Guide de ressources multisectorielles pour la prévention de la violence chez les jeunes en Amérique latine

MULTISECTOR RESOURCE GUIDE FOR PREVENTING YOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA Author: American Institutes for Research April 2021 DISCLAIMER: The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States government. MULTISECTOR RESOURCE GUIDE FOR PREVENTINGYOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA INTRODUCTION Authors: Paula Dias, Patricia Campie, Yemile Mizrahi, and Chandler Hill Youth violence is prevalent in the Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) region and has severe consequences across multiple sectors. Adolescents in this region are five times more likely to be victims of homicide than youth living in any other part of the world.1 In the past decade, several countries in the LAC region became the most violent in the world. As a group, Brazil, Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, and Venezuela produced one in every four murders worldwide in 2016.2 The region represents just 8.5% of the global population but accounts for an estimated 30% of the world’s homicides.3 High rates of homicide correlate with stifled progress toward sustainable development goals, such as reducing extreme poverty, hunger, youth unemployment, infant mortality rates, and adolescent birth rates.4 In the LAC region, youth violence has a direct effect on education, health, and economic opportunity. In the education sector, many students are victimized on their way to school by street gangs operating in their neighborhoods. Further, high teacher turnover, fueled by fear of violence in or around a school, inhibits opportunities to develop trusting, supportive relationships among students, teachers, and other school staff.5,6 Violence also greatly affects the health sector by depleting scarce health care resources and placing undue stress on health sector organizations. In addition, youth violence contributes to poor economic and workforce outcomes for both youth and their families (e.g., lack of job readiness, lack of access to jobs, lack of access to formal employment, hostile and dangerous work environments), which escalate risk factors and make youth vulnerable to disconnection from school and work. USAID and other donors have invested heavily in the prevention of violence in the region, and the results of these investments demonstrate that evidence-based interventions can be effective in reducing youth violence in even the most violent areas.7 This Multisector Resource Guide for Preventing Youth Violence in the LAC Region contains three sector-specific briefs on youth violence prevention. The purpose of this guide is to help key stakeholders in the education, health, and workforce sectors understand the types of violence that affect youth in the LAC region and how youth violence affects each sector. The sector briefs illustrate integrated approaches—working across education, health, and workforce sectors—to reduce the effects USAID.GOV MULTISECTOR RESOURCE GUIDE FOR PREVENTING YOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA| 1 of youth violence and offer evidence-based strategies to mitigate youth violence in these sectors. The sector briefs also offer guidance on measuring results and sustaining youth violence prevention efforts. The Education Sector Brief presents data and resources on how the sector can help prevent youth violence in schools and the surrounding communities where students and their families live. Schooling can serve as a protective factor for youth, because young people who stay connected to school are less likely to exhibit disruptive and violent behavior, carry or use a weapon, and experiment with illegal substances.8 However, violence in the community can be a significant source of trauma that can affect a student’s attendance at school due to fear of moving between home and classroom.9 Occurrences of violence at schools often prompt the rapid adoption of repressive policies or programs; however, such strategies can make matters worse, damaging the relationship among schools, students, and families and increasing violence in schools and communities. Instead, the Education Sector Brief suggests that actions to prevent school violence should begin with a careful review of the problem to identify the drivers of violence, and the use of evidence-based, targeted strategies to address the problem. The Health Sector Brief explains the ways in which this sector has the strong potential to contribute to violence prevention through public health approaches. Violence both directly and indirectly affects the health sector in LAC in diverse and significant ways, particularly because it depletes scarce health care resources and places undue stress on health sector organizations. Beyond its primary role of providing health care services, the health sector also plays a vital role as a leader in surveilling, researching, and monitoring violence prevention interventions. Many health sector workers do not fully appreciate the important role they can play in youth violence prevention. The health sector can contribute more effectively to violence prevention by broadening its focus beyond treatment to include greater communication about violence prevention as a public health priority and more involvement in health and social service partnerships for violence prevention. The Workforce Sector Brief presents information and evidence for how this sector can play an important role in preventing youth from engaging in violence. Young workers in the LAC region are especially vulnerable to a wide range of workplace violence from myriad sources. In particular, the informality of employment and the specific subsector in which they work put young workers at increased risk for violence at work. Further, some youths are more victimized than others. Using a preventive approach that considers how gender, race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status intersect to place young people at risk for violence is key to reducing risk and improving outcomes for youth, employers, and the broader community. Youth violence is preventable. By using data to identify the drivers of violence, consulting the research on effective strategies, and engaging community stakeholders and institutions to address the issue, an effective violence prevention plan can be put in place. Youth violence should be a concern for USAID and other donors working outside the citizen security and governance sectors. It is a problem that affects all segments of society and should be addressed by stakeholders in the education, health, and workforce sectors both as an intrinsic human rights issue and because of its impact on social and economic development. USAID.GOV MULTISECTOR RESOURCE GUIDE FOR PREVENTING YOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA| 2 REFERENCES 1 UNICEF. (2018). Children in Latin America and the Caribbean: Overview 2018. Panama City, Panama. 