

99 (

fax)

hapm

ail@

hmon

g.or

gw

ww

.hm

ong.

org

Four

mai

n ar

eas:

•St

reng

then

ing

the

scho

ol-p

aren

tspa

rtne

rshi

p;

•Y

outh

Sup

port

Gro

ups:

Dev

elop

sel

f-es

teem

, lea

rnin

g re

adin

ess,

soc

ial s

kills

;

•Te

achi

ng L

ao c

ultu

re a

nd la

ngua

ge

•Pa

rent

Wor

ksho

ps

•You

th I

niti

ativ

e P

lann

ing

Pro

cess

:yo

uth-

led

grou

ps d

evel

op a

Com

mun

ity

Act

ion

Plan

to

addr

ess

com

mun

ity

viol

ence

and

gen

erat

esh

ort

and

long

-ter

m s

olut

ions

.

•A

rtic

ulat

e va

lues

and

dev

elop

lead

ersh

ip s

kills

and

abi

litie

s to

prev

ent

yout

h vi

olen

ce in

the

irco

mm

unit

ies.

Aft

er s

choo

l Men

tori

ng•

Dru

g &

Cri

me

Pre

vent

ion

Pro

gram

:pr

even

tion

and

cul

ture

cur

ricu

lade

sign

ed s

peci

fica

lly f

or t

his

targ

etpo

pula

tion

.

•In

divi

dual

and

sm

all g

roup

inte

nsiv

ein

terv

enti

on a

nd p

reve

ntio

npr

ogra

mm

ing

for

Hm

ong

yout

hde

liver

ed in

indi

vidu

al a

nd s

mal

lgr

oup

sett

ings

.

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Indi

vidu

al

Indi

vidu

al

Indi

vidu

al

Polic

e,Sc

hool

s,Pa

rks

&R

ecre

atio

nD

epar

tmen

t,C

BO

s,M

utua

l Aid

Ass

ocia

tion

s

Ram

sey

Cou

nty

5 Sc

hool

Dis

tric

ts a

nd 3

Com

mun

ity-

base

dO

rgan

izat

ions

,Fo

unda

tion

s

YM

CA

,W

ilder

For

est,

Publ

ic S

choo

ls,

Cit

y Pa

rks

and

Rec

reat

ion.

Prob

atio

nD

epar

tmen

t,Y

MC

A,

Wild

er F

ores

t,C

ente

r fo

rE

mpl

oym

ent

Tra

inin

g,Pu

blic

Sch

ools

,C

ity

Park

s an

dR

ecre

atio

n,H

mon

g C

lans

and

Chu

rche

s

Lao

You

th

Hm

ong

adol

esce

nts

ages

14-

20.

Hm

ong

child

ren

ages

9-12

.

At-

risk

and

beha

vior

ally

-id

enti

fied

Hm

ong

yout

hag

es 9

-14.

U S I U U U S I

Info

rmal

Eva

luat

ion

Foun

dati

onev

alua

ted

broa

der

You

thV

iole

nce

Prev

enti

onIn

itia

tive

, not

spec

ific

You

thA

ctio

n Te

ams.

CSA

Pev

alua

tion

cond

ucte

d

CSA

PE

valu

atio

n

Cor

pora

teD

onor

s;Fo

unda

tion

s;St

ate;

Chu

rch

Don

atio

ns

Kni

ght

Foun

dati

on

Fede

ral C

ente

rfo

r Su

bsta

nce

Abu

sePr

even

tion

(CSA

P)

CSA

P 19

99-

2001

MIN

NE

SO

TA



LEG

EN

D F

OR

RIS

K L

EV

EL:

U=

Uni

vers

al P

reve

ntiv

e M

easu

re

S=

Sel

ectiv

e Pr

even

tive

Mea

sure

I

= In

dica

ted

Prev

entiv

e M

easu

re

PR

OG

RA

MST

RA

TEG

IES:

C

OM

PO

NEN

TS

& C

UR

RIC

ULU

MFO

CU

S O

FP

RO

GR

AM

CR

OSS

-SY

STEM

CO

LLA

BO

RA

TIO

NTA

RG

ETG

RO

UP

RIS

KLE

VEL

(U,S

,I)

PR

OG

RA

MEV

ALU

AT

ION

(TO

OLS

)FU

ND

ING

Stru

ggle

for

Succ

ess

Hm

ong

Amer

ican

Par

tner

ship

1600

Wes

t Uni

vers

ity A

ve.,

#12

St. P

aul,

MN

551

04L

aura

Sch

lick

LaB

lanc

651-

642-

9601

651-

603-

8399

(fa

x)ha

pmai

l@hm

ong.

org

ww

w.h

mon

g.or

g

Sout

h A

sian

You

th A

ctio

n(S

AYA

!)54

-05

Seab

ury

Stre

etE

lmhu

rst,

NY

113

73Sa

yu B

hojw

ani

718-

651-

3484

ed@

saya

.org

ww

w.s

aya.

