A project funded by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in partnership with the UNC School of Social

Work (SSW), UNC Injury Prevention Resource Center (IPRC), Robeson County Health Dept. (RCHD) and the

Center for Community Action (CCA). 

About NCACE-YVP•Use a unique multidisciplinary approach to

violence prevention•Research youth violence prevention approaches

•Collect & analyze surveillance data•Foster relationships with local community

partners to help develop, implement & evaluate promising prevention efforts

This collaboration between research universities, local communities, and community-based organizations results in empowered

communities that are mobilized to address the problem of youth violence.

History of the ACE Program

•In 2000, in the wake of the Columbine tragedy, legislation is introduced that would form the NACE.

•From 2000-2005, 10 research universities received awards•In 2005, new funding was awarded to 8 universities

•In 2006, 2 additional universities were funded as Urban Partnership ACE & The National ACE Coordinating Center was

established•In 2010, UNC-CH through the UNC-IPRC & UNC-SSW was awarded

a five year grant to implement the nation’s first rural ACE•In 2011, implementation of the project in Robeson County begins

2000

2005

20062010

2011

2000 -2005 Columbia University Harvard University John Hopkins University University of Alabama at

Birmingham University of California,

Riverside University of California, San

Diego University of Hawaii University of Michigan University of Puerto Rico Virginia Commonwealth

University

2005 Columbia University Harvard University University of California, Berkeley University of California, Riverside University of Hawaii University of Chicago Virginia Commonwealth

University

2006 Children’s Hospital of

Philadelphia Meharry Medical College

*Urban Partnership ACE to serve high-risk urban area with youth

homicide rates twice the national average.

Funded Research Universities

ACE Logic Model

Ranks first in NC for juvenile arrests (Rate: 16,064 per 100,000)

One of the poorest counties in the nation (Rate: 34.7% vs. 13% U.S.)

Homicide rate more than 4 times the national average (Rate: 23.9 % vs. 5.2 % U.S.)

Has the largest non-reservation concentration of Native Americans of any county in the nation

A diverse rural community with a history of strong community programs and passionate people

Why Robeson County?

Figure 2: Target and Comparison Communities

Robeson County (target community)

Buncombe County

Cumberland County

Pitt County

Socioeconomically disadvantaged, rural counties with troubled school systems and high levels of youth violence

Figure 5: Robeson County Schools, NC Academic Performance

55%

61%64%

73% 75%

37%

45%

51% 51%

77% 79%

32%

81%

77%

80%83%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

2005 2006 2007 2008

3rd GradersProficient in MathEOGs

3rd GradersProficient inReading EOGs

8th GradersProficient in MathEOGs

8th GradersProficient in MathEOGs

UNC-CH Injury Prevention Research Center (IPRC)

Jordan Institute for Families (JIF)UNC-CH School of Social Work

NC-rACE – Rural Academic Center for Excellence in Youth Violence Prevention

Academic Advisory Board

Administrative Core • Paul Smokowski, PhD., Director• Natasha Bowen, PhD.,Director• Cindy Porter, Administrative

Assistant• Accountant -TBN • IT Specialist - TBN • Rea Gibson, Graphics Designer• Michele Rogers (JIF), J’Ingrid

Mathis (IPRC)-Communications and Dissemination

Training Core• Kathleen Rounds, PhD. Core

Director• Doctoral Students, • Postdoctoral Fellow • Gary Nelson, DSW, Assoc.

Dir. For Community Training

Implementation & Evaluation Core • Mac Legerton, EdD., Director of

Community Relations• Martica Bacallao, PhD., Dir. of Program

Implementation• Jim Barbee, MPA, Center Coordinator

• Program Implementation Staff –see next chart

• Shenyang Guo, PhD., Director of Evaluation

• Dean Duncan, Assoc. Director of Evaluation • Data analysts - TBN

NC-rural Academic Center for Excellence in Youth Violence Prevention Local 2010-2011 Implementation Team

Paul Smokowski [UNC]Natasha Bowen [UNC]

Mac Legerton [CCA]Co-Directors

Jim Barbee[UNC]

Center Coordinator

Beth Jacobs[CCA]

Community Coordinator

Jennifer Clark[RCHD]

Social WorkCoordinator

Bobbie Donaldson[FSU]

Community OutreachIntern

Keith Bullard [DJJDP]

Juvenile JusticeCoordinator

Data Collection Specialist

----Stephen Covey

“Begin with the end in mind…”

Year 1: Community Engagement and Planning

• Community Violence Prevention Board

• Needs assessment• Individual data• School data• Community data

• Set & prioritize goals• Selection of

interventions

Years 2-4: Program Implementation

• Multi-faceted prevention initiative

• Universal & targeted components

• Target adolescents (grades 6-8)

• Focus on individual, relationship, and community risk factors

• Community change

Year 5: Sustainability and Final Evaluation

• Sustainability • Training local

clinicians• Comprehensive

evaluation:• County & School-

level youth violence outcomes

• Proximal individual and school-level risk and protective factors

Implementation & Evaluation Core: Five Year Overview

Specific aim: Reduce youth violence in Robeson County, NC by implementing and evaluating a multifaceted, evidence-based approach to prevent perpetration of youth

violence.