2 Luengo-Cabrera, J. (2017). (Rep.). The economic impact of violence in LAC: Implications for the EU. European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS). Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep06802 3 Muggah, R. A., & Tobin, K. A. (2018). Citizen security in Latin America: Facts and figures. Rio de Janeiro: Igarapé Institute. 4 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2018). Identifying the role of violence and its prevention in the post-2015 global agenda: Proceedings of a workshop—in brief. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi.org/10.17226/25076 5 Pérez, O. J. (2013). Gang violence and insecurity in contemporary Central America. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 32(S1), 217–234. doi:10.1111/blar.12114 6 Green, G., Rhodes, J., Hirsch, A. H., Suárez-Orozco, C., & Camic, P. M. (2008). Supportive adult relationships and the academic engagement of Latin American immigrant youth. Journal of School Psychology, 46(4), 393–412. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2007.07.001 7 Chioda, L. (2017). Stop the violence in Latin America: A look at prevention from cradle to adulthood. Washington, DC: World Bank. 8 Bushman, B. J., Newman, K., Calvert, S. L., Downey, G., Dredze, M., Gottfredson, M., . . . Webster, D. W. (2016). Youth violence: What we know and what we need to know. American Psychologist, 71(1), 17–39. doi:10.1037/a0039687 9 Moser, C., & Holland, J. (1997). Urban poverty and violence in Jamaica. Washington, DC: World Bank. doi:10.1596/0-8213-3870-6 USAID.GOV MULTISECTOR RESOURCE GUIDE FOR PREVENTING YOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA| 3 ISSUE BRIEF STOPPING YOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA: A GUIDE FOR THE EDUCATION SECTOR Authors: Patricia Campie, Nick Read, Yemile Mizrahi, Chandler Hill, Elyse Shaw, and Adria Molotsky INTRODUCTION Youth violence, or violence affecting individuals between the ages of 10 and 29, is a preventable social and public health problem. Youth violence encompasses various types of violence, including physical violence, psychological violence, sexual violence, intimate partner violence, harassment, and homicide. The education sector plays a vital role in preventing youth violence in schools and in the surrounding communities where students and their families live. This brief provides the education sector with actionable guidance on reducing violence in schools and engaging in multisector prevention efforts that support and engage youth so they do not become more vulnerable to committing or becoming a victim of violence in the community. COMMUNITY-BASED VIOLENCE, STUDENTS, AND SCHOOLS Violence impacts the developmental health of young children who live in areas with high rates of and/or persistent violence, affects the mental and physical health of community members, and displaces families that flee the violence. Furthermore, violence deters businesses from investing in areas where employment opportunities are desperately needed and affects the performance of key institutions that support the educational, social, financial, physical, and security needs of the broader community.1 Schooling can serve as a protective factor for youth. Young people who stay connected to school are less likely to exhibit disruptive and violent behavior, carry or use a weapon, and experiment with illegal substances.2 However, violence in the community can be a significant source of trauma that can affect a student’s attendance at school due to fear of moving between home and classroom.3 In many countries in the Latin America and Caribbean (LAC) region, many students are victimized on their way to school by street gangs operating in—and often controlling—a neighborhood. This is especially true when gangs establish “invisible borders” and often attack or harass children and adolescents who cross one of these boundaries on their way to school. Similarly, high teacher turnover, fueled by fears of violence in or around a school, inhibits the opportunity to develop trusting, supportive relationships among students, teachers, and other school staff.4,5 Once at school, students exposed to violence at home or in the community often have depressive symptoms that can be misconstrued as lack of interest or antisocial behavior.6 Schools may respond to USAID.GOV STOPPING YOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA: A GUIDE FOR THE EDUCATION SECTOR | 4 disengaged students with harsh discipline, such as suspension or expulsion, traumatizing them all over again.7 When students disengage from school, they are more likely to become involved in delinquent or criminal activity, including gang involvement. A study of 200 males ages 13 to 20 incarcerated for serious offenses in Brazil revealed striking similarities. Almost all had been repeatedly exposed to violence in the home or community, and most had dropped out of school because of community violence.8 In the LAC region, the dominant culture of “machismo” has a pronounced effect on gender-based violence.9 When male youth are exposed from a young age to hyper-masculine gender norms and gang violence in the community or at home, they are more likely to engage in violence against girls and women. Simultaneously, the fear among young women of sexual violence and harassment can lead to