Tools for Community Leaders: Implementing Communities That Care for Youth Success

In every community, young people navigate a complex landscape of influences, some positive and others negative. While initiatives like asset development focus on building strengths in youth, it’s crucial to acknowledge and address the challenges they face. Negative influences, such as lack of educational attainment within families or easy access to drugs, can significantly impact a young person’s trajectory. A community environment that normalizes violence further exacerbates these risks. For community leaders striving to foster healthy environments, understanding and utilizing effective frameworks is paramount.

This article delves into the Communities That Care (CTC) model, a proven strategy designed to empower community leaders with Communities That Care Tools For Community Leaders. Unlike some broad-based community health models, CTC offers a targeted approach, emphasizing both protective and risk factors affecting adolescents. By strategically enhancing protective factors and mitigating risks, CTC aims to foster healthy youth development and, consequently, a more robust community.

Like other successful community-wide models, Communities That Care emphasizes broad community participation and a comprehensive perspective. Similar to the PRECEDE/PROCEED model, it advocates for a systematic approach: identifying problems and resources, developing targeted solutions, and integrating rigorous evaluation into the implementation process.

CTC shares common ground with the Search Institute’s asset development model, particularly in its focus on youth and the impact of protective and risk factors. However, while asset development takes a holistic view of child and adolescent growth, Communities That Care zeroes in on preventing and reversing specific problem behaviors. For community leaders seeking actionable strategies, CTC provides a structured and effective pathway.

Understanding Communities That Care

Communities That Care (CTC) is rooted in the Social Development Strategy, a framework developed by J. David Hawkins and Richard Catalano at the University of Washington. It’s not a pre-packaged program but rather a comprehensive “operating system” for community-led initiatives addressing youth issues. CTC provides the structure and process, empowering communities to tailor the content to their specific needs. The core of CTC lies in its focus on risk and protective factors, addressed through a structured, community-wide process with training at each stage.

It’s important to note that CTC is a copyrighted, structured process. The Channing-Bete Corporation offers a comprehensive package for communities, which includes training, materials, and support for assessment, planning, intervention selection, implementation, and evaluation. This structured approach provides community leaders with valuable support and resources throughout the CTC journey.

The Five Focus Areas of Communities That Care:

CTC is specifically designed to address five key problem behaviors prevalent among youth:

• Substance use
• Delinquency
• Teen pregnancy
• School dropout
• Violence

These five areas represent significant challenges for communities and are interconnected, often stemming from shared root causes. By focusing on these behaviors, CTC provides community leaders with a clear and manageable set of priorities.

Identifying Risk Factors: Understanding the Challenges

Risk factors are elements within a person’s environment or individual characteristics that increase their vulnerability to negative behaviors or outcomes. Extensive research has identified 19 risk factors associated with the problem behaviors targeted by CTC. A fundamental principle of the CTC model is that these risk and protective factors are interwoven throughout all aspects of community life – family, school, community, and individual experiences. For community leaders, recognizing and understanding these risk factors is the first step in developing effective prevention strategies.

These 19 risk factors are categorized into four key contexts: community, family, school, and individual/peer. Understanding these categories helps community leaders to target interventions effectively.

Community Risk Factors: These factors encompass community conditions, attitudes, and structures that can contribute to youth problem behaviors.

• Availability of Drugs: Easy access to drugs is a significant risk factor for both substance use and violence. Alarmingly, studies show that perceived drug availability, even if inaccurate, can increase drug use rates in a community.
• Availability of Firearms: Statistical evidence consistently demonstrates a correlation between firearm availability and violent crime rates. Communities with more firearms tend to experience higher rates of violence.
• Community Laws and Norms Favorable to Drug Use, Firearms, and Crime: Community attitudes and regulations play a crucial role. For instance, policies like high alcohol and cigarette taxes and bans on public consumption can send strong messages about community values and help control substance use.

Ambiguity in laws and community practices can be detrimental to youth. If alcohol is readily available at community events, drinking age enforcement is lax, or excessive drinking is normalized among adults and adolescents, young people are less likely to perceive these behaviors as problematic. Community leaders must strive for clear and consistent messaging and policies.

