Streetworkers, Youth Violence Prevention, and Peacemaking in Lowell, Massachusetts: Lessons and Voices from the Community

The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Center for Injury Research and Policy, USA.
Progress in community health partnerships: research, education, and action 01/2010; 4(3):171-9. DOI: 10.1353/cpr.2010.0010
Source: PubMed


Communities across the United States are using street outreach workers (SWs) to prevent violence. SW programs are generally recognized as a promising model, particularly in light of a 2008 evaluation that demonstrated positive impacts associated with one well-known program. The United Teen Equality Center (UTEC) includes an SW program.
Through this paper we aim to (1) document the work of the UTEC SWs, (2) describe UTEC's approach to training SWs and managing the program, and (3) understand interviewees' perspectives (including UTEC managers, SWs and partners) on how the SWs impact youth violence in Lowell.
We designed a single-site observational study using qualitative methods to address our study aims. We collected data from in-person, semistructured interviews with the two UTEC SW program managers, the six SWs employed during the study period, and 17 representatives from partner agencies.
UTEC SWs outreach to youth, respond to crises in the lives of youth as opportunity, work to facilitate access to resources for youth, and engage in intensive follow-up with youth when needed. These findings are consistent with UTEC's pyramid model of SW outreach. The program emphasizes peacemaking (not only preventing violence) and partnerships as priorities. SWs participate in structured training, receive a comprehensive benefits package, and have opportunities for professional development.
Several aspects of UTEC's program may be useful for other SW programs: Involve youth in hiring SWs, invest in SW training, incorporate peacemaking strategies into outreach, and partner with agencies that also serve youth.

Download full-text


Available from: Shannon Frattaroli, Feb 05, 2014
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although the rates of violence among adults and youth have declined over the past 15 years, youth violence continues to be a significant public health concern. 1 Given the complexities associated with violence, prevention researchers often form collaborations with community partners to address this intractable public health problem. This special issue of Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, & Action is dedicated to the topic of youth violence prevention research. We have collected a series of high-quality papers that highlight research that engages the community in the planning, implementation, and evaluation phases of programs that aim to prevent youth violence. We are pleased to showcase the work of youth violence prevention researchers, practitioners, and community collaborators that is consistent with the principles and practices of community-based participatory research (CBPR). The special issue was supported in part by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) because preventing youth violence through promoting community–research partnerships is a critical function of the CDC’s Division of Violence Prevention. 1 We received dozens of strong submissions for this special issue. Consistent with the mission of Progress in Community Health Partnerships, we have featured a series of Original Research and Work-in-Progress & Lessons Learned papers that apply principles of CBPR in an effort to develop or implement evidence-based violence prevention strategies. 2 The articles described violence prevention research conducted in different contexts, including schools, after-school programs, community-based programs, and
    Progress in community health partnerships: research, education, and action 09/2010; 4(3):163-5. DOI:10.1353/cpr.2010.0004
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The United Teen Equality Center in Lowell, Massachusetts uses Street Outreach Workers (SWs) to intervene with individuals 13-23 years old who are involved in high risk behaviors or in need of assistance. Few studies have explored the perceptions of SWs by their target population (both individuals they have worked with and those who they have not yet worked with). To better understand how youth perceive the SWs and to contribute to the scant literature regarding their roles and impacts, we conducted a community-based survey to capture youth perspectives of, and experiences with SWs. Regardless of whether they had worked with a SW, youth respondents reported that their peers believed the SWs made Lowell a better place. Youth who had prior contact with a SW were more likely to respond that their peers view the SWs as helpful to youth and respected. Youth who had no prior contact with SWs were more likely to report that SWs were not present where they lived. Among youth who had worked with a SW 38% received help finding a job and 67% indicated that working with a SW made a difference in their lives. Approximately 82% of individuals who participated in mediation activities led by the SWs reported that it resolved their conflict. These results support the value of SWs in helping youth meet their needs and in mediating disputes. SWs should continue to connect with local agencies to address the needs of youth, especially employment, which was a priority.
    Journal of Community Health 11/2010; 36(3):469-76. DOI:10.1007/s10900-010-9329-3 · 1.28 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Mediation of potentially violent conflicts is a key component of CeaseFire, an effective gun violence-prevention programme. Objective: To describe conflicts mediated by outreach workers (OW) in Baltimore's CeaseFire replication, examine neighbourhood variation, and measure associations between conflict risk factors and successful nonviolent resolution. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using records for 158 conflicts mediated between 2007 and 2009. Involvement of youth, gangs, retaliation, weapons and other risk factors were described. Principal component analysis (PCA) was used for data-reduction purposes before the relationship between conflict risk components and mediation success was assessed with multivariate logistic regression. Results: Most conflicts involved 2-3 individuals. Youth, persons with a history of violence, gang members and weapons were commonly present. OWs reported immediate, nonviolent resolution for 65% of mediated conflicts; an additional 23% were at least temporarily resolved without violence. PCA identified four dimensions of conflict risk: the risk-level of individuals involved; whether the incident was related to retaliation; the number of people involved; and shooting likelihood. However, these factors were not related to the OW's ability to resolve the conflict. Neighbourhoods with programme-associated reductions in homicides mediated more gang-related conflicts; neighbourhoods without programme-related homicide reductions encountered more retaliatory conflicts and more weapons.
    Injury Prevention 05/2012; 19(3):204-209. DOI:10.1136/injuryprev-2012-040429 · 1.89 Impact Factor
Show more