Violence against women and girls is an important global health concern. Numerous health organizations highlight engaging men and boys in preventing violence against women as a potentially impactful public health prevention strategy. Adapted from an international setting for use in the US, "Manhood 2.0" is a "gender transformative" program that involves challenging harmful gender and sexuality norms that foster violence against women while promoting bystander intervention (i.e., giving boys skills to interrupt abusive behaviors they witness among peers) to reduce the perpetration of sexual violence (SV) and adolescent relationship abuse (ARA). Manhood 2.0 is being rigorously evaluated in a community-based cluster-randomized trial in 21 lower resource Pittsburgh neighborhoods with 866 adolescent males ages 13-19. The comparison intervention is a job readiness training program which focuses on the skills needed to prepare youth for entering the workforce, including goal setting, accountability, resume building, and interview preparation. This study will provide urgently needed information about the effectiveness of a gender transformative program, which combines healthy sexuality education, gender norms change, and bystander skills to interrupt peers' disrespectful and harmful behaviors to reduce SV/ARA perpetration among adolescent males. In this manuscript, we outline the rationale for and evaluation design of Manhood 2.0. Clinical Trials #: NCT02427061.

This cluster randomized clinical trial compares the effects of a gender norms program with those of a job-readiness program on sexual violence perpetration by adolescent boys and young men in disadvantaged neighborhoods.

Extensive practice-based evidence from international settings, as well as in-depth evaluations of programs promoting gender equity, have demonstrated effectiveness in reducing perpetration of violence against women and girls. Such "gender-transfor-mative programs" encourage critical analysis of gender norms, challenge homophobia and gender-based harassment, build skills to question harmful masculine norms, interrupt harmful and disrespectful behaviors, and encourage more equitable behaviors. Here we describe the history of a gender-transformative program, "Program H," first developed in Brazil and Mexico, the rationale for and evaluation of this original program, and the processes of adaptation for the US urban community-based setting, and highlight the risks as well as opportunities on the work with young men and boys in the future.

One promising though understudied approach to addressing race/ethnic disparities in teen pregnancy rates is through sexual and reproductive health (SRH) programming for young men. This pilot study assessed the feasibility, quality, and preliminary efficacy of Manhood 2.0—a group-based, after-school SRH program for young Black and Latino men, which examines gender norms. This mixed-methods study describes program attendance and quality; participant experiences and engagement in the program; and changes in participant gender norms, knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy, and social support. Quantitative data from baseline and post-intervention surveys ( n = 51) were analyzed using paired t-tests and McNemar’s tests. Qualitative data from five post-intervention focus groups ( n = 27) were transcribed, coded, and analyzed for themes. At baseline, participants were ages 15 to18 years ( M = 16.4 years), 30% were Latino, 66% were Black, 34% ever had sex, and 44% of sexually active participants had sex without any contraceptive method or condom. Quality ratings by program observers were high. The majority of participants (61%) attended at least 75% of sessions, and 96% rated Manhood 2.0 as “very good” or “excellent.” Pre–post comparisons showed increases in receipt of SRH information; contraception knowledge; positive attitudes about supporting partners in pregnancy prevention; self-efficacy in partner communication about sex; discussing program content with friends and family; and social competence and support. Focus group participants described benefits from the Manhood 2.0 content (i.e., full range of contraceptive methods, sexual consent, gender norms) and delivery (i.e., reflective discussion, nonjudgmental facilitators). Findings suggest that Manhood 2.0 is a promising SRH program for young men.

In 2013, the Institute of Medicine (IOM), in collaboration with faculty and students from Georgetown University (GU), launched the first annual District of Columbia (DC) Regional Public Health Case Challenge. The idea for this case challenge was born when representatives from the IOM and GU met at Emory University's Global Health Case Competition in March 2013, and the DC Case Challenge is both inspired by and modeled on the Emory competition. The DC Case Challenge aims to promote interdisciplinary, problem-based learning in public health and to foster engagement with local universities and the local community. The case challenge engages graduate and undergraduate students from multiple schools, disciplines, and universities to come together to promote awareness of and develop innovative solutions for 21st century public health issues, grounded in a challenge faced by the local community. Each year the organizers and a student case-writing team develop a case based on a topic that is not only relevant in the DC area, but also has broader domestic and global resonance. Universities located in the Washington, DC, area are invited to pull together teams of three to six students enrolled in undergraduate or graduate degree programs. In an effort to promote public health dialogue among a variety of disciplines, each team is required to have at least three different schools, programs, or majors of study represented. Starting 2 weeks before the case challenge event, these teams are asked to employ critical analysis, thoughtful action, and interdisciplinary collaboration to innovate a solution to the problem presented in the case. On the day of the case challenge, teams present their proposed solution to a panel of judges composed of representatives from local DC organizations as well as other subject matter experts from disciplines relevant to the case. In addition to the panel of judges, content experts are recruited to volunteer their service as reviewers to assist the student case-writing team.