Free Summer Meals: More Than A Free Lunch

Hunger doesn’t take a vacation when school lets out! As a result, the summer months are a critical time to provide low-income children, who depend on the free and reduced price breakfast and lunch programs during the school year, with nutritious food.  The D.C.Free Summer Meals program not only fills the nutrition gap for children under eighteen years of age, but also generates significant amount of federal dollars for summer youth education and recreation programs. This summer, the District is on track to provide 1.3 million meals and bring over $3 million dollars in federal funding. 

On top of combating hunger the D.C. Free Summer Meals program also helps to combat obesity. More and more children in the United States and in the District are becoming obese—and overweight children tend to  continue this trend into adulthood. Children gain weight three times faster during the summer months, gaining as much weight during the summer as they do during the entire school year, even though the summertime is three times shorter. This is due in large part to the inactivity many children and youth experience over the summer months, but nutrition contributes to this as well. When kids have limited healthy options at home, they go for the cheap stuff (think chips, sugary drinks, candy bars) and their health is clearly affected.

D.C. Free Summer Meals has been ranked the best summer food  program in the country for seven consecutive years for reaching the highest percentage of low-income children. Despite this fact, many more District children could benefit from the summer meal program. We know that healthy young people are the foundation of engaged young people and this applies as much during the summer as it does during the school year.By creating opportunities to provide children with healthy food, physical activity, and educational enrichment, children can continue to learn and stay safe when school is not in session. There are over 160 “open’ sites throughout the district, meaning children come to the site and receive a free meal without prior registration. This is an invaluable resource in fighting hunger here in the District, but also in supporting the development of young people year round.

Special thanks to Alyia-Smith Parker from DC Hunger Solutions for contributing to this post!

Why DC Needs More Summer Learning

This week DCAYA was featured on the National Summer Learning Association and the Walmart Foundation's "Smarter Summers" blog so this is a cross-posting from NSLA!  You can see the original post here.

What’s your favorite summer memory from childhood? Was it going to the beach? Heading off to sleep away camp? Maybe it was playing on a sports team, or spending some time at the library? Many of us have great memories of summers past when the end of the school year meant no more homework, and the beginning of free time to use however we (or in most cases, our parents) wanted. What many of us might remember less fondly, or not at all, is how hard it was to go back to school in the fall, and remember everything we learned just a few months prior.

That thing that we remember with a lot less nostalgia is something called summer learning loss.

Take an average student in D.C. who is considered low-income: the child will enter school at age 5 (likely already academically behind his middle- and high-income peers), and will lose two months worth of grade level knowledge and skills in both reading and math every year as he progresses through the elementary years. The learning loss that accumulates through elementary school will undoubtedly impact this child’s academic achievement in middle and high school, and can even have an effect on whether this student will earn a diploma and move on into post-secondary opportunities.

So what’s the moral of the story? Stemming the learning loss that occurs over the summer months is imperative if we want to improve academic achievement. This is especially true in cities like D.C. with a high percentage of the low-income students who are less likely to be engaged in the range of cultural, athletic, and social activities (trips to the museum, theater, science camp, and all-star teams) than their middle- and high-income peers.

Engaging students in high-quality summer learning programs that merge experiential learning into core standards and skills, and are complemented by diverse enrichment activities, equips these students with the academic skills and confidence they need to tackle the coming school year. This combination is critical. Students need to be engaged and interested in the learning process, and stimulated by new experiences that give them a vision for their future, but also help them advance academically.

The good news in all of this is that we do have programs that blend enrichment with academics in the District. Programs like KidPower DC andBrainfood teach students the value of nutrition, entrepreneurship, and service learning in the summer on top of their year-round afterschool programming. Other programs like DC Scores, Higher Achievement, and New Community for Children offer exciting summer sports like soccer and football, field trips across the region, and opportunities to expand on the reading, math, and science skills students have acquired during the school year. Urban Alliance andMartha’s Table teach vital career and life skills, and there are numerous other programs in D.C. that provide high quality experiences in the summer, but we can’t list them all!

The return on investment in these types of interventions is vast; particularly in cities like D.C. where anything we can do to even the academic playing field, and improve our graduation rate, reaps lasting benefits in the short, medium, and long term. Sadly, summer school at DCPS will see another budget reduction, receiving only $2,350,000 compared to the $4,596,000 allocated last fiscal year. Our city like many others has faced budget shortfalls, and tough decisions that have resulted in a gradual divestment in high-quality summer programming.

We are literally undoing the gains our students are making during the school year by not providing them with structured learning opportunities year-round. By funding a more robust system of summer education opportunities, D.C. can counter the trend of slumping student achievement. Is it the silver bullet to all of D.C.’s education woes? No, probably not. Nothing is that simple. However, as the research increasingly demonstrates, smart, creative planning, and high-quality summer programming is certainly a great place to start.

Visit the DC Alliance of Youth Advocates website to learn more.

