Afterschool Issue Paper: After-school Programming and Teens - DRAFT

After-school Programming and Teens - DRAFT

ISSUE SUMMARY

Over the last decade, national attention to after-school programs has increased dramatically. Leaders at all levels are calling for safe spaces in the hours between 3 and 6 pm, extended opportunities for academic learning, and improved supports for families with working parents. The calls have led to significant shifts in public will, policy, practice, philanthropy and research.

While the after-school movement has focused relatively little attention on teenagers to date, there is reason to believe the tide may be shifting, as increasing interest in this age group is cropping up in research, advocacy and practice circles. It is not surprising that high school programs have been low on the priority list; increasing investments in teens requires rethinking a range of strategic and conceptual decisions related to after-school, including recruitment and attendance, policy framing, program content and partnership development. Communities committed to increasing after-school opportunities for teens face several important issues:
| Program Quality. Efforts to expand the base of after-school programs and activities available in neighborhoods and communities have to be balanced with efforts to ensure acceptable levels of program quality. Research shows quality does matter, and there is reasonable agreement about the essential features of effective programs ? i.e. safe, supportive environments, opportunities for skill building, supportive relationships, well-trained staff, family/community connections, etc. It is important to take a developmental lens to this issue; while quality features remain the same, their implementation in programs for children vs. teens differs in important ways.
| Capacity Building, Professional Development and Staffing. Study after study shows that the relationship between staff and students is central to the quality of the after-school experience. Yet turnover rates are often high, especially among part-time staff. Training is uneven and compensation levels are low enough that programs have difficulty attracting and retaining qualified staff. Programs often have limited capacity to address these problems given tight budgets.
| Program content. Some after-school programs embrace academic content explicitly; others take a more embedded approach, using arts, sports or service to address academic content and skills. It is clear that children and youth need more than the ?basics? to enter adulthood successfully, and that in order to develop a full range of skills they need opportunities to apply their knowledge in real-life contexts. Good after-school programs are well positioned in terms of expertise and flexibility to deliver ?beyond the basics? skills and offer hands-on opportunities, and can expose young people to a range of interest-driven skills in the arts, music, sports and technology.
| Funding and Sustainability. Several recent trends stand out in relation to after-school program funding. First, categorical funding continues to be an obstacle to alignment and innovation. Second, public investments are essential to meet demand. Third, foundation funds are critical in supporting innovation, infrastructure and capacity building. Fourth, a broad array of federal funding streams can be used to support out-of-school programming. And finally, despite increasing attention over the past several years, most communities still struggle to secure sufficient funding to meet demand.
| Evaluation. Research that makes the case for after-school programs is fairly robust. While debates ensue about the degree to which out-of-school time programs can and should be held accountable for academic outcomes, we do know that participation in programs is associated with positive cognitive, physical, social and civic development as well as reductions in risky behavior, especially among economically disadvantaged children and youth. When adequate funds are available for evaluation, programs and initiatives are employing increasingly sophisticated designs to measure impact.
| Connecting School and Out-of-School Learning. There is growing evidence that learning is enhanced when youth have learning opportunities and supports that extend beyond the boundaries of the traditional school day, building and curriculum. And, there is growing evidence that school/community partnerships improve the capacity of families, schools and communities to support learning. Alignment between what happens during after-school programs and the school day are increasingly important.

NATIONAL LANDSCAPE

NEED/DEMAND| The parents of more than 28 million school-age children work outside of the home (U.S. Dept. of Labor). At least 7 million and as many as 15 million children and youth go home to an empty house on any given afternoon (U.S. Census Bureau, Urban Institute estimate, 2000).
| More than two-thirds of teens in a nationally representative survey say they would be likely to participate in academic enrichment, leadership and community service programs after school if they were available (YMCA, 2001). Interest remains fairly consistent across the high school years ? with 71 percent of 14- to 16-year-olds and 65 percent of 17- to 18-year-olds saying they would participate.
| The number of teens actually participating in activities, however, declines steadily with age. One study of three communities found that while two-thirds of 13- to 15-year-olds participated in out-of-school activities, only half of 15- to 17-year olds and one-third of 18- to 19-year-olds participated (Sipe, Ma, & Gambone, 1998). The reasons behind these declines have not been fully documented; given the demand noted above, it is critical that decision makers not mistake low teen participation rates for lack of interest.
| Public support for after-school programs is strong. Across all demographic and party lines, Americans see programs as a necessity, particularly from a safety and supervision perspective. They want governments at all levels to provide more funds. They are willing to pay more taxes if they are certain those monies will support after-school programs (Lake, Snell, Perry; 2003).

