Karen Pittman Executive Director Forum for Youth Investment Michael Williamson Vice President Field Leadership, United Way of America INTRODUCTION TO THE

Karen Pittman Executive Director Forum for Youth Investment

Michael Williamson Vice PresidentField Leadership, United Way of America

INTRODUCTION TO THE READY BY 21® CHALLENGE

for United Ways in Quality Counts Sites

May 21, 2008

© The Forum for Youth Investment 2008, unless otherwise noted. Ready by 21 and the Ready by 21 Logo are registered trademarks of the Forum for Youth Investment.

AGENDA

• Forum for Youth Investment and United Way of America• Partnership Overview

• UWA• Children and Youth Achieving their Potential

• Expansion of early childhood work to include older youth• 10-Year Goals

• Forum for Youth Investment• Ready by 21 Challenge• Quality Counts Initiative Overview

• Local United Ways and Quality Counts Sites• Discussion - What are local United Ways key focal areas related to children and youth?• How are local United Ways currently involved in the Quality Counts initiative? • Additional Opportunities for Involvement

• Questions/Discussion


Forum and UWA –Partnership Overview

The Forum’s Ready by 21 Challenge fits hand in glove with United Way’s Community Impact Model:

• Both are focused on assessing community needs, setting community-level goals, and implementing effective solutions for solving intractable problems.

• Both are grounded in the belief that investments in children and youth need to be early and sustained – starting with infants, because children are born learning, and staying with children throughout their developmental years to ensure that all youth are ready for college, work and life.

• Both understand the importance of data, partnerships, leadership and communications in creating lasting changes in policy, practice and public will.

• Both provide community leaders with tools, not pat formulas.


Partnership Overview

Phase I: Partnership DevelopmentMarch 07 – Feb 08

• National Staff work group to develop the relationship

• Introduced R by 21 at 2007 UWA SLC Annual Meeting.

• Introduced partnership to funders in October 2007.

• Awarded JCPenney funding in February 2008.

• Announced partnership at Ready by 21 Launch in February 2008.

Phase II: Exploratory Plan Development and Fundraising March 08- Feb 09

Lay the ground for the 2009/2010 roll-out by:• working with a smaller number of United Ways that

are already engaged in community impact level work to improve youth outcomes or have an interest/commitment to build on their early childhood work,

• using the existing outreach and communication vehicles of the United Way system to move these ideas out more broadly,

• seeking every potential funding opportunity to build the Ready by 21 Challenge Fund, including co-hosting a series of CEO Roundtables on Youth, and

• seeking every opportunity to leverage the potential of this project by working with other Ready by 21 national partners and bringing in other funders and business partners to assist in developing the plan.

Phase III: Implementation Timing Contingent on Funding

• Technical assistance, tools, ,technologies, and trainings available to all LUWs.

• Support for the intentional introduction of the tools and strategies work into ready LUW communities,

• Statewide introduction of the Ready by 21™ Challenge in selected states.


Partnership Details

• Memorandum of Agreement – October 2007• Agreed to work together to provide local United Ways with research-based frameworks,

metrics, strategies and tools to ensure that children enter kindergarten ready to succeed and enter the second decade of life ready for success.

• JC Penney Afterschool Fund Grant Award – February 2008• Grant awarded to the Forum and UWA to:

• convene national stakeholders and experts to identify strategic needs in youth development,

• develop a vision for a potential national youth program, • pilot community-wide outcome visioning around youth development in two communities, • pursue additional funding to support the growth of a national youth effort.

• Ready by 21 Challenge National Partners Announced – February 2008• UWA is the Forum’s signature partner

• Other national partners include Corporate Voices for Working Families, American Association of School Administrators, National Conference of State Legislatures, the National Collaboration for Youth, and the America’s Promise Alliance.


