Introduction

Adolescence is an extremely influential time in an individual’s life, setting the trajectory for development (including social, cognitive, emotional, and cultural) and behavior across a lifetime.[1] Youth that engage in antisocial behaviors and/or have adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are at greater risk for future problem behavior and negative physical and mental health outcomes.[2] While many policies and programs target the risk factors and negative experiences in a youth’s life, positive youth development focuses on expanding youths’ inherent strengths as a way to promote positive behavior while also decreasing risky behaviors.[3] Positive youth development recognizes that preventing problems is not a complete solution; youth also should be properly prepared for encountering life problems by positive asset enhancement.[4] Positive youth development assumes that childhood is a time of relative plasticity, and youths’ trajectory is impacted by the relationships between biology, psychology, family, community, culture, and history.[5]

Youth’s Risk and Protective Factors

In the context of youth development, protective factors refer to experiences that decrease the likelihood of negative outcomes and increase the likelihood of positive outcomes.[6] Risk factors, on the other hand, refer to events that decrease the likelihood of positive outcomes and increase the chances of negative outcomes.[7] Risk and protective factors can be intrinsic or extrinsic, typically co-occur in individuals, and are not uniform across all social groups.[8] These factors also expand across domains: family, peer, community, and school.[9] Protective factors can act as a buffer against the impact of risk factors.[10] Positive youth development recognizes that increasing protective factors can be just as impactful as decreasing risk factors as it allows youth to establish healthy coping skills and sustained positive development. Table 1 highlights some important risk and protective factors found in youth development literature.

Table 1

Select Risk and Protective Factors for Youth, by Domain

Domain Risk Factors Protective Factors
Family Inconsistent/harsh punishment Reliable support and discipline from caregivers
Lack of parental supervision/monitoring Adequate socioeconomic resources
Low levels of family bonding High levels of family bonding
High levels of family conflict Adequate parental supervision
School/Community Negative relationships with peers and teachers Positive relationships with peers and teachers
Involvement with antisocial activities and antisocial peers Involvement with prosocial activities and prosocial peers
Poor school performance/engagement Positive school performance/engagement
Individual Negative self-image/self-esteem Ability to self-regulate emotions and cope
Poor impulse control Ability to get along with peers and adults
Poor social and problem-solving skills High self-esteem/resiliency
Insecure attachment Engagement with/connection to school, peers, culture, religion, etc.
Lack of goals/commitment to conventional roles Future oriented
Adapted from U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2009). Risk and protective factors for mental, emotional, and behavioral disorders across the life cycle. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2mFm3ky.

Youth Development Interventions

While there is no universally adopted definition, youth development programs typically seek to increase exposure to positive, supportive environments that allow for skill-building experiences.[11] Youth development programming commonly targets the “Five C’s” of positive youth development: competence, confidence, character, connection, and caring.[12] Bernat and Resnick (2006) argue that the components of effective youth development programs are:

  • A foundation in relevant theory and incorporation of validated strategies and/or best practices.
  • The promotion of protective factors and reduction in risk factors.
  • A focus on multiple behaviors and systems.
  • A focus on preventing problems and promoting healthy development.
  • The appropriate intensity and duration.
  • Continuous, rigorous evaluation.[13]

Some youth development interventions are more applicable to and impactful during certain developmental stages.[14] Figure 1 illustrates relevant intervention themes across the youth developmental stages.

Figure 1

Interventions Across the Life-Course

Figure1
Source: National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine. (2019).

