Family and Community Violence Prevention (FCVP) Program

Texas A&M University—Corpus Christi Family Life Center

End of Year Evaluation Report 2002 – 2003

IV. End of Year Report

A. Abstract

The TAMU-CC FLC is an after-school and summer violence and delinquency prevention program provided in an after-school format at Haas Middle School. The FLC provides programming in academic, personal, and career development, cultural and recreational enrichment, and family bonding. The program is delivered by full-time staff and part-time mentor, college students. A matched control group experimental design using survey instruments, school data, and qualitative methods is used primarily for the academic year program. A total of 420 hours of programming was provided in the academic year with and additional 120 hours provided in the summer enrichment period.

The mission of the FLC to reduce violence and behavioral problems while improving academic performance, self-esteem, and family bonding appears to have been successfully accomplished. Of 9 objectives, 6 were achieved and the remaining 3 were achieved in part.

Participant youth demonstrated statistically significant changes across the period of the academic program in comparison to themselves and to the control group. The greater actual participation in program hours was correlated to higher levels in the desired behavior and attitude changes.

Data comparing first and second year participants indicate a positive cumulative effect of FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 2 program participation.

The FLC’s results can successfully be used to demonstrate the theoretical validity of the

OJJDP/YOU links between risk and protective factors for juvenile delinquency. The FCVP’s logic model is also validated by these results.

B. Background

The prevention activities at the TAMU-CC FLC will be conducted in the context of the

YOU ongoing community wide comprehensive strategic planning process that now in its seventh year. The process has followed that outlined in the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency

Prevention (OJJDP) documents: Communities that Care Prevention Strategies: A Research

Guide to What Works (2000) and Guide for Implementing the Comprehensive Strategy for

Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders (1998) and has adopted the theoretical model posed in those guides. The Youth Opportunities United Strategic Plan (1999) identified six of

18 risk factors studied as having the greatest effects on juvenile delinquency in Nueces County,

Texas. These risk factors are addressed by the TAMU-CC FLC. Current data indicators show that the risk factors contribute to major problem behaviors among juveniles: delinquency, violence, substance abuse, school dropout, and teenage pregnancy. The data for the indicators is updated here from the most recent YOU reports (Data Collection and Analysis Workgroup, 2002 and Zambrano and Rhoades, 2002).

The most significant risk factor set in Nueces County is family management problems and family conflict. Child abuse investigations 16 14 performed by the Texas Department of Protective and 12 10 Regulatory Services rose from 2,473 in 1996 to 3,068 8 6 4 in 2002 within Nueces County. From these, came 2 0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

State Nueces FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 3

1.211 confirmed victims of child abuse in 2002 for a 12.2% increase over 1996 (see Chart 1).

The rate of confirmed victims per 1,000 children in Nueces County in 2002 was 13.6 while the rate for the State of Texas was only 7.9. From 1994 to 2002, Driscoll Children’s Hospital reports a 127% increase in the number of children treated for child abuse. Texas police reported

a rate for family violence complaints of 8.4 per 1,000 in 16 14 2000 while Nueces County’s rate was 14.0 (see Chart 12 10 8 2). From 1993 to 2001, the number of victims provided 6 4 Chart 2: Rate of Familyservices from Violence the Texas Department of Human 2 0 Services due to family violence increased 88.1% while 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 ReportsState Nueces to Policein Nueces per County 1,000 the increase was 240.9%. In 2002, the Texas rate per 1,000 children placed in foster homes was 4.1 while in Nueces County it was double at 8.3. Finally, in 1999 the U.S. rate of divorce per 1,000 population was 4.0 while in

Texas it was 3.9 and in Nueces County it was 4.8. In 2000, the County rate increased to 4.7.

Clearly, the risk factors of family management problems and family conflict are driving juvenile delinquency in the community.

Locally, extreme economic deprivation is 29,000 evidenced by the fact that in 2000 only 11.3% of the 27,000 25,000 nation’s families were living in poverty, while 14.9% 23,000 21,000 19,000 Chart 3: Per Capita Income of the Texas and 22.3% of the Nueces County 17,000 15,000 families were living in poverty. For the County, this 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 National State County reflects an increase of nearly two percent from 1993.

The per capita income for Nueces County for 2000 was $24,013 (see Chart 3). This was only

86.5% of the Texas per capita income and 81.5% of the U.S. per capita income. While median

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 4 family income in the nation and Texas increased from 2000 to 2001, it decreased 10.3% in

Nueces County. Nueces County has experienced higher unemployment rates than the State and the Nation for several decades. In 2002, the U.S. and Texas unemployment rates were 4.8%, but in Nueces County, it was 5.7% (see Chart 4). It increased to 6.1 in 2002. In Texas, 40.5% of

school children qualified for free or reduced lunches in 2001- 9

8 2002 while in the Corpus Christi Independent School 7

6 District, CCISD, 56.8% qualified.

5 For Nueces County, favorable parental attitudes and 4

3 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 involvement in the problem behavior has been placed into

National State County 2,800 the priority risk 2,700Chart 5: Adult Arrests for Drug 2,600 Abuse Violations factors. After a decline from 1997 to 1999 adult 2,500 2,400 alcohol related arrests increased 4.7% from 1999 to 2,300 2,200 2000. Adult arrests for drug abuse violations 2,100 1997 1998 1999 2000 increased Nueces County 140 120 9.9% in the State from 1997 to 2000, but increased 100 Chart 6: Arrests age 10 – 14 80 15.3% in Nueces County (see Chart 5). Sales tax 60 40 Drugreceipts for theOffenses purchase of mixed beverages have 20 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 increased 25.4% from 1993 to 2001 in the County.

Nueces County Probation Dept. Offenses While adult arrest for property and violent crimes have declined, the evidence indicates that adult use and abuse of alcohol and drugs has increased.

Thus, the examples, the role models, provided to Nueces County children are likely to encourage alcohol and drug use.

This can be seen in the fourth primary risk factor, early onset of the problem behavior.

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 5

The number of arrests of juveniles ages 10 to 14 for alcohol and drug offenses in Nueces County increased 203% from 1993 to 1999 (see Chart 6). However, arrests of juveniles for property and violent crimes have dropped. Nueces County juveniles seeking treatment from the Texas

Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse report 11.2 starting their use of alcohol and marijuana one to Chart43 7: Age at First Use of 11.5 two years earlier than juveniles Statewide. The Alcohol or Drugs Never YOU Survey 2000 indicated that 16% of surveyed 10 10.5 11 students began their drug or alcohol use at age 10 12 13 7.6 and an additional 29.6% began by age 13 (see Chart 16 14+

7). These proportions are higher than those found in Statewide surveys. Nueces County had the highest proportion of births to mothers 17 years of age and younger of any Texas county several times in the past decade. For 2000, the Texas figure was 5.7% while that for Nueces County was

7.2%. This is down from the 1995 high of 9.7% for the County.

In addition to the primary risk factors, the risk factors early academic failure and lack of commitment to school contribute to the delinquency in Nueces County. The proportion of adults in 2000 that had not-completed high school for the 3 2.5Chart 8: Annual Dropout Rate U.S. was 19.6%, for Texas it was 24.4%, and for the 2 1.5 County it was 25.6%. The Texas Education Agency 1 reported in 1996 that the longitudinal drop out rate for 0.5 0 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 the State was 9.1% that was higher than the U.S. rate State CCISD of 5%. The rate for CCISD was significantly higher at 13.4%. The annual dropout rates for CCISD has been higher than that for the State until 1999-

2000 when it tied the State rate then and for 2000-2001 (see Chart 8). The annual attendance

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 6 rates for Nueces County school districts are now similar to that for the State. Test scores for

CCISD students have remained below those for the State as a whole on academic skill tests and on the SAT/ACT tests.

These risk factors operate within a context of adult and juvenile crime out of proportion for the County’s population. A 1999 study of the Corpus Christi Police Department by the

International Association of Chief of Police, Achieving the Commitment, compared Corpus

Christi to the 14 other largest cities in Texas. While Corpus Christi ranked 8th in population, it ranked 1st in overall serious crime rate and 5th in violent crime. It reported that juvenile arrests for aggravated assault increased 228% from 1993 to 1997.

The TAMUCC FLC is presently located at Haas Middle School. Its student and family population is typical of those most affected by the Nueces County risk factors. Within the YOU effort, Haas was selected because middle schools with larger proportions of at-risk students within the Corpus Christi Independent School District (CCISD) were already being served by some form of an after-school intervention program. Recently available year 2000 data for postal zip codes in Nueces County indicate that the 78412 zip code surrounding Haas ranked 15th in the rate of child abuse, 15th in the rate of individuals receiving Temporary Assistance to Need

Families, 14th in the adult arrest rate for drug offenses, 13th in the adult arrest rate for alcohol offenses, and 13th in the rate of adults receiving mental health services per 1,000 population among the 25 postal codes for which data were available. All other zip codes that rated worse than 78412 and that are overlapped by CCISD boundaries contain middle schools with other after-school intervention programs. These data indicate that the risk factors family conflict, extreme economic deprivation, and favorable parental attitudes and involvement in the problem behaviors are present in the part of the community served by Haas Middle School and the

TAMU-CC FLC.

For the 2001-2002 school year, Haas had a total enrollment of 485. Of these, 233 or

48.0% were eligible for free/reduced lunch. This is another data indicator for the risk factor extreme economic deprivation. The risk factors academic failure and lack of commitment to school are also present at Haas. Some 4.4% of 7th graders were retained (not promoted to 8th grade) compared to only 2.5% for the State. The attendance rate in 2000-2001 for Haas was

94.7% that was .2% lower than the previous year and .5% lower than the District. The attendance rate for African-American students at Haas was 95.1% but for Hispanic students it was only 94.2%. The 2002 Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) results for Haas indicated that 91.6% passed the reading portion which was higher than the District’s 90.3%.

