Negotiating Among Opportunity and Constraint: The Participation of Young People in Out-of-School-Time Activities

Out-of-school opportunities -- such as arts and music programs, sports teams, community service and youth entrepreneurship opportunities -- are increasingly seen as potentially powerful tools to promote positive youth development and to prevent problematic behaviors. Based on in-depth, semi-structured interviews conducted with 99 students in 10th grade in four Chicago Public Schools, this Chapin Hall report explores young people's perspectives on their use of out-of-school time and the influences, barriers, contexts, and processes that contribute to their choices and experiences. The report investigates how young people learn about and choose to get involved in different kinds of out-of-school opportunities and the influence that family members, peers, and non-family adults have on their thinking and decision making. It also explores the relationship between young people's participation in out-of-school programs and their interests, aspirations, and assessments of the kinds of opportunities and barriers found within their families, schools and neighborhoods. Finally, it offers conclusions and recommendations about how to improve opportunities for young people based on the insights provided by them, including specific suggestions about approaches to outreach, access, ongoing engagement and program provision

Mixed-income development in Chicago helps residential integration but also continues social exclusion.

Over the past two decades, many cities have attempted to tackle urban poverty through mixed-income redevelopment of public housing estates. Using Chicago’s Plan for Transformation as a case study, Robert J. Chaskin and Mark L. Joseph find that efforts to integrate public housing residents into more economically diverse developments actually lead to new forms of inequality and marginalization, rather than well-functioning mixed income neighborhoods. They write that developers are often focused on maintaining the attractiveness and market value of redeveloped communities, which often leads to the adoption of zero-tolerance mechanisms of monitoring and control against low-income residents

Toward Greater Effectiveness in Community Change: Challenges and Responses for Philanthropy - Executive Summary

Philanthropies of all types seek to improve communities—for lots of reasons, and in lots of different ways. Their efforts have produced promising results and some beginning lessons about community change. But more remains to be done to ensure that philanthropic investments in community change meet expectations and that funders use the emerging lessons to move their agendas forward. Based on interviews conducted for this paper, many funders are eager to take on that challenge

Toward Greater Effectiveness in Community Change: Challenges and Responses for Philanthropy

Offers a model suggesting how foundations can most effectively think about, do the work of, and learn from community change. Part of the series Practice Matters: The Improving Philanthropy Project

Toward Greater Effectiveness in Community Change: Challenges and Responses for Philanthropy - Discussion Guide

The goal of this discussion guide is to assist foundations to engage in a dialogue about how philanthropy can become more effective in its support of community-change initiatives. The guide can be used in at least two ways. A foundation or a group of foundations intending to launch a community change initiative can use the guide as part of its planning process. Alternatively, foundations already involved in supporting a community-change initiative can use the guide as a framework to review the project's status and examine whether any changes in philanthropic practice make sense

Capacity building in development projects

Development projects of different types mainly aim to alleviate poverty and ameliorate the livelihoods of local people. One of the strategies commonly used is to focus on organizations and build from their existing capacities in order to improve their living standards or try to build new organizations to work in a common project. Social and human capitals are two key components of these organizations and they might be crucial to the success of the actions that they accomplish. Both can be considered as part of the social capacity of the local organization. This capacity can be enforced with development projects through capacity building. This term means much more than training activities as it includes not only human resource development but also organizational and institutional development (UNESCO, 2010). Capacity and capacity building concepts, as well as capacity measurements in this context are explored to build a framework to evaluate the social capacity generated with the interventions and better plan the actions to be undertaken by the projects to succeed. The focus is set on rural development projects

Personal and Community Factors as Predictors of different types of community engagement

Citizen participation is an important element of local democracy because it increases residents’ influence over local community issues. Using a sample of 494 Israeli participants, this paper examines, for the first time, the unique and combined contribution of personal factors (self‐ esteem and mastery) and community factors (years of activity, knowledge of local services, trust in leaders, community commitment, and community belonging) to the explanation of the variance in each of two types of community engagement: development and planning, and activism and advocacy. Data analysis included hierarchical regression that examined all variables and possible interactions among them. The results indicate that mastery and the community variables, except for years of activity, predict both types of engagement. Interestingly, knowledge of services negatively predicts both, while trust in leaders also predicts both types of engagement, but in opposite directions. In conclusion, the paper considers how these findings might inform community work interventions

Using the Program Sustainability Assessment Tool to Assess and Plan for Sustainability

Implementing and growing a public health program that benefits society takes considerable time and effort. To ensure that positive outcomes are maintained over time, program managers and stakeholders should plan and implement activities to build sustainability capacity within their programs. We describe a 3-part sustainability planning process that programs can follow to build their sustainability capacity. First, program staff and stakeholders take the Program Sustainability Assessment Tool to measure their program’s sustainability across 8 domains. Next, managers and stakeholders use results from the assessment to inform and prioritize sustainability action planning. Lastly, staff members implement the plan and keep track of progress toward their sustainability goals. Through this process, staff can more holistically address the internal and external challenges and pressures associated with sustaining a program. We include a case example of a chronic disease program that completed the Program Sustainability Assessment Tool and engaged in program sustainability planning

How does community context influence coalitions in the formation stage? a multiple case study based on the Community Coalition Action Theory

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Community coalitions are rooted in complex and dynamic community systems. Despite recognition that environmental factors affect coalition behavior, few studies have examined how community context impacts coalition formation. Using the Community Coalition Action theory as an organizing framework, the current study employs multiple case study methodology to examine how five domains of community context affect coalitions in the formation stage of coalition development. Domains are history of collaboration, geography, community demographics and economic conditions, community politics and history, and community norms and values.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data were from 8 sites that participated in an evaluation of a healthy cities and communities initiative in California. Twenty-three focus groups were conducted with coalition members, and 76 semi-structured interviews were conducted with local coordinators and coalition leaders. Cross-site analyses were conducted to identify the ways contextual domains influenced selection of the lead agency, coalition membership, staffing and leadership, and coalition processes and structures.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>History of collaboration influenced all four coalition factors examined, from lead agency selection to coalition structure. Geography influenced coalition formation largely through membership and staffing, whereas the demographic and economic makeup of the community had an impact on coalition membership, staffing, and infrastructure for coalition processes. The influence of community politics, history, norms and values was most noticeable on coalition membership.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Findings contribute to an ecologic and theory-based understanding of the range of ways community context influences coalitions in their formative stage.</p