United Way. United Way. Advancing the Common Good Advancing the Common Good

EducationHelping children & youth

achieve their potential

• Readiness to achieve in school

• Academic achievement

• Productive & engaged youth

• Increased income

• Increased savings

• Assets gained and sustained

• Maternal health and infant well-being

• Basic health care coverage and prevention

• Healthy youth and adults

Re

sults

to

M

ea

sure

Creating the opportunities for a good life for all by focusing on:Creating the opportunities for a good life for all by focusing on:

Community & Volunteer Engagement

Partnerships

2-1-1Community Investment

Public Policy

Donor Relationships

Resource GenerationS

tra

teg

ic

Fo

un

da

tion

Income Promoting financial

stability and independence

Health Improving people’s

health

Inclusion

Bra

nd

P

osi

tion

ing

Bra

nd

P

rom

ise

Prio

rity

Imp

act

A

rea

s

Standards of Excellence


Born healthy(% of births at healthy weight)

Enter school ready to succeed

(measure under development)

Learning on track(measured by 4th grade reading scores)

Staying on track(measured by public

high school graduation rates)

Successfully connected to college, work, life(% of 18 – 24 year olds working or in school) (full or part time)

Supportive Communities

& Effective Policies

Dev

el-

opin

g on

tr

ack:

Lang

uage

&

Lite

racy

So

cial

–

Emot

iona

l In

telle

ctua

l

Hea

lth &

Ph

ysic

al

Safe, Enriching Environments & Relationships

Nurturing and Financially-

Stable Families

Comprehensive Health Care

Promoting Student Success


United Way’s National Focus on Helping

Children and Youth Achieve Their Potential

*The specific cognitive/literacy skills assessed are the ability to: 1) recognize letters 2) count to 20 or higher, 3) write their names, 4) read or pretend to read**1) Not working full or part-time 2) nor in school full or part-time 3) nor already have a degree beyond high school (AA, BA, etc.) or completed 1+ years of

college

1. Readiness to succeed in school Intended result: Children enter school developmentally on track in the areas of literacy

and social, emotional and intellectual skills. Indicator: % of 3 to 5-year-olds with 3 or 4 (of 4) school readiness skills*

2. Academic achievementIntended result: a): Elementary students are prepared to succeed in later grades. Indicator: a): % of 4th graders are proficient in reading

Intended result: b): Young people graduate from high school. Indicator: b): % of public high school students who graduate on time

3. Productive and engaged young adultsIntended result: Young adults make a successful transition from high school to work

life. Indicator: % of 18 - 24 year olds who are not working or in school**


Raise the Graduation Rate

Ready by 21 and the Quality Counts Initiative


Take Aim on the Big PictureHow are Young People Doing?

Pre-K0–5

School-Age6–10

Middle School11–14

High School15–18

Young Adults19–21+

Ready for College

LEARNING

Ready for Work

WORKING

Ready for Life

THRIVING

CONNECTING

LEADING

High school failure doesn’t occur in a vacuum


The Ready by 21 Challenge:

Changing the Odds for Youth by Changing the Way We Do Business

Change the oddsfor youth

Change the waywe do business

Change the landscapeof communities


43% are doing well in two lifeareas and okay in one

• Productivity: Attend college, work steadily

• Health: Good health, positive health habits, healthy relationships

• Connectedness: Volunteer, politically active, active in religious institutions, active in community

Too Few Young People Are Ready

Doing Well43%

Doing Poorly22%

In the Middle35%

22% are doing poorly in two lifeareas and not well in any

• Productivity: High school diploma or less, are unemployed, on welfare

• Health: Poor health, bad health habits, unsupportive relationships

• Connectedness: Commit illegal activity once a month

Researchers Gambone, Connell & Klem (2002) estimate that only 4 in 10 are doing well in their early 20s.


We Know What it Takes to Support Development

• The National Research Council reports that teens need:• Physical and Psychological Safety• Appropriate Structure• Supportive Relationships• Opportunities to Belong• Positive Social Norms• Support for Efficacy and Mattering• Opportunities for Skill-Building• Integration of Family, School and Community efforts


Do these Supports Really Make a Difference? Even in Adolescence?

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Youth with SupportiveRelationships

Youth with UnsupportiveRelationships

Ready by End of 12th Grade Not Ready

ABSOLUTELY

SOURCE: Finding Out What Matters for Youth: Testing Key Links in a Community Action Framework for Youth Development

Gambone and colleagues show that youth with supportive relationships as they enter high school are 5 times more likely to leave high school “ready” than those with weak relationships…


… and those seniors who were “ready” at the end of high school were more than 4 times as likely to be doing well as young adults.

