• PPN Home
• Programs that Work
  • View by outcome area
  • View by indicator
  • View by topic
  • View by evidence level
  • View alphabetically
• Research in Brief
• Resources and Tools
• Expert Perspectives
• Partner Pages
• Search the Site

Programs that Work

CASASTART

Program Info Program Overview Program Participants Evaluation Methods Key Evaluation Findings

Probable Implementers Funding Implementation Detail Issues to Consider Example Sites

Contact Information Available Resources Bibliography Last Reviewed

Program Info

Top  

Program Overview

CASASTART is a substance abuse and delinquency prevention program serving high-risk young adolescents and their families. CASASTART's primary goals are (1) to provide youths with the services and support they need to become productive, law-abiding citizens; and (2) to create a safer environment for adolescents and their families through the reduction of crime and illegal drugs in their neighborhoods. To attain its goals, CASASTART brings together key stakeholders in a community, including families, schools, law enforcement agencies, and social service and health agencies.

Developed by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA) at Columbia University, CASASTART ("START" stands for "Striving Together to Achieve Rewarding Tomorrows") was first implemented from 1992 to 1995 in six cities and was known as the "Children at Risk" program at that time. CASASTART currently operates in nearly 40 schools around the country.

In 1996, CASA implemented an enhanced CASASTART model in five additional sites: Philadelphia (PA), New York (NY), two sites in Los Angeles (CA), and Tampa (FL). Three important changes were made in the operation of the enhanced model. First, the eligible age was lowered to 8 from 11 years old. Second, case management staff was moved to be routinely based in the target schools and children and parents had greater access to staff. Third, curricula were developed in core program areas and were delivered to all new program sites (Murray and Belenko, 2005).

This program was given a "proven" rating for the indicator Youths not using alcohol, tobacco, or illegal drugs and a "promising" rating for the indicator Children and youth not engaging in violent behavior or displaying serious conduct problems. See Issues to Consider below for further explanation.

Top  

Program Participants

CASASTART targets high-risk young adolescents and their families.

Top  

Evaluation Methods

Youths age 11 to 13 in six cities (Austin, Texas; Bridgeport, Connecticut; Memphis, Tennessee; Savannah, Georgia; Seattle, Washington; and Newark, New Jersey) were recruited for voluntary participation in the CASASTART demonstration. All participants were considered to be high-risk youths, and they lived in severely disadvantaged neighborhoods. The average age of participants was 12.4 years at the time they entered the program. Fifty-two percent were male. Of all participants, 58 percent were black, 34 percent were Hispanic, and the remaining 8 percent were white or Asian. The primary caregiver was the mother in 80 percent of the participating families. Fewer than half of the caregivers were employed when they joined the study, more than half had not graduated from high school, and most received some form of public assistance. Parental and/or guardian consent was required for youths to be eligible to participate. Of all youths recruited, 89 percent were given consent to participate.

Individuals were identified for participation based on three areas of risk. To be eligible to participate, youths had to meet the risk criteria in one of those three areas: (1) School Risk--youths were eligible if they showed three of the following seven risk indicators: special education, grade retention, poor academic performance, truancy, tardiness, out-of-school suspension, or disruptive behavior in school; (2) Family Risk--youths were eligible if they experienced any one of the four following family risks within the previous five years: family violence or disintegration, any family member known to have used or dealt drugs, any family member having been convicted of an offense, or any family member who currently or previously was a gang member; (3) Personal Risk--youths were eligible if they or one of their family members showed any one of six following personal risks: known or suspected drug activity, under juvenile court supervision, mental illness, delinquency, membership in a gang or association with another delinquent peer group, victim of abuse or neglect, or teen pregnancy or being a teen parent.

The effectiveness of CASASTART was evaluated in all demonstration sites except Newark, New Jersey. The program was evaluated using both experimental and quasi-experimental comparisons. Youths in the target neighborhoods were randomly assigned to the treatment group (n = 338), which received targeted CASASTART services, or to a control group (n = 333), which received no direct CASASTART services. In addition, CASASTART participants were compared with a quasi-experimental group (n = 203), which consisted of individuals who lived in the same neighborhoods as the treatment group and benefited from program aspects that targeted the neighborhood in general (such as enhanced community policing and increased law enforcement). This discussion focuses on the analysis comparing the treatment group and the randomly assigned control group. Comparisons of these two groups indicate that there were no significant differences in their demographic characteristics.