However, only 76.6% of Haas students passed the writing portion and 88.6% passed the math portion of the TAAS. The District reported better results with 88.5% passing the writing portion and 89.9% passing the reading portion. Fewer Haas Hispanic and African-American students passed than Haas students as a whole. Only 89.5% of Hispanic students passed the reading portion, 71.1% passed the writing portion, and 86.5% passed the math portion. Similarly, only

87.9% of African-American students passed the reading portion, 63.6% passed the writing portion, and 85.3% passed the math portion.

The student population at Haas also demonstrates the risk factor early initiation of the problem behaviors. A total of 926 disciplinary referrals resulting in corrective action were reported from August through March of the 2002-2003 school year. Of these 23.3% were for forms of assault, 2.3% for sexual assault, and 2.6% for robbery. This is a total of 28.2% of the referrals that were clearly related to violent behavior. An additional 37.2% of the referrals were for behavior that was disruptive of a classroom, an activity, or a part of the school campus. Only

1.7% of the referrals were for alcohol, tobacco, or drug offenses on campus.

Goals for the TAMU-CC FLC for 2002-2003:

1. Academic Development: To increase by 10% the proportion of participants passing the

Texas Assessment of Academic Skills Test by end of academic program.

2. Academic Development: To increase the cumulative Grade Point Average by .05 of all

participants by the end of the academic program.

3. Academic Development: To increase bonding to school by 10% over the baseline

among all participating youth on SBI-R by end of the program year.

4. Cultural Development: To increase the level of affiliation and belonging to their ethnic

group by 10% of all participants as measured by the MEIM by end of the program year.

5. Career Development: To improve attitudes toward employment by 10% over the

baseline of all participants as measured by the CMI by end of the program year.

6. Personal Development-Recreational Enrichment: To reduce the incidence of truancy

among all participants by 10% by the end of the academic program.

7. Personal Development-Recreational Enrichment: To reduce the incidence of in

school behavioral problems by 10% of all participating youth by the end of the academic

program.

8. Personal Development-Recreational Enrichment: To increase self-esteem by 10% of

the participating youth as measured by the Rosenberg scale by the end of the program

9. Family Bonding: To increase family bonding among all participants by 10% as measured

by the FES by the end of the program year.

C. Method

1. Program Design:

The TAMU--CC FLC used the combined program in 2002-2003. In this design, youth that participated in the academic program may also participate in the summer program.

However, the summer program may include additional youth that did not participate in the FLC program for the academic year. Also, the TAMU—CC FLC planned to use a comparison group, pre-test and post-test evaluation design.

2. Participants:

Note that all tables for the evaluation sections are found in the Appendices.

Demographic data for the academic year participants and comparison groups are provided on

Table 1. The program began with 63 participants and ended with completed post-test data for

45. It began with 52 in the comparison group and ended with completed post-test data for 37 with demographics for only 35. The majority of the losses from both groups were due to transfers to other schools or transfers out of the school district. However, five (5) of the comparison group were expelled to the Student Learning and Guidance Center. None of the participants were expelled.

As reported on Table 1, the participant group included 7 more females than males while the comparison group included 8 more males than females at the time of the pre-test in

September 2002. By May 2003 and the post-test, the participant group included 5 more females than males and the comparison group included 7 more males than females. A majority (35) of the participants were Hispanic with the remainder evenly divided between Anglos and a combined Black/Other category. The comparison group was also predominately Hispanic (30) and contained slightly more Black/Other students.

At the post-test, the mean age for participants was 12.69 and for the comparison group it was 13.00. This is not a statistically significant difference.

No difference was found between the two groups in the total number of persons living in the home and the number of adults living in the home. The mean number of persons in the home for participants was 5.16 and for comparisons it was 4.30. This difference is not statistically significant. The mean number of adults in the participants’ homes was 2.14 and for comparisons it was 2.16.

Marital status of the parents for the groups at post-test was similar, but with participants indicating more separated or divorced parents and fewer married parents. For participants, 27.3% reported married parents, 43.2% reported separated or divorced parents, and

22.7% reported never married parents. For comparisons, 34.3% reported married parents, 34.3% reported divorced parents, and 20.0% reported never married parents. The groups were also similar in reported contact with parents. Of participants 84.4% reported daily contact with their mother and 31.1% reported daily contact with their fathers. This compares to 82.9% and 51.4% respectively for comparisons. The difference in contact with fathers (when coded into 3 categories) is statistically significant with Chi Square = 6.896, Phi = .294 at p = .032.

At the pre-test, 32.2% of the participants and 33.3% of the comparisons indicated that they had been suspended from school in the previous year. Of the participants at post-test,

24.4% had been suspended, but none had been expelled in the year. For the post-test comparison group, 41.2% had been suspended and 2.9% had been expelled in the year.

3. Instruments:

The pre- and post-test instruments used at the TAMU-CC FLC include those in the common cross-site set required from all programs by the Family and Community Violence

Prevention Program. These instruments include those on the following list.

a. The Violence Risk Assessment Inventory that includes a Violence Risk Index of 20

items covering the past three months and a High Risk Index of three items covering the

past six months.

b. The Wide Range Achievement Test 3rd Revision that measures the respondent’s

spelling and math achievement and provides standardized scores based on age.

c. The School Bonding Index Revised that consists of 24 items summed into four scales:

Experience, Involvement, Delinquency, and Pride.

d. The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale that provides a single score for self-esteem from a

ten item questionnaire.

e. The Family Environment Scales that contain 90 items summed into ten scales:

Cohesion, Expressiveness, Conflict, Intellectual-Cultural Orientation, Independence,

Achievement Orientation, Active-Recreational Orientation, Moral-Religious Emphasis,

Organization, and Control.

f. The Multigroup Ethnic Identity Measure that consists of 12 items summed into two

scales: Ethnic Identity Search and Affiliation.

g. The Career Maturity Inventory that consists of 25 questions resulting in a single score

concerning the respondents attitude about employment.

In addition to the cross-site instruments, a revised version of the Youth Opportunities United

Middle School/Junior High Student Survey—2000 was used (a copy is appended). The YOU

Survey is primarily concerned with behavior measures. These include tobacco, alcohol and drug use, truancy, carrying weapons at school, and victimization measures. It includes questions concerning the youth’s sense of safety, and participation in programs and services. The revision involved the deletion of questions that have not been found to be useful in prior analysis and the inclusion of twelve (12) evaluative questions. These questions solicit opinions about the

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 12 programming of the FLC and its effects from the participants.

4. Procedure: The procedure section describes

a) how your FLC implemented the various prevention activities to facilitate each of the objectives at the end of the background section; and

The TAMU—FLC collected quantitative data using the approved FCVP cross-site instruments, the YOU HAAS 2002-2003 Survey Instrument, and official school data indicators.

The cross-site instruments and the YOU Survey were administered as a pre-test in September

2002 and as a post-test in May 2003 within the time limits scheduled by the FCVP.

This year, the pre- and post-tests were facilitated by gaining permission from the

Principal to test during the school day. For both testing cycles, groups of students were called from their classrooms to a testing room (cafeteria for the pre-test and a classroom for the posttest). Testing sessions were held in the morning and afternoon after a lunch break. A different group was called each day Tuesday through Thursday during the testing weeks. The Friday and days early the next week were used to complete testing for students that had not completed one or more of the questionnaires. Testing was supervised by FLC Evaluator, staff, mentors, and staff of the Social Science Research Center. The persons participating in the testing processes were briefed about the process and instructed in theWRAT3 procedures prior to testing.

The cross-site instrument answer sheets and WRAT3 answer sheets were examined for completeness, duplicated and sent to the FCVP headquarters. For the pre-test, the checking was apparently inadequate. The FCVP Evaluation team reported that data was missing on the forms.

Due to the time to correct the data, we did not receive the data file until the first week of

December. At this time, it was discovered that much of the data had been scanned incorrectly.

Names, identification numbers, demographic data, and responses to questions on the instruments were missing and incorrect for almost every case. The staff of the Social Science Research

Center spent three and one-half work-days check coding and re-entering the data. This was possible due to the duplicated forms retained at the FLC. However, data for the FES and

WRAT3 were lost for some in both the participant and the comparison group. The late arrival of the data file and its poor condition dramatically delayed the analysis of the pre-test data and the completion of the Semi-Annual Report.

The data file received from the FCVP from the post-test was more timely and the data file was much more complete and correct. In the check coding process, most of the missing, incorrect, or misread data appeared to be due to light pencil marking in the bubbles or duplicate marks that were inadequately erased. The check coding process did not take as much time as with the pre-test. The process of computing the standard scores discovered that a conversion table for the CMI was not in the current edition of the FCVP Instrument Scoring Manual or on the FCVP web-page. This had resulted in miss calculating the CMI and its standard score. The problem was corrected and the issue brought to the attention of the FCVP Evaluator.

The FLC Evaluator enlisted the aid of a graduate class, CRIJ 5351 Seminar in

Management: Planning and Evaluation, in the Summer Session I to provide some analysis and interpretation of the YOU Survey data.

The school data indicators for the 2001-2002 program year were collected directly from records at Haas Middle School. This process was used for these data indicators for the Semi-

Annual Report. This process loses data for any student that leaves Haas Middle School, but remains in the school district as the leaving student’s file is no longer maintained at Haas. This year, the end of year school data indicators were requested directly from the Corpus Christi

Independent School District. The District Office provided an Excel file by name and FLC identification number for the school data indicators. This is a more complete data set than could have been obtained from Haas.

D. Results

1. Findings from Program Evaluation

a. Proximal measures

i. Academic Development  WRAT-3

Pre- and Posttest means for participants and comparisons for the WRAT-3 Spelling,

Math, and Reading Raw, Standard, Percentile, and Grade Equivalent are found on FCVP Form

EOY03-03. For participants the Post-Test mean is higher at a statistically significant level for the Spelling Raw and Grade Equivalent means, the Math Raw mean, and the Reading Raw,

Standard Score, Percentile, and Grade Equivalent means. The greatest change is found with the

Reading data and reflects the emphasis placed on reading improvement at Haas Middle School and supported by the TAMU-CC FLC. The pre- and posttest participant means for the WRAT-3

Math and Reading scores were different at a statistically significant level on the Wilcoxon

Signed Rank Test (See Table 2).

