After-School Programs for Delinquency Prevention

• Author: Sema A. Taheri,Brandon C. Welsh
• DOI: 10.1177/1541204014567542
• Published date: 01 July 2016
• Date: 01 July 2016
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article

After-School Programs for

Delinquency Prevention:

A Systematic Review

and Meta-Analysis

Sema A. Taheri

1

and Brandon C. Welsh

1,2

Abstract

This article reports on the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of

after-school programs (ASPs) on delinquency. Mixed results from some well-known evaluations,

a wide range of modalities, and continued interest in and demand for this social intervention

motivated this review. A rigorous criteria for inclusion of studies was developed, comprehen-

sive search strategies were employed to identify eligible studies (published and unpublished),

and a protocol was followed for coding of key study features. Meta-analytic techniques were

used to assess the impact of ASPs on delinquency and investigate study features associated with

variation in effects. Seventeen studies—based on 17 independent samples—met the inclusion

criteria. All but two of the studies were multimodal, involving primary and secondary interven-

tions. Studies could be grouped into one of the three primary intervention types: academic,

recreation, and skills training/mentoring. There was evidence that ASPs had a small but non-

significant effect on delinquency, with a weighted mean d¼0.062 (95% confidence interval:

–0.098, 0.223). Moderator analyses indicated that not one of the intervention types was asso-

ciated with a significant effect on delinquency. Nothing in the present review suggests that

ASPs—of any type—should be discontinued. But business as usual does not seem in order for

ASPs with a focus on delinquency prevention. Several research priorities could go some way

toward addressing this, including further high-quality evaluations targeted on the three main

typesofASPsandaspecialfocusonprogramfidelity.

Keywords

after-school program, delinquency prevention, systematic review, meta-analysis

1

Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA

2

Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Corresponding Author:

Brandon C. Welsh, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Northeastern University, Churchill Hall, 360 Huntington

Avenue, Boston, MA 02115, USA.

Email: b.welsh@neu.edu

Youth Violence and JuvenileJustice

2016, Vol. 14(3) 272-290

ªThe Author(s) 2015

Reprints and permission:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/1541204014567542

yvj.sagepub.com

Introduction

After-school programs (ASPs) rose to prominence in the late 1980s in the United States, largely out

of concern for ‘‘latch-key’’ children facing after-school self-care while parents finished the work day

(Mahoney, Parente, & Zigler, 2009). ASPs were touted as a way to address the unsupervised time of

youth as well as provide extended time for academic enhancement (Gottfredson, Gerstenblith,

Soule´, Womer, & Lu, 2004a; Kane, 2004). Although programs vary by type, size, and focus, many

serve a similar purpose of increasing the amount of time participants are supervised (Apsler, 2009),

providing shelter from unsafe neighborhoods, and reducing the amount of time youth spend socia-

lizing with delinquent peers (Gottfredson, Cross, Wilson, Rorie, and Connell, 2010a). In doing so,

ASPs target a number of risk factors for delinquency and may be beneficial in preventing delinquent

behavior among participating children and youths. More generally, ASPs may play a role in attend-

ing to some adolescent problem behaviors to mitigate the ‘‘burden of morbidity in adolescence and

adulthood’’ (Catalano et al., 2012, p. 1653).

In addition to providing supervision following school-time, ASPs are believed to engage youth in

learning new skills or building upon existing interests. In some of these programs, the prevention of

externalizing behavior problems remains a primary objective. ASPs can provide a unique platform

by which community members, families, and schools can unite to provide prosocial opportunities for

youth (Padia, 2009).

Involvement in delinquent behavior by youths, and the increased need for after-school supervi-

sion of children of working parents, spurred further interest in the after-school time by policymakers

and national agencies alike (Gottfredson et al., 2004a; Mahoney et al., 2009). As a result, additional

federal funding was allocated over time to the development of community centers that offer after-

school programming, with a special focus on academic enrichment opportunities for youth. Funding

for these centers was initiated by the Clinton administration in 1994. By 2012, the National 21st

Century Community Learning Centers project had established a budget of over US$1.1 billion for

programs nationwide (U.S. Department of Education, 2013). Such widespread financial contribu-

tions have also occurred at the state and local levels, garnering support from public and private fun-

ders of ASPs (Mahoney et al., 2009). Most recently, the 21st Century project lost approximately

5.2%of its annual operating budget, amounting to over US$60 million; this was the direct result

of the 2013 sequester (Afterschool Alliance, 2013).

Against the backdrop of these events are a number of narrative reviews, not to mention evalua-

tions of well-known programs, which show mixed results of the impact of ASPs on delinquency.

One of the first of these reviews was carried out by Sherman (1997), as part of a larger initiative

to assess what works in preventing crime (Sherman et al., 1997). Sherman’s review focused exclu-

sively on recreation centers and their effects on juvenile offending. On the basis of three high-quality

evaluations, Sherman concluded that ASPs represent a promising approach to community-based

crime prevention.

1

The same conclusion was reached by Welsh and Hoshi (2006) in their update

of Sherman’s review.

Gottfredson and her colleagues (2004a), as part of a larger study to investigate the effects of ASPs

on delinquency in the state of Maryland, reported on a brief review of the effectiveness of these pro-

grams. They concluded that there was insufficient evidence to support claims that ASPs are effective

in preventing delinquency or other problem behaviors. However, they noted that, among a small

number of experimental and quasi-experimental studies, ASPs that ‘‘involve a heavy dose of social

competency skill development ...may reduce problem behavior’’ (p. 256). In their Maryland study,

which used randomized experimental and quasi-experimental methods with statistical matching

designs to evaluate the effects of a multi-site ASP, it was found that participation in the programs

reduced delinquent behavior among children in middle school but not elementary school. Increasing

intentions not to use drugs and positive peer associations were identified as the mechanisms for the

Taheri and Welsh 273