Systems+and+Organizations

Youth Development Systems & Organizations: Organization, Evaluation, Partnerships, and Leadership ** Organizational Theory and Evaluating Success ** Wheeler, W. (2000). Emerging organizational theory and the youth development organization//. Applied Developmental Science, // 4(1), 47-54 i. Management Controlled Organizational System: during the industrial revolution jobs were rigidly defined, rules and policies were strictly enforced and a hierarchy of authority controlled decision (Wheeler p. 48). i. Greater freedom was established and workers were expected to initiate improvements to processes without specific direction. ii. The collective group was responsible for a range of tasks within the business process. i. Dissolves boundaries established in the Bureaucratic System ii. Teams become interdependent that work in tandem to complete projects iii. “The inflexible boundaries in the traditional concept of a “job” vanish; organizational systems are designed to be in tune with the capabilities of individual workers” (Risher & Fay, 1995). iv. “Today’s cutting-edge organizations are learning that, ironically, they have much greater competitive advantage when they are less protective of their own institutions borders” (Wheeler p. 48). I. Prior organizational charts were vertical in nature; newer frameworks encourage a nonhierarchical model. II. A nonhierarchical model decreases the levels of management, making an organization leaner and embracing the knowledge and value of all employees. i. This model sees youth and adults as equal in decision making, planning and implementing actions (Wheeler p.50) ii. Acknowledges that youth have a lot of contribute- making the model flat and lean like “The Virtual Workplace” model. iii. YD Organizations are creating permeable boundaries, fostering interdependence and encouraging involvement among youth and adults. i. YD Organizations are partnering with other agencies who are the “experts” in that area. ii. “The value of the youth development organization in the future will be determined by the organizations collaborations, connections, capacity, and contribution to the common good, rather than by its resources or client base” (Wheeler 51). ** Emerging Directions for Youth Program Evaluation ** Arnold, M.E., & Cater, M. (2011). From then to now: Emerging directions for youth program evaluation. //Journal of Youth Development, (6)//3, 82-94.
 * 1) ===== 1. The History Behind Organizational Structure =====
 * 2) a. 1950’s Bureaucratic System through the 1980’s
 * 1) b. 1980’s High Performance Systems
 * 1) c. 1990’s The Virtual Workplace
 * Ø ** Relate this to PYD organizations that should encourage resource sharing with other agencies to improve the outcomes in the field as a whole. **
 * 1) d. Organizational Model Shifts
 * 1) ===== 2. Youth Development Organizational Structures =====
 * 2) a. The Youth-Adult Partnership
 * 1) b. Resource Sharing- Breaking Down Boundaries

i. University researchers measured the effectiveness of social programs ii. Early evaluations revealed the programs were not successful iii. Weiss (1987) stated “the yardstick used to measure success almost guaranteed failure” (Arnold & Carter p. 84) i. Intellectually Reflective ii. Enroute to a life of meaningful work iii. Good citizens iv. Caring and ethical v. Healthy i. Group concluded that little improvement to youth program evaluation had occurred since the Carnegie Report. i. Evaluations take time, money and knowledge resources which are all limited in YD programs. a) A **rigorous design** to the evaluation will result in better evidence of program effectiveness. b) Others argued that qualitative methods that showed the “human side” of social programs were a valid way to evaluate programs. c) Intermediate progress was also important to validate the fact that humans are a work in progress and they will grow and change as a result of the program. d) Participant Satisfaction was also evaluated- if participants are happy, the funders will continue to support the program. This did not help to evaluate the overall effectiveness of the program.
 * 1) ===== 1. History of Youth Program Evaluation =====
 * 2) a. 1920’s evaluations of programs came in the form of participant testimonials from those who excelled in the program.
 * 3) b. 1960’s evaluations of federally mandated programs
 * 1) c. 1980’s evaluations- “1989 Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development” identified five goals of successful adolescent development:
 * 1) d. 1998 Roth, Brooks-Gunn, Murray and Foster attempted to synthesize youth development program evaluation.
 * 1) e. 2002- Eccles and Gootman conclude that evaluation is important but design of each evaluation will differ among programs.
 * 1) 2. Studying Valid Program Evaluation

