You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.

www.HFRP.org

The Harvard Family Research Project separated from the Harvard Graduate School of Education to become the Global Family Research Project as of January 1, 2017. It is no longer affiliated with Harvard University.

Terms of Use ▼

Program Description

Overview The goal of the Maryland After School Community Grant Program (MASCGP), which served Maryland youth in grades 4 through 8, was to strengthen youth resiliency and prevent substance abuse, violence, and delinquency among youth by increasing the availability of high quality, structured after school programs. The program's objectives were to increase participants' supervised after school time, academic performance, social skills, attachments to prosocial adults, aversion to substance use and illegal behavior, and involvement and investment in constructive activities.
Start Date 1997 (completed in June 2002)
Scope state
Type after school
Location urban, rural, and suburban
Setting public school, community-based organization, faith-based organization, private facility, recreation center
Participants elementary and middle school students (fourth through eighth graders, some third graders)
Number of Sites/Grantees approximately 40
Number Served 469 in 2001–2002
Components MASCGP activities varied by sponsoring agency (county or state government, public schools, youth agencies, church, and private organizations), program site (community center or public school), number of youth served, participation “dosage” (number of hours participants experience the program), and fee schedule. All MASCGP centers were required to include three basic components: academic achievement; social skills; and “bonding” activities, such as sports, arts, crafts, and other recreational activities aimed at retaining participants.
Funding Level $1.1 million for the 2001–2002 school year
Funding Sources Safe and Drug Free Schools Program of the U.S. Department of Justice, Maryland Governor's Office of Crime Control & Prevention, parent fees, other sources
Other MASCGP was incorporated into a larger “Youth Strategies” Activity Initiative that combines eight federal and state funding streams and funds a wide variety of prevention activities to reduce or prevent youth substance abuse and crime. The 5-year consolidated grant initiative offered $15 million over 18 months (January 2002–June 2003) to 24 Maryland communities for prevention, intervention, and aftercare services for youth.


Evaluation

Overview The goals of the evaluation were to examine program implementation and impact on participants' behavior and levels of risk and resiliency. Further studies focused on predictors of dropping out of programs, mechanisms linking participation to reduced delinquency, and relationships between program implementation and youth outcomes.
Evaluator Denise C. Gottfredson, Stephanie A. Weisman, Shannon C. Womer, Melissa Kellstron, Sean Bryner, Amy Kahler, Lee Ann Slocum, Shaoli Lu, and David A. Soulé, University of Maryland, College Park
Evaluations Profiled Maryland After School Community Grant Program: Report on the 1999–2000 School Year Evaluation of the Phase 1 After School Programs

Maryland After School Community Grant Program Part 1: Report on the 2000–2001 School Year Evaluation of the Phase 2 After School Programs

Maryland After School Community Grant Program Part 1: Report on the 2001–2002 School Year Evaluation of the Phase 3 After School Programs

Attrition From After School Programs: Characteristics of Students Who Drop Out

Do After School Programs Reduce Delinquency?

After-School Programs, Antisocial Behavior, and Positive Youth Development: An Exploration of the Relationship Between Program Implementation and Changes in Youth Behavior
Evaluations Planned none (The “Youth Strategies” Activity Initiative will be evaluated by Dr. Denise C. Gottfredson of the University of Maryland.)
Report Availability Weisman, S. A., Soulé, D. A., & Womer, S. C., under the direction of Gottfredson, D. C. (2001). Maryland After School Community Grant Program: Report on the 1999–2000 school year evaluation of the Phase 1 after school programs. College Park: University of Maryland.

Weisman, S. A., Womer, S. C., Lu, S., Soule, D. A., Bryner, S. L., Kahler, A., et al., under the direction of Gottfredson, D. C. (2002). Maryland After School Community Grant Program part 1: Report on the 2000–2001 school year evaluation of the Phase 2 after school programs. College Park: University of Maryland.

Weisman, S. A., Womer, S. C., Kellstrom, M. A. Bryner, S., Kahler, A., & Slocum, L. A., under the direction of Gottfredson, D. C. (2003). Maryland After School Community Grant Program part 1: Report on the 2001–2002 school year evaluation of the Phase 3 after school programs. College Park: University of Maryland.

Weisman, S. A., & Gottfredson, D. C. (2001). Attrition from after school programs: Characteristics of students who drop out. Prevention Science, 2, 201–205.

Gottfredson, D. C. Weisman, S. A., Soulé, D. A., Womer, S. C., & Lu, S. (2004). Do after school programs reduce delinquency? Prevention Science, 5, 253–266.

Weisman, S. A., Soule, D. A., Gottfredson, D. C., Lu, S., Kellstrom, M. A., Womer, S. C., & Bryner, S. L. (2005). After-school programs, anti-social behavior, and positive youth development: An exploration of the relationship between program implementation and changes in youth behavior. In J. L. Mahoney, J. S., Eccles & R. W. Larson (Eds.), Organized activities as contexts of development: Extracurricular activities, after-school, and community programs. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.


Contacts

Evaluation Denise C. Gottfredson, Ph.D.
Project Director
Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice
2220D LeFrak Hall
University of Maryland
Tel: 301-405-4717
Fax: 301-405-4733
Email: dgottfredson@crim.umd.edu
Program Andrea Alexander
Youth Services Division Chief
Governor's Office of Crime Control & Prevention
300 E. Joppa Rd, Suite 1105
Baltimore, MD 21286-3016
Phone: 410-321-3521 ext. 356
Fax: 410-321-3116
Email: andrea@goccp-state-md.org
Profile Updated May 19, 2006

Evaluation 5: Do After School Programs Reduce Deliquency?


