1. A project funded by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in partnership with the UNC School of Social Work (SSW), UNC Injury Prevention Resource Center (IPRC), Robeson County Health Dept. (RCHD) and the Center for Community Action (CCA).

3. Research youth violence prevention approaches

4. Collect & analyze surveillance data

5. Foster relationships with local community partners to help develop, implement & evaluate promising prevention effortsThis collaboration between research universities, local communities, and community-based organizations results in empowered communities that are mobilized to address the problem of youth violence.

7. From 2000-2005, 10 research universities received awards

8. In 2005, new funding was awarded to 8 universities

9. In 2006, 2 additional universities were funded as Urban Partnership ACE & The National ACE Coordinating Center was established

10. In 2010, UNC-CH through the UNC-IPRC & UNC-SSW was awarded a five year grant to implement the nation’s first rural ACE

12. Harvard University

13. University of California, Berkeley

14. University of California, Riverside

15. University of Hawaii

16. University of Chicago

19. Harvard University

20. John Hopkins University

21. University of Alabama at Birmingham

22. University of California, Riverside

23. University of California, San Diego

24. University of Hawaii

25. University of Michigan

26. University of Puerto Rico

27. Virginia Commonwealth UniversityFunded Research Universities

28. ACE Logic Model

29. Ranks first in NC for juvenile arrests (Rate: 16,064 per 100,000) One of the poorest counties in the nation (Rate: 34.7% vs. 13% U.S.) Homicide rate more than 4 times the national average (Rate: 23.9 % vs. 5.2 % U.S.) Has the largest non-reservation concentration of Native Americans of any county in the nation A diverse rural community with a history of strong community programs and passionate people Why Robeson County?

30. Figure 2: Target and Comparison Communities Buncombe County Robeson County (target community) Pitt County Cumberland County Socioeconomically disadvantaged, rural counties with troubled school systems and high levels of youth violence

34. Natasha Bowen, PhD.,Director

35. Cindy Porter, Administrative Assistant

36. Accountant -TBN

37. IT Specialist - TBN

38. Rea Gibson, Graphics Designer

40. MarticaBacallao, PhD., Dir. of Program Implementation

41. Jim Barbee, MPA, Center Coordinator

42. Program Implementation Staff –see next chart

43. Shenyang Guo, PhD., Director of Evaluation

44. Dean Duncan, Assoc. Director of Evaluation

46. Doctoral Students,

47. Postdoctoral Fellow

48. Gary Nelson, DSW, Assoc. Dir. For Community TrainingJordan Institute for Families (JIF) UNC-CH School of Social Work

49. NC-rural Academic Center for Excellence in Youth Violence Prevention Local 2010-2011 Implementation Team

50. ----Stephen Covey “Begin with the end in mind…”

51. Implementation & Evaluation Core: Five Year Overview Specific aim: Reduce youth violence in Robeson County, NC by implementing and evaluating a multifaceted, evidence-based approach to prevent perpetration of youth violence. Ongoing: Community Based Participatory Research (CBPR) approach / Monitoring & evaluation / Training experiences for doctoral students and junior investigators

53. Center for Community Action

54. Public Schools of Robeson County

55. Juvenile Crime Prevention Council

56. Duke Center for Child & Family Policy

57. Partnership for Children

58. Southeastern Mental Health (SOC)

59. Communities In Schools

60. NAACP local chapter

61. Lumbee Tribal Council

62. UNC-Pembroke

63. Lumberton Police Dept./Sheriff

64. District Juvenile Court Services

65. Southeastern Family Violence Ctr.

66. Chamber of Commerce

67. Healing Lodge

69. Evaluation Overview

71. Measures

72. School Success Profile PLUS

73. School Success Profile PLUS (cont’d)

75. Weekly session notes and implementation tracking

76. Attendance, hours, content delivered

77. Weekly clinical supervision sessions

78. Selection of programs with strong resources for dissemination, implementation, and fidelity measurement

79. Specialized measures of implementation and fidelity specific to selected intervention programs

80. Ongoing process evaluation

81. Quantitative and qualitative feedback from participants and facilitators

82. Understand any implementation and fidelity issues and identify salient themes for content and process improvement

85. Exposure to local and visiting scholars

86. Series of seminars on topics related to youth violence prevention

87. Risk and protective factors

88. Surveillance of youth violence

89. Prevention strategies

90. Research methods

91. Create mentoring opportunities

92. Master’s students, doctoral students, and junior youth violence prevention researchers receive supervision and guidance from senior researchers and advisory boardTraining Core Activities

94. Multi-disciplinary team of researchers and practitioners collaborate on Advisory Committee and Community Violence Prevention Board

95. Representatives from social work, public health, education, sociology, and psychology

96. Framework for connections between community practitioners and practitioners and researchers

97. Raise awareness in the professional and lay communities

98. Training and continuing education to social service providers, educators, public health practitioners, and cliniciansTraining Core Activities (cont’d)

99. For further information regarding the projectcontact Jim Barbee NC rACE Center Director jmbarbee@email.unc.edu