Salem As A Safer Child
Community Initiative
A Report by the Salem State University
Center for Childhood & Youth Studies on the
Symposium Findings
April 17, 2013
Compiled by
Yvonne Vissing & Quixada Moore-Vissing1 2
1
Thanks are given to the Facilitators and Reports who provided the information contained in this report.
Thanks are given to all of the speakers, participants, funders and all those whose efforts made the symposium
possible and successful.
2
Overview
On Wednesday, April 17 about 100 people from different agencies in Salem met with
Salem State University students, administration, faculty and staff to discuss how to make
the City of Salem as safer community for children and youth. The event included two
keynote presentations, one by Dr. Diane Levin of Wheelock College on When The World
Is A Dangerous Place: Meeting the needs of children in a violent society, and One Point: A
Community Collaboration by Salem Juvenile Court Justice Sally Padden and the On Point
team, including police officers, probation officers, and members of the Plummer Home
for Boys. These fine keynote presentations provided a scholarly context and an
exemplified the benefits of what can occur when people work together to make children
and the community safer. During lunch, students from the On Point project performed
an original song they had written about the Sandy Hook shootings.
In order for all of the partners in Salem to be willing to dedicate themselves to the issue of
making Salem as safer community for kids, the symposium focused upon the use of a
deliberative dialogue format in which key questions were asked of small groups of
participants. The deliberative dialogue format is a model advanced by the New
Hampshire Listens program and the conversations were designed to focus on what was
important to the members about key safety issues, to identify values and needs, intended
to increase input and information on complex decisions that must be made about how to
keep kids safe and were organized to allow the greatest possible time for everyone to
speak and listen to explore ideas, understand differences, and determine future actions.
This report focuses on the findings obtained in these community conversations.
Participants in the facilitated conversations were asked to focus upon Problem
Identification, Problem Prevention & Treatment, Identification of Obstacles and
Prioritization of the Issues. In particular, these included:
Problem Identification:
1. What types of child or youth safety issues do you think are the greatest concern
here in Salem? Don’t discuss solutions at this phase – just brainstorm problems
and issues.
Problem Prevention/Treatment
2. What additional information or resources do we need to identify next steps?
3. What are some ways you think the safety concerns could be addressed?
Identification of Obstacles
4. What do you think are the greatest challenges we may confront in addressing
them?
a. Structural challenges
b. Resource challenges
c. Attitude challenges
d. Other challenges?
Do you have ideas about how these could be overcome?
Prioritization
5. What is the thing that you’d like to see most in our community to protect kids?
6. Think of the range of all the things we could/should do, and what are the most
urgent?
7. What do you think are the most important issues or topics to address in the
upcoming months? What concrete steps could we take?
Findings
There were six facilitated groups consisting of about a dozen people each. Each group
contained a facilitator and a recorder. The findings of the groups have been aggregated
below. Detailed information provided in the focus groups can be found in Appendix A
and B. The feedback provided was rich and useful. It is not the role of the Salem State
University Center for Childhood & Youth Studies to tell the city of Salem and its leaders
what it should do to make Salem a safer community for children. Rather, information
about what the leaders observed and recommended are provided in this report. It is up to
community leaders to decide what to do with this information. We hope the information
provided below will facilitate that process.
Problem Identification
There was almost universal agreement among participants at the symposium that
families, schools, neighborhoods and the community/society as a whole needed to be a
safer place for kids. While individual comments varied, the same themes came up in the
groups, leading to the conclusion that there was some consensus within the participants
about what the problems were. Particular comments have been summarized in the
following categories, in alphabetical order.
Access to after school and recreational programs. Many participants voiced a concern
that there needed to be more for kids of all ages to do. Financial issues were seen as an
obstacle when kids could not afford programs. Some participants felt that there needed to
be greater access to recreation and more available locations for them. Participants in
some groups advocated for kids to have safe places for unstructured play. Others felt that
funding for qualified staffing and safe spaces is an important issue and felt it was
important to have trained and skilled staff to work with programs.
Accountability was seen to be important both for kids and for organizations. Many
participants asserted that there needs to be appropriate and high quality training for staff
in different environments and clear organizational protocols and policies. Some felt that
coordination of resources needs to be improved, as does more community collaboration,
wrap around services, and sharing of information. Some participants talked about how
band-aid solution don’t work and how we need to look at the root cause. Use of parentpartner services was recommended by many who attended the symposium. The
Children’s Behavioral Health Initiative (CBHI) and Children’s Friend and Family Services
were mentioned as possible helpers. Some participants felt there is a disconnect between
research/info available about kids and public policy and how resources are appropriated.
Participants in general felt it was important for community leaders to arrive at some kind
of consensus about what the needs are and which needs to pursue. Some participants felt
that coordination of the services must come from the leaders e.g. mayor, religious
communities, bringing cultural communities together and that “Leaders must lead.”
Communication issues were identified to be a problem by many participants who
argued that “no one is talking to each other”. This appears to be directed at several levels:
organizational, with the different agencies and professionals not having regular
opportunities to really talk and explore issues and solutions with each other, as well as at
the family level where parents and children don’t really talk with each other about serious
issues or even have dinner together. Understanding each other in general was seen to be
an issue, with some participants particularly concerned about those for whom English is
not their first language. Communication was also a problem in terms of people knowing
about available resources and how to help. Participants felt that people often don’t know
what resources are out there or how to find them. Use of Public Service Announcements
may be helpful ways to get the word out.
Gun control and access to weapons – Participants were not of like-mind with how best
to control children’s access to weapons or about the larger issue of gun control. It was
clear that everyone cared about the issue and making kids safer, but exactly how to do
that with respect to gun control, was not uniform.
Health Issues were identified to be important considerations for keeping kids safe.
Participants included eating (from obesity to anorexia), access to physical, dental and
mental health services, sexual and reproductive services, etc. Water safety was also
identified as a concern, as was safe driving. Depression and suicide in kids is something
many participants felt the community should be more attentive to, and some felt that
kids need more access to mental health services and there needs to be less stigma
associated with getting the help they need.
Homeless and at-Risk Youth. Many participants in the facilitation groups felt that
Salem has runaways, homeless youth, unaccompanied minors, those involved in a
prostitution network, organized criminal activity, gangs, cults, and the lack of services
moves youth underground. They expressed concern over how to identify victims, what
services should be offered, and whether the community had safe places for children if
they were removed from dangerous situations.
Language and Cultural Barriers. Salem was seen as a diverse community and some
participants felt that providers need to be attentive to the cultural and language divisions
that exist and find ways to reach everyone. Problems for recent immigrants were
discussed, with focus on communication issues and the challenges especially for older
youth who were new to country/community. There are also differences culturally in child