depressive behavior or running away from home, keeping them from attending school.10 Furthermore, girls who experience pregnancy as a result of sexual violence may end up dropping out of school entirely. This exacerbates the existing gender disparities in educational attainment that lead to further inequities in employment and lifetime economic insecurity.11 Finally, for youth who experience repeated and persistent exposure to violence in their communities when their brains are still in a fragile developmental state (up to age 25), the stress hormone cortisol can significantly damage the part of the brain that controls decision making.12 This may cause children to develop more pronounced fight-or-flight responses that can lead them to behave more aggressively when they feel threatened, even if the threat is simply a teacher asking them to follow a rule in the classroom in front of their peers.13 SCHOOL-BASED YOUTH VIOLENCE In this brief, school-based violence is defined as any incident in which a member of the school community is subject to abuse, whether it is threatening, intimidating, or humiliating behavior; or physical assault while on school premises, while traveling to or from school, or during a school sponsored event off school grounds. School violence can include fights, vandalism, sexual assault, and homicide. It also includes violent acts between students, by educators toward students, and by students toward educators. VIOLENCE EXPERIENCED BY STUDENTS School-aged youth often experience very different forms of violence and some youth are disproportionately vulnerable to certain types of violence. For example, boys are more likely to report accessibility to weapons and drugs in school, while girls are more likely to report instances of domestic violence and abuse (e.g., physical violence from parents, dating violence, stalking, and harassment).14 Victimization among school-aged youth has substantial and lasting effects on social and emotional adjustment. Students who are repeatedly victimized often experience a variety of mental health problems, including depression, anxiety, and low self-esteem.15 Research from other regions of the world demonstrates that harsh discipline in schools often disproportionately targets youth from disadvantaged backgrounds, including racial and ethnic minorities, or children with learning or developmental disabilities (e.g., autism). Such discipline can lead to involvement in the criminal justice system and further social isolation and exclusion, leaving youth more vulnerable to recruitment into gangs and less likely to complete their education.16 USAID.GOV STOPPING YOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA: A GUIDE FOR THE EDUCATION SECTOR | 5 In the Caribbean, school-based violence is most common in secondary schools and includes fights, vandalism, sexual assault, and homicide.17 Youth commonly cite as violence drivers self-defense, protecting self and peers,a establishing a profile that others will respect, and intimidating others. Victims of bullying are more often boys than they are girls,18 and data from the Caribbean show that nearly 30 percent of students experience bullying; Jamaica and Guyana have the highest prevalence. Like the Caribbean, the rest of the LAC region experiences a similarly high rate of school-based violence.19 For example: • In Mexico, nearly 69 percent of high school students reported experiencing some type of aggression or violence at school (2015). • Sixty-six percent of students in Argentina said they were aware of frequent harassment of students (2015). • In Brazil, 84 percent of students in 143 schools from six state capitals considered their schools violent, and 70 percent reported being victims of violence in school (2015). • In Bogota, Colombia, almost 30 percent of males and 17 percent of females have been in at least one fight in school (2015). • In Managua, Nicaragua, 37 percent of secondary school students had suffered from bullying and physical aggression in their schools (2015). • In San Salvador, El Salvador, approximately 15 percent of middle and secondary school students were involved in at least one school fight in any given month, and almost 20 percent carried bats or sticks to school for self-defense (2015). • More than 60 percent of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex (LGBTQI) children in Chile, Mexico, and Peru had experienced bullying (2012). • In Chile, 24.7 percent of students had been victims of one or more forms of sexual violence in schools (2018). VIOLENCE EXPERIENCED BY SCHOOL STAFF School violence has a direct impact on teachers and staff, including in the LAC region. A recent global systematic review found that up to 75 percent of teachers had experienced physical violence, threats of violence, or the theft of personal property while at school.20 Because more than 95 percent of all teachers in the region are female, violence against teachers more or less equates to violence against women, which has been shown to lead to adverse mental, sexual, and reproductive health outcomes and, consequently, can worsen health and socioeconomic outcomes for families, communities, and societies.21,22 In Mexico for example, more than half of all female teachers report experiences with violence in the forms of humiliation, insults, or physical aggression while on school grounds.23 Another study found that, while at school, teachers experience theft, property damage, physical assault, verbal abuse, sexual harassment, and noncontact aggression. These experiences correlate with teachers’ feelings about their job, lower levels of trust between teachers and students, decreased feelings of safety at school, and thoughts of quitting.24 Other research from the United States finds that special education teachers, including those who work with students who have disciplinary problems, experience greater victimization at the hands of students than do other teachers.25 Although research measuring violence a As many as 10 percent of Caribbean young people report carrying weapons to school. USAID.GOV STOPPING YOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA: A GUIDE FOR