National Evaluation of Weed &amp; Seed: Cross-Site Analysis

Dunworth, Terence; Mills, Gregory; Cordner, Gary W.; Greene, Jack P.

doi:10.1037/e521752006-001

Cited by 13 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Benzeval, 2003aBenzeval, , 2003dBostock & Sharp, 2002;Squires, 2002). Community groups are more likely to be included when the evaluation is of outcomes, but they should also be seen as a key part of an intervention's implementation process, as was shown to be important by Dunworth and Mills (1999).…”

Section: Limitations Of Available Evidencementioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Do area-based interventions to reduce health inequalities work? A systematic review of evidence

O'Dwyer

Baum

Kavanagh

et al. 2007

Critical Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reducing health inequalities by focusing health promotion efforts on specific areas rather than individuals is based on the premise that changing something about a place may improve health outcomes for people living in that place. This paper examines the evidence base regarding the efficacy of area-based interventions by reviewing evaluations of interventions aimed at reducing inequities between groups and which are based on changing a specific place. Only 24 papers met our review criteria. The overall success of area-based interventions was difficult to gauge due to the use of multiple strategies, inadequate evaluation reports, variation in the size or type of area, insufficient funding for implementation, policy changes over the course of the program and lack of long-term evaluations. However, the value of changing a place, area or location in some way was demonstrated in several studies which were adequately funded and evaluated. Thus, there is some evidence that area-based interventions reduce inequities, but more well-designed and well-timed evaluations of outcomes are necessary to draw any firmer conclusions. Explicit attention must also be given to geographical concepts associated with an area-based approach, such as area, scale, location and locality, neighbourhood, community and place.

show abstract

Section: Limitations Of Available Evidencementioning

confidence: 96%

“…There were also five evaluation studies where the success of the intervention was not clear (Bauld, Judge, Lawson, Mackenzie, Mackinnon, & Truman, 2001;Dunworth, & Mills, 1999;Squires, 2002, andTilford et al, 2002).…”

Section: Success Of Area-based Interventionsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Do area-based interventions to reduce health inequalities work? A systematic review of evidence

O'Dwyer

Baum

Kavanagh

et al. 2007

Critical Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Dunworth & Mills, 1999, p. 9; see also Dunworth, Mills, Cordner, & Greene, 1999). Often, evaluations are conducted on projects that are not fully implemented.…”

Section: Weed and Seed In Practicementioning

confidence: 97%

Weeding Criminals or Planting Fear

Bridenball¹,

Jesilow

2005

Criminal Justice Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study employed a quasi-experimental design to test the effect of a "Weed and Seed" program in a Santa Ana, California, neighborhood. The authors were specifically interested in learning how it affected the residents' attitudes about their neighborhood and their fear of crime. Interviews were conducted before and after a major "gang sweep" and Seeding in a targeted community. The results of the analyses failed to reveal any positive effects of the program on residents' attitudes and may have had the unintended consequence of enhancing citizens' fears of gang activity and crime.

show abstract

“…This program requires that resources be dedicated to both intensive law enforcement (i.e., weeding) and prevention, intervention, and restoration activities (i.e., seeding). The goals of this program are to reduce violent crime, drug abuse, and gangs by stabilizing and restoring high crime communities (Dunworth et al, 1999). Annual funding for the Weed and Seed Program increased from around $12 million in 1992 to over $58 million in 2002 (Dunworth et al, 1999;GAO, 1999GAO, , 2004.…”

Section: Other Anti-crime Initiativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Weed and Seed Program began with three pilot sites (Kansas City, Omaha, and Trenton) in 1992 and increased to 301 sites by 2002 (Dunworth, Mills, Cordner, & Greene, 1999;Justice Research and Statistics Association [JRSA], 2006). This program requires that resources be dedicated to both intensive law enforcement (i.e., weeding) and prevention, intervention, and restoration activities (i.e., seeding).…”

Section: Other Anti-crime Initiativesmentioning

confidence: 99%