Summer Learning Loss: How Communities Are Reversing the Trend

 

In her June 19 Summer Learning Day message, First Lady Michelle Obama thanked communities for their summertime investments in youth: “Summer shouldn’t just be a vacation. Instead, it should be a time to get ahead, to branch out and learn new skills, to have new experiences…and for anyone who’s fallen behind, it’s a time to catch up on lessons they missed.”

Research shows that summers without quality learning opportunities put our nation’s youth at risk for falling behind – year after year – in core subjects like math and reading. These losses over the summer are cumulative and contribute significantly to the achievement gap between lower- and higher-income kids.

At the National Summer Learning Association (NSLA), we continue to develop and provide resources around strengthening and expanding summer learning programs in communities. With the support of the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, our new report, Accelerating Achievement Through Summer Learning is an essential resource for program providers, education leaders, policymakers, and funders who are making important decisions around summer learning programs as a way to accelerate student achievement.

The report profiles thirteen diverse, replicable summer learning program models and demonstrates how these programs address a variety of K-12 education priorities to deliver strong outcomes for children, youth, and educators. As described in the report, we know a lot about the power of summer learning for students and teachers.

• Summer learning programs can erase early reading deficits. More than 80 percent of low-income youth in this country are not proficient in reading by the end of third grade, making them more than four times as likely to drop out of high school as their peers to who reach this critical benchmark. K-3 summer learning programs have been shown not only to mitigate summer learning losses in reading in the early grades, but to accelerate skill development to get young people up to grade level by third grade.

• High-quality summer learning programs level the college and career playing field. Alarming data on the skilled workforce pipeline and need for remedial coursework in two- and four-year colleges have created a national sense of urgency around work-embedded learning, apprenticeships and college preparation programs, particularly for first-generation attenders. Summer youth employment programs are proving critical to keeping students productively engaged and learning, making meaningful contributions to their community, learning valuable job skills, and exploring potential careers.

• Pre-service and in-service teachers want to make the most of their summers. Quality teaching is consistently linked to successfully closing achievement gaps, but most teachers today have between one and two years of experience. Summer learning programs are an increasingly likely place to find the kinds of pipelines into and through the teaching profession that are working. Offering training, mentorship, leadership, and ownership of their work, community-based programs give new teachers additional time to hone their skills, refine lesson plans, and build deeper relationships with students.

Many kinds of high-quality learning opportunities during the summer can make a difference in stemming learning loss. These opportunities can be voluntary or mandatory, at school, community organizations, or even at home. And we know that “quality” is well-defined and rooted in research. A major study from the RAND Corporation shows that individualized academic instruction, parental involvement, and smaller class sizes are a few components of high-quality programs that produce positive results for young people. The “Best Practices in Summer Learning for Middle and High School Youth” resource from NSLA and the New York Life Foundation is an online guide in text and video offering effective ways of engaging older youth in summer learning.

Across the country, NSLA is seeing many states and cities embrace summer learning as a key strategy in helping their students make measurable academic progress.  We hope that if you haven’t already, you will take the pledge to keep kids learning and place your program on our interactive map. Together, we can ensure that students have the opportunity to engage in meaningful learning all year long.

Rachel Gwaltney is the Director of Policy and Partnerships for the National Summer Learning Association (NSLA). She leads development and implementation of services, projects, and partnerships that strengthen summer learning policy and build capacity of state and national leaders and organizations. Learn more about DCAYA's fantastic partner, the National Summer Learning Association, at www.summerlearning.org. And consider attending their Summer Changes Everything annual conference, October 12-14 in Baltimore, MD.

The Saga of Summer Learning Part II: Karma Kicks In

You may recall an amusing blog series we posted last summer detailing the important role that summer plays in youth development.  Our Executive Director, Maggie Riden,  talked about her parents' brilliant creativity in signing her up for a summer theatre camp in the hopes that a new space would motivate her to try and learn to read and end her protracted campaign of summer tutor torture. In the spirit of continuity, we’d like to share with you Part II of that saga: 

Fast-forward nearly 10 years. I was 17 and it was the summer after my senior year. I was desperate to save enough money to avoid working my first semester of college. So to compliment my ice cream scooping job at Friendly’s,  I signed up with the local elementary schools to work as a summer tutor.

In the weeks leading up to my first session, I remember diligently tracking down worksheets and lesson plans from teachers and the library, neatly filing them into a variety of folders. I recall carefully writing out spelling words and math facts on index cards.  What I don’t remember as clearly (but she loves to mention it) is the look of utter amusement as my Mother watched me.  She gently suggested that given the kids I’d be working with, maybe I should consider a different approach than worksheets and rote memorization at a desk. She even offered her special education expertise to help me come up with some ideas. I, with the arrogant certainty that defines adolescence and early adulthood, scoffed at the suggestion that I didn’t know what I was doing.

Oh the irony. 

Two weeks later I found myself in one of those amazing life moments when karma catches up with you and not only smacks you in the face, but laughs with glee while doing so.  It was my second or third session with “Kevin”.  I remember sitting at his kitchen table watching in disbelief as he athletically tossed a massive pile of 3x5 index cards into the air, launched himself out of his seat, leapt over an ottoman and then slid with the practiced ease of a baseball player into the bathroom deftly locking the door behind him.

20 minutes and numerous bribery offers later, Kevin emerged.  

I arrived home frustrated and embarrassed and attempted to relay the incident to my Mom. Once she had stopped laughing and regained the ability to speak, we sat down and she helped me come up with some teaching strategies that were good for him. I can say with certainty, we never sat at his kitchen table or at his desk again.

For Kevin school was a frustrating and anxiety filled place. To ask him to replicate that setting with the added stress of 1:1 attention as he exposed his weaknesses (all while watching his brother play outside on a lovely summer afternoon) was never going to work, and it was borderline cruel to expect it to. So we turned his backyard into a giant clock to teach him how to tell time. We did math fact foot races with the neighbors. We incentivized reading by celebrating the completion of each goal with a scavenger hunt based on the theme of the book (he was into nature and we lived in Vermont which made it fairly easy).

Info-Graph: National Summer Learning Association 

For kids who struggle to learn or face barriers to academic progress, summer has to be a part of the learning equation. Summer learning loss is real, it’s cumulative, and it’s a major contributor to the achievement gap. However, as Kevin demonstrated, that doesn’t mean summer should be more of the same.  Learning can take many forms. Summer is a chance to see what works, to allow children and teachers the time to explore, and ultimately, it's a prime opportunity to engage developing brains in new and exciting ways.  

DC is fortunate. We live in a city with many organizations and educators that embrace the opportunity of summer. They are creating spaces that build the skills and academic confidence of those who may be struggling, and challenge high fliers to aim for even greater heights. 

However, despite improved funding and increased availability, there are still thousands of children who don’t have the chance to enjoy the opportunity of summer learning - but would benefit deeply. So, DCAYA would like to pose two challenges.

First, we need to do a better job of explaining to all parents the benefits of summer learning programs.  We need to be clear that signing up for a summer program is critical to a child’s academic, social and emotional success.

Second, we must message to policy makers that we need universal access and a range of programs that ensure youth can access opportunities that excite them, and provide what they need as they grow and mature. To achieve that, we must have smart funding and strong partnerships between schools, community organizations, parks and recreation and libraries. This must be a priority.

Kevin and I, like many of you, were lucky. Our parents and teachers got it. They realized early on that we would need additional support throughout our academic careers and that our learning styles would require multiple approaches. Many of which could not occur sitting at a desk. Isn’t that an opportunity we should extend to all our kids? 

---

Maggie Riden learned spelling words and history facts by setting them to music, recording herself singing them, and then playing them over and over again on a Walkman while jumping on a trampoline. All strategies she credits her Mother, a special educator and multi-modality teaching savant, with coming up with. 

For more on youth issues in DC you can FOLLOW us on Twitter, LIKE us on Facebook, SUBSCRIBE to this Blog and VISIT us at www.dc-aya.org 

Path to Equity & Parity through Afterschool Access

If you are a parent of a young person who attends an after school program or the staff of an organization that partners with DCPS schools you may have already heard about the significant changes coming to out-of-school time at DCPS in 2013. While many of the changes are troubling and will negatively affect young people, today we’ll focus on the changes to the afterschool enrollment process and the unintended burdens the changes will place on low income families.

In years past, DCPS enrolled students in afterschool at each school site. Parents would identify which program they wanted their child to attend, and then worked with the DCPS afterschool site coordinator to provide all the necessary paperwork. This system was ideal for parents, albeit somewhat labor intensive for DCPS. At the time this system worked well because there were enough staff within DCPS OSTP to ensure all the paperwork was submitted correctly.

Ensuring the completion of proper documentation may not seem important, however due to recent funding cuts to local funding streams office, having proper documentation has become an absolute necessity. This is because federal reporting requirements for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program are strict and somewhat onerous. Further, failure to meet these requirements will result in a loss of funding in future years. When local dollars were being blended with these federal funds, it was feasible for DCPS OSTP to provide the necessary paperwork and reporting functions for TANF, while also focusing on quality programming and effective community partnerships.

In the last two years, however, local funding to DCPS afterschool has all but evaporated. With the loss of local funds, DCPS also lost a significant amount of staff and infrastructure necessary to maintain federal compliance. While DCPS was able to meet the compliance threshold to sustain TANF funds last year, this compliance cost DCPS-OSTP the ability to focus on quality and to cultivate community partnerships.

So, this year, DCPS OSTP was left between a rock and a hard place. To sustain the funding stream, something had to give. Rather than organizing enrollment for afterschool expanded learning programming at individual schools, DCPS will require all parents to enroll their students for afterschool between August 14th and August 30th at just one enrollment site housed in the Logan Annex at 215 G St. NE Washington, DC 20002 (at the corner of G St. and 2nd St. NE). If a parent fails to enroll their child during this window, the student cannot participate in any afterschool programming until the parent has completed the enrollment process at the DCPS Central Office.

This change is especially disturbing given the unequal burden it places on families with little to no economic security. Think about two families each headed by a single parent with two children. One resides east of the river and receives the maximum TANF benefit but also works part-time. The second lives in Ward 1 with an annual income of $45,000 a year. The difference in both actual and opportunity cost (time, lost wages, and transportation) just to sign their children up for programming is stark.

	Low Income Single Parent with Two Children residing on Naylor Road with a weekly income of: $254 (receiving TANF)	Middle Income Single Parent with Two Children residing in Columbia Heights with a weekly income of: $700
Time	3 hours	1 hour 20 minutes
Lost Wages	$25 (assuming they can go to and from work directly with no delay)	$0 (assuming a salaried employee able to take personal time)
Transportation Costs (non-rush hour)	$7.60 (for just the parent) $22.80 (including children)	$3.40 (for just the parent) $10.20 (including the children)
Total Cost:	$32.60-$47.80 or 13%-19% of their weekly income	$3.40-$10.20 or .48%-1.45% of their weekly income

While the benefits of enrollment in afterschool programming do outweigh these immediate costs in the long term, establishing a process that is more costly for economically insecure families even from the start is patently wrong. Further, the signal this process sends to many parents and community members is hardly one of educational equity.

The negative impact on families doesn't end with the financial burden of signing a student up either. While DCPS has made efforts to spread the word to parents, changing this process six weeks before the start of the year will likely negatively impact access for those students who could benefit the most from this programming.

Parents who are the least connected to their child’s school, parents who are struggling to get by day to day working multiple jobs, parents living in a shelter or couch surfing with no consistent mailing address, parents who are non-English speakers or are functionally illiterate, these are the parents who will be the most negatively affected by the changes to the enrollment system.

The solution to this issue is surprisingly straight forward. Stop funding DCPS afterschool programming solely through Federal TANF dollars. Yes, it’s that simple. With a more robust local investment, DCPS could go back to serving thousands of children and youth, could continue to meet TANF requirements in a family friendly way, while also maintaining their focus on quality programming and meaningful partnerships. That is the path to equity and parity. 

Additional Materials:
Afterschool Enrollment Flier 

Letter to Parents of Amidon-Bowen ES about Afterschool Enrollment Change

OSTP Sites: SY 13-14 

DCPS Announces Major Changes to the Afterschool Enrollment Process 

Questions or concerns related to these changes, or how the enrollment period will operate should be relayed to the DCPS Office of Out of School Time Programming 202-442-5002.

Maggie Riden is the Executive Director of DC Alliance of Youth Advocates. DCAYA is a citywide coalition that works to ensure policies, programs and practices within the District of Columbia that promote and propel youth into a productive and healthy adulthood.

To read more about youth issues in DC, you can FOLLOW us on Twitter, LIKE us on Facebook and VISIT us at www.dc-aya.org.

Student Engagement is Key to School Climate

The following blog is an installment in the DCAYA “School Climate” series where we asked experts, community members, and youth to write about variables affecting school climate. Guest blogger Chris Brown is the Executive Director of BUILD and writes about the need to engage students beyond the classroom.  

According to the latest U.S. Department of Education data, Washington DC has the lowest high school graduation rate in the country: only 59% of DC students graduate high school within four years. This is compared to a 79% national average. What's more, the National Center for Education Statistics has shown that only about 50% of DC high school graduates enroll in college, compared to the national average of 62%. This means that only a quarter of people in our Nation's Capital receive a college education which will have detrimental effects on their lifelong earning potential .

For many students, dropping out is the final step in a student’s disengagement from a school community. Often times this is a symptom of schools and their partners not providing engaging and relevant programming or curriculum. It’s no secret that DC schools are overwhelmed and under-resourced so we shouldn't let our teachers and administrators carry the entire burden of helping our students overcome the odds. We have to invest in support networks and extended day learning programs that complement classroom instruction to keep students engaged in their education. We have to expose our students to diverse ways of learning, to keep them invested in building their own futures.

Many of BUILD’s students prove this point, however there is one student in particular whose journey through high school highlights why engaging in meaningful academic experiences can help students in the District overcome the incredible odds stacked up against them.

Several years ago I met a young woman named Natalee whom many described as hot-tempered, angry, and disengaged. Natalee came to BUILD as a ninth grader in a DC public high school. Natalee flourished at BUILD and even became the CEO of her business team "We Go Friendly ," manufacturing reusable and customizable shopping bags. Despite this success, Natalee struggled to keep her cool behaviorally and focus academically, which ultimately led to her expulsion from school. Fortunately, BUILD’s model is a holistic one and we did not give up on Natalee so easily. Our model targets rising 9th graders and serves them through their 12th grade year. We utilize effective strategies like mentoring for disengaged and disadvantaged youth, particularly those in the 9th grade year, as over half of the young people who drop out do so in the 9th grade.

Because of Natalee's 4 years in the BUILD program she did not just become another DC dropout. She was able to re-enroll in school, raise her GPA and eventually become valedictorian of her graduating class. I'm proud to report that our former CEO is now a rising junior, with a scholarship, at Drew University and a true testament to the amazing outcomes that can be achieved when young people are fully supported both in school and out.

Natalee with Executive Director Chris Brown and CEO of Square and Founder of Twitter Jack Dorsey

As she noted recently, "I am grateful for the many lessons that I have learned at BUILD. More importantly, I am thankful for all the support I have received over 4 years. The interactions that I've had with BUILD staff members and mentors have been invaluable. BUILD has been there for many important moments of my life and held my hand through many tough times. As happy as I was to leave DC for college, a part of me was nervous and sad. I just couldn't picture life without BUILD. But - I really never left. Every time I come home from school I find my way back to the Incubator and I'm welcomed by those same welcoming smiles."

Chris Brown is the Executive Director at BUILD Metro DC. BUILD's mission is to use entrepreneurship to excite and propel disengaged, low-income students through high school to college success. In school year 2012-2013, 100% of BUILD seniors - our second graduating cohort - were accepted to at least one college or university.



