TY - JOUR
T1 - Implementing a comprehensive program for the prevention of conduct problems in rural communities
T2 - The fast track experience
AU - Bierman, Karen L.
AU - Coie, John D.
AU - Dodge, Kenneth A.
AU - Greenberg, Mark T.
AU - Lochman, John E.
AU - McMahon, Robert J.
N1 - Funding Information:
1Thisworkwassupported in part byNationalInstitute of MentalHealth Grants R18MH48043, R18MH50951, R18MH50952, and R18MH50953. The Center for Substance Abuse Prevention also has provided support for Fast Track through a memorandumof agreement with the NIMH. Support has also come from the Department of Education Grant S184U30002, and NIMH grants K05MH00797 and K05MH01027. Appreciation is expressed to the families and schools who supported the Fast Track Program in Pennsylvania, the Bellefonte Area, Tyrone Area, and Mifflin County School Districts. 2Members of the Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group (in alphabetical order) are Karen L. Bierman (PennsylvaniaState University),John D. Coie (Duke University), Kenneth A. Dodge (Vanderbilt University),Mark T. Greenberg (Universityof Washington), John E. Lochman (Duke University), and Robert J. McMahon (University of Washington).
PY - 1997
Y1 - 1997
N2 - Childhood conduct problems are predictive of a number of serious long-term difficulties (e.g., school failure, delinquent behavior, and mental health problems), making the design of effective prevention programs a priority. The Fast Track Program is a demonstration project currently underway in four demographically diverse areas of the United States, testing the feasibility and effectiveness of a comprehensive, multicomponent prevention program targeting children at risk for conduct disorders. This paper describes some lessons learned about the implementation of this program in a rural area. Although there are many areas of commonality in terms of program needs, program design, and implementation issues in rural and urban sites, rural areas differ from urban areas along the dimensions of geographical dispersion and regionalism, and community stability and insularity. Rural programs must cover a broad geographical area and must be sensitive to the multiple, small and regional communities that constitute their service area. Small schools, homogeneous populations, traditional values, limited recreational, educational and mental health services, and politically conservative climates are all more likely to emerge as characteristics of rural rather than urban sites (Sherman, 1992). These characteristics may both pose particular challenges to the implementation of prevention programs in rural areas, as well as offer particular benefits. Three aspects of program implementation are described in detail: (a) community entry and program initiation in rural areas, (b) the adaptation of program components and service delivery to meet the needs of rural families and schools, and (c) issues in administrative organization of a broadly dispersed tricounty rural prevention program.
AB - Childhood conduct problems are predictive of a number of serious long-term difficulties (e.g., school failure, delinquent behavior, and mental health problems), making the design of effective prevention programs a priority. The Fast Track Program is a demonstration project currently underway in four demographically diverse areas of the United States, testing the feasibility and effectiveness of a comprehensive, multicomponent prevention program targeting children at risk for conduct disorders. This paper describes some lessons learned about the implementation of this program in a rural area. Although there are many areas of commonality in terms of program needs, program design, and implementation issues in rural and urban sites, rural areas differ from urban areas along the dimensions of geographical dispersion and regionalism, and community stability and insularity. Rural programs must cover a broad geographical area and must be sensitive to the multiple, small and regional communities that constitute their service area. Small schools, homogeneous populations, traditional values, limited recreational, educational and mental health services, and politically conservative climates are all more likely to emerge as characteristics of rural rather than urban sites (Sherman, 1992). These characteristics may both pose particular challenges to the implementation of prevention programs in rural areas, as well as offer particular benefits. Three aspects of program implementation are described in detail: (a) community entry and program initiation in rural areas, (b) the adaptation of program components and service delivery to meet the needs of rural families and schools, and (c) issues in administrative organization of a broadly dispersed tricounty rural prevention program.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031203524&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031203524&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1023/A:1024659622528
DO - 10.1023/A:1024659622528
M3 - Article
C2 - 9338956
AN - SCOPUS:0031203524
SN - 0091-0562
VL - 25
SP - 493
EP - 514
JO - American Journal of Community Psychology
JF - American Journal of Community Psychology
IS - 4
ER -