org

Stre

et I

mpa

ct a

nd

Seco

nd C

hanc

eN

ew V

ision

Asia

n Yo

uth

Serv

ices

39-0

8 Ja

net

Plac

e, #

13Fl

ushi

ng, N

Y 1

1354

Rev

. You

ng H

o L

eeR

ev. D

anie

l Dav

id71

8-96

1-05

3271

8-96

1-60

45

Asi

an P

rofe

ssio

nal E

xten

sion

,In

c. (

AP

EX)

120

Wal

l Str

eet,

3rd

Flo

orN

ew Y

ork,

NY

100

05Su

Min

g Y

eh21

2-80

9-43

9121

2-34

4-56

36ap

ex@

apex

-ny.

org

ww

w.a

pex-

ny.o

rg

•P

reve

ntio

n an

d In

terv

enti

on P

rogr

amad

dres

sing

dru

gs a

nd y

outh

vio

lenc

e.

•Fa

mily

-bas

ed w

ith

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

/You

th P

lans

: inc

lude

sm

ento

ring

, rec

reat

ion,

cul

tura

lac

tivi

ties

, hom

e vi

siti

ng, f

amily

med

iati

on, g

ener

atio

nal p

artn

ers,

pee

rsu

ppor

t gr

oup,

par

ent

supp

ort/

educ

atio

n an

d cl

ubs.

•Sc

hool

-bas

ed S

ervi

ces:

incl

ude

case

man

agem

ent,

adv

ocac

y, le

ader

ship

,m

ento

ring

pai

rs o

f U

.S. a

nd f

orei

gn-

born

stu

dent

s; a

lso

prov

ides

par

ent

supp

ort.

•C

ente

r-ba

sed

Serv

ices

: lea

ders

hip,

orga

nizi

ng, e

duca

tion

al p

repa

rati

on,

recr

eati

on.

•D

evel

oped

Lea

ders

hip

Cur

ricu

lum

•St

reet

Im

pact

: on

the

stre

et o

utre

ach

•L

eade

rshi

p T

rain

ing

•A

nger

Man

agem

ent

and

Con

flic

tR

esol

utio

n•

Pare

nt-Y

outh

Rel

atio

ns•

Cou

nsel

ing

•Se

cond

Cha

nce:

Div

ersi

on p

rogr

amfo

r yo

uth

offe

nder

s in

clud

esC

omm

unit

y Se

rvic

e an

d C

ouns

elin

g

•M

atch

es A

sian

Am

eric

an a

dult

prof

essi

onal

s w

ith

soci

ally

and

econ

omic

ally

dis

adva

ntag

ed A

sian

Am

eric

an ju

nior

hig

h an

d hi

gh s

choo

lyo

uth.

Pro

vide

s pe

rson

al, p

rofe

ssio

nal,

and

educ

atio

nal g

uida

nce.

•T

hree

pro

gram

s: M

ento

r P

rogr

am f

orhi

gh s

choo

l stu

dent

s; T

utor

ing;

and

Rea

ding

/Lit

erac

y P

rogr

am.

•Pr

omot

e in

terp

erso

nal a

ndac

cult

urat

ion

skill

s, p

osit

ive

self

-im

age,

and

bro

aden

hor

izon

s.

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Com

mun

ity

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Indi

vidu

al

Prob

atio

n D

ept,

YM

CA

, Wild

erFo

rest

Cen

ter

for

Em

ploy

men

tT

rain

ing,

Pub

licSc

hool

s, C

ity

Park

s an

dR

ecre

atio

n,H

mon

g C

lans

and

Chu

rche

s.

Scho

ols,

CB

Os

Scho

ols,

Dis

tric

tA

ttor

ney,

Prob

atio

n D

ept

Cor

rect

ions

,C

hurc

h

Chi

nato

wn

YM

CA

, Pub

licSc

hool

s

Hig

h-ri

skH

mon

g yo

uth

ages

12-

18.

Inte

rven

tion

Gro

up:

prim

arily

yout

h re

ferr

edby

Juv

enile

Just

ice.

You

th f

rom

Ban

glad

esh,

Indi

a,Pa

kist

an,

Sri L

anka

,G

uyan

a,T

rini

dad

Age

s11

-19.

Mos

tly

Chi

nese

and

Kor

ean

yout

hag

es 1

3-21

invo

lved

inga

ngs,

trua

ncy,

prob

atio

n,an

d af

terc

are.

Low

-inc

ome

AA

mid

dle

and

high

scho

ol y

outh

;Pr

imar

ilyim

mig

rant

Chi

nese

.

Exp

osed

to

high

-ris

ksi

tuat

ions

.

U S I U S S I S

CSA

P E

val.

1998

.

Uni

ted

Way

Rep

ort.

Tool

s: A

sset

sIn

vent

ory

&G

oal S

etti

ngW

orks

heet

;

Indi

vidu

alPl

an: P

osit

ive

Mem

ory

Ban

kB

uild

ing.