Now and Then: The History of DC's Summer Youth Employment Program

President Reagan hands over a check for SYEP to Mayor-for-life Marion Barry. PhotoCredit: Washington Post

The One City Summer Youth Employment Program starts today (as do most of the District's summer camps!)and it seems only appropriate given the number of District youth that have gone through SYEP over the years that we dedicate today's blog post to the program.

For those of you that need to brush up on your SYEP history, the program was established in 1979 by then- Mayor Marion Barry. Back in the day, SYEP served 22,000 exclusively low-income young people and was funded by the federal government. Flash forward to 2012 and SYEP serves upwards of 14,000 young people ages 14-21, from a variety of economic backgrounds almost exclusively with  local dollars (the 2011 program cost the District roughly $11.5 million). Given that the District now pays SYEP's full tab, one would hope that the program would have made leaps and bounds since its inception in '79, but this is not necessarily the case.


But why do I say not necessarily? Because the 2012 SYEP will operate absent a clear mission, articulated youth outcomes or vision for the future. A clear and targeted mission, vision and outcomes framework are the the foundation of any good program and SYEP's current lack of all three has proved to severely limit DC's capacity to effectively use youth workforce funding for years.


For example: Studies of SYEP have noted that SYEP host site supervisors and participating youth do report that young people benefit from taking part in the program. Cited benefits have included: exposure to the world of work, soft skills acquisition, career exploration, college and career planning etc. However ,SYEP currently lacks an outcomes framework which means none of these benefits have been clearly established as intended outcomes of participating in the program. What's more SYEP currently serves 12,000 youth whose work readiness, work experience and levels of educational attainment vary widely. The city doesn't know what skills and behaviors are the most important to teach  nor have they formulated a mission for the program that would specify which population of young people should be targeted with SYEP.


If we haven't established clear goals and outcomes for a program, collecting data on program effectiveness and quality becomes awfully tricky.Furthermore, without performance tracking  the city cannot make an informed decision about whether its yearly SYEP expenditure is cost-effective or if these local workforce dollars would be better targeted to another intervention.


Perhaps the one of the most troubling revelations about SYEP's current issues around system-wide quality and performance is that through at least some of its history SYEP has had articulated outcomes and a target population and performance monitoring. In the1990's SYEP slots funded by the federal program required individual assessments, data collection and evaluation. The impact of the federal  program could be measured from year to year because pre- and post-program assessments were mandated and these assessments captured performance data. Unfortunately when federal funding for these measures went away, so to did attention to outcomes and performance measurement.


Clearly SYEP has undergone quite a bit of change since 1979, but we still have a long way to go if we as a city want to make this program outcomes driven and cost-effective. The first step in achieving this goal is undoubtedly the formulation of a targeted mission and outcomes framework, but there are other steps and interim measures that could also be taken to affect positive change within SYEP.


For more information on reforming SYEP, check out DCAYA's 2011 Summer Youth Employment Program Report Card.


For more information on DCAYA's Youth Employment work, contact Anne Abbott, DCAYA Policy Analyst.

FY'13 Budget Season Wrap-Up

The FY’13 budget season is a wrap (well, at least as far as the Council’s role is concerned) and as is DCAYA’s habit we thought we would share some of the highlights;

Youth Employment

The Department of Employment Services (DOES) received $8,741,000 for Year Round Youth Programs up from the FY 12 budget mark of of $7,401,000. The Summer Youth Employment Program was funded at 11,371,000 with the Mayor’s Youth Leadership Institute funded at 762,000. In FY’13 DOES will continue to push out new agency run programming with the Pathways for Young Adults (PYAP)year-round program as well as the One City High School Internship Program and the One City College Internship Program. 

Additionally, CFSA has allocated 1 million of its budget formerly used for "Community Services and Child Placement Activity" to go towards a subsidized employment program for foster youth transitioning out of care. $800,000 of this allocation must go towards youth stipends which will be administered via an MOU with DOES.

Education

On the education front,summer school at DCPS will see another budget reduction, receiving only $2,350,000 compared to the $4,596,000 allocated last fiscal year. There was another surprising budget cut in School Social and Psychological Services. The program’s budget will get even smaller in FY' 13, going from 368,000 in FY 12 to 92,000. Moreover, Special Education’s funding dropped from $122,850,000 to $109,732,000.

 Despite the budget reductions in DCPS there is one noteworthy increase in FY’ 13. The Youth Engagement program will receive 1,791,000; over a million dollar increase to the meager $435,000 it received in FY’ 12. The program focuses on providing in-school programs and services that promote healthy lifestyles so that students are better prepared for school. Although, many of the DCPS programs will experience considerable budget reductions in FY’ 13, overall DCPS received four percent budget increase in FY ‘13. These increases aren’t focused on one specific area but are instead scattered throughout different DCPS programs. Some of the most significant increases are in Curriculum Development and Implementation whose budget rose from $1,390,000 to $7,710,000 and Inclusive Academic Programs which rose drastically from $2,535,000 to $10,332,000. Lastly, the per pupil funding base rate for both DCPS and DCPCS will rise from $8,945 to $9,124 per student for fiscal year 2013.

