Community Meeting Notes: Youth development

The following are notes taken at a meeting held on October 11, 2011 to discuss youth development.

Individuals participated with the understanding that they were speaking without attribution, so their names are intentionally omitted from these notes.

Meeting Purpose and Questions

Over the past decade, the Foundation has made substantial investments in Youth Development, primarily through an effort to create a neighborhood based system in three communities, and to expand youth workforce development internships in the city.  There has been some progress in Philadelphia toward alleviating fragmentation in the youth development landscape – building a professional development system that includes both city and non-city funded programs. Nevertheless, there is no dedicated public funding stream and no agreed-upon set of common outcomes or practice standards.

The Foundation’s Youth Development Initiative promotes the use of neighborhood networks to support older youth, ages 12-18 years. These networks, comprised of youth-serving programs and providers, are committed to program quality; data collection and tracking of youth participation; and collaborative planning. Evaluation of this initiative will be available next spring.  The Foundation also partners with the Philadelphia Youth Network to provide summer employment opportunities.

The Foundation’s initiatives lack an explicit focus on the region’s most vulnerable population, Black boys. The issue lacks a thoughtful and coherent advocacy and policy strategy that targets systems change goals.

Representatives of nonprofit providers, the city, and academia were invited to help us understand what the best interventions are to connect youth to the world of work and put them on a path toward productive lives and to discuss the following questions:

From your vantage points, what are the gaps in Youth Development field that, if addressed, would advance the work in significant ways?  What role could the Foundation play in helping to address the gaps?

With limited philanthropic resources and given the lack of a public sector structure to support youth development, which grantmaking strategy is most effective: supporting individual programs or building capacity to implement advocacy strategies? 

Which specific population should we target?  At-risk youth or higher-risk youth, and what are the most effective interventions to engage them?

At the present time, the Foundation’s grantmaking strategy does not explicitly target Black boys, although this population is served through a variety of currently funded programs.  What can we do to operationalize a specific approach to address the issues facing high-risk Black boys?

What examples exist in philanthropy where Out of School Time and Education portfolios are braided to promote improved outcomes?

What kinds of promising efforts are taking place in the juvenile justice or other public systems to address the needs of the most high-risk youth?

Major Points from the Discussion

There is a need for the system to think/operate in a holistic way: integrating the formal and informal aspects of support, connecting the range of youth-serving institutions, and facing the realities of racism.

Focus on outcome – beyond high school graduation -- College ready and/or have the skills to secure a job.

Address the inherent racial assumptions and biases facing youth, especially Black boys.

Map the eco-system in an effort to make better use of resources; incorporate the views and preferences of youth.

Widen the key skills needed by staff, as well as the informal players at the community and recreational levels. Consider the importance of cultural competency in staff training. Explore involvement of men with street credibility in working with Black youth.

Acknowledge the tough choices when targeting youth populations in an effort to achieve results.

Guidance to WPF

Create incentives and models of more integrated services for youth – connecting disparate public services and resources, recognizing the value of linking formal and informal systems, and valuing the efforts of staff and community leaders/coaches/volunteers, etc. Leverage existing youth workforce development infrastructure as a vehicle to provide mentoring.

Support skill building for staff serving youth in both formal and informal settings. There are many effective existing practices and programs that can be useful.  Address the range of skills that staff and volunteers need to work with youth experiencing many forms of discrimination.

Invest in mapping youth needs and targeting programmatic resources to address specific outcomes in schools, sports, arts, science, technology, and workforce skills.

Hold youth serving organizations to clear and meaningful standards. Enable the organizations to gather data and becoming increasingly more effective as they build the capacities of youth.

Support afterschool programs that address the developmental needs and interests of youth, rather than replicating educational efforts.  Connect youth to local, volunteer-led settings.

Support the emerging narrative for Black boys’ identity in this era.  Use ethnography and psychology as resources.

Support the distinctive value of programs that address the needs of most youth and high-risk youth.

Stay the course over long periods of time in order to have an impact on more than one generation of youth and young adults.

Support policies that will channel youth into productive options rather than the juvenile justice system.