Perspectives on Youth Violence
March 18, 2008 - Continuing its yearlong exploration of youth violence in Chicago, the Youth Task Force featured a diverse panel of young people from nonprofit youth organizations discussing their experiences with violence. The program featured youth-produced documentaries, audio and performance by young people on the topic, as well as discussion about the role violence plays in their lives. The panel was moderated by Daphnee Rene, Rogers Park Young Women Action Team, and included JaKira Williams, Free Spirit Media; Kenyatta Bryant, True Star Foundation; Shannon Smith, True Star Foundation; and Marlene Childress, Community TV Network. This was the second program in a three-part series examining the scope of youth violence, teen perspectives on the problem and potential funding best practices.

The Youth Task Force hosted a session on Youth Perspectives on Violence. The session was introduced by Sara Melillo, McCormick Tribune Foundation; Mark Hallett, McCormick Tribune Foundation; David Anderson, McCormick Tribune Foundation; and Jennifer Tani, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois; and featured contributions from Daphnee Rene, Rogers Park Young Women Action Team; JaKira Williams, Free Spirit Media; Kenyatta Bryant, True Star Foundation; Shannon Smith, True Star Foundation; and Marlena Childress, Community TV Network.

The youth speakers in this program are all involved in efforts to tell stories of youth and their reactions to violence through the media, and they discussed what they have learned in the course of doing their work and what they hope their messages will eventually accomplish. The students want to show the scope of the violence problem and help preserve the future, giving youth different voices to listen to that offer alternatives to violent behavior. There are many voices in the media, in politics, and in society in general that encourage violent behavior; messages presenting different, better options need the opportunity to be equally as widespread.

Along with the violent messages that are prevalent in youth's lives, the option to choose violence is often too easy. The prevalence of handguns in the nation makes it too simple for people to resort to violence without considering other options, and many of the panelists mentioned improvement in gun regulation as one way to help make youth and their communities safer. Additionally, there are cultural elements at play-too often gun ownership is seen by the larger society as desirable and empowering rather than destructive.

The panelists talked about positive influences in their lives, including parents and friends, that help them make good decisions, and they pointed to the lack of such influences as a problem for many youth. If youth do not have someone to provide a positive example and to demonstrate real care for them, they can too easily be led into violent behavior. Often, gangs give members the acceptance and interpersonal bonding that youth do not receive elsewhere, but these influences are used to encourage antisocial behavior.

Along with having a broader range of influences in their lives, youth can benefit from having more activities and job possibilities in their life. Youth media projects provide not only the opportunity for youth to be involved in creative outlets, but also to work jobs and build career skills in media-related occupations. Presenting youth with different options for their time and offering the tools to help them build a future can help lead them away from violent choices.

Panelists also spoke of the importance of having voices that speak to youth on a level they understand. Youth voices can identify with current concerns and issues affecting other youth and discuss those issues in a way that is relevant and interesting. Panelists have worked to produce different types of media, from videos that have been broadcast on local television stations to articles that appear in True Star magazine, which is distributed in many local high schools. These vehicles give youth the opportunity to address issues of

Mid Year Planning Retreat
December 19, 2007 - Several members of the Youth Task Force held a planning meeting to discuss the 2008 Youth Violence agenda. The program was held after the December 12th program The Scope of Youth Violence to reflect on what was learned and plan the best steps to move forward, and the next two sessions to be held by the Youth Task Force were outlined.

The Youth Task Force hosted a Mid-Year Planning Retreat. The discussion was introduced and facilitated by Jane Kimondo, Crossroads Fund.

The session started with a review of the previous week's session on The Scope of Youth Violence. Participants agreed that it was valuable to have different perspectives presented at that meeting to show how violence affects youth in schools and in their community, while also taking a closer look at how violence specifically affects LGBTQ youth. The group agreed to continue discussing violence using those perspectives in future sessions, and they decided to also examine the intersection of gender issues and violence.

The next session, which will likely take place some time in February, will focus on youth perspectives on violence. The current plan is to hold the session in a somewhat larger facility with audio-visual capabilities, with the theater at the McCormick Tribune Freedom Museum being one possible venue. The group will also attempt to hold the meeting during evening hours or on a day when Chicago Public Schools have a day off so that students can attend the session. The organizers hope to target participants from a variety of neighborhoods who can share their thoughts and stories, possibly including video or other artistic presentations. The group said that it might be useful to present participants with a list of questions to answer to help them focus their thoughts before the session.

The third session of the year will look at solutions to the problem of youth violence, and some of the content will be determined by what is discussed in the February session. The group thought it might be useful to identify a national leader on the subject and bring that person in as a presenter to discuss the current state of research. They also thought it would be useful to talk to organizations working on youth violence to see if they can present concrete experiences about programs and initiatives that have produced discernable, sustainable results.

In addition to these sessions, the group thought it might be useful to look at alternative justice or restorative justice systems for youth that can intervene with at-risk youth and help change their behavior without them having to encounter the often-harsh criminal justice system.

The Scope of Youth Violence
December 12, 2007 - Youth violence took center stage last summer in neighborhoods throughout Chicago and continued well into this fall season. In response to this crisis the Youth Task Force decided to make Youth Violence its theme for the year. The first of three sessions on that topic examined the scope of youth violence, its impact, and how it has changed over time in schools, after-school programs, homes, and on the streets, as well as how it relates to LGBTQ youth. Panelists included Sarah Karp, Associate Editor of Catalyst Magazine, who has written extensively on violence in CPS schools; Shannon Kenney Sullivan, Illinois Safe Schools Alliance, speaking on LGBTQ youth violence; and Tio Hardiman, CeaseFire, speaking on street-level youth violence. Co-sponsored by the Education Funders Group and the Funding LGBT Issues Group.

