|
December 2003
|
       |
Contents
Editor's PageJOE CommentariesIt's been a while, so I am happy to report that the "Commentary drought" seems to be over for the time being. Besides the two Commentaries in this issue, I have reviewed and accepted five other Commentaries and sent two back to their authors for revision. I've also been promised a couple more. This is good news for all of us. The two Commentaries in the December JOE are good news not because they deliver it but because they don't. As their titles suggest, Kirk Astroth's "Doorway, Doormat, or Doghouse? The Challenges Facing 4-H Youth Development Scholarship in Land-Grant Universities" and Theodore Alter's "Where Is Extension Scholarship Falling Short, and What Can We Do About It?" challenge us all. Astroth tells it like it is, and Alter tells it like it should be. I urge you to read both articles and to respond to them and to each other in the JOE Discussion Forum. This is a conversation we've got to hold. Where better than in the Journal of Extension? And, as you grapple with the issue of Extension scholarship, do not forget Charles Norman's "The Challenge of Extension Scholarship," from the June 2001 JOE. If they or the Commentaries to come inspire you to want to submit a Commentary of your own, please do. Consult the JOE Submission Guidelines, of course. Read "JOE Is Looking for a Few (More) Good Commentaries," in my August 2000 "Editor's Page." And have at it. December 2003 JOECertainly, many of the articles in this issue are notable for their scholarship, and all are notable for their usefulness to or implications for Extension. That's why they're published in JOE. There are a number of articles dealing with youth development and outreach to teens. The Feature, Research in Brief, and Ideas at Work sections lead off with articles demonstrating that the challenges Astroth talks about in his Commentary are being met. We also have a Feature, an Ideas at Work, and a Tools of the Trade about outreach to Hispanic audiences. And there are other fine articles too numerous to mention, but you'll have time over the holidays to read and learn from them. Laura Hoelscher, Editor
Doorway, Doormat, or Doghouse? The Challenges Facing 4-H Youth Development Scholarship in Land-Grant UniversitiesKirk A. Astroth While the dogs bark,
the caravan moves on. County Extension offices are often lauded as the portals, or the local doorways, to the land-grant university. Even those most insular within the "ivory tower" of land-grant universities recognize the valuable contributions of Extension to student recruitment and public support. And when Extension needs to have its bacon saved, it usually turns to 4-H to muster the political support to protect its funding base. Yet, in academic circles, 4-H continues to suffer from the Rodney Dangerfield Syndrome: 4-H doesn't get any respect. As recent events have shown, 4-H is good enough to save Extension's funding, but not good enough for the academy. In fact, 4-H often gets treated as a doormat in the academy, or worse--banished to the doghouse. For example, the University of Massachusetts (a land grant) recently decided to cut all funding for 4-H outreach in favor of funding research and teaching because these two functions were considered more "core" to the mission of the university (Burge, 2003). Such pronouncements are filled with much pointless woofing designed to distract any rigorous scrutiny. Meanwhile, the caravan moves on. Not surprisingly, some have begun to question whether UMass is reneging on its land-grant mission by cutting out 4-H youth development from Extension outreach. And this action comes despite evidence like a survey at Purdue University that found that more than 50% of the incoming freshmen class in the School of Agriculture were former 4-H members (Goecker, 2001). De-Institutionalizing 4-H ProfessionalsSadly, among certain circles of Extension and university administrators, there is a misguided and pernicious belief that 4-H faculty certainly are not scholarly and should be accorded neither academic rank nor tenure. As a result, universities have tried to "de-affiliate" 4-H youth professionals, removing all semblances of academic rank and tenure. As a result, 4-H professionals who once enjoyed academic status that distinguished them from other youth development practitioners find themselves cut off from academia like some pariah class. Meanwhile, the caravan moves on. Those who would try and turn the clock backwards remain tethered back in camp, barking and howling. In other cases, there have been attempts to "de-professionalize" the ranks of 4-H youth development professionals, substituting paraprofessionals or program assistants where once full-time faculty provided program leadership. After all, "anyone can do 4-H work," or so the saying goes. Meanwhile, the rest of the nation moves on. Woof, woof. Because of 4-H's unique ties to the land-grant universities, land-grant universities have an opportunity to give visionary leadership to the field of youth development. Instead, it appears that land-grant universities like UMass are going in the opposite direction. Ironically, though, increasing the scholarly status of 4-H professionals will only serve to enhance the engaged university's standing in the public eye. Eliminating this status or leaving 4-H professionals outside the hallowed walls of the academy will not. Clearly, on the national level, the field of youth development is moving in the opposite direction. (See, for example, the recent report of the National Research Council, 2002). Universities should be leading this movement, not stifling it. 4-H Youth Development's Academic FoundationsThe academic credentials and foundations for 4-H youth development work are strong. Since 1986, the 4-H professional research and knowledge taxonomy has provided a scholarly and theoretical framework for this kind of work. The taxonomy was deemed important enough to include in the AGRICOLA database and has been added to and updated ever since (National Association of Extension 4-H Agents, 1994). The taxonomy is used in many states as a basis for designing job descriptions, performance evaluation, and professional development plans. This past year, a consortium of land-grant universities involved with the Great Plains Interactive Distance Education Alliance pooled resources to offer the first ever on-line master's degree and graduate certificate in youth development, giving added credence to youth development's scholarly foundations as a discipline and a profession <http://www.gpidea.org>. These universities are giving leadership to professionalizing youth development work that will further elevate the field. Most recently, the U.S. Department of Labor has weighed in on the future importance of the youth development field by identifying "youth development" as one of over 850 apprenticeable occupations <http://www.levitan.org/ydpa>. Since the apprencticeship model has only recently been adapted to occupations in the social services, several national organizations were awarded competitive grants to develop, register, and implement youth development practitioner apprenticeship certificate programs through the U.S. Department of Labor. 4-H was one of those organizations receiving a grant <http://www.nae4ha.org>. Challenges to Articulating Youth Development ScholarshipAcross the nation, more enlightened Extension leadership has called upon 4-H to define and articulate appropriate standards for scholarship in the field of youth development. Because of 4-H's diverse expectations, 4-H professionals within even a state or county often have widely varying job descriptions. These differences in expectations result in gradients of scholarship--some have higher scholarly expectations than others and thus more freedom of action and thought. Some are on tenure and promotion tracks; others are not. These kinds of uniquenesses must be accounted for and included in any articulation of youth development scholarship. That is the challenge, and it remains largely unresolved. The National Association of Extension 4-H Agents has waded into this challenge. It's taking a leading role to articulate scholarship for 4-H professionals and define it in ways that are appropriate and relevant through the development of a concept paper that has been endorsed by both NAE4-HA and the National 4-H Leadership Trust. "4-H Youth Development: Scholarship in an Engaged University--A Blueprint for the Future" was also selected for presentation at the 2003 Outreach Scholarship Conference in Madison, Wisconsin in October 2003 <http://www1.uwex.edu/outreach/presentations.cfm>. By describing the importance of 4-H youth development scholarship and giving examples within the four categories described by Boyer (1990), we can begin to change the culture of promotion and tenure within land-grant universities. Moreover, we can also enhance the credential of 4-H youth development professionals who are an integral component of Extension, but who are often regarded as less than scholarly practitioners, unworthy of academic status. What we need today is a more validated and inclusive view of what it means to be a 4-H youth development scholar. This will mean a change in university culture (Lerner & Simon, 1998; McDowell, 2001) that we believe must begin with organizations like the National Association of Extension 4-H Agents, the Joint Council of Extension Professionals (JCEP), and the National 4-H Leadership Trust (Small & Bogenschneider, 1998). This work has already begun. Leading the Caravan or Just Barking?Clearly, the future lies in strengthening the scholarly attributions of 4-H professionals, not weakening their connection to land-grant universities. Nationally, the caravan is moving on. Youth development is becoming more professionalized. Youth development is being recognized as a discipline worthy of consideration as scholarly. Others are anxious to fill the void if universities won't help lead the movement to credential youth development professionals. Land-grant universities should partner with 4-H professionals in the effort to enhance the scholarship of 4-H youth development professionals. This connection to scholarship, after all, is what makes 4-H different from Scouts, Boys and Girls Clubs, the Y's, and all the other youth development organizations across the country. It's our scholarly edge, and we should take every opportunity to hone it. Let's hope that land-grant universities are not left behind, yipping and barking in camp, as the rest of the nation travels over the horizon and into the future.
ReferencesBoyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professorate. Special report. Princeton, NJ: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Burge, K. (2003). 4-H clubs hang on. Boston Globe, October 13. Goecker, A. D. (2001). Characteristics of freshmen and factors which influenced their enrollment in the Purdue University school of agriculture during 1992-2000. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University, School of Agriculture. Lerner, R. M., & Simon, L. K. (1998). Directions for the American outreach university in the twenty-first century. In R. M. Lerner & L. K. Simon (Eds.) University-community collaborations for the twenty-first century. (pp. 463-481). New York: Garland Publishing. McDowell, G. R. (2001). Land-grant universities and Extension into the 21st century. Ames: Iowa State University Press. National Association of Extension 4-H Agents (NAE4-HA). (1994). 4-HPRK: A professional research and knowledge taxonomy for 4-H youth development. Chevy Chase, MD: National 4-H Council. Available on-line at: http://www.cyfernet.org/prof/prk.html National Research Council. (2002). Community programs to promote youth development. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Small, S. A., & Bogenschneider, K. (1998). Toward a scholarship of relevance. In R. M. Lerner & L. K. Simon (Eds.) University-community collaborations for the twenty-first century. (pp. 255-274). New York: Garland Publishing.
Where Is Extension Scholarship Falling Short, and What Can We Do About It?Theodore R. Alter Scholarship of Extension
Seminar IntroductionI am pleased to have the opportunity to participate in this seminar on the scholarship of Extension. Scholarship is about creating, synthesizing, and applying knowledge to address the issues important in our world. Scholarship is also about respecting and learning from the knowledge and wisdom of others, our colleagues and the citizens with whom we work. Extension educators are full and essential players in the scholarly process of knowledge creation, synthesis, and application. The QuestionThe question I address is "where is Extension or outreach scholarship falling short, and what can we do about it?" PerspectivesThis question is one that I have faced daily throughout my 33 years in higher education--as a graduate student; faculty member with research, resident teaching, and Extension responsibilities; regional director for Extension; academic department head; dean of a major college of agricultural sciences; and director of cooperative Extension and associate vice president for outreach. My perspectives on this matter are grounded in my experiences and reflections during those years, and while they are cast as generalizations, I realize that there are personal and institutional idiosyncrasies associated with each one. ChallengesI see six key challenges for Extension or outreach scholarship, which reflect where current scholarship is falling short. These challenges are:
Achieving a Scholarly Mentality Every Extension educator must think of himself or herself as a scholar. We need a stronger sense of our individual and collective selves as scholars, and we need to view our work as a form of scholarship. We must be sure the work we do is grounded in current and emerging knowledge in disciplines relevant to the issues we are addressing as well as new developments in the field of education. We need a stronger drive to continuously reinvest in and renew our personal disciplinary expertise and scholarship. Broadening Our View of Scholarship We need to establish a more generally accepted, widely held philosophy and concept of scholarship in Extension and in our universities. This requires a philosophy and concept that fully embrace and clearly define the scholarship of engagement and how it is related to scholarship more generally. Changing our own and our universities' culture of scholarship is the key, instrumental challenge facing Extension and outreach scholars. Understanding the Scholarship of Engagement At the same time, we need to develop a deeper, richer, more widely held understanding of the scholarship of engagement. Such understanding involves gaining deeper insights about the craft and practice of Extension or outreach scholarship and how certain scholars come to do their work the way they do. We need better understanding of the barriers, obvious and subtle, to outreach scholarship, and we need better understanding of the institutional platforms, both within the academy and in communities, that make effective outreach scholarship possible. The academic and civic value-added of outreach scholarship must be assessed, documented, and communicated to people within and external to the university. And finally, we must better understand the politics of engagement and its impact on the practice and effectiveness of Extension or outreach scholarship. Conducting Research on the Scholarship of Engagement We need much more research on the scholarship of engagement. We need concerted, systematic scholarly initiatives with such a focus. This work should be empirical, historical, critically reflective, futuristic, and action-oriented. Above all, it should result in proposals for institutional change in our universities. This work has opportunity to reflect the scholarship of discovery, integration, application, and education. Currently, there is notable dearth of such scholarship. Action Proposals for Change We need action proposals for changing the culture of scholarship in our universities, and we need to vigorously pursue implementation and institutionalization of these proposals. Important topics for these action proposals include:
Assessing and Documenting Outreach Scholarship Assessing and documenting outreach scholarship is an issue, but it is not, to my mind, as problematic as many think. Actual assessment and documentation of outreach scholarship is not the "mystery" that some suggest. Scholarly expectations are clear:
This issue is problematic to the extent that others think it is problematic. There are many models and examples of how to assess and document Extension or outreach scholarship. We need to do a better job of cataloging these models and examples, and sharing them broadly within our universities. Addressing the ChallengesPart of the question posed is how to address the challenges facing Extension or outreach scholarship. I see three fundamental responses:
Action Action--urgent, concerted action--on these and related challenges is needed. We must "ratchet up" our discussion and action, and resist the temptation to become complacent. Moving the outreach scholarship agenda forward may require that we set aside some of our current, usual work. Leadership Strong, vigorous, persuasive, visionary leadership is essential to create sustainable institutional change. Within and across their spheres of influence, faculty and Extension educators; academic department heads and Extension regional directors; presidents, provosts, vice presidents, and deans; stakeholders; and students must provide leadership for the civic mission and institutional change within our universities. Graduate Education Reform The graduate education experience is the most important socializing experience for faculty, academic administration leaders, and field-based Extension educators associated with our universities. This experience is key in establishing perspectives on the university and its role in society, including what is appropriate, acceptable scholarship. In my view, if we hope to institutionalize outreach or Extension scholarship as an integral part of our university culture of scholarship, we must initiate fundamental reforms in graduate education. Above all, we must meaningfully incorporate the craft and scholarship of Extension, outreach, and engagement in the graduate education curriculum and experience. ConclusionIn my judgment, few if any issues are more important to the future of Extension than the issue of scholarship. It is essential that Extension educators strengthen their scholarship and scholarly practice if Extension is to continue as a viable provider of research-based, non-formal education in the twenty-first century.