THE EDUCATION SECTOR | 6 against teachers in the LAC region is rare, reports indicate that the problem is a growing concern. In Honduras, for example, 90 percent of teachers surveyed said that their school had been the target of violence levied by local gangs.26 This includes psychological violence in the form of threats, personal assaults, and damage to teachers’ vehicles. In Guatemala, approximately 30 percent of teachers reported having been victimized, or knowing someone who had been victimized, by gangs when entering or leaving school.27 Researchers found that gang members used threats of violence against teachers in exchange for school-related favors (e.g., selling drugs in class, passing grades), generating fear and diminishing the quality of education that teachers can provide, which then reduces the quality of learning in their classrooms.28 ACTION TO PREVENT SCHOOL-BASED VIOLENCE When violence occurs, parents, staff, students, and the broader community are understandably concerned. This concern often prompts the rapid adoption of repressive policies or programs, like zero-tolerance for any misbehavior, automatic expulsion, and police arrest protocols. However, such strategies can make matters worse, damaging the relationship among schools, students, and families, and increasing violence in schools and communities. For example, arming teachers with weapons or placing police in schools may increase feelings of safety among the public or parents outside the school, but it can increase tensions in the school and result in accidental or intentional violence. This can damage the supportive climate important to engaging youth in the learning process and helping them feel safe. Instead, actions to prevent school violence should begin with a careful review of the problem to identify violence drivers and use the most effective and appropriate strategies to address the problem. PROGRAM SPOTLIGHT The Trinidad and Tobago Violence Prevention Academy (VPA) pilot program, funded by the government of Trinidad and Tobago, trained school based personnel to develop comprehensive, integrated, evidence-based violence prevention plans tailored to the specific needs of participating schools. The VPA began its violence prevention planning with an assessment of the problem and a review of student risk for violence and the preventive supports available to promote safety, followed by a review of solutions that had been effective in similar circumstances. Then, using a combination of face-to-face learning and technical assistance, the training program tried to enhance the skills of school violence prevention specialists and the capacity of their schools to implement and sustain successful violence prevention programs.29 The VPA pilot program was found to reduce violent behavior among 16- and 17-year-old students by 30 percent. To make the VPA sustainable, a broad group of stakeholders became involved in planning, implementing, and monitoring program effectiveness. This ensures that when changes are needed, the commitment and resources necessary to improve outcomes are available.b b Image of the front cover of the VPA final report (https://cvpcs.asu.edu/sites/default/files/content/products/TT_VPA_Final_Report.pdf) is used and adapted with permission. USAID.GOV STOPPING YOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA: A GUIDE FOR THE EDUCATION SECTOR | 7 ASSESSING THE PROBLEM Schools typically have most of the information they need to understand where, when, and how violence is affecting students, teachers, and staff. This knowledge usually comes from records of student behavioral incidents in which staff or even police respond to stop the violence, discipline the offending student(s), and attend to victims. School records might include teachers’ reports of disruptive students, students’ complaints of victimization, parents’ complaints, and any calls to the local police force. Reports may also be available from on-site police or safety officers who might already be assigned to a school, such as a school resource officer. When analyzing these data, it is helpful to note the places where incidents are occurring, the time of day and day of the week, and demographic details of the parties involved so the school can assess patterns associated with the violence. For example, violence might be more likely before, during, or after a student assembly, when large groups of students are interacting, and it is more difficult for staff to manage the crowd. However, violence of a sexual nature often goes unreported and may be overlooked when simply analyzing school’s records and reports of violence. Therefore, it is important that schools talk with students, teachers, and parents to try to capture as complete a picture of violence in and around the school setting as possible. TALKING WITH STUDENTS, STAFF, AND PARENTS. The picture of violence is incomplete, however, if the school does not understand the root causes or factors that lead to violence, the relationship between victims and those committing violence, or any school or community environmental factors that might make it easier or more difficult for violence to occur in the school. For these reasons, it is useful for schools to also collect information directly from students, staff, and parents through one-on-one and group dialogues focused on school safety. School authorities should use a trauma-informed approach to collect such information. This approach requires training to ensure that school staff can recognize and respond to individuals who have been affected by traumatic stress during information gathering.30 This is especially important in the case of victims of sexual violence and harassment, because victims are often afraid to talk about their experiences, and these instances of violence often go unnoticed by the broader community. Conversations with students, staff, and parents should never be accusatory or focus only on those victimized by or accused of violence. School counseling staff or outside consultants should be used to facilitate objective conversations, with the goal of being open to understanding the factors that might underlie