Adult Involvement in Improving the Lives of Youth was prepared for CSAP's Division of Community Education in support of the Positive Activities campaign, part of the Youth Substance Abuse Prevention Initiative of the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The report was written by Maria G. Carmona of the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention's National Center for the Advancement of Prevention.
HHS has reviewed and approved policy-related information in this document but has not verified the accuracy of data or analyses presented in the document. The opinions expressed herein are the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official position of SAMHSA or HHS.
DHHS Publication No. (SMA)99-3356
Printed 1999
For single copies of this document, contact SAMHSA's National Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug Information (NCADI), P.O. Box 2345, Rockville, MD 20847-2345; 1-800-729-6686, 301-468-2600, or TDD 1-800-487-4889; or visit the Web site at www.health.org.
The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (SAMHSA/CSAP) is the Nation's lead agency for improving the quality and availability of substance abuse prevention services. In addition to the many programs sponsored by the agency, SAMHSA/CSAP seeks to enhance the work of policymakers and practitioners in their substance abuse prevention efforts.
Adult Involvement in Improving the Lives of Youth was created as technical guidance material supporting the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Positive Activities campaign. It is designed to provide practitioners and members of the general public with a conceptual framework for understanding the many ways in which adult involvement is manifested in the lives of youth. It also expands and clarifies the concept of adult involvement so that the contributions of volunteering adults are not confined to traditional, more obvious roles. Finally, it suggests ways to structure youth-oriented prevention interventions so that they are more likely to achieve prevention goals.
Karol L. Kumpfer, Ph.D.
Director
Center for Substance Abuse Prevention
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Nelba R. Chavez, Ph.D.
Administrator
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Adult Involvement in
Improving the Lives of Youth
Chapter 1
As part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary's Youth Substance Abuse Prevention Initiative, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) recognizes the importance of adult involvement in improving the lives of youth and is attempting to encourage positive involvement as an important element of a comprehensive approach to prevention through the Positive Activities campaign. This campaign does more than promote youth participation in alternative activities; it asserts that active adult involvement is necessary to ensure the provision of positive activities and environments in which youth can flourish.
Though not a prevention "strategy" per se, increased adult involvement in the lives of youth can be a valuable and effective way to implement prevention strategies for a range of problem behaviors. Adults can become involved in many ways. For example, adults can advocate for children either at a national or local level. Or, adults can volunteer their time and services to organizations serving youth such as recreational sports leagues and mentoring programs. Adults can also take a greater interest in the growth and development of the youth they regularly encounter, such as neighbors and coworkers. At the very least, adults can strive to behave in ways that model appropriate and responsible behavior.
This report summarizes and synthesizes research on various youth-oriented prevention activities that rely significantly on the participation of adults. It begins with a brief discussion about why increased adult involvement is considered a promising prevention activity and how adults can become more involved in improving the lives of youth. The document then reviews several studies that examine the effects of adult involvement on the lives of youth. The report next considers important elements of planned efforts to bring adults and youth together in prevention-oriented activities and closes with conclusions and recommendations.
Common sense tells us that youth exposed to caring adults who offer positive, appropriate, and supportive supervision and guidance are less likely to develop substance abuse and other problems than youth whose adult contact is less frequent or largely negative.
This belief is supported by research. Several studies address the issue of lack of supervision, showing that in single-parent households and in households in which both parents work, alcohol and drug use among young people is higher (Buckhalt, Halpin, Noel, & Meadows, 1992; Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development, 1992; Dornbusch et al., 1985; James & Wabaunsee, 1995; Johnson, Hoffman, & Gerstein, 1996; Richardson et al., 1989). The consequences of lack of parental supervision may be more acute among youth from low-income backgrounds because they have fewer options for adult supervision. For example, one study found that 40 percent of eighth graders from families with the lowest incomes did not participate in organized activities outside of school, compared with 17 percent from families with the highest incomes (U.S. Department of Education, n.d.).
Recent findings from the National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health further support the assumption that positive adult involvement in the lives of youth helps protect against youth substance abuse as well as other problem behaviors (Resnick et al., 1997). Researchers found that youth with high levels of connectedness--those who shared a greater number of activities with their parents and other family members--were less likely to use cigarettes, alcohol, and marijuana. Other findings revealed that more frequent parental presence at home was associated with less use of all substances, and a higher perceived level of parental expectation regarding school performance was associated with lower cigarette use.
The research literature on resilience and protective factors also supports the assumption that appropriate and constructive adult guidance and supervision are key components in the development of resilient youth. In particular, a longitudinal study of 698 at-risk infants in Hawaii found that resilient children often had at least one significant person (not necessarily a family member) who accepted them unconditionally (Werner, 1985; Werner & Smith, 1992). This study, as well as others, suggests that at-risk youth who are involved with at least one caring adult are more likely to withstand a range of negative influences, including poverty, parental addiction, family mental illness, and family discord (Anthony & Cohler, 1987; Brook, Whiteman, Gordon, Nomura, & Brook, 1986; Grossman et al., 1992; Rhodes, Gingiss, & Smith, 1994; Werner, 1985; Werner & Smith, 1992). Thus, the results of common sense and research might lead logically to an emphasis on encouraging more involvement of adults in the lives of youth as a prevention strategy.
Adult involvement with youth is more likely to be an effective intervention for substance abuse prevention intervention if such involvement is linked to factors that have been established by research or appear promising as having a low association with substance use. These protective factors include the following:
Thus, if increased adult involvement is expected to result in a long-term outcome of reduced substance abuse among youth, then the fostering of any one or more of the above protective factors would likely be an observed intermediate outcome. Taken one step further, the more protective factors boosted through increased adult involvement, the greater the likelihood that substance abuse will be reduced in the long term.
Since the early 1980's, the literature on effective prevention interventions has grown considerably, and it is now possible to identify some interventions that are either effective or promising. These interventions may or may not rely significantly on volunteer adult involvement or action. However, promising interventions such as school-based, skills-building curricula should be examined to see whether they could be adapted and incorporated into programs that bring adults and youth together in constructive endeavors. Similarly, family-based interventions that seek to enhance communication skills might help shape programs that increase adult involvement in constructive ways. Some of the most effective prevention interventions are policy based and focus on changing environments and social norms such that the use of substances becomes less acceptable and less desirable. The literature on environmental interventions provides insight on the many roles and factors involved in implementing these policy changes and often involves aspects of community mobilization.
Adults can become more involved in improving youths' lives through direct or indirect means. For example, adults can serve as advocates for children on a host of issues. At the national level, some advocacy organizations include the Children's Defense Fund and the Campaign to End Childhood Hunger. At the local level, advocacy may consist of active involvement in such issues as adequate educational and recreational spending and neighborhood safety. Local-level advocacy frequently occurs when community residents mobilize around the cause.
Adults can also become more involved in improving the lives of youth by implementing policies that provide opportunities for youth to thrive. By providing summer jobs for youth, local businesses supply youth with unique learning opportunities. Adults can also participate in various volunteer activities that improve the quality of youth's environments. Adults can volunteer time, expertise, or services such as in neighborhood cleanups, fundraising events, and active involvement in the school parent-teacher association.
Finally, adults can establish positive personal relationships with youth, or improve existing ones, through direct involvement in their day-to-day existence. The opportunities for direct involvement in improving the lives of youth are everywhere. For youth, mentoring adults can be present in:
Of course, mentoring adults may also be found in a variety of other settings in which a child or adolescent spends a lot of time. Most adults would probably agree that as youth, they shared a positive relationship with at least one adult in one or more of the above settings.
While some children are fortunate to be part of large social networks where they are exposed to numerous positive adult influences, many other children have few such resources. For youth in high-risk environments, the extra attention, affection, and guidance afforded by grandparents, other relatives, neighbors, and others in their community may be less available. And all too frequently, these youth succumb to various pressures (e.g., poverty and family discord) and begin to engage in a variety of problem behaviors, of which substance abuse is only one. More formal programs, called here "planned mentoring programs," have been established to address the needs of these youth.
Although it may seem as though planned mentoring is a relatively new phenomenon, it can be found as early as the late 19th century, when Friendly Visiting campaigns, supported by charitable societies, dispatched hundreds of middle-class women to poor and immigrant communities (Freedman, 1993). These women were charged with "raising the character" and "elevating the moral nature" of the poor families and, as a result, served to smooth class tensions (Freedman, 1993, pp. 26-27).
Big Brothers Big Sisters of America is a well-known successor to the Friendly Visiting campaigns. Founded in 1904, this organization connects primarily middle-class adults with disadvantaged youth. Although initially almost as unstructured as the Friendly Visiting movement, this organization has become considerably more structured, and the relationships established through them more supervised. Today, Big Brothers Big Sisters is perhaps the most respected planned mentoring program in the country. Other programmed mentoring efforts are in some ways a response both to Big Brothers Big Sisters' inability to meet the demand of so many disadvantaged youth and to potential volunteers' discouragement with the organization's necessarily comprehensive mentor-screening process (Brown, 1996; Freedman, 1993).
Today, there are several types of formal mentoring programs, which can be distinguished by their sponsoring organization or institution. Formal mentoring programs have been initiated by the following:
It should also be noted that planned mentoring programs most often focus on building one-on-one mentoring relationships. Less common examples are group mentoring (in which one adult mentors several youth) and team mentoring (in which several adults mentor one child).
