Progress in an Imperfect World: Measuring Positive Youth Development in Oregon

1. PYD Progress in an Imperfect World Sarah Ramowski, MSW Adolescent Health Section Oregon Public Health April 22, 2010

2. I. Measuring Positive Youth Development • The What, How, and Why of Benchmarking? • Results II. Moving the PYD Agenda • Statewide Partnership • Localized Changes III. Lessons Learned: Advice for Other States • Measure, measure, measure! • Use what you have

3. The Beaver State • 3,690,505 people living on 98,386 square miles • Oregon has 21.3% of its population living in rural areas. • 86.6% of the population is Caucasian • 29% of youth had an unmet physical or mental health care need in the past year

4. Benchmarking in Oregon 1989 Beginning of Benchmarking Annual, measurable goals tied to state strategic plan 1992-3 Link benchmarks to state agencies (273) 2001 Oversight of process put in statute 2005 90 benchmarks (7 categories) Public accountability at state & county level http://benchmarks.oregon.gov

5. Positive Youth Development Benchmark Who: • State Public Health Division • Oregon Progress Board • State & Local Commissions on Children & Families What: Positive Youth Measures + Youth Risk Measures = Balanced Picture of Youth Well-Being How: Use existing State-level youth survey (Oregon Healthy Teens survey/Oregon’s YRBS)

6. PYD Benchmark Questions

7. PYD Benchmark vs. Risk Hypothesis: If our questions capture PYD, we will find a strong association between higher levels of PYD and: • Lower levels of risk • Higher levels of healthy behaviors

8. Results • Lower scores on PYD questions STRONGLY ASSOCIATED with higher scores on risk behaviors • Eating fruits & veggies, getting recent physical activity, getting better grades, not using drugs are all associated with higher levels on PYD questions

9. Adopted Benchmark • Must answer at least 5 of 6 questions “positively” to meet benchmark • “The Percent of Teens who report positive youth development attributes; a) 8th grade; b) 11th grade.”

10. Benchmark Results

11. Benchmark & Risk (2009 data) * = p < .05 ** = p < .001 *** = p < .0001

12. PYD & Grades

13. State Policy Implications • Formalizes State’s commitment to PYD • Provides a baseline source for future state tracking • Determining future funding priorities

14. Local Policy Implications • Support for youth programs that have PYD framework (i.e, Oregon Mentors, Youth Bill of Rights) • Local assessment based on benchmark is possible

15. Moving the PYD Agenda 3 Goals of BPY Project for Oregon: • Training • Partnership • Evaluation/data collection

16. Building Statewide Partnership Capacity Start of the PYD Alliance • Passion & interest, not always resources • Keep momentum going around State

17. Who is at the table? Wide array of partners • Local Public Health/Social services • State Agencies • Youth-Serving Orgs (4-H, Afterschool, Camp Fire)

18. Goals of Alliance • Act as advising body to public & private orgs on youth policy & practice coordination • Coordinate and plan trainings, work sessions on youth engagement • Infuse youth engagement with principles of cultural competency

19. Localized Action Items Adolescent Health Section took steps where possible • Big Picture: Statewide Youth Sexual Health Plan • Influencing the Details: Infusing PYD into SBHC Planning Grants

20. Lessons Learned • Measure, Measure, Measure! • And teach others to measure too… • Use what you have • Progress can have many definitions

21. Questions?? Thank You! Sarah.Ramowski@state.or.us (971) 673-0377