violence, and a commitment to hearing from those most affected by the problem. For example, if drug activity is high in the school, violence might result from conflict over the sale or use of drugs, or from the presence of outsiders who come on to school property to sell drugs. These insights may not be in official records but may be common knowledge among students. However, students may not be willing to share this information if they fear disciplinary, legal, or even social consequences for doing so. The relationship between groups of students may drive conflict within the school if these groups conflict outside the school in the community. If these conflicts are brought into the school, they can fuel assaults in areas of the school that are not well-monitored (e.g., bathrooms) or where large groups of students congregate without much adult supervision (e.g., recreation areas). During the dialogue process, it is important for schools to identify these conflicts and avoid bringing together individuals from rival groups. Not only will this help students feel safer, it will likely enable students to share more details about intergroup violence and its underlying causes. ASSESSING ENVIRONMENTAL RISK. The school should also do a walkthrough of the campus, inside and outside, to examine, for example, the condition of lighting in dark areas, proper door security in bathroom stalls, and access to the campus by unauthorized visitors. The school environment can USAID.GOV STOPPING YOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA: A GUIDE FOR THE EDUCATION SECTOR | 8 create a safe and supportive place for students, staff, and parents to engage in learning, or it can place individuals at risk if areas are not secure and easy targets of opportunity for violent behavior. Research shows that ensuring proper lighting and security in bathrooms can greatly reduce instances of harassment and sexual assault at school.31 In some cases, schools may also need to obtain from the police or other community stakeholders community data related to violence or other problems in the surrounding community that affect the school. For example, the way students get to school may be disrupted by local construction or changes in transportation options, and students may be encountering new conflicts on their adjusted routes to school that boil over once they are in school, making them late and subject to punishment when they arrive, or keeping them from coming to school altogether. If a school has a clear understanding of what is happening inside the school as well as how the external community might be influencing student behavior at school, the school will be well equipped to have a more comprehensive understanding of the violence that jeopardizes school and student safety. EXAMINING CURRENT PRACTICE. Once problem assessment is complete, schools will need to examine their current school safety policies, practices, and programs to determine the extent to which they are effective and what can be done to improve them. Although violence is typically thought of as a physical act, it is critical for schools to take a broader approach to ensuring school safety, which also means ensuring social and emotional safety. Sometimes the same policy that promotes physical safety can compromise social or emotional safety. For example, schools commonly find that violence happens in bathrooms where students are at their most vulnerable and there is no adult supervision. If a school installed security cameras in the bathroom, physical safety could increase, but students might feel emotionally unsafe because their privacy has been violated. Similarly, school policies and practices that permit harsh discipline and school removal for students at greater risk of inciting violence are likely to make the problem worse, because students who disengage from school are at greater risk for recruitment into gangs and other delinquent or criminal activity that perpetuates violence in the community and in and around schools.32 Schools can create an inventory of each current school safety policy, program, or practice with the goal of answering the following questions: • How does the policy/practice/program intend to prevent school violence? • How does the policy/practice/program intend to promote school safety (physical/social/emotional)? • Is the policy/practice/program implemented properly? • Do students/staff/parents understand or know about the policy/practice/program? • What is evidence of the actual effectiveness of the policy/practice/program? • How does the (policy/practice/program) align with the research on creating safe and supportive schools? • Have there been any unintended negative consequences of the policy/practice/program? Students, staff, and parents can be valuable sources of insight when answering these questions, along with a review of any official data related to implementing these approaches. Once a school completes this program, practice, and policy inventory, the school can add the results to problem assessment findings to begin to understand where current approaches may be working well and where they may be falling short of addressing school violence. USAID.GOV STOPPING YOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA: A GUIDE FOR THE EDUCATION SECTOR | 9 IDENTIFYING SOLUTIONS On any given day, schools and the systems that support them are busy implementing a variety of academic and nonacademic programs, services, and supports. Some of these may be required by law; others may be in place to enhance and enrich the student experience or respond to and prevent problems. Still other practices may exist by virtue of being embedded in the history, culture, and norms of the local setting. Many of these activities relate to school safety, such as partnerships with community agencies to provide resources to youth and families, prevention programs to reduce bullying in the school, or teacher training on social-emotional learning skills. Because of this, it is critical that schools take stock of current efforts related to school safety before beginning new initiatives to see how resources can align better and be coordinated