The Youth Task Force hosted a discussion on The Scope of Youth Violence. The Education Funders Group and Funding LGBT Issues Group co-sponsored the session. The discussion was introduced by Jane Kimondo, Crossroads Fund, and Diana Derige, Chicago Community Trust, and featured contributions from Sarah Karp, Catalyst Magazine, Shannon Kenney Sullivan, Illinois Safe Schools Alliance, and Tio Hardiman, The Chicago Project for Violence Prevention: CeaseFire.

Creating a safe environment for youth is an ongoing challenge. Work to build safer schools has shown some positive results, though occasionally these efforts simply transfer violence problems from schools to surrounding communities. Some programs to intervene in violent situations have reduced violence in both schools and their surrounding communities, as have programs to change the culture that often exposes lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning youth to violence. Such programs can help make short-term impacts on youth violence while also contributing to larger, long-term solutions.

While the level of violence in Chicago schools has decreased in recent years, it still remains relatively high when compared to other urban districts. Pinpointing the exact scope of the problem can be difficult; depending on their relationship with central administration, principals may have an incentive to over-report or under-report violent activity. Additionally, police reports sometimes reflect significant violent incidents, but they also occasionally report more minor events (including students yelling at teachers).

One tool to help measure the effect of violence on students is the survey information released by the Chicago Public Schools, which includes questions on students' perceptions of their schools. Results show that students often feel their schools are safe, but they also feel they lack adults in the school that respect and care about them. Relationships with such adults can be important in limiting school violence.

This can be especially true for LGBTQ students, who too often lack a support structure. Studies have shown that LGBTQ students have an increased risk of harassment (both physical and verbal), and this hostility can contribute to depression, suicide attempts, and drug and alcohol use among LGBTQ youth. Three strategies have been shown to help make concrete improvement in school culture and treatment of LGBTQ youth: Forming Gay-Straight Alliances; writing and publicizing inclusive policies that cover LGBTQ students and have solid, enforceable consequences; and providing professional development to teachers and administrators on sexual orientation and gender identity topics.

Street-level interventions are another tool that can help defuse potentially violent situations. CeaseFire has gone into several Chicago communities with a multi-pronged strategy to reduce violence, including outreach to high-risk youth and community mobilization. By partnering with and hiring people in the community, CeaseFire can help resolve conflicts in peaceful ways while helping at-risk youth find new outlets. They also help youth learn skills, such as job readiness, to assist them in building a future for themselves. Recent State budget cuts, however, have reduced CeaseFire's reach, and they are adapting to their new financial situation while hoping the government restores some funding.

In discussing factors that can be indicators of potential future violence problems, the panelists mentioned the absence of fathers as strong role models. When youth have fathers who are either absent or incarcerated, this can establish a cycle of behavior that leaves them more prone to violence.

Addressing the issue of youth violence requires both short-term and long-term approaches, but the short-term programs will tend to have isolated effects until certain cultural issues are addressed. One such issue is that the current educational climate often over-emphasizes testing, which can alienate students while frustrating teachers and prompting otherwise skilled individuals to leave the teaching career. This deprives students of potentially positive relationships with teachers who care about them and respect them.

Youth Task Force Retreat
September 18, 2007 - The Youth Task Force is dedicated to promoting informed grantmaking that enhances the capacity of youth in the context of their families, their communities and the world at large. In the upcoming year, the task force will focus on youth violence. Programs will look at the scope of youth violence, the way it affects young people, and solutions to the problem.
Jane Kimondo welcomed everyone and led a round of introductions. She said that Tom Fuechtmann had completed his term as co-chair and they were still looking for someone to work with her over the next year. The group thanked Tom for his service.

In reviewing sessions of recent years and discussing areas of interest for upcoming sessions, the group looked at ways to strike a balance between planning sessions designed to bring more people into the group and planning sessions that provide information useful to existing group members. They also discussed the possibility of having an overarching theme for the year and in the end decided to plan sessions that related to the theme of youth violence. Participants also agreed that including youth voices and perspectives in their sessions was important.

The group planned three sessions for the upcoming year, as follows:

Early December 2007 - The Scope of Youth Violence
This session will look at the scope of youth violence to measure its impact and to see how it has changed over time. The safety of youth is a baseline issue that can affect many other areas, including their education and their employment. Particular attention will be paid to how violence affects certain locations, such as schools, home, after-school programs, etc. This session will be promoted as the first of three sessions that will help funders work toward solutions for youth violence problems. Organizers: Ray Crosland, Diana Derige.

March 2008 - Youth Violence: Voices of Youth
How do youth view the issue of youth violence? What are their thoughts about the causes of the problem and potential solutions? What role can youth leaders play in addressing youth violence, and what supports do they need to be effective? This session will focus on listening to the thoughts and ideas of youth about ways to approach the issue of youth violence.
Organizers: Sara Melillo, Jennifer Tani.

May 2008 - Youth Violence: Solutions
Building on information from the year's previous sessions, this session will look at strategies and ideas that have been shown to be effective in addressing youth violence. Participants will also examine how to replicate programs that have been successful in other areas and ways to involve youth leaders while also discussing possible collaborative funding efforts centered on youth violence. Organizers: Mark Hallett, Diana Spencer.

Black Youth Project
April 30, 2007 - The Youth Task Force, the Education Funders Group, the Community Building Task Force, and the Funders for Lesbian and Gay Issues hosted a session on The Black Youth Project. The discussion was introduced by Jane Kimondo, Crossroads Fund, and included contributions from Cathy J. Cohen, University of Chicago.

While issues and policies that affect black youth often make headlines and are the subject of much discussion, the voices and perspectives of the youth themselves are frequently overlooked or ignored. Public issues like education, poverty, HIV/AIDS, welfare reform, affirmative action, sex education, and others play a direct role in the lives of black youth, which makes it crucial to better understand their beliefs and opinions.

