THE

RISK
AND PROTECTIVE
FACTOR
RATING SCALE (RPF)
J.F. LE ROUX
MAY 2008

MANUAL

Division Clinical Psychology

Department of Psychiatry

University of the Free State

2
INTRODUCTION 4

BACKGROUND 5

RESILIENCY 5

RISK FACTORS 6

PROTECTIVE FACTORS 6

CONSTRUCTION 8

ADMINISTRATION 9

SCORING 10

STEP 1: CALCULATING RAW SCORES: 10

STEP 2: FINDING CONVERTED SCORES: 10

STEP 3: ENTERING CONVERTED SCORES: 10

INTERPRETATION 11

TABLE 1 12

TABLE 2 13

PRIMARY PROFILE 14

SECONDARY PROFILE 15

THE RISK AND PROTECTIVE FACTOR RATING SCALE 16

MEASURES FOR KEY RISK FACTORS 19

BIBLIOGRAPHY 24

3
INTRODUCTION
A LETTER FROM THE AUTHOR
As Child Psychiatry is moving from the traditional model of “Institution” or “Centre” -based services
to a community oriented and wraparound service, it has become clear to focus more on an
assessment of a child’s risk and protective factors. These factors play a pivotal role in explaining
the dynamics underlying the pathology of a child. Moreover it also explains the wellness of a child
and guide the assessor in the description of the extent to which a child complies with health and
normality.

It is therefore essential to assess and describe the resilience of a child i.e. to be able to know the
strength of a child in the face of adversity.

If a child demonstrates a mild form of psychopathology while having a large number of risk factors
together with the absence of most protective factors, the child’s resilience is high and he/she has a
better prognosis. The opposite is also true where a child with severe psychopathology in the
presence of limited risk factors and a large number of protective factors has a low resilience and
the prognosis is not so good.

There are an endless number of combinations of various risk and protective factors. The severity of
a child’s psychopathology in combination with the degree to which risk and protective factors are
present or absent, are an indication of a child’s resilience and can be a guide in the better
understanding of the psychodynamic aspects in the etiology and phenomenology of
psychopathology.

For these reasons the Risk and Protective Factor Rating Scale (RPF) was developed by the Division
Clinical Psychology at the University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa.

The hope is that the RPF will be a valuable asset in the assessment and treatment of children and
adolescents and that it will guide the clinician in focusing on the child’s development of “normality”
in contrast to obtaining an absence of psychopathology.

________________________

J.F. le Roux
Principal Clinical Psychologist and Consultant: Child and Adolescent Mental Health Centre.

4
BACKGROUND
Certain adverse experiences during childhood (e.g., sexual abuse, physical abuse, neglect) are
associated with an increased likelihood of developing psychological problems and disorders. Recent
research has also begun to uncover genetic vulnerabilities that are associated with an increased
likelihood of developing psychological problems and disorders. Genetic vulnerabilities and adverse
childhood experiences associated with an increased likelihood of developing psychological
problems and disorders are referred to as “risk factors.” Risk factors are an important consideration
when attempting to understand the likely psychological impact of adverse childhood experiences.

Although risk factors are an important part of the equation when attempting to determine the
likely impact of adverse childhood experiences, “protective factors” are equally important.
Research has found that certain protective factors serve to ameliorate the adverse impact of risk
factors. Protective factors have a profound impact on children’s ‘resiliency’—or their ability to
rebound from adverse experiences. It is now understood that resiliency plays a central role in
determining psychological outcomes for maltreated children.

Resiliency
Resiliency is characterized by positive adaptation despite exposure to considerable challenges,
traumas and threats to development. Resiliency research identifies risk and protective factors for
children exposed to varied adverse conditions including sexual abuse, neglect, physical abuse,
poverty, parental divorce and community violence.

In the last ten years alone, resiliency has been the topic of over 23000 peerreviewed journal
articles. And, a strong foundation has been established for resiliency research in widely
disseminated empirical and theoretical reports. Through this work, researchers have identified a
host of protective factors and mechanisms that contribute to resilient functioning in maltreated
children.

