Forging Hopeful Futures Program for Youth Violence

(FHF Trial)

Recruiting in Palo Alto (17 mi)

+1 other location

Overseen by Alison J Culyba, MD PhD MPH

Age: < 65

Sex: Any

Travel: May Be Covered

Time Reimbursement: Varies

Trial Phase: Academic

Recruiting

Sponsor: University of Pittsburgh

Disqualifiers: Age, Language, Location, others

No Placebo Group

Trial Summary

What is the purpose of this trial?

This trial will test a program called Forging Hopeful Futures that helps young people aged 13-19 by teaching job skills, promoting fairness between races and genders, and developing leadership abilities. The goal is to reduce violence in neighborhoods with high levels of inequality and community violence.

Will I have to stop taking my current medications?

The trial information does not specify whether you need to stop taking your current medications.

What data supports the effectiveness of the Forging Hopeful Futures treatment for youth violence?

The Fostering Healthy Futures program, which shares a similar positive youth development approach, has been shown to significantly reduce mental health symptoms, especially trauma symptoms, in maltreated children in foster care. This suggests that similar programs like Forging Hopeful Futures could be effective in addressing youth violence by improving mental health outcomes. ^{1 2 3 4 5}

Is the Forging Hopeful Futures Program for Youth Violence safe for participants?

The research articles provided do not contain specific safety data for the Forging Hopeful Futures Program or its related names. They focus on interventions for youth violence and childhood experiences but do not address safety information directly. ^{6 7 8 9 10}

How is the Forging Hopeful Futures treatment different from other youth violence prevention treatments?

The Forging Hopeful Futures treatment is unique because it focuses on creating environments that teach and encourage peaceful and positive behaviors, using a developmentally anchored health promotion model. Unlike other treatments, it emphasizes a seven-step problem-solving model to help youth find alternatives to violence. ^{11 12 13 14 15}

Research Team

Alison J Culyba, MD PhD MPH

Principal Investigator

University of Pittsburgh

Eligibility Criteria

This trial is for English-speaking youths aged 14-19 who live in, attend school in, or use facilities within certain neighborhoods. They must be able to share contact information for follow-ups. It's not open to those outside this age range, non-English speakers, or individuals without ties to the participating areas.

Inclusion Criteria

Participants must be able to provide follow up contact information

Participants must speak English

Participants must live in the participating neighborhoods, attend schools in the participating neighborhoods, or use participating facilities

Exclusion Criteria

I am not between the ages of 14 and 19.

Unable to provide follow up contact information

I do not speak English.

Trial Timeline

Screening

Participants are screened for eligibility to participate in the trial

2-4 weeks

Treatment

Participants engage in the Forging Hopeful Futures program, which includes 12 sessions over a 6 to 12 week period focusing on racial, gender, and economic justice, leadership development, and workforce opportunities.

6-12 weeks

12 sessions (in-person, 3 hours each)

Follow-up

Participants are monitored for changes in violence perpetration and other behaviors at 3 and 6 months after program conclusion.

6 months

Treatment Details

Interventions

• Forging Hopeful Futures (Behavioral Intervention)
• Wellness Check-ins (Behavioral)

Trial Overview The study tests 'Forging Hopeful Futures', a program aimed at preventing youth violence through racial, gender, and economic justice education. It also includes wellness check-ins as part of the intervention being studied.

Participant Groups

Group I: Forging Hopeful Futures Experimental Treatment 1 Intervention

Forging Hopeful Futures uses a group discussion format with activities that explore race, gender, class, identity, relationships, and multiple forms of violence. Forging Hopeful Futures is a 12 session curriculum for youth ages 13-19 that uses strengths-based and healing-centered approaches to critically examine structural forces that perpetuate racial and gender injustice, develop leadership skills in promoting gender equitable relationship norms, non-violent practices, and upstander skills, and enhance economic justice through job skills and employment opportunities. Through 12 sessions (3 hours/session) over a 6 to 12 week period, Forging Hopeful Futures combines racial, gender, and economic justice content with leadership development and workforce development opportunities.

Group II: Wellness Check-ins Active Control 1 Intervention

Youth in neighborhoods randomized to the control group will receive individual wellness checks. This will occur through a strengths-based telephone conversation focused on wellness resources. Youth will be provided with tailored resources based on needs identified during the call. Youth will be offered the option for additional phone check-ins to coordinate access to community resources and connection to individualized behavioral health supports if desired.

Who Is Running the Clinical Trial?