** Collaboration: Leveraging resources and expertise ** Byrne, A., & Hansberry, J. (2007). Collaboration: Leveraging resources and expertise. //New Directions for Youth Development, 114,// 75-84. i. The missions and goals of the collaborating parties should closely align i. Both parties contribute financial or human capital in comparable amounts. One organization should not “own” a project more than the other. i. Organizations should exploit interpersonal relationships with people in positions of institutional power to create an institution that supports their collaborative effort. i. Clear expectations of both parties prevent miscommunications that may hinder the project. i. Identify collaborators in organizational media i. Collaboration can improve organizational effectiveness by demanding accountability and comprehensive planning.
 * 1) ===== 3. Evaluation Capacity Building (ECB) =====
 * 2) a. Definition: “An intentional process to create and sustain an organizational culture that routinely conducts evaluations and uses the evaluation results” (p.89)
 * 1) ===== 1. Collaboration: Leveraging resources and expertise =====
 * 2) a. “a mutually beneficial and well-defined relationship entered into by two or more organizations to achieve common goals. The relationship includes a commitment to a definition of mutual relationships and goals; a jointly developed structure and shared responsibility; mutual authority and accountability for success; and sharing of resources and rewards.” (Byrne and Hansberry, 2007, p. 75)
 * 3) 2. Components of successful collaboration
 * 4) a. Shared priorities
 * 1) b. Combined resources
 * 1) c. Institutional support and political will
 * 1) d. Shared clarity of expectations
 * 1) ===== 3. Value of collaboration =====
 * 2) a. Organizational identity and branding
 * 1) b. Organizational effectiveness
 * 1) ===== 4. Common problems =====
 * 2) a. No need for collaboration
 * 3) b. Organizations are too different to collaborate (different expectations, quality of work, etc.)
 * 4) c. Unequal contributions makes shared ownership impossible
 * 5) d. Unclear expectations of roles of both organizations
 * 6) 5. Steps to improve collaboration (see “2. Components of successful collaboration” for further information)
 * 7) a. Identify and discuss differences in organizational approach
 * 8) b. Expand on strengths of both organizations
 * 9) c. Offer praise for accomplishments of collaborating organization
 * 10) d. Quickly and directly address problems
 * 11) e. Be willing to end collaboration if unsuccessful

** The evolving role of youth workers ** Borden, L.M., Schlomer, G.L., & Wiggs, C.B. (2011). The evolving role of youth workers. //Journal of Youth Development, 6//(3), 126-138. i. Increase of status and pay (3/4 workers leave the field for compensation reasons, (Borden et. al, p. 131)) i. Increased pay will distance workers from the population they serve ii. Even with increased pay and opportunities, still limited opportunities for advancement iii. Studies show that the majority of youth workers are content with their job and plan on staying in youth work (Borden et. al, p. 132) i. Creation of curriculums that provide comprehensive understand of youth development
 * 1) ===== 1. Historical perspective =====
 * 2) a. Child labor laws increased discretionary time and the need for youth programs
 * 3) 2. Youth Development as a field
 * 4) a. Youth development stems from psychology, sociology, education, and other disciplines
 * 5) b. Positive relationships with adult youth workers is an essential component of a youth program
 * 6) 3. Role of Youth Workers
 * 7) a. Tension arising regarding “professionalizing” youth workers
 * 8) b. Transition from all-volunteer workers to professional structure
 * 9) c. Those who want to professional YD argue for:
 * 1) d. Those who argue against professionalization:
 * 1) ===== 4. Professional Practice =====
 * 2) a. Youth workers are a confidante and ally for youth
 * 3) b. Passion is not enough to retain quality youth workers
 * 4) 5. Future Trends
 * 5) a. Increased training or education
 * 6) b. Professional development
 * 1) c. Increased compensation (increased salary, loan forgiveness, etc.)

** NAA (National Afterschool Association) ** National Afterschool Association & National Institute on Out-of-School Time (2011). Core knowledge and competences for afterschool and youth development professionals. Retrieved at []