Do these Supports Make a Difference in Adulthood?

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Ready by 21 Not Ready by 21

Good Young Adult Outcomes

Poor Young Adult OutcomesSOURCE: Finding Out What Matters for Youth: Testing Key Links in a Community Action Framework for Youth Development


from 4 in 10doing well

to 7 in 10 doing well

Providing These Supports CAN Change the Odds

Gambone/Connell’s research suggests that if all young people got the supports they needed in early adolescence, the picture could change…


One Third of 6-17 Year Olds Lack the Supports They Need

50% 37%

13%

6 – 11 Years Old

45%30%

25%

12 – 17 Years Old

• According to the America’s Promise Alliance National Promises Survey, only 31% of 6-17 year olds have at least 4 of the 5 promises. 21% have 1 or none.

• The likelihood of having sufficient supports decreases with age:• 37% of 6-11 year olds have at least 4 promises; 13% have 1 or none.• Only 30% of 12-17 year olds have at least 4; 25% have 1 or none.


“Communities should provide an ample array of program opportunities… through local entities that can coordinate such work across the entire community.

Communities should put in place some locally appropriate mechanism for monitoring the availability, accessibility and quality of programs…”

- Community Programs to Promote Youth Development, 2002

National Research Council Report Recommendations


Civic Social Emotional Physical Vocational Cognitive

Ages

Times of Day

OutcomeAreas

???

Reach Counts

Morning . . . Night

21

.

.

.

0 School AfterSchool

At its best, school only fills a portion of developmental space


Who is Responsible for the Rest?

• Families• Peer Groups• Schools and Training Organizations• Higher Education• Youth-Serving Organizations• CBOs (Non-Profit Service Providers and Associations)• Businesses (Jobs, Internships and Apprenticeships)• Faith-Based Organizations• Libraries, Parks, and Recreation Departments• Community-Based Health and Social Service Agencies

?


Improving Program Availability Isn’t Enough

• There is basic agreement that young people who participate fully in school and programs and their communities have better outcomes than those who do not.

• Consequently there is increased interest in getting inside the black box -- mapping the program landscape what is available to whom, when, where, why, how, and how much it costs.

Youth outcomes

Youth Participation


It is Marketable

It Matters

It is Malleable

It is Measureable

Research shows that improved youth outcomes requires program attendance and program quality.

The core elements of program quality are both measurable and consistent across a broad range of program types.

Decision-makers and providers will invest in improving quality if they believe that it matters, is measurable

and is malleable given available resources.

Most programs can improve quality by undertaking integrated assessment and improvement efforts.

Quality Counts


Defining QualityPoint of Service Quality

PlanMake choices

Reflect

Partner with adults

Lead and mentorBe in small groups

Experience belonging

Engagement

Reframing conflictEncouragementSkill building

Active engagementSession flow

Welcoming atmosphere

Supportive Environment

Interaction

Safe Environment Healthy food and drinks

Program space and furniture Emergency proceduresPsychological and emotional safety

Physically safe environment


Program Quality Drops as the Expectations increase

Scores Across Diverse Samples Trained outside observers used

Self -assessed

Program Offering LevelMixed N=140

School Age N=12

21st Elem N=15

21st MSN=26

I. Safe environment 4.35 4.10 4.38 4.39

II. Supportive environment

3.75 3.14 3.69 4.16

III. Interaction 3.11 2.97 2.93 3.73

IV. Engagement 2.83 1.70 2.71 3.37

Score range: 1= lowest 5= highest


Program Quality Improves with Training and Capacity Building

Across settings, POS Quality decreases with movement up the pyramid from safety to engagement. The High/Scope research strongly suggests that best way to improve “POS Quality” is to: • Reduce staff turnover• Increase training, professional development and on-site support• Increase opportunities for young people to have input and share

control


5+ States, 7 Localities

STATES (w/ participating localities)• Iowa

(Linn County, N. Central Iowa, Polk County/Des Moines)