care and how parents think children should be raised that can prove challenging for the
community.
Peer Pressure, including bullying, cyber bullying, social/media pressure, and the normal
range of challenges that face children of all ages were discussed as a concern. Peer
pressure was associated with the creation of social problems like gangs or drug use or
personal problem like stress and anxiety. How to combat it was discussed,
Poverty was identified in most groups to be a problem. Poverty and lack of access to
needed resources was seen by many participants to be a problem for many children and
youth. Associated problems discussed were feelings of desperation, access to affordable,
safe housing, adequate food, and access to health care. Single parent families were seen
by the participants to experience more economic pressure than other families, but they
agreed that even two parent families have problems making ends meet. Some
participants talked about the pressure kids face when trying to fit in and have the “right”
clothes and objects. Some participants felt that parents may not be able to afford them
which can put kids in difficult situations. Members in some of the facilitation groups
talked about the pressures kids face to participate in activities that the families can’t
afford. In some cases kids are working to help support their families, according to some
participants.
School Support. Some participants felt that schools should be open, well equipped, wellstaffed and have better resources. Some expressed a concern that schools do not have
what they need to do their jobs as well as needed. Social curriculum was regarded by
some participants to be an important addition to the school curriculum. Teaching
children about values, integrity, and character were seen to be by some group
participants to be important part of the school experience. Some participants felt there
students often faced limited accesses to services, especially those needing special
education services, broadly defined. Some felt teachers needed more support from school
administration and more coordination among programs and services for kids to maximize
student success.
Sexualized behaviors. Some participants were concerned that sexual contact seems to
be occurring at younger ages. Sexual harassment, rape, pregnancy, and STDs were
identified by some participants to be issues of concern, as was youth prostitution, sex
trafficking, and sexual exploitation.
Stress for children and youth was identified by some participants to be a problem. Many
felt there was more stress for kids in schools, at home, and in the community than there
used to be, but how to combat that was unclear.
Substance Abuse. While not a new problem, more different kinds of drugs were
identified to be available to youth in Salem. Some participants were worried that drug
use occurs at young ages. Prescription drug abuse was seen to be more of a concern than
it was in the past, according to some informants, who felt that parents could be taught
better storage systems and in general how to limit youth access to them. Usefulness of
the DARE program was discussed, as was how can youth develop a more positive
relationship with police and law enforcement officials.
Technology and Social Media Concerns, including bullying – cyber/online, what
information youth are exposed to in the media and online, texting, sexting, whether all
youth really have access to media, and whether some have too much access to
inappropriate information were topics of conversation in most groups. Participants also
discussed if technology had become a distraction and disengaged kids from life. Some
group participants felt that even toys have moved away from being creative and relying
upon human interaction to machine-driven. Technology and its relationship to
imagination was also a concern among some people, but not all. Some alleged that many
youth have developed multi-screen addiction and that parents may use media as a way of
parenting their kids and keeping them busy instead of engaging them in real human
interactions.
Violence in the home, including child abuse including physical, sexual and emotional,
exposure to domestic violence, and neglect, were topics of conversation in most groups.
Some felt that parents may not have the skills for good discipline and don’t know how to
deal with kids who have behavior problems. Verbal abuse was seen as a concern by some
who were concerned that many kids are exposed to vulgar language and disparaging,
non-respectful communication.
Youth activities and responsibilities were seen to be a concern among some
participant who wanted to make sure youth had enough to do outside of school, more
work opportunities, increased responsibilities for youth, and greater supervision at home
and within the community. Questions about how can the community engage youth to be
more involved in positive activities were explored. Also of concern to some was the issue
of latch-key kids and those with absent parents.
Problem Prevention & Treatment
Participants were divided about how best to prevent problems and to make Salem as safer
community for children and youth. Most identified the family level, the school level, and
the community level to be important players in this quest.
At the family level, most regarded parent education to be important and many
recommended that parents receive better conflict resolution and communication skills,
more knowledge about and access to community resources, ways to keep drugs and
weapons locked away from their children, and more time to supervise them and resources
to assist them. Monitoring children and teens can be very challenging and some
participants suggested that mechanisms be developed so parents can do a better job
monitoring them. Anti-poverty programs and financial support were seen to be
important resources by many participants, as were faith community involvement.
At the school level, better funding in general was deemed necessary by some participants.
Providing students with good citizenship skills, interpersonal relations, and self-worth
were things that some participants thought could be very useful. Some felt that teachers
need more information on risk and how to help kids whom they believe could benefit
from some additional assistance or interventions. Teacher education on how to deal with
potentially problematic situations or behaviors was identified by some participants to be
potentially useful. Some educators felt they needed more support from administrators.
At the community level, the role of nonprofit organizations, government and political
leaders, and the criminal justice community were identified to be of vital importance by
almost all of the participants. Some felt that police need to be trained to use age and
developmentally appropriate interactions and interventions. Creation of a juvenile
mental health court was thought to be useful by some participants. After school free
activities at parks and recreation places need to be better supervised and safer, according
to some group members.
Many of their prevention ideas were integrated into other questions, particularly the one
on Priorities. We encourage you to take a close look at that for more detail.
Identification of Obstacles
Participants were able to identify safety concerns, and they were also able to zero in on
challenges and obstacles to addressing safety issues. These included, by theme:
Administrative Complications. Some participants indicated that organizations tried to
help keep kids safe but sometimes the sheer nature of their structures made that hard.
Sharing of information, coordination of services, connecting the dots, working with
insurance companies to make sure kids get the services and care they need, implementing
programs with teeth that will make an impact instead of providing band aid solutions
were seen as essential by many participants in the groups. Staff burn-out was thought to
be common when they have inadequate resources and support to do their job well,
according to some respondents.
Advocacy. Some participants felt that people talk about wanting to help kids and
actually do want to do so, but sometimes issues pertaining to helping youth take a backseat to other adult concerns. Courage to implement and support youth activities
(imagination, knowledge, of models) was deemed important by many group members.
Making child safety a priority was a topic of lively conversation in groups. Knowing how
best to advocate for programs is a concern. Members discussed issues such as sometimes
programs exist and parents/kids/professionals don’t know about them, so how can we let
people know they exist so they can be used? How can we develop parent and youth
leadership in communities – they need opportunities and skills?
Attitude challenges. Some participants felt that turf issues and silo mentalities prevail
within organizations which may get in the way of creating partnerships and more
effective programs. Understanding the needs and ways of other cultures was identified to