Community Service Versus Service-Learning: Which Is Best for 4-H?Jill Stafford Barry Boyd James R. Lindner Introduction4-H members contribute thousands of hours of service to their communities each year, resulting in both benefits to others and growth in the 4-H members. In 1999, the National 4-H Council (2000) reported that some 271,146 4-H members participated in service activities to their communities. Activities ranged from mentoring other young people to helping shelters improve their services to the homeless. Participants categorized their activities as volunteerism, service-learning, and community service. The questions arise, what are the differences among these methods of contributing service, and what are the effects of each? Participants reported learning lessons in teamwork, positive interaction with adults, and how satisfying their communities could be, yet is one method of service more effective than another? As we move into the 21st century, leadership life skills are becoming a more prominent issue among youth educators. We value youth today and realize that they are our future leaders. Therefore, it is critical that we prepare youth with the leadership skills they will require to be successful members of society. For young people, the best approach to developing leadership is in real situations, rather than in the classroom. Young people can make real connections between needs and resources, learning and service, and people and leadership. Planned, thoughtful experiences, coupled with reflection, create a rich opportunity for youth to learn leadership skills. Des Marais, Yang, and Farzanehkia (2000) noted that "service-learning is the most powerful approach in youth leadership development." Service-learning is a method under which students learn through active participation in meaningful, organized community service. Students provide a purposeful service to the community and to society, while engaging in reflection activities that pertain to their learning curricula (Giles, Honnet, & Migliore, 1991). Three elements are necessary to make service-learning effective:
Traditional volunteerism and community service are differentiated from service-learning by the reciprocal learned amount that occurs between those being served and those serving. This exchange avoids the traditionally paternalistic, one-way approach to service in which one group or person has resources that they share voluntarily with another group or person who is lacking those resources (Kendall & Associates, 1990). The most prominent benefit of service-learning is that students have the opportunity to connect their experiences with real-life situations through the reflective process. Students learn to be knowledgeable citizens who can actively contribute to a community. Service-learning links experiential learning and service activities to provide a unique learning experience for students. When students have opportunities to learn by preparing, leading, and reflecting upon their service experiences, they ultimately create a reciprocal learning experience between them and the community. Students are given the opportunities to address social issues in their community and take action to solve them. Students develop problem-solving and communication skills (Stanton, Giles, & Cruz, 1999), but also learn about themselves and others--strengths and weaknesses and qualities of leadership (Schine, 1999). Studies show that there has been a rapid growth of using this model in the past 10 years (Ikeda, 1999). Organizations like 4-H are a perfect fit for service-learning because their programming can be adapted in many ways to fit community and members' needs. The following are learning outcomes developed by the University of Kentucky 4-H Extension (2000) to which 4-H members are exposed as they participate in thoughtfully organized service experiences:
These objectives can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the service-learning as well as to provide some direction for those developing the service programs. MethodologyThe purpose of the study reported here was to determine if the reflection component of service-learning made it more effective than traditional volunteerism or community service, which do not include reflection, in teaching teens leadership life skills. The study examined the effect of service-learning on the development of leadership life skills in youth, using a service-learning model used by the Louisiana Extension Service (1997). A secondary objective was to describe whether differences existed among youths' service experience, their self-perceived leadership life skills, and selected demographics. The study was conducted in conjunction with 4-H members at Texas 4-H Roundup in June 2001. 4-H Roundup is an annual week-long activity where members, who have previously qualified at the county and district levels, compete at the state level in 38 individual and team contests. Of the approximately 1,000 participants available for the study, approximately 200 were randomly selected for participation in the study to avoid systematic pretreatment differences (Ary, Jacobs, & Razavieh, 2002). The researchers had only sufficient resources and facilities to accommodate approximately 90 research participants, or 30 participants in each measurement group. Hopkins, Hopkins and Glass (1996) state that except in cases of unusually bizarre distributions, samples and sub-samples of n=25 will yield a normal sampling distribution. Sixty-seven out of 200 (34%) randomly selected students participated in the study (N=67). Based on their level of participation in 4-H, the participants were assumed to have had past community service experiences. The study used a posttest-only experimental design with two treatment groups and one control group. A student questionnaire was developed to reflect youths' perceived leadership life skills upon completion of the service-learning model. Questions used in the instrument were taken from both the Leadership Skills Inventory, developed at Iowa State University by Townsend and Carter (1983), and Dorman (1997). Additional questions were developed by the investigator based on the literature (Isaksen, Dorval & Treffinger, 1994; Juntune, 1999; Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 1998). Demographics were also collected from each participant on the student questionnaire: gender, age, residence, past service experience, and type of previous service experience, direct or indirect. The student questionnaire contained 33 items, which were further divided into five subscales. Each subscale contained between five and eight items. The following subscales, adapted from Stratford Public Schools exit outcomes, were used to measure leadership life skills:
4-H members were randomly assigned to three groups. Randomization assists in achieving comparability in the experimental and control groups (Babbie, 1992). One group served as the control group (n1=23) that had completed a community service activity within the past 6 months. All participants were asked to verify the type of community service completed and its frequency. This group only completed the student questionnaire. A second group (n2=22) was asked to recall a service experience they had previously completed and reflect, both written and orally, on that experience. Trained facilitators guided the reflection activity. This was the treatment group that received delayed reflection on their service activity. This group then completed the student questionnaire. The final group (n3=22) did reflection activities immediately after completing a service project. This group participated in a literacy service project with the local Boys and Girls Club. 4-H members were paired with a child from the Boys and Girls Club. After completing a get-acquainted activity, the members read books with the kids. After completing the service experience, the 4-H members participated in written and oral reflection activities on the service experience. Once again, the reflection was guided by trained facilitators. Following the reflection, the members completed the student questionnaire. Findings and ConclusionsThe objective of the study was to determine if the reflection component of the service-learning model made service-learning more effective than traditional community service in the development of Effective Team Skills, being a Self-Directed Learner, being a Contributor to Community, possessing Creative Problem Solving skills, and Personal Leadership Development. These comparisons are presented in Table 1.