The Black Youth Project surveyed 1,590 youths, including black, Hispanic, and white youth between the ages of 15 and 25. Approximately 40 in-depth follow-up interviews were conducted with survey participants. The survey included over 200 questions, and a large amount of data is still being analyzed. The project will also include a forthcoming analysis of the content of popular rap songs from the past ten years.

Some of the findings of the survey include:

• While rap music and rap videos are a frequent presence in the lives of many black youths, a majority of black youths agree that rap videos are too violent and that rap videos portray both black women and black men in "bad and offensive ways."
• Black youth are more likely than Hispanic and white youth to believe it is hard for black people to get ahead because of discrimination (61 percent of black youth agreed with this statement, compared to 45 percent of Hispanic youth and 43 percent of white youth). Follow-up interviews showed that the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina played a pivotal role for some youth in making discrimination plain to see.
• Black youth also differed from white and Hispanic youth in their perception of the quality of education black youth receive compared to the quality of white youth's education. Fifty-four percent of black youth agree that black youth receive a poorer education on average than white youth, while 40 percent of Hispanic youth and 31 percent of white youth agree with the statement.
• Responses to questions about the criminal justice system showed that black youth respondents were more likely to have been stopped by police officers than were white youth, and they were also more likely to have been arrested. White youth who were arrested were more likely to be convicted of a crime than black youth, but black youth were far more likely to be convicted of a felony.
• While a majority of black youth (79 percent) believes they have the knowledge and skills to participate in politics, most of the black youth surveyed (56 percent) believes that the government cares very little about people like them. Sixty-eight percent of the black youth surveyed believed the government would do more to find a cure for AIDS if it affected more white people.
• While only about one-fifth of the black youth surveyed indicated active political participation, they showed involvement in some non-traditional forms of action, including "buycotts" (purchasing goods or services because they like the values of a company), electronic petitions, and blogging.
• All youth surveyed are heavily in favor of mandatory sex education in school, and they also strongly disagree with government funding of abstinence-only programs.

Data analysis will be ongoing, including matching the data to community profiles to see if the racial and ethnic makeup of the respondents' communities had any bearing on their responses. More data and updates are available at www.blackyouthproject.com.

Sex In Our Schools: What Are Kids Learning Part Two
February 12, 2007 - The Youth Task Force, the Health Program Affinity Group, Funders for Lesbian and Gay Issues, and the Education Funders Group hosted a discussion on Sex in Schools: What Are Kids Learning, Part 2. The discussion was introduced by Julie Walther, Girl's Best Friend Foundation, and featured contributions from Dorinda Welle, The Ford Foundation; Kenneth Papineau, Chicago Public Schools; Vicki Pittman, Chicago Public Schools; Soo Ji Min, Illinois Caucus for Adolescent Health; Jonathan Stacks, Illinois Caucus for Adolescent Health (ICAH); Marcela Howard, Advocates for Youth; James Wagoner, Advocates for Youth; and students Mya Patitucci, Kevin Brown, and Adaku Utah, who are part of Furthering Responsible Education Everywhere, a program of ICAH.

In April 2006, the Board of Education for the Chicago Public Schools adopted a new Family Life and Comprehensive Sexual Health Education Policy. The policy was the result of organizing and advocacy on multiple levels, and it created a new mandate in the CPS system for comprehensive sexuality education within specific guidelines. While establishing such a policy is a significant step, there is more work to be done-the policy needs to be implemented in all Chicago schools, and efforts are underway to implement a similar mandate on the state level.

The CPS policy guidelines emphasize information that is comprehensive, age appropriate, medically accurate, abstinence-based, and includes information on emotional, social, and psychological aspects of sexuality along with physical and health aspects. The comprehensive approach can produce benefits in a wide range of areas, including student health, emotional well-being, and even job training and preparedness.

As part of the policy, CPS has provided every school with curriculum in both print and online forms. The online version allows teachers to search for lesson plans by subject area or by skills they are teaching, allowing them to present material that specifically addresses their students. CPS is working to monitor how many schools are using the curriculum and how often they employ it, and CPS staff will work with schools that are under-employing the curriculum to find ways to help these schools meet the new mandate. While CPS has occasionally encountered resistance from teachers and principals, most who go through the training for the curriculum speak positively of the experience.

The creation of the new policy happened with significant input from CPS students, and students also plan to be involved in promoting the policy. By spreading word about the policy to students throughout the system and telling them what kind of education they have a right to receive, student organizers hope to build participation in the new policy from the ground up.

Along with working on implementation of the new Chicago policy, organizers will focus on attempting to expand comprehensive sexuality education resources to suburban and downstate locations. Building momentum for a statewide mandate could help marshal resources for underserved areas while clarifying occasional confusion about what can and cannot be taught. Some of these areas do not have the organizational resources that the Chicago region has, and partnerships with community colleges and other groups are being explored as a way to offer the needed health and education services.

This organizing effort comes at a time when federal funding for abstinence-only education has constructed an infrastructure of programs that aggressively market themselves to schools. Since they do not need additional funding from the schools, these programs can present themselves as a fully funded sexuality education resource. While well funded, such programs often contain inaccurate, incomplete, or non-factual information, and there is not yet any peer-reviewed research showing the effectiveness of abstinence-only education. By emphasizing curricula that are medically accurate and fact-based, comprehensive sexuality education programs present an alternative to abstinence-only programs-an alternative that not only provides students with a broader range of knowledge but that has, in some cases, been shown to promote higher rates of abstinence from sexual activity than do abstinence-only programs.

