The Gang Resistance Education And Training Program - Essay Example

The Gang Resistance Education And Training (G.R.E.A.T) Program The increase of gangs in USA, a phenomenon more intensive during the last decade, has been related to the development of criminal activities across the country. According to a series of statistical data published by the Department of Justice, in 2009 the number of gangs in USA reached the 1,000,000, as compared to 750,000 in 2000 (Department of Justice 2012). As for the active gangs, these were estimated to 24,500 (Department of Justice 2012); a high percentage, about 40%, is under 18 years old (Department of Justice 2012). A survey developed in 2008 released similar findings. Through the above survey, the gang members were found to be 774,000 while active gangs were estimated to 27,900 (Crime in America 2010). The need for the intervention of the State for confronting the expansion of crime in USA has become emergent. The Gang Resistance Education and Training Program (G.R.E.A.T) has been introduced for helping towards the control of ‘delinquency, youth violence, and gang membership for children’ (G.R.E.A.T 2012). In order to be more effective, the program has developed a series of partnerships with organizations at state levels, so that the parts of the program used in each state are aligned with the local ethics and social rules (G.R.E.A.T 2012). In this way, the terms of the program are easier understood. Moreover, such approach urges local people to participate in the program’s realization and monitoring; local support has been proved vital to the success of the program (Peterson et al. 2012). The potentials of US authorities to promote such programs are established in Title 42 of the US Code. According to the relevant article (section 13921), the Attorney General is given the order to establish ‘not less than 50 Gang Resistance Education and Training (GREAT) projects’ (section 13921, title 42, US Code). The funding of each one of these projects is defined at $800,000, as a minimum (section 13921, title 42, US Code). It is clear that the specific program reflects the willingness of the US government to control the expansion of crimes across the country. It has been considered that focusing on prevention rather than on the punishment of crime would be a more effective approach to achieve the above target, a target that seems to have been achieved if taking into consideration the figures related to the program’s performance. The G.R.E.A.T program is school-based, focusing on learning in regard to the potential effects of violence and criminal behavior (G.R.E.A.T program 2012). In the context of the above program a particular curricula is promoted in each school with the help of appropriately skilled instructors (G.R.E.A.T program 2012). Police officers who have appropriately trained are used for the development of the program in each school setting. In the regions where the program is introduced, a Training Center is established for offering’ to criminal justice professionals the training necessary in order to teach the program’s curricula to children’ (G.R.E.A.T program 2012). It should be noted that the above program is available to elementary and middle school levels (G.R.E.A.T program 2012). At the same time, the program incorporates a training scheme available to the parents of children (G.R.E.A.T program 2012). In other words, the program aims not just to the temporary limitation of crime but rather to the establishment of rules and ethics that will help towards the change of people’s thinking on violence and crime (G.R.E.A.T program 2012). In this way, the program’s benefits in the long term would be secured. Esbensen et al. (2011) have tried to evaluate the performance of G.R.E.A.T since its introduction. The above researchers refer to two National-wide evaluations of the program (Esbensen et al. 2011, p.54). The results of these evaluations are contradictory. In the first of these evaluations, the specific program seems to have no particular effect on the reduction of crime (Esbensen et al. 2011, p.54). However, in the second evaluation signs appear that the program will achieve its target, to help towards the limitation of crime and violence among young people, a fact that would also help to control crime in general (Esbensen et al 2011, p.53). Esbensen et al. (2011) note that the G.R.E.A.T program is not a recent initiative; actually, the program was first introduced in 1991 in Phoenix for helping local authorities to control crime (Esbensen et al. 2011, p.54). In its first appearance, the program had a major disadvantage: it was not appropriately backed by theoretical or empirical evidence (Esbensen et al 2011, p.54). This means that the program had not primarily tested, as would be expected for its potential