University of Pittsburgh

Lead Sponsor

Trials

1,820

Recruited

16,360,000+

David Apelian

University of Pittsburgh

Chief Executive Officer since 2019

PhD in Molecular Biology from Rutgers University, MD from the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, MBA from Quinnipiac University

Pamela D. Garzone

University of Pittsburgh

Chief Medical Officer

PhD in Clinical Science from the University of Pittsburgh

Population Council

Collaborator

Trials

52

Recruited

63,400+

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Collaborator

Trials

902

Recruited

25,020,000+

Dr. Debra Houry

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Chief Medical Officer

MD, MPH

Dr. Susan Monarez

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Chief Executive Officer

PhD

Findings from Research

The Fostering Healthy Futures (FHF) program, a 30-week intervention for maltreated children in foster care, showed high engagement with 95% of participants starting and 92% completing the program, indicating its acceptability and feasibility.

The program significantly reduced mental health symptoms, particularly trauma-related symptoms, and increased the use of mental health services, demonstrating its effectiveness across diverse child subgroups.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

A Positive Youth Development Approach to Improving Mental Health Outcomes for Maltreated Children in Foster Care: Replication and Extension of an RCT of the Fostering Healthy Futures Program. Taussig, HN., Weiler, LM., Garrido, EF., et al.[2021]

The Fostering Healthy Futures (FHF) program, which involved 50 mentors working with preadolescent youth in foster care, was reported as very helpful in training mentors to support high-risk children and families effectively.

Mentors highlighted the program's effectiveness in preparing them to engage with diverse communities and collaborate with various professionals, indicating a positive impact on their mentoring skills.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Mentoring Children in Foster Care: Impact on Graduate Student Mentors. Taussig, HN., Culhane, SE., Raviv, T., et al.[2021]

Many young people with anxiety and depression experience negative feelings, such as loss and abandonment, when their treatment ends without improvement, highlighting the emotional impact of treatment conclusions.

Clinicians also find it challenging to manage treatment endings, often struggling to balance public expectations of therapy effectiveness with the reality of limited resources, suggesting a need for clearer communication and shared understanding of treatment goals from the start.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

How to manage endings in unsuccessful therapy: A qualitative comparison of youth and clinician perspectives. Bear, HA., Dalzell, K., Edbrooke-Childs, J., et al.[2022]

A long-term study of 120 severely disturbed adolescent patients showed that individualized treatment planning is crucial for improving outcomes in psychiatric hospitalization, assessed over a period of three to eight years.

The outcomes were measured across three key areas: peer and social functioning, relationships with parents, and educational and occupational functioning, highlighting the importance of comprehensive assessments in treatment effectiveness.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Follow-up of adolescents treated in a psychiatric hospital: measurement of outcome. Gossett, JT., Barnhart, FD., Lewis, JM., et al.[2019]

The study evaluated nursing and multidisciplinary interventions in a Youth Inpatient Unit in Christchurch, New Zealand, focusing on their effectiveness in improving outcomes for adolescents, as measured by the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales for Children and Adolescents.

Findings suggest that while most interventions were used similarly across different diagnoses, stress management and problem-solving education were particularly beneficial for patients with mixed affective disorders, highlighting the importance of targeted interventions in adolescent psychiatric care.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

An examination of frequent nursing interventions and outcomes in an adolescent psychiatric inpatient unit. Bobier, C., Dowell, J., Swadi, H.[2019]

A comprehensive approach to monitoring adverse and positive childhood experiences is essential for improving children's health and well-being, which includes standardizing definitions and measurements across data collection efforts.

Enhanced surveillance can lead to data-driven prevention strategies that target at-risk populations, ultimately reducing exposure to violence and adversities while promoting positive experiences for children.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Building Infrastructure for Surveillance of Adverse and Positive Childhood Experiences: Integrated, Multimethod Approaches to Generate Data for Prevention Action. Anderson, KN., Swedo, EA., Clayton, HB., et al.[2023]

In a study involving 15 youth victims of violence and 9 crime victim specialists, both groups preferred visual representations of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) with high color-shading and descriptive elements, indicating a strong interest in engaging formats for data presentation.

The most valued domains for PROs included social, anger, emotional, school, physical, peer relations, and psychosocial well-being, while there was less interest in domains like positive affect and depression, highlighting specific areas of focus for future violence intervention programming.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Youth victim perspective: optimizing presentation of patient-reported outcomes in a violence intervention program. Hollo, A., Nimmer, M., Cheaton, B., et al.[2023]

The Safe Start Promising Approaches (SSPA) initiative evaluated various community-based interventions aimed at preventing and reducing children's exposure to violence (CEV) across 15 different program sites in the U.S.

Each site implemented tailored programs to address specific types of violence and support families, highlighting the importance of localized approaches in effectively helping children cope with the effects of violence.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

National Evaluation of Safe Start Promising Approaches. Jaycox, LH., Hickman, LJ., Schultz, D., et al.[2020]

Children's exposure to violence can lead to serious mental health issues, but interventions like the Safe Start Promising Approaches (SSPA) program can significantly improve their future well-being.