But You Do Fund Youth, Part One: Finding Overlap In Programs
November 09, 2006 - The Youth Task Force hosted a discussion on But You Do Fund Youth Part One: Finding Overlap in Your Program Area. Julie Simpson, Cricket Island Foundation, introduced and moderated the discussion, which featured presentations by Marcia Festen, Marcia K. Festen and Associates; Tom Fuechtmann, Community Memorial Foundation; Ngoan Le, Chicago Community Trust; and Nikki Will Stein, Polk Bros. Foundation.

Success in youth funding efforts often directly relates to a foundation's ability to break down existing barriers. Some of these barriers are:

• Separate program areas that might each fund youth-related efforts (for example, education and community development) but have little interaction;
• The division between private and public funding sources;
• The lack of interaction and coordination between schools and other community organizations;
• The gap between leaders of community organizations and the youth in their communities; and
• The divide between programs serving large numbers of youth and programs that might not have as many youth enrolled but that provide deeper, more sustained services.

There is no one method to deal with these obstacles. However, programs that have produced positive results are generally ones that bring various organizations and institutions together and give youth ways to be involved. By providing youths with activities that capitalize on their interests and that respect their opinions and ideas, programs can help a variety of youths develop leadership skills.

Some of the more successful programs mentioned at the session include:

• A theater organization that enlists local youths in writing, producing, and staging their own shows. The organization has an open door policy-there are no auditions, and the youths are able to set their own level of involvement. The program's recruiting methods draw in many youths who are not often involved in other leadership development programs, including youths who are immigrants or children of immigrants.
• A college preparation program that brings students together for regular meetings and takes them on college visits. The students are selected from non-elite Chicago high schools and must be referred to the program and then pass a three-tiered interview process. They receive not only college preparation but also scholarships to the colleges they visit.
• A long-term initiative focused on building healthy interactions for youths before the need for interventions for negative behavior arises. A major focus of the initiative was strengthening links between youths, parents, and their community.
• A skateboard park designed with significant input from local youths. The youths had a hand in shaping the rules for the park (which they made stricter than those originally envisioned), and they also helped set up skateboard classes and fund raising efforts. The park was self-sustaining within a few years of its opening.
• A youth commission that meets the night before the board of trustees meeting in a suburban village. The youths receive the same information packet as the trustees and discuss the same issues. The next night, two of the youth commissioners attend the board of trustees meeting to share their thoughts and ideas.

While these programs provided useful examples of how some of the barriers surrounding youth programs can be broken down, questions remain and will be discussed at a continuation of this meeting. Some of these questions include: When designing a program for youth, how do you define "youth"? Is a sustainable program always desirable, or is it occasionally acceptable to fund a program that works in the here and now, meeting the current needs of a group of youths? How can you balance youth and adult leadership when youth leadership, due to the simple function of age, has more rapid turnover? How do you balance programs focused on quantitative results with more issue-oriented programs?

Participatory Evaluation of Youth Programs
January 18, 2006 - The Youth Task Force hosted a discussion on Participatory Evaluation of Youth Programs. Introduced by Thomas Fuechtmann, Community Memorial Foundation, and Mariame Kaba, Steans Family Foundation, the discussion featured presentations from Catlin Fullwood, On-Time Associates, Jessica Palmert, Alternatives, Inc., and Jennifer Tani, United Way of Metropolitan Chicago.

Participatory Evaluation Research (PER) is a method of evaluating programs that closely involves the participants in the process and helps them build the skills they need to shape programs according to their priorities and move the programs forward. By involving participants and having them tell their own stories, PER can provide a detailed picture of the progress and achievements of a program.

The presentation focused on one particular type of PER that includes it in an overall rubric known as Activist Inquiry, which looks at ways to gather and analyze information and apply it to ongoing efforts for social change. The exchange of information that is inherent in Activist Inquiry makes it difficult to measure its activities with a simple yardstick; instead, it needs something more flexible, like a tape measure that can bend around all the dimensions of the shapes revealed by PER. Such measures would look more at the reasons behind a program's course of action rather than listing a series of numbers that might not relate to a program's core activities.

Activist Inquiry is based on the idea that participants in a program-for example, youth involved in youth development programs-know a lot, and that building on their knowledge is the best way to move a program forward. As individuals, their families, and their social networks become more involved in development programs, they can effect social change in themselves, their networks, their community, and local institutions.

Since PER works with specific individuals involved in programs and deals with their concerns and ideas, it cannot be used to make generalizations-for example, the problems experienced by young women in Rogers Park and the solutions they develop to deal with those problems do not necessarily have any relevance to young women in other parts of the country or world. This is not a significant weakness, however; while PER cannot be used to generate solutions that are universally applicable, it can be used in different places to help people generate solutions to their own particular problems. In other words, while the solutions developed through PER cannot be applied everywhere, the procedures followed to help youth generate their own solutions can.

Using PER means stepping away from the model of having an outside "expert" come in to evaluate a program. PER assumes that participants themselves are the best experts about their neighborhoods and the programs in their communities, and PER engages them in conversation rather than lectures. The participants need to be the ones to process information gathered for evaluation so that they can come to an understanding ofwhat it means to them.

Two practitioners who have employed PER spoke about the benefits of this form of evaluation. They said that while PER involves certain time demands, it can be integrated into the structure of a program so that the evaluation flows naturally from ongoing program activities. The time spent on PER is worthwhile because it leads directly to improvements in the program, which can heighten involvement in a program and reduce the time needed for recruitment and retention of participants.

By focusing on learning from participants, PER can help shape programs in ways that program staff may not have anticipated. The concerns of the participants and the issues that are important to them may not be the things program staff would like to focus on, but when participants can work on their own priorities, instead of having priorities imposed upon them, they see more interest and relevance in a program, and they can often bring about change in ways staff had not expected.

One difficulty of implementing PER is that funders may have their own evaluation procedures that do not necessarily mesh with PER. Program staff may attempt to convince funders that PER functions well as an evaluation mechanism, and some funders will respond to that argument. Others, though, might be set on their own evaluation procedures and thus be more difficult to convince. In the end, though, many funders claim they want to encourage reflection by their grantees, and PER is a way to do just that.