Watch video from the BUILD Gala HERE. 

To read more about youth issues in DC you can FOLLOW DCAYA on Twitter,LIKE us on Facebook and VISIT us at www.dc-aya.org.

Engaging Students With Disabilities in their Education

The following blog is an installment in the DCAYA“School Climate” series where we asked experts, community members, and youth to write about the variables affecting school climate. Guest blogger Juanita Huff from School Talk, Inc. writes about the need to engage disabled students in school because they are most at-risk for dropping out. 

Students with disabilities[1] are faced with many challenges throughout their education, including becoming disengaged and dropping out of school. In June of 2002, the National Center on Secondary Education and Transition (NCSET) cited that the dropout rate for students with disabilities was approximately twice that of general education students. The problem persists, as evidenced in a NCES compendium report which specifies a 2008-2009 national status dropout rate of 15.5 percent for students with disabilities and 7.8 percent for students without disabilities, ages 16 through 24. The report links this trend of non-completion to lower earnings, higher rates of unemployment, poverty and illness later in life.

What leads so many students with disabilities to abandon their education? A publication of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) “Dropping Out and Disabilities” offers the following explanation for the higher dropout rates observed among students with disabilities

“Although they are often held to the same standard as the general population, students with disabilities must overcome serious obstacles that can interfere with their education. To graduate from high school, students with disabilities may need to work harder, study longer, or possess greater academic ability than their peers without a corresponding physical, emotional, or learning handicap. The added work and frustration associated with a disability can take its toll over time[…]”

As parents, educators, and school officials continue to collectively explore ways to ensure special needs students’ success, it is important to remember that the students themselves are valuable sources of information and insight. Students who are given meaningful opportunities to participate in their education typically display higher levels of motivation, more positive attitudes, and better behavior. Promoting students’ involvement in their education can support them in (1) creating their own academic success, (2) contributing to a caring and supportive environment, (3) clearly identifying with the connection between their education and future goals, and (4) addressing their own social challenges; which have been identified as “four broad intervention components that are important to enhancing student motivation to stay in school and work hard (McPartland, 1994).” (Cited in “Students with Disabilities who Drop Out of School – Implications for Policy and Practice”)

Students who receive special education and related services must have an Individualized Education Program (IEP). The IEP is individualized for each student and is created by a team of teachers, parents, school administrators, students, and related services personnel. Providing students with the ability to actively participate in their IEP meetings allows them to express their individual needs, goals, ideas, and interests. In an article published in TEACHING Exceptional Children Plus, author Becky Wilson Hawbaker maintains that meetings led by students promote greater parental involvement, undermine stereotypical assumptions concerning intellect, build students’ confidence and determination, and prepare students for transition to adulthood. Students are more likely to remain engaged when they are actively involved, reducing the risk of dropping out. Programs, such as I’m Determined in Virginia, have developed innovative practices for involving students from elementary to high school, and spanning all disability categories.

Support for improving students’ participation in their IEPs is gaining momentum in DC. The Office of the State Superintendent of Education and the DC Secondary Transition Community of Practice (members from OSSE, DCPS, charter schools, non-publics, community organizations, government agencies, etc.) are supporting a Student-led IEP Demonstration Project. The project team is working with selected District schools to support and document their efforts to increase the involvement of DC youth with disabilities in decision making about their education. For more information, contact Leila Peterson (Executive Director, SchoolTalk, Inc.) at leila.peterson@schooltalkdc.org.

_________________________________________________________________________________

[1][1] The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (P. L. 101-476), defines a "child with a disability" as a child: "with mental retardation, hearing impairments (including deafness), speech or language impairments, visual impairments (including blindness), serious emotional disturbance, orthopedic impairments, autism, traumatic brain injury, other health impairments, or specific learning disabilities; and who, by reason thereof, needs special education and related services." An important component of IDEA is Free and Appropriate Education (FAPE), which requires school districts to provide access to general education and specialized educational services for children with disabilities. It requires that children with disabilities receive support free of charge as is provided to non-disabled students. 

Juanita Huff is a recent graduate of George Mason University and currently works as a Transition Specialist at SchoolTalk, Inc. (www.schooltalkdc.org) Born with a mix of moderate hemiplegic and spastic diplegic cerebral palsy, Huff is familiar with the challenges that many students with disabilities face. She is passionately committed to improving the ability of youth with disabilities to succeed in education, employment, and independence.

It's Time for Another Blog Series!

Last week’s community convening with members of the Anti-Bullying Task Force and the DC Office of Human Rights really got us thinking about some important issues that bullying contributes to and BOOM! an idea for a new blog series was born. So, without further adieu we introduce you to our latest blog series on ... SCHOOL CLIMATE!

The American Psychological Association defines school climate as:

"the overall quality and character of school life, including teaching and learning practices, organizational structures, norms and values, and relationships"

Pretty simply put, school climate includes everything that happens in a school, but it's important to recognize school climate IS more than just the sum of its parts. School climate is really all about how the component parts of a school work together to achieve something greater.

As any youth development advocate will tell you this is an extremely important feature of any school or program. This is because everything, even programming options for children and youth, has at least some good component parts. However, these parts don't always combine in a way that we achieve an intended outcome. For instance, sometimes good elements of programming don't outweigh bad ones (having really great curriculum won't necessarily help if good staff aren't in place to utilize it), or good elements just fail to achieve synergy with other good elements of programming and they mute or negate one another. These occurrences shouldn't be especially shocking. Even as individuals, how often do we decide we don't like a bar or restaurant because it has a weird vibe or know we dislike a new person we meet but can't quite put our finger on why? These all have to do with the effect that occurs when various parts come together to form a whole, but sometimes the whole ain't so great.

There is a vast and ever growing body of research on the effect of school climate and negative outcomes for young people and its for that reason that we are dedicating an entire blog series to this subject. Furthermore, we're always excited to highlight and feature the exciting work of the DCAYA membership so expect plenty of guest blogs in the upcoming month about all the different facets of this exciting, but often hard to grasp concept.

We'll be kicking off the series with a guest blog from our friends from DC Lawyers for Youth so stay tuned for some more great information on school climate later this week!

Anne Abbott is a Policy Analyst at DC Alliance of Youth Advocates and is currently writing a report on disconnected youth in the District. 

To read more about youth issues in DC you can FOLLOW us on Twitter, LIKE us on Facebook and VISIT us at www.dc-aya.org.

If you have an interest in guest blogging or contributing to a future blog series or post please contact DCAYA's Communications Associate, Angela Massino.

Creating a Bully Free Environment

Suzanne Greenfield from the DC Office of Human Rights and Andrew Barnett (Executive Director of member org SMYAL and Anti-Bullying Taskforce member) joined DCAYA yesterday morning at our Community Convening to discuss the work to date of the District’s Anti-Bullying Task Force including some key provisions of the District's Youth Bullying Prevention Model Policy which will take effect this Fall.

Suzanne explained that the model policy somewhat deviates from the approach taken by other jurisdictions for two main reasons. First off many other jurisdictions focus on zero tolerance bullying policies that simple punish individuals who engage in bullying as a means of eliminating the problem. This approach however really only addresses bullying once it has already occurred and does not affect the root of the issue. Suzanne explained that this is problematic for several reasons, but highlighted that many young people report that they have both been a bully and been bullied. When communities attempt to address this issue with a purely punitive approach they do not take into account that bullying whether its physical, verbal, or electronically based, it is part of a larger cycle of conflict.

The purely punitive route also fails to provide individuals who engage in bullying with alternatives to the bullying behavior. For instance if a young person verbally abuses another young person and as a result gets suspended from a school or program the bully can recognize that getting caught for that behavior got them in trouble, but they may not realize that they really need to functionally change their behavior. To invoke some Rhett Butler they would be like “the thief who isn't the least bit sorry he stole, but is terribly, terribly sorry he's going to jail.”

The other big difference between DC’s model anti-bullying policy and the policies other jurisdictions have implemented is that it is aimed not just at school-based bullying but at citywide bullying prevention. The policy presented to the Mayor earlier this year aims to eliminate bullying in public libraries, parks, recreation centers, community based organizations and various other public spaces. This is incredibly important because while young people do spend a good amount of their time at school they also occupy their time with all kinds of activities and programs where bullying can also occur. While the city is not in a position to prevent bullying everywhere it occurs, it can do its due diligence in ensuring that at least the agencies and programs that are operated or funded with District funds have an eye towards prevention.

It’s for this reason that every government agency or community based organization that receives city funds will be required to formulate and implement their own bullying prevention policy by September 14 of 2013. This is obviously a very important tenant of the city’s anti-bullying work, but can also be a bit daunting for CBO’s, which is where DCAYA comes in. Check out our checklist below to make sure your organization or an organization you care about is in compliance:

1) Read Through the Anti-Bullying Model Policy! This document is lengthy, but is packed with useful resources about preventing bullying and how to manage bullying situations when they occur.

2) Talk to other CBOs or government agencies. As we noted earlier ALL CBOs and government agencies funded by the city are required to go through this process so if you have questions or concerns others do to. Andrew Barnett from SMYAL and a number of other DCAYA members that were at yesterday’s meeting offered up some great ideas and recommendations around implementing a good policy for your organization. If you’re currently involved in any of the DCAYA committees you have connections to other organizations built in, utilize them!

3) Get into contact with the DC Office on Human Rights. If you are currently receiving city funds you have probably already received an email from them regarding the requirement for an organizational policy regarding bullying, but if you haven’t, getting into contact with OHR sooner rather than later is a good plan.

4) Go back to the Model Policy, there are samples to work off of in the document’s appendices.

If after going through all these steps you are still at a loss, feel free to contact DCAYA and we are happy to help connect you with other resources!

Anne Abbott is the policy analyst at DCAYA. She swears, if the Anti-Bullying Policy was in place when she was a kid, she wouldn't have turned out like this guy <. 

To read more about youth issues in DC you can FOLLOW us on Twitter, LIKE us on Facebook and VISIT us at www.dc-aya.org.

Prepping for the FY'14 CYITC Budget Hearing

 Hopefully everyone reading this has already signed up to testify at Thursday mornings budget hearing for the Children Youth Investment Trust Corporation, and you’re amping up to explain to Council why investments in our youth intermediary and expanded learning sector are important. On the off chance that you’re still working on your testimony, or want a little more information before you take the plunge we thought we’d use today’s blog post to hit on the budget highlights that will impact expanded learning programming and provide some additional food for thought on crafting your testimony. 

