The Harvard Family Research Project separated from the Harvard Graduate School of Education to become the Global Family Research Project as of January 1, 2017. It is no longer affiliated with Harvard University.
HFRP
> Out-of-School Time
> OST Database & Bibliography
> Database
> Baltimore's After School Strategy—YouthPlaces Initiative
A Profile of the Evaluation of Baltimore's After School Strategy—YouthPlaces Initiative
Profile Information
- Full Text (HTML)
- Request reprint permission
- How to cite
- About the OST Database
Program Description
| Overview | The YouthPlaces Initiative is one component of Baltimore's After School Strategy, a citywide effort to increase the quantity and improve the quality of after school opportunities for Baltimore's children and youth, which is in turn a component of the city's Safe and Sound Campaign, a comprehensive effort to improve youth outcomes in Baltimore, Maryland. The YouthPlaces Initiative provides training, technical assistance, and implementation funds to after school programs (YouthPlaces) in order to enable these YouthPlaces to meet established quality standards and demonstrate the effectiveness of high quality after school programs in producing positive youth outcomes. |
| Start Date | 1999 |
| Scope | local |
| Type | after school |
| Location | urban |
| Setting | public schools, community-based organization, religious institution, recreation center, private facility |
| Participants | elementary, middle, and high school students |
| Number of Sites/Grantees | 69 sites and 25 grantees (2001) |
| Number Served | estimated at 10,000 (2001) |
| Components | The YouthPlaces Initiative is one component of Baltimore's After School Strategy, which is itself part of a larger systemic change initiative led by the Safe and Sound Campaign of Baltimore and funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Core components of the Baltimore After School Strategy include: the development of research-based standards for after school program quality, the establishment of a capacity-building intermediary (the After-School Institute), the leveraging of public and private funds for after school programs, accountability, and evaluation designed to take quality improvement to scale. The research-based standards are comprised of two parts. Organizational Standards address the quality of overall program infrastructure and climate in five sections: human relationships, indoor environment, outdoor environment, health, safety and nutrition, and administration. Program Standards address the quality and richness of program activities and content, including standards in six program areas: cognitive development, recreation, workforce development, artistic development, civic development, and open time. The After School Strategy is intended to promote caring relationships between young people and adults, enable young people to develop specific competencies, and offer them a sense of belonging and a place to congregate, all of which are proposed to promote safety and strong civic behaviors. These benefits are intended to lead ultimately to improved indicators of youth well-being such as school achievement, attendance/truancy, high school graduation rate, child and adolescent accidents and injuries, births to teen mothers, children's exposure to crime, and juvenile crime and delinquency rates. The Family League of Baltimore City (FLBC) awarded planning grants to 29 after school provider organizations in 1999. Planning grantees were required to assess their YouthPlaces against Safe and Sound's quality standards and to develop quality improvement plans for meeting any standards their program did not currently meet. In 2000, FLBC awarded implementation grants to 25 of the 29 planning grantees to conduct quality improvement efforts in a total of 69 YouthPlaces (or program sites). |
| Funding Level | $19.5 million (total funding as of 2000) |
| Funding Sources | Federal government, Baltimore city government, and private foundations: Baltimore City Department of Social Services/Reinvestment of TANF Savings, Baltimore City General Fund, Baltimore Community Foundation, Annie E. Casey Foundation, the Family League of Baltimore City/Incentive Dollars, Governor's Office of Children, Youth and Families/Community Partnership Agreement, Maryland After School Opportunity Fund, Open Society Institute-Baltimore, Aaron and Lillie Straus Foundation, U.S. Department of Education, 21st Century Community Learning Centers, and Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation |
Evaluation
| Overview | Phase one of the implementation evaluation has been completed and the evaluation is currently in a redesign phase. |
| Evaluator | Policy Studies Associates, Inc. in collaboration with the National Institute on Out-of-School Time (NIOST) and the Academy for Educational Development |
| Evaluations Profiled | Evaluation of the Baltimore Safe and Sound YouthPlaces Initiative, Initial Report Youths' Experiences in Their YouthPlaces: Results of a Youth Survey Conduced in Thirty-Six of Baltimore's YouthPlaces |
| Evaluations Planned | Future evaluation plans are to conduct three separate but related studies: (1) a tightly focused study of program quality and youth outcomes in a select number of sites; (2) a broad analysis of participation, youth and staff perspectives on the initiative, and school outcomes for participating youth in all sites; and (3) a macro-level systems study to guide future strategy development. |