The SSPA program, evaluated by the RAND Corporation across 15 sites, focuses on various types of violence and age-appropriate practices, showing promise in reducing the impact of children's exposure to violence during its first two years of implementation.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

National Evaluation of Safe Start Promising Approaches: Assessing Program Implementation. Schultz, D., Jaycox, LH., Hickman, LJ., et al.[2020]

The Youth Nonfatal Violent Injury Review Panel was created to address the high incidence of nonfatal violent injuries among young people in the U.S., which are 171 times more common than fatal injuries.

This panel, involving 23 different agencies, aims to enhance interagency collaboration and identify prevention strategies for nonfatal violent injuries, although further research is needed to assess its effectiveness.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The Youth Nonfatal Violent Injury Review Panel: An Innovative Model to Inform Policy and Systems Change. Purtle, J., Rich, LJ., Rich, JA., et al.[2018]

The Richmond Youth Against Violence Project, a 16-session program for middle school students, aims to reduce violence by teaching conflict resolution and promoting positive behaviors, particularly in high-risk communities.

Initial findings indicate that a significant number of students, especially boys, have been exposed to community violence and engaged in risk behaviors, highlighting the need for effective violence prevention strategies in these environments.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Richmond youth against violence: a school-based program for urban adolescents. Farrell, AD., Meyer, AL., Dahlberg, LL.[2022]

Youth violence remains a critical health issue, particularly affecting young people and communities of color, despite a general decline in violent injuries and homicides across the U.S. over the past 15 years.

The Cook County Department of Public Health is actively addressing this issue by educating community leaders and social service workers on evidence-based programs, specifically the Blueprints for Violence Prevention initiative, to help reduce youth violence.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Meeting the needs of a community: teaching evidence-based youth violence prevention initiatives to members of strategic communities. Ruffolo, DC., Andresen, PA., Winn, KL.[2013]

The Violence Prevention Program (VPP) showed positive effects on reducing violence outside of school after 12 months, indicating its potential efficacy in addressing youth violence.

The Positive Youth Development Program (PYDP) demonstrated positive effects on reducing violence in school after 6 months, highlighting its role in promoting protective factors among adolescents.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The Effects of Two Community-Based Participatory Action Research Programs on Violence Outside of and in School Among Adolescents and Young Adults in a Latino Community. Oscós-Sánchez, MÁ., Lesser, J., Oscós-Flores, LD., et al.[2022]

The UNITY Initiative highlights that violence in the US is preventable and is influenced by unequal safety distribution across communities, particularly affecting young people of color.

Comprehensive strategies that improve community environments, such as multi-sector collaboration and policy influence, can effectively reduce violence and promote health equity.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Communities are not all created equal: Strategies to prevent violence affecting youth in the United States. Cohen, L., Davis, R., Realini, A.[2019]

The Healthy Power program, a youth nonviolence initiative implemented in collaboration with a middle school, community nonprofit, and university, aimed to enhance conflict resolution skills among middle-school boys.

Although quantitative measures did not show significant changes, qualitative feedback indicated that students improved their understanding and application of conflict resolution, highlighting the value of mixed-methods evaluation in educational programs.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

A Community-Academic Partnership for School-Based Nonviolence Education: The Healthy Power Program. Dunn, M., Drew, C., O'Brien, J., et al.[2021]

References

1. England pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

A Positive Youth Development Approach to Improving Mental Health Outcomes for Maltreated Children in Foster Care: Replication and Extension of an RCT of the Fostering Healthy Futures Program. [2021]

2. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Mentoring Children in Foster Care: Impact on Graduate Student Mentors. [2021]

3. England pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

How to manage endings in unsuccessful therapy: A qualitative comparison of youth and clinician perspectives. [2022]

4. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Follow-up of adolescents treated in a psychiatric hospital: measurement of outcome. [2019]

5. Australia pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

An examination of frequent nursing interventions and outcomes in an adolescent psychiatric inpatient unit. [2019]

6. Netherlands pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Building Infrastructure for Surveillance of Adverse and Positive Childhood Experiences: Integrated, Multimethod Approaches to Generate Data for Prevention Action. [2023]

7. England pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Youth victim perspective: optimizing presentation of patient-reported outcomes in a violence intervention program. [2023]

8. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

National Evaluation of Safe Start Promising Approaches. [2020]

9. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

National Evaluation of Safe Start Promising Approaches: Assessing Program Implementation. [2020]

10. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The Youth Nonfatal Violent Injury Review Panel: An Innovative Model to Inform Policy and Systems Change. [2018]

11. Netherlands pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Richmond youth against violence: a school-based program for urban adolescents. [2022]

12. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Meeting the needs of a community: teaching evidence-based youth violence prevention initiatives to members of strategic communities. [2013]

13. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The Effects of Two Community-Based Participatory Action Research Programs on Violence Outside of and in School Among Adolescents and Young Adults in a Latino Community. [2022]

14. England pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Communities are not all created equal: Strategies to prevent violence affecting youth in the United States. [2019]

15. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

A Community-Academic Partnership for School-Based Nonviolence Education: The Healthy Power Program. [2021]