Studies measuring the effectiveness of increased adult involvement in children's lives as a substance abuse prevention strategy are limited; however, the research that does exist is promising. This research focuses primarily on the effects of formal mentoring programs designed not specifically for substance abuse prevention but for the prevention of a host of high-risk and problem behaviors. It is also unfortunate that the research literature on protective factors against substance abuse has not been extensively consulted when developing programs that seek to bring adults and youth together in constructive, prevention-oriented activities. Such background is essential to the development of both promising strategies and a body of research that can guide future programmatic directions.
Six studies are examined in this section. The first three focus on the effects of planned mentoring programs. The first two of these mentoring studies suggest that, if implemented properly, planned mentoring programs can be an effective substance abuse prevention strategy. The third mentoring study concludes that volunteer adult involvement in youth-oriented activities (not specifically planned mentoring) can produce positive outcomes. The fourth study in this section looks at the effects of community recreation centers on substance-related behavior and conditions. It is noteworthy that the civic engagement spurred by the existence of these centers is viewed as an important reason for the observed positive outcomes. The last two studies in this section examine the effects of community-based efforts to address youth substance abuse and related problems. These studies demonstrate the positive impact adult involvement can have on the lives of youth when this involvement mobilizes the community, spurring advocacy and policymaking.
The difficulty in assessing the effectiveness of many prevention interventions is that programs frequently do not identify the protective factors they seek to enhance. Put another way, programs often do not identify intermediate outcomes in addition to desired long-term goals of reduced substance use or other problem behavior. In cases where intermediate outcomes are identified, these outcomes often have little correlation with low levels of substance use. All of the studies described below produced positive outcomes. In this report, CSAP has attempted to identify the protective factors addressed through these interventions, although it should be noted that this information is primarily inferred rather than explicitly stated by the studies' authors.
Protective factors addressed by this intervention: adult supervision and monitoring, academic achievement, attachment to social institutions, and social and problem-solving skills.
Big Brothers Big Sisters of America (BB/BS) is the oldest planned mentoring program in the United States. The program matches adults with at-risk children between the ages of 5 and 18 years who come from single-parent (or single-guardian) households. BB/BS is a highly structured program with five main components: volunteer screening (e.g., background checks, psychological tests); youth screening to verify eligibility and a minimal level of social skills; mentor training (e.g., presentations on the developmental stages of youth, limit-setting skills); pair matching to ensure that practical considerations (e.g., geographic proximity) and participants' preferences are respected; and supervision by a paid caseworker who maintains monthly contact with the child, the mentor, and the parent during the first year and provides general guidance thereafter. Today, BB/BS supervises approximately 75,000 mentoring matches established through more than 500 chapters nationwide.
In 1992, Public/Private Ventures began an 8-year study of BB/BS. Earlier reports based on this longitudinal study's findings focused on program practices (Furano, Roaf, Styles, & Branch, 1993), volunteer recruitment and screening (Roaf, Tierney, & Hunte, 1994), and the characteristics of adult-youth relationships (Morrow & Styles, 1995). The portion of the study discussed in this review examined whether participation in the program resulted in important, observable changes in the attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors of youth in high-risk environments.
Researchers randomly assigned a total of 959 10- to 16-year-old youth from eight sites to either intervention or control conditions (487 intervention, 472 control). Youth assigned to the control group were placed on BB/BS waiting lists. At baseline (before the parents and children were notified of group assignment), both the parent and the child took pretests. The survey asked parents for general background information (e.g., educational level, labor force status, relationship with youth). Youth were asked for basic demographic information, information on other services received from BB/BS, and baseline measures for outcome variables. When children were matched with their mentors, their assigned caseworker completed two forms that requested background information on the youth and his or her family, including a series of personal questions (e.g., whether the caseworker believed the child had been a victim of abuse).
Eighteen months after the pretests, parents and youth took the posttests. In addition to providing the type of information solicited during the pretest, parents also evaluated the performance of the volunteer mentor and indicated their level of satisfaction with the BB/BS agency and whether they believed the program had made a difference in their child's life. Youth provided followup measures of outcome variables and commented on their relationship with their Big Brother or Big Sister. Caseworkers completed a followup form providing detailed information about the mentoring match.
Researchers employed logistic regression analysis and presented results comparing adjusted treatment and control means. Results regarding substance use initiation were impressive. Little Brothers (LB) and Little Sisters (LS) were significantly less likely (45.8 percent) than members of the control group to initiate illicit drug use during the study period. LB and LS were also 27.4 percent less likely to initiate alcohol use. This effect was stronger for minority LB and LS. In terms of initiation of illicit drug use, minority males were 67.8 percent less likely to initiate than counterpart controls, and minority females were 72.6 percent less likely. LB and LS also performed better than the control group on several other important outcome measures. They skipped half as many school days, skipped fewer classes, and felt more optimistic about schoolwork. LB and LS showed "modest gains" in grade point averages and felt a greater level of trust for their parents and more emotional support from their peers. All of these mentioned effects were statistically significant. No differences were found among any groups regarding self-concept or social and cultural enrichment.