For the comparisons, on the Spelling Raw score indicated a statistically significant difference between the pre- and posttests.

The WRAT-3 Spelling and Reading Standard Scores for participants were higher than those for comparisons. As noted on Table 3, these differences were statistically significant.

For participants, no variation in any of theWRAT-3 part’s standard scores were found by gender, age, ethnicity, or parental marital status. While not statistically significant, youth in their second

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 15 year of the program had higher Spelling, Math, and Reading standard scores than those in their first program year (see Table 4).

 School Bonding Index-R (SBI) (Organize data by the four subscales from the SBI.)

A review of the means and analysis results for both participants and comparisons on

FORM EOY03-4 indicates that no differences were found in the pre- and posttest SBI Subscale scores. This was confirmed by the fact that no statistically significant differences between pre- and posttest scores for either group were found for the four SBI Subscales using the Wilcoxon

Test as reported on Table 2. The posttest means for the participants and comparisons were not statistically different from each other for the four SBI Subscales. First and second year participants did not have significantly different posttest means for any of the SBI Subscales.

For participants, the SBI Subscale posttest means did not vary by gender, age, ethnicity, or parental marital status for participants. These means did not vary by gender, age, or parental marital status for comparisons. However, the comparison SBI Pride Subscale varied among the ethnic groups at a statistically significant level. The comparison posttest Pride mean for African

Americans was only 89.244 while it was 102.936 for Mixed Ethnicity, 103.296 for Hispanics, and 105.901 for Anglos (F = 3.168, p = .037).

ii. Personal Development  Rosenberg Self Esteem (RSE)

The RSE Self-Esteem Scale data are reported on FORM EOY03-5. Both the participant and comparison posttest means were higher than the respective group’s pre-test means at a statistically significant level. The increase in the participant mean (8.9 points) was nearly double that of the comparison mean (4.54 points). The Wilcoxon Test findings on Table 2 also indicate that the posttest means were significantly higher for both groups than the pretest

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 16 means.

Importantly, the participant RSE mean, while lower on the pretest than the comparison mean, is higher on the posttest as reported on Table 3 and the difference almost reaches the level of statistical significance required. Again, while not the difference is not statistically significant, the second year participant RSE mean is higher than the first year participant mean (Table 4).

The posttest RSE means for participants and comparisons did not vary by gender, age, ethnicity, or parental marital status.

iii. Cultural Development  Multi-Ethnic Identity Measure (MEIM) – 12 and over only (Organize data by the two subscales used in the MEIM.)

The pre- and posttest results for the MEIM Identification and Affiliation Subscales are reported on FORM EOY03-06. The raw mean scores for both Subscales and the Affiliation

Standardized mean did not vary significantly between the pre- and posttest. The Identification

Standardized score increased between the pre- and posttests for both the participants and the comparisons. The resulting posttest means were significantly different from the pretest means for both groups on the Identification Standard score. The statistical significance of the increased

Identification Standard Scores is confirmed by the Wilcoxon Test scores reported on Table 2.

The posttest mean Standard scores for the participants were slightly higher than those for the comparisons. The Affiliation Standard score for participants was 4 points higher than that for the comparisons. This difference almost reached the required level of statistical significance.

In the comparison between second and first year participants, the second year participants had higher scores on both subscales, but the difference was not statistically significant.

No statistical differences between the pre- and posttest mean standard scores for

either subscale were found by gender, age, ethnicity, or parental marital status for either group.

iv. Career Development  Career Maturity Index (CMI)– 12 and over only

Both the Raw CMI Score and the CMI-T Score increased between the pre- and posttests for the participants (see FORM EOY03-7. The larger participant posttest means were different from the pretest means at a statistically significant level. This statistically significant difference was confirmed by the Wilcoxon Test results reported on Table 2.

The participant posttest CMI-T Score mean was higher than that for the comparisons and this difference was statistically significant (Table 3).

The second year participant posttest CMI-T Score was higher than that for first year participants, but the difference was not statistically significant.

For participants the CMI-T Scores for the posttest did not vary by gender, ethnicity, age or parental marital status. For the comparisons, females had a higher CMI-T Score mean (53.785) than males (46.237) at a statistically significant level (F = 9.310, p = .004). Also, for comparisons, the CMI-T Score mean increased as contact with fathers decreased. Comparisons with daily contact with fathers had a CMI-T Score mean of 47.94 while those with infrequent contact the mean was 48.30, and for those with no contact with a father the mean was 58.48. The differences in means was statistically significant (F = 3.393, p = .048).

v. Family Bonding  12 and over – Family Environmental Scale (FES) (Organize data by the 10 subscales used in the FES.)

Pre- and Posttest means for participants and comparisons on the 10 FES Subscales are

found on FORM EOY03-8A. For participants, mean standard FES Subscale scores increased for

all scales except the Expressiveness and Conflict Subscales. The higher participant posttest

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 18 means for the Independence, Achievement, Moral-Religious, and Control Subscales were significantly different from the pretest means. The lower participant posttest mean for the

Conflict Subscale was significantly different from the pretest mean. The participant pre- and posttest significant differences were confirmed by the Wilcoxon Test results reported on Table 2.

Additionally, the Wilcoxon Test indicates that the difference between the pre- and posttest scores for the Recreational Subscale was statistically significant.

For the comparisons, the posttest means for the Expressiveness, Independence, and

Control Subscales were significantly different. Comparison group posttest scores were also higher than the pretest scores for all but the Expressiveness and Conflict Subscales. The

Wilcoxon Test for the comparisons indicated significant change in the Independence and Control

Subscales (Table 2).

On the posttest, the participant mean scores for the Cohesion, Independence,

Achievement, Intellectual, Recreational, and Moral Subscales were higher than those for the comparisons, but not at statistically significant levels (Table 3). The participant FES Control

Subscale mean on the posttest was higher and significantly different from that of the comparisons. The posttest participant mean scores for the Expressiveness, Conflict, and

Organization Subscales were lower than those for the comparisons, but not at statistically significant levels.

No statistically significant differences between the posttest FES Subscale scores for first and second year participants were found. Disappointingly, second year participants had higher

Conflict Subscale scores. Also, second year participants had desired higher scores on the

Achievement, Intellectual, Recreation, Moral, and Control Subscales than first year participants.

No differences were found between pre- and posttest Subscale mean scores for

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 19 participants by gender, ethnicity, or parental marital status. Several FES Subscale scores appear to have varied significantly by the participants’ age as reported on Table 5.

vi. Recreational Enhancement  12 and over – Active–Recreational Subscale of FES

Participant and comparison pre- and posttest mean standard scores for the Active-

Recreational Subscale of the FES are found on FORM EOY03-9A. Please, note the lower number of cases for on the pretest FES than for other measures. This relates to data being missing for the FES in the data file returned from the FCVP headquarters. The attempt made to acquire the original FES forms and enter the data locally failed.

The data indicate that the posttest means for both participants and comparisons are higher than their respective pretest means, but the differences are not statistically significant using the t- test. The Wilcoxon Test (Table 2) indicates that the posttest participant Active-Recreational

Subscale scores are significantly different from the pretest. This was not true for comparisons.

While the posttest participant mean on the Active-Recreational Subscale was higher than that for the comparisons, the difference was not statistically significant at an acceptable level

(see Table 3).

Second year participants had a higher Active-Recreational Subscale mean than first year participants, but the difference did not reach an acceptable level of statistical significance (see

Table 4).

As reported in the previous section, the FES Active-Recreational subscale did not vary by gender, ethnicity or parental marital status for participants. Younger participants had significantly higher Active-Recreational Subscale scores than older participants.

The FES Active-Recreational Subscale scores for comparisons did not vary by gender, ethnicity, age, or parental marital status.

vii. Non FCVP Instruments – Incorporate relevant statistical data related to outcomes for each instrument used.

The YOU Middle School Survey (modified) was used in the TAMU—CC FLC pre- and posttest evaluation. The participant and comparison data are reported on Table 18 for 14 questions. Data are provided for the original 5 site YOU study from 2000, the FLC participants’ posttest in May 2001, the participants’ and comparisons’ posttest in May 2002, and the participants’ and comparisons’ posttest in May 2003. Each figure represents the proportion of the tested group that responded affirmatively to the question.

For 2003 participants, experience with physical attacks and robbery were slightly higher than in 2002, but lower than 2001 and the YOU baseline data. Considerably more 2003 comparisons report being robbed than 2003 participants or 2002 comparisons. Of importance for the Haas Middle School environment, both participants and comparisons in 2003 report fewer incidences of theft and bullying at school than in 2002.

However, only 54.5% of participants and 60.5% of comparisons reported that they are never afraid that someone will attack or harm them at school on the 2003 posttest. Also only

61.4% of participants and 70.3% of comparisons reported that they were never afraid of attack or harm on the way to and from school. Only 65.7% of participants indicated that they do not stay away from school entrances due to fear of harm while 92.1% of comparisons so indicated.

Conversely, 2003 participants felt safer in hallways and restrooms than comparisons. For 2003 participants, 97.7% indicated they do not stay away from halls or restrooms due to fear of harm while only 89.5% of comparisons reported this for hallways and 84.2% for restrooms.

Few 2003 participants report experience with family violence. In addition to the low proportions reporting being hit by objects by their guardians, no participants reported being punched by their female guardian and only one reported this from their male guardian this year.

Yet, 15.5% report being slapped by their female guardian and 4.4% report being slapped by their male guardian. The experience with family violence of 2003 comparisons is similar. One comparison youth reported being punched by the female guardian and two reported being punched by the male guardian. For 2003 comparisons, 5.2% reported being slapped by their female guardian and 12.9% reported being slapped by their male guardian.