Youth Funding: It's So Yesterday?
December 01, 2005 - The Youth Task Force hosted a discussion on Youth Funding: It's So Yesterday? Julie Walther, Girl's Best Friend Foundation, introduced the program, which featured presentations by Robert Sherman, Surdna Foundation; Julia Beatty, Ms. Foundation for Women; Rini Banerjee, Overbrook Foundation; and Alice Cottingham, Girl's Best Friend Foundation. Julie Simpson, Cricket Island Foundation, and Rebecca Willis, Prince Charitable Trusts, facilitated the discussions.

The discussion centered on how the youth-focused activities of four foundations (the Surdna Foundation, the Ms. Foundation for Women, the Overbrook Foundation, and the Girl's Best Friend Foundation) have shifted in recent years. The Surdna Foundation began a program called Effective Citizenry about ten years ago, and originally the program was not youth-centered. The first years of the program were experimental and addressed many topics, but eventually the program focused on ways to build the necessary skills and motivation for effective citizenship in young people. As the program progressed, foundation staff saw that organizing youth and helping them be active in issues that matter to them works as a very effective youth development program. The youth become active in issues they care about, and they find ways to make positive changes. They not only build skills, but they find ways to employ those skills. This does not mean that youth development programs are not important; in fact, they are necessary if the youth are going to obtain the skills they need for successful organizing.

The Surdna Foundation's experience has shown that maintaining funding for youth-centered initiatives can be difficult, as both boards and societal philosophies tend to shift over time, and what was accepted one year may be questioned the next. Allowing the youth who participate in successful programs to share their own stories is one way to show the merits of these activities and can help trustees see the benefit of continuing funding.

Like the Surdna Foundation, the Ms. Foundation for Women began a youth initiative in the mid-1990s. Their focus has been on growing the perception of young women as assets and on building a new generation of female leaders. This has led them to be involved in youth organizing, which the youth are particularly interested in when they see societal disparities-they usually want to work on ways to resolve them. The Ms. Foundation has seen that youth organizing looks different in different communities; the problems and possible solutions in a place like Appalachia are different than the problems and solutions in an inner city.

The work of youth organizing is at a stage where some research on the effects of youth organizing is coming out, but more may be needed to make a persuasive case for the benefits of these efforts. Social Policy Research Associates (www.spra.com) has written an evaluation of the Ford Foundation's Youth Leadership Development Initiative, The Innovation Center (www.theinnovationcenter.org) has numerous resources concerning youth organizing, and the Funders' Collaborative on Youth Organizing (www.fcyo.org) has a collection of papers on the subject as well.

Representatives of the Overbrook Foundation and the Girl's Best Friend Foundation talked about working with programs that may be moving away from a focus on youth. The two foundations face different circumstances-at the Overbrook Foundation, funding for youth programming was suspended as the foundation's directors reviewed all funding programs. At present, emphasis is being placed on the foundation's Human and Civil Rights program, which could include youth-centered programs and could even conceivably result in increased funding being given to youth-centered organizations through this program. However, the present is still in flux as both the foundation and their grantees are learning how to deal with these changes. Grantees in particular are working on how to put their work into a human rights framework.

The changes at the Girl's Best Friend Foundation are different; the foundation is spending down its endowment and plans to make its last grant in mid-2008. They are trying to help their grantees find new sources of funding, as well as assisting them to build the capacity they will need to survive once the Girl's Best Friend Foundation closes. Much of their recent work has focused on building a new generation of female leaders who can carry on the ideas supported by the foundation after it is gone.

The session concluded with a discussion about how local foundations can engage more effectively with national foundations, and vice versa. At present, only two Chicago organizations receive funding from the Funding Collaborative, though that is partly due to the small amount of money available to the Collaborative. Another factor is that often, youth work in Chicago is nested in dominant adult organizations, and the youth-focused part of the work does not rise to prominence in the same way it does in other areas. However, that could be a circular problem-the youth programs do not receive funding because they are not a dominant part of an organization, and they don't become a dominant part of an organization because they do not receive sufficient funding. As youth funding continues to evolve, finding more ways to support such nested programs while also helping those programs become independent of foundation support can be a focus. Creativity is needed by both funders and grantees to deal with these and other continually evolving issues.

Youth Task Force Funders Exchange
September 7, 2005 - The Youth Task Force held a discussion among its members about what different funders are doing in the areas of youth development and what possibilities might exist for partnerships. Tom Fuechtmann, Community Memorial Foundation, introduced and facilitated the discussion.

The discussion began with each member of the task force outlining their focus when it comes to programs for youth and discussing some of the challenges they face. The issues discussed included:

• How can a foundation develop new ideas and innovative programs? Finding these programs can be a challenge and often requires a funder to go to their constituency looking for support for a particular area rather than simply reacting to proposals they receive. An additional problem is that individuals with innovative ideas are often new to the field and may not have the capacity of larger, more established organizations. Capacity building and technical assistance grants may be necessary to help some of these organizations move forward with their ideas.
• How do you sustain participation in a program as participants get older? If a 14-year-old enters a program that doesn't adjust to them, they are not likely to stay involved when they are sixteen. How can funders help organizations gain the capacity to make necessary adaptations?
• How can a funder spur innovative thinking when grantmaking is confined to a specific geographic area? Again this raises the issue of capacity building, as funders must work with newer or smaller organizations who are within their grantmaking borders rather than working with organizations who may be more sophisticated but do not operate within the specific geographic area.
• How should funders define the issue areas in which they wish to make grants? From determining which age group to serve to defining the difference between youth leadership training and youth development, making a clear statement of guidelines for funding can be a challenge.
• How can funders make sure they do not repeat society's tendency to not give youth a voice? There can be temptations or pressures to provide funding to support what adults believe youths should have, rather than what youths themselves say are important. Increasing youth input can have benefits; for example, a YMCA wanted funding to build a climbing wall, but a survey of youth showed no interest in such a thing. Survey results showed the youth would be better served by a skateboard park. The YMCA received funding to build the park, used local youth to shape the rules for the park and teach safety, and the park has become self-sustaining.
• What are some of the best methods for evaluation? Measuring the outcome of a grant is generally a non-scientific process, but board members often want quantifiable results. Something like a report card system may help start discussion on the effectiveness of a grant, while using stories and site visits as part of an evaluation can help display some of the less-quantifiable results of a grant. In October, the Donors Forum will host a program on the topic of story-based evaluation.
• How can a program become successfully self-sustaining? Very few programs can operate without assistance of some kind, and "self-sustaining" often means that a program has simply found another source of funding. How can a funder identify which programs may be completely self-sustaining (such as the previously mentioned skateboard park) and help them reach that point?
• When is it okay to continue funding a particular organization beyond a foundation's normal cutoff date? This is a special concern when cutting off support may mean the organization can no longer survive. How can a funder balance concern for an organization's future with their desire to help the organization build a diverse funding base?

Participants also mentioned efforts that have seemed particularly effective, including:

• Encouraging potential grantees to apply for government grants for after-school programs and then awarding them with a supplementary grant to fill in the gaps the grant does not cover.
• Providing small community grants to individuals and organizations that may not be 501(c)3s for youth-oriented work. These grants can often encourage development at the grassroots of a community and give people who may have great ideas but are not be part of a formal nonprofit organization access to foundation money. Additional fiscal monitoring may be required in connection with such grants.
• Having a wide range of ages represented on a foundation's board to encourage people with different perspectives to help shape the foundation's activities.
• Facilitating interaction between youth and their parents, as well as other adults like teachers, where the youth can chose the topics of discussion.
• Funding summer jobs programs and then having the participants get together to meet one another and share experiences.
  

Speaking of Youth
March 30, 2005 - The March 30 meeting of the Youth Task Force, Speaking of Youth, discussed the current state of the group and ideas for its future. The discussion was introduced and facilitated by Tawanna Brown, Family Matters, and Julie Walther, Girl's Best Friend Foundation.

Initial discussion centered on what the Youth Task Force provided that participants could not get anyplace else. The group mentioned interaction with other funders, discussion of youth-oriented programs and initiatives besides their own, interaction between funders and practitioners, in-depth discussions of issues like youth and justice, and the creation of the Funder's Guide to Youth Development, distributed to all new members of the Donors Forum and other interested parties, as useful aspects of the task force.

The group then moved on to discuss ways the task force may be reconfigured to respond to the needs of the participants and increase the number of people involved in planning and organizing group events. Some participants said that the level of involvement in planning and organizing is tied to the programs the task force plans to carry out; the more interest members of the group have in a certain area, the more likely they will want to be involved in planning activities or programs in that area. Participants also suggested the task force increase interaction with other groups, such as the Arts and Culture Funders Group and Grantmakers Concerned with Ending Homelessness, since their issues often overlap with youth issues. It was noted, however, that youth issues should not be allowed to simply become folded into these other concerns, as youth issues have distinct characteristics that require separate analysis, and that the task force needs to be able to articulate these issues themselves.

Participants mentioned that, when it comes to setting an agenda, making a plan for an entire year can be useful, but other member issue groups have seen success in responding to issues as they arise. A recent meeting of the Arts and Culture Funders Group to discuss Children's Theater was brought up as an example of a successful meeting that was not foreseen and then was planned subsequent to the summer retreat, as well as the type of meeting the Youth Task Force might be able to co-sponsor in the future since it overlaps with the interests of the group.

As the discussion continued, many participants said that a map of the youth funding scene in the Chicago region would be a useful tool. Databases of grantmakers maintained by the Donors Forum could be a valuable place to start, and the mapping project could then move on to talk with both funders and practitioners to get a better picture of who is invested in youth issues and what the general landscape looks like. There are also other datasets, such as a recent examination of youth and employment by the National Opinion Research Center, which could be useful in creating an overall map.

The task force members agreed that a mapping project would be a useful task for the group to undertake. Not only would the mapping project provide an agenda for future months, but the results of the project could inform future agenda items. The group decided that planning the project should be the central focus of the task force's scheduled July retreat, and that some of the issues that would need to be discussed would include what questions the mapping project should address and what resources would be needed to ensure the project is completed.

Planning questions include whether and how to include the voices of practitioners. Group members also agreed to share data on some recent mapping projects that might help shape this one, including study performed in Boston about school children that will be distributed to group members through the Donors Forum. Consuella Brown and Julie Simpson volunteered to draft questions for the mapping project. Mariame Kaba and Carol Mason offered to play an editing role

Youth Development and Education
November 10, 2004 - The Youth Development Task Force and Education Funders Group held a discussion on youth leadership in schools and communities. Panelists included: Jeff Bates, Prosser High School; Susana Torres, Big Picture Schools; Gary Goldman, International Quality Leadership Institute; and Sarai Martines, Juan Vidal, and Jay Wieczorek, students from the community.

Panelists spoke about how youth can act as elements of change in their schools and communities. It was stated that a culture of readiness has to be created for youth involvement so that youth feel supported and safe vocalizing their opinions and ideas. Youth are intelligent and willing to take leadership roles, but sometimes feel like adults see them they as incompetent to lead. Partnerships shared illustrated many examples in which communities are working to build youth-centered communities.

One panelist highlighted his involvement in the Service Learning Initiative Board at his school and the importance the school places on engaging youth in the community. Stories were shared regarding past and present community service projects with nonprofits around the city of Chicago.