to produce a more effective (based on student and school outcomes) and efficient (based on the time and money required) school safety approach. For example, if a school is offering adult education classes on the weekends to help parents improve their literacy or employability skills, the school might consider using some of that time to engage parents in a conversation or activities related to school safety. Likewise, if police are already patrolling the school campus or serving on a local safety committee with the school, this could provide the school with an opportunity to redefine the police–school relationship to increase safety and strengthen police– student relationships. Although police relationships may be more fragile in the LAC region than in other places, it is still important that schools determine how to work with police the most collaboratively to eliminate counterproductive and ineffective police-school practices, such as arresting students for minor issues like skipping school, which can further disengage students from school and promote the opportunity for involvement in violence. Resource-sharing is another strategy that schools can investigate with sister schools that may have similar needs. For example, if problem diagnosis indicates that more mental health counseling is needed for students who have already experienced violence, and a sister school is also experiencing this problem, the two schools can share the cost of a trained therapist so both groups of students can benefit. To select appropriate preventive and interventional approaches to reduce students’ future risk of violence—either perpetration or victimization—it is important to understand this risk. Risk may come from interpersonal characteristics, such as lack of impulse control, or from family dysfunction, delinquent peers, or weak social controls (e.g., an illegitimate police force). These factors coalesce to place youth at greater or less risk for violence. This risk can then be targeted by strategic approaches to prevention. Schools need to understand which prevention strategies will be most effective for which students, depending on students’ specific risks for experiencing or committing violence. Typically, schools are implementing many academic and nonacademic programs for students, and often these efforts are applied broadly to the entire student population. However, decades of research and practitioner experience show that youth differ in the factors that protect them or place them at risk of violence. Therefore, using a tiered prevention approach differentiated by student risk levels gives schools the flexibility they need to use the most effective approaches the most efficiently. A tiered approach to violence prevention is outlined below: • Primary Prevention: Strategies that seek to address the root causes of violence before it occurs are primary prevention strategies that apply to all students. For example, research indicates that preventing low- USAID.GOV STOPPING YOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA: A GUIDE FOR THE EDUCATION SECTOR | 10 level student conflict, such as bullying, should focus on all students in the early grades, from prekindergarten (pre-K, age 3) to the sixth grade (age 10–12). • Secondary Prevention: Secondary prevention strategies target a specific subset of students at risk for specific types of violence. For example, students with excessive, unexcused absenteeism may be at greater risk of recruitment by gangs. These students and their families can benefit from specific outreach and engagement strategies to strengthen their connection to and involvement in school.33 • Tertiary Prevention: To prevent the most serious forms of violence, including incidents involving weapons, programs should focus on the small minority of students who have previously engaged in such violent behavior.34 Schools that train teachers or other school staff to provide these tiered prevention supports have been shown to reduce school dropout, violence, and substance use.35 These programs also improve relationships between teachers and students, keeping students in school and decreasing youth violence in the community. UNDERSTANDING CONTEXT. Effective programming in one context is not necessarily transferable to other contexts. Although specific program elements may be effective to prevent violence where similar underlying factors are present, fidelity of implementation and other contextual factors necessarily influence the effectiveness of interventions replicated from other areas if they are not adapted for the new context. Therefore, it is essential to complete a problem assessment and resource inventory before developing proposed solutions. Solutions should be tailored to a specific context, focusing on distinctive risk factors, protective factors, and the resources available in the school or broader community to promote a safe and supportive learning environment. A recent study assessing the effectiveness of youth violence prevention interventions found that several strategies were effective for school-age youth. Exhibits 1–3 provide a list of tiered school-based violence prevention strategies for youth from elementary school through the 12th grade. More detailed information on these interventions can be found in the Resource Annex. Exhibit 1. Primary Violence Prevention Strategies With Evidence of Effectiveness PRIMARY PREVENTION—ALL STUDENTS NAME HOW IT’S IMPLEMENTED WHAT IT DOES RESULTS Safe Dates • Population: males and females, ages 11–17 • Nine 50-minute sessions, one 45-minute play, poster contest, and parent materials • Led by teachers and school administrators • Originated in the United States • Goals: change attitudes toward dating violence, attain conflict management skills, increase awareness of intimate partner violence and consequences, increase likelihood of seeking help, and change gender norms and attitudes36 • Shown to reduce victimization and certain perpetration behaviors • Positive changes in knowledge, attitudes, communication patterns, and conflict resolution skills37 USAID.GOV STOPPING YOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA: A GUIDE FOR THE EDUCATION SECTOR | 11 PRIMARY PREVENTION—ALL STUDENTS NAME HOW IT’S IMPLEMENTED WHAT IT DOES RESULTS Violence Prevention Academy • Population served: males and females, ages 16–17 • Trains school-based personnel to develop comprehensive, tailored violence prevention programs • Intervention consists of training program, school-based violence prevention plan, formal evaluation of implementation and impact • Originated in Trinidad and Tobago • Goal: use problem solving processes to respond to specific issues confronting individual schools38 • VPA was associated with a 30 percent decrease in offending and discipline39 Fourth R: Skills for Youth Relationships • Population: males and females, Grades 9–12 • 21 lessons • Led by teachers in sex-segregated classrooms • Curriculum is integrated into existing instruction • Teachers receive a 6-hour training • Originated in Canada • Goals: provide youth with instruction on bullying, peer and dating violence, personal relationships, substance use, and risky behaviors • Shown to decrease perpetration of physical and intimate partner violence among male students40 Responding in Peaceful and Positive Ways • Population: males and females, ages 10–14 • Designed for implementation along with a peer mediation program • Implemented by school staff • Originated in the United States • Goals: teach conflict resolution strategies and critical thinking skills • Key concepts: the importance of friends and mentors, self-image and gang-related behaviors, the effects of environment on personal health41 • Found to decrease disciplinary violations for violent behavior and the rate of in school suspensions42 Exhibit 2. Secondary Violence Prevention Strategies With Evidence of Effectiveness SECONDARY PREVENTION—STUDENTS AT RISK FOR VIOLENCE AS VICTIMS OR OFFENDERS NAME HOW IT’S IMPLEMENTED WHAT IT DOES RESULTS Break the Cycle • Population: males and females, ages 12–24 • 3-day interactive program • Implemented by school staff, youth organizations and agencies • Originated in the United States • Goals: increase knowledge of and improve attitudes toward legal issues and help-seeking • Found to improve knowledge of laws related to violence and to the perception and likelihood of seeking victim assistance43 USAID.GOV STOPPING YOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA: A GUIDE FOR THE EDUCATION SECTOR | 12 SECONDARY PREVENTION—STUDENTS AT RISK FOR VIOLENCE AS VICTIMS OR OFFENDERS NAME HOW IT’S IMPLEMENTED WHAT IT DOES RESULTS Families and Students Together (FAST) • Population: families with children, ages 0–18 (sessions divided among elementary-, middle-, and high school-age children) • 2.5-hour sessions held once a week in an after-school setting • Conducted by trained people who reflect the population served • Group sessions, one-on-one parent–child interaction time, and parent group time • Originated in the United States • Goals: develop protective factors for children to reduce the likelihood of adolescent delinquency, violence, and school dropout: child’s interpersonal bonds, family system, parent-to parent support, parent– peer social network, parent empowerment, and community support44 • Shown to improve child behavior and parenting strategies45 • Found to decrease family conflict, increase parental involvement in education, improve children’s academic performance and behavior in school, decrease emotional problems at home, and improve community social relationships46 Programa de Mediación Escolar • Population: males and females, Grades 5–10 • Training for teachers, principals, and students in mediation • Modification to school rules • 14 weeks or 200 hours of training • Originated in Chile • Goal: promote mediation skills and conflict resolution • Perception of fights occurring at school decreased by 17 percent • Perception of threats at school decreased by 9 percent Exhibit 3. Tertiary Violence Prevention Strategies With Evidence of Effectiveness TERTIARY PREVENTION—STUDENTS ALREADY EXPERIENCING VIOLENCE AS VICTIMS OR OFFENDERS INTERVENTION NAME HOW IT’S IMPLEMENTED WHAT IT DOES RESULTS Second Step: A Violence Prevention Curriculum • Population: males and females, pre-K to middle school • A year of weekly 25- minute lessons • Lessons are teacher led • Originated in the United States • Goals: support social emotional learning (SEL), reduce aggressive and impulsive behavior • Middle school–age children in a SEL program were 42 percent less likely to self-report physical aggression47 • Shown to be most effective in reducing bullying perpetration48 USAID.GOV STOPPING YOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA: A GUIDE FOR THE EDUCATION SECTOR | 13 TERTIARY PREVENTION—STUDENTS ALREADY EXPERIENCING VIOLENCE AS VICTIMS OR OFFENDERS INTERVENTION NAME HOW IT’S IMPLEMENTED WHAT IT DOES RESULTS Olweus Bullying Prevention Program • Population: males and females, ages 5–15 • Implemented by school staff • Program can be adapted to meet individual needs • Core principles and rules are integrated into existing school programming • Originated in the United States • Goals: prevent bullying and reduce existing bullying in elementary, middle, and high schools • Community-, school-, class-, and individual level components, including community partnerships, assemblies, interventions, and rules to prevent bullying49 • Shown to be most effective in reducing bullying perpetration50 INEFFECTIVE AND HARMFUL APPROACHES. While reviewing the programs and practices a school might want to implement, it is inevitable that voices may emerge in support of practices that have been used in the past or may still be popular but that research has shown to be ineffective—or worse, harmful to students. The two most common programs erroneously adopted by schools are the Scared Straight and Drug Awareness Resistance Education or D.A.R.E. programs:51 • Scared Straight programs are typically implemented with the highest risk students and involve taking youth into prisons or jails to speak to inmates who share stories about the horrors of prison life. Research has consistently shown that Scared Straight programs are harmful and should not be used with