Strategic Risk-Based Response to Youth Gangs
by Phelan A. Wyrick and James C. Howell

Once a community pinpoints its most prevalent local problems and links them to specific risk factors, it is able to develop strategies that address the root causes of those problems. This article illustrates how local leaders can use risk factor research in their efforts to address one such problem that affects communities nationwide—gangs.

OJJDP and others have long advocated for comprehensive approaches to youth gangs that involve multiagency collaboration and a combination of prevention, intervention, and suppression efforts (Howell, 2000; Huff, 2002; Spergel, 1995). There is a sound theoretical basis and growing evidence (see Spergel et al., 1999) to support the belief that such approaches will likely have the greatest communitywide impact. Establishing a comprehensive communitywide approach is a long-term effort, however, and it may not be a practical option if, for example, key community agencies are unwilling or unable to make responding to youth gangs a priority.

This article presents a framework for a strategic risk-based response to youth gangs that can be adopted even without full communitywide collaboration and regardless of whether the primary focus is prevention, intervention, or suppression or a combination of these methods. The strategic risk-based response discussed in this article is not a specific program; rather, it is an approach to developing and implementing programs that draws on an understanding of youth gangs, risk factors, and state-of-the-art practices in program design. Comprehensive approaches still remain the ideal community-level response to youth gangs. Many communities, however, cannot implement comprehensive programs for a variety of legitimate reasons, and these communities can benefit from developing a strategic risk-based response to youth gangs.

A strategic risk-based response must be grounded in a general understanding of youth gangs combined with an indepth knowledge of local youth gang problems. A community's assessment of its gang problem, in turn, must be based on an understanding of how a variety of risk factors relate to the onset and persistence of local gang activity and youth violence. The strategic response should implement state-of-the-art practices in program design to focus activities, optimize resources, and allow for tracking of program effectiveness. These topics are each addressed below.

Understanding Youth Gangs

Most U.S. residents live in or around a city that has experienced youth gang activity since at least the mid-1990s (Egley, 2002), and much earlier in some cities. Researchers have repeatedly demonstrated that gang members commit property, weapons, drug, and violent offenses at significantly higher rates than youth who are not involved in gangs (Huff, 1998; Thornberry et al., 2003) and even than other delinquent youth (Battin et al., 1998). Throughout the nation, lives are lost and devastated every day because of youth gangs. Although thousands of programs have been implemented that, directly or indirectly, address gang involvement (Gottfredson and Gottfredson, 2001), the ongoing difficulties with youth gangs make one lesson very clear: there are no quick fixes or easy solutions for the problems that youth gangs create or the problems that create youth gangs.

Part of the challenge to effectively responding to youth gangs is countering common assumptions about gangs that may not accurately reflect local problems. For example, many people assume that youth gangs are hierarchical organizations that control complex criminal endeavors such as drug trafficking. In contrast, many researchers have concluded that youth gangs are typically loose in structure with low levels of organizational sophistication (Curry and Decker, 2003; Decker and Van Winkle, 1996; Klein, 1995; Weisel, 2002). Gangs in any given locality may be more or less sophisticated in their organization and criminality, but it is critical that communities not attempt to treat all gangs equally based on untested assumptions. Differences in organizational sophistication suggest differences in the responses that are likely to be effective.

Existing research and certain specialized law enforcement training can provide excellent information about how gangs operate generally. However, gangs vary tremendously across and within communities (see Howell, Egley, and Gleason, 2002; Valdez, 2000). Thus, general knowledge about gangs should be supplemented with information gathered through a local assessment of gang problems. The National Youth Gang Center (2002a) has developed a gang problem assessment protocol that has been tested in approximately 20 sites, ranging from small rural areas to large urban localities.¹ Quantitative and qualitative data are collected to answer key questions such as: What, where are, and when are gang crimes being committed? How have these changed over time? What are the characteristics of youth involved in gangs or at risk of gang involvement? How do residents and community leaders perceive and define the problem?