The funding stream to support expanded learning programs is diverse, however recognizing that we already touched on DCPS last week, we’ll focus this analysis solely on CYITC ( the Trust). The Mayor’s proposed budget has kept the funding to the Trust flat at $3,000,000. At this mark:

· The Trust will be stretched to sustain support for the 3,100 youth who received Trust funded programming this year;

· The availability of summer grants will depend entirely on year-end savings or a budget surplus (as has been the case the last two years and is never a safe way to plan funding or programming);

· The Trust will remain unable to provide training and technical assistance, capacity development support, research, and evaluation to understand what works and what to grow within the youth serving sector; all of which are a primary components of the Trust’s mission and mandate.

At the same time however, the Mayor has indicated that an additional infusion of operating funds to the Trust is a priority if the money can be identified in the FY’14 Budget; and Council is still deciding how to allocate the FY’13 supplemental funds. This means we have the opportunity to make a thoughtful ask and clear recommendation at Thursday’s hearing.

The ask: We ask for an (at minimum) infusion of $2,000,000 into the Trust’s FY’14 Budget to ensure that the current level of school-year programming is sustained and high performing organizations can scale up additional services to reach far more youth (point of reference- a $1,000,000 increase would serve an additional 1,430 youth in year round programming); it would help to ensure the availability of youth development programming during the summer of 2014; and would provide the Trust with the necessary operating funds to reinvigorate their work as a capacity builder, trainer and data hub able to support and report back to key decision makers about the needs and opportunities within the field of youth development.

The recommendation/Where should the money come from: The Mayor’s proposed supplemental budget includes over $118,000,000 for Department of Parks and Recreation facilities.Obviously this is an admirable investments; but the removal of $2,000,000  will have a minimal impact on these projects while significantly expanding the availability and quality of youth development programs that we know will reap academic, social, emotional and health rewards for years to come.

The final question is, how do we make the case? The first step is being present on Thursday to give your testimony and show your support for the importance of a solid public-private youth development intermediary. We strongly encourage you to check out our talking points on this hearing which can be found here. If you’re feeling especially ambitious, we encourage you to recruit others (parents, youth, volunteers, board members, alumni) to do the same.

If you can’t make it Thursday, a second option is to commit to getting 10 people from your network (personal and professional) to call or email the members of the Committee on Human Services and their council member to tell them why expanded learning is important and why they should invest in the youth development programming and services. The opportunities presented by the supplemental budget, while not a guarantee beyond next year, shouldn't be forgotten in our advocacy work or asks this budget season- but as always, it will take a collective and loud voice to make this happen.

This blog post was written by DCAYA's Executive Director Maggie Riden. For more information on DCAYA's work in the fields of positive youth development and expanded learning please visit the Policy and Advocacy section of our website.

What's Inside the DCPS Budget?

Since we did our budget overview last week, it only makes sense this week to start to go a little deeper. With that in mind, DCAYA is proud to present some ideas and points about the DCPS budget proposal. The DCPS hearing will be next Wednesday April 17^th.

We said this last week, but we’ll say it again: the DCPSbudget can be a confusing thing and this year is no exception. There are a lot of questions to be answered given the convoluted proposed budgeting for many programs in FY’14.  A prime example of this is the reduction of $268,000 from last year’s already severely reduced budget for the Office of Out of School Time Programming being countered by a $2,680,000 increase to the “Extended Day” line item. Certainly, DCAYA is on board with the idea of extending the amount of time that students spend engaged and learning. However, as we have written about before, extendedday models can vary widely and do not all achieve the same intended results. It’s also important to note that previously schools were open to community partners during after-school hours with janitorial and security services because these things were centrally coordinated by the Office of Out of School Time Programming. This same office became responsible for vetting community partners and most importantly for placing full-time after-school coordinators in each school to work with the service providers, principals, teachers, and parents to improve coordination and service delivery. In the last two years, this office took the focus on coordination and quality a step further, initiating work with community partners, DCPS central office, principals and teachers to align what students learned during the school day (newly defined common core standards) with the academic focus and objectives of after school programming. As this office has been largely defunded it its very unclear where these functions will land within DCPS or if they will be maintained at all.

Another somewhat baffling number in the DCPS budget is the Proving What’s Possible line item which only comes in at $733,000, given the sheer size of this program that number seems impressively low and PWP does not show up elsewhere in the DCPS budget (although it is likely part of the Extended Day or Technology line items).

Summer school is set to receive a very small bump this year, which is discouraging given all the research that points to summerlearning’s ability to close the achievement gap. The Summer School line item is certainly a place that could use some spirited advocacy!

Inducing further confusion is the “Instructional Programs” section  of the budget which essentially zeros out “Alternative Education” whereas the “Vocational Education” line item is set to experience a $6,000,000 bump which about evens out to Alt. Ed cut. Is this change just a re-purposing of funds? We hope so.

In terms of places that could all use some serious infusions of cash: Evening Credit Recovery is set to get about $375,000 in new funds, but middle and high schools could do a lot more with larger budgets. We know many of our students could utilize opportunities to regain credits and get back on track, so we need to support this.