be important by some members and finding ways to respectfully respond to their needs.
Some felt we need climate change with regard to language/social marketing with win-win
motto and having a different attitude about responsibilities and who is responsible for
what is important. Some members felt that the “it takes a village” idea of helping children
sometimes seems lost in the territorial and time battles and the NIMBY or not my
problem attitude is an obstacle when it comes to making the community safer for kids.
Some argued that people have different vested interests on what they need and want and
it often gets in the way of doing what is the right thing for kids. Changing demographics
result in increased ethnic and cultural differences, which create the need for
multicultural, multi-linguistic competence according to some participants.
Family Issues. Participants were generally in agreement that families have lots of
pressures upon them and that some are more resourceful and functional than others.
Money, relationship, work, time, conflict, and other issues confront people daily. Many
felt that when people have economic woes, substance abuse problems or are going
through domestic violence or divorce the challenges mushroom. Some children lack
positive role models. Some surmised that families who are fragmented, isolated, and are
not well supported or connected would benefit with increased supports.
Finances. Poverty and economic distress was identified by some members to be a big
problem for families and for communities as a whole. How to pay for interventions and
preventions was identified by some to be a huge stumbling block for helping to keep kids
safe. Many groups talked about the need for more staff, more training, professional
development or better pay, but where would the money come from? Some felt that
budgets in organizations and schools are already strapped tight and that mental health
services and recreation are needed by kids, but often they are not free so they wondered
how are kids supposed to access them. A common question was - How can we get
financially limited families to be willing to pay for extra services for their child when they
have problems putting food on the table?
Information. Decision makers and program implementers need access to good
information according to some participants. Some discussed the value of qualitative or
quantitative data, program information, and a host of other material. For instance, one
participant noted that evidence will let us better target areas for services, ie– New
England is known for opiate trafficking. Many participants felt they needed more
information from the community and parents and ideas about how to engage them as
partners in child safety.
Intention. How do get people to care? How can we get parents to take the time to work
with their kids? How can we get administrators to provide the leadership and funding to
do what is best for kids? These types of questions were asked in some sessions.
Lack of services. Some participants indicated kids lacked access and availability to
services and things that would help them, especially in mental health services. Many felt
that lack of access also concerned child care, after school, and recreational services.
Music, sports, arts and special interest programs may not be affordable for kids according
to some informants. Others felt that transportation may also pose to be an obstacle when
services are not nearby.
Over-reliance on technological solutions. While technology can be a wonderful thing,
it is no replace for human contact according to some participants. Others were more
supportive of the role of technology. How to help children and youth gain personal
contact or work through a problem were identified by some participants to be important
areas for involvement.
Resourceful systems. Coalition building/partnerships that are community based are
necessary, as is funding promoting this system of care according to some participants.
Ways to make the programs sustainable for the long term with the help of businesses
partnering with communities for safety of children are essential were explored. A
clearinghouse of resources to coordinate a resource center model to help kids, parents
and professionals was thought to be helpful by some group members. Knowing who is
doing what and integrating the networks would be cost-effective strategy and provide
better services, some participants alleged. Some recommended creating a more
integrated system in which there is more available knowledge of resources and marketing
to help others know about them would be beneficial and would help increase public
access to services. Some felt that education could be provided in different locations
where people may be able to access them more readily, like community health centers,
and schools.
Rigidity in programs. Some participants felt that children and youth may not get needs
met because organizations are unable to address them. Some raised questions like, “If a
child needs mental health services and has no insurance or parental consent, which
professionals can see them?. If a school wants to implement a program on how to get
along with others or some other socially responsible topic and there isn’t funding or a
place in the curriculum or school day, how can it be provided?” Some participants felt
that standardized testing takes up much of the time in schools to the detriment of
providing other information that students may find very valuable in life.
Time. Time was discussed by many participants to be an issue in many ways. Some
alleged that it takes a long time for organizations to decide to do things, a long time to
figure out what, and a long time to implement them. The bureaucratic and political
systems (internal and external) often complicate getting things done. Some teachers
reported wanting to add social skills units to the curriculum but it was already so packed
that it was hard to find the time to do so. A few mentioned that children need time
“outside” to interact with their world – fresh air, parks, playgrounds, gardens (safe), but in
over cramped schedules or when parents are concerned that their kids won’t be safe
there, they don’t have the outside time they need. Another dimension of time
mentioned is when professionals resort to simple, expeditions responses instead more
detailed ones because they simply have too much to do in too little time for too many
people.
Next Steps
The general consensus among participants at the Salem as a Safer Child Community
symposium was that it was important to work together as a community toward making
children in Salem safer. There were many wonderful ideas put forward on how to do so.
Many of these are discussed in the appendix. Three major themes included:
1. Create an ongoing network of child safety stakeholders. Suggested options
included:
Create a resource guide that can be made available to professional and individuals
identifying where to get needed resources. The guide would also identify gaps to
be filled by new program endeavors.
Identify the stakeholders from every sector of society
Increase stakeholders and groups that focus on prevention or community
development
Formalized wrap-around meetings with decision makers in Salem so organizations
can network with each other on a regular basis was thought to be useful.
Strategize about how to involved community and families.
Consider round table discussions with decision makers in Salem that will lead to
increased transparency and shared information
Hold local town meetings where youth, parents, providers and community leaders
could discuss issues and explore solutions
Devise a marketing strategy to increase involvement in community-child safety
Develop strategies to provide more support for teachers and parents
Make sure to develop stronger cultural inclusion
Provide team building opportunities in the community for schools, families,
organizations
Strengthen the community by increasing community leadership from within.
Generate discussions with parents (keep the communication going from daycare to
high school)
Collaboration (not just when a problem comes up)
Communication (back and forth, not just one direction)
2. Collect more information about what youth and the community needs.
Suggested options included:
A youth oriented town meeting could be useful. Youth could be the target group
and they could identify their own problems, needs and solutions.
Community coalition with parents and leaders’ involvement
Education about what strategies really work supported by research – an evidence
based practices approach
People don’t know who is doing what. Figure out ways to get needed information
on resources out to professionals, parents and youth.
Use data gathering strategies on Salem you, such as the YRBS
3. Provide more support and funding for
Education
Health
Family support
Social Services
Mental health
Criminal Justice
Recreation
The Salem As A Safer Child Community Initiative
Other recommended actions included:


