Data were collected via interviews at the time of program entry, at the end of service delivery (two years after program entry), and one year after the end of the program (that is, three years after the start of the program). In addition, a parent or primary caregiver was interviewed pre- and post-intervention. Data on school performance and grades were collected from the schools. Finally, school, police, and court records were collected on each participant. Ninety-eight percent of the eligible and consenting participants completed the baseline interviews, 77 percent completed the posttest interview (at the end of service delivery), and 76 percent completed the follow-up interview. Caregiver response rates by group ranged from 96 percent to 100 percent at baseline and from 80 to 86 percent at the end of the two-year program. An extensive analysis of attrition showed almost no difference in response rates by group, city, demographic characteristics, or baseline risk factors such as drug involvement. The only exception was a higher level of attrition in the control group than in the treatment group among youths with higher levels of baseline delinquent peer associations.

Top  

Key Evaluation Findings

Research by Harrell, Cavanagh, and Sridharan (1998, 1999) found that one year after program completion, compared with youths in the control group, CASASTART youths were as follows:

• Significantly less likely to have used drugs in the past month--67 percent of control youths reported any drug usage within the past month, compared with only 52 percent of CASASTART youths.
  • 5 percent of CASASTART youths, compared with 9 percent of control youths, reported use of "strong drugs," such as psychedelics, crack, cocaine, heroin, or nonprescription drugs within the past month.
  • 51 percent of CASASTART youth, compared with 65 percent of control youths, reported use of what the program calls "gateway" drugs, including marijuana, alcohol, inhalants, or cigarettes.
• Significantly less likely to use any drugs in the year following the end of the program--63 percent of youths in the control group reported usage compared with 56 percent of youths in CASASTART.
  • 74 percent of youths in the control group reported use of gateway drugs, compared with 64 percent of youths in CASASTART.
• Significantly less likely to report lifetime sales of drugs and significantly less likely to report drug sales activity in the past month.
  • 14 percent of CASASTART youths, compared with 24 percent of control youths, reported having sold drugs within the past month.
  • 37 percent of CASASTART youths, compared with 46 percent of control youths, reported lifetime drug sales activity.
• Significantly less likely to have committed a violent crime in the year following completion of the program.
  • 22 percent of CASASTART youth, compared with 27 percent of control youth, committed a violent crime during this period.

• Self-esteem, feelings of alienation, or antisocial risk-taking behaviors.
• Sexual activity.
• The number or severity of personal problems, such as conflict in the home or at school, running away, early pregnancy or parenthood, problems with peers and/or significant others (that is, boyfriend or girlfriend), or feeling sad, lonely, or anxious.
• Grade point average, dropping out of school, chronic absenteeism, truancy (self-reported), school misbehavior, attachment to school, neglecting schoolwork, or likelihood of grade promotion.
• Property crimes, gang membership, contacts with police agencies and courts, or lifetime drug use.

Top  

Probable Implementers

Youth agencies, social service agencies, schools, police, or community-based organizations.

Top  

Funding

The demonstration and evaluation of CASASTART was funded by the National Institute of Justice, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the Bureau of Justice Assistance, and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Additional support was provided by the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Prudential Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, the American Express Foundation, the Pew Charitable Trusts, Ronald McDonald Children’s Charities, and United Technologies. At the local level, programs were supported through partnerships with private businesses and volunteer organizations. More recently, state and municipal funds are supporting programs in several locations.

Financing

In 1992, the average CASASTART program supported 90 participants at a total cost of $569,000 per year (in 2005 dollars). This amounts to approximately $6,400 per youth participant per year (in 2005 dollars).

In 2009, the cost of the CASASTART program is approximately $3,500 per child and family per year.

Top  

Implementation Detail

Program Design

CASASTART is composed of eight components designed to reduce neighborhood, family, peer group, and individual risk factors. Program sites are able to adapt the program to fit their specific needs and strengths. The style and level of implementation across the sites is not uniform.

The core components of the program are the following:

1. Community-Enhanced Policing/Enhanced Enforcement. This component is intended to improve neighborhood safety. It requires direct participation of police officers, particularly the increased presence of officers in and around school grounds and increased community policing. This component further includes cooperation between police and residents to implement plans and achieve goals regarding crime prevention activities. Finally, police work directly with youths, serving as mentors, teaching drug prevention, volunteering in recreational activities, making home visits, and working with case managers on issues with particular youths.
   