The risk for negative psychological outcomes from child maltreatment can be modified by both
environmental factors and genetic factors. Resiliency research to date has focused primarily on
environmental mechanisms that underlie resiliency in children. One environmental protective
factor that has been recurrently associated with positive adaptation in maltreated children is the
presence of a stable and supportive caregiver. In fact, the availability of a supportive parent or
guardian has been identified as one of the most important factors that distinguish abused children
with good developmental outcomes from those with poor outcomes. With respect to sexually
abused children in particular, the quality of the relationship between sexually abused children and
their parenting figures, more than any other environmental factor, defines children’s ability to
rebound from victimization.

In contrast to research on environmental factors, research on the genetic correlates of positive

adaptation and the interactive influence of environmental and genetic factors involved in resiliency
5
is just beginning. However, emerging research has already found that certain ‘genotypes’ can have
a powerful influence on psychological functioning. Therefore, in attempting to determine the likely
psychological impact of various forms of child maltreatment, it is important to realize that
psychological outcome is best explained by the interaction of the particular genetic and
experiential risk factors and protective factors that are operating in the child’s life.

Risk Factors
Many of the risk factors that make it likely that youth will engage in risky behaviors are the
opposite of the protective factors that make it likely that a teen will not engage in such behaviors.
For example, one risk factor is family management problems. If parents fail to set standards for
their teen’s behavior, it increases the likelihood that the teen will engage in substance abuse or
delinquent behavior. Conversely, a protective factor is effective parenting. If parents consistently
provide both nurturing and structure, it increases the likelihood that a teen will not get involved
with substance abuse or delinquent behavior and will become involved in positive activities.
Exposure to risk factors in the relative absence of protective factors dramatically increases the
likelihood that a young person will engage in problem behaviors. The most effective approach for
improving young people’s lives is to reduce risk factors while increasing protective factors in all of
the areas that touch their lives.

Risk factors function in a cumulative fashion; that is, the greater the number of risk factors, the
greater the likelihood that youth will engage in delinquent or other risky behavior. There is also
evidence that problem behaviors associated with risk factors tend to cluster. For example,
delinquency and violence cluster with other problems, such as drug abuse, teen pregnancy, and
school misbehavior.

Protective Factors
Researchers know less about protective factors than they do about risk factors because fewer
studies have been done in this area. However, they believe protective factors operate in three
ways. First, they may serve to buffer risk factors, providing a cushion against negative effects.
Second, they may interrupt the processes through which risk factors operate. For example, a
community program that helps families learn conflict resolution may interrupt a chain of risk
factors that lead youth from negative family environments to associate with delinquent peers.
Third, protective factors may prevent the initial occurrence of a risk factor, such as child abuse. For
example, infants and young children who are easy-going may be protected from abuse by eliciting
positive, rather than frustrated, responses from their parents and caregivers.

Recent scientific studies have shown that community resources also can influence individual
teenagers’ positive traits. For example, young people are more likely to be a part of youth
organizations and sports teams if their parents perceive that the community is safe and that it has
good neighborhood and city services (such as police and fire protection or trash pickup). Similarly,
youth are more apt to be exposed to good adult role models other than their parents when
communities have informal sources of adult supervision, when there is a strong sense of community,

6
when neighborhoods are perceived to be safe, and when neighborhood and city services are
functioning.

7
CONSTRUCTION
Assessment will disclose potential indicators of risk and protective factors influencing youth in the
community. Explore available data to determine the extent of impact those risk and protective
factors are having on youth in the community and their influence on identified issues to focus on.
Once the risk and protective factors to be addressed are identified, efforts to address those factors
can be applied by proven programs and strategies.

Risk factors and protective factors are organized into five categories:

Individual
Family
School
Peer group
Community

The RPF is divided into two sections, namely Risk and Protective. Each section is subdivided into
the five categories (Individual, Family, School, Peer group and Community). Each category has a list
of elements descriptive of the category.

The presence or absence of a specific element is evaluated by the clinician and indicated on the
rating scale.

The various elements are by no means meant to be exhaustive but do represent a broad range of
indicators regarding risk and protection.

Further development will refine the elements to be even more representative. Another future
development will be to construct specific resilience scales for e.g. delinquency, sexual abuse, eating
disorders etc.

8
ADMINISTRATION
There is no formal procedure in the administration of the RPF. The clinician can use any means
available to obtain information to be able to rate an element as present or absent.

It is essential that the clinician must ensure that information is reliable and valid. Confirm that a
specific piece of information supporting an element is based as much as possible on fact and not on
speculation or opinion. Remember that the primary source of information (patient, family or
caretakers) can be distorted in perceptions of various risk and protective factors. It is the task of
the clinician to evaluate the degree of reliability and validity of information. If in doubt, it is helpful
to crosscheck some information by accessing other sources to confirm reliability and validity.

The normal procedure in administration of the RPF is to interview the child/adolescent as well as
the family or caregivers. This can be done separately or together. Any missing or doubtful
information can then be confirmed by obtaining collateral information. If the clinician is still unsure
of the reliability and validity of the descriptors of an element after exhausting all resources, the
element can be scored based on clinical judgment.

For each Category the clinician indicates the presence or absence of an element by entering a
check mark in the corresponding box, for example:

Family
Family history of problem behavior/parent criminality
Family management problems/poor parental supervision and/or monitoring
Poor family attachment/bonding
Child victimization and maltreatment

Pattern of high family conflict

Family violence

The clinician may extend the rating over more than one session or even integrate the rating with
the interview and complete the elements afterwards.

When the clinician is sure that all elements have been verified as absent or present, the scoring of
the answer sheet may be completed.

9
SCORING
The scoring of the RPF is designed so that all calculations can be done by hand with the aid of a
calculator.

Step 1: Calculating raw scores:

1. Add the checked elements for each category separately.
2. Add the totals of all categories for the Risk and Protective sections separately

Step 2: Finding converted scores:

For each category for the Risk and Protective Factors respectively do the following:
1. Start with the First category of Risk Factors (Individual).
2. In TABLE 1, find the corresponding value in the top row (Yellow)
3. Move down to the corresponding category row (Individual) in the Pink row.
4. Make a note the converted score displayed in the block.
5. Continue with the rest of the categories for Risk and Protective Factors making a note of
each category’s converted score.
6. In TABLE 2, find the corresponding total for the Risk Category in the first (Yellow) column
and make a note of the converted score in the Risk (Pink) column. Do the same for the
Protective Category total score in the Protective (Green) column.

Step 3: Entering converted scores:

1. Enter the converted score for each category into the Primary Profile Graph next to the
nearest corresponding value on the Y-Axis. Note: The nearest corresponding value is
rounded off to the nearest 5% of a Y-Axis value, e.g. a value of 31 will be entered in the row
corresponding to 30 on the Y-Axis and a value of 33 will be entered in the row
corresponding to 35 on the Y-Axis.
2. Enter the totals for the Risk and Protective Categories in the respective columns in the
Primary Profile Graph.
3. Calculate the secondary order values (Factor A to J) in the Calculation table, e.g. for Factor B
add converted scores in row A and F and divide it by 2. Add converted score in row B to this
result and divide the result by 2. Enter the final result in the Factors column. Continue to
calculate all the Factor scores (A to J) and enter the result in the Factors column. Finally,
enter the Factor results into The Secondary Profile Graph using the same principle as set
out in step 3.1.

10
 INTERPRETATION
The clinician is free to analyze and interpret the results in any meaningful clinical manner. The
basis of interpretation is:

1. Describe the intensity of Risk Factors – Primary Profile Graph Left section.
2. Describe the availability and intensity of Protective Factors – Primary Profile Graph Right
section.
3. Describe the differences and/or similarities between Risk and Protection Primary Profile
Graph Left and Right sections.
4. Describe the relative influence of Protective Factors on individual functioning (combined
Risk and Protection for Individual Category as related to each one of the other Categories) –
Secondary Profile Graph Left Section.
5. Describe the differences and/or similarities of the relative combined and separate
influences of Risk and Protection on each one of the various Categories.

The aim of interpretation is to assist the clinician in making an educated assessment of the
multivariate influences and clinical presentation of Risk and Protective Factors in a
child/adolescent.

It is important to confirm the results of the RPF with the clinical picture of the patient. Any
differences between the RPF and the clinical picture must be reassessed and if differences still exist
the clinical picture assumes priority.

Finally, interpretation aids not only in assessment, but is a valuable tool in treatment planning by
integrating strengths and weaknesses in an individual in therapy to ensure that a patient receives
maximum benefit from treatment.

11
 TABLE 1

RISK AND PROTECTIVE FACTORS RATING SCALE (RPF)

Le Roux, JF. (May 2008)

TABLE 1
RISK FACTORS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 RAW SCORE
CONVERTED
1 INDIVIDUAL 9 18 27 36 45 55 64 73 82 91 100 SCORES
CONVERTED
2 FAMILY 8 15 23 31 38 46 54 62 69 77 85 92 100 SCORES
CONVERTED
3 SCHOOL 13 25 38 50 63 75 88 100 SCORES
CONVERTED
4 PEERS 25 50 75 100 SCORES
CONVERTED
5 COMMUNITY 11 22 33 44 56 67 78 89 100 SCORES

PROTECTIVE FACTORS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 RAW SCORE

CONVERTED
6 INDIVIDUAL 100 86 71 57 43 29 14 SCORES
CONVERTED
7 FAMILY 100 75 50 25 SCORES
CONVERTED
8 SCHOOL 100 86 71 57 43 29 14 SCORES
CONVERTED
9 PEERS 100 67 33 SCORES
CONVERTED
10 COMMUNITY 100 83 67 50 33 17 SCORES

INSTRUCTIONS:

1. Administer Risk and Protective Rating Scale

2. Calculate total for each category as well as totals for Risk and Protective Factors. Then continue with TABLE 1 to retrieve converted scores
3. For Risk items find the converted score by cross referencing the raw category total (Yellow row/Row 1) with the respective risk categories (Pink row/Rows 1 - 5)
Example: Patient had a total score of "3" on the School Category under "Risk" factors. The "3" in the yellow row (Row 1) corresponds with
a converted score of "38" in the Risk Factor section in the Row for the "School" category (Row 3)
4. Do the same for Protective Factors
5. Enter the various converted scores into the Primary Profile Graph
6. The Totals for "Risk" (Maximum 45) and "Protective" (Maximum 27) are converted with TABLE 2 and also entered in the Primary Profile Graph
7. Secondary Factors are calculated with the following formula:

RPF = Risk Category 1 + Protective Category 1 + Protective Category 2 "to" 5"

2

2
8. Enter the calculated figures in Secondary Profile Graph

12
TABLE 2
TABLE 2
TOTAL SCORES RAW SCORE RISK PROTECTIVE

45 100
44 98
43 96
42 93
41 91
40 89
39 87
38 84
37 82
36 80
35 78
34 76
33 73
32 71
31 69
30 67
29 64
28 62
27 60 4
26 58 7
25 56 11
24 53 15
23 51 19
22 49 22
21 47 26
20 44 30

19 42 33

18 40 37
17 38 41

16 36 44
15 33 48
14 31 52
13 29 56
12 27 59
11 24 63
10 22 67
9 20 70
8 18 74
7 16 78
6 13 81
5 11 85
4 9 89
3 7 93
2 4 96
1 2 100
0
13
 PRIMARY PROFILE

PRIMARY PROFILE
INTENSITY OF RISK ASSESSMENT
100 WORSE
95
90
85 CRITICAL
80
75
70
65 PROFOUND
60
55
50
45 MODERATE
40
35
30
25 SLIGHT
20
15
10
5
0 NORMAL BETTER
INDIVIDUAL FAMILY SCHOOL PEERS COMMUNITY TOTAL TOTAL INDIVIDUAL FAMILY SCHOOL PEERS COMMUNITY

RISK FACTORS PROTECTIVE FACTORS

14
 SECONDARY PROFILE
SECONDARY PROFILE
DYNAMIC INTERACTION OF INTERRELATIONSHIPS

100 WORSE
95
90
85 CRITICAL
80
75
70
65 PROFOUND
60
55
50
45 MODERATE
40
35
30
25 SLIGHT
20
15
10
5
0 NORMAL BETTER
FACTOR A FACTOR B FACTOR C FACTOR D FACTOR E
INDIVIDUAL FAMILY SCHOOL PEERS COMMUNITY TOTAL TOTAL INDIVIDUAL FAMILY SCHOOL PEERS COMMUNITY

A B C D E F G H I J
FACTORS RESOURCES
INFLUENCE OF PROTECTIVE FACTORS COMBINED RISK AND PROTECTIVE FACTORS
ON INDIVIDUAL RESILIENCE FOR ALL CATEGORIES
AS COMPARED TO

CALCULATION
COVERTED
RISK SCORE FACTORS

A INDIVIDUAL (A+F)/2 =
B FAMILY (((A+F)/2)+ G)/2 =
C SCHOOL (((A+F)/2)+ H)/2 =
D PEERS (((A+F)/2)+ I)/2 =
E COMMUNITY (((A+F)/2)+ J)/2 =
TOTAL (A+B+C+D+E)/5 =

PROTECTIVE RESOURCES

F INDIVIDUAL (A+F)/2 =
G FAMILY (B+G)/2 =
H SCHOOL (C+H)/2 =
I PEERS (D+I)/2 =
J COMMUNITY (E+J)/2 =
TOTAL (F+G+H+I+J)/5 =
15
 THE RISK AND PROTECTIVE FACTOR
RATING SCALE

NAME:.....................................................................................................................................................

BIRTHDATE:.......................................................................................

DATE OF EVALUATION:.....................................................................

EVALUATED BY:.................................................................................

RISK FACTORS
Individual
 Antisocial behavior and alienation/delinquent beliefs/general delinquency
involvement/drug dealing
 Gun possession/illegal gun ownership/carrying
 Teen parenthood
 Favorable attitudes toward drug use/early onset of AOD use/alcohol/drug use
 Early onset of aggression/violence
 Intellectual and/or development disabilities
 Victimization and exposure to violence
 Poor refusal skills
 Life stressors
 Early sexual involvement
 Mental disorder/mental health problem

Family
 Family history of problem behavior/parent criminality
 Family management problems/poor parental supervision and/or monitoring
 Poor family attachment/bonding
 Child victimization and maltreatment
 Pattern of high family conflict
 Family violence
 Having a young mother
 Broken home
 Sibling antisocial behavior
 Family transitions
 Parental use of physical punishment/harsh and/or erratic discipline practices
 Low parent education level/illiteracy
 Maternal depression

16
School
 Low academic achievement
 Negative attitude toward school/low bonding/low school attachment/commitment to
school
 Truancy/frequent absences
 Suspension
 Dropping out of school
 Inadequate school climate/poorly organized and functioning schools/negative labeling by
teachers
 Identified as learning disabled
 Frequent school transitions

Peer
 Gang involvement/gang membership
 Peer ATOD use
 Association with delinquent/aggressive peers
 Peer rejection

Community
 Availability/use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs in neighborhood
 Availability of firearms
 High-crime neighborhood
 Community instability
 Low community attachment
 Economic deprivation/poverty/residence in a disadvantaged neighborhood
 Neighborhood youth in trouble
 Feeling unsafe in the neighborhood
 Social and physical disorder/disorganized neighborhood

TOTAL ITEMS PRESENT

17
PROTECTIVE FACTORS
Individual
 Positive/resilient temperament
 Religiosity/valuing involvement in organized religious activities
 Social competencies and problem-solving skills
 Perception of social support from adults and peers
 Healthy sense of self
 Positive expectations/optimism for the future
 High expectations

Family
 Good relationships with parents/bonding or attachment to family
 Opportunities and reward for prosocial family involvement
 Having a stable family
 High family expectations

School
 School motivation/positive attitude toward school
 Student bonding and connectedness (attachment to teachers, belief, commitment)
 Academic achievement/reading ability and mathematics skills
 Opportunities and rewards for prosocial school involvement
 High-quality schools/clear standards and rules
 High expectations of students
 Presence and involvement of caring, supportive adults

Peer
 Involvement with positive peer group activities and norms
 Good relationship with peers
 Parental approval of friends

Community
 Economically sustainable/stable communities
 Safe and health-promoting environment/supportive law enforcement presence
 Positive social norms
 Opportunities and rewards for prosocial community involvement/availability of
neighborhood resources
 High community expectations
 Neighborhood/social cohesion