Age cutoffs for these life-course stages vary by source, but are generally as follows:

  • Infancy, 0-2 years old. This time period contains a large amount of growth and change. During this time period, infants learn to roll over, crawl, walk, and improve on hand-eye coordination.[15]
  • Early childhood, 3-5 years old. During early childhood, children learn language, gain a sense of independence, and begin preschool.[16] During early childhood, youth learn to spend time away from caregivers and tend to be extremely curious.[17]
  • Childhood, 6-11 years old. This stage is marked by entrance into elementary school, and the growth of mental, physical, language, and social skills.[18] During this time period, youth tend to form groups and seek out approval from peers.[19]
  • Early Adolescence, 12-14 years old. The physical changes of puberty typically begin during this time period. Youth tend to seek approval from peers over their parental figures.[20] Cognitively, youth begin to truly understand the concepts of cause and effect and are ready for in-depth, long-term thinking.[21]
  • Adolescence, 15-17 years old. During this stage, youth continue to experience the physical changes of puberty and develop interest in romantic and sexual relationships.[22] Brain development continues and many youth strive to become independent from authority figures.[23] During this time period, youth typically start high school.
  • Young adulthood, 18 years old and up. This stage is highlighted by complete physical development and the final stages of the development of impulse control and gauging risks/rewards.[24] The age that completes young adulthood is debated across many fields. Psychology and brain studies have indicated that the brain is not completely developed until the mid-20s, suggesting that young adulthood extends until close to 30 years old.[25]

Youth development interventions can also target a variety of different developmental aspects: cognitive, social, emotional, moral, or physical. A meta-analysis of randomized control trials (considered the “gold standard” of research studies) of youth development programs found that youth development interventions had significant, albeit small, effect on youths’ academic achievement and psychological adjustment independent of program characteristics and participant age.[26]

Descriptions of Select Youth Development Programs

A wide variety of evidence-informed and evidence-based youth development programs are available for application in communities. Program ratings are offered by the Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development, a registry of 89 evidence-based interventions that have been found to reduce antisocial behavior and promote healthy development in youth. Blueprints certifies programs as “promising,” “model,” or “model plus” programs.

  • A promising intervention is one that meets the minimum standards of effectiveness.
  • A model intervention meets a higher standard of effectiveness and indicates greater confidence in the program’s ability to change behavior and targeted outcomes.
  • A model plus intervention meets all standards met by a model intervention plus has been replicated independently from the original program.

Similarly, CrimeSolutions.gov is a registry of programs/practices and their impact on criminal justice, juvenile justice, and crime victim services outcomes. Crime Solutions rates interventions as “no effects,” “inconclusive,” “promising,” or “effective.”

  • An intervention rated as no effects has strong evidence suggesting that there were no effects or had harmful effects when implemented with fidelity.
  • An inconclusive intervention made it past the initial review but has inconclusive evidence.
  • A promising intervention has some evidence indicating that they achieve intended outcomes.
  • An effective intervention has strong evidence to suggest that it achieves the intended outcomes when implemented with fidelity.

The following programs offer varied services and delivery methods (community, school, or home). This list provides a glimpse into the variety of evidence-informed/evidence-based interventions that exist to target youth development, organized by their ratings from Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development.

Promising Programs

Big Brothers Big Sisters of America

This community mentoring program matches adult mentors to at-risk children based on goals and interests of the mentor and child.[27] Big Brothers Big Sisters seeks to foster positive relationships between youth and their mentors. Further, mentors and youth set and work toward personalized goals for the youth.[28] Research on this program indicates youth participating in Big Brothers Big Sisters are less likely to initiate illicit drug and alcohol use, are less likely to skip school and cut class, have improved grades, and improved relationships with parents and peers.[29] In addition to the Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development rating, Crime Solutions rates Big Brothers Big Sisters as effective.

Child First

This home-based intervention works with vulnerable children (prenatal through five years) and their families.[30] Child First has two components: a system of care that works to decrease stress and promote positive outcomes and a relationship-based approach that works to heal trauma by enhancing positive parent-child relationships and promoting positive social-emotional/cognitive development.[31] A randomized control trial of Child First showed children receiving the intervention had improved language and externalizing one-year after receiving the intervention. Further, mothers had less parenting stress six months after receiving the intervention and fewer negative mental health symptoms one-year after receiving the intervention.[32]

Familias Unidas

This culturally-specific intervention is targeted toward Hispanic youth and immigrant parents and works to improve family functioning and prevent conduct disorders, drug/alcohol use, and risky sexual behaviors in youth.[33] Program delivery consists of family visits and multi-parent groups engaged in participatory exercises. Familias Unidas evaluators found the intervention improves family functioning and communication between children and parents and reduces illicit drug use and conduct problems.[34] In addition to the Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development rating, Crime Solutions rates Familias Unidas as promising.