From earlier analysis of BB/BS, researchers attributed these findings to two principal program characteristics: the nature of the mentoring relationship (e.g., intense, supportive, nondidactic) and the program's supportive infrastructure.
One limitation of this study is that reported school-related changes were not verified by analyzing school records. In addition, the number of participants included in the substance-initiation-specific analyses is unclear. Researchers noted that only those subjects who reported never trying illicit drugs or alcohol at baseline were included in the analysis, but the number of youth in this presumed subsample was not provided.
Protective factors addressed by this intervention: adult supervision and monitoring, academic achievement, attachment to social institutions, social and problem-solving skills, and parental support.
Across Ages is a program sponsored by Temple University's Center for Intergenerational Learning in Philadelphia, which designs cross-age programs as a means of meeting community needs. The program targets sixth grade students attending three public middle schools in Philadelphia's most impoverished neighborhoods. It serves approximately 180 students a year. In each of the three schools served by the program, student achievement is low and attendance is poor.
The Across Ages program is composed of four components. The primary component is the one-on-one pairing of senior citizen mentors with students. Mentors are recruited from the community at large, screened, trained, and matched with compatible students. Mentor and student are expected to spend at least 4 hours a week together throughout the entire year. They are also encouraged to participate in a variety of activities together, including cultural and sporting events, tutoring, and community service projects. Mentors receive constant supervision and support from project staff and receive a $60 monthly stipend (because most live on a fixed income).
Other components of the program are youth community service directed toward the elderly (often with their mentor), youth participation in skills-building classes, and parenting workshops for the parents of youth participants. These workshops might or might not include the mentors and are based on the idea that parents can learn more effective parenting styles.
An ongoing, randomized study of Across Ages is currently being conducted (LoSciuto, Rajala, Townsend, & Taylor, 1996). This study looks at data for the 1991-92, 1992-93, and 1993-94 academic years. A total of 729 students were split into three groups: a full treatment group, which participated in all four components of the program; a treatment group, which participated in all program components except the mentoring component; and a control group, which received no intervention. All students took a battery of pretests that measured their attitudes toward the future, school, and elders; attitudes toward older people; self-perception; well-being; reactions to stress or anxiety; knowledge about older people; problem-solving efficacy; knowledge about substance abuse; reactions to situations involving drug use; participation in community service; and frequency of substance abuse. It should be noted that negligible drug use was measured across all three sample groups at the pretest. Thus, this study could not measure the intervention's effectiveness at encouraging drug use cessation. Other data sources include teacher ratings of student participation in classes and community service, Across Ages staff ratings of the mentors' involvement with students, and school records.
The attrition rate for the 3-year period was 23 percent, but information regarding how many study participants were lost from each test group was not provided. A total of 562 students completed both the pretest and posttest.
Of the 11 scales used, 7 showed marginal or significant differences among means. Of these seven, the full treatment group scored better than the control group on six scales: attitudes toward school, future, elders; attitudes toward older people; well-being; knowledge about older people; community service; and reactions to situations involving drug use. All of these differences were statistically significant.
There were also marked differences in the number of days absent from school among the three groups. Control group students missed the most days and the full treatment group missed the fewest. Researchers broke the full treatment group into three categories: students who received exceptional mentoring, students who received average mentoring, and students who received marginal mentoring. Significance tests showed clear differences among the three groups. Higher-quality mentoring was related to fewer absences from school. Exceptional mentoring was also correlated with higher scores on attitudinal scales, but the differences were small.
The findings from this study suggest that planned mentoring programs have the potential to produce positive effects when combined with other intervention approaches and when the quality of the mentoring relationship is high.
Protective factors addressed by this intervention: adult supervision and monitoring, academic achievement, and attachment to social institutions. Project RAISE was a multifaceted intervention targeting middle school youth in high-risk environments. The intervention sought to increase children's school attendance, report card averages, and test scores on standardized tests and to get them promoted to the next grade. Intervention components included one-on-one mentoring and afterschool activities supervised by adult volunteers. The program also employed paid youth "advocates" who recruited mentors and other volunteers to serve in the program.
A 2-year evaluation of Project RAISE compared Project RAISE students in six sites with a comparison group of students (McPartland & Nettles, 1991). Study participants were not randomly assigned to either a treatment or comparison group. Also, treatment students in two of the six sites were not paired with mentors. Intervention effects were examined by analyzing school records and administering a standard achievement test at both the beginning and end of the 2-year period.
The evaluation reported statistically significant differences in attendance and report card grades between the intervention and comparison groups, with the intervention youth demonstrating marked improvement. No differences were detected in promotion to next grade level or in performance on standardized tests. Interestingly, positive effects were found only in sites where one-on-one mentoring was not provided. That is, positive effects were found in sites where youth involvement consisted only of participation in afterschool activities supervised by volunteer adults.