Only one participant and one comparison youth reported being sexually assaulted by someone they did not know on the 2003 posttest.

The 2003 participants report earning higher grades than comparisons on the post-test. Of participants, only 13.9% report usually earning “C” and “D” grades while 60.5% report earning

“B’s” and 25.6% report earning “A’s.” For comparisons, 27.8% report earning in the “C-D” range while 58.3% report earning “B’s” and only 13.9% report earning “A’s.” For 2002-2003,

67.7% of participants reported earning “A” or “B” grades on the pre-test. This increased to

86.1% on the post-test.

The school bonding issue is examined by using the 11 questions about participation in extracurricular activities. When totaled, the 2003 participants report participation in an average of 3.585 activities while the comparisons report only 2.105. This difference is statistically significant (F = 15.877, p = .001). When participation in the FLC is added, the 2003 participants had a mean of 4.585 activities which was higher than the 2002 FLC mean of 4.1. The comparison mean appears to have dropped from 3 to 2 activities between 2002 and 2003. For

2002-2003, the participant pre-test mean of reported activities was 3.185 which increased to

4.585 by the post-test. This was an increase of 43.9% in participation. The comparison group increase was only 31%. On a related dimension, 43.2% of 2003 participants report attending church at least one time per week while only 36.4% of comparisons reported this.

The TAMU-CC FLC uses additional measures of Academic Development derived from official school records that include grade point averages and scores on standardized tests. The final yearly grade point average for participants was 89.368 while for the comparison youth it was 86.489 (Table 8). The higher participant average was different at a statistically significant level.

The Corpus Christi Independent School District was mandated by the State to change to a new set of standardized tests known as the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS).

A greater proportion of participants passed the Math, Reading, and Writing portions of this test than comparison youth (Table 9). For the Math and Writing portions the higher success rate for participants was statistically different at a significant level. When test score means were compared, the participant means for the Math and Reading portions were higher than those for the comparison youth at a statistically significant level (Table 10). Too few of either group took the Writing portion of the test to make analysis meaningful.

b. Distal measures

i. Violence Risk Assessment Inventory (VRAI) (Use FCVP Form EOY03-1A for under age 12, form EOY03-1B for 12& over.)

Data for the Violence Risk Assessment Inventory are found on Form EOY03-1B and

Tables 2 and 3. The participant’s VRAI T-Score and VRAI high risk T-Score means did not change at a statistically significant level between the pre- and post-tests. The High Risk score mean declined 2.3 points. A similar decline was found with the comparison youth, but again, differences in the pre- and post-test VRAI T-Score and VARI High Risk T-Score means were not statistically significant.

For participants, the VRAI T-Score and VARI High Risk T-Score means did not demonstrate any significant differences by gender, age, ethnicity, contact with father, suspension,

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 23 or marital status of guardians.

For comparison youth, the VRAI T-Score and VARI High Risk T-Score means did not vary by gender, ethnicity, marital status of guardians, or suspension. The comparison youth’s

VRAI High Risk T-Score mean increased with age at a statistically significant level (F = 4.268, p

= .023). The youngest youth recorded a mean of 45.96 while those age 13 recorded a mean of

46.34 and those 14 or older recorded a mean of 56.16. The comparison youth’s VRAI High Risk

T-score increased as contact with their father decreased. While the change was notable moving from 50.47 for those with frequent contact, to 55.20 for those with moderate contact and to 64.49 for those with little or no contact, the results are not statistically significant as the number of cases is too small.

The VRAI High Risk T-Score means on the post-test are essentially the same for the participants and the comparison youth. While the VRAI T-Score mean for participants is 3.2 points lower than the comparison youth on the post-test, the difference did not reach an acceptable level of statistical significance (Table 3). Part of reason that no difference was found on these post-test VRAI scale means is that the comparison group lost youth with high scores.

Five of the comparison youth were expelled from Haas and could not be reached for the posttest. Thus, youth that would have likely scored high on the VRAI post-test scales were not included in the calculation of the comparison youth means.

The VRAI T-Score mean for second year participants was lower than that for the first year participants, but the differences did not reach an acceptable level of statistical significance

(Table 4).

For participants, the post-test VRAI T-score was significantly correlated with the VRAI

High Risk T-score, the SBI Delinquency scale and the FES Conflict scale (Table 6). Also the

High Risk scale and SBI Delinquency scale were significantly correlated wity the FES Conflict scale. These data are important in that they demonstrate that the measures of dimensions that are theoretically related to each other are actually related within the youth’s responses. The data provide greater confidence that the measures are actually alternate measures of the violence- delinquency phenomenon. This lays the foundation for belief that correlations between measures of protective factors and these risks indicate evidence of programmatic effects.

Table 7 reports data that demonstrate this latter issue. If the measures of violence and delinquency are valid and the measures of school bonding, self-esteem, and family bonding are valid, then changes in the latter should be negatively correlated with changes in the former. The

FCVP Logic Model proposes this. FLC programming should improve protective factors such as school and family bonding and self-esteem. Improvements in protective factors should reduce participation in violence and delinquency. The data on Table 7 indicate that the higher the SBI

Experience, Involvement, and Pride scores for participants were for 2002-2003, the lower were their VRAI, SBI Delinquency, and FES Conflict scores. Similar results were found with the

Rosenberg Self-Esteem measure and the FES Cohesion, Organization, and Intellectual indexes.

As noted on Table 7, many of these correlations were statistically significant. The strongest relationships appear to be within the SBI where higher scores on the Experience, Involvement, and Pride scales are negatively correlated to the SBI Delinquency scale. Also a strong set of correlations is found between higher scores on the FES Cohesion scale (a measure of family bonding) and lower scores on the VRAI, SBI Delinquency, and FES Conflict scales.

ii. Non FCVP Instruments

Official school data have been used as distal measures that include office referrals, in school suspension, out of school suspension, expulsion, unexcused absences, and unexcused tardy as reported on Table 8. For each of these, the average number reported for participants was

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 25 lower than for comparison youth. The differences for in school suspensions, expulsion, unexcused absences, and a sum of all discipline actions were significantly lower at an acceptable level statistically. These findings are highly important as they relate directly to FLC goals and are behavioral measures not influenced by variation in interpretation of questions by the youth.

The latter may have an effect on the indexes and scales on the cross site instruments and the

YOU Survey questions.

The YOU Survey provides questions related to distal measures, also (Table 18). For participants, the proportions reporting the use of cigarettes, liquor, and marijuana are slightly higher than for the 2002 participants, but are considerably lower than the 2001 participants and the YOU 2000 respondents. This year no FLC participant reported using cocaine. On the 2003 posttest, participants and comparisons report similar lifetime use of cigarettes and beer. A greater proportion of participants reported using liquor and marijuana than comparisons. When lifetime use was summed across all seventeen questions about cigarettes, alcohol, and drugs, those on cigarettes and alcohol only, and those on drugs only, no significant differences in substance use was found between participants and comparisons.

Fewer 2003 participants reported skipping school than in 2002 or 2001. Fewer 2003 participants reported skipping school than the comparisons.

No 2003 participant or comparison youth reported carrying a knife to school on the posttest. Similar proportions of 2003 participants (8.9%) and comparisons (7.7%) reported carrying a gun to school.

2. Presentation of additional evaluation findings derived from qualitative methods.

a. Methods

The evaluator used direct observation techniques by visiting the FLC generally on a

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 26 weekly basis. Times and days were varied so that all processes from preparation, sign in by the youth, programming, and closing of the days’ session could be observed. Observations were conducted in the FLC Office-Activity space, classrooms, computer lab, gym, cafeteria, school playing fields, and patio.

Evaluative information was collected by informal interviews with the FLC Director,

Prevention Specialist, and Mentors. Brief interviews were conducted with parents at family bonding activities. Information was obtained during meetings between the FLC staff and the

Haas Principal.

b. Results

The results of the qualitative interviews for the fall semester at Haas Middle School were reported in the Semi-Annual Report. It was reported that the parents/guardians believed that the

FLC program was improving their children’s academic performance, contributing to their personal development (including improved self-esteem, better cooperation and relationships with peers, and better behavior), providing recreational entertainment, and increasing family bonding.

The themes noted above from the fall interviews were repeated in the interviews of parents/guardians for the spring. Examples of comments are below.

 Grandmother of Hispanic male: He has really enjoyed the program this year.

It has really helped him. His grandfather is disabled and was ill with the flu

so he missed classes and got a lot of zeros. The FLC tutoring helped pull him

back to the A-B honor roll.

 Guardian of Hispanic male: He likes the program and gets good exercise. It

keeps him out of trouble. He can talk to the mentors. They are very

understanding.

 Mother of Anglo Female: I love the program. I have a much younger

daughter and she is problematic. This one is not. The FLC has helped with

her grades. My son said to have her join the program because he was in it and

liked it. She has problems with math and I could not help her. The program

has helped her with the advanced math.

 Father of Hispanic male: I like that it gives incentives. His attitude has

changed. He looks forward to doing things. His school performance is better.

There has been a definite improvement in his behavior. He will talk to us

instead of throwing a tantrum. He looks forward to activities and tells us

about what is going on. He had been to ask for help in math, but now is not

afraid to ask the mentors for help.

 Father of a Hispanic female: The program is useful to the children. It teaches

them responsibility and they can earn rewards. It provides role models. It has

help with her grades. Got her to do her homework. It has had good impact on

her maturity and self-esteem. It is good that the program involves the children

in groups and gets the family involved.

 Mother of Anglo male: He has enjoyed it a lot. It has had a really good effect

on him. He was always shy and never involved. This got him involved. He

stayed on the A-B honor roll all year long. He had mad good friends in the

program.

 Mother of Hispanic male: It was a very good program. My son liked it. It

helped him with homework and I think he learned more when he was in the

program. It could give a little more help in specific classes.