1) Mission a) The NAA is the leading voice of the after school profession dedicated to the development, education and care of children and youth during their out-of-school hours 2) Core Knowledge and Competencies a) Outlines the knowledge and skills needed by professionals who interact with youth b) Hopes to establish standards in this industry of youth development 3) History and Development of Framework a) Unify individual states core knowledge and competency frameworks b) Based widely on the work of Kansas/Missouri model 4) Organization of Framework a) Grouped into 10 content areas b) Each content is broken down into three sections: (1) Organized into 5 levels (not awards or cert., but pathways for progression)  (a) Level 1 (entry)- knowledge and skill expected of an entry- level worker, minimal specialized training  (b) Level 2 (developing)- foundational knowledge and skill; cert. if child/youth development  (c) Level 3 (proficient)- practitioner who can apply knowledge and information in the setting; associates degree in child/adolescent development (social work, recreation, etc.)  (d) Level 4 (advanced)- seasoned practitioner who can apply knowledge and information in increasingly nuanced ways; bachelor’s degree  (e) Level 5 (mastery)- advanced from basic knowledge and understanding to analysis, synthesis and evaluation; advanced degrees in child/adolescent development; reflects skills attributed of leaders (administrators, directors, supervisors) // Knows typical benchmarks for growth and development and uses it to develop programs that meet youth needs // (1) Growth and development is optimized when fundamental principles are applied (2) Recognizes that understanding developmental patterns are critical // Creates high-quality learning environment and implements curriculum and activities // (1) Professionals provide critical support (2) Understand importance of high quality environments (consistent schedules and routines) (3) Know how to implement appropriate curriculum models // Understands and applies observation and assessment techniques and tools to meet individual needs // (1) Practitioners understand the goals, benefits, and uses of individual observation and assessment, use these tools to adapt the program to meet the needs of each child or youth // Understands the importance of relationships and communication // (1) Rationale: (a) Recognize the critical importance of communication and relationships (b) Are aware of factors that impact behavior and implement strategies of support // Partnership with youth to foster youth leadership and voice // (1) Work with youth to cultivate relationships for youth leadership (2) Important at all ages, but will be different depending on developmental stages and ages // Promotes and embraces respect for cultural diversity // (1) Actively promote respect for and seek self understanding of cultural diversity (2) Development of cultural competencies on both personal and organizational levels Build//s on reciprocal relationships across settings for optimal development// (1) Professionals understand that youth learn in multiple settings (2) Research shows that successful programs depend on partnerships with families, schools and communities (3) Reciprocal relationships are needed for optimal development // Ensures safety and wellness of youth by implementing safety practices // (1) Physical and emotional safety and wellness are important for youth development (2) They implement a broad range of health and safety practices // Supports staff, builds healthy relationships with colleagues and families // // (1) // Program managers understand best business practices // (2) // Developing shared understanding with families and staff are important to quality programs // Acts ethically, committed to life-long learning //
 * 1) 1. Rationale-why content area is important
 * 2) 2. Supporting evidence- current doc. And research that supports rationale
 * 3) 3. Competencies- identifies specific, observable behaviors and skills that describe the range of practice of a capable afterschool or youth development professional
 * c) ** ** Child/ Youth Growth and Development **
 * 1) 1. Rationale:
 * d) ** ** Learning Environments and curriculum **
 * 1) 1. Rationale:
 * e) ** ** Child/Youth Observation and Assessment **
 * 1) 1. Rationale:
 * f) ** ** Interactions with children and youth **
 * g) ** ** Youth Engagement **
 * 1) 1. Rationale:
 * h) ** ** Cultural Competency and Responsiveness **
 * 1) 1. Rationale:
 * i) ** ** Family, School, and Community Relationships **
 * 1) 1. Rationale:
 * j) ** ** Safety and Wellness **
 * 1) 1. Rationale:
 * k) ** ** Program Planning and Development **
 * 1) // 1. // Rationale:
 * // l) //** ** Professional Development and Leadership **
 * 1) **// 1. //** Rationale:
 * // (1) //** Practices must be grounded in professional code of ethics
 * // (2) //** Professionals continue to learn and develop

** Growing the Next Generation of Youth Work Professionals: Workforce Opportunities and Challenges. **

Yohalem, N., Pittman, K., & Moore, D. (2006). Growing the next generation of youth work professionals: Workforce opportunities and challenges. Retrieved at [|http://www.cornerstones4kids.org].


 * I. ** ** Introduction **
 * 1) ** a. ** Youth Work: A Definition
 * i. ** Youth work professionals or youth workers are individuals who work with or on behalf of youth to facilitate their personal, social and educational development and enable them to gain a voice, influence and place in society as they make the transition from dependence to independence.
 * ii. ** Because youth work is so broad, we are working under three assumptions that help define the workforce:
 * 1) 1. Youth work professionals are working with young people in primarily informal and voluntary settings;
 * 2) 2. Youth work professionals are working with young people primarily between the ages of 8 and 18; and
 * 3) 3. Youth work professionals, like social workers or nurses, can be employed by a variety of systems and settings.