Despite some questions regarding sample size and inconsistency in the nature of the intervention, the Project RAISE findings support the belief that adult involvement (though not neces-sarily planned mentoring) can produce positive effects on factors associated with low levels of substance use.
Protective factors addressed by this intervention: peer and broader social norms that view the use of substances unfavorably, adult supervision and monitoring, parental support, attachment to social institutions, social and problem-solving skills, and low availability of substances.
Boys & Girls Clubs of America is a nonprofit organization founded in 1902 to provide its members with cultural enrichment; social activities; health, physical, and environmental education; and citizenship, leadership, personal, and educational development programs. In addition, Boys and Girls Clubs (BGCs) frequently provide free lunch programs. The clubs rely significantly on the donation of volunteer services as well as financial support.
Schinke, Orlandi, and Cole (1992) studied the effect of the BGCs' recreational centers on public housing developments, areas where drug-related activity and crime are prevalent. In addition to comparing substance abuse and other problem behavior rates of youth with and without access to clubs, researchers also evaluated the effect of the SMART (Self-Management and Resistance Training) Moves substance abuse prevention program, which some BGCs provide. SMART Moves is a substance abuse and teen pregnancy prevention curriculum that focuses on increasing personal skills; social skills; and knowledge about the harmful effects of alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drugs. The program also includes alternative activities and parent outreach components. Thus, the study focused on three types of housing developments: those without access to BGCs, those with access to BGCs, and those with access to BGCs that also offered the SMART Moves program.
Data were collected through polls and interviews with local authorities, review of crime statistics, observation of site conditions and club activities, evidence of drug-related activity noted and quantified by researchers, and semistructured questionnaires distributed to neighborhood residents.
Although the data indicated only slight differences between housing developments with BGCs and those with BGCs that also offered the SMART Moves program, the data clearly showed significant differences between housing developments with BGCs and those without them. Housing developments with BGCs showed lower rates of substance abuse, drug-related trafficking, and other drug-related crime. In explaining these differences, researchers highlighted data showing that BGCs appear to encourage residents to become active in efforts to improve their community. BGCs also facilitate communication between residents and a variety of government agencies, such as the police department and the mayor's office. Thus, this study concluded that civic engagement by adults results in reduced substance abuse and improved living conditions among youth.
Protective factors addressed by this intervention: peer and broader social norms that view the use of substances unfavorably, and low availability of substances.
Sponsored by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the Saving Lives Program sought to reduce alcohol-impaired driving, related driving risks such as speeding and not wearing seat belts, and traffic deaths and injuries in six communities (Hingson et al., 1996). The program was implemented at the community level and tailored to each of the communities by six local coalitions. These coalitions were composed of private citizens and representatives of government agencies, and membership ranged from 20 to 100 persons.
All communities launched interventions consisting of such strategies as media campaigns, business information programs, speeding and drunk driving awareness days, telephone hotlines, sobriety checkpoints, peerled education in high schools, college-based prevention programs, alcohol-free prom nights, beer keg registration, and liquor outlet surveillance.
Composite data on the six Savings Lives cities were compared with data on five cities with similar population densities and geographic locations within the Commonwealth. Researchers monitored traffic citations, reports of crashes that resulted in injuries or fatalities, and speed patterns, and surveyed 15,000 residents by telephone. Data were collected for the 5 program years as well as for the 5 years before the start of the program.
Program cities recorded impressive results, including a 42-percent decrease in fatal crashes involving alcohol and a 50-percent decrease in teenagers who reported driving after drinking.
The Saving Lives Program demonstrates that encouraging adult advocacy and policymaking on behalf of youth can produce positive outcomes. Researchers cite the intervention's organizational structure as the cornerstone of its success. The voluntary participation of numerous community members enabled coalitions to function effectively. Moreover, with the political will of government agencies behind them, the interventions were much more likely to take root, receive attention, and achieve desired outcomes.
Protective factors addressed by this intervention: peer and broader social norms that view the use of substances unfavorably, and low availability of substances.
Based in upstate New York, Project SCAN was launched to address the rate of tobacco sales to minors in Erie County (Cummings & Coogan, 1992). The Rosewell Park Cancer Institute conducted an initial compliance check that showed an alarming 80-percent noncompliance rate for the county. The institute decided to address the problem of youth access to tobacco through a community-based campaign. A coalition of over 100 community residents, including private citizens, business leaders, school administrators, youth, and health and social service workers, was formed. They identified three coalition objectives: increase public awareness about the problem of tobacco use, educate merchants about the tobacco access law to promote voluntary compliance, and encourage local law enforcement agencies to enforce the access law.
To initiate their campaign, Project SCAN members organized a number of events to publicize their cause, including press conferences and speaking engagements. Members also wrote newspaper editorials and visited local law enforcement agencies to encourage and assist with compliance checks of tobacco retailers. Members then distributed thousands of educational packets to retailers.