 Mother of Hispanic female: She liked the program. It was very successful

this year, her second year. Her grades improved dramatically. She was shy

and blossomed this year. Her self-esteem increased tremendously. I would

recommend the program to anyone. You need to get the booster club back

into operation. She changed so much that she was selected as the Princess for

the 7th grade class and was nominated for most popular.

The Mentors believed that the FLC Program was managed well and that the program had positive effects on the children. Examples of he Mentors’ comments are below.

 The program went great this year. The new mentors fit in fine. The kids did

not listen much at first, but then got better. The Second year kids really

improved. Some who had graduated and were in high school came back to

visit. The transition with the new director and then change in Prevention

Specialist went smoothly. Everybody stepped up to take care of things with

the vacancy in Prevention specialist. We could use more training. He had

more this year, but need more. We had more communication with the

teachers this year.

 We had a girl participant this year that was very depressed and had low-self-

esteem. Now she is more open and positive. She is more active. We go

through the transition of Prevention Specialists well. The year ran very well.

Instead of tokens and a story we might want to give individual rewards.

Maybe give 3 or so per month. We need to recognize the kids more often.

 The loss of the Prevention Specialist brought the mentors together stronger,

more close-knit. I think we need to do the sports fest again.

 We could use more consistency with rewards. We have points and stars and

tokens. We should reduce to fewer. We need to get the kids input on

activities more.

 The program went fine this year. Tony helped with the structure. We got

more organized. It went ok with the Prevention Specialist vacant. We had

one female that was very depressed and was a loner. She matured a lot and

made friends. One male was very hyperactive and had no attention span. He

is always on task now. I think we need a formal end of year banquet.

 We had good success with some kids. One female was into theft and the FLC

intervened. We had her write a letter to her mentor to apologize. She got

involved in the program and is on good behavior now. We have two brothers

that were always running around and not paying attention. Now they often

offer to help pick up and clean up trash around the school. They have good

behavior now.

 I have seen improvement in the kids anger management. We do get feed back

from teachers so we can focus tutoring. AR was in 7th grade last year and she

was always in trouble with the dress code and arguing with the other kids.

This year we tried to get her involved in all sports through our intervention.

We talk to her about getting involved. She has been and she is doing much

better.

Also, the YOU Survey provided twelve evaluative questions about the FLC programming. The participants were asked to rate the FLC program’s effects on their knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behaviors. These data may be found on Table 19. The analysis

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 30 of the YOU Survey data was supported by five (5) graduate students in a Summer Session I graduate class CRIJ 5351 Planning and Evaluation. Each student examined the results for questions concerning two FLC Objectives and provided the Evaluator with opinions. The classroom discussion and the results reported by the students have been incorporated into this report.

More than 70 percent of the 2003 participants report that the FLC program helped to improve their school performance, improved their behavior at school and home, kept them from being violent or using alcohol or drugs, and helped them get along better with other students.

Also, over 70% indicated that the FLC program increased their knowledge about the environment, cultures, nutrition, and jobs and careers. Only 63.7% reported that the FLC program helped to keep them from feeling angry.

The final column on Table 19 reports the change in the percentage responding that they agreed or strongly agree with the statements between the May 2002 and May 2003 posttests. In all but one dimension, an increase in the proportions is found. Increases at 10 or more percent are found in both behavior and knowledge improvement dimensions. The highest improvement appears to be with improved behavior at home (20.4 percentage points higher). The one negative change was very small (0.6) with keeping the respondents from feeling angry.

V. Discussion

In this section, each of the nine (9) objectives of the TAMU-CC FLC will be discussed in relation to the findings presented in the Results section above.

Objective 1 targeted an increase of 10% in the number of participants passing the Texas

Assessment of Academic Skills TAAS) test. This objective was written while it appeared that the TAAS exam would still be in use. However, the TAAS was discontinued and the Texas

Assessment of Knowedge and Skills (TAKS) set of tests was instituted in the spring of 2003.

The TAKS was thought to be more difficult than the older TAAS. As noted, 91.7% of the participants passed the Reading portion of the test while 71.4% passed the math and 100% passed the reading portion. While the tests are dissimilar, this is a similar proportion passing the new harder TAKS as passed the older TAAS for reading and math. Too few participants took the writing part of the TAAS last year to make a comparison viable. Note that scores on the

TAKS parts were higher for second year participants than first year participants and that scores for participants were significantly higher than those for comparison youth.

Given that Objective 1 is targeted at improvement on standardized tests, it may be concluded from the results noted above that this Objective has been met in spirit while it cannot be directly tested with the available data. Reinforcing this conclusion are the findings that the participants scored significantly better on the Spelling and Reading portions of the WRAT3 than comparison youth at the post-test and that the participant post-test scores for the Reading and

Spelling grade equivalent were significantly higher than their pre-tests.

Objective 2 required that the cumulative grade point average for the participants be increased by .05. Phrased differently, this is a .05 point increase in the participants’ mean of annual grade point averages. Objective 2 has been accomplished. The 2002-2003 end of year grade point average for participants at 89.36 was 2.68 points higher than the 86.68 end of year grade point average for 2001-2002. Of the 47 participants for which data are available, 26 or

58.3% had a grade point increase of 1.0 or higher. The participant grade point average is higher than that for the comparison youth and the increase from the previous year is much higher (2.68 points compared to .58 points). Supporting the conclusion that Objective 2 was met are the qualitative observations that both parents in interviews and the participants on the YOU Survey

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 32 indicate the program helped them do better academically. The YOU Survey data also indicate greater improvement for participants from the pre- to post-tests on self reported grades than for comparison youth. The proportion of participants that reported typically earning “A” and “B” grades rose from 67.7% on the pre-test to 86.1% on the post-test. The proportions for the comparison youth changed from 60.0% to 72.2%.

The quantitative results for Objective 3 that requires the improvement in the SBI-R scale data by 10% indicate that this objective was not met. Participant SBI-R scale scores did not increase by 10% nor were their pre- and post-test means significantly different.

Some progress in bonding to school may be found in the alternative behavioral measures found on the YOU Survey. On the pre-test, participants indicated participation in and average of

3.185 extracurricular activities beyond the FLC. This increased to 3.585 on the post-test for an increase of 12.5% in the mean of activities. Further, the FLC participants were significantly more active in extracurricular activities than the comparison youth. The details are revealing.

While the participants and comparison youth were similarly involved in athletics, choir, and drama/speech, participants were much more involved in the spirit club, student government, academic clubs, and use of the after school computer lab. These activities appear to indicate greater bonding to school by the participants than the comparison youth.

Objective 4 required the improvement of the participants’ belonging (Identification) and

Affiliation scores on the MEIM by 10%. Objective 4 has been partially met. The participant’s

Identification scale mean on the post-test was significantly higher than their pre-test mean. The post-test increase was 20.6% over the pre-test. The participants’ Affiliation scale means were not different between testing periods at a significant level. Their post-test mean was 4.22% higher than their pre-test mean. Thus, on one index the objective is met, but on the other the

10% level of change is not met.

Supporting the MEIM results are two dimensions of the YOU Survey. 81.8% of the participants in this year indicated that the program increased their knowledge of their environment which is an increase of 10.4 percentage points over the 2001-2002 results. On the question of whether the FLC program increased their knowledge of Texas cultures, 70.4% indicated that it had. This is only 2.6% higher than the proportion reporting this in the previous year.

Objective 5 has been accomplished. The FLC was to improve the participants’ attitude towad employment by a mean score increase of 10% on the CMI. A statistically significant increase in the participant CMI mean score was recorded between the pre- and post-test. The increase of 12.817 points was a 29.65% increase in the participant mean. Also, the participant post-test mean was significantly higher than that for the comparison group.

Supporting the conclusion that Objective 5 was met is the fact that 84.4% of the participants reported that the FLC program improved their knowledge of careers on the YOU survey. This is an increase of 10.2 percentage points from the previous year’s results.

The Personal Development and Recreation Objective 6, to reduce truancy among participants by 10 percent was achieved. The participants recorded fewer unexcused absences than the comparison youth. This difference was statistically significant. The mean of unexcused absences for participants in 2003-2003 at 1.187 was a 50% reduction over the 4.38 mean for

2001-2001. These official school data are supported by the self-reports of skipping school on the

YOU Survey. In 2001-2002, 20.3% of the participants reported skipping school. This figure dropped by 34.5% to 13.3% in this year’s results.

Objective 7 is the reduction of in-school behavior problems by 10% as measured by

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 34 officially recorded disciplinary actions. First, the participants had significantly fewer disciplinary actions than the comparison group. Second, the second year participants had fewer disciplinary actions than first year participants. Both of these findings indicate that the FLC program is having the desired effect. Third, the participant disciplinary action mean for 2002-

2003 was 2.24 which is 21.4% lower than the 2001-2002 participant mean.

Supporting the conclusion that Objective 7 has been met are findings from the YOU

Survey. The data indicate that the proportions of participants that report use of beer, liquor, and cocaine have decreased. The qualitative questions indicated that in comparison to 2001-2002 results, 12.1% more participants reported the program improved their behavior at school, 12% more reported it kept them from use of alcohol or drugs, 12% more reported it helped them get along better with other students, and 8.5% more reported that it kept them from being violent.

No change was recorded in participants reporting that the program helped them keep from being angry.

Objective 8 to increase the participant’s self-esteem as measured by a 10% increase in their mean score on the Rosenberg Self-esteem measure appears to have been accomplished. A statistically significant increase from pre- to post-test on the Rosenberg measure was recorded for participants. The 2002-2003 participant post-test mean on the Rosenberg was 48.3% higher than their post-test mean in 2001-2002.

The YOU Survey results support the conclusion that Objective 8 was met. The 79.5% of participants that indicated the program helped them feel better about themselves was 11.7 percentage points higher than the 2001-2002 result.