Out of School Time

Funding for CYITC or The "Trust" remained stable this year at the $3 million mark. While the Trust's budget isn't a reduction from FY'12 its important to remember that out-of-school time programs in DC have experienced a 44% reduction overall since 2009. DCPS' Office of Out of School Time Programs received a cut of $3 million dollars and will also see a substantial change in the number of programs it can effectively partner with in SY'13 due in large part to the new Proving What's Possible grant program.

The Commission on Arts and Humanities did receive an uptick in funds this year,as did the Department of Parks and Recreation did receive a budget increase this year, although mainly to cover additional FTE's at notoriously understaffed sites. DPR will also launch the new Office of Partnerships and Development in FY'13 as a means of better integrating into the communities they serve.

Health and Human Services

The Department of Health’s Prevention and Intervention Service’s budget rose from $5,390,000 to $14,277,000. The Council also made the critical decision to delay the anticipated 25 percent reduction in Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) benefits which was scheduled to take affect this fall. Thousands of children, youth a families would have felt the effects if this reduction had it taken place. On the Youth Homelessness front, the Department of Human Services reports allocating $5 million to homeless youth services up from $3.5 million in FY'12 while this is a budgetary increase what this really is a better accounting of funds spent on different sub-populations of homeless and unstably housed young people (children, teen parents, runway and homeless youth).

While not every program the youth advocate community would have liked to have seen funded made it into the the final budget, it important to remember that funding is not the only piece of the puzzle.As such organizations like DCAYA need youth, parents, service providers and community members to be involved in  advocacy efforts YEAR Round!

Interested in getting more involved with DCAYA and the youth policy scene in the District? Check out Why YOU should be a member of our coalition!

Why Are We Devaluing Community Partners at a Time When We Need Them the Most?

At Mayor Vincent Gray’s budget townhall meeting onTuesday night, a student asked the Mayor “why (did) his budget only include $3 million for out-of-school time programs?” The Mayor’s response was interesting. He explained that we shouldn’t be looking at things as “after-school vs. during school” and that the direction the District’s schools should really be moving is toward an extended day model -- one where we utilize community based-organizations to provide services and extend the amount of time students spend engaged in academic activities.

The Mayor has obviously been doing his research. The type of extended day the Mayor suggests where expanded learning opportunities exist through structured partnerships between schools and community-based organizations (CBOs) is exactly the type of model that has seen success in other jurisdictions (TASC in NYC, ProvidenceAfter School Alliance). We applaud the Mayor’s vision to implement this kind of education reform here in the District.

In fact, the District could easily achieve an extended school day model (at least at DCPS) by better utilizing the DCPS Office of Out-of-School Time Programs to leverage new and pre-existing relationships with high-quality CBOs to add valuable hours to the school day. Quality CBOs are already aligning their curriculums with that of DCPS.  They are already using contextual and activity based or experiential learning to reinforce what happens during the traditional school day. They are also showing measurable gains on student achievement, attendance and many other factors, such as health and public safety. What’s more, the current out-of-school time community in the District has a quality assurance mechanism already built in via the Children and Youth Investment Trust Corporation (CYITC). Despite being largely defunded by the city government in recent years, CYITC could easily be revitalized in support of a larger educational reform agenda involving multiple partners.

So this all sounds like great news! Unfortunately, Mayor Gray is not following his words with actions.

Last month DCPS announced a new grant program called ProvingWhat’s Possible (PWP)  that could have very serious implications for the out-of-school time in the District.  PWP will reduce the infrastructure supporting the capacity of CBOs to get into schools, will erase many of the relationships CBOs have already established with schools and may result in simply adding on an additional half hour of instructional time rather than maintain the robust array of services and supports we currently have in place. A couple of years ago, national education analyst Elena Silva presented a caveat on the need to extend the school day in the District: “DC cannot expect to just add time and stir, and 30 minutes aday is unlikely to be enough to close the gaps that keep widening throughout the year and especially over the summer. Butif the right kinds of staffing structures and partnerships are created–--wherecommunity-based organizations, universities, and businesses are integrated into school-based learning--longer hours and an extended year shouldabsolutely be part of DC’s education plan.” We agree with Ms. Silva’s point, which makes it all the more discouraging that now more than ever community based organizations are being shut out of school buildings and devalued by our local education officials.

Improving the academic attainment and closing the achievement gap for our students are not just nice goals, they are an economic imperative for the District. Mayor Gray knows, and has made laudable investments in the District’s public education system. However, if we really want to achieve meaningful educational gains we need all hands on deck when it comes to our young people. Ideally there would be financial resources available to community and neighborhood providers, but as that seems increasingly unlikely in the current budget climate, the very least the administration could do would be to foster stronger relationships between institutions like schools and community providers. Mayor Gray’s response to the student’s question at last night’s town hall seemed to assume this was happening, so why isn’t it?

Questions about this blog post may be forwarded to Anne Abbott, DCAYA policy anlayst.

For more information on the Out-of-School time sector here in the District, please visit dc-aya.org.