In one town, two enforcement campaigns were conducted after the educational material was distributed. Noncompliance decreased from 66 percent at the time of the first campaign to 40 percent at the time of the second. In another municipality where compliance checks were conducted, the noncompliance rate was 31 percent just a few months after the Cancer Institute's initial series of compliance checks.
While the coalition recognized that implementation difficulties (primarily a lack of support from law enforcement officials) limited the number of compliance checks that could be conducted in the county, coalition members' efforts did produce positive changes in at least two towns, where tobacco sales to minors were reduced to rates well below the county average. Thus, through the indirect means of advocacy, adult involvement in improving the lives of youth resulted in important changes not just in terms of availability of a substance, but also in retailer practices and community awareness about the problem of adolescent tobacco use.
Key Considerations
for Planned Efforts to Increase Direct Adult Involvement in Improving the
Lives of Youth
Chapter 2
Thus far, this report has stressed that increased adult involvement in improving the lives of youth need not be seen as something that can or should occur only within a planned effort (e.g., a mentoring or tutoring program). Adults can certainly improve the lives of youth considerably through indirect means such as advocacy. It must be recognized, however, that for most people planned activities are a more common way of becoming engaged with youth. This section of the report focuses on two questions that should be considered when implementing a prevention program that brings adults and youths together.
When adult involvement in improving the lives of youth takes the form of a direct personal relationship, it is proper to ask what factors contribute to the development of positive relationships. Information about the elements important to the development of such relationships has been discussed extensively in the literature on mentoring (Benard, 1992; Freedman, 1993; Morrow & Styles, 1995; Saito & Blyth, 1992; Tierney, Grossman, & Resch, 1995). These elements can be summarized as follows:
When these principles are violated, there appears to be some potential for causing psychological or emotional damage to youth, particularly when youth come from high-risk environments and may already have psychological or emotional problems.
Common sense suggests that programs that seek to bring adults and youth together (e.g., tutoring, sports, and mentoring) should take precautionary steps to ensure that the program will be a positive experience for all involved. The practice literature on mentoring is a useful source of information in this regard (Brown, 1996; Crockett & Smink, 1991; Furano et al., 1993; McHale, 1990; National Mentoring Working Group, 1991; U.S. Department of Education, 1990). Experts in this field recommend that the following elements be included in planned efforts to bring adults and youth together:
Conclusions and Recommendations
Chapter 3
This report has been guided by the question, "Can increased adult involvement in improving the lives of youth affect substance initiation and substance use?" After examining the research literature, the preliminary answer appears to be "Yes, if...." The potential for effective substance abuse prevention resides in part with experiences and settings in which youth develop capacities associated with low levels of substance use or find themselves in settings or circumstances in which substance use is not condoned or tolerated. Adult involvement is an effective prevention tactic only when it produces positive changes in substance use or in factors associated with low levels of substance use.
This report also recognizes that adult involvement in improving the lives of youth need not be limited to the formation of direct personal relationships. As the research has shown, adult involvement in improving the lives of youth can be a particularly effective prevention tactic when the nature of that involvement assumes the form of advocacy and policymaking and improves the environments in which youth live.
To promote positive adult involvement in improving the lives of youth as a tactical approach to substance abuse prevention, the following recommendations can be made:
Bonnie Benard, a strong proponent of boosting protective factors in youth as a prevention strategy, notes that for poor youth, the lack of resources for quality child care, schooling, and afterschool programs results in a lack of the "social capital" derived from exposure to additional caring adults (Benard, 1992). Given this lack of resources, promoting adult involvement in improving the lives of youth appears to serve an obvious purpose. However, while adult involvement in improving the lives of youth should not be considered a cure-all for problem behavior among youth in high-risk environments, it can be an important component in a comprehensive prevention effort. It is a means through which effective prevention strategies can be implemented. Increased adult involvement in improving the lives of youth should also be considered as part of a continuum of support services for youth in any community. This is the philosophy underlying the adage, "It takes a village to raise a child."
Another way of conceptualizing the value of positive adult involvement in improving the lives of youth lies in what Freedman (1993) termed "mentor-rich environments," in which adults become proactive participants in improving the lives of youth where they are. This means becoming more attuned to and responsive to youth wherever we encounter them: at work, at religious services, or in the neighborhood. It may also mean becoming part of the daily landscape of youth: becoming mentors, tutors, translators, and advocates in school and becoming involved in other community-based organizations that provide services and recreational opportunities for youth. In such settings, youth benefit from the availability of mentoring adults and a variety of supportive environments. As a result, increased adult involvement in improving the lives of youth can help us engage in what Freedman called "the essential and unfinished drama of reinventing community, while reaffirming that there is an important role for each of us in it" (Freedman, 1993, p. 141).
Agnew, R. (1994). Adolescent drug use and leisure activity. In P. J. Venturelli (Ed.), Drug use in America: Social, cultural, and political perspectives (pp. 87-95). Boston: Jones and Bartlett.