• Media Portrayals of Violence: Exposure to media violence can desensitize young people and increase the likelihood of violent behavior. This underscores the need for media literacy initiatives and responsible media practices within the community.
• Transitions and Mobility: Transitions, such as moving between schools or transitioning from middle to high school, are inherently challenging for adolescents. Significant community transitions, like socioeconomic integration through school busing or widespread job losses, can compound these difficulties. High levels of transience and family mobility can also increase risks for substance use, delinquency, and school dropout.
• Low Neighborhood Attachment and Community Disorganization: When residents feel powerless and disconnected from their community, it often leads to decreased community participation, lower voting rates, reduced surveillance of public spaces, vandalism, and deterioration of the community’s social and physical fabric. These conditions create an environment conducive to substance use, violence, and delinquency among youth.
• Extreme Economic Deprivation: Poverty significantly elevates the risk of all five problem behaviors in youth. Addressing economic disparities and providing opportunities for disadvantaged families are crucial components of community-wide prevention efforts.

Family Risk Factors: The family environment profoundly shapes a child’s development and behavior. Family attitudes and circumstances are significant predictors of youth involvement in problem behaviors.

• Family History of Problem Behavior: A family history of incarceration, teen pregnancy, school dropout, substance abuse, or violence increases the risk of adolescents engaging in similar behaviors. These patterns can become normalized across generations.
• Family Management Problems: Effective family management involves consistent and positive parenting practices, clear expectations, and appropriate discipline. Problems such as lack of supervision, child abuse, inconsistent discipline, unclear boundaries, and a lack of clear behavioral expectations are significant risk factors for all five problem behaviors.
• Family Conflict: High levels of conflict within the family – between parents, parents and children, siblings, or other household members – contribute to adolescent vulnerability to problem behaviors. Creating a stable and supportive family environment is essential.
• Parental Attitudes Toward, or Involvement in, Substance Use, Crime, and Violence: Parental approval or acceptance of substance use, crime, or violence, or parental involvement in these behaviors, dramatically increases the likelihood of youth involvement. This is especially true when parents directly involve children in their own problem behaviors.

School Risk Factors: Schools are more than just places of learning; they are social hubs that mirror broader societal dynamics. An adolescent’s school experience and identity significantly influence their development and future trajectory.

• Early and Persistent Antisocial Behavior: While occasional misbehavior is normal, persistent antisocial behavior in early childhood, particularly if it continues into middle school, is a serious risk factor.
• Academic Failure in Elementary School: Academic struggles in elementary school can create a cycle of frustration, disengagement, and further academic decline. It can also lead to a negative self-image and a perception of education as irrelevant, pushing children towards subcultures associated with problem behaviors.

In some peer groups, academic success might be viewed negatively. For instance, in some urban communities, excelling in school might be perceived as “acting white.” Similarly, some working-class cultures may view academic achievement with suspicion. These cultural pressures can limit a child’s options and increase vulnerability to problem behaviors. Community leaders need to foster a culture that values education for all youth.

• Lack of Commitment to School: Whether stemming from academic difficulties or a general lack of interest, a lack of school commitment and a perception of education as unimportant are significant risk factors.

Individual/Peer Risk Factors: These factors relate to personal characteristics and peer influences that can increase vulnerability to problem behaviors.

• Alienation and Rebelliousness: Youth who feel disconnected from society, disregard rules, reject responsibility, and actively rebel are at higher risk. Addressing feelings of alienation and fostering a sense of belonging are crucial.
• Friends Who Engage in Problem Behaviors: Peer influence is particularly strong during adolescence. Having friends who engage in substance use, delinquency, or other problem behaviors is a consistently strong predictor of a young person’s own involvement.
• Favorable Attitudes Toward the Problem Behavior: If a youth’s peers or even family members hold positive views towards substance use, crime, or dropping out of school, the youth is more likely to adopt similar attitudes, increasing their risk.
• Early Initiation of the Problem Behavior: Starting problem behaviors at a young age, such as early alcohol use, normalizes these behaviors and increases the likelihood of continued and escalating involvement.
• Constitutional Factors: These are inherent individual traits, potentially biological, neurological, or genetic, that can contribute to risk. Examples include impulsivity, sensation-seeking tendencies, and low risk aversion.

The Social Development Strategy illustrates how protective factors counteract high-risk environments.

Protective Factors: Building Resilience and Strength

Just as risk factors increase vulnerability, protective factors act as buffers, shielding adolescents from engaging in problem behaviors. These protective factors fall into three categories, providing community leaders with key areas to strengthen within their communities.

Individual Characteristics: Inherent traits and attributes that contribute to resilience.

• Gender: Statistically, girls tend to engage in fewer problem behaviors than boys, with the exception of teen pregnancy. While the reasons are complex and likely a combination of biological and social factors, this gender difference is a notable protective factor.
• Resilient Temperament: Some individuals possess an innate ability to cope with adversity and bounce back from challenges. This resilient temperament allows them to navigate risk factors without succumbing to problem behaviors.
• Positive Orientation: Children who are optimistic, cheerful, enjoy social interaction, and are well-liked by others are at reduced risk for problem behaviors. Fostering positive social-emotional development is key.
• Intelligence: Intelligence acts as a protective factor against delinquency and school dropout, although not against substance use.

While intellect can offer protection, emotional intelligence – the ability to understand oneself and others, to be self-aware, and to consider consequences before acting – may be particularly crucial in navigating the complexities of adolescence and resisting negative influences.

Bonding: Strong, positive connections to individuals and groups that promote pro-social values. These bonds create a sense of belonging and responsibility, guiding behavior.

CTC emphasizes bonding as a powerful protective factor. However, it’s crucial to recognize that not all bonds are protective. Bonds to gangs or groups that promote problem behaviors can be detrimental. Protective bonds are those formed with individuals and groups that uphold pro-social values and norms.

Examples of Protective Bonds:

• Parents and Families
• Other Significant Adults: Relatives, mentors, counselors, neighbors
• Teachers
• Peer Groups (positive peer influence)
• School
• Organizations: Scouts, faith-based groups, social clubs, workplaces
• Sports Teams
• Community Groups: Service organizations, cultural groups

Healthy Beliefs and Clear Standards: A community environment that clearly communicates positive values and expectations for youth behavior.

Significant adults and community institutions play a vital role in establishing healthy beliefs and clear standards. Families, schools, and the community at large should explicitly communicate and model values that discourage problem behaviors. This includes setting high expectations for behavior and achievement.

In essence, adults within the community should “preach and practice” a positive value system and expect youth to adhere to it.

The ideal, as envisioned by CTC, is a community where values and standards are consistently and clearly communicated. While achieving complete consensus can be challenging, when key adults – parents, teachers, coaches – effectively communicate reasonable values and expectations, most adolescents will internalize these messages. Community leaders can play a crucial role in fostering this unified community voice.

How Protective Factors Counter High-Risk Environments: The Social Development Strategy

Hawkins and Catalano’s Social Development Strategy provides a framework for understanding how protective factors operate to promote healthy youth development.

Individual characteristics serve as a foundation for positive behavior. Traits like resilience, optimism, and intelligence, while not guarantees of success, provide a starting point for healthy development. They offer potential and opportunity.

While individual protective characteristics are valuable, their absence doesn’t predetermine a negative outcome for a young person. Other protective factors can be strengthened to compensate, and in some cases, individual traits can be developed. Attitudes, personality, and even intelligence can evolve with positive changes in environment, supportive relationships, and targeted interventions like counseling or education.

Developing and Enhancing Individual Characteristics: To cultivate these protective traits, young people need opportunities to contribute meaningfully to their families, schools, and communities. Meaningful contribution requires three essential components:

• Skills: This includes both social skills necessary for collaboration and specific competencies – foundational skills, reasoning abilities, specialized knowledge, or physical talents – that make their contributions valuable.
• Opportunity to Contribute: Youth need age-appropriate responsibilities and high expectations. They should be given chances to make genuine contributions, not just token gestures.

Contributions can range widely depending on age and ability, from simple household chores to leading youth organizations or serving on community boards. Examples include peer tutoring, participation in peer mediation programs, responsibilities in clubs or faith-based groups, involvement in music or arts, or caring for younger siblings.

• Recognition for their Contribution: Like everyone, young people need validation and appreciation. Recognition reinforces their sense of value and belonging within a group, whether family, school, or community.

Contribution Fosters Bonding: Actively helping others – individuals, groups, organizations, or the community – strengthens a young person’s identification with that entity and its values. This sense of belonging and connection makes adolescents less likely to engage in problem behaviors, both out of concern for damaging the relationship and because their self-image becomes aligned with the values of the group or individual they are bonded to.

Bonding Reinforces Healthy Beliefs and Clear Standards: For a bonded young person, the presence of healthy beliefs and clear standards provides essential structure and corrective feedback for positive development. They receive consistent messages about desired goals and are held accountable by significant adults and groups in their lives.

This progression ultimately leads to Healthy Behavior. The Social Development Strategy illustrates a clear pathway: individual characteristics, nurtured through opportunities, skills, and recognition, lead to bonding, which in turn reinforces healthy beliefs and standards, ultimately resulting in healthy behaviors.

Advantages and Disadvantages of the Communities That Care Approach

Like any community-based model, CTC has both strengths and weaknesses. For community leaders considering implementing CTC, a balanced understanding of these advantages and disadvantages is essential. Many of the advantages, viewed from a different perspective, can also present challenges.

Advantages of CTC:

• Grounded in Theory and Practice: CTC is built upon established prevention theory and research, particularly the concepts of risk and protective factors. Its recommended “best practices” are drawn from evidence-based programs with demonstrated effectiveness in various settings. This theoretical and practical foundation provides community leaders with confidence in the model’s potential.
• Inclusive and Participatory: The CTC planning and implementation process emphasizes inclusivity, involving stakeholders from all sectors of the community in discussions and decision-making. A community board, representing diverse perspectives, oversees the initiative.

Inclusivity and participation offer significant benefits. Firstly, they bring a wide range of knowledge and ideas to the table, particularly regarding the community’s history, character, and youth population. Secondly, they ensure thorough deliberation and careful decision-making. Most importantly, they foster community ownership of the plan and its implementation. When a plan originates from the community itself, rather than being imposed externally, community members are more likely to support it and actively contribute to its success.

• Community-Wide Perspective: CTC, consistent with other effective community models, views youth development and problem behavior prevention as a shared community responsibility requiring a collective effort. Whether in a small rural town or a large city, CTC operates on the principle that community-wide engagement is crucial for program effectiveness.
• Training at Every Step: CTC provides ongoing training and support throughout the entire process, from initial assessment to program evaluation. This structured training equips community members with the necessary knowledge and skills to confidently navigate each phase, particularly crucial stages like community assessment and strategic planning.
• Menu of Best Practices: Instead of requiring communities to develop interventions from scratch, CTC offers a curated menu of “best practice” programs and methods with proven effectiveness. This saves communities significant time and resources, allowing them to select interventions best suited to their local context from a pre-vetted list. Furthermore, CTC encourages communities to adopt multiple approaches targeting various risk factor areas for a comprehensive strategy.

“Best practices” are interventions whose effectiveness has been documented through rigorous research studies by funding agencies (often government bodies) or academic institutions, with results published in peer-reviewed journals and other reputable publications. This evidence-based approach enhances the credibility and potential impact of CTC initiatives.

• Adaptable to Community Needs: CTC is not a rigid, “one-size-fits-all” model. It encourages communities to customize their prevention programs by combining best practices in ways that address specific local needs and reflect the community’s unique character. The built-in training and community assessment processes empower communities to analyze their needs and make informed choices.
• Integrated Evaluation and Adjustment: CTC incorporates ongoing evaluation and program adjustment as essential components. Recognizing that no program is universally perfect, CTC emphasizes regular evaluation to identify areas of success and areas needing improvement, allowing for continuous refinement and optimization of interventions.
• Demonstrated Effectiveness Across Problem Behaviors: Community reports suggest that CTC has been successful in reducing the incidence of most targeted problem behaviors, with the exception of substance use, where results have been more varied.

Disadvantages of CTC:

• Limited Inclusivity and Participation in Practice: While CTC promotes community-wide involvement, the initial stages can be top-down, starting with a small group of “key community leaders.” This initial group, which may not fully represent the community’s diversity, then invites others to form a community board. This process can inadvertently limit true inclusivity, particularly if the “key leaders” invite individuals from their existing networks who may share similar backgrounds and perspectives.

Especially in larger communities, identifying truly representative individuals requires deliberate research and outreach. A board of 30 members may be insufficient to represent the full spectrum of community demographics, interests, and experiences. Furthermore, certain sectors, such as youth themselves or marginalized groups, may be underrepresented unless specifically targeted for inclusion. If “key community leaders” maintain a dominant role, the participatory nature of CTC can be compromised. Community leaders must actively strive for genuine and broad-based representation from the outset.

• Finite Choice of Approaches: CTC’s claim of allowing communities to devise their own solutions is partially limited by its reliance on a pre-selected menu of best practices. While communities can create combinations of interventions, they are restricted to this finite pool of choices.

The “best practices” menu is a double-edged sword. It provides communities with readily available, proven interventions and established curricula, offering a sense of security and efficiency. However, it can also stifle creativity and limit the potential for leveraging local wisdom and developing truly innovative, community-specific programs. Community leaders should consider if this limitation might hinder the development of uniquely effective solutions.

• Potential for Passive Implementation: Relying on pre-packaged best practices might lead communities to simply “follow directions” rather than fully engaging their passion and creativity. An intervention that is pre-designed, rather than organically developed within the community, could foster a belief that simply implementing it “correctly” will automatically yield results. If expected outcomes are not immediately achieved, the community might focus on refining implementation mechanics rather than critically analyzing the underlying situation or exploring alternative approaches.
• Narrow Focus on Youth and Specific Behaviors: CTC’s focus is specifically on youth and the five identified problem behaviors. This targeted approach can be both an advantage and a disadvantage. On one hand, it allows for focused efforts and manageable goals. On the other hand, it can lead to a limited view of community health and development, potentially neglecting broader, long-term community needs.

If the primary goals are narrowly defined as reducing specific problem behaviors, achieving these goals might create a false sense of “fixing” the community. If the intervention is seen as an end in itself, rather than part of a larger, ongoing process of community improvement, it may not foster a sustained commitment to long-term social change, which is often necessary for truly addressing the root causes of community problems.

• Reliance on Assumptions and Limited Long-Term Data: While CTC is grounded in research and best practices, long-term effectiveness data is still developing. The program’s effectiveness has primarily been demonstrated in the short- to mid-term range. Long-term outcomes and sustained impact require further investigation.
• Commercial Aspect and Potential Conflict of Interest: CTC is often offered as a packaged service that includes materials, training, and ongoing support. While this package provides valuable resources, it also introduces a commercial element. The provider benefits from selling all components of the package, which may not always be the most appropriate or effective options for every community. While not inherently problematic, this commercial aspect raises the potential for a conflict of interest, and community leaders should be mindful of this when considering CTC.

Many of these disadvantages can be mitigated by adapting CTC to the specific needs of a community. For example, community leaders can proactively define “key community leaders” more inclusively, ensuring broad representation from the outset. They can encourage creativity in programming and consider developing community-designed interventions alongside or in place of “best practice” programs. No model is universally applicable, and tailoring CTC to local contexts is crucial for maximizing its effectiveness.

Who Should Be Involved in Communities That Care?

As emphasized throughout, CTC should be a broad-based, community-driven initiative. While “key community leaders” – elected officials, prominent business figures, etc. – are important to initiate and champion the effort, engaging all stakeholders is essential for community buy-in and long-term success.

Key Stakeholders in Communities That Care Initiatives:

Stakeholders encompass anyone with a vested interest in the initiative, including supporters, beneficiaries, planners, and implementers. A diverse range of stakeholders ensures a comprehensive and community-owned approach.

• People Directly Affected by Problem Behaviors: Their lived experiences and insights are invaluable.

  • Youth themselves, especially those with past experiences with problem behaviors – former gang members, individuals in recovery, teen parents, dropouts. They offer unique perspectives and credibility with other youth, speaking from experience rather than from an adult authority position.
  • Families, significant others, and friends of those affected by problem behaviors. Their experiences are often deeply personal and can provide crucial understanding of the issues and their impacts.
  • Victims of delinquency or youth violence. Their perspectives highlight the real-world consequences of these behaviors and underscore the urgency for prevention.

• People Indirectly Affected by Problem Behaviors: This broad group includes individuals whose roles and responsibilities are impacted by youth problem behaviors.

  • Teachers, counselors, coaches, and other school staff. They witness the effects of problem behaviors in educational settings and are crucial partners in prevention efforts.
  • Professionals working in youth-serving organizations – caseworkers, street outreach workers, gang intervention specialists, mentors, youth group leaders. They have direct experience working with at-risk youth and can offer valuable insights.
  • Professionals who address the consequences of youth actions – police officers, medical professionals, healthcare workers, judges, probation officers. Their perspectives highlight the societal costs of inaction and the need for proactive prevention.
  • Business owners and residents who believe their businesses or property values are negatively affected by youth-related issues, such as loitering, public intoxication, or youth violence. Their involvement demonstrates the broader economic and social benefits of a healthy youth population.

• Community Leaders and Decision-Makers: Both formal and informal leaders are essential.

  • Official Leaders: Elected and appointed officials – mayors, council members, school board members, agency heads. Their support and policy influence are critical for resource allocation and community-wide implementation.
  • Unofficial Leaders: Opinion leaders, respected business and institutional figures, community activists, representatives of minority groups, labor union leaders, neighborhood spokespersons, clergy members, and respected citizens. Their influence within the community can mobilize support and shape public opinion.

