1 / 51

SF Beacon Centers: A Youth Development Initiative October 2002

SF Beacon Centers: A Youth Development Initiative October 2002 Community Network for Youth Development.

melvyn
Download Presentation

SF Beacon Centers: A Youth Development Initiative October 2002

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. SF Beacon Centers: A Youth Development Initiative October 2002 Community Network for Youth Development

  2. San Francisco Beacon Centersare neighborhood centers in public schools offering comprehensive supports and activities for young people and their families during the after-school hours, evenings, weekends and throughout the summer.

  3. Fight Crime: Invest in Kids California Violent Juvenile Crime Soars When School Bell Rings 3 - 4 PM Data from large CA cities, 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 school years

  4. San Francisco Beacon Initiative: EARLY HISTORY 1994 SFBI planning begins 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2002

  5. New York Beacons • Serving all neighborhood youth and their families • Place-based - with the SCHOOL as the PLACE • School-based but neighborhood-run • “Neighborhood Center” hours • Broad array of programs and choices

  6. San Francisco Beacons PLUS • Schools as a full partner • Need for a public/private partnership • Engaging multiple CBOs in the delivery of programs

  7. CNYD joins as the technical assistance intermediary San Francisco Beacon Initiative: EARLY HISTORY 1994 SFBI planning begins 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2002

  8. 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2002 San Francisco Beacon Initiative: Driving the train while laying down the track Beacon # 1 & # 2: Visitacion Valley and the Mission Beacons # 3 & # 4: Sunset and Chinatown

  9. Community Planning for Beacons #6, #7 & #8 San Francisco Beacon Initiative 1994 1995 1996 1997 Beacon # 5: Richmond District 1998 1999 2002

  10. Community and Systems-Level Partnership City of San Francisco Private funders: San FranciscoUnified School District (Evelyn & Walter (DCYF& Probation) Haas, Jr. Fund) Intermediary: Community Network for Youth Development Public Support Campaign Evaluation Site Technical Assistance Bayview Hunter’s Point Mission Beacon Visitacion Valley Beacon Sunset Beacon Chinatown Beacon Richmond Beacon OMI/ Excelsior Western Addition 1996 1997 1999

  11. San Francisco Beacon Initiative 1994 1995 Theory of Change Process 1996 1997 Evaluation 1998 1999 2002

  12. Theory of Change Successful comprehensive initiatives have a solid plan, with needed resources identified and in place, to guide planning, management and evaluation: • Agreements on guiding principals • Clear and specific outcomes • A plan that is developmental • Outcomes that are: • Doable • Plausible • Measurable • Clear and distributed accountability

  13. Youth Youth Workers Organizational Leaders Policy Makers & Funders Aligning the Systems

  14. Theory of Change SFBI Beliefs and Assumptions About What Success Would Require: • Community and systems-level stakeholders would have to work separately and together • Public and private funders would have distinct roles and responsibilities: • Private: planning & start-up, technical assistance, evaluation • Public: serve as the sustaining funder for direct services • P/P: hold one another accountable, push for systems accommodations; promote building of public support

  15. SFBI Theory of Change SFBI Beliefs and Assumptions About What Success Would Require: • Stable core funding would be critical: MORE than a demonstration project • Create stable infrastructure • Afford focus on quality • Enable sites to build a service delivery platform: serve as a magnate for new funding and a launch pad to start newly funded programs

  16. SFBI Theory of Change Systems-Level Outcomes

  17. Foundation/City RevenueSan Francisco Beacon Initiative FY ‘97-’98FY’98-’99FY’99-’2000FY 22000-’01 Foundation Dollars $1,299,623 $1,328,343 $1,349,000 $1,140,415 City Dollars $1,075,000 $1,900,000 $2,875,000 $3,250,000

  18. How are Initiative Funds Allocated? 1998-’99

  19. Systems Accommodations • Private funds: pooled funding • Public: City leads negotiations with school district • Public & Private: • shared leadership and governance • common proposals/reporting and shared funding decisions • assist in attracting new, leveraged funding

  20. SFBI Theory of Change Site Level Outcomes

  21. Last year 8 San Francisco Beacons Centers served: • 1,861unduplicated adults • 5,896 unduplicated youth

  22. Beacon Center Participation

  23. Ethnic and cultural diversity: Participant demographics closely match that of their neighborhoods and host schools and they are attracting a higher percentage of African American young people than exist in their host school populations.

  24. Language diversity:P/PV findings also indicate that Beacons have a highly diverse staff, and are attracting a high percentage of young people and their families whose first language is other than English.

  25. FINDING: Gender Although recent studies have shown that girls’ participation in after-school activities falls with age, the San Francisco Beacon Centers served approximately equal numbers of girls and boys. FINDING: Academic profile of participants Despite questions about voluntary school-based programs drawing at risk youth, the Beacon Centers at the three middle schools have recruited students who are at risk of academic failure.

  26. Age Range: Unlike most youth programs, the Beacon Centers are able to attract and serve young people from a large range, with the majority being adolescents who attend voluntarily in large numbers.

  27. Program Offerings: Beacon Centers provide program choices in five core areas with the most popular beingarts/recreation and educational supports.

  28. FINDING: Opportunities for leadership Youth at the Beacon Centers reported significantly greater opportunities to assume leadership roles than did youth not at the centers. FINDING: Feelings of safety in the after-school hours In surveys, the overwhelming majority of participating middle school youth report that they feel safe at the Beacon Centers (88%).

  29. FINDING: Out-of-school time in productive activities Beacon participants in middle school reported spending approximately 2 hours more per week in productive leisure activities — art, music, dance, drama and tutoring — than youth who attended the schools but not the centers.

  30. PUBLIC/PRIVATE VENTURES: INTERIM REPORT “By many measures, the Beacon Initiative has enjoyed an extraordinary start. The centers — through programs after school, on weekends and during the summer — offer youth a broad range of challenging and enriching opportunities.”

  31. SFBI Theory of Change The Things That Make A Difference: Youth Experience Organizational Practices

  32. Sense of Safety Physical safety Emotional Safety

  33. Meaningful participation • Leadership • Decision Making

  34. Sense of membership and belonging

  35. Skill building through interesting and engaging activities

  36. National Research Council:Institute of Medicine(2002)

  37. National Research Council Report:Research on Features of Positive Youth Development Settings • Safety / Appropriate Structure • Positive Social Norms (rules of behavior) • • Supportive Relationships • Opportunities to Belong • Support for Mattering (meaningful participation) • Opportunities for Skill Building • Integration of Family, School, • Community Efforts (coordination)

  38. PUBLIC/PRIVATE VENTURES: • FINAL REPORT - • Preliminary Findings • Academic gains: greatest among youth who participate in educational supports AND enrichment programs • Developmental experiences --> greater attachment to school • Beacon participation for 2 months--> Much less chance of a significant decline in academic performance during middle school

  39. Policy Makers & Funders RECOMMENDATIONS We need to address the needs of young people ACROSS ALL AGES and ALL SETTINGS

  40. Policy Makers & Funders RECOMMENDATIONS Priority on: Youth Development Outcomes

  41. Policy Makers & Funders RECOMMENDATIONS • Resources that enable practitioners to reach outcomes: • professionalizing the field • training and professional development • organizational capacity building

  42. San Francisco Beacon CenterSite Visits:Richmond Beacon at Washington High School• Community Bridges Beacon Center at Everett Middle School

  43. Lead Community-based Organization Beacon Center: THE WHO? Neighborhood School Public/Private Agencies Youth Neighborhood Adults

  44. Education • Tutoring • ESL • Computers • Leadership • Cross-age tutoring • Beacon Youth Council • Community Service • Health • Counseling • Parenting • Prevention What is a Beacon Center? • Career • Development • Job skills development • Internships • Career Exploration • Arts & • Recreation • Martial arts & sports • Fine arts & crafts • Dance & theater

  45. REVIEW OF YOUR SITE VISIT PACKETS

More Related