Start at home with the help of community leader, e.g. reconnect with family by
doing simple things
Have meal together as family e.g. Lynn, school with family centered model
Gun safety
More summer activities/community sponsored
More education on effects of bullying/cyber bullying
Legislation to cover electronic communication
Laws to empower the victims to come forward
Have an advisory set up where two parties feel safe
Summer/after school programs
Community care movement
Develop mental health education plan
Create a multi-faceted strategy
Language and culture to build effective “bridges” helpful connections
Acknowledge and address fears – parents/kids/teachers
Address the acceptance of violence in all segments of society
Pressuring legislature to fund projects that really work – not the expedient thing –
projects that address underlying issues – poverty
Shift emphasis from embracing diversity to fostering inclusivity
Involved kids in creating the solutions problems they face


































Salem State host a conference like this with kids in the community and have them
identify problems and solutions
Give kids a voice
Get politically involved
Getting educated on real risks
Learning screen management
Identify family friendly activities
Let Salem State be the voice of Salem
Resources – overuse/underuse
Healthy images and role models
Role of schools, more proactive
Training in “how to” have productive conversations
Community – school, home, city, agency
Information (on resources, programs, services)
Access to resources, knowing who to call
Information for parents, educators, students
Training on resources -> referrals
Strengthen the community by increasing community leadership from within.
Increase education and training programs for teachers, law enforcement and social
services providers
Increase resources for programs (such as education, health, mental health) and for
parents and agencies (schools, health centers)
Develop stronger cultural inclusion
Making resources and information access more transparent
Relationships – community connections
Partnerships with schools and safety agencies
Communication with families, schools, community
Neighborhoods – positive – know each other, help each other
Adult Education and support (for parents)
Information
Parents as Partners (community lead)
We need effective ways to engage parents in the process
Shift the paradigms
Social Skill Development
Educate whole child
Curriculum
Play spaces – play opportunities