One specific school shared its philosophies on why it engages its youth in the community through internships. Comments illustrated how youth are empowered to make a difference and encouraged to participate in decision-making procedures. Each student must be involved in an internship each semester that creates something that will continue to be utilized by the organization. At the end of each term, students present their experiences from their internship to a panel consisting of their parents, school officials, internship site person and others. Students present at the program commented on how much they respect being involved and engaged in policy making decisions at their school.

Sex in Our Schools: What Are Kids Learning?
September 28, 2004 - The Youth Development Task Force held a discussion on abstinence-only education. Invited panelists included William Smith, The Sexual Information and Education Council of the United States (SECUS) and Jobi Peterson, Illinois Caucus of Adolescent Health.

Abstinence-only education is defined by an 8 Point Federal Definition as defined by Section 510(b) of Title V f the Social Security Act, P.L. 104-193 and has an enormous influence on what is taught in schools. The definition includes:

• Teaching abstinence from sexual activity outside of marriage is the expected standard for all school-age children
• Teaching young people how to reject sexual advances and how alcohol and drug use increase vulnerability to sexual advances

National studies have revealed that Abstinence-only-until-marriage programs negatively impact young people's sexual health. Some studies reveal that young people who took a virginity pledge were one-third less likely to use contraception when they did become sexually active than their peers who had not pledged, and have the same rates of sexually transmitted diseases as young people who do not pledge abstinence. State evaluations fail to find that abstinence-only-until-marriage is effective.

Each school, under the Clinton administration, had the liberty of selecting one or two points. Under the Bush administration, to qualify for federal funding, each school program must adhere to the 8 Point Federal program.

There is no official definition for a comprehensive sex education. Some issues that make a comprehensive sex education program include:

• Starts early enough to make a difference and is over enough time to become substantive
• Addresses kids who haven't had sex and those who have had multiple partners
• Highlights information that is clear and accurate
• Integrates the information with the health program already in the school

Chicago Public schools recently surveyed students and revealed that 55% had sex by graduation. In Chicago, over 13% of students are active by age 13. Twenty percent of students have had four or more partners before graduating. In Illinois, schools are not teaching sex education. If they are, they are by law required to discuss HIV and abstinence-only education. CPS has a policy to only teach abstinence-only education.

Real Truth for Illinois Youth Campaign, a research collaboration between Illinois Caucus for Adolescent Health and Planned Parenthood, is addressing how sex education is taught. The Real Truth model is the most comprehensive model that SEICUS has seen nationally.

No Child Left Behind
March 25, 2004 - The Youth Development Task Force invited Tracy Dell'Angela, Educational Reporter for the Chicago Tribune, to discuss the No Child Left Behind Act and its effect on schools.

Testing is a key component of the No Child Left Behind Act. Since all students are required to be tested, participating ESL and special education students can influence the overall testing scores. In Illinois, a 40 percent passing rate is required on state reading and math tests, or a school will be labeled as failing. Present testing has changed the way subjects are taught. Test drilling has become mainstream. Curricula have been narrowed to eliminate subjects not covered on the tests. Since the implementation of this law, additional attention has been given to higher needs students to gain assistance to succeed.

Most schools in Chicago can not opt out of the No Child Left Behind Act. Title I dollars could be decreased or eliminated if a school's test scores are lower than the set criteria. Teachers and students feel the continued pressure to perform. In high schools, some administrations offer motivational prizes to encourage successful test scores.

When a school does not meet the set criteria, it is required to offer the students an option to transfer. The school is required to pay for the associated transportation fees. Another school is not always an option, especially in rural communities. If a school is labeled failing a second year, it is required to offer tutoring for the students. Some parents are not aware of these options.

Funders have seen school programs affected. Programs are pushed from after school to the weekends or canceled. A number of principals commented that the money used to fund after school programs is being diverted to assist with the additional costs associated with the No Child Left Behind Act.

Local and national organizations discussed how youth programming is stronger when it is gender conscious. The discussion highlighted different models on gender-specific programming, including a peer model working with low-income women and an organization with young men and women's gender-specific programming implementing side-by-side. Organization leaders recognize that youth feel more comfortable discussing gender-specific issues in a gender-specific space. The conversation illustrated the importance of creating a safe and nurturing space for young women and young men to create, learn and grow.

Positive outcomes of gender specific programming included:

• Youth gain experience in leadership opportunities.
• Youth are involved in the creation of their programming.
• Youth are empowered to make decisions on issues that affect them.

One organization illustrated the challenges teenage boys, specifically those of color, face in our society, highlighting gangs, drugs, and families without a male role model. Addressing leadership training, building a feeling of self-worth and growing group cohesion among the young men build a sense of responsibility and create opportunities to be effective and powerful in their community.

Challenges of gender specific programming included securing funding for bisexual and transgender youth programming and the lack in expertise and experience some youth leaders bring to leadership roles.

One funding opportunity identified highlighted the credibility given to research funded by foundations. Often embedded in the research are citations of other resources and tools useful to nonprofit organizations.

Distributed materials included:

• Gender Matters: Funding Effective Programs for Women and Girls by Molly Mead, June 2001
• What's Equal: Figuring Out What Works For Girls In Co-Ed Settings, Girls Incorporated

Ideas for FY05 programming included a presentation by local and national funders on strategies to fund youth organizing and a discussion on Lessons in Leadership by the Innovation Center.
Members decided to discuss changing the group's name and the program ideas at the summer retreat.

Personal telephone calls were suggested as a possible solution to increasing program attendance. Members stressed the benefits of program attendance, including staying informed on current issues and identifying other areas of funder collaboration.