• Kentucky (Lexington, Louisville)

• New York (Broome, Onondaga, Orange & Rockland Counties)

• Oklahoma (Norman, Tulsa)

• Rhode Island (Central Falls, Newport, Pawtucket)

• Washington (Honorary site)

LOCALITIES• Austin, TX• Georgetown Divide

(Black Oak Mine), CA• Columbus

(Bartholomew County), IN• Grand Rapids, MI• Indianapolis, IN• Nashville, TN• St. Louis, MO


Representing a Range of Lead Intermediaries and Team Members…

Lead Organizations• 2 Broad-based Coalitions

• Austin, Columbus• 1 School District

• Georgetown Divide• 3 Capacity Building Organizations

• Oklahoma, Kentucky, Indianapolis• 2 Government Agencies

• City Government: Grand Rapids• State Government: New York, Iowa

• 1 Youth Serving Organization• Nashville

• 2 Partnerships• St. Louis, Rhode Island

Team Members• 15 Youth Serving Organizations• 13 Capacity Building Organizations• 10 Government

• 3 State Government Agencies• 6 Local Government Agencies• 1 Mayor’s Office

• 7 Education• 5 K-12• 2 Higher Education

• 4 United Ways• 2 Recreation• 2 Coalitions


…Supported by an Even Broader Range of Stakeholders

• 33 Youth Serving Organizations

• 25 Government Agencies• 14 Local Funders• 8 K-12 Education• 7 Higher Education• 7 Intermediaries • 5 Coalition/Collaborations

Plus Many Others: • Recreation• Business• Professional Development • Faith-Based Workforce

Intermediary• Prevention/Drug Treatment• Museum• Evaluation/Training• Technical Assistance


Capacity to Recruit, Train, Retain Workforce

Strong Policy / Leadership Horsepower

Capacity to Assess & Improve Programs

Strong, Stable Program Base

Ready by 21 Quality Counts Framework


Capacity to Recruit, Train, Retain

Workforce

Strong Policy / Leadership Horsepower

Decision-maker engagement & coordinating structures Aligned policies for quality accountability and improvement

Shared vision, strong demand, active family/youth involvement

Capacity to Assess & Improve Programs

Buy in re definitions, quality standards, accountability requirementsWidely adopted assessment and monitoring procedures

Adequate assessment and improvement training/TA capacity

Strong, Stable Program Base

Professional development opportunities/incentivesAccurate data on workforce (skills, supports, recruitment, retention)

Cross-system provider networks and communications

Cross-system convening/coordination mechanisms

Healthy program landscape (distribution & focus)Cross-system program data base/info source

Building the Capacity to Sustain Change: The Four Quality Counts Work Areas


Using Quality Improvement as the Anchor

Quality Matters presentation Planning with Data

A la carte Methods Workshops

TAQuality Coaching

STEP 1Key $$ Holders

Decide to build QI system

STEP 2aSelf-

assessmentsconducted

STEP 2bExternal

assessmentsconducted

STEP 3Managers with StaffPlan for

improvement

STEP 4Managers help

StaffCarry out planat the Point of

Service

STEP 5ProgramsMeasure change

Program Self-Assessment

External AssessmentObservation-

Reflection

Focusing on quality improvement can be a concrete place to start….

The H/S Assessment Improvement Sequence

But there may be broader organizational and workforce needs and issues …

broader policy, leadership and public awareness issues …

a broader base of programs that you need to document and engage…

and there may be reasons not to lead with program assessment, even though that’s where you want to end up.


across Systems

& SettingsTime

Supports

across

Ages

Outcomes

Populations

across

Stakeholders& Strategies

Using the Big Picture Approach to Improve Quality & Reach

across Systems & Settings

Ready by 21 Quality Counts Initiative

Change the oddsfor youth

Change the landscapeof communities

Change the waywe do business


Example Language

From Core Principles to Common Language and Expectations

The Forum for Youth Investment www.forumfyi.org

Documents

Karen Pittman Executive Director Forum for Youth Investment Michael Williamson Vice President Field Leadership, United Way of America INTRODUCTION TO THE