Inte

rnal

ongo

ing

eval

uati

on

Info

rmal

surv

eys

and

Big

Bro

ther

/Big

Sist

ers

outc

ome

mea

sure

men

t.N

o fo

rmal

eval

uati

on.

Vol

unte

erA

sses

smen

tPr

ogre

ss

Rep

ort;

Men

tor

Log

She

et.

CSA

P, e

nded

1998

.

Foun

dati

ons

Cit

y;St

ate;

Priv

ate

Don

ors

Cor

pora

tefu

nder

s an

dD

onor

s

MIN

NE

SO

TA

NE

W Y

OR

K



LEG

EN

D F

OR

RIS

K L

EV

EL:

U=

Uni

vers

al P

reve

ntiv

e M

easu

re

S=

Sel

ectiv

e Pr

even

tive

Mea

sure

I

= In

dica

ted

Prev

entiv

e M

easu

re

PR

OG

RA

MST

RA

TEG

IES:

C

OM

PO

NEN

TS

& C

UR

RIC

ULU

MFO

CU

S O

FP

RO

GR

AM

CR

OSS

-SY

STEM

CO

LLA

BO

RA

TIO

NTA

RG

ETG

RO

UP

RIS

KLE

VEL

(U,S

,I)

PR

OG

RA

MEV

ALU

AT

ION

(TO

OLS

)FU

ND

ING

Ham

ilton

-Mad

ison

Hou

se

Yout

h D

evel

opm

ent

Prog

ram

s50

Mad

ison

Str

eet

New

Yor

k, N

Y 1

0038

Sim

eon

Cur

ry21

2-34

9-37

2421

2-79

1-75

40 (

fax)

sim

eon@

hmh1

00.c

om

Pro

ject

Rea

chYo

uth

Divi

sion

of C

hine

se-

Amer

ican

Pla

nnin

g Co

unci

l65

-69

Lis

pena

rd S

tree

t, 2

nd F

l.N

ew Y

ork,

NY

100

13Fl

oren

ce L

i21

2-94

1-09

20 e

xt. 1

2221

2-96

6-85

81 (

fax)

Yout

h Tr

aini

ng Y

outh

Yout

h D

ivisio

n of

Chi

nese

-Am

eric

an P

lann

ing

Coun

cil

65-6

9 L

ispe

nard

Str

eet,

2nd

Fl.

New

Yor

k, N

Y 1

0013

Flor

ence

Li

212-

941-

0920

ext

. 122

212-

966-

8581

(fa

x)

Asi

an Y

outh

Pro

gram

sAs

ian

Amer

ican

Com

mun

itySe

rvic

es57

Jef

fers

on A

venu

eC

olum

bus,

OH

432

15Ju

dy Y

eh61

4-22

0-40

2361

4-22

0-40

24as

ianc

omsv

@ju

no.c

om

•T

een

Rea

ch P

roje

ct: C

ouns

elin

g, C

ase

Man

agem

ent

•W

orks

hops

on p

reve

ntio

n of

hig

h-ri

skbe

havi

ors,

you

th e

mpo

wer

men

tco

nfer

ence

.

•A

fter

Sch

ool P

rogr

am

•T

een

Eve

ning

Pro

gram

•Sa

turd

ay S

port

s &

Tut

oria

l

•Su

mm

er D

ay C

amp

•L

eade

rshi

p T

rain

ing

•Pr

even

tion

•E

mpo

wer

men

t &

Adv

ocac

y

•H

ands

-on

Exp

erie

nce

•C

omm

unit

y Pr

ojec

ts

•Jo

b-Sh

adow

ing

•T

ruan

cy a

nd g

ang-

rela

ted

prev

enti

onus

ing

peer

cou

nsel

ing

mod

el.

•C

urri

culu

m f

ocus

: ide

ntit

y, c

ultu

re,

imm

igra

tion

exp

erie

nces

,di

scri

min

atio

n

•C

ouns

elin

g fo

cus:

lead

ersh

ip a

ndde

cisi

on-m

akin

g.

•W

orks

hops

on

gang

pre

vent

ion.

•A

dvan

ced

Dev

elop

men

t fo

r A

sian

You

th: t

eam

app

roac

h, A

sian

col

lege

stud

ents

as

yout

h le

ader

, col

labo

rati

onw

ith

Teen

Ins

titu

te a

nd c

omm

unit

yse

rvic

e ed

ucat

ion;

reg

ard

yout

h as

reso

urce

in t

he c

omm

unit

y

•L

eade

rshi

p de

velo

pmen

t

•Pa

rent

ing

educ

atio

n

Indi

vidu

al

Indi

vidu

al

Indi

vidu

al

Indi

vidu

al,

Fam

ily

Park

Dep

artm

ent,

Chu

rche

s

Com

mun

ity,

CB

Os,

Scho

ols

Scho

ols,

Cou

rts,

Chi

nato

wn

YM

CA

,C

hina

tow

nM

enta

l Hea

lth

Scho

ols,

Teen

Ins

titu

te

Mul

ti-e

thni

cte

ens:

Chi

nese

com

pris

e 25

-30

%; A

fric

an-

Am

eric

an;

Lat

ino

Mul

ti-e

thni

cyo

uth

Low

-inc

ome

14-1

8 ye

arol

d, m

ulti

-et

hnic

, mos

tly

Chi

nese

,im

mig

rant

san

d U

.S.-

born

Asi

an-

Am

eric

anA

dole

scen

ts

U U S S U

Eva

luat

ions

for

fund

ers

and

inte

rnal

prog

ram

eval

uati

on

Yea

rly

eval

uati

ons

for

fund

ers

Yea

rly

eval

uati

on f

orfu

nder

s;in

tern

ally

cond

ucte

d

Priv

ate

foun

dati

on

Stat

e, D

ivis

ion

Of

Cri

min

alJu

stic

e; S

tate

,O

ffic

e of

Alc

ohol

&Su

bsta

nce

Abu

se

Stat

e, D

ivis

ion

of C

rim

inal

Just

ice

(Fed

eral

DO

J gr

ants

.)

NE

W Y

OR

K

OH

IO



LEG

EN

D F

OR

RIS

K L

EV

EL:

U=

Uni

vers

al P

reve

ntiv

e M

easu

re

S=

Sel

ectiv

e Pr

even

tive

Mea

sure

I

= In

dica

ted

Prev

entiv

e M

easu

re

PR

OG

RA

MST

RA

TEG

IES:

C

OM

PO

NEN

TS

& C

UR

RIC

ULU

MFO

CU

S O

FP

RO

GR

AM

CR

OSS

-SY

STEM

CO

LLA

BO

RA

TIO

NTA

RG

ETG

RO

UP

RIS

KLE

VEL

(U,S

,I)

PR

OG

RA

MEV

ALU

AT

ION

(TO

OLS

)FU

ND

ING

Asi

an P

acifi

c A

mer

ican

Con

sort

ium

on

Subs

tanc

eA

buse

PO B

ox 1

4431

5Po

rtla

nd, O

R 9

7293

Vic

tor

Leo

503-

257-

9117

503-

254-

7467

(fa

x)vi

ctor

leo@

hotm

ail.c

om

Gan

g En

forc

emen

t Te

amPo

rtla

nd P

olic

e Bu

reau

449

NE

Em

erso

n St

reet

Port

land

, OR

972

11Pr

esto

n W

ong

503-

223-

3331

(Mr.

Won

g ha

s si

nce

reti

red

from

the

Pol

ice

Bur

eau)

.

Sout

heas

t A

sian

You

thFa

mily

Dev

elop

men

tCi

ty o

f Pro

viden

ceM

ayor

’s C

ounc

il on

Dru

g an

dAl

coho

l Abu

se59

1 C

harl

es S

tree

tPr

ovid

ence

, RI

0290

4H

. Phe

ngso

mph

one

401-

421-

7740

Ext

. 334

401-

421-

9243

how

ardh

p@ao

l.com

•Pr

even

tion

-ori

ente

d gr

oup

acti

viti

es

•C

omm

unit

y W

orks

hops

base

d on

com

mun

ity

educ

atio

n ap

proa

ch;

•Y

outh

Gro

up: f

ocus

es o

n le

ader

ship

skill

s, y

outh

init

iate

and

lead

ow

npr

ogra

ms,

add

ress

es s

ubst

ance

abu

sean

d yo

uth

viol

ence

pre

vent

ion.

•“K

itch

en T

able

Cha

t P

rogr

am”

for

yout

h an

d fr

iend

s.

•P

aren

t G

roup

: soc

ial a

nd e

duca

tion

alne

eds;

add

ress

con

cern

s an

d id

enti

fyne

eded

ser

vice

s fo

r th

eir

child

ren.

•Tu

tori

ng a

nd a

cade

mic

sup

port

•C

hess

Gam

e P

rogr

am: p

rovi

des

stud

ent

wit

h co

nfid

ence

and

str

ateg

ies

for

futu

re p

lann

ing

and

goal

set

ting

base

d on

che

ss c

ompe

titi

ons/

tour

nam

ents

. Thr

ough

che

ss, s

tude

nts

lear

n to

thi

nk, p

lan

ahea

d, s

et g

oals

.