The data showed that service-learning with immediate reflection was more effective than traditional community service without the reflection components, if activities were planned that targeted certain leadership skill areas. 4-H members who completed the service-learning activity with immediate reflection perceived their leadership life skills to be significantly higher in two of the five scales. The service activity with the Boys and Girls Club focused on personal leadership development and being a contributor to the community. The 4-H members helped community youth practice their literacy skills while using leadership skills to communicate and work with these youth. 4-H members who had completed the service-learning activity with immediate reflection after the service had significantly higher self-perceived Personal Leadership and Contributor to Community skills than teens in the control group and the group who reflected on a previous service experience. It may be concluded that reflection immediately following a service activity has the most significant impact on leadership life skill development, especially in the areas of personal leadership and community contribution. An implication exists, then, that the reflection component of the service-learning model is crucial in the development of certain leadership life skills. The service activity completed by the participants with the Boys and Girls Club and the reflection discussions that followed were designed to focus on personal leadership and community development. Students shared their thoughts and, in turn, had higher self-perceived scores in the Personal Leadership Development and Contributor to Community categories. A secondary objective in the study was to describe whether differences existed among youths' service experience, their self-perceived leadership life skills, and selected demographics. Demographics collected from participants were:
T-tests revealed that gender had a significant influence on the Effective Team Skills subscale. Females perceived themselves as possessing more Effective Team Skills than males (t = -2.31). However, there was no significant difference between gender and the remainder of the leadership life skill subscales. Types of previous community service experiences were identified as direct help or indirect help. Direct help was described as visiting a nursing home or reading to children. Indirect help was described as collecting canned goods or picking up trash. The data showed that a significant difference was found between the Contributor to Community subscale and type of service completed. This suggests that working directly with other people on a service project gives students a greater sense of community. The value of working with others in a service project is definitely substantial. Participants living in cities with a population greater than 10,000 had completed significantly more service than those in rural/farm areas and in towns with less than 10,000. The reasons for this finding are unclear, suggesting a new line of research. Is it possible that community service opportunities are easier to access in cities than in rural/farm areas and towns with less than 10,000? Do 4-H leaders in smaller communities receive less training in developing service programs? Implications for ExtensionService-learning has tremendous implications for Extension agents working with youth, especially at-risk youth. Boyd (2001) found that service-learning was effective in helping at-risk youth learn leadership skills. Service-learning activities in 4-H and other youth organizations can be designed to teach youth leadership skills. As we develop youth programs, we can design service activities and reflection discussions around certain leadership skills, such as working with others, problem solving, and decision-making, and expect teens' perceptions of those skills to increase. This part of planning educational programs can be difficult. But this research suggests how we, as youth development professionals, target important leadership and life skills with service-learning activities and expect students to increase their knowledge and use of those particular skills. 4-H and other youth development professionals can adopt service-learning as a meaningful learning experience in which youth can learn and enhance leadership skills as well as learn about social and community issues. By adding written and oral reflection to the service experience, youth gain reciprocal learning. They can richly articulate what they have learned, as well as become more aware of issues in the community. Service-learning can help youth see the big picture of why service and civic engagement is important. Written and oral reflection of service activities provides essential documentation for youth development professionals about the impact that well-planned service activities have on both the providers and the recipients of the service. Service-learning links experiential learning and service activities to provide a unique learning experience for students. By providing students opportunities to learn by preparing, leading, and reflecting upon their service experiences, they ultimately create a reciprocal learning experience between them and the community. Applying this service-learning model to youth activities and curriculum can improve the development of leadership life skills and provide a foundation for life-long learning. ReferencesAry, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Razavieh, A. (2002). Introduction to research in education. (6th ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Babbie, E. (1992). The practice of social research. (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Boyd, B. L. (2001). Bringing leadership experiences to inner-city youth. Journal of Extension [On-line], 39(4). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2001august/a6.html Des Marais, J., Yang, Y., & Farzanehkia, F. (2000). Service-learning leadership development for youths. Phi Delta Kappan, 81, (1). 678-680. Dorman, A.K. (1997). Critical leadership in service learning classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation: University of Colorado at Denver, Denver, CO. Giles, D., Honnet, E. P., & Migliore, S. (Eds.). (1991). Research agenda for combining service and learning in the 1990's. Raleigh, NC: National Society for Internships and Experiential Education. Hopkins, K. D., Hopkins, B. R. & Glass, G. V. (1996). Basic statistics for the behavioral sciences. (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Ikeda, E.K. (1999). How does service enhance learning?: Toward an understanding of the process. Unpublished doctoral dissertation: University of California, Los Angeles. Isaksen, S. G., Dorval, K. B., & Treffinger, D. J. (1994). Creative approaches to problem solving. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company. Juntune, J. (1999). Creative problem solving workshop. Unpublished manuscript, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX. Kendall, J. C. & Associates. (1990). Combining service and learning: A resource book for community and public service (Vol. I). Raleigh, N.C.: National Society for Internships and Experiential Education. Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (1998). The adult learner. (5th ed.). Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing Company. Louisiana State University Cooperative Extension Service. (1997). Applying head, heart, and hands to 4-H community service-learning. Informational packet. Louisiana State University. National 4-H Council (2000). 4-H youth development: 2000 programs of excellence. Retrieved on June 27, 2002 from http://www.reeusda.gov/4h/excellence/comm_serv_learn.htm National Service-Learning and Assessment Study Group. (1999, Oct.). Service-learning and assessment: A field guide for teachers. Vermont Department of Education. Schine, J. (1999). Beyond test scores and standards: Service, understanding, and citizenship. In J. Waterman & C. Ogden (Eds.), Service-learning for youth empowerment and social change. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc. Search Institute. (1994). Trends on youth and service-learning. National Service Learning Initiative. Stanton, T. K., Giles, D. E., Jr., & Cruz, N. (1999). Service-learning: A movement's pioneers reflect on its origins, practice, and future. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Townsend, C. E., & Carter, R. I. (1983). The relationship of participation in FFA activities and leadership, citizenship, and cooperation. Journal of American Association of Teacher Educators in Agriculture, 24(1), 20-25. University of Kentucky 4-H Extension. (2000). 4-H Community service-learning. Retrieved on February 20, 2001 from http://www.ca.uky.edu/agcollege/4h/resource/servlern.htm
