Journal of Primary Prevention

, Volume 26, Issue 5, pp 439–454 | Cite as

The Impact of Culturally Relevant Violence Prevention Models on School-Age Youth

  • Laxley W. Rodney
  • Dana L. Johnson
  • Rameshwar P. Srivastava

The Family and Community Violence Prevention (FCVP) Program was established in 1994 to address the escalation of youth violence among ethnic minorities. This federally funded program adapted the public health model and organized Family Life Centers throughout the country to serve youth who were considered to be at risk for violence and other abusive behaviors. The purpose of this three-year study, 1999–2002, was to determine the effectiveness of the FCVP Program's six-component curriculum in reducing violence among participants. Results from posttest scores of 2,315 youth showed girls 12 and over to be most at risk for deviant behaviors; the program was most effective with boys under age 12. Academic performance and bonding to school were protective factors whereas exposure to violence was a risk factor for all four ethnic groups studied—African Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, and Native Hawaiians.

Editors' Strategic Implications: Cultural anthropologists, public health specialists, and school officials should know that prevention programs can be designed to reflect the unique, culturally appropriate norms of specific ethnic minority groups, even as these programs address shared risk factors. The authors discuss the promising strategy of enhancing academic performance and school bonding to serve as protective factors against school violence, but they also describe age, gender, and cultural differences that must be addressed in future research.


school violence culture exposure gender 


  1. Bureau of Justice Statistics (2001). Differences in rates of violent crime experienced by Whites and Blacks narrow. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice.Google Scholar
  2. Elliott, D. S., & Huizinga, D. (1989). Improving self-report measures of delinquency. In M. Klein (Ed.), Cross-national research in self-reported crime and delinquency (pp. 155–186). Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  3. Flannery, D. J., & Singer, M. I. (1999). Exposure to violence and victimization at school. New York: ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education, Institute for Urban and Minority Education.Google Scholar
  4. Garbarino, J. (1999). Lost boys: Why our sons turn violent and how we can save them. Los Angeles: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  5. Goldstein, A. (1991). Delinquent gangs. Champaign, IL: Research Press.Google Scholar
  6. Hawkins, J. D. (1995). Controlling crime before it happens: Risk-focused prevention. National Institute of Justice Journal, August (Issue Number 229), 10–18.Google Scholar
  7. Howell, J. C. (Ed.) (1995). Guide for implementing the comprehensive strategy for serious, violent and chronic juvenile offenders. (NCJ No. 153681) Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  8. Junger-Tas, J., Terlouw, G. J., & Klein, M. W. (1994). Delinquent behavior among young people in the western world: First results of the international self-report delinquency study. Amsterdam: Kugler.Google Scholar
  9. Kachur, S. P., Stennies, G. M., Kenneth, E. P., Modzeleski, W., Stephenson, R., Murphy, R., et al. (1996). School associated violent deaths in the United States, 1992–1994. Journal of the American Medical Association, 275, 1729–1733.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kadel, S., & Follman, J. (1993). Reducing school violence in Florida. Hot topics, usable research. [ED 355614]. Washington, DC: Southeastern Region Vision for Education.Google Scholar
  11. Kaufman, P., Chen, X., Choy, S. P., Ruddy, S. A. , Miller, A. K., Fleury, K. K., et al. (2000). Indicators of school crime and safety, 2000. (NCES 2000-017/NCJ-184176) Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
  12. Maguire, K., & Pastore, A. L. (1999). Sourcebook of criminal justice statistics, 1998. U.S. Department of Justice, (NCJ 176356). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  13. National Center for Education Statistics (2002). Indicators of school crime and safety: 2002 (NCES Electronic Catalog No. 2003009). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.Google Scholar
  14. Pianta, R. C., Steinberg, M., & Rollins, K. (1995). The first two years of school: Teacher-child relationships and deflections in children's classroom adjustment. Development and Psychopathology, 7, 297–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Rennison, C. (2001). Criminal victimization 2000: Changes 1993-2000 (NCJ-187007). Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.Google Scholar
  16. Rodney, L. W. (1999). Collaboration diversity and self-help in violence prevention. In L. Rodney (Ed.), Proceedings from fourth national conference on family and community violence prevention. Wilberforce, OH: Family and Community Violence Prevention Program.Google Scholar
  17. Rodney, H. E., Tachia, H. R., & Rodney, L. W. (1999). The home environment and delinquency: A study of African American adolescents. Families in Society, 80(6), 551–559.Google Scholar
  18. Satcher, D. (2001). Youth violence: A report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  19. Siegel, L. J., & Senna, J. J. (1988). Juvenile delinquency: Theory, practice, and law (3rd ed.). West, NY: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  20. Srivastava, R., & Rodney, L. W. (2003). FCVP Program instrument scoring manual. Retrieved December 2003, from
  21. Stinson, N. (2002). Cooperative agreement with Central State University for the Family and community violence prevention program. Federal Register, 67, 10413–10417.Google Scholar
  22. Trump, K. (2002). School-related deaths, school shootings, and school violence incidents. Cleveland, OH: National School Safety and Security Services.Google Scholar
  23. Walker, H. (1995). School violence prevention. Eugene, OR: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management.Google Scholar
  24. Walker, H., Colvin, G., & Ramsey, E. (1995). Antisocial behavior in school strategies and best practices. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
  25. Wilkinson, G. S. (1993). The Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT 3): Administration manual. Wilmington, DE: Wide Range.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laxley W. Rodney
    • 1
    • 2
  • Dana L. Johnson
    • 1
  • Rameshwar P. Srivastava
    • 1
  1. 1.Family and Community Violence Prevention Program (FCVP)Central State UniversityWilberforceUSA
  2. 2.Graduate Program College of EducationCentral State UniversityWilberforceUSA

Personalised recommendations