CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
1
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale:
Acommunity-basedapproachwithinanationalframework
RossHomel,PhDKateFreiberg,PhDSaraBranch,PhD
GriffithCriminologyInstitute
Publishedas:
Homel,R.,Freiberg,K.&Branch,S.(2015).CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale:Acommunity-basedapproachwithinanationalframework.AustralianandNewZealandJournalofCriminology48(3):367-385
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
2
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale:Acommunity-basedapproachwithinanationalframework
Abstract
Developmentalcrimepreventionisfoundedonthelong-termoutcomesandeconomic
efficiencyofabout50promisingormodelprogramsforfosteringhealthychildand
youthdevelopmentandforpreventingcrime.However,fewifanyoftheseprograms
havebeensuccessfullyimplementedonalargescale,aproblemthatisthefocusofType
2(T2)TranslationResearchwithinpreventionscience.Thispaperdescribesone
approachtobuildingcapacityforpopulation-levelcommunity-baseddevelopmental
preventionusingtheCREATEmodelthatwedevelopedasanoutcomeofthePathways
toPreventionProjectthatoperatedinadisadvantagedregionofBrisbanebetween
2002and2011.CREATEisanacronym:Collaborative;Relationships-driven;Earlyin
thepathway;Accountable;Training-focused;Evidence-driven.CREATEisbeingusedto
develop,inT2Translationterms,apreventionsupportsystem(PSS)fortheCommunities
forChildren(CfC)program,apreventiondeliverysystemthatisoperatedbythe
DepartmentofSocialServicesin52communitiesacrossAustralia.Theaimistobuild
thecapacityforschoolsandcommunityagenciestotranscendsystemsilos;foster
ethicalpracticesandrespectfulrelationships;anddelivergoal-directed,quantitatively
evaluated,evidence-basedresourcesthataddresstheneedsoffamilieswithcomplex
needs,promotechildwellbeing,andpreventantisocialandcriminalbehaviours.The
PSScombinesweb-basedinteractiveelectronicresourcesforschoolsandcommunity
agenciesservingchildreninCfCcommunitieswithsystemsandprocessesestablished
byprojectpersonnelcalledCollectiveImpactFacilitatorswhobuildtheskillsand
knowledgeofcommunitycoalitionstousetheelectronicresourcesandimplement
CREATEeffectively.Thiscapacitybuildingexerciseisbeingevaluatedthrougha
comprehensivearrayofpre-andpost-measuresofcoalitionfunctioning.ThePSS
integrateswithnationalpreventioninfrastructuredevelopedbyDSS,includingaData
ExchangeSystem,anExpertPanel,andanInformationExchange.
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
3
Thefirstcorechallenge[ofType2TranslationResearch]istobuild
infrastructuresandthecapacityforbroadtranslationofevidence-based
preventiveinterventionsintocommunitypracticesthroughprevention
deliverysystems.…Thesecondcorechallengeistoclarifyandconductthe
rangeofnecessaryscientificadvancesrequiredforinvestigationofsustained,
high-qualityimplementationof[evidence-basedinterventions]atscale.
(Spothetal.,2013;p.322)
Thispaperisaboutoneapproachtorealisingthepromiseofdevelopmentalcrime
preventiononalargescale.Thatis,itisaboutinvestingincapacitytobuildonthe
successofagrowingnumberofrelativelysmall-scaleinnovationsthathave
demonstratedconvincinglythatitispossible,inaneconomicallyefficientway,tocreate
conditionsearlyinlifeorinchildhoodthatfosterhealthydevelopmentalpathwaysand
reduceadolescentandadultratesofinvolvementinantisocialbehaviourandcrime
(Manning,Homel&Smith,2010;Piqueroetal.,2009).
Onlyinthepastdecadeorsohavesomeoftheconceptualtoolsessentialforthejourney
from‘success-in-miniature’topopulation-levelimpactbeendeveloped(Schorr,1998).
Thisprocessof‘scalingup’isreferredtointhepreventionscienceliteratureasType2
Translation,incontrasttoType1Translationthatappliestheresultsofbasicresearchto
thedevelopmentandtestingofnewpreventioninitiatives(Spothetal.,2013).Notonly
arethebasicconceptsrelativelynew,buttheempiricalevidenceforsuccessfulType2
(T2)Translationstrategiesiscurrentlyverylimited,notonlyforcrimebutforhealth
andothersocialobjectives(Fagan&Eisenberg,2012;Farrington&Welsh,2007;Homel
&McGee,2012).
Thispaperdescribesourapproachtobuildingcapacityforpopulation-levelcommunity-
basedpreventionusingtheCREATEmodelthatwedevelopedasanoutcomeofthe
PathwaystoPreventionProjectthatoperatedinadisadvantagedregionofBrisbane
between2002and2011(Branch,Homel&Freiberg,2012;Homeletal.,1999;Homel,
Elias&Hay,2001;Homel,2005).CREATEisanacronym:Collaborative;Relationships-
driven;Earlyinthepathway;Accountable;Training-focused;Evidence-driven.These
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
4
keyterms,whicharesummarisedinFigure1andexplainedfurtherthroughoutthis
paper,areanattempttoencapsulatethemainprinciplesunderpinningamodelof
preventativeactionthat–inthecontextinwhichweareapplyingit-empowersschools
andcommunityagenciestotranscendsystemsilos;fosterethicalpracticesand
respectfulrelationships;anddelivergoal-directed,quantitativelyevaluated,evidence-
basedresourcesthatpromotechildwellbeingindisadvantagedcommunitiesand,in
particular,helpdeflectchildrenfromantisocialandcriminalbehaviours.
Ourspecificconcernsinthispaperarethereforecrimeanddisadvantagedcommunities,
theinstitutionsthatoperateintheselocalities,andthechildrenandfamilieslivingin
them.HoweveritisimportanttokeepinmindthattheCREATEprinciplesarein
themselvescompletelygeneral,andcouldunderpinpreventionactivitiesinnon-
disadvantagedcommunities.Indeedthemodelcouldbethefoundationforprevention
initiativesthatarenotplace-basedatall,oraredirectedatproblemsotherthanyouth
crime(suchashealthyaging),orarefocusedonwholepopulations.Theapproachis,in
otherwords,universalandflexiblewithnospecificproblemfocus.
AspartofourexplanationoftheCREATEmodel,weoutlinehowwearecontributingto
thenascentAustralianresearchonT2Translationinpartnershipwitharangeof
governmentandnon-governmentagencies,usingtheAustraliangovernment’s
CommunitiesforChildrenProgramasaframework(Edwardsetal.,2014)1.Weplacethis
researchinthecontextofthegrowingemphasisbytheDepartmentofSocialServices
(whichdevelopedandadministersCommunitiesforChildren)onevidence-based
practice,andthewidespreadenthusiasmamongstpolicypeople,practitioners,and
socialentrepreneursforcollaborativeapproachesthatachievecollectiveimpact.Kania
andKramer(2011),theoriginatorsoftheterm,definecollectiveimpactas:
…long-termcommitmentsbyagroupofimportantactorsfromdifferentsectorstoa
commonagendaforsolvingaspecificsocialproblem.Theiractionsaresupportedby
asharedmeasurementsystem,mutuallyreinforcingactivities,andongoing
communications,andarestaffedbyanindependentbackboneorganization.(p.39)
Aswillbecomeapparent,theconceptofcollectiveimpactandtheprinciplesofthe
CREATEmodel(andofCommunitiesThatCareandrelatedpreventioninitiatives)have
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
5
agreatdealincommon,andforthisreasonwehavebeenhappytoadoptthecollective
impactframeworkasawayofcommunicatingourideas.Howeverourjudgmentisthat
thecollectiveimpactmovement,atleastinitscurrentstageofdevelopment,is
weakenedbywidespreadignoranceofpreventionscienceandbyacorrespondinglack
ofattentiontocarefullyresearchedevidenceonwhatworks.
INSERTFIGURE1ABOUTHERE
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
WhyCREATE?
CREATEhasbeenstronglyshapedbythePathwaysProject.Keyconsiderationshave
been:
1. Ourintuitionthatmuchofwhatcommunityagenciesdoinsocially
disadvantagedcommunitiesisquiteeffectivedespitebeingmostlyunevaluated
(Homeletal.,2006);
2. Ourobservationthatstronginterpersonalrelationshipsandcreativeformsof
outreachthatbuildtrustwiththecommunity,andparticularlywithso-called
‘hardtoreachfamilies,’arefundamentalforeffectivepractice;
3. Ourobservationthatevidence-basedprogramsfigureverylittleintheplansand
practicesofbusypractitioners;and
4. Ourfrustrationwiththegovernancearrangementsthatunderpinnedthe
PathwaysProject,especiallythedividebetweenschools,communityagencies
andfamilies(Branch,Homel&Freiberg,2013).
BeyondwhatwehavelearnedfromthePathwaysProject,experienceinternationally
overthelasttwodecadeswiththeimplementationofevidence-basedinnovations
(Fixsenetal.,2009)andwithcrimepreventionpartnershipshavehelpedshapeour
thinking.Particularlyimportanthavebeenthelessonsabouteffectivegovernance
arrangementsforpreventionpartnerships(Crawford,1998;Homel&Homel,2012),
oneofthemostcentralbeingtheneedforstrategicvisionwithrolesandresponsibilities
clearlydefined.InthePathwaysworktherewasnoadequatemechanismfor
hammeringoutspecificgoalsthatweresharedbyschools,communityworkersand
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
6
researchers,resultinginconfusionaroundrolesandrelationships.Theinter-
relatednessofgoals,roles,proceduresandrelationships,withgoalsattheapexand
relationshipsatthebaseofaconceptualtriangleofgoodorganisation,wasidentified
manyyearsagointhemanagementliteratureandapplieswithconsiderableforceto
communitypartnerships(Plovnick,Fry&Rubin1975).
Aswehaveforeshadowed,thearrayofnewT2Translationconceptsandframeworksin
thepreventionscienceliteraturehasalsobeenaformativeinfluenceonourthinking,
especiallytheInteractiveSystemsFrameworkforDisseminationandImplementation
developedbyAbrahamWandersmanandhiscolleagues(2008).Animportantfeatureof
theISFisthecleardistinctionbetween:
1. ThePreventionDeliverySystemthatimplementsinnovationsintheworldof
practice;
2. ThePreventionSupportSystemwhichprovidestraining,technicalassistanceor
othersupporttousersinthefield;and
3. ThePreventionSynthesisandTranslationSystemwhichdistilsinformationabout
innovationsandtranslatesitintouser-friendlyformats.
Thesesystemsarecharacterisedbytheiractivities,notbyspecificindividualsor
organizations,andeachsystemdependsontheothersincomplexways.Forexample,
theactiveinvolvementofpractitionersfromthedeliverysysteminthesupportsystem
willhelpensurethedevelopmentofusefulproducts,andathoroughunderstandingby
researchersofthesocial,culturalandpoliticalcontextswithinwhichpreventive
innovationswillbedeliveredmightdomuchtobridgethemuchlamentedgulfbetween
scienceandservice–orinthelanguageoftheISF,thegapbetweenthesynthesisand
translationsystemandthedeliverysystem.Asimportantexamplesofprevention
deliverysystems,CommunitiesThatCare(CTC)andCommunitiesforChildren(CfC)are
describedbelow.
CommunitiesThatCare
CTCisacommunity-basedpreventionsystemthatwasdevelopedinthe1980sbythe
SocialDevelopmentResearchGroupattheUniversityofWashingtonintheUnited
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
7
States.IthasbeenimplementedwidelyintheUnitedStates,includingthroughthe
CenterforSubstanceAbusePreventionintheUSGovernment,andalsooperatesin
manycountriesinEurope,Australia,andelsewhere(Toumberouetal.inpress).CTC
involvestheformationofcollaborativepartnershipsamongcommunitystakeholdersto
spearheadadoptionandsupportofevidence-basedinterventionsthathavebeenshown
toreduceriskandenhanceprotectivefactorsforadolescentbehaviorproblems.CTCis
nowaccumulatingimpressiveevidenceforpopulation-levelimpactsinPennsylvania
andelsewhereintheUnitedStates(Feinbergetal.,2010;Hawkinsetal.,2009),andhas
beenaveryimportantinfluenceonourthinking.AtleastsomeofthesuccessofCTC
maybeattributedtotheavailabilityof‘intermediateorganisations’liketheEvidence-
BasedPreventionandInterventionSupportCenterwithinthePreventionResearch
CentreatPennsylvaniaStateUniversity.TheEPISCenter,initsownwords,“supports
thedissemination,qualityimplementation,sustainability,andimpactassessmentofa
menuofproven-effectivepreventionandinterventionprograms,”therebyconstituting
acriticalpartofapreventionsupportsystemforPennsylvaniaandbeyond2.We
characterizetheEPISCenterasanintermediateorganizationbecauseitactsasan
intermediarybetweenresearchersandpractitionersinalargenumberofcreativeways
(Bumbarger&Campbell,2012;Rhoades,Bumbarger&Moore,2012).Awiderangeof
similarsupportsystemshavecontributedtothesuccessofCTCelsewhereintheUnited
States(Faganetal.,2012).
Despiteitsachievements,theimpactofCTConcrimeandsubstanceabusehasnot
specificallybeendemonstratedinhighlydisadvantagedorurbancommunities,most
successesbeingrecordedforruralandsuburbanareas(Brownetal.,2010).Since
sociallydisadvantagedareasproducemoreyoungoffendersandarelesssocially
cohesivethanmoreprivilegedareas,thisisanimportantissueforyouthcrime
prevention(Wickes,Homel&Zahnow,inpress).InadditiontheCTCmodelperhapshas
somestructuralweaknessesasanationalpreventiondeliverysystem,atleastfor
EuropeandcountrieslikeAustralia,CanadaandNewZealandwherethewelfarestate
hassurvivedinmorevigorousformsthanintheUnitedStates.Thepersistenceofa
strongersafetynetinthesecountriessuggeststhatgovernmentneedstooccupyamore
centralplaceinpreventionplanning.Boththeseconsiderationsledustodevelopthe
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
8
CREATEmodelappliedtochildwellbeingasacomplementaryapproachtoCTCthat
explicitlyaddressestheseapparentweaknesses.
CommunitiesforChildren
Theuseofcommunitycoalitionsisacentralelementofhowwearecurrentlyapplying
theCREATEmodel.ThisapproachissharedwithCTC(Oesterleetal.2010)andother
community-basedpreventioninnovationsintheUnitedStates,includingthedrug
preventionprogramPROSPER(Spothetal.,2011)andtheemergingEvidence2Success
model(Fagan&Eisenberg,2012;Ripper&Ortiz,2012).Thestartingpointinour
currentworkistheserviceproviderpartnershipsin10ofthe52Communitiesfor
Childrencommunities,allofwhichare(ascoreselectioncriteria)locatedin
disadvantagedurbanandregionalareasofAustraliawithahighincidenceofchildren
notmeetingthemilestonesofhealthanddevelopmentexpectedfortheirage,as
measuredbytheAustralianEarlyDevelopmentCensus(CentreforCommunityChild
Health,2007).ThefundamentalgoalofCfCistoimprovethewellbeingofchildrenaged
0to12yearsintheselectedcommunities.Governmentfundingisprovidedtoanon-
governmentorganisationineacharea(thefacilitatingpartner)whichestablishesand
maintainsapartnershipofcommunityagenciesthatdesignanddeliverservicesin
responsetocommunityneeds.However,untilrecentlytherehasbeennoregulatory
mechanismforensuringthattrulyevidence-basedactivitiesareimplemented,no
systemsformonitoringandimprovingimplementationprocesses,norequirementto
quantifypatternsofparticipationbyfamiliesandchildrenintheservicesofferedbya
partnership,andnomeasurementofoutcomes.Arecentquasi-experimentalevaluation
ofCfCimpactatthecommunitylevel(Edwardsetal.,2014)foundthat“althoughthere
wereanumberofpositive(andafewnegative)effectsoftheCfCinitiative,mostwere
notdurableandfadedoutbythetimechildrenstartedschool”(p.xiii).
CREATEaimstoovercomesomeofthelimitationsinCommunitiesforChildrenbuthas
muchwiderapplication.Critically,akeysustainabilitystrategyistobuildcapacityfor
evidence-baseddevelopmentalpreventionwithintheframeworkofanationalprogram
(CfC)thathasnotonlysurvivedseveralchangesofgovernmentsinceitbeganin2004
buthasgrowninsizeandsophistication.
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
9
UnpackingCREATE
Behindmuchdevelopmentalpreventionthinkingaretheconceptsofequifinalityand
multifinality(Cicchetti&Rogosch,1996).Equifinalityreferstothefactthatthesame
endstate(suchasparticipationinyouthcrime)maybereachedbymultiplepathways,
suchasalackofcapacityforself-regulationcombinedwithinadequateparental
supervisionintheearlyyears,oranantisocialpeergroupanddisruptedschool
attachmentinearlyhighschool.Multifinalityreferstothefactthatindividualsmay
beginonthesamemajorpathwaybutbecauseofpersonalattributes,subsequent
choices,orlifeeventsexhibitverydifferentpatternsofadaptationormaladaptation.
Thuschildrenraisedinsimilar‘toxicenvironments’characterisedbyharshanderratic
discipline,familyviolence,andpoverty,maybecomewellfunctioningadults,chronic
offenders,homeless,ormentallyill.Multifinalitymeansthatsuccessfulearlyprevention
initiativestendtohavemultiplebenefitsoverthelifecourse(Manningetal.,2010),
whileequifinalitymeansthatsuccessfulinitiativesarefrequentlymulti-systemic,
targetinganumberofaspectsofthesocialecologysuchasfamily,school,andpeer
group.Therealityofmultifinality,combinedwithagrowingemphasisbyacademicsand
practitionersonpositiveyouthdevelopmentandstrength-basedapproachesin
preferencesimplytothepreventionofnegativeoutcomes(Lerner&Overton,2008),
meansthatitisoftentheoreticallydesirableandstrategicallysensibletoframe
preventioninitiativesaspromoting‘positivedevelopment’or‘childandyouth
wellbeing,’ratherthanascrimepreventionordrugpreventionorsomeotherkindof
prevention.ForthesereasonstheCREATEprinciplesinFigure1areframedbythe
overarchinggoalofBetterlivesforchildrenindisadvantagedcommunities.
UnderpinningallaspectsofCREATE(andhenceinboldatthebottomofFigure1)is
relationaldevelopmentalsystemstheory(DST),closelyalignedintheworkofRichard
Lernerandhiscolleagueswiththestudyofpositiveyouthdevelopment(Lerner,2002;
Lerner&Castellino,2002;Lerner&Overton,2008).Thecentralemphasiswithinthis
perspectiveisonthedynamicrelationsamongstructuresfrommultiplelevelsof
organisation;thatis,onthetime-varyingprocesseslinkingindividualswithallaspects
oftheircontexts.“Levelsoforganization”areconceptualizedextremelybroadly,ranging
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
10
fromthebiologicalandinner-psychologicalthroughtheproximalsocialrelational
(especiallywithinthecontextofthefamily)throughlocalcommunitylevelstothe
socio-culturalandsocialstructural.Withinthispost-positivist,inter-disciplinary
perspective,humanagencyandrelativeplasticityacrossthelifecoursearecentral
concepts,andfamilyprocesses,socialinstitutionsandsocietalaccessroutesthatopen
upopportunitiestotakenewdirectionsarefundamentaltothepreventiveenterprise
(FranceandHomel,2006).
DSThasmanyimplicationsforpracticalpreventionworkincommunities.One
implicationistheneedtothinkbroadlyaboutthemajorinfluencesongrowingchildren,
bothinsideandoutsidethecommunity,andtoidentifythoseinfluences–particularly
thespecificcontexts,localgroupsandorganisations-thatarepotentiallyamenableto
inclusioninpreventiveinitiatives.Sincerelationsbetweenindividuals,contextsand
levelsoforganizationarefundamentalbuildingblocksofthedevelopmentalsystem,
communityactionmustbefocusedasmuchonconnectionsortransactionsbetween
individualsandbetweenorganisationsasonthecapabilitiesofindividualsorthe
qualityofdevelopmentalcontexts.Strengtheningrelationshipsbetweenpeopleandthe
connectionsbetweenorganisationsisclearlyoneimportantgoal,butfromasystems
perspectivecommunitybuildingcannotstopthere:evenmoreimportantishowthe
variouselementsofthesystemoperateasawholeforthebenefitofchildren.AsBranch
andcolleagues(2012,p.294)putit:“…agenciesandinstitutionsideallyneedtooperate
withinaframeworkofcollaborativepractice,characterisedbyablurringofthe
boundariesbetweenorganisationsandbyharmonious,mutuallysupportivepracticesin
families,schools,communityagencies,andotherkeysettings.”Thestrengtheningand
harmonisationoflearningenvironmentswithinfamiliesandlocalschoolswasacentral
goalofthePathwaystoPreventionProject,chieflythroughtheprovisionof
comprehensiveandintegratedformsoffamilysupportandchildactivities,in
partnershipwithprimaryschools.
CollaborationandRelationshipsprovidethefirsttwolettersoftheCREATEacronym,for
reasonsthatshouldnowbeapparentinthelightofthesystemsperspective.Allsix
CREATEprinciplescouldbediscussedinmuchmoredetailthanispossibleinthispaper,
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
11
soinwhatfollowsweconcentrateonCollaborativepracticesinceitallowsustodraw
intothediscussionaspectsofRelationships,AccountabilityandTrainingaswellasthe
undergirdingpracticesofgoodgovernanceandempowerment(ofparents,children,and
the‘child-serving’workforce).Buildingonthefoundationalthinkinginthe1999
PathwaystoPreventionreport(DevelopmentalCrimePreventionConsortium,1999)
wetaketheprincipleofEarlyinthePathwaylargelyasread,althoughwerecognisethat
issuessuchasthetimingofinterventions(e.g.,shouldearlyalwaysmeanearlyinlife?:
Hayes,2007)andthebalanceofuniversalandtargetedprogramsarecritically
importantinshapingdeliveryandsupportsystems.Evidence-drivenisabedrock
principleinCREATEthatisreservedforextendeddiscussionafterweexamine
collaborativepractice.
Collaborativepractice
Althoughitisageneralmodel,CREATEwasconceivedprimarilywithaplace-based
approachinmindbecauseitiswithinalocalitythatasharedunderstandingofcomplex
problemscanbemoreeasilyarrivedatandusedtoguidecollaborativepractice(Fryet
al.,2014).Wealsoenvisagedthatcommunitypartnershipsinsomeformwouldbeboth
thevehiclethroughwhichlocalprioritiesandstrategiesaredecidedaswellasa
primarydeliverysystematthelocallevel.Howeverakeyproblem,iftheoverallgoalis
tostrengthenthedevelopmentalsystem,isthatmanypartnershipsaredominatedby
communityagenciesandgovernmentorganisationsratherbytheenduring
developmentalinstitutionsthatmostinfluencechildren,especiallyschools,preschools,
churches,and–mostcritically–families3.Indeedparentsorcarers,asoneofthe
primarytargetgroupsfortheactivitiesdevisedbycommunitypartnerships,are
frequentlyabsentfromthetablealtogether,eveniftheyaresometimesincludedin
communityconsultationsofvariousforms.Childrenandyoungpeopletypicallyhave
evenlessofavoice,althoughunderstandingwhatitmeansinpracticetotreatchildren
associalactorsandthentoactonwhatwelearnfromthemisachallengingenterprise
(France&Homel,2006;James,2007).
Gettingschoolsintocommunitypartnershipsisequallychallenging,eventhoughmany
ofthemostdifficultproblemsschoolsface,suchasseriousantisocialbehaviouror
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
12
learningdifficulties,havetheiroriginslargelyoutsidetheschoolgatesandrequire
externalresourcesandthecooperationoffamiliestoaddresseffectively.Sincemanyof
thestandardriskfactorsforyouthcrime,suchasimpulsivity(Farrington&Welsh,
2007),alsopredictpooracademicperformanceandconflictwithschool(oftenbecause
ofdisruptiveandantisocialbehaviours),bridgingtheyawningchasmbetweenfamilies
andschoolsindisadvantagedcommunitiescanprovideaveryeffectiveplatformfor
bothcommunity-basedcrimepreventionandforpromotinglearningoutcomes
(Freiberg,Homel&Branch,2010;Feinbergetal.,2010).Howeveritisadaunting
prospectforprincipalsandteacherstoinitiateengagementsothatparentsand
communitymembersbothcreateandcontributetoinitiativesthatsupport(say)
readingdevelopmentathomeandinpartnershipwiththeschool(Dempsteretal.,
2012;Johnson&Jervis-Tracey,2011).
OurexperienceinthePathwaystoPreventionProjectisthatwhenofferedexternal
resourcesprincipalswerekeentocooperateandtoreferchildrentothefamilysupport
team,butweregenerallyunwillingorfeltunabletotakeresponsibilityforsharedgoal
settingandforthedevelopmentofjointinitiativestailoredtotheirneeds.Inshort,
schoolswerereluctanttotakethenextstepalongthecontinuumfromcooperationwith
communityworkersandcoordinationofschoolandPathwaysactivitiesthrough
timetabling,tofullcollaboration,anexperienceduplicatedinmanysectorswhere
horizontalserviceintegrationhasbeenattempted(Keastetal.,2007).AsBruder(2005,
p.31)hasputit,inthehistoryofserviceintegration“oneisstruckbyitsnobilityof
intent,itstenacityofpurpose,anditsineffectivenessinimplementation.”Our
experienceisthatcollaborativepracticeacrosstheschool-communitysectordivideis
especiallyproblematicbecauseteachershaveaverystrongoccupationalcultureand
schoolsaretraditionallyindependentorganisationswiththeirownclearlyfocused
goalsandwell-establishedorganisationalstructures.
Collaboration,asdistinctfromcooperationandcoordination,requiresahighdegreeof
trustamongmemberswhichallowsacommitmenttoacommonmissionandtosystem
change(Keastetal.,2007).Thehistoricfailureofattemptsatcollaborationorservice
integration,despitetherhetoricanddespitemorethanonehundredyearsofeffort,
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
13
underpinsthegrowingconsensusamongstresearchers,socialentrepreneursand
practitionersthatcollaborationisnotpossiblewithoutanexternalimpetusandinthe
absenceofspecialisedresourcesthatareindependentoftheorganisationsdelivering
services.InthecollectiveimpactapproachpopularisedbyKaniaandKramer(2011),the
solutiontothisproblemistointroduceaseparateorganisation–thebackbone
organisation-withstaffthathavetheskillsthatmakesitpossibleforparticipating
organisationstoadoptacommonagenda;sharedataandadoptcommonmeasures;
engageinmutuallyreinforcingactivities;andcommunicateconsistentlyandopenly.
Backboneorganisationscantakemanyforms,rangingfromexistingornewnon-profits
toaseniorlevelsteeringcommittee(Hanleybrown,KaniaandKramer,2012).
ThefunctionalequivalentofabackboneorganisationwithintheCREATEframework,
andwithintheCfCproject,isapreventionsupportsystemthatprovideshumanand
electronicresourcesthatmakeitpossibleforCfCpartnershipstomovefrom
coordinationtocollaboration;toagreeonasmallnumberofmeasurablegoalsfor
childreninthelightofneedsrevealedthroughdataonthewellbeingofchildreninthe
community;todevelopcommunityactionplansunderpinnedbyatheoryofchange;to
shareagencydataonfamilyparticipationinactivitiesandrelevantoutcomemeasures;
andtoselect,implementwithfidelity,andevaluateevidence-basedprograms.Every
oneofthesestepsischallengingforcommunitycoalitions,althoughmanyhave
independentlymadesignificantprogressonsomeaspects,suchastheassessmentofthe
needsofchildreninthelightofavailabledata4.
Inspecificterms,theCfCprojectisdeveloping:
1) Aninteractiveweb-basedsetofresources,consistingofsuchelementsas:
a) TrainingtoolsforCfCteachersandcommunityworkers;motivationalvideosand
infographics;andgamesforchild-parentlearningandformeasurementof
outcomes;
b) Evaluationtoolsformeasuringcommunitycoalitionfunction;child&family
outcomes;resourcesfordoingeconomicanalyses;
c) Adatasharingmanagementsystem.
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
14
2) Systemsandprocessesestablishedbycommunityworkersthatwecall‘Collective
ImpactFacilitators’whoworkwithcommunitycoalitionstobuildtheskillsand
knowledge:
a) ToimplementtheCREATEcommunitypreventionmodelusingtheelectronic
resources;
b) Toachievethecoreconditionsofcollectiveimpact.
Theseprojectresourcesarebeingintegratedwithotherresourcesdevelopedbythe
federalgovernment,including:(a)asophisticatedanduser-friendlynationalData
ExchangeSystemthatwillfacilitatethedevelopmentofcommunitystate-of-the-child
reports;inter-agencydatasharingandreportingatlocallevelsandbeyond;
measurementofoutcomes;andprogramevaluations5;(b)anExpertPanelofindividuals
andorganisationsthatwillprovidetechnicalsupporttoindividualagenciesand
communitycoalitions6;and(c)theChildFamilyCommunityAustralia(CFCA)
InformationExchange,aweb-basedsourceofquality,evidence-informedpublications,
researchandresourcesrelatedtochildren,familiesandcommunities(Robinson&
Knight,2012).
Nomatterhowsophisticatedthetechnicalsupports,thesuccessofcommunity
coalitionsdependsontheestablishmentofgoodgovernancesystemsthatregulatethe
waypowerisexercisedandaccountrendered,andensurethatenergyisdirectedat
betteroutcomesforchildren.Theprinciplesofeffectivegovernanceforhealthy
coalitionshavebeeninventedandreinventedinmanycontexts,includingpublichealth
(Butterfloss,2007)andthecollectiveimpactmovement7.Thereisaremarkabledegree
ofsimilarityintheadducedprinciples,withHomel&Homel’s(2012)analysisofwhat
constitutesgoodgovernanceforcrimepreventionpartnershipsasusefulasany:
1. Legitimacyandvoice:powerisacquiredandexercisedinawaythatisperceived
aslegitimate,andallaffectedbydecisionsareheardandcanhaveaninfluence.
Thismeans,amongstotherthings,thateveryonewhoneedstobeisatthetable.
2. Strategicvision:theexerciseofpowerresultsinaclearsenseofdirectionthat
servesasaguidetoaction.Thismeansthatrolesandresponsibilitiesareclearly
defined.
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
15
3. Performance:Organisationsandprocessesareresponsivetotheinterestsof
participantsandstakeholders.Critically,performanceismonitoredand
reportedwithinanagreedframework,whilebeingsensitivetothecontextsin
whichpartieswork.
4. Accountability:Thereistransparencyandopennessintheworkofthecoalition,
includingmeasurementandreportingofoutcomes.
5. Fairness:Thereisconformitywiththeruleoflaw(e.g.,privacylaws)andthe
principleofequity.
Animportantareaofcontemporaryactivitywithinpreventionscienceisthe
developmentofarigorousevidence-basefortheseandsimilargovernanceprinciples,
focusingonthemeasurementofthedimensionsofahealthycoalitionandthecritical
characteristicsforachievingimpact.Forexample,intheiranalysisofcommunity-level
mediatorsintheCTCcommunitytrialintheUnitedStates,Brownandcolleagues
(2014)haveshownthattheeffectsoftheCTCinterventiononyouthproblem
behavioursbytheendofeighthgradeweremediatedfullybycommunityadoptionofa
science-basedapproachtoprevention.Ofcoursemanyotherfeaturesofcoalitions,such
asstrengthofleadershipandstronginternalandexternalrelationships,feedinto
supportforhighqualityevidence-basedprograms(Brownetal.,2010).TheCREATE
capacitybuildingexerciseisbeingevaluatedthroughasimilarlycomprehensivearray
ofpre-andpost-measuresofcoalitionfunctioning(especiallyorientationtoevidence),
butregrettably,despitetheiremphasisondataandmeasurement,thereappearstobe
limitedappreciationbycollectiveimpactproponentsoftheimportanceofevidence-
basedprograms.
Rethinkingevidence-baseddevelopmentalcrimeprevention
Thefoundationsfordevelopmentalcrimepreventionrestontheimpressivelong-term
outcomesandeconomicefficiencyofarepositoryofmorethan50promisingormodel
programsforfosteringhealthyyouthdevelopmentandforpreventingorreducing
crime,violenceandsubstanceabuse.Oneofthemostwidelyusedsourcesfor
informationonevidence-basedpreventionistheaptlynamedBlueprintsforHealthy
YouthDevelopment,developedbyDelElliottandcolleaguesattheUniversityof
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
16
Colorado(Mihalic&Elliott,2014).Theseprogramsspantherangefromuniversal
interventionsthatareprovidedforthegeneralpopulationorforallmembersofa
specifiedcollectivitylikealocalcommunity;selectiveinterventionsdirectedatgroups
judgedtobeatincreasedrisk;andindicatedinterventionsdirectedatindividuals
alreadymanifestingaproblemsuchasdisruptivebehaviour(Mrazek&Haggerty,1994).
Theyalsovarygreatlyaccordingtoproblemfocus(e.g.,antisocialbehaviour,alcohol
abuse),targetagerange(frompreschoolorbeforebirthtouniversitystudents),andthe
contextforintervention(home,community,school,workplace).Whatunitesthe
programspresentedintheBlueprintswebsiteandotherregistriesofevidence-based
interventionsistheircarefuldesignandfocusonkeyriskandprotectivefactors
(Farrington,2002);evaluationsusinghigh-qualityrandomisedorquasi-experimental
designs;andeffectsthataresustainedforatleast12monthsaftertheprogram
interventionends.
Establishinghighstandardsformodelorpromisingevidence-basedprogramsis
important,sinceasMihalicandEliott(2014,p.2)observe,“lowerstandardcomeswith
agreaterriskoffailurewhenprogramsaresubsequentlyimplementedonawiderscale.”
Thedownsideofthis,however,isthathighstandardsmightmakeithardertoactually
movetoscale,becausesuitablytrainedstaffarenotavailable,orhighqualitycoststoo
much,orisinconflictwithprevailingprofessionalnorms,orforanynumberofother
reasonsdocumentedintheimplementationscienceliterature(Homel&Homel,2012).
Experiencewithpreschooleducationprovidesaninstructiveexampleofthegap
betweenflagshipprogramsandgeneralpractice.
TheHighScopePerryPreschoolprogramisperhapsthemostinfluentialevidence-based
developmentalcrimepreventioninitiativeeverconducted,eventhoughitbeganlife
morethan50yearsagoasashort-termevaluationoftheeffectsofaninnovative
preschoolcurriculumontheintellectualandlanguageperformanceof58three-and
four-yearoldAfrican-Americanchildren,comparedwith65controls,growingupin
povertyinYpsilanti,Michigan.Theprojectwaswelldesigned,wellimplemented,and
rigorouslyevaluated,butthemainreasonithasbeensoinfluentialisbecausethe
authorscontinuedtofollow-uptheprogramsampleandtherandomisedcontrols,
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
17
expandingtherangeofoutcomemeasuresovera40-yearperiodtoincludeschool
achievement,commitmenttoschooling,childhoodantisocialbehaviour,highschool
graduation,adultemploymentandearnings,andyouthandadultcrimeand
incarceration.Theoutcomesatallfollow-uppointsacrossallthesedomainsfavoured
theprogramgroup,withthestudypresenting“strongevidenceofalifetimeeffectofthe
HighScopePerryPreschoolprograminpreventingtotalarrestsandarrestsforviolent,
property,anddrugcrimesandsubsequentprisonorjailsentences”(Schweinhart,2013,
p.397).
TheHighScopeearlychildhoodeducationalmodel,whichis“anopenframeworkof
educationalideasandpracticesbasedonthenaturaldevelopmentofyoungchildren”
(Schweinhart,2013,p.394),wasthefoundationforboththedailyclassroomactivities
andweeklyhomevisitsfor90minutestoeachmotherandchild.Boththeseprogram
strands,byencouragingchildrentomakechoices,solveproblems,andengagein
activitiesthatpromotedbothcognitivedevelopmentand(especially)socialadjustment
andcapacityforself-regulation(Heckmanetal.,2013),contributedtothelong-term
reductionsincrimeandimprovementsinsocialandeconomicwellbeing.Thepointis
thattheinterventionmadeitpossibleforasmallgroupofinfantstoflourishina
mannerthatresembled,atleastinsomedegree,the‘natural’developmentofchildren
raisedinmoreprivilegedcircumstances.Unfortunatelythecriticalingredientsinthis
innovativeprogram–highlyqualifiedteachers,avalidchilddevelopmentcurriculum,
extensiveengagementofparents,andregularassessmentofprogramimplementation
andchilddevelopment-havenotgenerallybeenreproducedinthelarge-scalefederal
HeadStartprogramintheUnitedStates,whichtypicallyhasweakshort-termeffects
withsmalllikelihoodoflong-termbenefits(Pumaetal.,2012).Thegoodnews,however,
isthatmanylocalpreschoolprogramsintheUSarehighlyeffective,atleastintheshort
term(Schweinhart,2013).Thesefindings,concerningthelarge-scaleandthelocal,are
importantbeyondtherealmofearlychildhoodeducation,andhaveinformedthe
developmentoftheCREATEmodel.
Expandingthedefinitionofevidence
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
18
ShonkoffandFisher(2013)havedistilledmanyofthechallengesfacingdevelopmental
criminologistsengagedinT2Translation,eventhoughtheirfocusisearlychildhood
policyandpracticewithcrimepreventiononlyoneofmanybenefitsenvisaged.One
elementoftheirargumentisthatflagshipprogramslikethePerryPreschoolProgram
shouldbeviewedprimarilythroughahistoricallensandtheirseminalcontribution
appreciatedasproofofconceptratherthanasevidenceforthevalueofcurrent
investments.Theypointoutthatforalltheirbenefits,theseflagshipprogramsgenerally
producemodesteffectsizesandfallfarshortofconstitutingoptimumearlyprevention
models.InthePerryPreschoolStudy,forexample,athirdoftheinterventiongrouphad
atleastonearrestforaviolentoffence,reinforcingtheneedfor“moreeffective
strategiestoproducelargereffects”(p.1637).Theyacknowledgethegreatvalueof
qualityimprovementandsystembuilding(includingenhanceddatamanagement
practicesandbettercoordinatedservices),butarescepticalthatthesewillbesufficient
toproducethebreakthroughimpactsforchildrengrowingupundertheburdensof
poverty,parentswithlimitededucation,andsocialexclusion.
Oneoftheirkeyproposalsrelatestotheneedforanexpandeddefinitionofevidence
andforinnovationinT1research:translatingthewealthofnewfindingsfromchild
developmentresearchandpreventionscienceintonewtypesofpreventiveinnovations.
Theyobservethatinapolicyenvironmentthatincreasinglyemphasisesevidence-based
programs,thereislittlefundingorencouragementforthedevelopmentandtestingof
newideas.Theyareparticularlyconcernedthatnewfindingsfromneurosciencebe
translatedinto“ecologicallyvalidinterventionstrategiesthatpromotethepracticeof
specificbehaviouralskillsthatareknown(orhypothesized)tobemanifestationsofthe
underlyingneuralsystemsofinterestinreal-worldsettings”(p.1639).Thiscouldlead,
forexample,toinnovativenewwaysofeffectingimprovementsintheneural
mechanismsofself-regulation,adimensionofgreatinteresttocriminologists.
Whilestronglyendorsingthisproposalfortheexpansionoftheevidencebase,weareof
theviewthatthedevelopmentofnewpreventiveinitiativesshouldnotberestrictedto
thosebasedonneuroscience–veryimportantastheseare–butshouldencompassall
formsofsoundresearch.Totakea‘frontierissue’incommunitycrimepreventionasan
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
19
example,inseminalresearchSampsonandhiscolleagueshavedemonstratedthatrates
ofcommunityviolenceandviolentvictimisationresultfromthedifferentialabilityof
neighbourhoodstorealisethecommonvaluesofresidentsandmaintaineffectivesocial
controls,capacitiesthattheyrefertoascollectiveefficacy.Evenincommunities
characterisedbyweakties,whenresidentstrusteachotherandarewillingtowork
togethertosolvelocalproblems,violenceislower(Sampsonetal.,1997).Thisbegsthe
obviousquestion:dopreventiondeliverysystemslikeCTC,whichexplicitlybuildor
strengthenlocalcoalitionsandempowerthemtoaddresslocalproblemsusing
evidence-basedpractices,improvelevelsofcommunitycollectiveefficacy,particularly
levelsofsocialcohesionandtrust?Thereisintriguingevidencethattheymight.Brown
andcolleagues(2014),forexample,foundthatCTCstrengthenedcommunitynorms
againstadolescentdruguse,whichsuggeststhatrelatedcommunityconstructssuchas
socialcohesionandtrustmightwellbeamenabletobeinginfluencedbythecoalition
approach.Thebasicproblemisthatevidence-basedstrategiestostrengtheninformal
socialcontrolsareintheirinfancy(Wickes,Homel&Zahnow,inpress),partlybecause
preventionsciencehasconcentratedtoomuchonindividualandfamilyriskfactorsfor
violenceandnotenoughoncommunity-levelsocialprocesses(Haegerich,Oman,Vesely,
Aspy&Tolma,2014).Researchtobridgethisgapcouldyieldimportantnew
innovationsthatcouldstrengthenbothcommunityanddevelopmentalcrime
preventionandaidthedevelopmentofintegratedapproaches.
AfurtherwaythattheevidencebasecanbeexpandedispromptedbySchweinhart’s
(2013)findingthatmanylocalpreschoolprogramswereveryeffective,evenifthe
nationalHeadstartprogramwasn’t.Acomprehensiverepositoryofsuccessfullocal
preschoolinitiatives,includingacarefulanalysisoftheircriticaloperating
characteristics,wouldmakeanimportantcontributiontothePreventionSynthesisand
TranslationSystemenvisagedbyWandersmanandcolleagues,andwouldcomplement
Blueprintsandsimilarregistriesofevidence-basedprogramsdevelopedandtestedby
researchers.ThisproposalexactlyparallelswhatMarkLipseyhasdevelopedthrough
extensivemeta-analysesoftheevaluationsofhundredsof‘noname’treatment
programsforyoungoffendersthatareusuallyrestrictedtoonejurisdictionorlocality.
HisStandardizedProgramEvaluationProtocolis“adata-drivenratingschemebuilt
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
20
aroundtheinterventioncharacteristicsfoundtobemoststronglyrelatedtorecidivism
reductionsinthemeta-analysis…”(Lipsey,2014,p.9),greatlyexpandstheevidence-
baseofwhatworksforyoungoffenders,andtheprocessesunderlyingsuccess(typeof
program,amountofservice,qualityofdelivery,andrisklevelofparticipants).
Insummary,weproposethat‘evidence-driven’fordevelopmentalcrimeprevention
consistofthreekindsofpreventiveinitiatives:
1. Themodelorpromisingprogramsinregistriesofevidence-basedprograms,
suchasBlueprints;
2. PromisinginnovationsdevelopedandrigorouslyevaluatedthroughaT1process,
preferablyinpartnershipwithpractitionersandwithdatacollected‘inthefield’
ratherthaninaclinicorlaboratory;
3. ActivitiesroutinelyofferedincommunitiesacrossAustraliaandelsewhere,such
asfacilitatedplaygroups,familysupport,orafter-schoolprograms,provided
thereareasufficientnumberofexperimentalorwell-designedquasi-
experimentalevaluationsthatdemonstrateimpactontheriskfactorsfor
antisocialbehaviourandotherchildoutcomes,andthatalsoprovideguidanceon
theprocesseshighlightedbyLipsey(2014),suchasamountofservicethatis
optimal.
Modelprogramsshouldofcoursebegivenpriorityiftheyfitthecommunityneed,with
establishedpracticesthatarewellevaluatedthesecondpreference.However,
opportunitiestoaddnewknowledgeabouteffectivepreventionthroughstrong
researcher-practitionerpartnershipsshouldalsobeencouragedwhereverpossible.The
formsofevidencethatactuallyunderpinactivitiesinCfCcommunitieswillbesubjected
todetailedanalysisandevaluationastheydevelopwithinthenewDSSframework1.
Ridingthewave:whythetimeisrightto‘thinkbig’
ThispaperhasdescribedtheCREATEmodelofcommunitypreventionasoneapproach
toT2translation:takingevidence-basedpracticetoscale.CREATEemergedfromthe
struggleinthePathwaystoPreventionProjecttoinstantiatetheprinciplesof
developmentalcrimepreventioninpartnershipwithschoolsandanationalcommunity
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
21
agencyinonesociallydisadvantagedregionofoneAustraliancity,butwearguethatits
principlesareapplicabletoallformsofdevelopmentalpreventiononamuchlarger
scale,includinginitiativesthatarenotplace-based.Inthespiritofpreventionscience,
andwiththegoalofsustainability,wearesubjectingCREATEtocomprehensive
evaluation,beginningwithacapacitybuildingphasethroughCommunitiesforChildren,
anationalplace-basedprogramforchildrenandfamiliesin52disadvantagedareas.
WhileCfCarguablyfallsshortofconstitutingatrulynationalpreventiondelivery
system(sinceitisrestrictedtoselecteddisadvantagedcommunitieswhichdonot,for
example,includeremoteAboriginalcommunities),itisanidealvehiclefortestingsome
T2translationstrategiesonamuchlargerscalethanwouldbepossibleinauniversity-
basedinitiative.
Allthisistakingplaceinaclimateofrenewedinterestintheuseofdataandevidence-
basedprogramstoimprovethelivesofchildrenandyoungpeoplethroughprevention
andearlyintervention(Andrews,2014),supportedbymajordevelopmentsinthe
enablinginfrastructureatanationallevel(includingtheDataExchangeSystem,the
ExpertPanel,andtheCFCAInformationExchange).Thismovementhasgained
considerableextraimpetusbecauseoftheunsustainablegrowthinthenumbersof
children‘known’tothechildprotectionsystemandthewidespreadacknowledgmentof
theineffectualnatureoftertiaryresponses.
Thehistoryofsocialreformmovementsbasedonrigorousscience,includingtheareas
ofclimatechangeandharmcausedbyalcohol,demonstratesthatwhenevidence
conflictswithpowerfulentrenchedinterests,theentrenchedinterestsnearlyalways
win.Howeverdevelopmentalpreventionhasnonaturalenemies(exceptperhapswhen
adolescentalcoholabuseorfoetalalcoholspectrumdisorderarethetargets),sinceit
involvesdoingwhataverylargemajorityofcitizens,businesspeopleandpoliticians
wanttodoinanycase:strengthenfamiliesandcommunitiesandfosterbetterlivesfor
disadvantagedchildren.Nowisthetimeforprevention-orientedcriminologiststograsp
theopportunitiesprovidedbytheconvergenceoftherecentbreakthroughsin
preventionsciencewiththeurgentpolicyprioritiesthathavestimulatedthe
developmentofpromisingnewnationalinfrastructurefordevelopmentalprevention.
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
22
Acknowledgments
Wearegratefultothetworeviewersofthispaperforextremelyhelpfulcomments,and
alsotoJonBright,AlanHayes,PeterHomel,DorothyScott,andRobynSeth-Purdiefor
theirgenerouscommitmentoftime,carefulreadings,andveryhelpfulcritiques.
Fundingacknowledgments
TheCfCprojectisfundedthroughanAustralianResearchCouncilLinkagegrant
LP130100142(2014-2016).PathwaystoPreventionhasbeenfundedthroughARC
grantssince1999,mostrecentlythroughDP0984675(2009-13).
Notes
1. Thenature,operationsandimpactoftheCfCprojectaredescribedindetailin
separatepapersinpreparation.
2. http://www.episcenter.psu.edu/
3. Webasethisassertiononapreliminarysurveyofcoalitionmembershipsin10CfC
communities,butalsomorebroadlyonobservationsofcommunitiesthroughout
Australia.
4. Forexample,StateoftheChildrenandYoungPersons’Report2014:IpswichandWest
Moreton(Child,YouthandFamilyAlliance,IpswichandWestMoreton);TheStateof
Launceston’sChildren2014(AnglicareTasmania).
5. TheDSSDataExchangeFramework:Anewapproachforstreamlinedprogramme
performancereporting.Canberra:DepartmentofSocialServices,July2014.
6. https://www3.aifs.gov.au/cfca/families-and-children-activity-expert-panel
7. TheTamarackInstitute,ResourcesataGlance:CollaborativeGovernance:
http://tamarackcommunity.ca/
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
23
References
Andrews,K.(2014,July21).AddresstotheAnnualCoalitionofOrganisationsCommittedtotheSafetyandWellbeingofAustralia’sChildren.Melbourne.
Branch,S.,Homel,R.&Freiberg,K.(2012).Makingthedevelopmentalsystemworkbetterforchildren:LessonslearnedfromtheCirclesofCareProgramme.ChildandFamilySocialWork18,294-304.DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2206.2012.00845.x
Brown,E.C.,Hawkins,J.D.,Rhew,I.C.,Shapiro,V.B.,Abbott,R.D.,Oesterle,S.,Arthur,M.W.,Briney,J.S.&Catalano,R.F.(2014).PreventionsystemmediationofCommunitiesThatCareeffectsonyouthoutcomes.PreventionScience,15,623-632
Brown,L.D.,Feinberg,M.E.&Greenberg,M.T.(2010).Determinantsofcommunitycoalitionabilitytosupportevidence-basedprograms.PreventionScience,11(3):287-97.
Bumbarger,B.K.&Campbell,E.M.(2012).Astate-universitypartnershipfortranslationalresearchandthedisseminationofevidence-basedpreventionandintervention.AdministrationandPolicyinMentalHealthandMentalHealthServicesResearch39,268–277.
Butterfoss,F.D.(2007).CoalitionsandPartnershipsinCommunityHealth.USA:Jossey-Bass.
CentreforCommunityChildHealth(2007).AustralianEarlyDevelopmentIndex:Buildingbettercommunitiesforchildren,finalevaluationreport.Melbourne:RoyalChildren’sHospital.
Cicchetti,D.&Rogosch,F.A.(1996).Equifinalityandmultifinalityindevelopmentalpsychopathology.DevelopmentandPsychopathology,8,597-600.
Crawford,A.(1998).Crimepreventionandcommunitysafety:Politics,policiesandpractices.Harlow,Essex,UK:AddisonWesleyLongman.
Dempster,N.,Konza,D.,Robson,G.,Gaffney,M.Lock,G.&McKennariey,K.(2012).PrincipalsasLiteracyLeaders:Confident,CredibleandConnected.Kingston,ACT:AustralianPrimaryPrincipalsAssociation.
DevelopmentalCrimePreventionConsortium(1999).Pathwaystoprevention:DevelopmentalandearlyinterventionapproachestocrimeinAustralia(FullReport,SummaryandAppendices).Canberra:AustralianGovernmentPublishingService.
Edwards,B.,Mullan,K.,Katz,I.,&Higgins,D.J.(2014).TheStrongerFamiliesinAustralia(SFIA)Study:Phase2.Melbourne:AustralianInstituteofFamilyStudies.
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
24
Fagan,A.&Eisenberg,N.(2012).Latestdevelopmentsinthepreventionofcrimeandanti-socialbehaviour:AnAmericanperspective.JournalofChildren’sServices,7(1),64-72.
Fagan,A.A.,Hanson,K.,Briney,J.S.&Hawkins,J.D.(2012).SustainingtheutilizationandhighqualityimplementationoftestedandeffectivepreventionprogramsusingtheCommunitiesThatCarePreventionSystem.AmericanJournalofCommunityPsychology49,365–377
Farrington,D.P.(2002).Developmentalcriminologyandrisk-focusedprevention.InM.Maguire,R.Morgan&R.Reiner(Eds.),TheOxfordhandbookofcriminology(3rded.,pp.657-701).Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
Farrington,D.P.&Welsh,B.C.(2007).Savingchildrenfromalifeofcrime:earlyriskfactorsandeffectiveinterventions.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress
Feinberg,M.E.,Jones,D.,Greenberg,M.T.,Osgood,D.W.&Bontempo,D.(2010).EffectsofthecommunitiesthatcaremodelinPennsylvaniaonchangeinadolescentriskandproblembehaviors.PreventionScience11:163–171
Fixsen,D.L.,Blase,K.A.,Naoom,S.F.&Wallace,F.(2009).Coreimplementationcomponents.ResearchonSocialWorkPractice16:531-540.
France,A.&Homel,R.(2006).Societalaccessroutesanddevelopmentalpathways:Puttingsocialstructureandyoungpeople'svoiceintotheanalysisofpathwaysintoandoutofcrime.AustralianandNewZealandJournalofCriminology,39,295-309.
Freiberg,K.,Homel,R.&Branch,S.(2010).CirclesofCare:ThestruggletostrengthenthedevelopmentalsystemthroughthePathwaystoPreventionproject.FamilyMatters,84,28-34.
Fry,R.,Keyes,M.,Laidlaw,B.,&West,S.(2014).ThestateofplayinAustralianplace-basedactivityforchildren.Parkville,Victoria:MurdochChildren’sResearchInstituteandTheRoyalChildren’sHospitalCentreforCommunityChildHealth.
Haegerich,T.M,Oman,R.F.,Vesely,S.K.,Aspy,C.B.&Tolma,E.L.(2014).Thepredictiveinfluenceoffamilyandneighbourhoodassetsonfightingandweaponcarryingfrommid-tolate-adolescence.PreventionScience,15,473-484
Hanleybrown,F.,Kania,J.&Kramer,M.(2012).Channelingchange:makingcollectiveimpactwork.StanfordSocialInnovationReview(January),1-9
Hayes,A.(2007).Whyearlyinlifeisnotenough:timingandsustainabilityinpreventionandearlyintervention.InAlanFrance&RossHomel(Eds.),Pathwaysandcrimeprevention:Theory,policyandpractice(pp.202-225).Cullompton,UK:Willan.
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
25
Hawkins,J.D.;Oesterle,S;Brown,E.C.;Arthur,M.W.;Abbott,R.D.;Fagan,A.A.&Catalano,R.F.(2009).ResultsofaType2TranslationalResearchTrialtoPreventAdolescentDrugUseandDelinquency:ATestofCommunitiesThatCare.ArchivesofPediatricAdolescentMedicine,163(9):789-798
Heckman,J.,Pinto,R.&Savelyev,P.(2013).UnderstandingtheMechanismsThroughWhichanInfluentialEarlyChildhoodProgramBoostedAdultOutcomes.AmericanEconomicReview,103(6),2052-86.
Homel,R.,Elias,G.&Hay,I.(2001).Developmentalpreventionindisadvantagedcommunities.InEckersley,R.,Dixon,J.&Douglas,R.(Eds),TheSocialoriginsofhealthandwell-being:Fromtheplanetarytothemolecular(pp.269-279),Melbourne:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Homel,R.(2005).Developmentalcrimeprevention.InNickTilley(Ed.),Handbookofcrimepreventionandcommunitysafety(pp.71-106).Cullumpton,Devon,UK:WillanPublishing
Homel,R.,Cashmore,J.,Gilmore,L.,Goodnow,J.,Hayes,I.,Lawrence,J.,Leech,M.,Najman,J.,O’Connor,I.,Vinson,T.&Western,J.(1999).Pathwaystoprevention:DevelopmentalandearlyinterventionapproachestocrimeinAustralia(FullReportandAppendices)(400pages).Canberra:AustralianGovernmentPublishingService.
