Journal of Child and Family Studies

, Volume 16, Issue 6, pp 799–807 | Cite as

The SNAP™ Under 12 Outreach Project: Effects of a Community Based Program for Children with Conduct Problems

  • Leena K. Augimeri
  • David P. Farrington
  • Christopher J. Koegl
  • David M. Day
Original Paper


We examined the immediate, short- and long-term effectiveness of the SNAP™ Under 12 Outreach Project (ORP)—a community-based program for children under the age of 12 at risk of having police contact. Sixteen pairs of children were matched on age, sex and severity of delinquency at admission, and randomly assigned to the ORP or to a control group which received less intensive treatment. Level of antisocial behavior was assessed pre and post intervention (immediate effects) and at three follow-up periods (up to 15 months post treatment) to investigate maintenance of possible treatment effects. A search of criminal records was also performed to assess long term effects. Results indicated that ORP children decreased significantly more than controls on the Delinquency and Aggression subscales of the Child Behavior Checklist pre- to post-intervention, and these effects were maintained over time. For statistically significant differences, effect sizes were large (.79 to 1.19). Fewer ORP children (31%) had criminal records at follow-up compared to controls (57%), although this difference was not statistically significant. Overall, the ORP appears to be an effective cognitive-behavioral program for antisocial children in the short term, with possible effects that extend into adolescence and adulthood.


Randomized controlled trial (RCT) Conduct disorder Children Antisocial behavior Cognitive behavioral therapy 



The authors are grateful to Trisha Beuhring, Kathryn Levene, and Paola Ferrante for their contributions to this article. Funding for this evaluation was originally provided by Justice Canada under file #6114-20.


  1. Achenbach, T. M. (1991). Manual for the child behavior checklist/4-18 and 1991 profile. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry.Google Scholar
  2. Brooks, R. B. (1994). Children at risk: Fostering resilience and hope. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 64, 543–553.Google Scholar
  3. Earlscourt Child and Family Centre. (2001a). SNAP™ children's group manual. Toronto: Earlscourt Child and Family Centre.Google Scholar
  4. Earlscourt Child and Family Centre. (2001b). SNAP™ parent group manual. Toronto: Earlscourt Child and Family Centre.Google Scholar
  5. Farrington, D. P., & Welsh, B. C. (2003). Family-based prevention of offending: A meta-analysis. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 36, 127–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Howell, J. C. (2003). Preventing and reducing juvenile delinquency: A comprehensive framework. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Hrynkiw-Augimeri, L., Pepler, D., & Goldberg, K. (1993). An outreach program for children having police contact. Canada's Mental Health, 41, 7–12.Google Scholar
  8. Kazdin, A. E., Mazurick, J. L., & Siegel, T. C. (1994). Treatment outcome among children with externalizing disorder who terminate prematurely versus those who complete psychotherapy. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 33, 549–557.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Levene, K. (1998). SNAPP stop-now-and-plan parenting: Parenting children with behavior problems. Toronto: Earlscourt Child and Family Centre.Google Scholar
  10. Loeber, R., & Farrington, D. P. (2000). Young children who commit crime: Epidemiology, developmental origins, risk factors, early interventions, and policy implications. Developmental Psychopathology, 12, 737–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lösel, F., Beelmann, A. (2006). Child social skills training. In B. C. Welsh & D. P. Farrington (Eds.), Preventing crime: What works for children, offenders, victims, and places (pp. 33–54). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  12. Malik, N. M., & Furman, W. (1993). Practitioner review: Problems in children's relations: What can the clinician do? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 34, 1303–1326.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Moretti, M. M., Emmrys, C., Grizenko, N., Holland, R., Moore, K., Shamsie, J., & Hamilton, H. (1997). The treatment of conduct disorder: Perspectives from across Canada. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 42, 637–648.Google Scholar
  14. Scott, S., Knapp, M., Henderson, J., & Maughan, B. (2004). Financial cost of social exclusion: Follow up study of antisocial children into adulthood. British Medical Journal, 323, 1–5.Google Scholar
  15. Tremblay, R. E., Pagani-Kurtz, L., Masse, L. C., Vitaro, F., & Pihl, R. O. (1995). A bimodal preventive intervention for disruptive kindergarten boys: Its impact through mid-adolescence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 560–568.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Webster-Stratton, C., & Hammond M. (1997). Treating children with early-onset conduct problems: A comparison of child and parent training interventions. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 93–109.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Welsh, B. C., & Farrington, D. P. (2006). Evidence based crime prevention. In B. C. Welsh & D. P. Farrington (Eds.), Preventing crime: What works for children, offenders, victims, and places (pp. 1–17). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  18. Williams, S., Waymouth, M., Lipman, E., Mills, B., & Evans, P. (2004). Evaluation of a children's temper taming program. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 49, 607–612.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leena K. Augimeri
    • 1
  • David P. Farrington
    • 2
  • Christopher J. Koegl
    • 1
  • David M. Day
    • 3
  1. 1.Centre for Children Committing OffencesChild Development InstituteTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Institute of CriminologyUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeEngland
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyRyerson UniversityTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations