Memorandum — Neighborhood Services and Education Committee (nse), April 14, 2022

TO: NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES AND FROM: Jon Cicirelli
EDUCATION COMMITTEE Director
SUBJECT: SEE BELOW DATE: March 28, 2022
Approved Date
4/5/22
SUBJECT: MAYOR’S GANG PREVENTION TASK FORCE’S BRINGING
EVERYONE’S STRENGTHS TOGETHER, SAFE SUMMER INITIATIVE

GRANT, AND YOUTH INTERVENTION SERVICES PROGRAMS

ANNUAL REPORT

RECOMMENDATION
Accept the 2020-2021 Annual Report on the Mayor’s Gang Prevention Task Force’s Bringing Everyone’s Strengths Together, Safe Summer Initiative Grant, and Youth Intervention Services.

OUTCOME
The Committee and Council are informed on the accomplishments and challenges the City’s youth violence prevention and intervention programs faced in Fiscal Year 2020-2021, and the plans to address youth violence issues going forward.

BACKGROUND
The Mayor’s Gang Prevention Task Force (Task Force) advances the City of San José’s Youth Violence Reduction Strategy. The Parks, Recreation and Neighborhood Services Department (Department) administers prevention and intervention programs to mitigate youth violence as part of the Task Force. These programs include the Department’s staff-led Youth Intervention Services (YIS) programs and two grant-making programs1 outlined in Figure 1, below. 1 For more information on the programs, please refer to Attachment A.

NSE AGENDA: 4/14/2022
ITEM: (d) 5

NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES AND EDUCATION COMMITTEE
March 28, 2022
Subject: Mayor’s Gang Prevention Task Force’s Bringing Everyone’s Strengths Together, Safe Summer Initiative Grant, and Youth Intervention Services Programs Annual Report

Page 2 ends

Figure 1: Mayor's Gang Prevention Task Force Programs
The programs and resources focus on supporting youth in specific Task Force target population risk categories, which include at-risk, high-risk, gang-impacted, and gang-intentional. 2 Though
the Task Force efforts are city-wide, resources are focused in areas that experience higher rates of gang incidents, especially those identified as “Hot Spot” areas3. The “Hot Spot” areas are spread across the Foothill, Western, Central, and Southern police divisions of San José.

YIS is the City’s internal team that delivers direct services to the Task Force’s target population, with emphasis given to youth exhibiting higher-risk characteristics that fall under the gangimpacted and gang-intentional profiles. In addition to City staff led programming, the City administers the funding arm of the Task Force in the delivery of the Bringing Everyone’s Strengths Together (BEST) and Safe Summer Initiative Grant (SSIG) programs which fund nonprofit partners to implement services city-wide to all four of the Task Force’s target populations.

As outlined in Figure 2 below, for 2020-2021, the funding allocation comprised of a total $9,118,722 with YIS budgeted for $5,425,255, BEST budgeted for $2,403,999, $1,076,8144 for SSIG and $212,655 for support services. The Analysis section outlines the outcomes achieved and services implemented as a result of this collaborative funding model. 2 See Attachment C – Target Population 3 See Attachment D – “Hot Spot” Areas 4 The allocation for SSIG 2020-2021 was $546,364. The additional $530,450 was rebudgeted from 2019-2020 and was provided to agencies for the SSIG 2020 program.

Page 3 ends

Figure 2:2020-2021 Funding Distribution

ANALYSIS
Public health guidelines, including mask and vaccination mandates, remote learning, and social distancing protocols, affected Task Force services and activities and made it more difficult to engage youth and families than in previous years. Despite the challenges, the Task Force programs continued to provide services in 2020-2021 during the height of pandemic conditions, and most programs found creative ways to accomplish their program goals while prioritizing participants’ mental health and socioemotional well-being. Task Force program services were readjusted to meet participants’ evolving needs by increasing case management services and providing outdoor spaces for socializing and interacting with peers. Regardless, services continued to conform with the Task Force’s current workplan and the 2020-2021 evaluation aims to better understand program accomplishments in that context, identifying the direct impacts Task Force services have on participating youth, their families, and the broader community.

The 2020-2021 Program Year Annual Report: Evaluation of the BEST Program5 produced by Social Policy Research Associates (SPR) serves two main functions: 1) to provide an implementation study that evaluates how service delivery (e.g., participants, service hours 5 The SPR report can be accessed at
https://www.sanjoseca.gov/home/showdocument?id=83652&t=637837349615501033 $3,250,949
$1,959,763
$2,403,999
$214,542
$1,076,814
$212,655
$-
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$7,000,000
$8,000,000
BEST Appropriation Non-BEST Appropriations
SJWorks
YIS Non-BEST
Support Services
SSIG Grants
BEST Grants

YIS BEST

Page 4 ends

delivered, and funding spent) was administered in the context of program objectives; and 2) to provide an outcome study to identify the direct impacts related to participants’ psychosocial well-being. To measure changes in outcomes over time, SPR designed an anonymous survey to be administered at various points in time during each grant cycle, with an added question about respondents’ length of time in the program at the time of the survey. Grantees administered up to three rounds of surveys during September-December 2020, January-May 2021 and June-August 2021. This effort resulted in 59 completed child surveys and 412 completed youth surveys.

In addition to the BEST evaluation, in 2020 the Department hired SPR to conduct a separate evaluation for the City’s YIS programs, excluding the San José Works Program managed by the Office of Economic Development and Cultural Affairs. The YIS team is currently working with SPR to develop an outcome evaluation model for all YIS programs. The evaluation work began in late 2020 and the initial phase of the work is scheduled to conclude by April 30, 2022.

Consequently, the results of that evaluation are not part of this report. However, looking forward, the evaluation will include a report summarizing each of the six YIS programs. For this annual report, YIS participation data was collected from the staff that oversee the various programs. The case management data was collected and tabulated using QuesGen, a web-based data management system.

Key Outcome Study & Other Results
BEST Grant Program
In this year’s 2020-2021 BEST Program Year Annual Report, SPR examined three key areas of participant outcomes6
, including: 1) changes in psychosocial outcomes; 2) participant satisfaction; and 3) participant perceptions of safety in the program. 1) Psychosocial Outcomes: The average scores of established youth participants were significantly higher than those of baseline participants7. These results suggest that youth program participants who have been in the program for at least one month tend to have better psychosocial outcomes (e.g., feeling confident to handle what comes their way, can express opinions when in a group, handle problems and challenges when they arise) than those who are new to the program.
6 For more details on the outcome study, refer to page 48 of the SPR Report. 7 Established survey respondents are those that have said they had been in the program for a month or longer and baseline survey respondents are those who said they had been in the program for less than a month

Page 5 ends

Table 1: Psychosocial Outcomes for BEST Youth Participants, Ages 14-24 Baseline
Participant
Established
Participant
I feel connected to my school or job 3.6 3.9**
I feel confident that I can handle whatever
comes my way 3.8 4.2***
I think things through carefully before making
decisions 3.8 3.9
I can express my opinions when I am in a
group 3.7 4.1***
I can listen to others 4.6 4.5
I stay out of situations that make me feel
uncomfortable 4 4.2*
I feel comfortable solving conflicts 3.7 4.1***
I can handle problems and challenges when
they arise 3.8 4.2***
Note: Results are weighted to adjust for differences between survey takers and BEST participants overall. *Statistically significant at 90%; **Statistically significant at 95%; ***Statistically Significant at 99% 2) Participant Satisfaction: The results from the youth survey, displayed in Table 2, suggest that, overall, satisfaction with the program increased in all areas and remained strong among youth respondents.
3) Safety: One substantial change from 2019-2020 is in the measure of whether participants felt safe in the program. In 2019–2020, 30% of participants said they felt safe “sometimes” or “never.” In 2020-202,1 only 4% of participants reported these feelings which translates to more youth feeling safe in BEST programs compared to last year.

This is remarkable given the increased stress and health dangers posed by the pandemic.

Table 2: Satisfaction with BEST Program Youth Participants, Ages 14-24 2019-2020 2020-2021
Sometimes/
Never/
Rarely
Always/
Often
Sometimes
/ Never/
Rarely
Always/
Often
Change in
Always/Often
Response
compared to
2019-2020
This program helps me to get
along with other people my
age 27% 73% 20% 80%
🔺🔺13%
I am interested in what we do
at this program 17% 83% 11% 89% 🔺🔺 6%

Page 6 ends

Youth at this program respect
each other 20% 80% 8% 92% 🔺🔺12%
I have learned a lot of new
things 18% 82% 14% 86%

🔺🔺 4%
The program helps me to
think about the future 20% 80% 8% 92% 🔺🔺12%
The people who work at this
program understand my
family’s culture 22% 78% 8% 92%

🔺🔺12%
Program staff can
communicate with me in the
language of my choice 15% 85% 7% 93%

🔺🔺 8%
There is an adult at this
program who cares about me 15% 85% 4% 96% 🔺🔺11%
I feel safe in this program 30% 70% 4% 96% 🔺🔺26%
In this program, adults listen
to what I have to say 6% 94% 3% 97% 🔺🔺 3%
SSIG Grant Program
In the summer of 2021, SSIG outcomes were measured with survey tools provided by the Department and administered by grantees at the end of summer program. For this last year, grantees met the four key program performance targets around feeling safe and satisfied with programming, as well as feeling connected to resources and caring adults. Table 1 outlines survey results.

Table 3: SSIG 2021 Survey Results
2020 2021
Change
compared to
2020
Felt SSIG was a safe program 92% 93% 🔺🔺1%
Felt satisfied with program 91% 92% 🔺🔺1%
Connected to a caring adult through SSIG 94% 87% 🔻🔻 7%
Learned about the other resources through
SSIG 91% 89%
🔻🔻 2%
As the table shows, there was a reduction in the percentage of youth that found a connection to a caring adult through SSIG. This is attributable to several factors including remote distance learning and zoom fatigue.

Page 7 ends

Youth Intervention Services
Over the life span of the Task Force, the YIS unit has continued to grow to its current sevenprogram model (as discussed in Attachment A). YIS, like many of the BEST agencies, had to pivot from normal operation to meet community needs during the pandemic. Nonetheless, many programs found ways to maintain participation as shown in Figure 3 of Attachment F. In addition:
• During school closures, YIS staff pivoted to providing street outreach in the City’s “Hot Spot” areas to make up for the lost opportunities to engage youth in school settings. YIS staff remained visible in these communities and engaged youth via phone, text, and video conference. This enabled staff to monitor the climate in priority neighborhoods; mitigating potential youth-violence threats; and responding to incidents. • As a part of the pivot from school-based to community-based services, YIS street outreach efforts included more than 2,000 contacts with youth and community residents, and more than 6,700 referrals to BeautifySJ for graffiti and litter dumping from December 2020 - August 2021.

Task Force Service Implementation Results
In 2020-2021, the Task Force provided a wide range of services to a diverse group of children, youth, and families in targeted San José neighborhoods to address a variety of needs. Table 4 below illustrates the number of unduplicated participants served by the Task Force in 2019-2020 and 2020-2021, including gender and target population breakdown.

Table 4: Task Force Participant Characteristics by Year:
2019-2020 2020-2021
BEST SSIG YIS Total BEST SSIG YIS Total
Unduplicated
Participants
3,229 5,976 2,162 11,367 2,448 1,955 570 4,973
Female 56% - 23% 62% - 25%
Male 43% - 77% 37% - 75%
Target Population Distribution by Risk Category
At-Risk 39% 91% 30% 52%
High-Risk 45% 4% 45% 22%
GangImpacted11% 3%
100%
20% 14%
100%
GangIntentional5% 2% 4% 12%

Page 8 ends

The Task Force served 4,973 unduplicated participants in 2020-2021. This constitutes a decrease of 6,394 (56%) participants from 2019-2020. This decrease is attributable to three main reasons:
1) COVID-related public health adaptations involving more case management and one-on-one services; 2) fewer “light-touch” emergency services offered under SSIG in 2021; and 3) high vacancy rates among programming positions in the City and among partner agencies.

During the pandemic, programs focused greater emphasis on students’ overall well-being versus class grades and attendance. Programs continued to observe academic engagement; however, those concerns became less critical as youth confronted increased isolation, depression, and anxiety. As one program staff person observed, “The expectations changed because everything around the students changed.” Whether virtual or in-person, staff met youth “where they were” and where they felt the safest.

YIS primarily served youth through street outreach services who were at higher risk levels (gang-impacted and gang-intentional). In 2020-2021, BEST and SSIG grant programs experienced an increase in participant distributions under the gang-impacted and gangintentional risk categories, where more intensive individually-focused, case management services are offered more prevalently.

BEST grantees provided more than 100% of the projected number of units of service (UOS) to all four target populations for 2020-2021 (112,813 of the 104,523 projected)8 , surpassing
projections in Street Outreach Intervention and Case Management services in particular. This reflected the shift to more one-on-one services from group sessions as a result of the pandemic.

Three BEST grantees that were funded to provide services under the Street Outreach eligible service area conducted related services to youth in the 18 “Hot Spot” areas for which they were contracted. In doing so, they reported an estimated 2,646 contacts with youth through Street Outreach/Intervention.
9 This constitutes a 47% increase over the estimated 1,800 served 2019– 2020 and is 32% higher than the 2020-2021 target of 2,000 contacts.

Challenges with Service Implementation
School and PRNS facility closures reduced participation in the BEST Grant Program’s “Personal Transformation through Cognitive Behavioral Change and Life Skills Education” eligible service area most substantially, along with the YIS Safe School Campus Initiative, Female Intervention Team, and Late-Night Gyms programs, all of which typically operate at 8 To see the breakdown of total units of service completed by eligible service area, go to page 23 of the SPR 2020- 2021 annual report - https://www.sanjoseca.gov/home/showdocument?id=83652&t=637837349615501033 9 To calculate the total number of contacts, SPR staff added the number of estimated contacts at each street outreach location reported in grantee workbooks to arrive at the total estimated number of contacts in the program year.

These numbers include duplicate youth within and across hot spot areas.

Page 9 ends

schools and PRNS facilities. Similarly, restricted access to hospitals and hospital staffing issues reduced participation in the Clean Slate Program.

In general, City and partner agency staffing vacancies impacted case management services across the Task Force spectrum. At its peak, YIS saw a 41% vacancy rate along with other temporary displacements like interim assignments that diminshed the Department’s capacity to deliver “high-touch” services to the community in 2020-2021. That said, programs which were more suitable for online/hybrid models of service delivery like Digital Arts, Trauma to Triumph, and San José Works were able to meet their service targets.

Looking Forward
Strategic Work Plan
The Task Force is now developing the 2023-2025 Strategic Work Plan, which includes a snapshot of current issues facing San José youth and community; information on existing programs and how they addressed challenges identified in the past; and a series of Task Force goals for the upcoming three-year period. This new plan will succeed the 2018-2020 plan which could not be updated earlier due to the COVID-19 pandemic. A steering committee of Task Force staff and key stakeholders is overseeing this process, and a draft plan is expected to be ready in the next three months, and the final draft of the plan will be presented to the Task Force Policy Team for approval in August 2022.

There are major changes on the horizon, including a likely new name for the Mayor’s Gang Prevention Task Force. After 25 years of branding, there is consensus from City leaders and City staff, to youth and community members that the name needs to evolve because words matter.

Several options are being considered, and feedback on the new name is a part of every engagement opportunity. The new name will be recommended to the Task Force Policy Team in June 2022.

At the heart of the strategic planning process is a series of dialogues with community groups, youth groups and stakeholder groups to solicit feedback on the approach and goals for the upcoming three years. A consultant has been hired to assist the Department in analyzing the community feedback into themes that will shape the goals of the new plan. The Department has also been collecting statistical data to depict current conditions in the community around youth crime, risk and protective factors.

The Strategic Work Plan is also working on alignment with the Reimagining Community Safety Advisory Board recommendations, new state guidance on juvenile justice, and ensuring that the extraordinary legislative changes that impact City-operated and City-funded operations, and dayto-day life in neighborhoods is documented and contextualized in the Strategic Work Plan.

BEST Request for Qualifications (RFQ)and Program Enhancements

Page 10 ends

The BEST RFQ was originally scheduled to be released in January 2022 and has been postponed to January 2023 in anticipation of the Task Force’s new 2023-2025 Strategic Work Plan. In addition, staff will take this extension as an opportunity to follow-through on modifications to the scope, objectives, and methodologies used in the past. This will be done in response to feedback staff has received to advance improvements to our performance measurement, oversight and accountability systems. To this end, onetime-funded positions, including a Senior Analyst and an Analyst, will be leveraged to support the accountability and oversight of the program through June 30, 2023. The Department is in the process of hiring for these positions.

In addition, the Department hired a consultant to assist in the evaluation of the program’s risk assessment process and tools, including the performance measurement framework to be used for all Task Force programs. With that, the Department has also formed a Partner Engagement Group comprised of currently funded BEST grantees to gather input and feedback on the BEST Grant Program’s participant intake and risk assessment process; our performance measurement framework; and the request for qualifications assessment process. The outcomes of these efforts will be reflected in the new 2023-2026 RFQ application when it is released in early 2023 and implemented for the 2023-2024 program cycle. Until August 2023, staff will continue to administer and track grant awards in accordance with the agreements established from the current list of BEST eligible service providers.

Challenges and limitations with Individual Level Administrative Data Beyond survey-based data, the Department continues to address challenges in gathering individual-level administrative data that measures the impacts the BEST Grant Program has on educational performance, criminal justice involvement, etc. Participants, parents, and grantees continue to voice reluctance in providing personal data to third-parties that can anonymize, aggregate and analyze the BEST Grant Program’s ability to affect positive, measurable change in the broader community. To address this concern, the Department will work with the newly formed Partner Engagement Group to explore how best to obtain informed consent in ways that participants and partners perceive to be safe, with results expected by June 2023. The feedback from the group will help inform the Department’s process for collecting and sharing administrative data in order to determine individual level outcomes. The Department is also pursuing a new evaluation design to explore other approaches that will incorporate the outcomes of the Partner Engagement Group.

Implementing Audit Recommendations
In May 2019, the City Auditor released an audit report, “The Mayor’s Gang Prevention Task Force: Better Coordination and use of Data Can Further the Task Force’s Strategic Goals.” On June 4, 2019, City Council directed staff to include the implementation status of the audit recommendations in this Task Force annual report. The audit included 17 recommendations and

Page 11 ends

the Department has successfully implemented twelve. The remaining five are projected to be fully implemented by spring 2023.
10 CONCLUSION
In 2020-2021, the Task Force programs continued to face challenges due to the pandemic. Most programs adapted their traditional operating models to sustain programming services to their target populations. The programs that experienced the most challenges were those providing school-based services. For those, several resorted to prioritizing participants’ mental health and socioemotional well-being in-lieu of more traditional cognitive behavioral health programming.

They did this because program staff recognized that youth were experiencing increased isolation, depression, and anxiety. Though City-staffed and BEST/SSIG grantee programs made strides to modify our approaches to service delivery in-line with public health constraints and in response to community safety concerns, all facets of the Task Force collaborative faced challenges in achieving and maintaining full-staffing throughout 2020-2021. This made administrative oversight and accountability more challenging than in past years.

Despite these challenges, the YIS, BEST, and SSIG programs, all saw increases in units of service over the prior year, with youth participants in the BEST programs continuing to report high levels of satisfaction and personal growth, as discussed above. More importantly, SPR’s evaluation of the 2020-2021 program cycle found that for psychosocial outcomes, the average scores of youth participants who had been involved in a BEST Grant Program for at least one month were significantly higher than those of baseline participants entering the program. These results suggest that youth program participants who have longer BEST-funded program involvement tend to have better psychosocial outcomes than those who are new to the program.

And there is continuing evidence that the BEST program may be having positive effects upon its participants, particularly those ages 14–24.

Looking forward to the completion of the current 2021-2022 fiscal year and program cycles, staff expects future updates on a number of pending projects, including:

1. Returning to maximum program use and an increase in unduplicated participants.

2. Finalizing the implementation of the five remaining audit recommendations.

3. Developing the 2023-2025 Strategic Work Plan.

4. Working with consultants and the BEST grantees to enhance program oversight and accountability, including:
a. Updating the performance measurement framework (units of service vs. other measures); and
10 The key updates that will be forthcoming in the March 2022 Auditor’s report can be found in Appendix B, pages 58-60: https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=10661284&GUID=1EE1F737-832F-4D4C-8242- AB01713F3C28

Page 12 ends

b. Creating a common participant risk assessment tool to be used across all the Task Force programs and partner agency contracts.

5. Pursuing a new evaluation design for the BEST Grant Program.

6. Issuing the 2023-2026 Triennial BEST Grant Program RFQ in conformance with the updated Task Force Strategic Work Plan and the oversight and accountability systems and tools developed in 2022.

CLIMATE SMART SAN JOSE
The recommendation in this memorandum has no effect on Climate Smart San José energy, water, or mobility goals.

PUBLIC OUTREACH
This memorandum will be posted on the Neighborhood Services and Education Committee agenda website for the April 14, 2022 meeting.

COORDINATION
This report was prepared in coordination with the City Manager’s Budget Office and the City Attorney’s Office.

COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION/INPUT
No commission recommendation or input is associated with this action.

CEQA
Not a project, File No PP17-009, Staff Reports, Assessments, Annual Reports, and Informational Memos that involve no approvals of any City action.
/s/

JON CICIRELLI
Director of Parks,
Recreation and Neighborhood Services

Page 13 ends

For questions, please contact Neil Rufino, Assistant Director at (408) 535-3576.

Attachment A: Task Force Programs
Attachment B: Mayor’s Gang Prevention Task Force Target Populations Profile Attachment C: 2020-2021 “Hot Spot” Areas by Police Location Attachment D: 2020-2021 Task Force Participants
ATTACHMENT A – Task Force Programs
Youth Intervention Services

1. Safe Schools Campus Initiative (SSCI) coodinates a crisis response and communication protocol to respond to campus incidents with an aim to reduce violence and maintain a safe learning environment for all youth. This program is a partnership between the City of San José, the San José Police Department, the Santa Clara County Probation, and 19 school districts with 82 middle and high school campuses. Using a federal grant, we are offering new training in identifying and responding to threats of school violence to staff at all 18 participating school districts.

2. Female Intervention Team (FIT) provides services to high-risk, gang-impacted, and gangintentional girls and women who are 11 to 24 years of age. FIT provides culturally relevant cognitive skill building groups using the Xinachtli curriculum as well as gender-responsive, trauma-informed case management and mentorship services.

3. Clean Slate Tattoo Removal Program partners with Santa Clara Valley Medical Center to assist former gang-impacted and gang-involved youth, and victims of human trafficking, with free removal of gang-related tattoos, which can be a barrier to future education and employment.

4. Trauma to Triumph (T2T) is a hospital-based violence intervention program in partnership with Santa Clara Valley Medical Center and recently expanded to Regional Medical Center of San José. Starting with bedside support for the victim of gang violence, the T2T program provides case-management assistance to prevent re-victimization and to assist gang-involved or gang-intentional victims in pursuing a different life path, helping to break the cycle of violence.

5. San José Works Youth Jobs Initiative provides work experience to youth aged 15 to 18 who reside in designated gang hot spots in San José. The program permits participants to gain work experience in various nonprofit or City jobs.

6. Digital Arts offers several courses designed to educate and engage youth through digital media. Participants acquire the skills to express themselves through the art of music production, recording, graphic design, and video.

7. Late Night Gym is offered at four gym locations (Alum Rock, Seven Trees, Bascom and Roundtable) and provides positive alternative evening activities to youth who might otherwise seek to engage in gang-related activities.

Grant-making Programs
Bringing Everyone’s Strengths Together (BEST)
In addition to City staff led programming, the City administers the funding arm of the Task Force in the delivery of the BEST Grant Program. In 2019, the Department issued a Request for Qualifications to renew the list of qualified service providers for another three years beginning with the 2019-2022 program year. During the second program year, grantees provided services in community-based, school and agency settings in one or more of the program’s five eligible service areas, and continued to provide services under the temporary sixth Emergency Services area that was added in the 2019-2020 program year to support the City’s COVID-19 response.