FUNDING| Federal funding for after-school programs has grown dramatically over the last five years. Between 1998 and 2002, funding for 21st Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC) initiative increased from $40 million (57,000 slots) to $1 billion (1.4 million slots). The President?s proposed FY2005 budget calls for no increase, falling short of the promise made in No Child Left Behind, which calls for $2 billion in federal funds for 21st Century CCLC in 2005. State and local governments have also increased funding. During the 1998 school year, New York State increased funding for after-school programs from $500,000 to $10 million. (Brookings Institute, Feb. 2003)
| According to a Department of Education official, of schools receiving 21st CLCC funds last year, roughly 55 percent were elementary schools, 30 percent were middle schools, 9 percent were high schools, and the remainder were multi-grade. In the state of California, only 3% of high schools receive federal 21st CLCC funds (FCIK report, 2004)

NEW YORK CITY LANDSCAPE

REACH (data on kids served)

FUNDING (spending by schools and other large sources)
| In 1998, George Soros?s Open Society Institute established The after-school Corporation in New York City and it now supports 165 programs in New York City and 20 in other locations in New York State. The Open Society Institute is providing up to $25 million per year on a 3:1 match basis for these efforts. (Brookings Institute, Feb. 2003)
| Additional info on foundation funding. Soros broadly invested 25 mill in NYC but pulling out by 2005-06. Nationally, Mott put in 10 mill. Wallace is putting up X.

PROMISING STRATEGIES
| The After-School Corporation (TASC) is one of many organizations working to broaden the after-school landscape to include opportunities that are relevant to and utilized by high school students. In 2002?2003, high school enrollment in TASC projects was 3,920 New York City youth, about 10 percent of the total TASC enrollment. Beginning in 2001, several TASC projects began receiving Workforce Investment Act (WIA) funds to offer targeted academic support and career development opportunities to low income teens at risk of dropping out of school. After-school opportunities for participating ?fellows? focus primarily on academic and leadership development, with summer activities revolving around internships. Fellows have been placed in internships around the city, at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Children?s Museum of Manhattan, Mt. Sinai Hospital, the United Nations, local middle and elementary schools, and a range of other agencies. In 2004, TASC will release a new set of findings from their evaluation that zooms in specifically on the nature and benefits of projects serving high school youth.

The Open Society Institute established The After-School Corporation in 1998 and has committed up to $125 million over seven years, contingent upon a 3:1 match. TASC and its partners receive funding from a range of public and private sources and have received commitments of more than $27 million in matching funds from corporations, foundation, and individuals. For lists of public and private sources, see www.tascorp.org, click on ?about TASC? and ?funders.?
| The Partnership for After School Education (PASE) has over 1,500 community-based member organizations that improve the lives of hundreds of thousands of under-served children and youth in New York City through creative after-school programming. PASE was founded in 1993 by a small group of after-school professionals and is today one of the nation's premier professional organizations for after-school educators, providing capacity building, training, demonstration programs, policy and advocacy expertise and a rage of services. In the next several months, PASE will be printing the second edition of The New York City Family Guide to After School Programs, once again with DYCD as a partner.

PASE's current budget is about $3.9 million. Foundation grants account for roughly $1.5 million, corporate grants $1.2 million, and public sources $800,000 (NYCDYC, USDoE, and NYS Dept. of Education). The remainder comes from small gifts, grants and contracts.
| The New York City Beacons initiative is an ambitious model of school-community-family partnerships that began in 1991 through a collaboration between New York City and the Youth Development Institute (YDI)/Fund for the City of New York. Currently funded at $36 million a year with 80 sites, the initiative enables community-based, not-for-profit agencies to create school-based community centers as ?safe havens? providing stimulating, structured, supervised activities for children, youth, and families in New York City neighborhoods. In 2001 more than 180,000 children, youth, and families were served. All sites receive a base grant of $400,000 and an additional $50,000 to cover space and custodial fees. AED?s extensive evaluation and found that the strongest impacts occurred in those Beacons in which youth development principles were applied to both the overall environment and specific activities. Staff development and other capacity-building activities conducted by YDI have contributed significantly to the Beacons? quality. These and other findings have been used as a means to continuously improve the Beacons. EMAIL SENT TO P KLEINBARD ABOUT AGE BREAK-DOWN.
| Learning in Communities is a city-based strategy supported by the Wallace Foundation aimed at ensuring that children, particularly from low- and moderate-income families, have meaningful participation in high quality programs outside school that contribute to their learning achievement and eventual career success. A hallmark of Learning in Communities is its emphasis rallying a wide range of political, business and community leaders around the importance of providing high-quality programs to children and youth who need them most. Efforts are underway, with coordination by the Fund for the City of New York, to engage a broad spectrum of public and private community leaders in New York City to develop and implement plans to: redesign local systems so that the best possible use is made of public and private funds, with priority placed on achieving high standards of program quality and learner participation; engage national partners to provide expertise to local initiatives and spread lessons throughout the field; and build and share useful knowledge with policymakers and practitioners throughout the country.
| Educational Video Center (EVC). EVC has trained New York City high school students in media arts during the non-school hours since Steve Goodman began it in 1984. New York City students have produced over 75 documentaries at the EVC, on topics ranging from race relations to the environment. A handful of their videos have made it onto national television. Many have been used to change policies and bring attention to community issues. Students at EVC learn not only filmmaking and social science research, but also the arduous business of revising one's work. It also teaches two indisputably important values: intellectual rigor and respectful collaboration. Mentored by experts in the field, young videographers typically begin by taking EVC's semester long Documentary Workshop twelve hours a week, earning high school credit for this non school-based experience. Students choose a topic, research it in depth, assemble raw materials of images and audio, edit them and submit it for critical review. IF YOU WANT TO INCLUDE A SPECIFIC PROGRAM EXAMPLE ? COULD ALSO GO UNDER ARTS