Homel,R.,Freiberg,K.,Lamb,C.,Leech,M.,Hampshire,A.,Hay,I.,Elias,G.,Carr,A.,Manning,M.,Teague,R.&Batchelor,S.(2006).ThePathwaystoPreventionProject:TheFirstFiveYears,1999-2004.Sydney:GriffithUniversity&MissionAustralia
Homel,R.&Homel,P.(2012).Implementingcrimeprevention:Goodgovernanceandascienceofimplementation.InBrandonWelshandDavidFarrington(Eds.),TheOxfordHandbookofCrimePrevention(pp.423-445).Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress
Homel,R.&McGee,T.(2012).Communityapproachestocrimeandviolenceprevention:Buildingpreventioncapacity.Chapter20inRolfLoeber&BrandonWelsh(Eds.),Thefutureofcriminology(pp.172-177).NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress
James,A.(2007).Givingvoicetochildren’svoices:practicesandproblems,pitfallsandpotentials.AmericanAnthropologist,109(2),261-272
Johnson,G.&Jervis-Tracey,P.(2011).Re-imaginingtermsofengagementinleadershipforlearningfordisadvantagedcommunitiesandfamilies:An(im)modestproposal.InTonyTownsend&JohnMacBeath(Eds.),Internationalhandbookofleadershipforlearning(pp.1591-1616).Dordrecht:Springer
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
26
Kania,J.&Kramer,M.(2011).Collectiveimpact.StanfordSocialInnovationReview(Winter),36-41.
Keast,R.,Brown,K.&Mandell,M.(2007).Gettingtherightmix:unpackingintegrationmeaningsandstrategies.InternationalPublicManagementJournal,10(1),9-33
Lerner,R.M.(2002)Conceptsandtheoriesofhumandevelopment.L.ErlbaumAssociates,Mahwah,N.J.
Lerner,R.M.&Castellino,D.R.(2002).Contemporarydevelopmentaltheoryandadolescence:Developmentalsystemsandapplieddevelopmentalscience.”JournalofAdolescentHealth,31:122-135.
Lerner,R.M.&Overton,W.F.(2008).Exemplifyingtheintegrationsoftherelationaldevelopmentalsystemsynthesizingtheory,research,andapplicationtopromotepositivedevelopmentandsocialjustice.JournalofAdolescentResearch,23,245-255.
Lipsey,M.W.(2014).Interventionsforjuvenileoffenders:Aserendipitousjourney.Criminology&PublicPolicy,13,1-14.
Manning,M,Homel,R&Smith,C.(2010).Ameta-analysisoftheeffectsofearlydevelopmentalpreventionprogramsinat-riskpopulationsonnon-healthoutcomesinadolescence.ChildrenandYouthServicesReview,32,506–519.
Mihalic,S.F.,&Elliott,D.S.(2014).Evidence-basedprogramsregistry:BlueprintsforHealthyYouthDevelopment.EvaluationandProgramPlanning,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2014.08.004
Mrazek,P.J.&Haggerty,R.J.(1994).InstituteofMedicine(IOM),Reducingrisksformentaldisorders:Frontiersforpreventiveinterventionresearch.WashingtonD.C.:NationalAcademyPress.
Oesterle,S.,Hawkins,J.D.,Fagan,A.A.,Abbott,R.D.,&Catalano,R.F.(2010).TestingtheuniversalityoftheeffectsoftheCommunitiesThatCarepreventionsystemforpreventingadolescentdruguseanddelinquency.PreventionScience,11,411-423.
Piquero,A.R.,Farrington,D.P.,Welsh,B.C.,Tremblay,R.&Jennings,W.G.(2009).Effectsofearlyfamily/parenttrainingprogramsonantisocialbehaviouranddelinquency.JournalofExperimentalCriminology,5,83-120.
Plovnick,M.,Fry,R.andRubin,I.(1975).NewdevelopmentsinOD[OrganisationalDevelopment]technology:Programmedteamdevelopment.TrainingandDevelopmentJournal,29(4),19-25.
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
27
Puma,M.,Bell,S.,Cook,R.,Heid,C.,Broene,P.,Jenkins,F.,Mashburn,A.&Downer,J.(2012).ThirdGradeFollow-UptotheHeadStartImpactStudy:FinalReport.OPREReport2012-45.Washington,DC:AdministrationforChildren&Families.USDepartmentofHealthandHumanServices.http://www.acf.hhs.gov/
Rhoades,B.L.,Bumarger,B.K.&Moore,J.E.(2012).Theroleofastate-levelpreventionsupportsysteminpromotinghigh-qualityimplementationandsustainabilityofevidence-basedprograms.AmericanJournalofCommunityPsychology,50:386–401
Ripper,J.&Ortiz,A.(2012).Buildingonwhatworks:Improvingchildren’sfutures.Better:Evidence-basedEducation,4(2),18-19.
Robinson,E.&Knight,K.(2012).TheChildFamilyCommunityAustralia(CFCA)InformationExchange.FamilyMatters,90,110-112.
Sampson,R.J.,Raudenbush,S.W.&Earls,F.(1997).Neighborhoodsandviolentcrime:Amultilevelstudyofcollectiveefficacy.Science277,918-924.
Shonkoff,J.P.&Fisher,P.A.(2013).Rethinkingevidence-basedpracticeandtwo-generationprogramstocreatethefutureofearlychildhoodpolicy.DevelopmentandPsychopathology,25,1635-1653
Schorr,L.(1998).Commonpurpose:StrengtheningfamiliesandneighborhoodstorebuildAmerica.NewYork:AnchorHouse.
Schweinhart,L.J.(2013).Long-termfollow-upofapreschoolexperiment.JournalofExperimentalCriminology,9,389-409
Spoth,R.,Redmond,C.,Clair,S.,Shin,C.,Greenberg,M.,&Feinberg,M.(2011).Preventingsubstancemisusethroughcommunity–universitypartnerships:Randomizedcontrolledtrialoutcomes4½yearspastbaseline.AmericanJournalofPreventiveMedicine,40(4):440–447
Spoth,R.,Rohrbach,L.A.,Greenberg,M.,Leaf,P.,Brown,C.H.,Fagan,A.,Catalano,R.F.,Pentz,M.A.,Sloboda,Z.,Hawkins,J.D.&SocietyforPreventionResearchType2TranslationalTaskForceMembersandContributingAuthors(2013).Addressingcorechallengesforthenextgenerationoftype2translationresearchandsystems:TheTranslationSciencetoPopulationImpact(TSciImpact)Framework.PreventionScience,14,319-351.
Toumbourou,J.W.,Leung,R.,Homel,R.,Freiberg,K.,Satyen,L.,andHemphill,S.A.(inpress).Violencepreventionandearlyintervention:whatworks?InAndrewDay&EphremFernandez(Eds.),PreventingviolenceinAustralia:Policy,PracticeandSolutions.Sydney:FederationPress
CREATE-ingcapacitytotakedevelopmentalcrimepreventiontoscale
28
Wandersman,A.,Duffy,J.,Flaspohler,P.,Noonan,R.,Lubell,K.,Stillman,L.,Blachman,M.,Dunville,R.&Saul,J.(2008).Bridgingthegapbetweenpreventionresearchandpractice:TheInteractiveSystemsFrameworkforDisseminationandImplementation.AmericanJournalofCommunityPsychology,41,171-181.
Wickes,R.,Homel,R.&Zahnow,R.(inpress).Safetyinthesuburbs:Socialdisadvantage,communitymobilization,andthepreventionofviolence.InJ.Stubbs&S.Tomsen(Eds),AustralianViolence.Sydney:FederationPress