1. Personal Transformation through Cognitive Behavior Change and Life Skills Education

2. Street Outreach Intervention Services

3. Vocational/Job Training Services

4. Parent Awareness/Training and Family Support

5. Case Management Services

6. Emergency Services
Safe Summer Initiative Grant (SSIG) Program
In addition to the BEST Grant Program, the SSIG Program funds partner agency summer “bridge services” designed to keep youth engaged in safe, positive activities throughout the summer, thereby providing positive experiences and reducing academic learning loss between school years. Programs and services are offered under three program categories, including Educational/Cognitive Programs; Recreation, Health and Fitness Programs; and, Youth Development Programs. The Department granted $419,230 to 30 agencies in summer 2021.

Based on the scope and reach of the individual proposals, awards of up to $20,000, were granted to qualified partner agencies.

ATTACHMENT B
MAYOR’S GANG PREVENTION TASK FORCE

TARGET POPULATION PROFILES
At-Risk: This category may be distinguished from other at-risk youth in that they are residing in a high-risk community (“Hot Spot” areas, low socio-economic) and have some of the following gang risk characteristics.

1. Has a high potential to exhibit high-risk gang behaviors.

2. Has not had any personal contact with juvenile justice system.

3. Exhibits early signs of school-related academic, attendance and/or behavior problems.

4. Has periodic family crises and/or is a child welfare case.

5. Is low-income and/or lives in overcrowded living conditions.

6. Knows some neighborhood gang members but does not associate with them.

7. Is beginning to experiment with drug/alcohol use.

High-Risk: This category may be distinguished from the “at-risk” population based on the level of intensity of the following additional characteristics.

1. Admires aspects of gang lifestyle characteristics.

2. Views gang member as "living an adventure."

3. Lives in gang “turf" area where the gang presence is visible.

4. Has experienced or participated in gang intimidation type of behaviors or has witnessed violent gang acts.

5. Feels unsafe being alone in neighborhood.

6. Has family members who have lived or are living a juvenile delinquent, criminal and/or gang lifestyle.

7. Has had several contacts with the juvenile justice system and law enforcement.

8. Does not see the future as providing for him/her; has a perspective of "you have to take what you can get."

9. Casually and occasionally associates with youth exhibiting gang characteristics.

10. Has a high rate of school absences, and experiences school failure and disciplinary problems.

11. Uses free time after school to "hang out" and does not participate in sports, hobbies or work.

12. Is suspicious and hostile toward others who are not in his/her close circle of friends.

13. Does not value other people's property.

14. Believes and follows his/her own code of conduct, not the rules of society.

15. Only follows advice of friends; does not trust anyone other than friends.

16. Uses alcohol and illegal drugs.

17. Has had numerous fights and sees violence as a primary way to settle disagreements and maintain respect.

18. May have been placed in an alternative home or living arrangement for a period.

19. Does not have personal goals/desires that take precedence over gang impacted youth groups.

Gang-Impacted: Youth exhibiting high-risk behaviors related to gang lifestyles.

1. Has had several contacts with the juvenile justice system and law enforcement. Has likely spent time in juvenile hall. Has had a probation officer and/or may have participated in delinquency diversion program.

2. Has had numerous fights, and views violence as primary way to intimidate, settle disagreements and maintain respect.

3. May claim a turf or group identity with gang characteristics, but still values independence from gang membership.

4. Personally knows and hangs out with identified gang members.

5. Considers many gang-related activities socially acceptable.

6. Feels he/she has a lot in common with gang characteristics.

7. Views gang involvement as an alternative source for power, money and prestige.

8. Wears gang style clothing and/or gang colors/symbols.

9. Promotes the use of gang cultural expressions and terminology.

10. Identifies with a gang-related affiliation and/or turf, but has not officially joined a gang.

Is ready to join a gang.

11. Does not seek employment, and regards “underground economy” as a viable option.

12. Probably has gang-related tattoos.

13. Has drawing of gang insignia or symbols on notebook/book covers, other personal items.

Gang-Intentional: This category is distinguished from all other categories in that youth must be identified and/or arrested for gang-related incidents or acts of gang violence through the justice system (Police, DA, Probation, etc.).

1. May have been identified or certified as a gang member by law enforcement agencies.

2. Associates almost exclusively with gang members to the exclusion of family and former friends.

3. Views intimidation and physical violence as the way to increase personal power, prestige and rank in gang. He/she is active in "gang banging."