Partnerships With Grantees
November 12, 2003 - Members of the Youth Development Task Force and Chicago Grantmakers for Effective Change welcomed Kathryn Wittneben and Lisa Hoffman of The Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund (US), who shared their lessons learned on building effective partnerships with youth.

The funders at The DPWMFUS found it was important to validate the work of the youth involved and to have youth participation integrated at every level in order to develop a successful partnership between the funder and grantees. The most important benefits gained were learning together while going through the process of implementing the funded project. Establishing a common vocabulary and having a clear understanding of the different non-verbal languages that youth and adults use can help create mutual understanding and respect, leading to more successful results. This includes funder responsiveness and flexibility in communicating at non-conventional times of day, which may work best for the youth. Ms. Hoffman suggested hiring an intermediary to work with youth if your foundation is interested in this type of capacity building but does not have the capacity to work directly with them.

Megan Carney from About Face Youth Theatre (AFYT), one of the organizations funded by The Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund (US), was present to discuss the role funding played in expanding their touring component of the theatre and creation of an on-site leadership program for youth. Overall, organizations which received funding vocalized the additional opportunities to step out of their daily routines and conduct research, dialogue with others, and spend more time focusing on the broader goals of the organization.

Brenna Conley Fonda and Tony Alvarado-Rivera, interns at AFYT, agreed that through the experience they gained a better understanding of nonprofits and learned how to create change in their communities. The youth organizations selected by the Diana, Princess of Wales Memorial Fund (US) also formed a peer-learning network to share experiences, challenges and strengths, and provide each other support.

Dealing With Homeless Youth
November 11, 2003 - The Youth Development Task Force, Grantmakers Concerned with Ending Homelessness, and Health Program Affinity Group sponsored a program addressing the most effective way to end youth homelessness. Featured panelists included: Daria Zventina, Board Member, Teen Living Programs; David L. Myers, Executive Director, Teen Living Programs; Melissa Maguire, Director of Youth Shelter Network, The Night Ministry; Carole Mills, Director of Open Door Shelter, The Night Ministry; and Sol A. Flores, Executive Director, La Casa Norte.

The panelists discussed how being homeless affected youth development and addressed the most effective way to end youth homelessness. One panelist reviewed the Plan to End Homelessness, mentioning how the plan was developed and its three-prong approach to decrease homelessness: prevention, rapid re-housing, and wrap-around service. Even though it has been documented that these techniques assist adults, he mentioned there had been little information and research on how these models work for youth.

Other topics discussed by the panelists included:

• Impact of homelessness has on adolescent development
• Causes, challenges, and resources available to homeless youth
• Increased risk of youth becoming homeless
• Program descriptions and key features of the Continuum of Care program models
• Statistics on current interim housing models

The program concluded with an overview on current resources and providers response to the Plan. Changes the initiative has brought about included: an increase in available beds for homeless adults, families and youth on the north, west and south sides and increased interest in shared and cluster permanent housing. Needs for increased youth program funding included: capital money; supportive services such as 24-hour security in youth facilities; and strategic planning.

Climate for Youth Programs in Chicago
November 16, 2002 - The Youth Development Task Force hosted "Climate for Youth Programs in Chicago & Gaps in Services and Funding" to hear updates from representatives from the area's two largest youth funding areas; Youth Services and Chicago Public Schools. Renae Ogletree, the director of the Youth Services Division of the City of Chicago spoke first, outlining developments with key programs like YouthNet and After School Matters. The city's programs seek to coordinate service provision between area agencies, like CHA, CPS and CDHS. Youth development is often ignored as a stand-alone area, but is a key area within larger program structures. Jon Schmidt, the director of Service Learning for the CPS, similarly spoke about the need for a coordination of efforts to reduce gaps in services. He spoke of the need to connect schools and communities, and the efforts of programs like Service Learning that tie together the service requirements of students and the communities they live in.

Where Do You Go To School?
April 11, 2002 - The Youth Task Force co-sponsored this program on the transformation of the Chicago Housing Authority, focusing on its impact (potential or realized) on Chicago Public School students, families and communities. The discussion looked at what CPS and the CHA are doing to ameliorate the effects of this tremendous transition. Linda Lenz, publisher of Catalyst magazine moderated a panel that included:

Kathryn Greenberg, Chicago Housing Authority
Rene Heybach, Chicago Coalition for the Homeless
Mary Kelly Dowd, Homeless Education Program at CPS
Janice Ledvora, principal, Woodson South Public School
Kay Giles, superintendent, District 144

Prostitution Roundtable
March 22, 2002 - Notes: Julie Walther from Girl's Best Friend Foundation moderated a panel discussion between members of the Prostitution Alternatives Roundtable (PART). Jody Raphael of the Center for Impact Research oriented the audience to current prostitution statistics, particularly in the Chicago area, while Maggie Litgen from Rape Victim Advocates discussed the intersection of emergency health services and prostitution. Vena Ier from the Midwest Immigrant and Human Rights Center discussed prostitution through a lens of illegal trafficking.

The panel articulated three primary opportunities for philanthropy, including:

• Legal services for immigrants in prostitution seeking legal status.
• Further community education around the realities of prostitution.
• Creating safe spaces for providing services to persons being prostituted.

5 Girls
November 8, 2001 - The Youth Development Task Force hosted a screening of the documentary film "5 Girls" with a post-film discussion featuring filmmaker Maria Finitzo, Professor Dolores Norton from the University of Chicago and Karen Zeitlin, executive director of Girl's Best Friend Foundation. The film portrays five young, ethnically and economically diverse women and is a powerful testimony to the complexity of adolescence and the strength of adolescent girls.

Finitzo and Norton discussed making this film available to girl-serving organizations. A first step in their outreach efforts will be a girl's summit at the U. of C. that will convene staff from girl-serving nonprofits, researchers and adolescent girls.

POV interview with Finitzo and the 5 girls.

Back to Youth main page.