Community AND schools
Meeting the family where they are at
o Includes multicultural education (and perspective when delivering services)
o Adult education
Increase community philosophy and resource/programs
o Low cost/free
o Community outreach – law enforcement
Increase funding and increase resources
Create foundation linked to tourism and Halloween
Increase community leadership
Access to HC/MHC
Don’t separate children from their families. In order for children to be safe, we
need to support the family.

Summary
Feedback obtained by the participants at the April 17 2013 Salem as a Safer Child
Community Symposium during the focus groups, on the quantitative and qualitative data
on the program evaluation, and interviews with key participants, indicated that a) they
appreciated the opportunity to meet together in partnership to talk about the issues of
child safety in Salem, b) that they were willing to work together in the future, and c) that
they had very good ideas about what the issues were and how to address them.
A follow-up meeting will be held in November 2013. Participants in the April symposium
are encouraged to attend. It will also be open to the community. The agenda will focus
upon how to advance the community’s child safety efforts and interests. More
information will be sent out about that event later.
Two grants were submitted to support the continuation of this project, one through the
MA Department of Juvenile Justice and one through Salem State University’s Strategic
Plan Grants. Neither was awarded funding. Therefore, at this time, there is no formal
financial support for the continuation of the Salem as a Safer Child Community Initiative.
The SSU Center for Childhood and Youth Studies (CCYS) will organize space for a halfday meeting in November 2013. The agenda for that meeting is for people to come back
together with concrete information and ideas that we can share to determine how to
move child safety forward in Salem. In the meantime, we hope that organizations and
groups will meet and work together to continue creating partnerships that we can add to
this initiative.
The CCYS and On Point team have provided examples of collaboration that we hope will
inspire you to work diligently on child safety issues. The possibility of working together
on grants and projects is huge. However, we must all be aware that improved child safety
can occur only if we actively pursue that goal. We have created this opportunity and
encourage you to realize that as individuals and organizations, it’s up to us.
Let us know how we can help.
Respectfully submitted,
Yvonne Vissing, PhD
Director, Center for Childhood & Youth Studies
Salem State University 335 MH
Salem, MA 01970
yvissing@salemstate.edu
(978) 542-6144
Appendices
A.
B.
C.
D.
Small group reports
Facilitator notes
Sponsor Appreciation
Event photographs
Appendix A
Small Group Reports for Salem as a Safer Child Community
Group 1
Facilitator Krishna Mallick
Group Report Submitted by Hope Benne
6 people in group
1. Please list the types of child safety issues identified by your group. Put a * by those deemed
especially important.
Domestic violence, physical, and sexual abuse/child abuse
Poverty
Access to health services including mental health
Cyberbullying
Lack of constructive summer and after school programs
Various schools and officers not coordinated
Lack of coordination between schools, churches, and agencies helping family and children
2. What were the solutions or activities suggested by the group to help address the issue of child
safety in Salem?
1. Parent to parent help with domestic violence – Children’s Behavioral Health Initiative
2. Encourage and lobby community leaders – principals, mayor city counselors, churches, to place
children as a very high priority
3. Coming to consensus on needs
4. PSA’s on SAT-TV
5. DARE program Drug Awareness Resistance Program
3. Please list the types of challenges or obstacles discussed in your group.





Community coordination
System has emphasized technology rather than human values
Codes of silence
Intervention programs often require having Mass Health, so other children may not get
services
More needs to be done for children’s mental health care


Development of parent leadership
Gun control needed, violence glorified
Attitude challenges:




Adjusting assumptions about other people
Superintendents and principals insist on better behavior and language in schools
Emphasize friendly competition in community
Win/win frameworks and slogans such as “Can’t do it alone”
4. What are your group’s specific input, concerns, and recommendations?
 More coordination between agencies for children’s safety
 A clearinghouse in community for children and families
 Funding for children’s welfare programs
 Partnering between universities, state agencies, and businesses
5. What other information does your group feel important to pass along in the summary report?
 Change will start in the home in partnerships and with community leaders
 Schools offer children and parents educational help in the evening
 Communities should offer constructive summer programs
 More education on effects of bullying including cyber bullying
 Empower victims to come forward
 Small safe groups set up in schools to talk over any and all issues
Most important issues:


Set up community coalitions with parents and community leaders, mental health care, SATTV
Identify key stakeholders
Group 2
Facilitator: Pat Ould
Group Report Submitted by Tiffany Lever
7 people in group
1. Please list the types of child safety issues identified by your group. Put a * by those deemed
especially important.
 Disconnect between research information available about kids and public policy and how
resources are appropriated
 Creating a better environment for teachers and having support from administration
2. What were the solutions or activities suggested by the group to help address the issue of child
safety in Salem?



Salem State University providing a youth forum to discuss the same topics.
Family day to reach out to all families to enjoy together
Expanding network to expand stakeholders in representing specific groups (law enforcement,
public health, government)
3. Please list the types of challenges or obstacles discussed in your group.
 Getting agencies to talk and coordinate with each other to solve problems with the
community
4. What are your group’s specific input, concerns, and recommendations?
 Create a multi-faceted strategy to focus on families to determine issues they are facing
 Putting pressure on politicians for change in public policy to support families
5. What other information does your group feel important to pass along in the summary report?
 Marketing strategies to encourage families to participate in solving problems for children
within our community
 Giving kids a voice in the community
Group 3
Facilitator: Cynthia Mclorey
Submitted by Anya McDavitt
8 people in group
1. Please list the types of child safety issues identified by your group. Put a * by those deemed
especially important.
 Technology/cyberbullying
o Social media
o Kids seeing too much on media and accessing technology (inappropriate)
o Drugs a major issue (parents and youth)
o Lack of resources and coordination of resources – this is not formalized
o Language
o The family – the breakdown of the family unit – the family is the filter
o Poverty
2. What were the solutions or activities suggested by the group to help address the issue of child
safety in Salem?
 Round table discussion groups with decision makers to help with servicing the family
 Adult education
 Better access to services
 Town meeting in local communities – “community pride” to support people
3. Please list the types of challenges or obstacles discussed in your group.
 Disconnect of accessing services for families