4. Regularly uses/abuses alcohol and other drugs.

5. Self identifies as a gang member.

6. Has spent time in juvenile hall, juvenile camp or California Youth Authority.

7. Regularly deals with gang rival and allied gang business.

8. Has gang-related tattoos.

9. Identifies specific individuals or groups as enemies.

10. Is engaged in the gang lifestyle.

11. Rejects anyone or any value system, other than that of the gang.

12. Believes that the gang, its members, and/or his/her family live for or will die for the gang.

13. Has fully submerged his/her personal goals and identity in the collective identity and goals of the gang.

ATTACHMENT C
2020-2021 HOT SPOT AREAS BY POLICE DIVISION
BEST-funded services in "Hot Spot" areas are delivered within the four police divisions of the City (Foothill, Southern, Western, and Central). These areas are developed through a process that combines administrative data with on-the-ground knowledge of the community to be sure that resources are allocated to neighborhoods that matter most. While services are provided throughout each division, there continues to be a greater emphasis on placing services in areas specifically identified as "Hot Spots," as approved by the Mayor's Gang Prevention Task Force Policy Team (April 25, 2019).

FOOTHILL DIVISION

1.Valley Palms and San José Apt. Area – Lanai Rd./Tully Rd./Cunningham Ave./Midfield Ave.

2. Kollmar Area – Story Rd./Capital Ave./McGinness Ave./Murtha Dr./Capital Ave.

3. Overfelt Area – Tully Rd./Ocala Ave./King Rd./Hillview Airport

4. Poco Way – Sunset Ave./Story Rd./King Rd./HWY 680

5. Mayfair Area – McCreery/E. San Antonio St./HWY 280/N. Jackson Ave.

6. Foxdale Area – Samoa Wy./Tallahassee Dr./Foxdale Dr./Capital Expwy.

SOUTHERN DIVISION

1. Round Table/Great Oaks Area – War Admiral Ave./Great Oaks Dr./Monterey Hwy./Edenview Dr.

2. Hoffman/Via Monte Area – Blossom Hill Rd./Gallup Dr./Almaden Expwy./Croydon Ave.

3. Seven Trees Area – Senter Rd./Cas Dr./E. Capital

4. Coy Park/Tradewinds Area – Judith St./Spinmaker Dr./Eagles Dr./Coy Dr.

WESTERN DIVISION

1. Washington Area – Grant St./Duane St./2nd St./Goodyear St./Palm St.

2. Santee/Audubon Area – Story Rd./Crucero Dr./Bacchus Dr./McLaughlin Ave.

3. Cadillac/Winchester Area – Payne Ave./Winchester Blvd./Hamilton Ave./Eden Ave.

4. Buena Vista/San Carlos Area – San Carlos Ave./Meridian Ave./Parkmoor Ave./Leigh Ave.

CENTRAL DIVISION

1. Roosevelt Park Area – McKee Rd./Story Rd./E. Santa Clara St./Coyote Creek

2. Jeanne Ave. Area – Jeanne Ave./22nd St./William St./McLaughlin Ave.

3. 10th and Williams Area – E. William St./ Margaret St./7th St.

4. Julian Street Area – 10th St./St. James St./Empire St./Coyote Creek ATTACHMENT D: 2020-2021 Task Force Participants
Task Force Participants – All Programs (YIS, BEST and SSIG) In 2020-2021, the Task Force programs served 4,973 unduplicated participants. This constitutes of decrease of 6,456 (57%) participants from 2019-2020, and a decrease of 3,467 (41%) from 2018-2019, the last full year prior to the pandemic.

Figure 1: Total Task Force Program Participants Served by Program Year Figure 2: Participants Served by Task Force Program per Year 4973
11367
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000

PARTICIPANTS SERVED
2019-2020 2020-2021
2162
3229
5976
570
2448
1955

YIS BEST SSIG
2019-2020 2020-2021
Figure 3: Youth Intervention Services Participants by Program While services are provided throughout each division, there continues to be a greater emphasis on placing services in areas specifically identified as "Hot Spots," as approved by the Mayor's Gang Prevention Task Force Policy Team (April 25, 2019). 73 111
788
165
54 517
165 203
86 0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
19-20 participants 20-21 participants

Neighborhood Services and Education Committee (nse)April 14, 2022

Neighborhood Services and Education Committee (nse)
April 14, 2022