What impact does court-ordered therapy have on incarcerated youth, and how do these experiences with mandated treatment vary between male and female adolescence? In this study we will be examining the efficiency of court-ordered therapy for incarcerated youth and the ways male and female youth experience required treatment differently. The purpose of this study is to analyze survey data collected by the Office of Child’s Representatives. Surveys such as the Likert scale will be conducted either in person or over the phone. Each survey will begin with democratic questions such as race, gender, and age as well as therapy type, case type, and therapeutic licensure. Surveys will be examined with Mann-Whitney U tests and Kruskal-Wallis tests, which are nonparametric statistical tests used to identify statistically significant differences between independent groups. The Mann–Whitney U tests compare two groups, whereas the Kruskal-Wallis tests compare three or more groups. Chi-square tests will be used to explore relationships between demographics and outcomes. Chi-square tests are statistical hypothesis tests used to determine if there is a significant relationship between categorical variables. We hypothesize that court-ordered therapy produces less meaningful outcomes than voluntary therapeutic engagement. Additionally, we hypothesize that female youth will demonstrate greater receptivity to treatment and achieve more positive therapeutic outcomes than male youth. We believe this research matters because male youth are overrepresented in juvenile correctional settings. If court-ordered therapy is less effective than voluntary engagement and male youth are less receptive to therapy, we may be demanding an intervention that isn’t working.

Veteran Theory is a culturally grounded, practice-informed model developed through a qualitative, exploratory study examining how veterans interpret and navigate reintegration. Thematic analysis of open-ended responses from 10 veterans revealed recurring patterns of identity disruption, communication differences, institutional mistrust, stress responses, and the search for belonging. These patterns informed the development of a four-stage framework, Return, Navigate, Align, and Advance, that conceptualizes reintegration as an ongoing cultural process rather than a discrete transition event. Eric Hodges notes that 93% of Americans have no connection to military culture, creating a reintegration environment where veterans often feel unseen, misunderstood, and culturally isolated. This cultural disconnect contributes to identity loss and moral injury, reinforcing the need for a culturally grounded framework such as Veteran Theory (Hodges, 2013). The framework integrates trauma-informed, empowerment-based, ecological, and intersectional perspectives, positioning veteran behavior as culturally conditioned and frequently adaptive. Practice-aligned mechanisms of action, such as the Identity Logbook and Movement-Optional Participation, operationalize the framework into practical strategies for engagement and identity reconstruction. The model also addresses the experiences of veterans whose reintegration is shaped by structural precarity, including those who are incarcerated, deported, or navigating undocumented status. Veteran Theory offers a culturally specific lens that may help professionals, program developers, and community practitioners interpret veteran experiences and design responsive interventions. As an early-stage qualitative model grounded in lived experience, it establishes a foundation for future research, refinement, and application across clinical, community, and carceral settings.

Multi-Dimensional Family Therapy (MDFT) is a treatment approach that helps adolescents and their families address substance use and related challenges. Research has shown that MDFT can reduce substance use and improve psychological, behavioral, and family functioning outcomes among adolescents (Greenbaum et al., 2015). By strengthening family support systems and addressing risk factors across multiple areas of an adolescent’s life, MDFT promotes recovery and overall well-being. The purpose of this study is to examine the association between substance use and life satisfaction among adolescents participating in MDFT through the Great Outcomes for Family Adolescent Recovery (GO FAR) program. Research suggests individuals who are flourishing experience greater emotional, psychological, and social well-being, which impacts their overall life satisfaction (quality of life, including feeling happiness, and fulfillment; Chowdhury, 2019). As part of its evaluation, GO FAR explores life satisfaction in adolescents and assesses whether substance use is related to attempts to fulfill unmet aspects of well-being. This quantitative study will use a secondary data analysis with existing Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) survey data collected at intake, 3 months, 6 months, and discharge. According to the GO FAR Annual Programmatic Report (2025), 80% of participants referred to the program identified as Hispanic or Latino, 54% were male, and the mean age was 15.30 years (SD = 1.68). Descriptive statistics and correlational analyses will examine the association between substance use and life satisfaction. Findings may inform MDFT interventions aimed at improving well-being and recovery outcomes among Latine youth.

In the United States, anti-immigration policies and practices have placed significant strain on mixed-status families, where at least one member is undocumented and one or more members are documented. Because of immigration policies, mixed-status families often encounter financial strain, limited access to institutional resources, and fear of deportation (Enriquez, 2015; Garcini et al., 2022). Hardships have multiplied since the Trump administration took office in 2025, and efforts have increased to deport undocumented migrants. The heightened level of surveillance and violence led to the following research questions: How has the presence of U.S Immigration and Customs Enforcement affected mixed-status families and their daily lives, and how do families navigate these threats to safety? This study draws on resilience theory (Zimmerman, 2013) and semi-structured interviews with mixed-status families. Triadic family data consist of individual interviews with undocumented parents, undocumented children, and documented children. To analyze the data, I will use the phronetic iterative approach, conducting first-level, second-level, and then axial coding (Tracey, 2018). Despite extensive research on the impact of ICE enforcement with Latino communities, that work primarily focuses on individual experiences; therefore, this study extends past research by considering how mixed-status families navigate these hardships during times of heightened fear. My findings will demonstrate how participants experience intensified stress, while also working together as a family in cohesive, but at times, fragmented ways. This study contributes to existing research by identifying the social consequences of immigration enforcement on the well being of mixed-status families. 

My research examines what existing research says about the relationship between green space access and well-being in low-income communities, with a particular interest in Los Angeles County. In traveling to different neighborhoods, I have noticed how access to parks, trees, and more natural environments can change from one community to another. This literature review explores how researchers view these differences and what they say about environmental inequality. In about fifteen peer-reviewed articles, I examine research on green space access, mental health, stress, and quality of life (QOL). Rather than asking how much green space there is, I also explore who has access to it, how neighborhood conditions shape its use, and whether different communities experience and value green spaces in different ways. Existing research generally finds that greater access to safe, well-maintained green spaces is associated with lower stress, better mental health, stronger social connections, and improved QOL. At the same time, studies show that low-income communities and communities of color are more likely to experience limited access to high-quality green spaces due to segregation and discriminatory planning practices, disinvestment, and environmental inequalities. This review suggests that green space is more than just a space. It has an influence on public health and community well-being. By examining what the existing literature says about unequal access to nature, this project contributes to conversations about how neighborhoods are shaped by broader social inequalities and what more equitable urban planning could look like in communities across Los Angeles County.