Anthony, E. J., & Cohler, B. J. (Eds.). (1987). The invulnerable child. New York: The Guilford Press.
Benard, B. (1992). Mentoring programs for urban youth: Handle with care. Portland, OR: Northwestern Regional Education Laboratory.
Block, J., Block, J. H., & Keyes, S. (1988). Longitudinally foretelling drug usage in adolescence: Early childhood personality and environmental precursors. Child Development, 59, 336-355.
Brook, J. S., Whiteman, M., Gordon, A. S., Nomura, C., & Brook, D. W. (1986). Onset of adolescent drinking: A longitudinal study of intrapersonal and interpersonal antecedents. Advances in Alcohol and Substance Abuse, 5, 91-110.
Brown, R. S. (1996). Challenges and potential of mentoring at risk students: A literature review. ERS Spectrum, Spring 1996, 17-28. (Available from Educational Research Service, 2000 Clarendon Blvd., Arlington, VA 22201, [703] 243-2100)
Buckhalt, J. A., Halpin, G., Noel, R., & Meadows, M. E. (1992). Relationship of drug use to involvement in school, home, and community activities: Results of a large survey of adolescents. Psychological Reports, 70, 139-146.
Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development. (1992). A matter of time: Risk and opportunity in the nonschool hours. (Report of the Task Force on Youth Development and Community Programs). New York: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
Castro, F. G., Maddahian, E., Newcomb, M. D., & Bentler, P. M. (1987). Multivariate model of the determinants of cigarette smoking among adolescents. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 28, 273-289.
Cohen, D. A., & Rice, J. (1997). Parenting styles, adolescent substance use, and academic achievement. Journal of Drug Education, 27(2), 199-211.
Crockett, L., & Smink, J. (1991). The mentoring guidebook: A practical manual for designing and managing a mentoring program. Clemson, SC: National Dropout Prevention Center. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 341 924)
Crundall, I. A. (1993). Correlates of student substance use. Drug and Alcohol Review, 12(3), 271-276.
Cummings, K. M., & Coogan, K. (1992). Organizing communities to prevent the sale of tobacco products to minors. International Quarterly of Community Health Education, 13(1), 77-86.
Dornbusch, S. M., Carlsmith, J. M., Bushwall, S. J., Ritter, P. L., Leiderman, H., Hastorf, A. H., & Gross R. T. (1985). Single parents, extended households, and the control of adolescents. Child Development, 56, 326-341.
Foxcroft, D. R., & Lowe, G. (1997). Adolescents' alcohol use and misuse: The socializing influence of perceived family life. Drugs: Education, Prevention, and Policy, 4(3), 215-229.
Freedman, M. (1993). The kindness of strangers: Adult mentors, urban youth, and the new voluntarism. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Furano, K., Roaf, P. A., Styles, M. B., & Branch, A. Y. (1993). Big Brothers/Big Sisters: A study of program practices. Philadelphia: Public/Private Ventures.
Grossman, F. K., Beinashowitz, J., Anderson, L., Sakurai, M., Finnin, L., & Flaherty, M. (1992). Risk and resilience in young adolescents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 21, 529-550.
Gruenewald, P. J., Ponick, W. R., & Holder, H. D. (1993). The relationship of outlet densities to alcohol consumption: A time series cross-sectional analysis. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 17, 38-47.
Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R. F., & Associates. (1992). Communities that care: Action for drug abuse prevention. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Heaven, P. C. (1993). Personality predictors of self-reported delinquency. Personality and Individual Differences, 14(1), 67-76.
Hingson, R., McGovern, T., Howland, J., Heeren, T., Winter, M., & Zakocs, R. (1996). Reducing alcohol-impaired driving in Massachusetts: The Saving Lives Program. American Journal of Public Health, 86(6), 791-797.
Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Jackson, C., Henriksen, L., Dickinson, D., & Levine, D. W. (1997). The early use of alcohol and tobacco: Its relation to children's competence and parents' behavior. American Journal of Public Health, 87, 359-364.
James, W. H., & Wabaunsee, R. (1995). At-risk students: Drug prevention through afterschool/latchkey programs? Drugs: Education, Prevention, and Policy, 2(1), 65-75.
Jessor, R. (1976). Predicting time of onset of marijuana use: A developmental study of high school youth. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 44(1), 125-134.
Johnson, R. A., Hoffman, J. P., & Gerstein, D. R. (1996). The relationship between family structure and adolescent substance use (DHHS Publication No. SMA 96-3086). Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Office of Applied Studies.
Kafka, R. R., & London, P. (1991). Communication in relationships and adolescent substance use: The influence of parents and friends. Adolescence, 26(103), 587-598.