Lack of coordination of resources – not formalized
Not sharing information
Language and cultural barriers
You can’t separate the child from family
Knowledge, accessible, marketing of resources
Public transportation
Medical services
Burn out from service providers
4. What are your group’s specific input, concerns, and recommendations?
 Delivery of counseling services to youth is a concern
o Better access to mental health services
 Round table discussion groups with decision makers at the table for better service
 You can’t separate the family from the child
o Serve the child, serve the family
 Language and cultural barriers
5. What other information does your group feel important to pass along in the summary report?
Final Priorities:
1. Don’t separate children from their families. In order for children to be safe, we need to
support the family.
a. Round table discussions with decisionmakers in Salem (increase transparency and
share information)
b. Town meetings (local)
2. Meeting the family where they are at
a. Includes multicultural education (and perspective when delivering services)
b. Adult education
Group 4
Facilitator: Jim Gubbins
Submitted by Rebecca Hains
11 people in group
1. Please list the types of child safety issues identified by your group. Put a * by those deemed
especially important.
 Poverty
 Media
 Families under stress
 How to balance work life
 Guns/control
 Parental discipline issues
 Traffic safety – texting while driving
 Health issues
2. What were the solutions or activities suggested by the group to help address the issue of child
safety in Salem?
 Get public schools involved
 Advocacy groups
 Supporting non-profits/community organizations like the Y
 Getting political-letting politicians know how we feel
 Counter arguments to gun support/gun education
3. Please list the types of challenges or obstacles discussed in your group.
 Children are never a priority in our society
 How much time is spent in front of a screen?
 The nag factor
 Commercialization -> marketing to children
4. What are your group’s specific input, concerns, and recommendations?
 More research
 Better communication
5. What other information does your group feel important to pass along in the summary report?
 More funding
 What underutilized resources are out there?
Group 5
Facilitator: Christine Shaw
Group report submitted by Stephanie Zeller
8 people in group
1. Please list the types of child safety issues identified by your group. Put a * by those deemed
especially important.
 Gangs
 Bullying
 Violence at home
 Neglect – lack of adult supervision
 Poverty – access to housing
 Limited English
 Prostitution
 Increased stress in schools
 Environmental factors – homes/neighborhood
 Reduce human connection

Technology – information, access, distraction
o Toys/play -> move to machine technology from human interaction
2. What were the solutions or activities suggested by the group to help address the issue of child
safety in Salem?
 Access to after school programs
 Safe places for unstructured play
 Funding for qualified staffing and safe places
 Accountability -> follow through
 Social curriculum is important
 General discussions with parents, collaboration
 How to have productive conversations -> training
 Community – school, home, city, agency
3. Please list the types of challenges or obstacles discussed in your group.
 Time to add social skills etc. to curriculum, bring into classroom and afterschool
 Money to pay staff in afterschool programs
 Funding for playspace (open, clean, safe)
 School leaders need imagination for research to generate new programs
4. What are your group’s specific input, concerns, and recommendations?
 Time outside for kids
 Limited access to services
 Run-aways ->homeless youth, prostitution problems
 Safe places for children in dangerous situations
5. What other information does your group feel important to pass along in the summary report?
Information:




Access to resources
Information for parents, educators, students
Training on resources
Adult education
Relationships:



Community connections
Partnerships with schools and safety agencies
Communication with families, schools, community (positive)
Parents as Partners:

Communication, collaboration, effective ways to engage parents in process (shift paradigm)
Educate whole child
Group 6
Facilitator: Yvonne Ruiz
Group Report Submitted by Sharon Zajac
8 people in group
1. Please list the types of child safety issues identified by your group. Put a * by those deemed
especially important.
 Child abuse – within families, emotional physical
 Bullying in schools – including cyberbullying
 Drug use/abuse – substance abuse, alcohol
 Poverty
o Create desperation
o Lack of resources
o Inadequate hosing
o Family instability
o Cults/cliques and gangs
o Family well-being
o Shelter
o Food
o Basic needs
o Parental abuse
o Latch key kids
o Deployed
o Incarcerated
2. What were the solutions or activities suggested by the group to help address the issue of child
safety in Salem?
 Teacher education – support from management
o What teachers can do to help children
o Be aware of problems in the community as well as the home
 Increase community resources (i.e. police)
 More after school programs that are free
 Parenting in communication and boundaries
 More parental involvement – see what your children are doing on computer
3. Please list the types of challenges or obstacles discussed in your group.
 Lack of shared spaces in community
 More staff training (teachers)
 The school system needs to implement
 Lack of connections in neighborhoods, families, etc.
 Cost of after school programs





Need parent education
Community safety impacts child’s sense of safety
Recreational resources
Safe community
Use appropriate law enforcement education
4. What are your group’s specific input, concerns, and recommendations?
 More community run programs for both at risk and not at risk kids
 Increase free programs – or low cost programs
 More community outreach programs
o Need funding
o More community leaders
 Create a foundation around Halloween Tourism
5. What other information does your group feel important to pass along in the summary report?
 Lack of access to health care and mental health care
 Lack of providers to manage child’s safety issues
o Abuse
o Family issues
o Medical community needs to be more involved in identifying issues
 Need more community leaders, community pride
 Strengthen the community
 People need a voice
Appendix B
Facilitator Notes
Group 1
Concerns:

