• Those with a General Community Interest: Individuals who may not be directly affected but care about youth wellbeing and community vitality.

  • Parents and community members who desire a positive and supportive environment for all youth.
  • Business leaders and community developers who recognize that a healthy youth population is essential for attracting businesses and residents and fostering economic growth.
  • Community volunteers and concerned citizens who are motivated by civic responsibility and a desire to make a positive impact.

• The Media: Engaging media representatives from the outset is crucial for effective communication and community awareness.

  • Involving media personnel not just in their professional capacity, but also as individuals and parents, fosters a deeper understanding of CTC and ensures accurate and comprehensive community information dissemination.

Implementing the Communities That Care Approach: A Step-by-Step Guide

In 2000, Hawkins and Catalano partnered with the Channing-Bete Company to offer a structured “Communities That Care®” package to communities. This package provides a comprehensive framework, including an overall strategy, training for community participants at various stages, assistance in selecting and implementing effective interventions, evaluation tools, and ongoing technical support.

To formally implement a CTC program, communities need to engage with Channing-Bete. Detailed information about the CTC package, resources, success stories, and publications can be found on the CTC section of their website.

The following outlines the typical phases of a CTC implementation process, mirroring the structure offered by Channing-Bete. While specific details of the proprietary CTC program are not fully disclosed, this provides a general understanding of the process.

According to CTC, an effective community prevention process typically involves seven phases, with the first two being preliminary and potentially not necessary in all communities:

1. Awareness:

The initial step is assessing community readiness to address adolescent problem behaviors. A critical mass of citizens across all sectors must be aware that these behaviors are present in the community and recognize them as significant issues requiring attention. Community readiness is a prerequisite for moving to the next phase.

2. Education:

Once awareness exists, the community needs comprehensive information about the problem behaviors. This education phase aims to deepen understanding of the nature and effects of these behaviors and to underscore the importance of addressing them. Community education should provide citizens with the knowledge base needed to engage with the issue – defining problem behaviors, outlining their consequences, presenting evidence of their prevalence within the community, and identifying at-risk populations.

These first two phases align with the initial stages of readiness for change recognized in social marketing. The Community Tool Box resource, “Understanding Social Marketing: Encouraging Adoption and Use of Valued Products and Practices,” describes a “continuum of understanding” essential for behavior change:

• Knowledge about the problem.
• Belief that the problem is important.
• Desire to change.
• Belief that change is possible.
• Action.
• Maintenance of action.

The awareness and education phases of CTC directly address the first two stages of this continuum, ideally leading to the third – a desire for change. The subsequent phases of CTC are designed to facilitate action and long-term maintenance of positive changes.

A key principle underlying this continuum is that an individual’s level of understanding significantly influences their willingness to change. Effective engagement requires meeting people where they are on this continuum and using tailored information and arguments to progress them to the next stage. Therefore, before launching a CTC initiative, or any similar community-wide effort, it is vital to gauge the community’s current level of understanding regarding the targeted issues. Regardless of the quality of the proposed intervention or process, if the community is not yet ready to support the effort, it is likely to falter. Laying the groundwork by fostering community awareness and understanding (ideally through participatory processes) is a critical prerequisite to effective action.

3. Community Mobilization:

Once the community is aware of the problems and the need for prevention and intervention, community mobilization begins. This phase involves recruiting a core group of “key community leaders” – decision-makers and influential figures whose support is essential for driving community action. These leaders typically include top elected officials, business and labor leaders, heads of major institutions and agencies, and the school superintendent.

This core group receives a comprehensive orientation to CTC and makes a commitment to the process. They then expand the effort by inviting approximately 30 individuals from diverse community sectors to form a community board to oversee the CTC initiative. This community board, in turn, receives a two-day orientation and training session on the theoretical underpinnings of CTC and the practical implementation process.

As previously discussed, this stage can be improved to ensure greater diversity and community ownership from the outset. The Orlando Healthy Community initiative provides a valuable example. While initially starting with a self-selected group of key leaders, they recognized the lack of diversity in their initial community board list. Through proactive community research and outreach, they significantly broadened their reach and ultimately engaged a much larger and more representative group of 160 participants.

The size of the community board also raises considerations about representativeness. While 30 members may be sufficient for a small, homogenous community or neighborhood, larger and more diverse communities may require a larger board to ensure adequate representation across ethnic groups, geographic areas, age demographics, socioeconomic classes, and various organizational and professional sectors. Community leaders should carefully consider the appropriate board size to ensure true community representation.