Kellam, S. G., Brown, C. H., & Fleming, J. P. (1982). The prevention of teenage substance use: Longitudinal research and strategy. In T. J. Coates, A. C. Petersen, & C. Perry (Eds.), Promoting adolescent health: A dialog on research and practice (pp. 171-200). New York: Academic Press.
LoSciuto, L., Rajala, A. K., Townsend, T. N., & Taylor, A. S. (1996). An outcome evaluation of Across Ages: An intergenerational mentoring approach to drug prevention. Journal of Adolescent Research, 11, 116-129.
McHale, G. (1990). Turning point: A white paper on the course of mentoring. Pittsburgh, PA: PLUS (Project Literacy U.S.). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 329 613)
McPartland, J. M., & Nettles, S. M. (1991). Using community adults as advocates or mentors for at-risk middle school students: A two-year evaluation of Project RAISE. American Journal of Education, 99, 568-586.
Morrow, K. V., & Styles, M. B. (1995). Building relationships with youth in program settings: A study of Big Brothers/Big Sisters. Philadelphia: Public/Private Ventures.
Mulhall, P. F., Stone., D., & Stone, B. (1996). Home alone: Is it a risk factor for middle school youth and drug use? Journal of Drug Education, 26(1), 39-48.
National Mentoring Working Group. (1991). Mentoring: Elements of effective practice (Publication No. ADP 96-5688). Alexandria, VA: United Way of America. (Available from Resource Center, Mentor Program, State of California Alcohol and Drug Programs, 1700 K Street, Sacramento, CA 95814, [916] 327-3728)
O'Malley, P. M., & Wagenaar, A. C. (1991). Effects of minimum drinking age laws on alcohol use, related behaviors and traffic crash involvement among American youth: 1976-1987. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 52, 478-491.
Pruitt, B. E., Kingery, P. M., Mirzaee, E., Heuberger, G., & Hurley, R. S. (1991). Peer influence and drug use among adolescents in rural areas. Journal of Drug Education, 21(1), 1-11.
Resnick, M. D., Bearman, P. S., Blum, R. W., Bauman, K. E., Harris, K. M., Jones, J., Tabor, J. Beuhring, T., Sieving, R. E., Shew, M., Ireland, M., Bearinger, L. H., & Undry, J. R. (1997). Protecting adolescents from harm: Findings from the National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health. Journal of American Medical Association, 278, 823-832.
Rhodes, J. E., Gingiss, P. L., & Smith, P. B. (1994). Risk and protective factors for alcohol use among pregnant African-American, Hispanic, and White adolescents: The influence of peers, sexual partners, family members, and mentors. Addictive Behaviors, 19, 555-564.
Richardson, J. L., Dwyer, K., McGuigan, K., Hansen, W. B., Dent, C., Johnson, C. A., Sussman, S. Y., Brannon, B., & Flay, B. (1989). Substance use among eighth-grade students who take care of themselves after school. Pediatrics, 84, 556-566.
Roaf, P. A., Tierney, J. P., & Hunte, D. E. I. (1994). Big Brothers/Big Sisters: A study of volunteer recruitment and screening. Philadelphia: Public/Private Ventures.
Saito, R. N., & Blyth, D. A. (1992). Understanding mentoring relationships. Minneapolis, MN: Search Institute. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 359 295)
Schinke, S. P., Orlandi, M. A., & Cole, K. C. (1992). Boys & Girls Clubs in public housing developments: Prevention services for youth at risk. Journal of Community Psychology (OSAP Special Issue), 118-128.
Shedler, J., & Block, J. (1990). Adolescent drug use and psychological health: A longitudinal inquiry. American Psychologist 45(5), 612-630.
Tierney, J. P., Grossman, J. B., & Resch, N. L. (1995). Making a difference: An impact study of Big Brothers/Big Sisters. Philadelphia, PA: Public/Private Ventures.
U.S. Department of Education. (1990). One on one: A guide for establishing mentor programs. Washington, DC: Author. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED 327 344)
U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). Beyond prevention curricula: A guide to developing alternative activities programs. Washington, DC: Author.
Van Nelson, C., Thompson, J. C., Rice, C. M., & Cooley, V. E. (1991, October). The effect of participation in activities outside the school and family structure on substance use by middle and secondary school students. Paper presented at annual meeting of the Midwest Educational Research Association, Chicago.
Wang, M. Q., Fitzhugh, E. C., Eddy, J. M., & Westerfield, R. C. (1996). Attitudes and beliefs of adolescent experimental smokers: A smoking prevention perspective. Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education, 41, 1-12.
Watts, R. K., & Rabow, J. (1983). Alcohol availability and alcohol-related problems in 213 California cities. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 7, 47-58.
Werner, E. E. (1985). Stress and protective factors in children's lives. In A. R. Nicol (Ed.), Longitudinal studies in child psychology and psychiatry (pp. 335-355). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Werner, E. E., & Smith, R. S. (1992). Overcoming the odds: High risk children from birth to adulthood. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.