Objective 9 required the FLC to improve the participant’s family bonding as measured by the FES by 10%. The results indicate that either Objective 9 was achieved or it was achieved in

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 35 part. Statistically significant improvements in mean scores were achieved for the Conflict,

Independence, Achievement, Moral-Religious, and Control FES scales between the participant pre- and post-test results using the t-test. Additionally, the Wilcoxon test results indicate that significant change in the desired direction occurred with the Cohesion and Active-Recreational scales.

When the percent change in each of the 10 scales is calculated and averaged across them, a 12.8% change in the desired direction is obtained. The percent change by scale varies from a

–7.2 for Expressiveness, to a 1.7% for Organization, 4.37% for Intellectual, 8.4% for Moral-

Religious, 8.51% for Active-Recreational, 9.3% for Conflict, 11.67% for Cohesion, 16.4% for

Achievement, 32.2% for Independence, and 43.2% for Control. Thus, four of the individual scales increased by 10% and the mean change was greater than 10%.

Supporting the conclusion that Objective 9 has been accomplished is the finding from the

YOU Survey that indicates 70.4% agree that the FLC program improved their behavior at home.

This proportion is 20 percentage points higher than the finding for the previous year.

Note also that, where the inquiry was made in the qualitative interviews, the guardians reported better family behavior by the participants and better family functioning.

The TAMU-CC FLC’s success in achieving a majority of its objectives is largely due to its successful operation and meeting of its dosage targets. The FLC proposed to provide services to 50 youth in the academic program. It recruited and pre-tested 63 in an attempt to cover the expected attrition of participants across the program year. The FLC post-tested 45 participants.

This is a successful program delivery to of 90% of the targeted figure (50).

Dosage was delivered above the requirements of the Implementation Guidelines. The

TAMU-CC FLC proposed to offer 420 of dose during the academic program. The

Implementation Guidelines require that 75% or 315 hours be delivered. The FLC delivered the full 420 hours (100%) of dose in the academic program. A mean of 354.51 hours of dose was received by the 45 participants that completed the post-test (Table 11). This is 84.4% of the proposed hours. Received dose varied from a low of 209 hours to a high of 419 hours. Of the 45 youth completing the academic program, 37 or 82.2% completed 315 or more hours of dose. In comparison to the proposed number of participants (50), the FLC provided the minimum or more hours of dose to 74% of the proposed number of youth.

Dose was positively correlated with the measures for the Academic Objectives 1 and 2,

TAKS scores and final yearly grade point average as reported on Table 13. The correlations for

Personal Development dose hours and total dose hours were positively correlated at a statistically significant level with the TAKS Math score and the final yearly grade point average.

It may be concluded that participation in the FLC improves one’s academic performance.

Related to these objectives is the evidence from Table 15 that academic, personal development, career development, and total dose are correlated in a positive direction with the participants’

WRAT3 Math Standard Score. This is another indicator that as participation increased, academic performance increased.

An interesting relationship between dose and the FES Independence scale occurred. This relationship lends evidence that participation in the FLC increased family bonding (Objective 9).

All of the forms of dose were negatively correlated with the Independence scale with the results for career development, personal development, academic development, and total dose reflecting significant correlations (Table 15). The Independence scale measures the extent to which family members are assertive, self-sufficient, and make their own decisions (see Rudolf Moos, the

Family Environment Scale at http://www.mindgarden.com/Assessments/Info/FESINFO.htm).

The results indicate that among the participants’ families, Cohesion (the degree of commitment and support family members provide for one another), Control (the use of rules and procedures to run family life), and Moral-Religious (the emphasis on ethical and religious issues and values) all increased significantly while Conflict (the amount of openly expressed anger and conflict among family members) significantly decreased. All of these point to greater integration and bonding in the families. They point to family members viewing themselves as inter-dependent.

Thus, while the Independence scale mean increased from the pre- to the post-test, it is not surprising that it is negatively correlated with dose. Participation in the FLC was strengthening the students’ family bonding as noted with the other scales. It was not strengthening the students’ independence. Greater participation reduced independence and increased family bonding.

Dose was negatively correlated with behavioral measures of truancy (Objective 6) and school disciplinary actions (Objective 7) as reported on Table 12. In other words, participants with greater levels of dose (participation in the FLC) had lower levels of unexcused absences and disciplinary actions. The correlations for disciplinary actions and academic, personal development, and total dose were statistically significant. The correlations between Personal development and total hours of dose and unexcused absences were also statistically significant.

It can be concluded that participation in the FLC reduces truancy and in-school behavioral problems.

The mission of the TAMU-CC FLC for 2002-2003 was to reduce the incidence of violence and abusive behavior, academic failure, and early onset of behavioral problems among the participating youth. The achievement of most of the FLC’s objectives indicates that this mission has been accomplished. The preceding information related to dose indicates that it is the

FLC’s programming that has had the effects described. Final evidence that the violence and behavioral problem prevention mission has been accomplished are the strong correlations between program dose and measures of violence and problem behaviors in the cross site instruments found on Table 14. Career Development, Personal Development, and Total Dose are negatively and significantly correlated with the VRAI scale at statistically significant levels. All other forms of dose are also negatively correlated with the VRAI scale. Academic Development,

Personal Development, and Career Development dose levels are also negatively correlated at a statistically significant degrees with the SBI-R Delinquency Scale. All other forms of dose are also negatively correlated with the Delinquency Scale. Greater participation in the FLC program appears to result in lower self-reported violence and delinquency measures.

VI. Conclusion

The TAMU-CC FLC appears to have had a successful year in its academic program for

2002-2003. It completed the academic program with 45 of its original participants. It delivered the proposed 420 hours of programming and 82% of the final participants received at least 75% of that dose with the mean dose received at 354 hours. Recruitment and retention of a comparison group were successfully completed this year.

These goals were met even with turnover in two major positions on the staff. Process for hiring, continuation of the program with vacant positions, and integration of new personnel into the program appeared to work well.

The TAMU-CC FLC achieved Objectives 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, and 8. Objectives 3, 4, and 9 were partially met. The FLC improved its participants’ academic performance, self-esteem, in school behavior, school attendance, cultural identification, career development, school bonding, and family bonding. It can be demonstrated that improvements in participant behavior and attitudes

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 39 were related to program dose in the year and to participation in the program a second year.

While positive academic change occurred, the results indicate that the FLC should improve its instruction or tutoring in Math. This appears to be the weakest area among participants and when comparing them to comparison youth.

Very positive behavioral change is documented. However, the reduction in behavior problems is not necessarily found in participant VRAI and VRAI High Risk scale scores. Part of this appears to be related to questions concerning drugs and anger. These demonstrate the lowest change or undesirable change on the VRAI and the YOU Survey. The qualitative YOU question about the program reducing participant anger indicates that this is not occurring well. Increased or more directed programming about anger management and substance use may be indicated.

Behavioral and qualitative evidence from interviews and the YOU Survey indicate that the participants increased their bonding to school. However, this did not meet the level desired in the planned objective using the SBI-R scales. It is clear that the youth are responding on those scales in the desired way. Higher levels of Experience, Involvement, and Pride were related to lower Delinquency scores. The issue is that the pre- and post-test changes in the magnitude of the participant mean did not occur as desired. It may be that the youth are not defining their improved behavior as improved school bonding in the dimensions defined on the SBI-R. Some consideration about making such a connection in programming may be useful.

The participants continue to report victimization at the school at the same or higher rate as the comparison youth on the YOU Survey. The FLC may want to engage in some structural changes to increase participant protection. Also, programming in skills related to victimization avoidance, communication, mediation, bully avoidance, and the like may be useful.

The results and discussion sections above indicate that the application of the OJJDP/YOU

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 40 theoretical construct relating risk and protective factors is working in practice. The results also strongly support the FCVP logic model.

VII. References

Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development. 1994. A Matter of Time Risk and

Opportunity in the Out-of-School Hours. New York: Carnegie Corporation.

Coordinating Council on Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. 1996. Combating

Violence and Delinquency: The National Juvenile Justice Action Plan. Washington, D.C.:

OJJDP, U.S. Dept. of Justice.

Data Collection and Analysis Workgroup, Youth Opportunities United. 2002,

Delinquency Risk Factors with Supporting Data Indicators. Corpus Christi: Social Science

Research Center (SSRC).

Developmental Research and Programs. 2000. Communities That Care Prevention

Strategies: A Research Guide to What Works. Seattle, WA: Author as Publisher.

Dyer, J. A. et al. 1998. Texas School Survey of Substance Use 1998: Methodology

Report and Validity Analysis. College Station, TX: Public Policy Research Institute.

Hawkins, J. D., T. I. Herrenkohl, D. P. Farrington, D. Brewer, R. F. Catalano, T. W.

Harachi, and L. Cothern. 2000. Predictors of Youth Violence. Washington, D.C.: OJJDP, U.S.

Dept. of Justice.

Rudolf Moos, Family Environment Scale at http://www.mindgarden.com/Assessments/Info/FESINFO.htm.

National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. 1993. The Prevention of Youth

Violence: A Framework for Community Action. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention.

OJJDP. 1998. Guide for Implementing the Comprehensive Strategy for Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile Offenders. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Justice.

Satcher, D. 2001. Youth Violence: A Report of the Surgeon General. Washington, D. C.:

U. S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Thornton, J. N., C. A. Craft, L. L. Dahlberg, B. S. Lynch, and K. Baer. 2000. Best

Practices of Youth Violence Prevention: A Sourcebook for Community Action. Washington,

D.C.: Centers for Disease Control, U. S. Department of Health and Human Service.

Zambrano, Kristina and Philip W. Rhoades. 2002. Nueces County Juvenile Delinquency

Risk Factor Data and Trend Analysis, 5th Edition. Corpus Christi: SSRC.

Youth Opportunities United. 1999. Strategic Plan.. Corpus Christi, TX: YOU.