Model Programs

ParentCorps

This program seeks to enhance pre-K programming for children of color in low-income communities through the promotion of effective parenting practices and the prevention of problem behaviors.[35] ParentCorps recognizes families from typically high-risk environments have many strengths. The program contains three main components: professional learning for teachers/leaders/mental health professionals/parent support staff, a parenting program for families of pre-K students, and social emotional classroom learning for pre-K students.[36] ParentCorps evaluators found that, compared to the control group, participant parenting practices improved while children experienced a reduction in behavioral problems.[37] Other studies showed that, at the end of their kindergarten year, youth in the program scored higher on academic achievement tests and teacher-rated academic performance and parent participants had higher parent/teacher-rated effective parenting practices.[38] Further, youth in the program increased academic performance and reduced internalizing and externalizing problems through 8 years of age.[39]

GenerationPMTO

Originally titled Parent Management Training-Oregon Model, this program seeks to teach family management skills to reduce antisocial behavior in children ages 3 to 16.[40] The program aims to teach core parenting practices (skill encouragement, effective discipline, monitoring, problem solving, and positive involvement) along with regulating emotions, giving clear directions, tracking behavior, and promoting school success.[41] Generation PMTO evaluators identified reductions in coercive parenting, improvements in youths’ socio-emotional functioning and social skills, and reductions in deviant behavior with program participation.[42]

Functional Family Therapy (FFT)

FFT is a short-term intervention for youth at risk for institutionalization and their families.[43] This intervention seeks to improve family communications/support while decreasing negative and problem behaviors.[44] FFT targets cognitive, emotional, and behavioral domains in both youth and their families through five distinct phases.[45] FFT evaluators found the program reduced recidivism rates, reduced days of drug/alcohol use, and led to improvements in internalizing/externalizing behaviors.[46] In addition to the Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development rating, Crime Solutions rates FFT as effective.

Model Plus Programs

LifeSkills Training (LST)

This three-year, classroom-based substance abuse prevention program targets middle school students. LST teaches self-management skills, social skills, and resistance skills specifically targeting drug use.[47] Program evaluators found LST participants had lower rates of cigarette use, binge drinking, and illicit drug use (including methamphetamine, marijuana, opioids, and hallucinogens).[48] Additionally, research suggests LST participation increases life-skills and substance abuse knowledge and reduces future delinquency and fighting.[49] In addition to the Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development rating, Crime Solutions rates LST as effective.

Multisystemic Therapy (MST)

MST is an intensive family and community-based treatment that targets the causes of antisocial behavior in justice-system involved juveniles.[50] This intervention seeks to give parents the necessary skills and resources to teach their children how to cope with family, peer, school, and neighborhood problems.[51] The targeted age group includes middle- and high school-aged youth— typically juveniles who frequently commit offenses. MST evaluators found that those receiving the intervention have lower rearrest and recidivism rates, increased family cohesion, and heightened youth functioning.[52] In addition to the Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development rating, Crime Solutions rates MST as effective.

Conclusion

Approaches to youth development highlight the relationships between biology, psychology, family, community, and culture in a youth’s life. Moreover, those supporting youth development acknowledge that the quality of a person’s childhood is critical to outcomes in adulthood. Interventions intended to set youth on a positive life trajectory must target protective factors in addition to risk factors. Research supports the effectiveness of several promising, model, and model plus programs/interventions in the field of youth development. While researchers should continue to evaluate programming to more precisely determine the impacts of specific program components, policymakers should focus their attention on rigorous, systematically evaluated youth development interventions to ensure youth are connected to programs most likely to guide them toward a better future.