TOTAL ITEMS PRESENT

18
Measures for Key Risk
Factors
Risk/Protective Instrument Name
Factor Name
Attachment to School
Measure 1: National Youth Survey
(NYS)
Measure 2: What About You (WAY)
Measure 3: Self-reported grades
Peer Influence
Measure 4: American Drug and
Alcohol Survey (ADAS)
Measure 5: What About You
(WAY), forms C & E
Measure 6: Survey of Youth
Measure 21: Survey of Risk and
Protective Factors Associated with
Adolescent Alcohol, Tobacco, and
Other Drug Use ("Communities That
Care Youth Survey")
Conduct Problems
Measure 8: Child Behavior Checklist
(CBCL) & Teacher’s Report Form
(TRF)
Measure 9: Conners’ Rating Scales
You can obtain the instrument from:
Delbert S. Elliott, Institute of Behavioral Science,
University of Colorado, Campus Box 483, Boulder, CO
80309. Phone: (303) 492-1266
Gary D. Gottfredson, Ph.D., Gottfredson Associates, Inc.,
3239B Corporate Court, Ellicott City, MD 21042. Phone:
(410) 461-5530
N/A
RMBSI, Inc., 419 Canyon Ave., Ste. 316, P.O. Box 1066,
Fort Collins, CO 80522. Phone: (800) 447-6354
Gary D. Gottfredson, Ph.D., Gottfredson Associates, Inc.,
3239B Corporate Court, Ellicott City, MD 21042. Phone:
(410) 461-5530
Ronald L. Akers, Ph.D., Dept. of Sociology, P.O. Box
115950, University of Florida, Gainseville, FL 32611-5950.
Phone: (904) 392-1025
Channing Bete Company, One Community Place, South
Deerfield, MA, 01373-0200
Phone: 877-896-8532
Child Behavior Checklist, 1S. Prospect Street, Burlington,
VT 05401-3456. Phone: (802) 656-8313; Fax: (802) 656-
2602
Multi-Health Systems, 908 Niagra Falls Blvd., North
Tonawanda, NY 14120-2060. Phone: (800) 456-3003; Fax:
(416) 424-1736
19
 Measure 10: Youth in Transition
Survey (YIT)
Measure 11: Rutter Child Scale,
Form B
Measure 12: Revised Behavior
Problem Checklist (RBPC) - PAR
Edition
Measure 21: Survey of Risk and
Protective Factors Associated with
Adolescent Alcohol, Tobacco, and
Other Drug Use ("Communities That
Care Youth Survey")
Impulsivity/Low Self Control
Measure 14: I7
Measure 15: Junior I6
Measure 16: Functional and
Dysfunctional Impulsivity Scale
Measure 17: Self-Control Rating
Scale
Measure 18: Teacher’s Self-Control
Rating Scale
Belief in Conventional Social Rules
Measure 19: What About You
(WAY), Forms C and E
Measure 20: RTI Panel Study Survey
Measure 21: Survey of Risk and
Protective Factors Associated with
Adolescent Alcohol, Tobacco, and
Other Drug Use ("Communities That
Care Youth Survey")
Attitudes Favoring Substance Abuse
Jerald G. Bachman, Ph.D., Institute for Social Research,
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. Phone:
(313) 763-5043
Michael Rutter, FRS, MRC Child Psychiatry Unit,
University of London Institute of Psychiatry, London SE5
8AF, United Kingdom
Psychological Assessment Resources, P.O. Box 998,
Odessa, FL 33556. Phone: (800) 383-6595; Fax: (800) 727-
9329
Channing Bete Company, One Community Place, South
Deerfield, MA, 01373-0200
Phone: 877-896-8532
Hodder and Stoughton, Test Dept., 338 Euston Rd., London
NW13-H, United Kingdom. Phone: (0171) 873-6000, Fax:
(0171) 873-6299
Sybil B.G. Eysenck, Dept. of Psychology, Institute of
Psychiatry, DeCrespigny Park, Denmark Hill, London SE5
8AF, United Kingdom
Scott J. Dickman, Dept. of Psychology, University of Texas,
Austin, TX 78712
Phillip C. Kendall, Ph.D., Dept. of Psychology, Temple
University, Philadelphia, PA 19122
Laura Lynn Humphrey, Ph.D., Dept. of Pediatrics,
University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics, Madison, WI
53792
Gary D. Gottfredson, Ph.D., Gottfredson Associates, Inc.,
3239B Corporate Court, Ellicott City, MD 21042. Phone:
(410) 461-5530
Research Triangle Institute, P.O. Box 12194, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709
Channing Bete Company, One Community Place, South
Deerfield, MA, 01373-0200
Phone: 877-896-8532
20
 Measure 22: Drug Attitudes Scale
Measure 23: Survey of Youth
Measure 24: What About You
(WAY), Forms C and E
Social Competency and Peer Rejection
Measure 25: Peer Rejection
Measure 26: Social Skills Rating
System (SSRS)
Measure 27: Walker-McConnell
Scale of Social Competence and
School Adjustment—Elementary
Version (K–6)
Measure 28: Walker-McConnell
Scale of Social Competence and
School Adjustment—Adolescent
Version
Substance Use in the Family
Measure 29: Various items or sets of
items measuring family history of
substance abuse
Measure 21: Survey of Risk and
Protective Factors Associated with
Adolescent Alcohol, Tobacco, and
Other Drug Use ("Communities That
Care Youth Survey")
Parental Attitudes Favorable to Substance Use
Measure 31: Various items or scales
measuring parental attitudes
favorable toward substance abuse
Family Processes
Measure 32: Family Environment
Scale (FES), Form R
Michael Stephen Goodstadt, Addiction Research
Foundation, 33 Russell St., Toronto, Ontario M5S 2S1,
Canada
Ronald L. Akers, University of Florida, Dept. of Sociology,
P.O. Box 115950, Gainesville, FL 32611-5950. Phone:
(904) 392-1025