National Training Institute for Community Youth Work/AED (NTI) BEST Network members (survey and focus groups):
 * II. ** ** Project Design and Methods **
 * 1) ** a. ** Advisory Group used to review previous studies and create new questions to be added to survey instruments
 * 2) ** b. ** Partnered with National Training Institute for Community Youth Work’s BEST network to survery; (view table for specific group titles)
 * i. ** 1,053 frontline youth workers
 * ii. ** 195 organization directors
 * iii. ** 70 youth workers put into focus groups
 * iv. ** 4 additional research sites
 * ||  || ** Field Research Partner Organizations **
 * ||  || ** Field Research Partner Organizations **

Corporation (New Haven)
 * YouthNet of Greater Kansas City
 * Alternatives, Inc. (Hampton)
 * DC Children and Youth Investment Trust
 * The After-School Institute (Baltimore)
 * Youth Development Training & Resource Center
 * Chicago Area Project
 * Jacksonville Children’s Commission
 * San Diego City College

Beyond (modified survey) Youth Development Peer Network (interviws)
 * Additional Research Partners **
 * Boston Medical Foundation/NIOST/Boston and
 * Girls Incorporated (modified national survey)
 * San Francisco Beacons (interviews) and Bay Area
 * Illinois After-School Partnership (focus groups) ||  ||


 * III. ** Theoretical Framework
 * 1) ** a. ** Survey and analysis founded in belief that a high-performing workforce influences program effectiveness
 * i. ** High performing workforce defined by four qualities – workforce status
 * 1) 1. Stability
 * 2) 2. Satisfaction level
 * 3) 3. Feelings of support
 * 4) 4. Level of competency
 * 5) ** b. ** Link between effective programming and positive outcomes for youth.
 * i. ** Next Generation Youth Work Coalition shows this working link in below mode


 * IV. ** ** Basic Findings **
 * 1) ** a. ** Worker Demographics
 * i. ** Age and Gender – Mostly female (seven out of ten) and relatively young. Half are under age 30, and half are about age 30; 13 percent are 21 or younger.
 * ii. ** Race/Ethnicity – Predominantly minority. Consisting of majority African American (59 percent); only 27 percent of workers are white, and 7 percent are Hispanic/Latino.
 * iii. ** Personal Similarity – Three-quarters of youth workers describe themselves as either very or somewhat similar to the participants in their program.
 * iv. ** Education – 85 perfect have some type of higher education; 60 percent have a two-year college degree or higher.
 * v. ** Experience – Most of those surveyed come to youth work from related fields. Two-thirds have a relevant credential.
 * 1) ** b. ** Organizational Characteristics
 * i. ** Settings – Youth work settings vary. Only one in four youth work professional’s works in a school-based program.
 * ii. ** Incomes Served – Most of those surveyed work with low-income children and youth.
 * iii. ** Ages (and Age Ranges) Served – Coverage across the age groups is quite broad. Responsibility for children and youth of all ages is relatively common—one in four reports working with all grades.
 * iv. ** Program Activities – The majority of youth workers surveyed identified academics and educational enrichment as the most common activities offered in their programs.
 * 1) ** c. ** Organizational Practices/Policies
 * i. ** Full-time/Part-time Employment – One in two surveyed works part time. One in three works only during the school year.
 * ii. ** Roles and Responsibilities – Three-quarters of those surveyed spend 75 percent or more of their time with youth.
 * iii. ** Compensation – The median range for salaried youth workers surveyed is $25,000 - $25,999; the median range for hourly employees is $9.00 - $10.99. Forty percent of those surveyed have a second job.
 * iv. ** Professional Development, Recognition and Achievement – Training opportunities are plentiful, but formal support or compensatory recognition for training is more elusive.
 * 1) ** d. ** Workforce Status
 * i. ** Stability – Job mobility in this workforce appears to be very high—4 in 10 surveyed have been in their job less than one year.
 * ii. ** Job Satisfaction – The youth work professionals in our sample report high levels of job satisfaction compared to other occupations.
 * iii. ** Satisfaction Drivers – Workers identify compensation as the top factor (by far) in influencing their decisions to stay in or leave the field, but there are important intrinsic rewards and challenges as well.
 * V. ** ** Further Analysis **
 * 1) ** a. ** From analysis and specifically the focus group study, youth workers believe their occupations are a viable profession until “developmental milestones” are reached.
 * 2) ** b. ** Full- and part- time employees are equally satisfied in their positions and plan to stay for similar amounts of time.
 * 3) ** c. ** Better educated workers spend less time interact with youth but account for more of the full-time positions, inversely workers spending majority of their time with youth are you people, part time, less educated, and more likely to be African American