  1. Ciocanel, O., Power, K., Eriksen, A., & Gillings, A. (2016). Effectiveness of positive youth development interventions: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(3), 483-504. ↩︎

  2. Ciocanel, O., Power, K., Eriksen, A., & Gillings, A. (2016). Effectiveness of positive youth development interventions: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(3), 483-504.; Curran, T., & Wexler, L. (2017). School-based positive youth development: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of School Health, 87(1), 71-80.; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2019). Fostering healthy mental, emotional, and behavioral development in children and youth: A national agenda. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.; Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. (2015). Risk factors for delinquency. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2kju8dR. ↩︎

  3. Ciocanel, O., Power, K., Eriksen, A., & Gillings, A. (2016). Effectiveness of positive youth development interventions: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(3), 483-504.; Committee on Community-Level Programs for Youth. (2002). Community programs to promote youth development. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.; Roth, J. L., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2003). What exactly is a youth development program? Answers from research and practice. Applied Developmental Science, 7(2), 94-111. ↩︎

  4. Roth, J. L.& Brooks-Gunn, J. (2016). Evaluating youth development programs: Progress and promise. Applied Developmental Science, 20(3), 188-202. ↩︎

  5. Lerner, R. M., Almerigi, J. B., Theokas, C., & Lerner, J. V. (2005). Positive youth development: A view of the issues. Journal of Early Adolescence, 25(1), 10-16. ↩︎

  6. Bernat, D. H., & Resnick, M. D. (2006). Healthy youth development: Science and strategies. Journal of Public Health Management Practices, 12, S10-S16. ↩︎

  7. Bernat, D. H., & Resnick, M. D. (2006). Healthy youth development: Science and strategies. Journal of Public Health Management Practices, 12, S10-S16. ↩︎

  8. Bernat, D. H., & Resnick, M. D. (2006). Healthy youth development: Science and strategies. Journal of Public Health Management Practices, 12, S10-S16. ↩︎

  9. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. (2015). Risk factors for delinquency. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2kju8dR. ↩︎

  10. Bernat, D. H., & Resnick, M. D. (2006). Healthy youth development: Science and strategies. Journal of Public Health Management Practices, 12, S10-S16. ↩︎

  11. Roth, J. L., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2003). What exactly is a youth development program? Answers from research and practice. Applied Developmental Science, 7(2), 94-111. ↩︎

  12. Lerner, R. M., Almerigi, J. B., Theokas, C., & Lerner, J. V. (2005). Positive youth development: A view of the issues. Journal of Early Adolescence, 25(1), 10-16.; Roth, J. L., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2003). What exactly is a youth development program? Answers from research and practice. Applied Developmental Science, 7(2), 94-111. ↩︎

  13. Bernat, D. H., & Resnick, M. D. (2006). Healthy youth development: Science and strategies. Journal of Public Health Management Practices, 12, S10-S16. ↩︎

  14. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2019). Fostering healthy mental, emotional, and behavioral development in children and youth: A national agenda. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. ↩︎

  15. Science NetLinks. (n.d.). Major physical growth stages. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2VbBUon. ↩︎

  16. Open Educational Resources. (n.d.). Periods of development. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/31U3Xv7. ↩︎

  17. Accord Alliance. (2008). Ages 3-5 years (pre-schoolers). Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2o1R57u. ↩︎

  18. Accord Alliance. (2008). Ages 6-11 years. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2GtjNnF.; Child Development Institute. (n.d.). The ages and stages of child development. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/356Sha3 ↩︎

  19. Accord Alliance. (2008). Ages 6-11 years. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2GtjNnF. ↩︎

  20. Youth Advocates for Health. (n.d.). Handout: Ages and stages. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2dw7Imv. ↩︎

  21. Youth Advocates for Health. (n.d.). Handout: Ages and stages. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2dw7Imv. ↩︎