| Report Availability | Marzke, C., & White, R. (2001). Evaluation of the Baltimore Safe and Sound YouthPlaces Initiative, initial report. Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates. Policy Studies Associates. (2001). Youths' experiences in their YouthPlaces: Results of a youth survey conducted in thirty-six of Baltimore's YouthPlaces. Washington, DC: Author. |
Contacts
| Evaluation | Carolyn Marzke, Ph.D. Policy Studies Associates, Inc. 1718 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20009 Tel: 202-939-9780 Email: cmarzke@policystudies.com Eric Bruns, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Psychiatry University of Maryland School of Medicine 701 West Pratt Street, Suite 430 Baltimore, MD 21201 Tel: 410-328-3522 Email: ebruns@psych.umaryland.edu |
| Program | Martha Holleman Director of Policy and Planning Safe and Sound Two East Read Street Baltimore, MD 21202 Tel: 410-625-7976 Email: marthah@safeandsound.org |
| Profile Updated | June 10, 2003 |
Evaluation 1: Evaluation of the Baltimore Safe and Sound YouthPlaces Initiative, Initial Report
Evaluation Description
| Evaluation Purpose | To present findings related to the implementation of the YouthPlaces Initiative. |
| Evaluation Design | Non-Experimental: Data were collected from all 25 organizations and 69 YouthPlaces included in the initial round of YouthPlaces grants. The first year of the evaluation was also spent working with the Family League of Baltimore City (FLBC) and after school providers to develop, test, and implement an effective enrollment and attendance data collection and reporting system and developing data collection instruments and procedures. |
| Data Collection Methods | Document Review: Evaluators reviewed documents prepared by grantee organizations, such as grant proposal and implementation plans. Secondary Source/Data Review: Initial information about student attendance and achievement were obtained from the YouthPlaces Management Information System (operated by FLBC). Surveys/Questionnaires: Surveys were administered to executive directors of grantee organizations and YouthPlaces staff. These surveys elicited information on the structure, quality, and the implementation of the Organizational and Program Standards in YouthPlaces. A brief questionnaire was administered to YouthPlaces site leaders to obtain information about site staffing. |
| Data Collection Timeframe | Data were collected between May and September of 2000. |
Findings:
Formative/Process Findings
| Activity Implementation | Conflicts between youth and behavior problems arise regularly in these YouthPlaces, including arguments among participants, incidents of bullying or threatening behavior, and physical fights. Staff reported that they typically use positive strategies to address conflicts and behavior problems. The majority of staff reported using some strategies for promoting youth responsibility, such as allowing youth to choose, lead, or influence activities, but many rarely or never provide such opportunities. Data about program content and activities suggest that most YouthPlaces provide academic assistance and instruction, as well as recreation, opportunities for free indoor and/or outdoor play, and arts and crafts, while arts instruction and organized sports are offered less frequently. This pattern appears to be particularly pronounced for school-based programs—staff in school-based YouthPlaces reported providing athletic activities, arts activities, and free play opportunities less often than staff working in other YouthPlaces. Evaluators found that more data are required to assess fully the extent to which YouthPlaces promote mastery, although staff survey data suggest that opportunities for mastery are limited in the arts and athletics. |
| Parent/Community Involvement | A large proportion (66%) of staff reported that they have regular paid time during the week for individual program planning, while another 14% had such paid planning time monthly. Some grantee organizations include parent representatives on YouthPlaces advisory boards as a means of soliciting parent input to their programs, but few employ staff whose primary role is to support and facilitate parent outreach and engagement. Eighteen of 22 executive survey respondents indicated that their YouthPlaces offered at least one type of activity or service for parents. These included referrals for mental health services, parenting classes, parent counseling, and on-site health services. |
| Staffing/Training | Staff members who completed the survey met and typically exceeded the minimum years of education and relevant experience required by the standards. Organizational support for staff training is mixed. For example, about half of grantee organizations provide a few hours per month of paid training time, but the other half provide no paid training time for staff outside of program hours. Staff turnover likely limits opportunities for stable youth-staff relationships, although most staff work enough hours per week to be available during program hours and report low staff-youth ratios and group sizes. Implementation plans, priorities, and budgets submitted by grantees focused on staff support and training. |