Ongoing: Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR) approach / Monitoring & evaluation /

Training experiences for doctoral students and junior investigators

NCACE Community Violence Prevention Board

• Robeson County Health Dept.• Center for Community Action

• Public Schools of Robeson County• Juvenile Crime Prevention Council

• Duke Center for Child & Family Policy• Partnership for Children

• Southeastern Mental Health (SOC)• Communities In Schools

• NAACP local chapter• Lumbee Tribal Council

• UNC-Pembroke• Lumberton Police Dept./Sheriff• District Juvenile Court Services

• Southeastern Family Violence Ctr.• Chamber of Commerce

• Healing Lodge• Palmer Drug

Flexible community-based participatory approach to intervention selection, with non-negotiable aspects◦ Multi-faceted with universal and targeted components◦ Focus on individual, family, and community risk factors◦ Evidence of effectiveness with grades 6-8◦ Reasonable implementation resource requirements

Potential interventions

Intervention Approach

o Universal programs • Positive behavior • (Positive Action)• Dating relationships • (Safe Dates)• Bullying/peer relationships

(Success in Stages)• Academic engagement

(CareerStart; Cultivating Student Success)

o Targeted programs• Family relationships

(Parenting Wisely; Functional Family Therapy)

• Quasi-experimental

• Longitudinal HLM• Aggressive

behavior• Risk & protective

factors

• Training• Manualized programs• Technical support• Supervision• Process evaluation

•Quasi-experimental•Longitudinal HLM•School-level indicators

•violent acts•suspensions•academic performance

• Longitudinal trajectory• Quasi-experimental

RPD design• Juvenile arrests;

delinquent acts

County

SchoolIndividualFidelit

y

Evaluation Overview

County-Level• Does the youth violence prevention initiative

reduce county-level indicators of violence?• -Juvenile Arrests, Delinquent/Undisciplined rates

School-Level• Does initiative reduce school-level indicators?• Do county-level statistics help explain changes in

indicators?• -School violence, suspensions, EOG/EOC scores

Individual-Level• Is initiative associated w/ individual level

outcomes; changes in youth social experiences• What are the relationships among changes in

social enviromental risk & protective factors, academics, & conduct

Level Measure Source Data Collection

County • Juvenile arrests• Delinquent acts• Complaints against

juveniles

NC-OJJDP

Annually + 3-year baseline for all North Carolina counties

School • Acts of violence at school• Suspensions• Math & Language Arts

EOG/EOC

NC-DPI Annually + 3-year baseline for target and comparison schools

Individual • School Success Profile PLUS• Aggressive behaviors• Neighborhood, school,

peer, and family systems

• Physical & psychological health

Self-report

Annually from students in target and comparison county

Math & Language Arts EOG/EOC

NC-DPI Annually for students in target and comparison schools

Measures

Neighborhood

• Neighbor Support (7 items; =.82)

• Neighborhood Youth Behavior (8 items; =.84)

• Neighborhood Safety (8 items; =.84)

Peers

• Friend Behavior (9 items; =.90)

• Peer Group Acceptance (7 items; =.80)

• Friend Support (5 items; =.87)

• Bullying Perpetration and Victimization

• Social Problems (YSR: 16 items; =.70)

Family

• Parent Support (5 items; =.92)

• Home Academic Environment (3 items; = .76)

• Parent Education Support (6 items; =.87)

• Parent-Child Conflict (12 items; =.88)

School Success Profile PLUS

School

•School Safety (11 items; =.88)

•Learning Climate (7 items; =.81)

•School Satisfaction (4 items; =.86)

•Academic Rigor (10 items; =.91)

•Academic Relevancy (11 items; =.91)

•Teacher Support (8 items; =.89)

•Micro Interactions (13 items; =.90)

Personal Beliefs & Well-being

•Physical Health (5 items; =.75)

•Self-Confidence (5 items; =.91)

•Adjustment (6 items; =.87)

•Aggressive Behaviors (YSR: 16 items; =.81)

•Internalizing Problems (YSR: 16 items; =.85)

•Ethnic Identity (6 items; =.80)

•Religious Orientation (4 items; =.91)

Attitudes & Behavior

•School Engagement (4 items; =.78)

•Extracurricular Participation

•Success Orientation (12 items; =.92)

School Success Profile PLUS (cont’d)

Initial staff training and periodic refresher sessions Weekly session notes and implementation tracking

◦ Attendance, hours, content delivered Weekly clinical supervision sessions Selection of programs with strong resources for dissemination,

implementation, and fidelity measurement Specialized measures of implementation and fidelity specific to

selected intervention programs Ongoing process evaluation

◦ Quantitative and qualitative feedback from participants and facilitators

◦ Understand any implementation and fidelity issues and identify salient themes for content and process improvement

◦ Iterative cycle of integrating feedback into ongoing program planning

Implementation & Fidelity

Specific Aim: Enable the development of scholars and scholarly practitioners through cross-disciplinary training of new and established investigators in youth violence prevention

Training Core

Mentoring

Collaboration

Training

Awareness

Create training opportunities ◦ Exposure to local and visiting scholars ◦ Series of seminars on topics related to youth violence

prevention Risk and protective factors Surveillance of youth violence Prevention strategies Research methods

Create mentoring opportunities◦ Master’s students, doctoral students, and junior youth

violence prevention researchers receive supervision and guidance from senior researchers and advisory board

Training Core Activities

Establish new collaborations◦Multi-disciplinary team of researchers and

practitioners collaborate on Advisory Committee and Community Violence Prevention Board

◦Representatives from social work, public health, education, sociology, and psychology

◦Framework for connections between community practitioners and practitioners and researchers

Raise awareness in the professional and lay communities◦Training and continuing education to social

service providers, educators, public health practitioners, and clinicians

Training Core Activities (cont’d)

For further information regarding the project

contact Jim Barbee

NC rACE Center Director jmbarbee@email.unc.edu