  22. Allen, B., & Waterman, H. (2019). Stages of adolescence. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2uZhIZ2. ↩︎

  23. Allen, B., & Waterman, H. (2019). Stages of adolescence. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2uZhIZ2. ↩︎

  24. Allen, B., & Waterman, H. (2019). Stages of adolescence. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2uZhIZ2. ↩︎

  25. Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late tends through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469-480. ↩︎

  26. Ciocanel, O., Power, K., Eriksen, A., & Gillings, A. (2016). Effectiveness of positive youth development interventions: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(3), 483-504. ↩︎

  27. Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development. (n.d.). Big Brothers Big Sisters of America. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2naTBra. ↩︎

  28. Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development. (n.d.). Big Brothers Big Sisters of America. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2naTBra. ↩︎

  29. Grossman, J. B., & Tierney, J. P. (1998). Does mentoring work? An impact study of the Big Brothers Big Sisters program. Evaluation Review, 22(3), 403-426; 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. ↩︎

  30. Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development. (n.d.). Child First. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2m755vH. ↩︎

  31. Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development. (n.d.). Child First. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2m755vH.; Lowell, D. I., Carter, A. S., Godoy, L., Paulcin, B., & Briggs-Gowan, M. J. (2011). A randomized control trial of child first: A comprehensive home-based intervention translating research into early childhood practice. Child Development, 82(1), 193-208. ↩︎

  32. Lowell, D. I., Carter, A. S., Godoy, L., Paulcin, B., & Briggs-Gowan, M. J. (2011). A randomized control trial of child first: A comprehensive home-based intervention translating research into early childhood practice. Child Development, 82(1), 193-208. ↩︎

  33. Blueprints for Youth Development. (n.d.). Familias Unidas. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2mj1URx. ↩︎

  34. Molleda, L., Estrada, Y., Lee, T.K., Poma, S., Teran, A.M.Q., Tamayo, C.C., Bahamon, M., Tapia, M. I., Velazquez, M. R., Pantin, H., & Prado, G. (2017). Short-term effects on family communication and adolescent conduct problems: Familias Unidas in Ecuador. Prevention Science, 18(7), 1-10.; Pantin, H., Prado, G., Lopez, B., Huang, S., Tapia, M. I., Schwartz, S. J., Sabillon, E., & Branchini, J. (2009). A randomized controlled trial of Familias Unidas for Hispanic adolescents with behavior problems. Psychosomatic Medicine, 71(9), 987-995.; Prado, G., Cordova, D., Huang, S., Estrada, Y., Rosen, A., Bacio, G. A., Jimenez, G. L., Pantin, H., Brown, C.H, Velazquez, M., Villamar, J., Freitas, D., Tapia, M. I., & McCollister, K. (2012). The efficacy of Familias Unidas on drug and alcohol outcomes for Hispanic delinquent youth: Main effects and interaction effects by parental stress and social support. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 125(Suppl 1), S18-S25.; Prado, G., Pantin, H., Huang, S., Cordova, D., Tapia, M. I., Velasquez, M. R., Calfee, M., Malcolm, S., Arzon, M., Villamar, J., Jimenez, G. L., Cano, N., Brown, C. H., & Estrada, Y. (2012). Effects of a family intervention in reducing HIV risk behaviors among high-risk Hispanic adolescents: A randomized controlled trial. Archive of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, 166(2), 127-133. ↩︎

  35. Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development. (n.d.). ParentCorps. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2nORbP7.; Brotman, L. M., Calzada, E., Huang, K. Y., Kingston, S., Dawson-McClure, S., Kamboukos, D., Rosenfelt, A., Schwab, A., & Petkova, E. (2011). Promoting effective parenting practices and preventing child behavior problems in school among ethnically diverse families for underserved, urban communities. Child Development, 82(1), 258-276. ↩︎