| Systemic Infrastructure | The After School Strategy as a whole has several distinguishing and potentially promising features. These include larger community mobilization and systemic change, an emphasis on improving the quality and capacity of existing YouthPlaces rather than creating new ones, commitment to developing local capacity for program administration, contract monitoring, and technical assistance, and the development of a separate, locally based capacity-building intermediary. The multilevel, collaborative approach to implementation has benefits and risks. The benefits include visibility and support for high-quality after school programs at the policy and organizational level. The risk is spreading resources too thinly at the service delivery site level. Transforming existing organizations and YouthPlaces often requires significant incentives for changes in long-standing organizational culture and policies, and these organizations must respond to the sometimes competing demands of multiple funding sources. The scope and complexity of the YouthPlaces Initiative delayed funding and rollout of key procedures for program monitoring, accountability, and support. Collaborative management may increase community involvement and commitment, but this approach also slows decision making. |
Evaluation 2: Youths' Experiences in Their YouthPlaces: Results of a Youth Survey Conducted in Thirty-six of Baltimore's YouthPlaces
Evaluation Description
| Evaluation Purpose | To gain information about the characteristics of and risk factors facing participants, as well as young people's perceptions of safety, quality, and opportunities in YouthPlaces. |
| Evaluation Design | Non-Experimental: Data were collected from over 500 young people in 36 YouthPlaces sites. |
| Data Collection Methods | Surveys/Questionnaires: A survey was conducted of over 500 young people (nine years and older) in 36 YouthPlace sites. |
| Data Collection Timeframe | Surveys were administered in April, May, and early June of 2001. |
Findings:
Formative/Process Findings
| Program Context/Infrastructure | Survey responses suggest that most youth feel safe at their YouthPlaces, but feel less safe getting to and from their YouthPlaces. Most (81%) participants live within walking distance of their YouthPlace. Youth report a high overall incidence of fighting, hurting others, and school suspensions. These behaviors may take place in a variety of locations, but also likely spill over into youth interactions within YouthPlaces. The majority of youth (59%) reported physical fighting, a substantial proportion of respondents reported that they had hurt someone physically in the past year, and more than one-quarter had been suspended from school in the past year. Participants report negative interactions among youth to be a problem in YouthPlaces. These results are congruent with results of program executive and staff surveys that conflicts among youth are a pervasive problem and that staff training on behavior management and conflict resolution are high priorities. |
| Recruitment/Participation | Demographically, YouthPlace participants are largely reflective of children in Baltimore as a whole, although girls participate at slightly higher rates (57% girls, 43% boys). Eighty-two percent of respondents were African American and 10% were white. Only 30% of responding youth lived with both parents. Most respondents (88%) had participated in their YouthPlace for at least a year, and a substantial proportion have been enrolled for more than three years. These results suggest that these after school providers have the capacity to retain youth in their programs for relatively long periods. Most respondents (83%) reported that they had attended the program every day or almost every day in the last month, and 88% reported attending the program at least three days a week in the past month. Youth survey respondents participate in a variety of activities, most often arts and crafts, homework help, and team sports, and many take advantage of unstructured time to “hang out” with friends. Results suggest a relatively low level of participation in activities and opportunities likely to promote youth's mastery in specific skill areas. While these patterns require additional exploration, the youth survey results are consistent with staff survey results suggesting that in many cases, YouthPlaces offer a few activities across many different program and skill areas, rather than offering programs designed to help youth master advanced skills in a particular area. |
| Satisfaction | Overall, most youth surveyed enjoy coming to their YouthPlaces, feel safe in these places, and have positive views about how staff treat youth. Only 7% voiced dissatisfaction with their YouthPlace overall. |
| Staffing/Training | Survey respondents offered relatively positive assessments of staff. However, results were mixed on youth's report of individualized, personal interactions with adults in their YouthPlaces. One-third of respondents had never had a one-on-one talk with a staff member about things going on in their lives. |
Summative/Outcome Findings
| Academic | The longer youth had been enrolled in a YouthPlace, the more positive their feelings about issues such as learning and attending school. |
| Youth Development | Youth strongly voice that their YouthPlaces have helped them, particularly in areas related to school, enjoyment of reading, and working together with others. |