Gary D. Gottfredson, Ph.D., Gottfredson Associates, Inc.,
3239B Corporate Court, Ellicott City, MD 21042. Phone:
(410) 461-5530
N/A
American Guidance Service, Publishers’ Building, Circle
Pines, NM 55014. Phone: (800) 328-2560
Singular Publishing Company, 4284 41st St., San Diego,
CA 92105. Phone: (800) 521-8545
Singular Publishing Company, 4284 41st St., San Diego,
CA 92105. Phone: (800) 521-8545
N/A
Channing Bete Company, One Community Place, South
Deerfield, MA, 01373-0200
Phone: 877-896-8532
N/A
Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc., 3803 E. Bayshore Rd.,
Palo Alto, CA 94303. Phone: (800) 624-1765
21
Measure 33: Conflict Tactic Scale
(CTS)
Measure 34: O’Leary Porter Scale
(OPS)
Measure 35: Conflict Behavior
Questionnaire (CBQ)
Measure 36: What About You
(WAY), Forms C and E
Measure 37: Family Instrument
Measure 38: The Oregon Youth
Study
Measure 39: Parenting Scale
Measure 40: McMaster Family
Assessment Device (FAD)
Measure 41: Children’s Report on
Parent Behavior (CRPBI B 30)
Measure 42: Family Environment
Scale (FES), Form R
Measure 43: Family Instrument
Measure 44: Family Adaptability and
Cohesion Evaluation Scales B II
(FACES II)
Measure 21: Survey of Risk and
Protective Factors Associated with
Adolescent Alcohol, Tobacco, and
Other Drug Use ("Communities That
Care Youth Survey")
Murray A. Straus, Family Research Laboratory, University
of New Hampshire, Durham, NH 03824. Phone: (603) 862-
1888
K. Daniel O’Leary or Beatrice Porter, Dept. of Psychology,
State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook,
Stony Brook, NY 11794. Phone: (516) 632-7850
Ronald J. Prinz, Dept. of Psychology, University of South
Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208. Phone: (803) 777-4137
Gary D. Gottfredson, Ph.D., Gottfredson Associates, Inc.,
3239B Corporate Court, Ellicott City, MD 21042. Phone:
(410) 461-5530
N/A
The Mother Report Discipline scale can be obtained by
contacting Oregon Social Learning Center, 207 E. 54th
Ave., Ste. 202, Eugene, OR 97401. Phone: (541) 485-2711.
Send a self-addressed envelope, stamped envelope to Susan
G. O’Leary, Dept. of Psychology, State University of New
York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY 11794-2500. Phone:
(516) 632-7833.
N/A
Edward and Shirin Schludermann, Dept. of Psychology,
University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3T
2N2. Phone: (204) 474-9617.
Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc., 3803 E. Bayshore Rd.,
Palo Alto, CA 94303. Phone: (800) 624-1765.
N/A
The FACES II instrument may be obtained by calling (602)
625-7250 or writing Family Inventory Project (FIP), Family
Social Science, University of Minnesota, 290 McNeal Hall,
St. Paul, MN 55108. A publication containing abstracts of
over 600 studies completed using the FACES instruments is
also available.
Channing Bete Company, One Community Place, South
Deerfield, MA, 01373-0200
Phone: 877-896-8532
22
 Measure 46: National Youth Survey
(NYS)
Measure 47: Monitoring the Future
(MTF)
Measure 48: American Drug and
Alcohol Survey (ADAS)
Measure 49: What About You
(WAY), Forms C and E
Delinquent or Criminal Behavior
Measure 50: National Youth Survey
(NYS)
Measure 51: Monitoring the Future
(MTF)
Measure 21: Survey of Risk and
Protective Factors Associated with
Adolescent Alcohol, Tobacco, and
Other Drug Use ("Communities That
Care Youth Survey")
Sexual Activity
Measure 53: Scale of AIDS risk
(SAR)
Measure 54: Life Events
Questionnaire (LEQ)
Measure 55: Sexual Risk
Withdrawal from School
Measure 56: School records of
truancy and dropout
Measure 57: Self-report items
measuring dropout and truancy from
school
Delbert S. Elliott, Institute of Behavioral Science,
University of Colorado, Campus Box 483, Boulder, CO
80309. Phone: (303) 492-1266
Dr. Lloyd D. Johnston, Institute for Social Research,
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. Phone:
(313) 763-5043
RMBSI, Inc., 419 Canyon Ave., Ste. 316, P.O. Box 1066,
Fort Collins, CO 80522. Phone: (800) 447-6354
Gary D. Gottfredson, Ph.D., Gottfredson Associates, Inc.,
3239B Corporate Court, Ellicott City, MD 21042. Phone:
(410) 461-5530
Delbert S. Elliott, Institute of Behavioral Science,
University of Colorado, Campus Box 483, Boulder, CO
80309. Phone: (303) 492-1266
Dr. Lloyd D. Johnston, Institute for Social Research,
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. Phone:
(313) 763-5043
Channing Bete Company, One Community Place, South
Deerfield, MA, 01373-0200
Phone: 877-896-8532
N/A
Michael D. Newcomb, 722 Kensington Rd., Santa Monica,
CA 90405-2420. Phone: (310) 825-5735
N/A
N/A
N/A
23
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Arthur, M. W., J. D. Hawkins, J. A. Pollard, R. F. Catalano, A. J. Baglioni, Jr. (2002), “Measuring Risk
and Protective Factors for Substance Use, Delinquency, and Other Adolescent Problem Behaviors.
The Communities That Care Survey,” Evaluation Review, 26(6):575-601.