The problem assessment begins by clearly defining what is meant by gang, gang member, and gang-related offenses. A resource inventory is conducted to identify services in the community that are being provided or could be provided to at-risk youth, gang members, and their families. The assessment protocol is designed to be very thorough and requires considerable collaboration. Programs with limited resources can adapt the protocol by focusing on issues of highest relevance or making adjustments to obtain similar information at lower cost.²

A common challenge to conducting gang problem assessments is the availability of gang crime data. Many jurisdictions lack any mechanism for tracking gang crime, even though one can be quite simple to implement. A tracking system for gang crime requires little more than a check box on incident and arrest reports, a standard operational definition for determining whether an incident is gang related, and appropriate training and oversight of law enforcement personnel. Such a system provides a community baseline of gang activity that can be sorted in multiple ways and compared against future measures for evaluation purposes. In addition, tracking systems improve the ability to target resources during program implementation.

Risk Factors

Recent youth gang research has produced three important findings regarding the impact of risk factors on the likelihood of gang membership. First, risk factors for gang membership span all major risk factor domains—individual characteristics, family conditions, school performance, peer group influences, and the community context—that research has shown to be related to various adolescent problem behaviors, including serious violence and delinquency.

Second, the accumulation of risk factors greatly increases the likelihood of gang involvement, just as it increases the likelihood of other problem behaviors. Researchers in a Seattle study (Hill et al., 1999) found that the presence of risk factors from any of the five major domains in youth ages 10–12 was predictive of their joining a gang at ages 13–18. Children with 7 or more risk factors were 13 times more likely to join a gang than children with no risk factors or only 1.

Third, the presence of risk factors in multiple domains appears to increase the likelihood of gang involvement even more than the general accumulation of risk factors.³ Researchers in the Rochester Youth Development Study (Thornberry et al., 2003) found that a majority (61 percent) of the boys and 40 percent of the girls who scored above the median in seven risk factor domains⁴ were gang members. Approximately 20 percent of the Rochester youth who experienced risk in four to six domains joined a gang.

These findings demonstrate that there is no single cause for youth gang membership or delinquency. Therefore, isolated efforts to target a single risk factor or even a single domain are unlikely to have much success in reducing a community's gang problems. It is the accumulation of risk factors across domains that greatly contributes to the likelihood of gang membership and delinquency. Thus, communities need to address not only multiple risk factors, but multiple risk factor domains. One way to do this is to implement a comprehensive communitywide approach to gang prevention, intervention, and suppression involving a broad representation of community leaders and including community grassroots efforts (see National Youth Gang Center, 2002b).

Another way to address multiple risk factors across domains is through a coordinated partnership between programs that have succeeded in eliminating a single risk factor or risk domain or in neutralizing its negative impact. To be effective in reducing gang problems, such a partnership must be developed and managed with a broad understanding of local risk factors across domains. The partnership must also coordinate existing programs that address complimentary risk factors in the same population. For example, a partnership could involve an intensive probation program that ensures accountability of youth with a history of violence (individual-level risk factor), an afterschool program that provides prosocial activities and tutoring to improve school attitudes and performance (school risk factor), and a parenting skills program that addresses childcare and parent-child relationships (family risk factor). This partnership is likely to have the greatest impact if the programs involve the same high-risk population (Howell, 2003a).

Beyond addressing multiple risk factors across domains, consideration should be given to the relative importance of the risk factor. Researchers have not developed a definitive ranking of risk factors that are consistently more or less important in predicting gang membership and violent behavior, and such a list may not be forthcoming soon. However, Lipsey and Derzon's (1998) meta-analysis of 34 independent longitudinal studies identified five levels of risk factors based on how important they were for predicting violence and serious delinquency at ages 15–25 when measured at ages 6–11 and 12–14. The most important predictors at ages 12–14 were having antisocial peers such as gang members or having few social ties at all. The next set of ranked risk factors included poor school attitude and performance, aggression, poor parent-child relationships, psychological conditions, prior physical violence, and being a male. Important predictors for the younger group (ages 6–11) were general delinquency, substance use, being a male, coming from a disadvantaged family, and having antisocial parents. Research-based rankings can be important starting points, but communities should confirm or modify such information based on data and knowledge of local risk factors.

Communities should also consider the feasibility of modifying conditions of risk. Certain risk factors—gender, for example—cannot be affected by any kind of program. Others, such as community disorganization, are quite difficult to influence and may require very long commitments, and still others, such as school performance, may be more amenable to change with fewer resources.