Domestic violence
o Vulgar language at home
Poverty
Access to health services
Cyber bullying 24/7
o Issue
Cultural approaches with child care
Lack of programs for children
Coordination of all the programs
Band-aid solution doesn’t work. Need to look at the root cause – Children’s Behavioral
Health Initiative (CBHI)
Parent-partner services
Wrap around services
Children’s friend and family services
Coming to some kind of consensus about what the needs are, which needs are low cost
Coordination of the services must come from the leaders e.g. mayor, religious
communities, bringing cultural communities together
Forums (dialogue) help kids feel safe with police
Public service announcement (PSA)
DARE (Drug Awareness Resistance Programs)
Teaching children about values, integrity, character
Structural Challenges:





Education system emphasizing technology
Sharing of info (coordination, connecting the dots)
State funding
More emphasis on prevention rather than band aid solutions
Work with health insurance companies on mental health
Resource Challenges



Coalition building/partnerships that are community based
Developing parent leadership in communities
Funding promoting this system of care


Ways to make the programs sustainable for the long term with the help of businesses
partnering with communities for safety of children
Clearinghouse of resources to coordinate family resource center model
Attitude challenges:





Turf issues
Understanding/responsiveness to other cultures
Climate change with regard to language/social marketing with win-win motto
Having a different attitude about responsibilities
Not my problem attitude
5,6,7:








Start at home with the help of community leader, e.g. reconnect with family by doing
simple things
Have meal together as family e.g. Lynn, school with family centered model
Gun safety
More summer activities/community sponsored
More education on effects of bullying/cyber bullying
Legislation to cover electronic communication
Laws to empower the victims to come forward
Have an advisory set up where two parties feel safe
Most important issues:




Community coalition with parents and leaders’ involvement
Start identifying the stakeholders from every sector of society
Summer/after school programs
Community care movement
Group 2
Problems:



Domestic violence
Sexually exploited kids
o Trafficking
Substance abuse issues
o Availability








o Lack of services
o Kids involvement in selling
Bullying
Depression/mental health/suicide
Poverty
o economic issues
o single parent families
o pressure to participate in activities
o pressure to have clothes/objects
Kids working to help
o Support family
Disconnect between research/info available about kids and public policy and how
resources are appropriated
Environment for teachers
o Support from school administration
Lack of coordination among programs/services for kids and schools
Support for teachers after administration
Obstacles/Priorities:








Obstacles:
o Resorting to simple, expeditions responses
o Expansion of teacher role to more than education
Priority:
o Education about what strategies really work supported by research
o Focus on families to determine issues they are facing
o Develop mental health education plan
o Create a multi-faceted strategy
Acknowledge and address fears – parents/kids/teachers
Increase stakeholders
o Groups that focus on prevention or community development
Address the acceptance of violence in all segments of society
Pressuring legislature to fund projects that really work – not the expedient thing –
projects that address underlying issues – poverty
Shift emphasis from embracing diversity to fostering inclusivity
Involved kids in creating the solutions problems they face
Next steps:


Use our networks to include more stakeholders in this process
Strategize about how to involved community and families





Develop strategies to provide more support for teachers and parents
Provide team building opportunities in the community for schools, families, organizations
Marketing strategy:
o Have Salem participate in the youth risk survey
Salem State host a conference like this with kids in the community and have them
identify problems and solutions
Give kids a voice
Group 3
Problem Identification:







Family (2 parents – can they be fully responsible for tech?
Technology
o Cyberbullying
o Texting
Coordination of resources
o Need for community collaboration
o Wrap around services
o Sharing of information is needed
Families don’t know about resources (lack of knowledge access)
Language and cultural barriers
Drugs (prescription drugs)
Quick escalation of conflict into violence
Priorities:


Family
o Start with community leaders
o Needs support
Language and culture
o Build effective “bridges” helpful connections
Challenges:







Poverty (cuts across all subgroups)
Finances and resource allocation
Knowledge of resources and marketing (ER example)
Public access to services
Time
Attitude
Burn out (professionals)








Cultural acclimation
Target areas – New England is known for opiate trafficking
Delivery of counseling services for adolescents
Town meeting (micro)
o Inform families about resources
Formalized wrap-around meeting with decisionmakers in Salem organizations can
network
Community health centers – awareness and need for trade skills, classes, networking
Adult education
Better access to mental health services
Final Priorities:
3. Don’t separate children from their families. In order for children to be safe, we need to
support the family.
a. Round table discussions with decisionmakers in Salem (increase transparency and
share information)
b. Town meetings (local)
4. Meeting the family where they are at
a. Includes multicultural education (and perspective when delivering services)
b. Adult education
Group 4

Stressed families
o Economical
o Cultural

Drug use/abuse
o Storing safely



Bullying
Lack of affordable after school activities and supervision
Media exposure
o Multi screen addiction
Safe playgrounds
Parental discipline
o Parental styles
Gun control












Mental health
Informing parents of resources
Water safety
Unsafe driving
o awareness
Stigma of help
Mental health issues
Priority of children
o Structural
o Attitude
Screens, media technology
o In a way of parenting
o Taking away from relationships
Poverty
Solutions:



Public schools
o Parent education
o Advocacy
o Religious
Nonprofits
o Politics
o Prevention
o Gun education
Education on risk
o Importance on children
o Feeling safe
Next Steps:








Get politically involved
Getting educated on real risks
Learning screen management
Identify family friendly activities
Salem State be voice of Salem
Resources – overuse/underuse
Healthy images and role models
Role of schools, more proactive
Group 5 (group labeled self group 6 incorrectly)
Bullying – cyber/online
Violence in home
Neglect
Poverty
Limited English – communication challenges

Increased responsibilities for youth
Prostitution (youth engaged and environment)
Increased stress in schools
Older youth – new to country/community
Housing – availability and access to housing
Environments (safe)



Homes
Neighborhoods
Schools
Lack of supervision/adult etc

Safety – both physical and violence issues
No one is “talking” to each other
Interactions – human
Technology/media – info, access, distraction
Toys –play – move to machine interactions from human interactions, imagination
Access to after school programs – not just location but also financial
Safe places for unstructured play (real challenges)
Schools should be open, well equipped, staffed
Funding for qualified staffing and safe spaces
Staff training and skilled staff to work with programs
Accountability -> training (for staff in different environments) – protocol and policies
Social curriculum is important
Limited access to services – special education services
Run aways, homeless youth, unaccompanied minors
Prostition – network – organized criminal activity – moves youth underground


How do we identify victims?
What do we offer to them, what services do we offer?
Do we have safe places for children if we remove them from a dangerous situation
Access to weapons
Strategies and Resources:
Generate discussions with parents (keep the communication going from daycare to high school)
Collaboration (not just when a problem comes up)
Communication (back and forth, not just one direction)
Training in “how to” have productive conversations
Community – school, home, city, agency
Obstacles:
Time to add social skills, etc. to curriculum after school
Funding to pay staff in OST (hopefully at a “good” rate and hire)
Funding for play/space (open)
Funding for professional development
Information to decision makers
Courage to implement and support youth activities (imagination, knowledge, of models)
Priority
Time “outside” to interact with their world – fresh air, parks, playgrounds, gardens (safe)
Emphasis on testing – labeling, medicating, inequity in course conten
Priorities:
Information (on resources, programs, services)



Access to resources, knowing who to call
Information for parents, educators, students
Training on resources -> referrals
Relationships – community connections



Partnerships with schools and safety agencies
Communication with families, schools, community
Neighborhoods – positive – know each other, help each other
Adult Education and support (for parents)

Information
Parents as Partners (community lead)


We need effective ways to engage parents in the process
Shift the paradigms
Social Skill Development




Educate whole child
Curriculum
Play spaces – play opportunities
Community AND schools
Group 6
Types of child/youth safety:








Child abuse – emotional, physical
Bullying, cyber bullying, peer pressure, social/media pressure
Drugs/ETOH
Poverty/desperateness/lack of resources for basic needs
Cults/gangs
Parental absence/latch key
Early sexual activity
Obesity/DMI
Resources needed:


Teacher education to deal with situations
o Support from management
o Practical training
o Parental resources to monitor children
 Boundaries/structure/communication
Police and safety for age appropriate interactions and interventions
Safety concerns:





After school free/supervised (parks and rec department)
Adult surveillance
Safe communities
Shared open space (safe)
Police and safety personnel
Challenges for child and youth safety:

Structural:
o family, economy, divorce
o Lack of positive role models
o System deficits – DYS, JuviSx

Resources:
o budget – national, state, agencies, families
o Lack of mental health
o Lack of education

Attitude:
o need for multicultural, multi-linguistic competence
o changing demographics
o ethical and cultural differences

Other:
o Isolation – lack of family connections
Prioritize:


Increase community philosophy and resource/programs
o Low cost/free
o Community outreach – law enforcement
Increase funding and increase resources



Create foundation linked to tourism and Halloween
Increase community leadership
Access to HC/MHC
Final Priorities:
1. Strengthen the community by increasing community leadership from within.
2. Increase education and training programs for teachers, law enforcement and social
services providers
3. Increase resources for programs (such as education, health, mental health) and for parents
and agencies (schools, health centers)
4. Develop stronger cultural inclusion
5. Making resources and information access more transparent
Appendix C
Sponsor Appreciation
The Center for Childhood and Youth Studies would like to give particular
thanks to the following, who made this day possible.
Salem State University
Kristen Esterberg, Provost
Jude Nixon, Dean of Arts and Sciences
Eileen O’Brien, SSU Institutional Advancement
Chartwells of SSU
Carol Glod, Graduate School
Mary-Lou Breitborde, Center for Education & Community
Patricia Ould, Sociology Department
Ron Rodriguez, Instructional Media and staff
Adria Leah, President’s Office
Anna Wolfe and Margo Steiner, Marketing
Center for Childhood and Youth Studies
also Eric Metchik, James Gubbins, Christine Shaw, Beverly Gerson, Krishna
Mallick, Hope Benne, Rebecca Hains, Yvonne Ruiz, Stephanie Zeller, Corey Grasso,
Shraddha Gaikwad, Sharon Zajac, Andrew Allen, Mary Byrne, Tiffany Lever and
countless others who have given their time, energy and concern to this project
Students in Sociology 370: Seminar in the Sociology of Children
Diane Levin, Wheelock College
Salem Juvenile Justice Sally Padden and the On Point Team
Salem student music group
Quixada Moore-Vissing, UNH
North Shore Mediation, Anya McDavitt and Cynthia McClorey
Appendix D Event Photographs
ON POINT Keynote Speakers
Diane Levin, Keynote Speaker
Luncheon, Ellison Campus Center
Luncheon Music: On Point Student Band
Small Group “Town –Gown” Facilitated Dialogue Groups
State Senator & SSU Alum, Joan Lovely