The effect of neighborhood-based community organizing: Results from the Seattle Minority Youth Health Project

Citation
A. Cheadle et al., The effect of neighborhood-based community organizing: Results from the Seattle Minority Youth Health Project, HEAL SERV R, 36(4), 2001, pp. 671-689
Citations number
37
Categorie Soggetti
Public Health & Health Care Science","Health Care Sciences & Services
Journal title
HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH
ISSN journal
00179124 → ACNP
Volume
36
Issue
4
Year of publication
2001
Pages
671 - 689
Database
ISI
SICI code
0017-9124(200108)36:4<671:TEONCO>2.0.ZU;2-E
Abstract
Objective. To evaluate the effect of a community mobilization and youth dev elopment strategy to prevent drug abuse, violence, and risky sexual activit y. Data Sources/Study Setting. Primary surveys of youth, parents, and key neig hborhood leaders were carried out at baseline (1994) and at the end of the intervention period (1997). The study took place in four intervention and s ix control neighborhoods in Seattle. Study Design. The study was designed as a randomized controlled trial with neighborhood as the unit of randomization. The intervention consisted of a paid community organizer in each neighborhood who recruited a group of resi dents to serve as a community action board. Key variables included percepti ons of neighborhood mobilization by youth, parents, and key neighborhood le aders. Data Collection/Extraction Methods. Youth surveys were self-administered du ring school hours. Parent and neighborhood leader surveys were conducted ov er the phone by trained interviewers. Principal Findings. Survey results showed that mobilization increased to th e same degree in both intervention and control neighborhoods with no eviden ce of an overall intervention effect. There did appear to be a relative inc rease in mobilization in the neighborhood with the highest level of interve ntion activity. Conclusion. This randomized study failed to demonstrate a measurable effect for a community mobilization intervention. It is uncertain whether the neg ative finding was because of a lack of strength of the interventions or pro blems detecting intervention effects using individual-level closed-end surv eys.