VIII. Appendices

Table 1: Demographics Characteristic Participants Participants Comparison Comparison Pre-test Post-test Pre-test Post-test (N=63) (N=45) (N=52) (N=35) Gender Male 44.4 44.4 57.7 60.0 Female 55.6 55.6 42.3 40.0

Ethnicity Anglo 22.6 20.0 19.2 11.4 Hispanic 56.5 60.0 57.7 54.3 Black/Other 20.9 20.0 23.1 34.2

Age 11 27.0 4.4 21.2 8.6 47.6 42.2 25.0 25.7 12 20.6 35.6 42.3 37.1 13 4.8 15.6 9.6 17.1 14 2.2 1.9 11.5 15+

Table 2: Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test for Difference Between Pre- and Post-test for Participants and F Test for Difference Between Means for Participants and Comparison Group on Post Test with Significance Participants Comparisons Scale or Index Wilcoxon Significance Wilcoxon Significance Signed Rank Signed Rank VRAI -1.215 NS -.484 NS VRAI HR -1.508 NS -.393 NS WRAT Spell -.639 NS -.147 NS WRAT Math -2.254 .024 -1.153 NS WRAT Reading -3.080 .002 -.794 NS Experience -1.215 NS -1.379 NS Involvement -.424 NS -.591 NS Delinquency -1.784 NS -.329 NS Pride -1.198 NS -.545 NS Rosenberg -5.167 .001 -3.190 .001 Identification -4.465 .001 -2.797 .005 Affiliation -1.354 NS -.385 NS CMI -3.025 .002 -.919 NS FES Cohesion -2.000 .046 -.699 NS Expressiveness -1.623 NS -.101 NS Conflict -2.053 .04 -1.859 NS Independence -2.824 .005 -.2.437 .015 Achievement -3.184 .001 -.054 NS Intellectual -1.350 NS -.415 NS Recreation -1.972 .049 -.836 NS Moral -2.951 .003 -.116 NS Organization -.056 NS -.633 NS Control -3.454 .001 -.2.542 .001

Table 3: F Test for Difference Between Means for Participants and Comparison Group on Post Test Scale or Index F Significance VRAI .074 NS VRAI HR 1.377 NS WRAT Spell 12.034 .001 WRAT Math 2.745 NS WRAT Reading 11.639 .001 Experience .461 NS Involvement .073 NS Delinquency .017 NS Pride .498 NS Rosenberg 3.808 .054 (NS) Identification .182 NS Affiliation 3.703 .058 (NS) CMI 11.794 .001 FES Cohesion .004 NS Conflict 1.985 NS Expressiveness 1.833 NS Independence 1.457 NS Achievement 1.765 NS Intellectual .366 NS Recreation 3.344 .071 ( NS) Moral 3.011 .087 (NS) Organization .005 NS Control 6.056 .016

Table 4: Scale and Index Means for First and Second Year Participants Scale or Index First (N=26) Second (N=16) VRAI 49.995 48.305 WRAT Spell 100.27 101.44 WRAT Math 98.69 101.31 WRAT Reading 100.73 112.81 Experience 101.79 99.34 Involvement 97.78 99.44 Delinquency 106.51 108.29 Pride 99.01 97.09 Rosenberg 28.69 32.94 Identification 49.45 51.39 Affiliation 50.40 52.10 CMI 53.56 60.33 FES Cohesion 48.42 47.94 Conflict 37.96 44.31 Expressiveness 48.42 47.94 Independence 39.77 36.50 Achievement 54.58 55.94 Intellectual 48.08 51.19 Recreation 51.92 57.06 Moral 51.92 55.69 Organization 49.54 49.56 Control 59.73 60.81

Table 5: Participant FES Subscale Mean Differences by Age Scale 11-12 13 14-15 F p Cohesion 50.82 41.89 26.67 3.742 .032 Intellectual-Cultural 50.88 48.89 37.00 3.937 .027 Moral Religious 58.73 54.33 44.33 4.624 .015 Active-Recreational 55.78 49.89 38.00 5.346 .009 Conflict 46.88 52.11 63.00 3.440 .041

Table 6: Pearson’s R Correlations on Measures of Violence, Delinquency, and Conflict for Post-test Participants Only High Risk SBI Delinquency FES Conflict VRI .468; p=.001 .401; p=.006 .564; p=.001 High Risk .109; NS .336; p=.024 Delinquency .444; p=.002

Table 7: Pearson’ R Correlations Between Proximal Measures and Measures of Violence, Delinquency, and Conflict for Post-test Participants VRAI SBI Delinquency FES Conflict SBI Experience -.316 -.390 -.281 p=.034 p=.008 NS SBI Involvement -.217 -.363 -.314 NS p=.014 p=.035 SBI Pride -.237 -.479 -.403 NS p=.001 p=.006 Rosenberg -.295 -.168 -.278 P=.049 NS NS FES Cohesion -.336 -.338 -.604 P=.024 p=.023 P=.001 FES Organization -.306 -.320 -.575 P=.041 p=.032 p=.001 FES Intellectual -.168 -.284 -.353 NS NS p=.019

Table 8: Difference in Participant and Comparison Means Official School Data Indicators Participants Comparisons F Significance Final GPA 89.368 86.489 9.290 .003 Office Referrals .31 .76 2.374 NS In School Susp. .80 2.46 21.841 .001 Out School Susp. .63 1.07 3.049 NS Expulsion .00 .00763 9.934 .002 Unexcused Abs. 1.50 2.04 2.258 NS Spring Unexcused 1.69 2.02 .294 NS Tardy Spring Year Total Abs. 2.187 3.667 6.872 .01 Year Total 2.875 4.333 1.343 NS Tardy Year Total 2.241 5.340 13.838 .001 Discipline

Table 9: Percent of Participants and Comparisons Passing TAKS with PHI Test for Difference Test Participants Comparisons PHI Significance Math (N=89) 71.4 45.0 -.268 .012 Reading (N=89) 91.7 78.0 .192 .070 (NS) Writing (N=28) 100 54.5 -.649 .001

Table 10: Participant and Comparison Mean Scores on TAKS with F Test of Difference Between Means Test Participant Comparison F Significance Mean Mean Math 2104 2008 11.815 .001 Reading 2216 2125 6.371 .013

Table 11: Mean Dose Hours for 45 Participants Analyzed in Post-Test Academic 90.51 Cultural 24.71 Personal 60.62 Career 22.78 Recreation 111.16 Family Bonding 44.73 Total Hours 354.51

Table 12: Pearson’s R Correlations Between Dose and Negative School Behaviors Academic Hours Personal Hours Total Hours Year Total Tardy .100 .070 .080 NS NS NS Year Total Absence -.190 -.332 -.341 NS p=.026 p=.022 Year Total Discipline -.382 -.347 -.403 .009 p=.02 p=.006

Table 13: Pearson’s R Correlations Between Dose and School Academic Indicators Academic Hours Personal Hours Total Hours TAKS Math .231 .320 .315 NS p=.044 .048 TAKS Writing .127 .218 .061 NS NS NS TAKS Reading .174 .103 .103 NS NS NS Final Year GPA .215 .412 .415 NS p=.005 p=.005

Table 14: Pearson’s R Correlations Between Dose and VRAI and SBI Delinquency Dose VRAI SBI Delinquency Total Dose -.311 -.277 .037 NS Academic -.242 -.346 NS .02 Personal -.297 -.334 .048 .025 Cultural -.241 -.174 NS NS Career -.364 -.345 .014 .02 Recreational -.259 -.243 NS NS Family Bonding -.254 -.087 NS NS

Table 15: Pearson’s R Correlations Between Dose and FES Independence and WRAT3 Math Dose FES Independence WRAT3 Math Total Dose -.301 .361 .031 .015 Academic -.353 .431 .018 .003 Personal -.388 .307 .008 .041 Cultural -.241 .161 NS NS Career -.316 .382 .034 .01 Recreational -.271 .252 NS NS Family Bonding -.113 .284 NS NS

Table 16: First and Second Year Participant Means and F Test for Difference School Data Indicators First (N=26) Second (N=16) F Significance TAKS Math 2104 2163 3.794 .032 TAKS Reading 2193 2314 4.805 .014 Final Grades 88.25 92.33 4.223 .021

Table 17: First and Second Year Participant Means and F Test for Difference Negative School Behavior Indicators First (N=26) Second (N=16) Year Tot. Tardy 2.357 5.267 Year Tot. Absences 2.429 1.600 Year Tot. Discipline 1.750 .600

Table 18: YOU Survey Data Percent Responding Affirmatively Question FLC 03 Compar. FLC 02 Compar. FLC 01 YOU 03 02 2000 Used Cigarettes at 20.0 20.5 17.2 50.0 42.2 43.2 least once Used Beer at least 31.1 33.4 35.7 83.2 46.7 45.0 once Used Liquor at least 31.1 20.5 27.5 50.0 40.0 40.7 once Used Marijuana at 17.7 10.3 13.3 50.0 42.2 35.1 least once Used Cocaine at 0 0 3.4 0 13.3 8.1 least once Used Heroin at 0 2.6 0 0 6.6 5.7 least once Attended School 0 2.6 6.7 0 24.4 17.8 Stoned at least once Skipped School at 13.3 20.5 16.7 50.0 15.6 22.6 least once Physically Attacked 6.7 5.1 3.3 16.7 13.6 9.2 at School Robbed at School 4.4 15.4 3.3 0 13.3 7.4

Had Something 28.9 25.6 43.3 66.7 60.0 31.9 Stolen at School Bullied at School 22.2 25.6 34.5 33.3 20.5 16.7

Hit with object by 6.6 2.6 3.6 0 20.9 8.5 Father Hit with object by 4.4 5.2 7.4 20.0 26.7 13.4 Mother