•G

angs

to

Clu

bs P

rogr

am: w

eekl

y gr

oup

mee

ting

s to

red

irec

t/ p

rovi

de a

lter

nati

ves

to g

ang

invo

lvem

ent;

add

ress

nee

d fo

rse

nse

of b

elon

ging

, ide

ntit

y an

d se

lf-

este

em, a

nd li

fe s

kills

tra

inin

g.•

Aft

ersc

hool

Tut

oria

l and

Sum

mer

Aca

dem

y:

earn

sch

ool c

redi

ts, i

nten

sive

wor

k w

ith

tuto

rs a

nd m

ento

rs; p

rovi

des

acad

emic

and

life

skill

s su

ppor

t to

at-

risk

stu

dent

s.•

Par

ent

Wor

ksho

p: t

rain

ing

on c

ross

-cu

ltur

al p

aren

ting

, con

flic

t re

solu

tion

,an

ger

man

agem

ent,

Sub

stan

ce A

buse

prev

enti

on. A

dapt

ed P

LA

CE

cur

ricu

lum

for

pare

nts.

•C

ase

Man

agem

ent:

pri

mar

ily f

or t

ruan

cyan

d yo

uth

invo

lved

in v

iole

nt in

cide

nts;

prov

ides

link

age

to s

ervi

ces.

•C

urri

culu

m: S

urvi

val S

kills

for

mid

dle

scho

ol s

tude

nts

to t

each

ris

k av

oida

nce

adap

ted

for

SE A

sian

you

th. (

Adv

ocat

esfo

r H

uman

Pot

enti

al).

•O

ffic

e of

Ref

ugee

Res

ettl

emen

t L

ife

Skill

s C

urri

culu

m.

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Com

mun

ity

Indi

vidu

al

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Scho

olC

omm

unit

y

Stat

e O

ffic

e of

SA, T

obac

coPr

even

tion,

Cou

nty

Men

tal

Hea

lth, P

olic

e,R

egio

nal D

rug

Initi

ativ

e, S

choo

ls,

Chu

rche

s, E

thni

cC

omm

unity

Ass

ocia

tions

(e.

g.K

orea

n G

roce

rA

ssoc

., H

mon

g U

nity

, Vie

tnam

ese

Pare

nt A

ssoc

.)

Polic

e B

urea

u,A

sian

Fam

ilyC

ente

r, Sc

hool

s,R

ose

Cit

yV

illag

e H

ousi

ngPr

ojec

t

Scho

olD

epar

tmen

t,Po

lice

Dep

artm

ent,

Rec

reat

ion

Dep

artm

ent,

Eth

nic

CB

Os,

and

the

May

or’s

Off

ice

You

th a

ges

9to

18,

90%

imm

igra

nts;

Pare

nts.

2nd

thro

ugh

12th

gra

ders

At-

risk

and

gang

and

subs

tanc

eab

use-

invo

lved

mid

dle

and

high

sch

ool

yout

h of

prim

arily

Sout

heas

tA

sian

ref

ugee

pare

nts

U U S I

No

form

alev

alua

tion

.

Kno

wle

dge

Surv

ey r

e:A

lcoh

ol,

Toba

cco,

and

Oth

er D

rugs

and

som

e Pr

e-Po

st m

easu

res.

Info

rmal

, in

-hou

seev

alua

tion

.

Pre-

Post

Surv

eys;

Adv

ocat

es f

orH

uman

Pote

ntia

l,Pr

ojec

tE

valu

ator

s.SE

AY

FDPr

ojec

t:St

uden

t Su

rvey

Stat

e A

lcoh

olan

d O

ther

Dru

gs a

ndSu

bsta

nce

Abu

se;

OJJ

DP

Fede

ral;

Cou

nty

Men

tal

Hea

lth

Cou

nty;

Pri

vate

Don

atio

ns

Fede

ral O

RR

(pre

viou

sly,

fede

ral A

CY

Ffu

nds)

& C

ity

OR

EG

ON

RH

OD

E I

SL

AN

D



LEG

EN

D F

OR

RIS

K L

EV

EL:

U=

Uni

vers

al P

reve

ntiv

e M

easu

re

S=

Sel

ectiv

e Pr

even

tive

Mea

sure

I

= In

dica

ted

Prev

entiv

e M

easu

re

PR

OG

RA

MST

RA

TEG

IES:

C

OM

PO

NEN

TS

& C

UR

RIC

ULU

MFO

CU

S O

FP

RO

GR

AM

CR

OSS

-SY

STEM

CO

LLA

BO

RA

TIO

NTA

RG

ETG

RO

UP

RIS

KLE

VEL

(U,S

,I)

PR

OG

RA

MEV

ALU

AT

ION

(TO

OLS

)FU

ND

ING

Scou

trea

ch P

rogr

amBo

ys S

cout

s of

Am

eric

a13

25 W

est

Wal

nut

Hill

Lan

eIr

ving

, TX

750

38D

e N

guye

nA

ssoc

iate

Nat

iona

l Dir

ecto

r,Sc

outr

each

Div

isio

n(9

72)

580-

2168

(972

) 58

0-21

84 (

fax)

dngu

yen@

netb

sa.o

rgIn

Cos

ta M

esa,

CA

:K

ent

Gib

bs, (

714)