Following training, the community board facilitates public meetings to introduce CTC to the broader community and to engage residents in developing a shared vision to guide the planning and implementation phases. This participatory visioning process is crucial for building community ownership and ensuring alignment with local values and priorities.

4. Community Assessment:

The community assessment phase of CTC goes beyond simply identifying problems and needs; it also focuses on recognizing existing community strengths and resources. The community board utilizes various strategies to comprehensively assess community needs and assets:

• Youth Survey: A standardized youth survey is part of the CTC package. This survey is designed to identify prevalent risk and protective factors within the community’s youth population, providing the community board with data-driven insights into prevention needs.
• Census and GIS Data: Analyzing census data and utilizing Geographic Information Systems (GIS) mapping can reveal valuable demographic trends, changes over time, and potential problem areas or emerging assets within the community. GIS maps can visually represent concentrations of specific racial or ethnic groups, language minorities, socioeconomic strata, employment patterns, and other relevant data to inform targeted interventions.
• Archival Records: Examining records from schools, law enforcement agencies, local newspapers, and government bodies can provide historical context and valuable information about past trends, recurring problems, previous prevention efforts and their outcomes, and other relevant insights.
• Direct Community Engagement: Through focus groups, community forums, individual interviews, and informal conversations with youth and other residents, the community board gathers firsthand information from those directly experiencing problem behaviors, risk factors, and protective factors and their impacts on a daily basis.

Utilizing these diverse data sources, the community board identifies the most pressing risk and protective factors within their community and selects two to five key risk factors to prioritize for intervention. Action plans developed in subsequent phases will be specifically tailored to address these prioritized risk factors within the identified geographic areas or demographic groups where the need is greatest, as indicated by the assessment data.

Following the needs assessment, the board participates in a one-day training focused on identifying community strengths and resources. This training equips them to locate resources that can support the CTC initiative:

• Financial Resources: Identifying potential local funders, grant opportunities, or other funding sources to support program implementation.
• Expertise: Leveraging academic expertise, community organizations with relevant experience, or individuals with specialized knowledge in youth development or prevention strategies.
• Human Resources: Identifying both paid staff and volunteers who can contribute to program implementation and support tasks.
• Access to Youth: Identifying effective channels for reaching youth, such as schools, libraries, media outlets, recreational facilities, street outreach programs, and direct engagement with parents.

5. Prevention Plan Development:

This phase focuses on strategic planning and program selection. The community board determines program priorities, sets measurable goals, and chooses from a menu of evidence-based programs to address identified issues. This phase begins with community planning training, followed by a structured strategic planning process.

The community board carefully analyzes the prioritized risk and protective factors identified in the assessment phase, along with the specific geographic, social, or demographic groups most affected. Using this information, they define clear, measurable outcomes for enhancing protective factors, reducing risk factors, and achieving desired behavior changes. They also establish timelines for achieving these outcomes and assign accountability for plan implementation.

The next step is a two-day “effective prevention strategies” workshop that introduces the board to a range of evidence-based programs and practices. This workshop guides them in selecting one or more programs that are appropriate for their community context and aligned with their planning goals. CTC encourages communities to adopt a comprehensive approach, selecting strategies that address risk factors across family, school, and community domains, rather than focusing solely on one area.

6. Program Implementation:

The community board establishes an implementation task force responsible for overseeing program implementation. This task force comprises board members, individuals who will directly manage or deliver the program, program beneficiaries, and other community stakeholders. CTC provides guidance and support in setting up the implementation infrastructure and replicating the chosen evidence-based programs with fidelity.

As with any community initiative, successful implementation hinges on thorough and inclusive planning, a well-structured implementation process (clearly defined roles, responsibilities, and timelines), and effective communication among all involved parties. When these elements are in place, program implementation is more likely to proceed smoothly and as intended.

However, smooth implementation does not guarantee effectiveness. Program outcomes ultimately depend on the appropriateness of the chosen interventions for addressing the identified issues and the quality of program delivery – the skills, dedication, and collaborative spirit of those directly implementing the program and working with the target population.

7. Outcomes Evaluation:

The program’s effectiveness is rigorously evaluated against the outcome criteria and accountability measures established during the planning phase. CTC provides evaluation instruments and technical assistance to support this process. The evaluation is designed to provide the community board with data-driven insights into program successes and areas for improvement. This information is crucial for making informed decisions about program adjustments and ongoing refinement.