Table 19: Participant Evaluations of FLC Programming Effects Dimension Strongly Somewhat Agree or Change from Disagree or Agree Strongly Agree Spring 02 Disagree Agree/Strongly Helped me do better 6.8 11.4 81.8 3.3 at school Improved my behavior 20.4 9.1 70.4 20.4 at home Increased my knowledge 4.6 13.6 81.8 10.4 about the environment Increased my knowledge 9.1 20.5 70.4 2.6 about Texas cultures Increased my knowledge 13.6 6.8 78.6 0.1 about good nutrition Improved my behavior at 10.5 17.9 72.8 12.1 school Helped me feel better 9.1 11.4 79.5 11.7 about myself Helped to keep me from 22.7 13.6 63.6 -0.6 feeling angry Helped me from 11.3 15.9 72.8 8.5 being violent Improved my knowledge 8.8 6.7 84.4 10.2 about jobs and careers Helped me get along better 6.8 15.9 79.5 12.9 with other students Helped to keep me from 13.6 13.6 72.7 12.0 using alcohol or drugs

End of Year Report FCVP Program Form: EOY03-1B FLC Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi Violence Risk Assessment Inventory (VRAI) - Distal Measure Age (ALL)

2002-03 Participant Group 2002- 03 Comparison Group

2Pretest Posttest Pretest Posttest Mean VRAI Item Mean Mean Mean (N=37) N=_63 N=_45 N=52_ E. N 1 Carried weapon in public in last 90 days .25 .22 .35 .14 =35 2 Fought with a group against another group .14 .11 .40 .23 3 Physically fought someone I knew .42 .36 .63 .54 4 Physically fought someone I did not know .19 .13 .58 .17 5 Been with someone who was selling drugs .32 .64 .46 .46 Been with someone smoking pot, weed, .94 .66 6 bliss .63 .69 7 Someone has offered me drugs or alcohol .60 .69 1.02 1.09 8 Been away from home without permission .44 .49 1.08 1.34 9 Have drunk or been drunk .76 .44 .73 .86 10 Argued with my parent(s) or guardian(s) 1.63 1.44 1.47 1.51 Damaged or destroyed school, private, .33 .26 11 property .33 .20 Used a weapon like a knife, gun, stick in a .35 .11 12 fight .0048 .00 Taken something not belonging to me .69 .91 13 without paying .38 .29 14 Held a real gun in my hands .78 .38 .98 .69 Been so mad that I thought I was going to 1.50 1.49 15 lose control .95 1.07 Someone in my family has gotten in a .92 1.17 16 physical fight .68 .71 17 Been mad enough to fight .94 1.16 1.77 1.46 Seen someone close to me settled argument .96 1.06 18 by fighting .89 .69 Felt like no way out of situation without .80 .80 19 using violence .48 .62 Been so angry I acted without thinking of 1.38 .97 20 the consequences .89 .84 Used a weapon like a knife, stick, or gun in .00769 .00571 21 a fight in the past 6 months. .00317 .00 Held a real gun in your hands in the past 6 .13 .00857 22 months. .00952 .00889

Carried a weapon in a public place like to .17 .00286 23 school or store in the past 6 months. .17 .00444

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report FCVP Program Form: EOY03-1C End of Year Report FLC Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi

Violence Risk Assessment Inventory (VRAI) - Distal Measure*

2002-03 Participants 2002-03 Comparison Score Type Pretest Posttest Pretest Posttest All Ages Mean Mean t-test Mean Mean t-test (N=_63_) (N=45_) (N=52_) (N=35_) 11.63 17.17 15.91 .529 VRAI raw score 11.18 -.933 .30 .38 .17 .529 VRAI high risk raw score .13 -.933

VRAI T-score 50.78750 50.4182 1.530 55.2609 54.244 1.00 49.33681 50.4741 47.553 1.00 VRAI high risk T-score 47.0319 1.530

*Pre- and Post-test data reported from analysis of total N of available cases. T-tests were performed on matched pairs using the smaller N of the post-test data sets.

Denote data with statistical significance in bold type.

End of Year Report FCVP Program Form: EOY03-5 FLC Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi

Proximal Measures – Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale* Academic Year 2002- 2003

Age Participation Test Standard F- N Mean t Value Sig. Group Level Type Deviation Ratio

Pretest 62 21.26 4.57 -7.595 .001 Participant 5.30 Age 12 Posttest 45 30.16 or Older Pretest 52 23.08 4.41 -3.508 .001 Comparison Posttest 37 27.62 6.46

*Pre- and Post-test data reported from analysis of total N of available cases. F and T-tests were performed on matched pairs using the smaller N of the post-test data sets.

1 End of Year Report FLC Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi FCVP Program Form: EOY03-3

Findings of Program Evaluations (e.g. Pre and Posttest Results)* (Proximal Measure – WRAT-3)

2002-03 Participants 2002-03 Comparison Score Type Pretest Posttest Pretest Posttest Age 12 & Older Mean Mean t-test Mean Mean t-test (N=63) (N=45) (N=48) (N=37) Spelling Raw 33.54 35.27 -4.592 29.94 31.94 -3.758 Spelling Standard 100.84 100.18 -.458 90.06 90.60 .235 Spelling Percentile 52.70 50.91 -.316 30.04 29.71 .630 Spelling Grade Equiv. 6.40 6.91 -2.489 5.02 5.37 -.942 Math Raw 34.90 36.11 -2.422 33.08 34.66 -.943 Math Standard 96.00 98.44 -1.985 90.43 92.63 .097 Math Percentile 43.86 47.49 -1.543 29.86 39.17 -1.283 Math Grade Equiv. 6.13 7.16 -3.591 5.35 6.34 -2.020 Reading Raw 39.24 43.07 -3.944 36.65 38.34 -1.653 Reading Standard 100.97 108.62 -3.400 92.48 94.89 -1.008 Reading Percentile 51.52 65.02 -3.029 35.48 39.14 -.867 Reading Grade Equiv. 6.89 8.96 -5.293 5.77 6.71 -2.016

Denote data with statistical significance in bold type. End of Year Report FLC Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi FCVP Program Form: EOY03-4

Findings of Program Evaluations (e.g. Pre and Posttest Results)* (Proximal Measure – School Bonding - R)

2002-03 Participants 2002-03 Comparison Pretest Posttest Pretest Posttest Mean Mean Mean Mean t-test t-test (N=63_) (N=_45__) (N=_52__) (N=_34_)

School ALL 100.508 1.295 99.286 98.495 100.988 1.513 Experience AGES School ALL 98.384 .258 96.649 97.716 98.527 .577 Involvement AGES School ALL 107.732 -1.509 108.610 108.521 104.928 -.510 Delinquency AGES School ALL 98.117 1.412 100.556 100.897 101.006 -.331 Pride AGES

Participants served are those individuals who received at least 50% of total hours provided in a given program year. FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 58

End of Year Report FLC Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi FCVP Program Form: EOY03-6

Cultural Enhancement Multi-Group Ethnic Identity Measure - Proximal Measures All Ages

2002-03 Participants Pretest Posttest t-test (N=63_) (N=44_) Mean Mean Significance F. Raw ID -.907 Search 13.06 13.71 NS Score Raw Affiliation -1.228 21.06 22.13 Score NS -4.549 ID Search T-Score 41.894 50.539 .001 -1.111 Affiliation T-Score 49.158 51.231 NS

2002-03 Comparison Pretest Posttest t-test (N=50_) (N=35_) Mean Mean Significance G. Raw ID .333 Search 13.18 13.34 NS Score Raw Affiliation .184 19.78 20.17 Score NS -3.078 ID Search T-Score 42.273 49.443 .004 .167 Affiliation T-Score 46.363 47.227 NS

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report End of Year Report FLC Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi FCVP Program Form: EOY03-7

Proximal Measures – Career Maturity Index

All Ages

2002-03 Participants

Pretest Posttest t-test (N=_62_) (N=44_) Mean Mean Significance 14.00 15.67 -3.140 H. Raw CMI Score .003 43.231 56.048 -3.140 CMI T-Score .003

2002-03 Comparison

Pretest Posttest t-test (N=51__) (N=_32_) 12.46 13.17 -.718 Raw CMI Score NS 47.676 49.533 -.718 CMI T-Score NS

*Pre- and Post-test data reported from analysis of total N of available cases. T-tests were performed on matched pairs using the smaller N of the post-test data sets. Denote data with statistical significance in bold type. FCVP Program 2002-03 Page 60 End of Year Report FLC Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi FCVP Program Form: EOY03-8A

Proximal Measures – Family Bonding Family Environmental Scale (FES) – All Ages

2002-03 Participants 2002-03 Comparison

Pretest Pretest FES Subscales Posttest Posttest Mean Mean Mean t-test Mean t-test (N=58___ (N=_43__ (N=45__) (N=35_) ) ) I. Cohesion 40.62 47.42 -1.894 44.86 46.97 -.461 Expressiveness 43.50 40.38 1.803 43.60 43.00 .045 Conflict 54.02 49.00 2.619 57.44 52.66 1.889 Independence 29.47 38.96 -3.033 31.74 35.86 -2.529 Achievement 47.34 55.09 -3.243 50.47 51.46 .263 Intellectual-Cultural 47.17 49.23 -.960 46.44 47.49 -.709 Active-Recreational 49.09 53.27 -1.918 47.77 49.11 -.821 Moral-Religious 52.47 56.89 -3.315 52.21 53.29 -.077 Organization 48.74 49.56 -.133 49.16 49.69 .558 Control 41.79 59.84 -3.915 50.37 55.46 -2.773

End of Year Report FLC Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi FCVP Program Form: EOY03-9A

Recreational Enhancement - Proximal Measures Active – Recreational Subscale of FES

All Ages

Participants 2002-03

Pretest (N=58) Posttest (N=45) t-test

Mean Mean Sig.

Active- -1.918 49.09 53.27 Recreational .062 (NS)

Comparison Group 2002-03

Pretest Posttest (N=37) t-test (N=43_)

Active- 8.821 47.77 49.49 Recreational NS

FCVP Program End of Year Evaluation Report