CAYDO: Connecting the Gaps of Community Youth AssessmentsKenneth R. Jones Daniel F. Perkins The Pennsylvania State
University IntroductionCommunity assessments have long been an active practice of the Cooperative Extension Service (Sofranko & Khan, 1988). Needs assessments, the most popular method, have been used to identify and address local problems through educational programs. However, some researchers have argued that typical needs assessments tend to pose a number of disadvantages, such as cost, inability to articulate needs, inaccurate translation and evaluation of needs by outsiders, and, often, a focus entirely on community deficiencies (Israel & Ilvento, 1995: Sofranko & Khan, 1988; Etling, 1995; Nieto, Schaffner, & Henderson, 1997). Sofranko and Khan (1988) recommended pursuing methods of assessing needs from a plethora of informative sources, one being local citizens. Moreover, others have acknowledged the importance of strengthening communities by building upon existing assets (Kretzmann & McKnight, 1990; Dorfman, 1998; Roberts, Dedrick & Mitchell, 1998). Today, with limited resources, it is imperative to harness the capacity of individuals and organizations within the community to address community needs. One major resource that often goes unnoticed is young people, who can provide significant contributions if allowed to participate in the community development process. Indeed, the energy of youth should be incorporated by providing them with real opportunities to contribute in meaningful ways. Involving youth in the community enhances youth decision-making skills while building solid adult-youth partnerships (Kurth-Schai, 1988). Scholars have also documented that, through community involvement, young people can develop skills to become more responsible and capable of addressing civic issues relating to social, economic, and environmental problems (Israel & Ilvento, 1995; Rennekamp, 1993). Furthermore, young people foster their own development through "mattering"--the positive youth-centered engagement in communities (Eccles & Gootman, 2002). Identifying and connecting local assets through an assessment serves as a catalyst for effective neighborhood revitalization (Kretzmann & McKnight, 1990). Community YouthMapping is one way to collect assessment information that empowers youth within communities (Academy for Educational Development, 2001). However, the purpose of this article is to note significant gaps in Community YouthMapping. The authors address these gaps by presenting a new assessment technique that includes, in part, an adapted youth mapping process. In presenting more comprehensive procedures, the authors do not seek to discredit community youth assessments, but to acknowledge alternatives that may potentially lead to more positive youth development opportunities. What Is Community YouthMapping?Community YouthMapping is a form of what researchers have described as participatory evaluation (Nieto, Schaffner, & Henderson, 1997), which aims to solicit practical, useful, and empowering methodologies. The goal of Community YouthMapping is to canvass communities in search of positive resources and opportunities for young people and their families. Community YouthMapping, unlike most needs assessments, engages young people at specific stages of the assessment process. In addition, whereas a traditional needs assessment would focus more on deficits (e.g., crime, vacant buildings), Community YouthMapping targets positive assets (e.g., parks, YMCA's, youth club meeting facilities). Community YouthMapping, developed by the Academy for Educational Development's (AED) Center for Youth Development and Policy Research (Academy for Educational Development, 2001), allows a community to gather an accurate picture of what local youth need by first seeking the advice of the youth. With Community YouthMapping, young people visit areas of the community and caring adults, who have a vested interest in serving youth and the community, respectively. Upon collection and analysis of the data, the information is mapped using Geographic Information System (GIS) software. The mapped information provides a powerful resource for youth service providers and others concerned about the well-being of young people. Many communities either do not have such information readily available, or the data will often sit untouched, becoming outdated (Academy for Educational Development, 2001). The practice of Community YouthMapping has occurred in over 30 sites across the country within the past decade. A number of organizations, such as the National 4-H Council, National Urban League, and United Way, have partnered with AED in carrying out the process. The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee's Center for Urban Initiatives and Research (1999) reported a Community YouthMapping project that occurred in the city during the summers of 1997 and 1998. Teenagers in 10 Milwaukee neighborhoods conducted block-by-block inventories identifying local youth resources. The participants made recommendations to improve the community and were later invited to share the success of the project with interested parties in Miami, Florida, and Washington, DC. The project has gained critical acclaim and financial support from the public and private sectors. Extension has also participated in similar youth mapping processes with very productive results. Iowa State University Extension, Polk County (1999) worked with youth to survey over 3,000 businesses and organizations. The findings resulted in a Web site for the public to search and access available resources. A teen community service club was also organized at a local YMCA after the need was identified through youth mapping. The youth participants reported that the most important skills learned from the process was how to communicate with community organizations and to accept responsibility for doing a job. Pinellas County, Florida Extension (1999) also has a Web site, created by 4-H youth, to post a list of places for their peers to go for recreational activities and volunteer opportunities. Local businesses can also be added to a database by contacting the county Extension office with the services the business or organization provides. Open forums are also held periodically to analyze and interpret data collected. The first step of Community YouthMapping is to identify a group of individuals or an organization with an interest in coordinating the process. This organization's responsibility should include organizing an advisory group, presenting the youth mapping concept to interested parties, and fundraising, if necessary. The lead organization is not necessarily the convening organization, but rather one with a strong youth-development component (such as Extension). This organization is most suitable to manage and implement the project, in addition to creating a community work group that supervises the mapping activities. Second, an asset mapping team is recruited to design, plan, and implement the mapping activity. After training, youth conduct the fieldwork of collecting data, listing assets within the community. The mappers, consisting of youth and adult field supervisors, walk throughout the community in search of places to go and things to do, while mapping positive resources. Youth will also conduct surveys (developed by the work group and youth mappers) with local residents to identify opportunities. The next step involves the analysis of information to determine what resources are available to young people through various venues. Youth participate in the presentation of the findings to local leadership (school districts, legislators, etc.) to increase their awareness on community resources and needs. Participants then evaluate the process to recognize strengths and identify areas for improvement. Comprehensive Assessment of Youth Development OpportunitiesAs indicated in the AED process, Community YouthMapping is most often utilized to conduct an assessment of the opportunities for youth in terms of resources (e.g., parks, youth centers). However, by ignoring the negative resources, Community YouthMapping is missing half the picture, that is, negative resources of the neighborhood that have been linked to youth's engagement in risk behaviors. Perkins and Jones (2002) have developed a more comprehensive assessment, Comprehensive Assessment of Youth Development Opportunities (CAYDO). This assessment model utilizes multiple techniques, including a modified version of youth community mapping. The goal of CAYDO is to conduct a community planning process with the desired outcome of a community mobilization plan to implement the needed positive youth development opportunities (both school-based and community-based) during out-of-school time. Perkins and Jones (2002) proposed strategies that were aimed at achieving results pertinent to the diverse issues facing a wide array of communities. The major strategies involved in the CAYDO process are:
In the Perkins-Jones CAYDO model, a community taskforce acts as the board of directors. Their major function is to assist the Youth Action Team (YAT) in identifying goals/objectives, interpretation of data, presenting data, and developing the community mobilization plan. The taskforce members composed of representatives from local youth service organizations, school personnel, parents, and youth (at least two YAT members), meet monthly. An assessment of the opportunities for youth in terms of skill development, recreation, and engagement in risk behaviors is collected through youth mapping the community. The following procedures are utilized:
The CAYDO youth mapping methodology is conducted utilizing GPS, GIS, and photography. The youth, traveling in pairs, are given a section of the community to map, walking street-by-street, while identifying positive and negative resources. Then, one youth employs a hand-held GPS tool to enter the exact location of the resource, while the other youth documents the type of resources. Pictures are taken to make community maps more visual and realistic. Youth transfer the data from GPS into a computer, creating GIS maps that identify geographical gaps in opportunities for youth in terms of skill development and recreation. Additionally, those locations identified as potential risks to youth (e.g., abandoned buildings, street corners used for selling drugs, etc.) are displayed. The pictures are placed on a display that is linked with the maps. Utilizing the data and the technique of Concept Mapping (Trochim, 1989), the taskforce and YAT work together to develop a community mobilization plan within the positive youth development framework. Concept Mapping is a process that requires the participants to brainstorm a large set of statements relevant to the topic of interest, individually sort these statements into piles of similar ones, and rate each statement on a particular scale. Concept Mapping helps groups manage complexity without trivializing or losing focus and assists them in reaching objective outcomes (Trochim, 1989). The analyses typically include multidimensional scaling (MDS) of the unstructured sorted data, a hierarchical cluster analysis of the MDS coordinates, and the computation of average ratings for each statement and cluster of statements. Maps are displayed on a computer monitor or printed to show the individual statements in two-dimensional (x, y) spaces. Those statements (of the participants) that are similar are located nearer to each other, while the more varied responses are spaced or scattered accordingly (Trochim, 1989). The software also produces maps that group the similar statements into clusters. This allows participants to determine which issues (individually and collectively, based on their rating of the brainstormed ideas) are most important to the community. Members of the YAT and the taskforce present the findings from the GIS maps, pictures, youth-conducted interviews, and the surveys to 10 groups of 10-30 stakeholders who take part in the Concept Mapping process. The data from GPS/GIS and the surveys provide unique information for the stakeholder groups as they work with the YAT to develop a community mobilization plan. The stakeholder groups address the following question through Concept Mapping: "Given the information from the youth community mapping, youth-conducted interviews, and surveys, what five things should the community do in the next three to five years to enhance the lives of youth?" Stakeholder groups are broken down into three categories: youth (six groups), parents (two groups), and youth-service providers (two groups). Members of the YAT and the taskforce then use the information from the concept maps to develop and prioritize a community mobilization plan. Members of the YAT and the taskforce present the plan to local leaders at organized seminars and community meetings. They present a database of all the newly discovered assets throughout the community, which, in turn, provides a valuable resource for future community development efforts. Potential BenefitsThe purpose of assessing the community for youth opportunities is to raise awareness of what is available and to improve accessibility by increasing the number of positive youth development programs (Butler & Bowman, 1998). CAYDO provides this type of information in a clear and visual way and also engages youth in the process of community change. Through mapping, the youth have the chance to improve their skills in job readiness, data collection, and communication (AED, 2001). Young people also learn to be proactive citizens through serving their community (Israel & Ilvento, 1995). CAYDO provides youth and adult participants with the benefit of gaining an understanding of advanced technology (e.g., GPS, GIS), collecting data and using it in community planning, as well as discovering new things about their neighborhood. Using the technology and having to walk through their own communities to collect and analyze data promotes youths' sense of mastery. Because the youth personally conduct the interviews while mapping the area, there is, in most cases, a much higher response rate on completed surveys than on those that are normally mailed (Babbie, 2001; Dillman, 2000). Youth interpreting and then presenting findings to local leaders can boost their confidence, which, in turn, encourages further involvement in the mobilization process. The use of Concept Mapping also increases the likelihood of a community-owned plan, resulting in a stronger commitment to the plan by the stakeholders. Having local citizens discover ways to build their neighborhood also promotes community pride, encouraging residents to become dedicated to nurturing their living environment. Community building, through coalitions such as adult-youth partnerships, is one of the few interventions that promote collaborations from whole communities (having every individual and organization involved) to create and analyze community change (Wolff, 2001). CAYDO taps the strengths of all local citizens while encouraging activism for the transformation and, ultimately, the preservation of neighborhoods. CAYDO works best when local stakeholders are identified and willing to commit to making key decisions in carrying out the procedures. Youth participating in developing ideas on the CAYDO and needs assessment methods are encouraged to serve on planning committees (i.e., taskforce). However, this does not occur on a routine basis, often due to overpowering adults (Camino, 2000). There is also a risk of creating an instrument that does not capture all that is to be measured, due to inexperienced researchers (local youth and adults). Another concern, similar to needs assessments in general, is the related costs. However, the benefits and potential for community mobilization far outweigh the limitations. ConclusionExtension professionals and other youth service providers should become more aware of alternative methods of assessing communities. If properly administered, CAYDO has the potential to bridge the gap between a community's needs and the actual resources provided. This type of assessment strongly encourages youth and adults to take ownership of their communities by looking internally to search for strategies that increase the positive opportunities for young people, reduce crime, increase job opportunities, and raise awareness. This, in turn, encourages social action. Researchers have identified that youth participation in civic affairs can augment a community's response to emerging needs (Israel & Ilvento, 1995). Additionally, youth and adults have expressed the ability to more adequately address communication barriers after participating as partners (AED, 2001). As most human service agencies, such as Extension, have moved to evaluation methods that demonstrate accountability and program impact, Extension agents and other youth workers need to have more instructional opportunities about how to improve their communities. New Extension agents must be properly trained in identifying needs as well as assets, while more experienced Extension agents must embrace innovative ways of providing service to new audiences. CAYDO and Community YouthMapping are both flexible processes that can serve as guides to deciding the overall purpose of a community assessment. Despite the methods chosen, empowering communities should be the ultimate goal, if we desire to witness positive changes. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank Joan Thomson for her feedback on an earlier draft of this document. In addition, we wish to acknowledge the support of Penn State University's Agricultural Experiment Station and Extension Service. ReferencesAcademy for Educational Development, Center for Youth Development and Policy Research. (2001). Community YouthMapping: A ten-step process. Available at: http://www.aed.org/us/cyd/cym/tensteps.html Babbie, E. (2001). The practice of social research (9th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Butler, C. L., & Bowman, J. B. (1998). Assessing the needs of 4-H'ers. Journal of Extension [On-line], 36(2). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1998april/rb1.html Camino, L. A. (2000). Youth-adult partnerships: Entering new territory in community work and research. Applied Developmental Science, 4(1), 11-20. Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Dorfman, D. (1998). Mapping community assets workbook. Strengthening community education: The basis for sustainable renewal. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Lab. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED426499) Eccles, J. S., & Gootman, J. A. (Eds.). (2002). Community programs to promote youth development. Committee on Community-Level Programs for Youth. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Etling, A. (1995). Needs assessment: A handbook. Journal of Extension [On-line], 33(1). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1995february/tt1.html Iowa State University Extension, Polk County. (1999). Community YouthMapping: Are you mapped? Available at: http://www.polkfun.org/cym/index.html Israel, G. D., & Ilvento, T. W. (1995). Everybody wins: Involving youth in community needs assessment. Journal of Extension [On-line], 33(2). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1995april/a1.html Kurth-Schai, R. (1988). The role of youth in society: A reconceptualization. The Educational Forum, 52(2), 113-132. Kretzmann, J., & McKnight, J. L. (1990). Mapping Community Capacity (Research and Policy Report). Evanston, Il.: Northwestern University, Center for Urban Affairs and Policy Research. Nieto, R. D., Schaffner, D., & Henderson, J. L. (1997). Examining community needs through a capacity assessment. Journal of Extension [On-line], 35(3). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1997june/a1.html Perkins, D. F., & Jones, K. R. (2002). Comprehensive Assessment of Youth Development Opportunities. Available at: http://agexted.cas.psu.edu/fcs/dp/EdMaterials.html Pinellas County, Florida Extension. (1999). Community YouthMapping. Available at: http://www.pinellasteeninfo.com/default.htm Rennekamp, R. (1993). Double standard for youth involvement. Journal of Extension [On-line], 31(3). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1993fall/f2.html Roberts, S., Dedrick, A., & Mitchell, G. (1998). Westlawn keys to community. Project Report. Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada: Community Building Resources. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED423378) Sofranko, A. J., & Khan, A. (1988). It's not that simple. Journal of Extension [On-line], 26(4). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1988winter/a3.html Trochim, W. (1989). An introduction to concept mapping for planning and evaluation. In W. Trochim (Ed.) A Special Issue of Evaluation and Program Planning, 12, 1-16. Available at: http://www.conceptsystems.com/intro_article.htm University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Center for Urban Initiatives and Research. (1999). Youth mapping project. Wolff, T. (2001). The future of community coalition building. American Journal of Community Psychology, 29(2), 263-268.
Comprehensive Model for Sustaining Community ProjectsJan Carroll Mary Gross Robin Leist Local sustainability is a goal from any project's first day. The excitement and commitment arriving with project funding are always shadowed by knowledge that grants, awards, and contracts are finite. The time funded for action and impact is limited. When projects begin, directors move quickly to locate and secure space, hire and orient staff, recruit clients, and begin service delivery. They contract with evaluators and assure the project's intended outcomes are clear. They acquire clearances for research, set up accounting systems, and calendar reporting dates. And all the time, in spite of all the activity, the grayness lurks. Sustainability is part survival and part success. Project-developed agencies can survive when soft money runs out and yet never attain the success of a sustainable project. As grant funding runs out and competition for charitable dollars becomes more heated, a nonprofit agency must organize to support its mission. There are options and choices that each organization must address (Weisman, 2000). Most fundraising literature is based on experience (Buchanan, 1994). But looking back is not the way to attain sustainability. A family literacy effort in two rural communities, A and B, faced the sustainability issue at its first staff retreat. Staff, including the campus-based Principal Investigator, Project Director, and Project Evaluator and community-based Site Directors, Community Site Assistants, and Cooperative Extension Community and Family Educators, drew a comprehensive model to clarify their intent and to guide the projects' efforts toward sustainability and long-term success. One assumption, as confirmed by Wyzbinski, Moore, & Gelzer (1998), was that a "diversified income base represents the most stable fiscal position for any nonprofit organization" (p. 13). They also predicted accurately that a bonus outcome of the planning process would be enhanced teamwork--instilling confidence and demonstrating how the pieces could fit together to meet project goals. The model designed at the retreat was based on previous experiences of staff members, input from community members who had been involved in design of the funding proposal, and expertise of Cooperative Extension professionals. See Table 1.
Strategy 1: Grant WritingRecommendations
Example The chronology of the strategy for sustainability was set when Community Site Directors were invited immediately after the retreat to attend a weeklong grant-writing workshop presented by Colorado State University. This annual workshop on grant writing is sponsored by the College of Applied Human Sciences and offered largely to faculty, staff, and graduate students at the university. The same instructors have taught every workshop since 1989, and for the last 6 years, an Associate Dean for Research in the College of Applied Human Sciences has assisted in the instruction. Family literacy project staff spent 4 days with these academic professionals, surveying funding opportunities and practicing techniques for successful grant writing. In addition to providing instruction on state and federal funding agencies, national and statewide foundations, regulatory compliance requirements, and Office of Sponsored Programs procedures, the workshop provides time in small group activities for support, practice writing, and feedback. Results Project staff used the skills they practiced at the workshop to write grant proposals to be funded by United Way, the state Department of Education, two national foundations, two large statewide foundations, and several local foundations. See Table 2.
