210 likes | 294 Views
PYD Progress in an Imperfect World. Sarah Ramowski, MSW Adolescent Health Section Oregon Public Health April 22, 2010. I. Measuring Positive Youth Development The What, How, and Why of Benchmarking? Results II. Moving the PYD Agenda Statewide Partnership Localized Changes
E N D
PYD Progress in an Imperfect World Sarah Ramowski, MSW Adolescent Health Section Oregon Public Health April 22, 2010
I. Measuring Positive Youth Development • The What, How, and Why of Benchmarking? • Results II. Moving the PYD Agenda • Statewide Partnership • Localized Changes III. Lessons Learned: Advice for Other States • Measure, measure, measure! • Use what you have
The Beaver State • 3,690,505 people living on 98,386 square miles • Oregon has 21.3% of its population living in rural areas. • 86.6% of the population is Caucasian • 29% of youth had an unmet physical or mental health care need in the past year
Benchmarking in Oregon 1989 Beginning of Benchmarking Annual, measurable goals tied to state strategic plan 1992-3 Link benchmarks to state agencies (273) 2001 Oversight of process put in statute 2005 90 benchmarks (7 categories) Public accountability at state & county level http://benchmarks.oregon.gov
Positive Youth Development Benchmark Who: • State Public Health Division • Oregon Progress Board • State & Local Commissions on Children & Families What: Positive Youth Measures + Youth Risk Measures = Balanced Picture of Youth Well-Being How: Use existing State-level youth survey (Oregon Healthy Teens survey/Oregon’s YRBS)
PYD Benchmark vs. Risk Hypothesis: If our questions capture PYD, we will find a strong association between higher levels of PYD and: • Lower levels of risk • Higher levels of healthy behaviors
Results • Lower scores on PYD questions STRONGLY ASSOCIATED with higher scores on risk behaviors • Eating fruits & veggies, getting recent physical activity, getting better grades, not using drugs are all associated with higher levels on PYD questions
Adopted Benchmark • Must answer at least 5 of 6 questions “positively” to meet benchmark • “The Percent of Teens who report positive youth development attributes; a) 8th grade; b) 11th grade.”
Benchmark & Risk (2009 data) * = p < .05 ** = p < .001 *** = p < .0001
State Policy Implications • Formalizes State’s commitment to PYD • Provides a baseline source for future state tracking • Determining future funding priorities
Local Policy Implications • Support for youth programs that have PYD framework (i.e, Oregon Mentors, Youth Bill of Rights) • Local assessment based on benchmark is possible
Moving the PYD Agenda 3 Goals of BPY Project for Oregon: • Training • Partnership • Evaluation/data collection
Building Statewide Partnership Capacity Start of the PYD Alliance • Passion & interest, not always resources • Keep momentum going around State
Who is at the table? Wide array of partners • Local Public Health/Social services • State Agencies • Youth-Serving Orgs (4-H, Afterschool, Camp Fire)
Goals of Alliance • Act as advising body to public & private orgs on youth policy & practice coordination • Coordinate and plan trainings, work sessions on youth engagement • Infuse youth engagement with principles of cultural competency
Localized Action Items Adolescent Health Section took steps where possible • Big Picture: Statewide Youth Sexual Health Plan • Influencing the Details: Infusing PYD into SBHC Planning Grants
Lessons Learned • Measure, Measure, Measure! • And teach others to measure too… • Use what you have • Progress can have many definitions
Questions?? Thank You! Sarah.Ramowski@state.or.us (971) 673-0377