The general Student Support Services is supposed to take a $286,000 cut along with a cut to School Social and Psychological Services of $92,000. This on its face is bad news but again these cuts are more than balanced out by School Health Services budget item which is set to receive an increase of $1,353,000.Youth Engagement will experience a cut of $733,000. Parent Resource Centers will experience a cut of $1,492,000 and Student Attendance will be cut $514,000. The Family and Community Engagement budget is set to experience an increase of $1,230,000. A lot of these cuts and bumps are likely internal repurposing of funds, and especially considering the focus on truancy prevention and student engagement this is likely. However, what advocates need to look at for is that these funds a re-purposing and that the functions formerly carried out are continuing to happen.

We know that the Committee on Education and the larger Committee of the Whole have an intense interest in solving the truancy issue within the District’s schools and especially at DCPS so as a community of advocates we need to look at things through the school engagement lens. While the DCPS budget may be complicated and may just be moving pots of money from one line to another, we still need to ensure that the programs that have proven their effectiveness or show great promise of doing so remain intact. With that we encourage all youth providers that have worked with DCPS to testify at next week's hearing.

If you wish to testify, please contact the Committee on Education ASAP so they can add you to the witness list.

 For more information on DCAYA's policy priorities and recommendations about out-of-school time and expanded learning please visit us online at dc-aya.org or contact Susan Ruether or Maggie Riden.

Youth-Led Talks Youth Employment

The below post is from Debohnei Reed, a participant in the Sasha Bruce YouthLed Program. Youth-Led has been working with DCAYA over the past few months to accomplish their goals around creating more opportunities for young people to gain work experience beyond the Summer Youth Employment Program which only serves young people for six-weeks out of the year.

On February 11, 2013 my colleagues and I attended a meeting with Ward 8 Council Member Marion Barry. Previously Council Member Barry was the Mayor of DC. One of his largest initiatives was the creation of the Summer Youth Employment Program (SYEP). For this reason we were hoping he would support us and our plan for creating youth jobs.

We prepared for our meeting by doing research on the costs of SYEP. We determined the difference in cost between serving one youth during the summer (at the SYEP wage for 16-21 year olds) and serving one youth year round. We then developed a proposal to support youth in high school and youth who are currently out of school with year round jobs. Our group decided to start with trying to add 50 year round jobs.

Members of Sasha Bruce Youth Led prepare for their
meeting with Council Member Marion Barry.

Because our meeting was on a Monday afternoon, our group went into work on a Sunday to make sure we were as ready as we needed to be to meet with Council Member Barry. Practice occurred throughout the day as we recited what we had to say and asked each other “did I sound good?” which served as a great help.The next day when we  arrived at the Wilson Building, we didn’t get seen as quickly as we thought but that also served as a help because we had more time to practice and even laugh a little. Finally we entered Council Member Barry’s office and introduced ourselves which was followed by a little story telling from the Council Member himself.

After introductions, we described our plan for year round jobs. We picked the issue of year round jobs because our group sees a lot of issues with youth unemployment in the city.We told Council Member Barry that while 14,000 youth in the summer youth employment program could be seen as a good thing,  the negative consequence of such a large number of youth is that some programs are overrun with young people and some are not providing authentic skills for youth. We also spoke on how we felt an evaluation of SYEP was needed because there is no way of knowing if job sites are providing youth workers with real job skills.  Our solution to this issue is to transition a portion of summer youth jobs into year round youth jobs. We told Council Member Barry how it would be beneficial to the community and youth because businesses would have more workers to help therefore making them run more efficiently. It would also save them money because they would not have to pay workers themselves.We also informed him on how we already had businesses that would take youth.

At the end of the meeting Council Member Barry told us that he was a big supporter of efforts to employ more young people and that he was supportive of our proposal.We were pleased with the Council Member’s comments on how he would like to see more money going into year around jobs. He also agreed with us on developing an outside evaluation system for the SYEP. In our eyes the meeting went well and our points were heard. END

Here at DCAYA, we deeply value programs like Youth Led that inspire and empower young people to make their voice heard in local government efforts to support them. Advocating not just for the community based organizations that serve youth but also for young people directly is an essential part of our mission and we welcome partnerships with our member organizations that directly infuse the youth voice into policy making. With performance oversight and the FY'14 budget process upon us this is an especially important time to support young people in this endeavor.

If you or your organization has youth who are interested in testifying before the City Council on an issue please contact our Policy Team ASAP and we are happy to help young people prepare testimony, go over the local oversight and budget process and set up meetings with Council Members.

Succeeding Where Others Have Failed

This week the Raise DC partnership released its baseline report card on the state of the District’s young people.  Through collaborating with a number of organizations and city agencies, the report card outlines how well the city as a whole is preparing young people to become self-sufficient adults. Perhaps not surprisingly, DCAYA was involved with Raise DC since its inception. While the final report card may seem as if the Deputy Mayors for Education and Health and Human Services just collected information for publishing, we can assure you the process was much more in depth and deliberate. Over the past year, the amount of work put in by the Raise DC partners has been truly inspiring for us to witness, as well as take part in. Furthermore, as a coalition of child and youth service providers, DCAYA understands how the mere convening of a group of such diverse stakeholders is a major undertaking.

As the report card authors point out, DC has attempted mass collaborations in the past that have not necessarily yielded results. The educational attainment of our cities young people is still abysmally low, youth unemployment (and adult unemployment in certain areas of the city) is persistently high and we still have far too many families living below the poverty line. This reality begs the question, what makes Raise DC different from past efforts?