Evaluation Description

Evaluation Purpose To examine the effects of MASCGP on delinquent behavior and the mechanisms through which such programs may affect delinquent behavior.
Evaluation Design Experimental, Quasi-Experimental, and Non-Experimental: Outcome data were collected on 14 programs, which were given the choice of using a randomized control or comparison group design. Three programs chose a randomized control group design, in which youth interested in MASCGP were either assigned to participate in the program immediately, were placed in a comparison/control group (ineligible to participate), or were placed on a waiting list during the 1999–2000 school year. Youth on the waiting list were selected randomly to fill vacancies as youth withdrew from the program, while the remainder of this group was added to the comparison/control group. Eleven programs selected comparison group members from schools or areas outside the population served by their program. Evaluators examined the results to see if they differed by evaluation design; they concluded that programs' use of nonrandomized designs did not bias estimates of the effects of program participation. Thus, data from both types of sites were collapsed together in the analysis.

A survey was administered to all participants and control/comparison youth. In total, 97% of both the program and control/comparison groups completed pretests, and 89% of the program group and 87% of the control/comparison group completed a posttest. The main outcome analyzed was a “delinquent behavior” variable, which included delinquent behavior, rebellious behavior, and substance use. Results are presented separately for younger (grades 4 and 5) and older (grades 6 through 8) youth.

In total, 417 youth were in the treatment group (which included those who dropped out of the program, had inconsistent attendance, or participated later in the year after being taken off the waiting list). A total of 408 youth were in the control/comparison group, including waiting list youth who were never recruited to participate. Younger participants and nonparticipants were very similar at pretest. Among older youth, comparison youth reported lower levels of rebellious behavior (p < .01), higher levels of social skills (p < .05), and fewer unsupervised hours per week (p < .01) than did participating youth. All analyses statistically controlled for demographic differences. There were no differences between the groups in attrition bias.

To examine possible mechanisms through which participation produced estimated effects on reduced delinquency, evaluators estimated a “path model,” testing links between program participation and hypothesized mechanisms (i.e., involvement in constructive activities, intentions not to use drugs, social skills, positive peer associations, and unsupervised time) and between these hypothesized mechanisms and delinquency outcomes.
Data Collection Methods Document Review: Logs and forms completed by program staff provided data on daily facets of program administration and components (e.g., number of hours spent on social skills and character development training).

Surveys/Questionnaires: The youth survey, What About You? (Gottfredson, 1991), measured youth's attachment to school, rebellious and delinquent behavior, drug use, attitudes about drug use, peer relationships, parental supervision, commitment to education, belief in rules, unsupervised after school time, and involvement in constructive activities. In addition, a measure of youth's social skills was embedded in the survey.

Tests/Assessments: The social skills assessment in the survey was drawn from the Social Skills Rating System (SSRS) Elementary Level Student form (Gresham & Elliott, 1990).

References
Gottfredson, G. (1991). What about you? Ellicott City, MD: Gottfredson Associates.

Gresham, F., & Elliott, S. (1990). Social skills rating system. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
Data Collection Timeframe Data were collected in the 1999–2000 program year.


Findings:
Formative/Process Findings

Program Context/Infrastructure Middle school programs were expected to meet 3 days per week for a total of 90 program days, and elementary school programs were expected to meet 4 days per week for a total of 120 program days. Middle school programs in general exceeded this standard by meeting for 116 days, while elementary school programs fell short, meeting 107 days on average.

Elementary school participants were found to have received approximately 30 fewer hours of social skills and character development lessons over the course of the program than middle school participants.

In the typical program, students received approximately 1.7 hours of educational services per week and 1.8 (elementary) or 2.4 (middle) hours of social skills or character development training.
Recruitment/Participation On average, youth attended 71% (for middle school youth) and 80% (for elementary school youth) of available program days. The mean number of days actually attended was 64 (middle) and 68 (elementary). Eighty-four percent of elementary and 77% of middle school youth participated for more than 30 days.


Summative/Outcome Findings

Prevention Participation was significantly related to reduced delinquent behavior among older youth (p < .01). No significant relationship was found among younger youth.

In the path model, the intervening (or mechanism) variables partially explained the estimated effect of after school participation on reduced delinquency, but a direct relationship remained, implying that the mediating variables were not sufficient to explain all of the estimated program effect on delinquent behavior.

Taken together, the path model revealed that program participation was significantly related to reduced delinquency through two of the estimated pathways: increased intentions not to use drugs and positive peer associations. In particular, participation was related to both increases in intentions not to use drugs (p < .05) and increases in positive peer associations (p = .10). Both of these factors were then significantly related to reductions in delinquency (p < .01).

Among the other hypothesized mechanisms, increased social skills were significantly related to decreased delinquency, but program participation was unrelated to changes in social skills. Program participation was related to decreased hours per week in self-care, but this relationship did not reach significance. Hours per week in self-care were not in turn associated with changes in delinquency. Program participation was positively related to involvement in constructive activities (p < .01), but involvement in constructive activities was positively related to delinquent behavior (p < .05).

The effects of participation on reduced delinquency were generally larger in the five middle school programs that had a high level of emphasis on social skills and character development then in the three middle school programs with a low emphasis on social skills and character development (p < .10). In these programs, relationships between participation and delinquency continued to be mediated by attitudes pertaining to substance use and by positive peer associations. However, the positive relationship between involvement in constructive activities and reduced delinquency was not found in the programs with a high level of emphasis on social skills and character development.

© 2016 Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College
Published by Harvard Family Research Project