  36. Brotman, L. M., Calzada, E., Huang, K. Y., Kingston, S., Dawson-McClure, S., Kamboukos, D., Rosenfelt, A., Schwab, A., & Petkova, E. (2011). Promoting effective parenting practices and preventing child behavior problems in school among ethnically diverse families for underserved, urban communities. Child Development, 82(1), 258-276. ↩︎

  37. Brotman, L. M., Calzada, E., Huang, K. Y., Kingston, S., Dawson-McClure, S., Kamboukos, D., Rosenfelt, A., Schwab, A., & Petkova, E. (2011). Promoting effective parenting practices and preventing child behavior problems in school among ethnically diverse families for underserved, urban communities. Child Development, 82(1), 258-276. ↩︎

  38. Brotman, L. M., Dawson-McClure, S., Kamboukos, D., Huang, K., Calzada, E., Goldfeld, K., & Petkova, E. (2016). Effects of ParentCorps in prekindergarten on child mental health and academic performance: Follow-up of a randomized clinical trial through 8 years of age. Journal of the American Medical Association Pediatrics, 170(12), 1149-1155.; Brotman, L. M., Dawson-McClure, S., Calzada, E. J., Huang, K., Kamboukos, D., Palamar, J. J., & Petkova, E. (2013). Cluster (school) RCT of ParentCorps: Impact on kindergarten academic achievement. Pediatrics, 131(5), 1521-1529.; Dawson-McClure, S., Calzada, E., Huang, K., Kamboukos, D., Rhule, D., Kolawole, B., Petkova, E., & Brotman, L. M. (2015). A population-level approach to promoting healthy child development and school success in low-income, urban neighborhoods: Impact on parenting and child conduct problems. Prevention Science, 16(2), 279-290. ↩︎

  39. Brotman, L. M., Dawson-McClure, S., Kamboukos, D., Huang, K., Calzada, E., Goldfeld, K., & Petkova, E. (2016). Effects of ParentCorps in prekindergarten on child mental health and academic performance: Follow-up of a randomized clinical trial through 8 years of age. Journal of the American Medical Association Pediatrics, 170(12), 1149-1155.; Brotman, L. M., Dawson-McClure, S., Calzada, E. J., Huang, K., Kamboukos, D., Palamar, J. J., & Petkova, E. (2013). Cluster (school) RCT of ParentCorps: Impact on kindergarten academic achievement. Pediatrics, 131(5), 1521-1529.; Dawson-McClure, S., Calzada, E., Huang, K., Kamboukos, D., Rhule, D., Kolawole, B., Petkova, E., & Brotman, L. M. (2015). A population-level approach to promoting healthy child development and school success in low-income, urban neighborhoods: Impact on parenting and child conduct problems. Prevention Science, 16(2), 279-290. ↩︎

  40. Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development. (n.d.). GenerationPMTO. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2mkzWoy. ↩︎

  41. Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development. (n.d.). GenerationPMTO. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2mkzWoy. ↩︎

  42. Akin, B. A., & McDonald, T. P. (2018). Parenting intervention effects on reunification: A randomized trial of PMTO in foster care. Child Abuse & Neglect, 83, 94-105.; Forgatch, M., & DeGarmo, D. (1999). Parenting Through Change: An effective prevention program for single mothers. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67(5), 711-724.; Patterson, G. R., Chamberlain, P., & Reid, J. B. (1982). A comparative evaluation of a parent-training program. Behavior Therapy, 13, 638-650. ↩︎

  43. Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development. (n.d.). Functional Family Therapy. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2lInO0m. ↩︎

  44. Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development. (n.d.). Functional Family Therapy. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2lInO0m. ↩︎

  45. Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development. (n.d.). Functional Family Therapy. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2lInO0m. ↩︎