For starters, the government offices that organized the Raise DC report card actually acknowledged some past mistakes (as well as successes). This in itself is a good sign. A great concern amongst many entities that serve and care about youth in the District is that past collaborations usually begin well, but often lose steam over time. Past efforts such as the ICSIC and the SCCYF (hey, at least we didn’t use an adjective this time!) are good examples of this pit fall.  Both the ICSIC and the SCCYF began as a large collaboration amongst city entities and community partners to gather city wide indicators of young people’s success, each eventually fizzled out. Obviously, this is bad. At the end of the day we want to help young people achieve a healthy and productive adulthood and when we are not doing that, the city struggles. This is clearly evident in the amount of money the city spends every year to rectify past mistakes, like failing to invest in public education and health services on the front end. Also, unsuccessful efforts like the ICSIC and the SCCYF often affect the partner’s willingness to engage in future city wide collaborations and initiatives, which inevitably affects eventual success.

While Raise DC cannot guarantee loss of momentum and following down the path of its predecessors, there are many encouraging factors to indicate success.  The leadership structure of Raise DC was very intentionally set up by not just including city officials, but business leaders, philanthropic organizations and Executive Directors of prominent community based organizations. This structure not only allows for mass buy in, but also protects Raise DC from the typical life cycle of initiatives and collaborations tied to a specific political administration.

Another reason to think this time may be different from past efforts is that outside investors have already come to the table to aid the city and the partnership in achieving its mission. Also the formation of “cradle to career” partnerships across the country is considered a best practice by both the federal Department of Education and by numerous national and local think tanks and research organizations. These are both very important indicators of the aforementioned mass buy in from stakeholders that is necessary for Raise DC to achieve its mission. These indicators are also an encouraging sign the District may be able to garner even more long term, outside resources for the city. Good news for everyone.

Lastly, Raise DC has the extreme benefit of being guided through its planning and implementation process by one of the foremost collaborative impact organizations in the country, the STRIVE network out of Cincinnati, Ohio. STRIVE has been recognized locally and nationally as a leader in this area, but more importantly has achieved many of the goals it set out for itself through their work in Southwest Ohio and Northern Kentucky. Raise DC does not look exactly like the STRIVE network , but that does not mean we should be discouraged.  Collaborative efforts should be tailored to the specific needs of the communities and geographic regions they are meant to affect, so of course Raise DC is not a carbon copy of STRIVE.  Furthermore, by having STRIVE guide DC’s efforts we can learn from their five years of experience and make room for our own innovations.

DCAYA is especially proud of two Raise DC accomplishments: the inclusion of a change network (think of these as working groups) dedicated to the disconnected youth (youth who are neither enrolled in school nor working) population in the District and the inclusion of our Workforce Investment Act’s Youth Council into the Youth Employment Change network. While these two things may seem like common sense moves, we cannot overstate the need to eliminate redundancies and streamline the work being done around these issues.

Sir Winston Churchill famously said “Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it” and we couldn’t agree with him more. That being said there are some very positive signs from the work Raise DC has already engaged in that suggest perhaps the city is finally in a place to build off past endeavors.

This blog post was written by DCAYA Policy Analyst Anne Abbott.  For questions about this post of DCAYA’s involvement with the Raise DC partnership you can email her here or ask her on Twitter!

For more information about the Raise DC partnership please visit the newly launched raisedc.net. The baseline report card is available here.

Don’t forget to follow DCAYA on Twitter and Facebook! 

Message from DCAYA Board Member and Executive Director of DC Scores Amy Nakamoto

With election season upon us, some of the District’s key issues for all of its constituents have taken center stage. Those issues have predominantly been education, public safety, economic and jobs development, and education (oh, did I already mention that?). While DC SCORES does not and will not endorse any one mayoral or council candidate over the other, we do feel this is the time to bring to light what is important for our participating poet-athletes.

As an after-school provider working intensively with 25 public and public charter elementary and middle schools in Wards 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, and 8, we believe strongly that a high-quality education should encompass well-rounded experiences that contribute to the formal and informal learning a student undertakes. For DC SCORES, this includes the opportunity to be active, creative, and part of a team in a non-formal school environment.

We feel that funding, policies, practices, and expectations at all levels of District government should not impede, rather enhance, our (or any other quality program’s) ability to provide a transformative experience for youth in the critical after-school hours. Youth spend more time out of school than in, which must not be overlooked when thinking about what youth most need to develop into functioning, educated, contributing adults.

An example of such a policy is the recently passed Healthy Schools Act (HSA). The act mandates, among other things, that over the next several years schools modify and enhance the opportunity for physical activity by changing formal physical education, expanding sport offerings, and/or including physical activity in after-school programs.

This Council-led bill passed in late spring 2010. In order for something as important as this piece of legislation to be realized, the Mayor’s office and the Council need to support funding and policies in accordance with this act. It is what is right for youth’s health, and their growing minds and bodies. This is just one example of what is important to DC SCORES.

Broadly, DC SCORES has the ability to thrive, expand, and increase our impact on the community in a District that is forward-thinking, resourceful, and collaborative. Changes and improvements to all systems (education, safety, and economy) impact directly or indirectly thousands of District youth every day.

Since youth can’t vote, I’d like to push our supporters to think hard about the policies and decisions made on a District level that will make the youth experience in DC a worthwhile one.

-- Written by Amy Nakamoto, Executive Director, DC Scores