Strategy 2: Community InvestmentRecommendations
Example At the same time project staff was writing local grants, planning for service delivery was underway at both community sites. Multiple stakeholder groups were involved in designing programming through use of focus groups, organization of a technical advisory committee, and involvement of a steering committee. Representatives from local school districts and community colleges attended the facilitated planning sessions, along with health and human service providers, government officials, and parents. Buy-in and participation of the local Cooperative Extension educator was critical. Both sites developed a "case statement," or a summary of mission, goals and objectives, and capacity to serve the targeted population (Mixer, 1993). Community participants who "truly understand the needs of the people they serve will understand the critical need for money to serve them," (Weisman, 2000, p. 29). According to Wyzbinski, Moore, and Gelzer (1998), "An organization will usually find that when a thoughtful plan is presented, a donor's confidence in the organization's ability to attract sufficient support for the goals described in proposals is significantly bolstered" (p. 11). Results In-kind donations, volunteers, local advice and political support are easier to acquire when community members are engaged and "bought in" to the project. As a secondary outcome, the commitment to stakeholder involvement also contributes to funding success. See Table 3. Donations included:
Strategy 3: MarketingRecommendations
Example A Service Learning project was a way to get expertise at little or no cost and to have university participation and visibility at the sites. Client recruitment at both sites was successful because of agency referrals, word of mouth, and relevant programming. Simple marketing efforts, such as fliers and posters, kept attendance at adequate levels. Still, both sites recognized the need for a marketing plan and collateral supporting materials to increase community awareness and interest, and ensure an ongoing client base. The campus-based Office for Service Learning facilitated the match between family literacy project B and a senior-level graphics design class. The site selected for service learning was remote from campus, so site personnel traveled to campus to present information rather than having class members travel across the state. Students emphasized the value of quality programming to meet community needs in marketability, and encouraged staff to clarify these points:
Students and staff also explored media availability, advertising options, and community norms before designing materials. Project staff returned to campus later in the semester to receive the students' designs, each of which included a logo, letterhead and business cards, and at least one other piece, such as a T-shirt, book jacket, magnet, calendar, board game, or bookmark. Staff narrowed the field to six designs that were most on target, and agency clients voted to select their favorite among the proposed logos. Results The logo that was selected seemed to capture the spirit of the family literacy project with its image of an adult with a child and a book. See Figure 1. It brought into more public awareness the efforts of staff and volunteers, and sharpened the focus of those efforts. The process of creation and selection engendered more local ownership for the project. Currently the logo is displayed on the project site's windows and signs, and on special stationery. Other logos have been used for event promotions. Figure 1.
The other location (Site A) selected a logo not used in Site B. See Figure 2. It is now used on the Site A Web site, for staff T-shirts, and on office stationery. Figure 2.
It is unknown if or how the students were affected by their service learning activity. Ideally, they will have developed a greater awareness of community needs and concerns through planning, participating, and processing the experience. Strategy 4: Not-for-Profit StatusRecommendations
Example In all the sustainability efforts, the question of "to be or not to be" a not-for-profit entity arises. According to the Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service (1998), benefits of Section 501(c)(3) status include:
For the nonprofit agency, this allows the opportunity to focus specifically on the purpose of the project, without others' influence because they hold the purse strings. In addition, there are opportunities for others in the community to turn to the agency as a collaborator. The agency is able to:
Considerations include the following.
The Application for Recognition of Exemption (Form 1023) requires an agency to have an Employer Identification Number (EIN) and to submit documentation of status along with a user fee payment that must accompany the application (Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service, 2001). Results One site was opened under the umbrella of an already existing 501(c)(3) in the community. See Table 4. Non-profit status gave the project opportunities to write grants to foundations. They also became a United Way agency, which allowed for additional collaboration and sharing through agency meetings and in-kind donations under their umbrella. The other site opened as a joint program of the local school district and Colorado State University, funded by a federal grant and a state-administered grant. The federal grant covered management salaries, rent and utilities, while the state funds paid program expenses and salaries for field staff.
Strategy 5: Fee-for-ServiceRecommendations
Example Income can be generated based on local service delivery and measured impacts. Some projects are externally funded based on being free to clients, in which case fee-for-service is obviously not an option. Other projects deliver services to limited-resource audiences for whom a sliding scale is appropriate, in which case fees are inadequate to cover costs of service delivery. Earned income, as through offering computer literacy courses to paying clients when program clients are not in the computer lab, is another option when staff, equipment, and space are available. Business ventures (earned income) that are supported at the highest administrative level, according to Mixer (1993) can assure the effort, funds, personnel, and facilities required for success when dealing with tax problems, acquisition of necessary experience, financing, and marketing. Clients can participate in earned income strategies, such as selling produce from a community garden or unwanted books from a library. Another fee-for-service design is contracting for services. In this strategy, the nonprofit organization provides human services under terms of a contract from the government or another agency. There are benefits to the contractor in flexibility, management of costs, and continuity of structure and personnel (Mixer, 1993). Results Fee-for-service has not yet been implemented at either site. The concept has not been widely adopted by Cooperative Extension, but is under consideration for some programs. It remains a viable option for both sites. Strategy 6: FundraisingRecommendations
Example The community-wide potential for income from activities such as membership campaigns, product sales, phone banks, and special events often makes fundraising the first strategy considered by new agencies. However, the intensive effort required by staff and volunteers seldom, if ever, results in a positive cost/benefit analysis. Still, fundraising activities are active and alive, not static, according to Blank (2000), and they are appealing to staff, volunteers, clients, and many donors. Results When the logos were designed and selected, both sites discussed fundraising implications. A limited edition commemorative poster was considered, and various events were proposed vis-·-vis a marketing approach introducing the logo. However, fundraising activities have not yet been conducted at either site. There are for-profit organizations that sell fundraising services to nonprofits (Mixer, 1993). Their services may include data management, telemarketing, demographic analysis, and/or pledge collection. Obtaining and checking a list of references may increase the confidence of a nonprofit that is considering one of these services. Summary and ConclusionsCreating a model and reviewing it, at least annually, supports a community-based | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