2. Case Management. Youths are assigned to a case manager who assesses their service needs and those of their families. The manager develops and implements a delivery plan to meet the identified needs and also coordinates service delivery. In addition, case managers mentor youths, plan and lead activities, and provide transportation. Each manager is responsible for 13 to 18 families.
   
3. Family Services. This component uses the same case managers that are assigned to the target youths. Case managers develop plans to help reduce risk factors within the home. These plans include helping adults gain access to drug-abuse treatment, job training, and family therapy. In addition, case managers advocate for families by interacting with social service agencies and advocate for families within the school system.
   
4. Criminal/Juvenile Justice Intervention. Case managers work with juvenile justice authorities when target youth become involved in the court system.
   
5. After-School and Summer Activities. Participating youths have access to CASASTART-sponsored after-school and summer activities. These activities include recreational activities, such as sports and arts programming, and activities designed to enhance prosocial and personal development, such as workshops on developing self-esteem and life skills.
   
6. Education Services. Youths have access to tutoring and homework assistance.
   
7. Mentoring. This component is primarily in the form of group mentoring programs.
   
8. Incentives. Participants are given incentives for cooperating with and participating in CASASTART program activities. Incentives are in the form of monetary and non-monetary awards (such as prizes).

Top  

Issues to Consider

This program was given a "proven" rating for the indicator Youths not using alcohol, tobacco, or illegal drugs and a "promising" rating for the indicator Children and youth not engaging in violent behavior or displaying serious conduct problems. It involves an experimental research design using a large sample size, and it has yielded a number of sizeable positive outcomes with regard to drug use and drug sales. Moreover, studies showed that positive program effects were sustained a year after the program intervention ended. Results for the violence indicator are encouraging, but the program resulted in a less than 20 percent difference between the treatment and control groups (leading to its rating of "promising").

A strength of the program evaluation is that it was conducted by an independent outside evaluator rather than by the program implementers and designers. A weakness of the program evaluation is that it was difficult to determine which specific program components accounted for the observed significant program effects, due to the large number of program components and inconsistent implementation across sites.

While CASASTART youths experienced improvements in the areas of reduced substance use and criminal behavior, they did not exhibit similar improvements in educational outcomes, such as improved school attendance and higher grades. Although CASASTART youths were significantly more likely to be promoted in school than control youths, the size of this gain was very small.

Top  

Example Sites

Austin, Texas; Bridgeport, Connecticut; Chicago, Illinois; Denver, Colorado; El Paso, Texas; Memphis, Tennessee; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Queen Anne’s County, Maryland; San Antonio, Texas; Savannah, Georgia; Seattle, Washington; St. Mary’s County, Maryland; Ute Mountain Ute Reservation, Colorado; and Wicomico County, Maryland.

Top  

Contact Information

Lawrence F. Murray, LMSW
The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University
633 Third Avenue, 19th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Phone: 212-841-5200
Fax: 212-956-8020
E-mail: lmurray@casacolumbia.org
Web: http://www.casastart.org/

Top  

Available Resources

Materials are available on the Web site of The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University at: http://www.casacolumbia.org/absolutenm/articlefiles/203-casastartsm.pdf (PDF file)


The CASASTART Field Guide, a development and implementation manual, is available for download at: http://www.casacolumbia.org/absolutenm/articlefiles/203-casastart_field_guide_2003.pdf (PDF file)

Top  

Bibliography

Harrell, Adele, Shannon Cavanagh, and Sanjeev Sridharan,    Impact of the Children At Risk Program: Comprehensive Final Report,    Volume I, Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, 1997.  

Harrell, Adele, Shannon Cavanagh, and Sanjeev Sridharan,    Impact of the Children At Risk Program: Comprehensive Final Report,    Volume II, Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, 1998.  

Harrell, Adele, Shannon Cavanagh, and Sanjeev Sridharan, "Evaluation of the Children at Risk Program: Results 1 Year After the End of the Program,"   National Institute of Justice Research Brief,   Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice, November 1999 (http://www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/nij/178914.pdf).   

Murray, Lawrence F., and Steven Belenko, "CASASTART: A Community-Based, School-Centered Intervention for High-Risk Youth,"   Substance Use and Misuse,   Vol. 40, No. 7, 2005, pp. 913-933.  

Top  

Last Reviewed

November 2009

Top