Acknowledging both a risk factor's importance and its amenability to change may allow for more effective use of limited resources. If the risk factors most important to the local gang problem are also the most difficult to change, it is likely that chances for success will hinge on whether the effort is well funded, broad stakeholder support is present at the highest levels, and the effort focuses on the long term in achieving results. Absent such resources, a sizeable community-level impact may still be realized by addressing risk factors that are more amenable to change but are perhaps of lower overall importance.

The following sections identify key risk factors for gang membership by domain, including those that are the most likely to be amenable to change by gang prevention and intervention programs. For a detailed review of risk factors found in longitudinal studies, see “Youth Gangs: Prevention and Intervention” (Howell, 2003b); for a complete list of risk factors found in other kinds of studies, see Youth Gangs: An Overview (Howell, 1998, pp. 6–7).

Individual Risk Factors

The most dysfunctional youth, particularly those on a trajectory of worsening antisocial behavior, are most likely to join gangs (Lahey et al., 1999). The individual risk factors for future gang membership appear at a very early age (Howell, 2003b). For example, increasing levels of conduct disorders—measured thus far as early as the first grade—predict gang involvement. Youth who use drugs and who are also involved in delinquency—violent delinquency in particular—are more likely to become gang members than those who are not as involved in delinquency and drug use (Thornberry et al., 2003). Early dating, precocious sexual activity, and negative life events⁵ are also strong predictors. It is very difficult to influence early conduct disorders and negative life events, but programs that prevent or postpone sexual activity and deter drug use among delinquent youth may hold greater chances for success.

Family Risk Factors

Key family risk factors for gang membership include the family structure (e.g., broken home), family poverty, child abuse or neglect, and gang involvement of family members (Howell, 2003b). Poor family management, including poor parental supervision (monitoring) and control of children, has been shown to be a strong predictor of gang membership (Hill et al., 1999; Le Blanc and Lanctot, 1998; Thornberry, 1998; Thornberry et al., 2003). Among these risk factors, poor family management may be the most amenable to change, primarily through parenting classes and, in some cases, family counseling.

School Risk Factors

One of the strongest school-related risk factors for gang membership is low achievement in school, particularly at the elementary level (Hill et al., 1999; Le Blanc and Lanctot, 1998; Thornberry et al., 2003). This in turn is related to low academic aspirations, a low degree of commitment to school, and teachers' negative labeling of youth (Howell, 2003b). Early tutoring and appropriate mentoring can address school achievement, academic aspirations, and school commitment. Many future gang members also have problems with truancy (Lahey et al., 1999). Another school-related risk factor for gang membership is feeling unsafe at school (Gottfredson and Gottfredson, 2001). Increasing individuals' feelings of safety at school may be more difficult (Gottfredson and Gottfredson, 2001). Nevertheless, such programs (e.g., Safe Schools/Healthy Students) are essential for creating an environment in which opportunities for educational achievement can be enhanced.

Peer Group Risk Factors

Association with peers who engage in delinquency is one of the strongest risk factors for gang membership (Thornberry et al., 2003). Association with aggressive peers, whether or not they are involved in delinquency during adolescence, also is a strong predictor (Howell, 2003b). However, limiting youth's choice of peers can be very difficult. A more feasible approach would be to increase adult supervision of youth since lack of adult supervision is integrally related to the negative impact of delinquent peers on a youth's decision to join a gang (Le Blanc and Lanctot, 1998; Thornberry, 1998).

Community Risk Factors

Longitudinal studies have identified the availability of drugs, the presence of many neighborhood youth who are in trouble, youth's feelings of being unsafe in the neighborhood, low neighborhood attachment, low levels of neighborhood integration, area poverty, and neighborhood disorganization (i.e., low informal social control) as the strongest community risk factors for gang membership (Howell, 2003b). Each of these risk factors, however, is very difficult to modify. Another important community risk factor—one with greater potential to be changed—is the presence of gangs in the neighborhood.

