The Little Village Gang Violence Reduction Project in Chicago

elationships to family members. Total household size is correlated with an increase in propertyarrests both at Time I (r = 0.386, p # 0.01) and Time III (r = 0.249, p # 0.01). In other words,the more household members, the more likely the youth reports that he has been arrested forproperty offenses. Annual household illegal income is highly correlated with an increase inarrests for serious violence (r = 0.426, p # 0.01) at Time I, but not at Time III. Annualhousehold illegal income is also highly correlated with an increase in drug-selling offenses atTime I (r = 0.303,p # 0.05) and also at Time III (r = 0.305, p # 0.001), i.e., the higher thelevel of household illegal income, the higher the probability that the youth reported he wasselling drugs.Also, the more household members the youth reports are incarcerated, the more likely theyouth will self-report lower levels of property offenses (r =.280, p # 0.01) and total arrests (p #0.05), but only at Time I. A household crime-socialization effect may have occurred for certainyouth in our sample. Deviant family members may or may not be a model for deviancy for gangyouth.Program youth reported very positive relationships with members of their families,particularly with their mothers. At Time I, these positive relationships with mothers tend to behighly correlated with a lower level of self-reported criminal offenses and arrests. The morepositive the relationship with mothers, the more likely the youth self-reported fewer totaloffenses (r = 0.255, p # 0.01), total fewer property offenses (r = 0.231, p # 0.01), fewer totalarrests (r = 0.272, p # 0.01) and fewer total property arrests (r = 0.382, p #.01). Positiverelationships with mothers are also correlated with less violence, less serious violence, and lessdrug use at Time I (p # 0.05). However, all of these statistical relationships are no longer10.16