546

-499

0

Yout

h Ed

ucat

ion

and

Adv

ance

men

tAs

ian

Amer

ican

Fam

ily

Coun

selin

g Ce

nter

6220

Wes

tpar

k W

ay, S

uite

104

Hou

ston

, TX

770

57K

im S

zeto

713-

339-

3688

713-

339-

3699

kim

szet

o@aa

fcc.

org

ww

w.a

afcc

.org

At-

Ris

k Yo

uth

Serv

ices

Cent

er fo

r Mul

ticul

tura

l Hum

anSe

rvic

es (

CMH

S)70

1 W

est

Bro

ad S

t., S

uite

305

Falls

Chu

rch,

VA

220

46Sa

rah

Sum

mer

s, C

oord

inat

or

of P

rogr

ams

for

You

th A

t-R

isk

703-

533-

3302

703-

237-

2083

(fa

x)cm

hs20

00@

aol.c

omw

ww

.cm

hsw

eb.o

rg

•In

nova

tive

AA

PI e

mph

asis

in o

utre

ach

and

curr

icul

um

•Sc

outr

each

is u

rban

out

reac

hco

mpo

nent

to

unde

rser

ved

grou

psw

ithi

n th

e B

oy S

cout

s of

Am

eric

a:

•O

utdo

or a

ctiv

itie

s, s

kills

& le

arni

ng

•L

eade

rshi

p

•C

ultu

ral p

rese

rvat

ion

and

trad

itio

ns

•W

orks

hops

: foc

us o

n se

lf-e

stee

m,

ethn

ic id

enti

ty a

nd p

ride

, cha

ract

erbu

ildin

g an

d sk

ills.

•M

enta

l Hea

lth

focu

s: C

ouns

elin

gse

rvic

es f

or y

outh

and

the

ir f

amili

es

At-

Ris

k Y

outh

Ser

vice

s—pr

even

tion

and

trea

tmen

t pr

ogra

ms

for

at-r

isk

yout

h in

elem

enta

ry, m

iddl

e an

d hi

gh s

choo

ls in

Fair

fax

Cou

nty.

Loc

ated

at

com

mun

ity

cent

ers

in lo

w-i

ncom

e ne

ighb

orho

ods

and

at t

he C

MH

S si

te. S

ervi

ces

incl

ude:

•ac

adem

ic s

uppo

rt, m

ento

ring

, lif

esk

ills

grou

ps, t

eam

and

lead

ersh

ipsk

ills,

rec

reat

iona

l and

enr

ichm

ent

acti

viti

es, c

ouns

elin

g, a

dvoc

acy,

supp

ort

for

pare

nts

and

assi

stan

cew

ith

cris

is a

nd c

onfl

ict

situ

atio

ns.

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Gro

up

Rel

igio

usin

stit

utio

ns,

Publ

ic h

ousi

ng,

Eth

nic

Cha

mbe

rof

Com

mer

ce,

Lan

guag

esc

hool

s, L

ocal

CB

Os

Eth

nic

Prog

ram

s;T

RIA

D: J

uven

ilePr

obat

ion

MH

/MR

, Soc

ial

Serv

ices

(C

PS);

Scho

ols

Scho

ols,

Hou

sing

,So

cial

Ser

vice

s,C

omm

unit

yPo

lice

and

Prob

atio

nO

ffic

ers

Boy

s (5

-20

year

s);

Gir

ls (

14-2

0ye

ars)

;Pa

rent

sU

S-bo

rnre

fuge

es a

ndim

mig

rant

s

You

th 1

3-20

year

s ol

d; a

t-ri

sk; i

nvol

ved

wit

h Ju

veni

leJu

stic

e; s

ome

have

mad

ese

riou

s su

icid

eat

tem

pts.

You

th t

o ag

e18

; Pri

mar

ilyfr

om d

iver

secu

ltur

es.

Incl

udes

imm

igra

nts

and

refu

gees

U S I S I

Nat

iona

lO

utco

mes

Stud

yco

nduc

ted

byL

ouis

Har

ris

&A

ssoc

iate

s

Gra

nts

from

Foun

dati

on;

Don

ors;

Due

s

TR

IAD

Loc

alfu

nds:

Cit

y of

Hou

ston

Com

mun

ity

Dev

elop

-men

tB

lock

Gra

nt

Cou

nty;

Foun

dati

ons

and

Cor

pora

teD

onat

ions

;Fe

es a

ndIn

sura

nce

TE

XA

S

VIR

GIN

IA



LEG

EN

D F

OR

RIS

K L

EV

EL:

U=

Uni

vers

al P

reve

ntiv

e M

easu

re

S=

Sel

ectiv

e Pr

even

tive

Mea

sure

I

= In

dica

ted

Prev

entiv

e M

easu

re

PR

OG

RA

MST

RA

TEG

IES:

C

OM

PO

NEN

TS

& C

UR

RIC

ULU

MFO

CU

S O

FP

RO

GR

AM

CR

OSS

-SY

STEM

CO

LLA

BO

RA

TIO

NTA

RG

ETG

RO

UP

RIS

KLE

VEL

(U,S

,I)

PR

OG

RA

MEV

ALU

AT

ION

(TO

OLS

)FU

ND

ING

Chi

ldre

n, Y

outh

and

Fam

ilies

Pro

gram

Asia

n Co

unse

ling

and

Refe

rral

Ser

vice

720

8th

Ave

nue

S., S

uite

200

Seat

tle,

WA

981

04Ju

nko

Yam

azak

i, D

irec

tor

206-

695-

7500

(of

fice

)20

6-69

5-76

06 (

fax)

junk

oy@

acrs

.org

ww

w.a

crs.

org

Com

unic

atio

n A

bout

Hea

lth

betw

een

Adu

lts

and

Teen

s(C

HA

T)

Uni

vers

ity o

f Was

hing

ton

927

N. N

orth

lake

Way

, Ste

. 210

Seat

tle,

WA

981

03-8

871

Mar

yElle

n C

unni

ngha

m20

6-61

6-30

6220

6-61

6-31

64 (

fax)

mec

68@

u.w

ashi

ngto

n.ed

u

Safe

Futu

res

Yout

h C

ente

r63

37 3

6th

Ave

nue

SWSe

attl

e, W

A 9

8126

Stev

e H

amai

206-

938-

9606

ext

.106

206-

938-

7540

(fa

x)w

ww

.sfy

c.ne

t

Yout

h P

rogr

amRe

fuge

e W

omen

’s A

llian

ce30

04 S

. Ala

ska

Seat

tle,

WA

981

08Pa

ng C

hang

206-

721-

3846

Ext

. 29

206-

721-

3967

(fa

x)

1)C

ouns

elin

g:In

divi

dual

/Fam

ilyPa

rent

Edu

cati

on/F

amily

Sup

port

2)Pr

even

tion

/Ear

ly I

nter

vent

ion:

Peer

Sup

port

Gro

upPe

er L

eade

rshi

p Pr

ojec

tPr

omot

ing

Ass

ets

Acr

oss

Cul

ture

s (P

AA

C)

Sum

mer

You

th A

ctiv

itie

s

•C

HA

T:P

aren

t ed

ucat

ion

prog

ram

toim

prov

e co

mm

unic

atio

n be

twee

nad

ults

and

tee

ns in

a V

ietn

ames

eco

mm

unit

y.

•M

ulti

-ses

sion

par

enti

ng p

rogr

am w

ith

occa

sion

al t

een

sess

ions

; com

mun

ity

part

ners

hips

, and

com

mun

icat

ion

stra

tegi

es

•C

urri

culu

m d

evel

opm

ent

•C

ouns

elin

g C

ase

Man

agem

ent:

tar

get

area

s in

clud

e pe

er, i

ndiv

idua

l,ac

adem

ic, j

uven

ile ju

stic

e is

sues

and

fam

ily in

volv

emen

t;

•E

duca

tion

Ser

vice

s: G

ED

HS

cred

itpr

ogra

m; a

cade

mic

tut

orin

g an

den

rich

men

t; n

ativ

e la

ngua

ge a

ndcu

ltur

e in

stru

ctio

n in

Cam

bodi

an;

•Y

outh

Lea

ders

hip

Dev

elop

men

t: y

outh

lead

ersh

ip t

eam

s m

eet

wee

kly

tode

velo

p ac

tivi

ties

for

the

ir m

ulti

ethn

icco

mm

unit

y.

•A

fter

scho

ol B

iling

ual R

eade

r’s

The

atre

: aca

dem

ic a

ssis

tanc

e,

cult

ural

pre

serv

atio

n;

•G

irls

Em

pow

erm

ent

Gro

up: p

eer

supp

ort

for

prev

enti

on o

f hi

gh-r

isk

beha

vior

s;

•P

aren

t G

roup

: foc

uses

on

com

mun

icat

ion

wit

h ad

ults

.

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Scho

ol

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Com

mun

ity

Scho

ols,

Chi

ld P

rote

ctiv

eSe

rvic

es,

Chi

ld W

elfa

reSe

rvic

es,

Juve

nile

Jus

tice

,Y

WC

A,

You

thN

ET,

API

Task

For

ce o

nY

outh

Uni

vers

ity,

Com

mun

ity

Uni

vers

ity

ofW

ashi

ngto

n,Se

attl

e Pu

blic

Hou

sing

,Ju

veni

lePr

obat

ion,

Eth

nic

CB

Os,

Dep

t. o

f So

cial

and

Hea

lth

Serv

ices

,D

epar

tmen

t of

Dru

gs a

ndA

lcoh

ol

Scho

ol’s

Out

,Sc

hool

s

You

th a

ges

3 -1

7

Pare

nts

of

6-8t

h gr

ader

s

You

th, a

ges

5-18

yea

rs o

ld,

prim

arily

Cam

bodi

anan

d a

smal

ler

grou

p of

Vie

tnam

ese

You

th a

ges

7-14

;pr

imar

ilyC

ambo

dian

& E

thio

pian

.M

ostl

y,

U.S

.-bo

rn.

