The Little Village Gang Violence Reduction Project in Chicago

as the comparable program age group. The differences are statistically significant for the16-andunderand the 17- and 18-year-old youth in the program sample compared to the same agecategories of the youth in the comparison sample (respectively p = 0.011 and p = 0.024).Finally, we note differences over time between moderate and serious drug offenders. Thereduction is for program youth with moderate levels of drug arrests at Time I who increase theirlevel of drug arrests at Time II, in relation to similar comparison youth with the same level ofdrug arrests at Time I.At this time, we cannot adequately explain why the Project was so consistently effectivein reducing gang-related drug crime. This objective was not a priority for the Project. Thecombination of Project-police and youth-outreach attention was apparently effective with thoseprogram youth who were only partially committed to drug dealing and were in process oftransitioning out of the gang and criminal behavior generally. We explore this possibility in thenext chapter. Also, in Chapter 14, we find that youth who are not highly committed to violenceand drug crime do better in reduction of the different types of arrests than youth more specializedto either violence or drug arrests.Model VI: Other Arrests“Other” arrests include arrests for all other crimes committed by the youth in the threesamples, as well as and status offenses and violations of probation, but especially crimes such asmob action, disorderly conduct, gang loitering and obstruction of justice which typically mayreflect special police activity regarding gang youth. We look at this latter combination of otheroffenses separately in the next model.11.15