effectiveness and its implications, a fact that would threaten the program’s viability (Esbensen et al. 2011, p.54). As a result, when the program first appeared, in 1991, no guarantee would exist for its feasibility (Esbensen et al. 2011, p.54). As already noted, in regard to the first evaluation of the program, Esbensen et al. (2011) did not retrieve evidence that the program would be effective (Esbensen et al. 2011, p.55). It was just proved that the police officers participated, as instructors, in the program ‘show the greatest possibly fidelity’ (Esbensen et al. 2011, p.55); still no indications existed that the program could actually contribute in the reduction of crime (Esbensen et al. 2011, p.55). However, in the second evaluation, conducted in 2006, a different result appears in regard to the program’s effectiveness (Esbensen et al. 2011, p.57). Indeed, the second evaluation showed that instructors, police officers, performed at the highest possible fidelity (Esbensen et al. 2011, p.58). Also, the program was highly welcomed by the personnel and children, a finding that it has been quite encouraging in regard the program’s continuation (Esbensen et al. 2011, p.58). The establishment of the G.R.E.A.T program is expected to help USA towards the control of crime. Up to now, the signs in regard to this effort seem to be controversial. According to a recent report published in USA Today, cities across USA try to control crimes developed by gangs but the results have been, yet, rather discouraging (Johnson 2012). As an example, within 2012 a total of 200 murders have been committed only in Chicago (Johnson 2012). A percentage of about 80% of these murders has been committed by gang members (Johnson 2012). In Houston also, a trend for continuous increase in gang membership has appeared (Johnson 2012). There, the District Attorney decided the introduction of an anti-gang program of $1.7 million (Johnson 2012), aiming to keep gang membership at low levels. The above program would include the introduction of G.R.E.A.T curricula, combined with other initiatives in order to ensure that the crime in the region will be controlled. In Boston, the application of the G.R.E.A.T program has significantly helped towards the decline of crime, as the specific fact has been highlighted by the local Police Department (Boston Strategy 2012). It should be noted that criminal activity in general seems to be in decline in all USA cities (Johnson 2012). Still, the crimes of gangs remain at high level, a fact that verifies the need for the rapid expansion of the G.R.E.A.T program across USA. The G.R.E.A.T program can be characterized as a well structured plan for preventing delinquency among young people. Still, the full development of the program in a particular state may not be possible due to factors that cannot be controlled, especially the lack of human resources appropriately skilled. For this reason, the promotion of the above program has been combined with the application of other, supportive, programs that also aim to help towards the control of crime and violence. The ‘Comprehensive Anti-Gang Initiative and the Chicago Project for Violence Prevention’ (National Institute of Justice 2011) are examples of such initiatives. At this point, the following issue should be highlighted: the G.R.E.A.T program seems to be highly supported within states; still, no scheme seems to exist for ensuring the appropriateness of the measures taken for the program’s establishment in each state. The freedom of each state to choose the tools and mechanisms that are most appropriate for this purpose cannot be limited; still, the effectiveness of the Program is mainly depended on the success in the implementation of all its phases. Otherwise, it will take a long period of time before positive results appear. Works Cited Crime in America. ‘Crime Statistics, Gangs, Violent Crime.’ Crime in America Net. 1 April 2010. Web. 4 December 2012. . Department of Justice. ‘Statistics.’ 4 December 2012. . Esbensen, Finn-Aage, Peterson, Dana, Taylor, Terrance, Freng, Adrienne, Osgood, Wayne, Carson, Dena and Matsuda, Kristy. ‘ Evaluation and Evolution of the Gang Resistance Education and Training (G.R.E.A.T.) Program. Journal of School Violence, 10:53–70, 2011. Web. 4 December 2012. http://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/Content/Documents/GREAT-Evaluation-and-Evolution.pdf Gang Resistance Education And Training (G.R.E.A.T.). Web. 4 December 2012. . Johnson, Kevin. ‘Cities across the USA fight to control street gangs.’ USA TODAY. 4 June 2012. Web. 4 December 2012. . National Institute of Justice. ‘Research and Evaluation Projects on Gangs.’ National Institute of Justice. 1 November 2011. Web. 4 December 2012. . The Boston Strategy. Programs. Web. 4 December 2012 . Read More