Homeless Youth Summit - Part Three

NOTE: This is Part Three of a continuing entry. See Monday 4/16 and Thursday 4/19 for Part’s One and Two.

Point two of my three point plan is for runaway and homeless youth (RHY) agencies and systems to implement a higher level of training and accountability to Youth Development as a practice. Youth Development is a proven, research-based best practice that has a demonstrated history as a successful approach to services for this population, which is why most funding for RHY services requires an agency commitment to Youth Development. This funding requirement is the reason why most agencies use the language of Youth Development and make at least token nods toward implementation. However, while there are some notable exceptions to this rule, Youth Development remains a misunderstood, under-utilized, and under-supported approach to RHY services.

The best example I can give of this is the over-reliance on Youth Advisory Boards as a demonstration of an agency’s Youth Development focus. An empowered and functioning Youth Advisory Board is an excellent Youth Development structure, but the truth is that many of the Youth Advisory Boards I’ve seen are neither empowered nor functioning. Support and assistance to the Board are often delegated to lower level staff who are themselves without much power or authority, there is often little training for or organization of the Board, and the Board’s authority is either unclear or extremely limited (if not both). But even in cases where the Board is empowered and functioning well, Youth Development is not about giving young people a voice in your organization. An Advisory Board is simply one option for a structure that gives young people an opportunity for Meaningful Participation -- which is one of multiple “Protective Factors” that fosters innate resilience and promotes development. Therefore, an Advisory Board is only really promoting development for the handful of young people who serve on the Board. What about the developmental needs of the hundreds of other young people served by the agency?

True utilization of the Youth Development approach requires an agency-wide commitment supported by intention and dollars. Staff from the most entry-level position up to the President of the Board of Directors must be committed to full implementation of Youth Development in all aspects of practice, and support in terms of quality assurance, accountability, and on-going training and supervision must be in place. As a Youth Development trainer, this last point may be a bit self-serving, but the truth is that you cannot expect Youth Development to be realized in practice if some of your staff have attended a Youth Development presentation once in their career. The sad truth is I have visited many organizations that are required by funding and claim to be using a Youth Development approach, but the level of staff training is even less than I just described.

In fact, the level of training period in many youth-serving organizations is pitiful. Few organizations have any line item in their budget for on-going training, and most rely on sporadic community training opportunities. Group trainings for agency personnel and a regular schedule of attention to training is definitely the exception in youth services. Not too long ago I read a book about sales and learned that sales teams often dedicate 20% of their time to training. That means we live in a world where a man or woman who wants to sell you something spends 20% of their time learning new strategies and techniques for sales, or practicing already known skills. Yet a man or woman who wants to reach an abused, alienated, distrustful young person who is acculturated to a criminal world of violence and exploitation receives training as an afterthought or occasional opportunity.

Anyone else see something wrong with this picture?

On Monday, the final point in my three point plan.