students. Students who have participated in these programs show a greater propensity to get involved in criminal activity.52 • D.A.R.E. is a very popular school-based program in the United States, delivered to students by law enforcement to deter drug use. Repeated evaluations of the intervention have shown that the program has no effect on student drug use. Although it may seem attractive to bring police into schools to develop positive relationships with students, this type of relationship-building should not be confused with programs that will produce measurable reductions in school-based violence or drug activity that can lead to violence. From a practice perspective, Zero-tolerance policies that swiftly remove students for the smallest infraction and send them off to police to “teach them a lesson” are equally damaging and should never be used. Zero-tolerance policies that enact harsh discipline—for example, suspend or expel students for minor infractions—may do more harm than good by broadly affecting the entire family, encouraging less civic participation in adulthood, and incurring future financial costs in the form of high rates of arrest, incarceration, and unemployment.53 GETTING READY TO IMPLEMENT A NEW SCHOOL SAFETY STRATEGY Changing or developing new school safety policies, practices, or programs represents an innovation, or new way of doing things. Readiness for change at the individual and organizational levels is a critical precursor to the successful implementation of any innovation. Organizational readiness has been broadly defined in the literature as (1) motivation to implement an innovation; (2) general capacity, or broad organizational characteristics applicable to any innovation (e.g., paying staff); and (3) specific capacity, or an USAID.GOV STOPPING YOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA: A GUIDE FOR THE EDUCATION SECTOR | 14 organization’s ability to deliver a specific innovation (i.e., technical skill) as designed. In the school context, readiness can be described as specific actions that a school takes to inform; generate buy-in from; and support staff, students, families, and community stakeholders regarding school safety efforts. Understanding and addressing concerns about new school safety approaches and what changes may mean for individual staff, parents, and students is critical to creating the buy-in needed to commit to behavior change. The Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM)54 explains that organizational change is impossible until individuals within an organization change. The CBAM identifies individual readiness for change at different ecological levels (e.g., self, relationships, organizations), providing a complete picture of how people and organizations (e.g., schools) are moving in alignment toward change. For comprehensive school safety approaches to succeed, schools—including students, teachers, and staff, and the communities in which schools operate—must collectively act to advance change. Schools can prepare for implementing and sustaining change by:55 • Developing an understanding of the local context—understanding the status of efforts, their cost effectiveness, and how they can contribute to the larger agenda; • Mobilizing interest, consensus, and support among key stakeholders (e.g., identify champions); and • Clarifying feasibility and how new practices can be institutionalized through existing, modified, or new infrastructure and operational mechanisms. As schools undertake an innovation, they often focus exclusively on the internal environment (e.g., staff, work processes) and rarely spend as much time preparing the external stakeholders who will benefit from or use the innovation (e.g., clients, community) for the coming change. Emerging research indicates that an innovation’s “fit” within the larger community context may be as equally critical to the successful implementation of a new practice or policy as preparing the organization that is leading the change effort.56 In the case of school safety innovations, this means that, if an innovation is to succeed and be sustained over time, the approach must be a good fit with the community’s social, political, and cultural context, as well as the expectations and needs of family members, community agencies, and students. MONITORING AND IMPROVEMENT Once a school safety plan is in place, it will have to be monitored according to specific measures that indicate the degree to which the program is making the intended improvements. Indicators are the desired change, for example an increase in the number of students feeling safe at school. Measures are the specific means used to collect this information, for example through a student survey in which students report their feelings of safety each year. For each school safety goal, there must be outcomes, indicators, and measures to track progress and show where an innovation is on track or falling short. For example, if a school has the goal of reducing the number of students who report being bullied in the cafeteria by 25 percent, there needs to be a reliable and accurate means of observing or collecting data on incidents of bullying in the cafeteria, and of reporting on these outcomes transparently. If the data are not reliable or results are not openly shared, staff, students, and families may question the legitimacy of any new initiatives that are implemented and disengage from prevention efforts. Minimally, schools should be collecting and reviewing data every year on the following: • School climate, or how staff, students, and parents feel about being in school. Are they supported, engaged, and feeling connected to the school? Anonymous surveys are a good way to get honest feedback USAID.GOV STOPPING YOUTH VIOLENCE IN LATIN AMERICA: A GUIDE FOR THE EDUCATION SECTOR | 15 on school climate and school safety, along with focus groups or dialogues to have in-depth conversations about specific school climate issues. • School safety, or how safe students, staff, and parents feel in and around school. Are they afraid to travel to or from school? Are they threatened, harassed, or abused while at school? • Stude