  46. Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development. (n.d.). Functional Family Therapy. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2lInO0m.; Gottfredson, D. C., Kearley, B., Thornberry, T. P., Slothower, M., Devlin, D., & Fader, J. J. (2018). Scaling-up evidence-based programs using a public funding stream: A randomized trial of Functional Family Therapy for court-involved youth. Prevention Science, 19(7), 939-953.; Sexton, T. L., & Turner, C. W. (2010). The effectiveness of Functional Family Therapy for youth with behavioral problems in a community practice setting. Journal of Family Psychology, 24(3), 339–348.; Slesnick, N., & Prestopnik, J. (2009). Comparison of family therapy outcome with alcohol-abusing, runaway adolescents. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 35(3), 255-277. ↩︎

  47. CrimeSolutions.gov. (2011). Program profile: LifeSkills Training. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2oVnA5e. ↩︎

  48. Botvin, G. J., Griffin, K. W., Diaz, T., & Ifill-Williams, M. (2001). Drug abuse prevention among minority adolescents: Posttest and one-year follow-up of a school-based preventive intervention. Prevention Science, 2, 1-13.; Botvin, G. J., Griffin, K. W., Diaz, T., Scheier, L. M., Williams, C., & Epstein, J. A. (2000). Preventing illicit drug use in adolescents: Long-term follow-up data from a randomized control trial of a school population. Addictive Behaviors, 25, 769-774.; Crowley, D. M, Jones, D. E., Coffman, D. L., & Greenberg, M. T (2014). Can we build an efficient response to the prescription drug abuse epidemic? Assessing the cost effectiveness of universal prevention in the PROSPER trial. Prevention Medicine, 62, 71-77.; Spoth, R. L., Clair, S., Shin, C., & Redmond, C. (2006). Long-term effects of universal preventive interventions on methamphetamine use among adolescents. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 160, 876-882.; Spoth, R. L., Randall, G., Trudeau, L., Shin, C., & Redmond, C. (2008). Substance use outcomes 5 1/2 years past baseline for partnership-based family school preventive interventions. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 96, 57-68. ↩︎

  49. Botvin, G. J., Griffin, K. W., Diaz, T., & Ifill-Williams, M. (2001). Drug abuse prevention among minority adolescents: Posttest and one-year follow-up of a school-based preventive intervention. Prevention Science, 2, 1-13.; Botvin, G. J., Griffin, K. W., Diaz, T., Scheier, L. M., Williams, C., & Epstein, J. A. (2000). Preventing illicit drug use in adolescents: Long-term follow-up data from a randomized control trial of a school population. Addictive Behaviors, 25, 769-774.; Crowley, D. M, Jones, D. E., Coffman, D. L., & Greenberg, M. T (2014). Can we build an efficient response to the prescription drug abuse epidemic? Assessing the cost effectiveness of universal prevention in the PROSPER trial. Prevention Medicine, 62, 71-77.; Spoth, R. L., Clair, S., Shin, C., & Redmond, C. (2006). Long-term effects of universal preventive interventions on methamphetamine use among adolescents. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 160, 876-882.; Spoth, R. L., Randall, G., Trudeau, L., Shin, C., & Redmond, C. (2008). Substance use outcomes 5 1/2 years past baseline for partnership-based family school preventive interventions. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 96, 57-68. ↩︎

  50. Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development. (n.d.). Multisystemic Therapy. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2nQiTv0. ↩︎

  51. Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development. (n.d.). Multisystemic Therapy. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2nQiTv0. ↩︎

  52. Borduin, C. M., Mann, B. J., Cone, L. T., Henggeler, S. W., Fucci, B. R., Blaske, D. M., & William, R. A. (1995). Multisystemic treatment of serious juvenile offenders: Long-term prevention of criminality and violence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63(4), 569–578.; Henggeler, S. W., Melton, G. B., & Smith, L. A. (1992). Family preservation using Multisystemic Therapy: An effective alternative to incarcerating serious juvenile offenders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60(6), 953–961.; Timmons–Mitchell, J., Bender, M. B., Kishna, M. A., & Mitchell, C. C. (2006). An independent effectiveness trial of Multisystemic Therapy with juvenile justice youth. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 35, 227–236. ↩︎