The Little Village Gang Violence Reduction Project in Chicago

associated with a 67% greater success-to-failure ratio of youth reducing their violence arrests.The oldest age category (odds ratio = 3.45) was associated with a significantly higher success-tofailureratio than the two younger age categories, and the Latin Kings (odds ratio = 1.50) wereassociated with a higher success-to-failure ratio than the Two Six. The violence and drugarrestees had a 22.0% higher odds ratio of success to failure in reducing violence arrests thanthe violence/no-drug arrestees (Table 14.16).For change in violence and drug arrests, police and probation workers’ contacts withprogram youth were associated with a 7% greater odds ratio of failure to success in youthreducing their levels of both violence and drug arrests. Suppression apparently made nocontribution to the success or failure of youth reducing their violence and drug arrests. The olderage group’s odds ratio (3.04) was significant. The Latin Kings’ odds ratio (1.20) was associatedwith higher success-to-failure ratios in reducing violence and drug arrests. The violence anddrug arrestees had a 23.0% greater odds ratio of success to failure in reducing levels of violencearrests than the violence/no-drug arrestees (Table 14.17).For change in drug arrests, the police and probation workers’ suppression contacts wereassociated with an odds ratio of failure to success in reducing drug arrests in the program periodthat was more than twice as high as for no-suppression contacts. However, the older agecategory (odds ratio = 1.45) and the Two Six (odds ratio = 1.34) had a higher success-to-failureratio in reducing drug arrests. The violence and drug arrestees had a 57% better odds of successto failure in reducing drug arrests than the drug/no-violence arrestees (Table 14.18).14.14