Gangs tend to cluster in high-crime, socially disorganized neighborhoods. The clustering of gangs in such high-crime communities has a negative influence and provides ample opportunity for recruitment of at-risk youth into gangs. Suppression, curfew enforcement, and civil abatement activities such as public nuisance ordinances may help reduce this negative influence.

Program Design and Management

The importance of strategic program planning is too often overlooked in favor of expediency. Sometimes it takes a tragic act of violence before communities openly recognize their youth gang problem. Determined to respond quickly, community leaders may launch into program activities with only minimal attention paid to program planning and development. Efforts aimed at achieving rapid results, however, often undercut the careful planning required to optimize resources and maximize effects on the complex social problems related to youth gangs.

Kettner, Moroney, and Martin (1999) describe what they call an effectiveness-based approach to program planning that includes problem analysis, developing a program hypothesis, developing a hierarchical set of goals and objectives, and evaluation and performance measurement. In general, problem analysis seeks to determine the nature and distribution of the problem, the characteristics of those experiencing the problem, how key terms are defined, and the causes or origins of the problem. Note that the first three of these items reflect in general terms the key questions answered through the National Youth Gang Center's (2002a) gang problem assessment protocol. The last item—determining the causes or origins of the problem—relates back to an examination of local risk factors for violence and gang membership.

The second element of the effectiveness-based approach to program planning, the program hypothesis, specifies cause-and-effect relationships between risk factors and describes consequences or problem behaviors in an if/then format. The program hypothesis clarifies the relationship between problems to be addressed and activities, links program activities to outcomes, and provides a framework for ongoing monitoring and evaluation. Based on this information, a hierarchical set of goals and objectives is developed to describe how program activities relate to overall goals and to an evidence-based understanding of the nature of the local gang problem. The National Youth Gang Center (2002b) has developed parallel guidance that provides more detail specific to constructing implementation plans for comprehensive gang programs. However, the basic elements of effective program design remain the same.

Evaluation and performance measurement are critical components of program planning. Evaluation activities must begin early to determine whether a program was delivered as designed (process evaluation) and whether it had the intended effects (impact evaluation). An evaluation's level of complexity and scientific rigor directly affect its cost and the technical expertise necessary to conduct the evaluation. However, even relatively inexpensive program monitoring can be very beneficial when carefully planned. In any event, communities should make some effort to measure both the process and the impact of their programs. As previously noted, a tracking system for gang crime may be one critical community- level indicator for evaluating impact for many programs. Determining individual-level outcomes may require data collection (e.g., through surveys, interviews, individual police histories) before and after program participation.

Putting It All Together

The most desirable program is comprehensive and communitywide. Failing that, programs should involve strategic partnerships among diverse providers serving the same high-risk population. As stated earlier, these strategic risk-based responses to youth gangs synthesize general knowledge of youth gangs with indepth knowledge of local gang problems, risk factor research, and state-of-the-art practices in program design. Developing such a response may seem too daunting a task to complete before service delivery. However, costs associated with program design can be spread across partners and can be justified based on improved resource targeting and program feedback mechanisms. In addition, the use of sound program documentation and evaluation increases a community's ability to access outside funding.

There are no easy solutions to community gang problems. However, with proper program planning and development, local policymakers and practitioners can make informed decisions on the efficient use of limited resources to respond to youth gangs.

Notes

1. For more information about this assessment protocol, please visit NYGC's Web site at www.iir.com/nygc/acgp/assessment.htm.

2. Note that this latter strategy could potentially detract from data quality.

3. It is important to recognize that risk factor research suggests probabilities for groups of youth who display certain characteristics, and thus are not predictions pertaining to each individual in the group. Not all high-risk youth join gangs.

4. The Rochester study, part of OJJDP's Program of Research on the Causes and Correlates of Delinquency, examined seven risk factor domains: area characteristics, family sociodemographic characteristics, parent-child relationships, school, peers, individual characteristics, and early delinquency. Findings from this study are discussed in “The Causes and Correlates Studies: Findings and Policy Implications”.

5. These include failing a course at school, being suspended or expelled from school, breaking up with a boyfriend or girlfriend, having a big fight or problem with a friend, and the death of someone close (Thornberry et al., 2003).

