|
|
|
 |
Dr. Pedro Noguera is a professor of education at the University of California, Berkeley. He is also past president of the Berkeley School Board. His in depth analysis of the causes of and assessment of succesful programs for reducing and preventing youth violence is published here by In Motion Magazine as a series of hyper-linked articles which can be downloaded in segments. All sections can be reached from the intro page, or readers can follow from one section to another.
Case Study III:
Prepackaged freebase or crack cocaine, known as "rock" on the West Coast, began to appear on the streets of Berkeley in the early 1980s.*53 Concentrated in the predominantly Black neighborhoods of South and West Berkeley, the advent of crack cocaine brought with it a substantial increase in violent crime and social upheaval. Young people featured prominently in drug trafficking activities, serving both as street-level dealers and security for the protection of turf. Minors were particularly well suited for this trade because if apprehended by the police, they could avoid the stiffer penalties reserved for adults. The absence of more established gangs in Berkeley also created conditions that were favorable to aspiring young drug dealers. With considerable profits available for those willing to take the risk, many young people in Berkeley became involved with the drug trade, and consequently there was soon a significant increase in the number of youth arrested for drug related and violent crimes during the period from 1984 to 1988.
The city's ability to respond to this situation was complicated by a split between city residents regarding perceptions of the drug problem, dividing them along socioeconomic and racial lines. While most residents in Berkeley's African-American community demanded tough action on the part of the city, many progressive, white residents residing in safer middleclass neighborhoods expressed more concern about the protection of civil liberties. The latter opposed any policy that seemed to emphasize law enforcement and questioned the efficacy of a strategy focused primarily on arresting street-level dealers, who comprised only the lower echelons of the illicit drug trade. Both sides were vocal and active, and both groups asserted considerable political pressure on city government.
Initially, the City's attempts to counter drug trafficking relied on intensifying law enforcement efforts in the affected neighborhoods. However, though the number of drug-related arrests soared as a result of increased police pressure, the problem persisted. Each time a crack house was shut down or a dealer was arrested, another venue and dealer emerged to fill the market niche. Pressure from South and West Berkeley who were residents feeling besieged by the rising crime rate, continued to grow, eventually prompting the city to develop and implement a new drug policy that included short -- and long-term strategies for addressing drug-related problems.*54 Intended to be comprehensive in nature, the new strategy combined neighborhood-based policing with new opportunities for treatment for drug users and their families and the creation of various opportunity programs for youth. The Real Alternatives Project (RAP) was created in 1988 and intended to serve as the model opportunity program for troubled youth.
Created by a coalition of community-based agencies providing different types of youth services in Berkeley, RAP was designed to provide individualized and integrated prevention and intervention services to disadvantaged, at-risk youth, the kind of youngsters who were being lured into the drug trade. The 38 young people selected for the program were between the ages of 14 and 16 and had previously been identified as "at-risk" by school counselors and/or the police department. The basis for this selection included prior contact with the police for a criminal offense, poor school performance, low income, and a family history of criminal or delinquent behavior. The program goal was to provide these teenagers with a comprehensive array of services so that negative behavioral outcomes could be prevented and reduced. Additionally, the designers of RAP believed that if these "at-risk" youth could be integrated into a peer group that modeled positive behaviors and norms, they would be more likely to distance themselves from the environmental and peer influences that had contributed to their past troubles. *55
A central feature of RAP involved the provision of culturally relevant services, including tutoring, part-time and summer employment, counseling, recreational activities, mentoring, and family workshops. In addition, youth in RAP were each assigned a case counselor who served as their confidant, broker, and advocate, and who closely monitored their behavior at home, school, and in the neighborhood. The operating assumption of the program was that case counselors who shared the cultural background of the youth, and who were not too much older, could most effectively assist them in avoiding trouble and improving their behavior.
After seven years of operation, there is clear evidence that RAP has been successful as a deterrent to violence and criminal behavior. For the young people enrolled, the number of contacts with police for criminal or violent behavior has been greatly reduced. Graduation and school-retention rates increased dramatically, and suspension and expulsion rates declined substantially. The cost of the program (approximately $3,500.00 per student), its comprehensive character, and its proven effectiveness, have enabled it to grow from 38 students in 1988 to 120 in 1995. With base funding from the City of Berkeley secured through the year 2000, the program has been able to attract additional funds from the Federal government Office of Substance Abuse Prevention, to support its expansion.
RAP is now widely seen as a valuable community resource in that it has provided a viable alternative for serving the needs of delinquent youth, before they get into deeper trouble. For the youth in the program, RAP counselors have supplied crucial emotional and psychological support, providing the stability lacking in their families and environment. Furthermore, as the program's links with the community have strengthened, participation in RAP has evolved from stigma to status: whereas participants in the program previously viewed RAP as yet another means to punish kids, the participants and their peers now report that membership in RAP is a privilege. According to one participant:
Very Very
Low Low OK High High
Self Esteem (28)-- (34)5 (36)18 (2)42 (--)35
Effort/Attitude (44)6 (42)12 (14)38 (--)35 (--) 9
Toward School
Drug and (moderate use)
Alcohol Use (26)58 (44)38 (23)4 (7)-- (--)--
School (42)-- (25)4 (21)26 (12)48 (--)22
Attendance
Police Contacts (22)40 (34)46 (18)14 (20)-- (6)--
*All numbers represent percentages (N=38). Figures in parentheses are based on data collected at the beginning of the program in 1998. The adjacent number represents finding from 1992 evaluation study. *57