U S I U S U S I S

Eva

luat

ors:

Seat

tle-

Kin

gC

ount

y Pu

blic

Hea

lth

Dep

t.

Fort

yD

evel

opm

enta

lA

sset

sSa

tisf

acti

onSu

rvey

All

proj

ects

do

Pre-

and

Pos

tte

stin

g.

Pre-

Post

surv

eys

Ext

erna

lE

valu

ator

s:

Urb

an I

nsti

tute

& U

nive

rsit

y of

Nor

th C

arol

ina

Res

earc

h an

dE

valu

atio

n

Qua

rter

lyE

valu

atio

n;St

uden

t an

dPa

rent

Sati

sfac

tion

Eva

luat

ions

Stat

e an

dL

ocal

; Pri

vate

;Fo

unda

tion

;Fe

es

U.S

. Off

ice

ofPo

pula

tion

Aff

airs

Stat

e an

d L

ocal

fund

s; F

eder

alG

rant

Loc

al f

unds

;Pr

ivat

e an

dFo

unda

tion

fund

s; F

ees

WA

SH

ING

TO

N



LEG

EN

D F

OR

RIS

K L

EV

EL:

U=

Uni

vers

al P

reve

ntiv

e M

easu

re

S=

Sel

ectiv

e Pr

even

tive

Mea

sure

I

= In

dica

ted

Prev

entiv

e M

easu

re

PR

OG

RA

MST

RA

TEG

IES:

C

OM

PO

NEN

TS

& C

UR

RIC

ULU

MFO

CU

S O

FP

RO

GR

AM

CR

OSS

-SY

STEM

CO

LLA

BO

RA

TIO

NTA

RG

ETG

RO

UP

RIS

KLE

VEL

(U,S

,I)

PR

OG

RA

MEV

ALU

AT

ION

(TO

OLS

)FU

ND

ING

Sout

heas

t A

sian

Lea

ders

hip

(SEA

L)H

mon

g M

utua

l Ass

istan

ceAs

soci

atio

n26

13 G

eorg

e St

reet

LaC

ross

e, W

ID

enis

Tuc

ker

608-

781-

5744

ext

.26

608-

781-

5011

dtuc

ker@

cent

uryt

el.n

et

Prov

ides

pos

itiv

e al

tern

ativ

es t

o ri

sky

beha

vior

thr

ough

pos

itiv

e ac

tivi

ties

and

supp

ort

grou

ps. I

ncre

ases

sel

f -e

stee

man

d se

nse

of p

ride

and

em

pow

erm

ent

inyo

uth.

Edu

cate

s an

d en

light

ens

Asi

anyo

uth

abou

t th

eir

own

cult

ure/

heri

tage

.

•W

eekl

y gr

oup-

base

d di

scus

sion

on

life

skill

s, v

alue

s, g

ang

prev

enti

on

•C

ultu

ral e

duca

tion

and

rec

onne

ctin

gw

ith

cult

ure

of o

rigi

n

•In

stru

ctio

n in

Lif

e Sk

ills

•C

ase

man

agem

ent

•Tu

tori

ng

•M

ulti

cult

ural

You

th C

ounc

il: b

ring

sto

geth

er y

outh

fro

m d

iver

se c

ultu

res

to a

ddre

ss c

ultu

ral

diff

eren

ces/

sim

ilari

ties

, and

rac

ism

and

prej

udic

e to

sch

ools

and

civ

ic g

roup

s.

•C

urri

culu

m f

or S

EA

L p

rogr

am

Indi

vidu

alFa

mily

Scho

ol

Scho

ols,

Polic

e,Ju

veni

le C

ourt

,C

omm

unit

y an

dL

ocal

col

lege

s,L

ocal

Hum

anSe

rvic

esD

epar

tmen

t

You

th a

ges

12-1

8; m

ostl

yH

mon

g w

ith

som

eC

ambo

dian

and

Lao

You

th.

U S I

Pre-

Post

Mea

sure

sTo

ols

deve

lope

dw

ithi

n th

eag

ency

Job

Tra

inin

gPa

rtne

rshi

pG

rant

s; H

mon

gM

utua

lA

ssis

tanc

eA

ssoc

iati

onFo

unda

tion

s

WIS

CO

NSIN



LEG

EN

D F

OR

RIS

K L

EV

EL:

U=

Uni

vers

al P

reve

ntiv

e M

easu

re

S=

Sel

ectiv

e Pr

even

tive

Mea

sure

I

= In

dica

ted

Prev

entiv

e M

easu

re

Promoting Positive Development and Preventing Youth ...

Documents

Transcript of Promoting Positive Development and Preventing Youth ...