References

Battin, S.R., Hill, K.G., Abbott, R.D., Catalano, R.F., and Hawkins, J.D. 1998. The contribution of gang membership to delinquency beyond delinquent friends. Criminology 36(1):93–115.

Bureau of Justice Assistance. 1998. Addressing Community Gang Problems: A Practical Guide. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance.

Curry, G.D., and Decker, S.H. 2003. Confronting Gangs: Crime and Community, 2d ed. Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury Publishing Co.

Decker, S.H., and Van Winkle, B. 1996. Life in the Gang: Family, Friends, and Violence. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Egley, A. 2002. National Youth Gang Survey Trends From 1996 to 2000. Fact Sheet. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Gottfredson, G.D., and Gottfredson, D.C. 2001. Gang Problems and Gang Programs in a National Sample of Schools. Ellicott City, MD: Gottfredson Associates.

Hill, K.G., Howell, J.C., Hawkins, J.D., and Battin-Pearson, S.R. 1999. Childhood risk factors for adolescent gang membership: Results from the Seattle Social Development Project. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 36(3):300–322.

Howell, J.C. 1998. Youth Gangs: An Overview. Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Howell, J.C. 2000. Youth Gang Programs and Strategies. Summary. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Howell, J.C. 2003a. Preventing and Reducing Juvenile Delinquency: A Comprehensive Framework. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Howell, J.C. 2003b. Youth gangs: Prevention and intervention. In Intervention With Children and Adolescents: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, edited by P. Allen-Meares and M.W. Fraser. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, pp. 493–514.

Howell, J.C., Egley, A., and Gleason, D.K. 2002. Modern-Day Youth Gangs. Bulletin. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Huff, C.R. 1998. Comparing the Criminal Behavior of Youth Gangs and At-Risk Youth. Research in Brief. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.

Huff, C.R. 2002. Gangs and public policy: Prevention, intervention, and suppression. In Gangs in America III, edited by C.R. Huff. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 287–294.

Kettner, P.M., Moroney, R.M., and Martin, L.L. 1999. Designing and Managing Programs: An Effectiveness-Based Approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Klein, M.W. 1995. The American Street Gang. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Lahey, B.B., Gordon, R.A., Loeber, R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., and Farrington, D.P. 1999. Boys who join gangs: A prospective study of predictors of first gang entry. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 27(4):261–276.

Le Blanc, M., and Lanctot, N. 1998. Social and psychological characteristics of gang members according to the gang structure and its subcultural and ethnic makeup. Journal of Gang Research 5(3):15–28.

Lipsey, M.W., and Derzon, J.H. 1998. Predictors of violent or serious delinquency in adolescence and early adulthood: A synthesis of longitudinal research. In Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders: Risk Factors and Successful Interventions, edited by R. Loeber and D.P. Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 86–105.

National Youth Gang Center. 2002a. A Guide to Assessing Your Community's Youth Gang Problem. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. [www.iir.com/nygc/acgp/assessment.htm]

National Youth Gang Center. 2002b. Planning for Implementation. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. [www.iir.com/nygc/acgp/implementation.htm]

Rossi, P.H., Lipsey, M.W., and Freeman, H.E. 2003. Evaluation: A Systematic Approach, 6th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Spergel, I.A. 1995. The Youth Gang Problem. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Spergel, I.A., Grossman, S.F., Wa, K.M., Choi, S., and Jacob, A. 1999. Evaluation of the Little Village Gang Violence Reduction Project: The First Three Years. Chicago, IL: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority.

Thornberry, T.P. 1998. Membership in youth gangs and involvement in serious and violent offending. In Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders: Risk Factors and Successful Interventions, edited by R. Loeber and D.P. Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 147–166.

Thornberry, T.P., Krohn, M.D., Lizotte, A.J., Smith, C.A., and Tobin, K. 2003. Gangs and Delinquency in Developmental Perspective. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Valdez, A. 2000. Gangs: A Guide to Understanding Street Gangs, 3d ed. San Clemente, CA: Law Tech Publishing.

Weisel, D.L. 2002. The evolution of street gangs: An examination of form and variation. In Responding to Gangs: Evaluation and Research, edited by W.L. Reed and S.H. Decker. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, pp. 25–65.