Catalano, R. F., J. D. Hawkins (1996), “The Social Development Model: A Theory of Antisocial
Behavior.” In J. D. Hawkins (ed.), Delinquency and Crime: Current Theories (pp. 149-197), New York:
Cambridge University Press.

Guo, J., J. D. Hawkins, K. G. Hill, R. D. Abbott (2001), “Childhood and Adolescent Predictors of
Alcohol Abuse and Dependence in Young Adulthood,” Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 62(6):754-762.

Hawkins, J. D., R. F. Catalano, et al. (1992), Communities That Care, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hawkins, J. D., M. L. Van Horn, M. W. Arthur (2004), “Community Variation in Risk and Protective
Factors and Substance Use Outcomes,” Prevention Science, 5(4):213-220.

Howell, J. C. (2003), Preventing and Reducing Juvenile Delinquency: A Comprehensive Framework,

Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Howell, J. C., A. Egley, Jr. (2005), “Moving Risk Factors Into Developmental Theories of Gang
Membership,” Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 3(4):334-354.

Kegler, M. C., R. F. Oman, S. K. Vesely, K. R. McLeroy, C. B. Aspy, S. Rodine, L. Marshall (2005),

“Relationships Among Youth Assets and Neighborhood and Community Resources,” Health
Education and Behavior, 32(3):380-397.

Kirby, L. D., M. W. Fraser (1997), “Risk and Resilience in Childhood.” In M. W. Fraser (ed.), Risk and
Resilience in Childhood (pp. 10-33), Washington, DC: National Association of Social Workers.

Stouthamer-Loeber, M., R. Loeber, E. Wei, D. P. Farrington, P. H. Wikstrom (2002), “Risk and

Promotive Effects in the Explanation of Persistent Serious Delinquency in Boys,” Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 70(1):111-123.

24