Evaluation and adjustment are integral and ongoing components of the CTC process, continuing throughout the life of the initiative. Positive evaluation results do not signal the end of the effort but rather the need for continued program maintenance and adaptation to sustain positive outcomes. If results are less favorable than anticipated, evaluation data informs necessary program adjustments. The process of continuous evaluation, adaptation, and implementation is essential for achieving and maintaining long-term positive impact on youth and community health.

Even in the face of overwhelmingly positive results, complacency is discouraged. Sustaining gains requires ongoing effort – continuous evaluation, adaptation, and implementation of interventions, along with proactive identification and addressing of emerging needs – to create a continuously improving and healthier future for youth and the community.

In Summary: Empowering Communities to Care for Their Youth

Communities That Care® (CTC) is a structured, evidence-based process, rooted in the Social Development Strategy developed by J. David Hawkins and Richard Catalano. It provides communities that care tools for community leaders to address youth problem behaviors by strategically reducing risk factors and enhancing protective factors.

CTC focuses on five key problem behaviors: substance use, delinquency, teen pregnancy, school dropout, and violence. It aims to mitigate 19 research-identified risk factors across individual/peer, family, school, and community domains, while strengthening three core protective factors: individual characteristics, bonding, and healthy beliefs and clear standards.

Key Advantages of the CTC Process:

• Evidence-based and grounded in prevention science.
• Inclusive and participatory, fostering community ownership.
• Community-wide perspective, promoting collective responsibility.
• Comprehensive training and support at each phase.
• Menu of proven best practices for intervention selection.
• Adaptable to specific community needs and contexts.
• Integrated evaluation and adjustment for continuous improvement.
• Demonstrated effectiveness in addressing multiple problem behaviors.

Potential Drawbacks of CTC:

• Inclusivity and participation may be limited in initial implementation phases.
• Reliance on a finite set of best practice interventions.
• Risk of passive implementation due to pre-packaged approaches.
• Narrow focus on youth and specific problem behaviors.
• Limited long-term outcome data.
• Commercial nature of the CTC package.

Successful CTC implementation requires broad-based participation from all stakeholders and community sectors. This includes individuals directly and indirectly affected by problem behaviors, community leaders, concerned citizens, and media representatives.

The CTC process is typically delivered as a comprehensive package that includes a structured framework, training modules, materials, survey and evaluation instruments, ongoing guidance, and technical assistance. The process begins with assessing community awareness and readiness, followed by community education, mobilization of key leaders and a community board, comprehensive community assessment, prevention plan development utilizing best practices, program implementation, and rigorous outcomes evaluation for continuous program improvement and sustainability.

By providing a structured, data-driven, and community-engaged approach, Communities That Care empowers community leaders to effectively address youth problem behaviors and build healthier, more thriving communities for all.

Online Resources:

• Channing-Bete: The official provider of CTC programs. Offers information on CTC, background, success stories, publications, and contact information.
• Intensive Aftercare for High-Risk Juveniles: A Community Care Model: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention resource on a community-based aftercare model for high-risk youth.
• Investing in Your Community’s Youth: An Introduction to The Communities That Care System: A guide providing an overview of the CTC system and its benefits for communities seeking to support youth development.
• Lower Dauphin School District (PA): Example of a school district implementing CTC. Pennsylvania has statewide recommendations for CTC adoption in school districts.
• Regional Prevention Center of the Flint Hills (KS): Information on CTC from a regional prevention center.
• Southern York County (PA) School District: Another Pennsylvania school district implementing CTC, with website information including the district’s CTC implementation history.

Print Resources:

• Communities That Care Delinquency Prevention Model: A Study in Florida. Research report #72, Florida Dept. of Juvenile Justice. Research study on risk factors, problem behaviors, and racial disparities within the CTC model in Florida.
• Hawkins, J., Catalano, R., & Michael W. (2002). Promoting science-based intervention in communities. Addictive Behaviors, vol. 27, pp. 951-976. Academic article on promoting science-based interventions in community settings.
• Hawkins, J., & Catalano, R. (1992). Communities That Care: Action for Drug Abuse Prevention. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. A foundational book outlining the Communities That Care model and its application for drug abuse prevention.
• Paglin C. (1998). Communities That Care. Northwest Education Magazine, Winter 1998 issue. Article on the Portland, OR CTC program in a regional education magazine.