“YOUTH AS PARTNERS FOR SMART GROWTH”
AGENDA AT-A-GLANCE	

A.	Overview Of Session Goals

B.	Introductions 

C.	Warm-Up Activity – What Is Effective Citizenship? 

D.	Step-By-Step Guide To Youth Engagement  (Part One) - Visualizing Youth Engagement!

Step #1 -   Develop Rationale  (Handout #1 - Pink)
Step #2  -  Identify Opportunities (Handout #2-White)
Step #3 – Identify Host Organization and Partners  

E.	Youth Perspectives – Live and Direct from our Youth Presenters!

•	Observations on the effects of sprawl and poor planning in their communities.
•	Statements why youth should be fully engaged as “New Partners for Smart Growth.”
•	Presentation of profiles of youth engaged throughout the country.  (Handout #4-Blue)

F.	Step-By-Step Guide Continued  (Part-Two) – Moving Forward; Making it Happen!

Step #4 - Assess Your Readiness to Engage Youth   (Handout #5- Yellow)
Step #5 - Be Realistic About the Challenges  (Handout #6 - Buff)
Step #6 - Develop a Recruitment Strategy (Handout #7- Ivory)
Step #7 – Select and Define The Specific Opportunity You Will Pursue  (Handout #8- Gray                                                                                      
Step #8 – Think About What Youth will Need to be Effective (Handout #9- Orchid)
Step #9 - Develop a Plan to Prepare and Support Youth 
Step #10 – Honor Commitments- Institutionalize

G.	Presentation Of Two Successful Youth Engagement Models 

KIDS CONSORTIUM 
CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR CIVIC PARTICIPATION AND YOUTH 

Handout #1:
RATIONALE FOR ENGAGING YOUTH IN PLANNING AND POLICY-MAKING	

Background: The following results are from a recent youth engagement survey conducted by the California Center for Civic Participation and Youth Development.  Respondents included community and national non-profit organizations (14),  state, regional, county and city governments (17) and the remainder (6) either business, education or faith-based organizations.  An additional 15 persons participated in a follow-up focus group. The results of this non-scientific process are designed to facilitate discussion and to develop tools and shape policies to support youth.

SURVEY RESULTS: WHAT ARE BEST TWO REASONS TO ENGAGE YOUTH PLANNING AND POLICY-MAKING?

(29)  Youth will provide adults with ideas and perspectives, that otherwise, might not be considered. Thus, planning and policy-making processes might be improved.
(28)  Engaging youth is an important “youth development” strategy that helps those youth grow into healthy, well-rounded individuals and community leaders.
(13)  Participation of youth as partners with adults creates a positive community climate; as a result, adults will come to appreciate youth, and youth will develop higher expectations for themselves.
(5)  Youth concerned about their future will inspire adults in policy-making to work harder to resolve differences and make progress towards common goals.
(0)  Participation of youth will—by setting an example--encourage other segments of the community to become more interested and active in shaping the future of their community.

Related Insights From Focus Group: Most (90%) of the reasons offered by focus group participants fell in the category of the top three ranked reasons on the survey (improves the process; important youth development strategy; builds climate of respect).  However, participants highlighted two other rationale--left off the survey--that included creating incentives and aspirations (among youth) to go to college, and workforce recruitment and retention.   

Handout #2:
OPPORTUNITIES TO ENGAGE YOUTH IN PLANNING AND POLICY-MAKING	

Background: The following results are from a recent youth engagement survey conducted by the California Center for Civic Participation and Youth Development.  Respondents included community and national non-profit organizations (14), state, regional, county and city governments (17) and the remainder (6) either business, education or faith-based organizations.  An additional 15 persons participated in a follow-up focus group. The results of this non-scientific process are designed to facilitate discussion and to develop tools and shape policies to support youth

SURVEY RESULTS - WHAT THREE TYPES OF YOUTH ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES ARE YOU MOST LIKELY TO CONSIDER?  

(14) Include youth in official planning processes, such as the development of a neighborhood, reform, or master plan
(14) Invite youth delegates to participate in adult professional policy or planning conferences.
(13) Have youth develop and present policy recommendations to city, county, or state elected officials.     
(13) Form a youth advisory committee for an official board, commission, planning department, or program.
(11) Prepare youth to conduct research, or to evaluate a particular program, community, environment or plan.
(9)   Invite youth to participate in existing school or workplace planning committees.
(8)   Support youth who organize and facilitate an educational forum for other youth or the community.
(8)   Support youth who conduct a public education or media campaign.
(5)   Establish a youth grant-making or award-giving programs. 
(5)   Support youth participating in advocacy campaigns with other like-minded stakeholders.
(4)   Create a city-wide or regional youth council to develop a master action plan for expanding youth engagement. 
(4)   Train youth to conduct and analyze surveys and focus groups.
(3)   Create youth seats government or non-profit boards or commissions.  

Handout #3:
ORGANIZATIONS THAT WANT TO INITIATE OR EXPAND YOUTH
ENGAGEMENT IN PLANNING AND POLICY-MAKING	

BACKGROUND
Nationwide more than 100 public, non-profit and other organizations and agencies of all sizes indicated their willingness to initiate, improve or expand youth engagement in community planning and policy-making. They did so by nominating a youth to the 2003 New Partners for Smart Growth Conference, by completing a survey, or by responding to an invitation to participate in a focus group. Since this was only a limited outreach effort, we believe this group of willing adults is just the “tip of the ice-berg.”  Here is a sample list of some of these folks, why they want to engage youth, and how they might like to proceed:

NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND COALITIONS

National Safe Kids Campaign (Washington, D.C.): The Coordinator of their Program Department says that some of their local chapters have engaged youth, but that they might like to explore doing this on a national level. She believes youth can provide helpful ideas and perspectives to adults, especially on issues such as pedestrian and bicycle safety and injury prevention. The types of youth engagement they might consider include having youth develop and present policy recommendations to government officials; having youth plan and facilitate educational forums; having youth participate in existing school or workplace committees. Contact: Mary Hanley, 202-662-0637; mhanley@safekids.org

STATEWIDE AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS

Massachusetts Office of Environmental Affairs (Boston, Massachusetts) The Coordinator of the Community Preservation Initiative within the Office of Environmental Affairs is planning a two-day event (April 2003) for high school students across Massachusetts to introduce to them the concepts and issues of Community Preservation, including land and watershed preservation; economic development; transportation and affordable housing. The would like guidance to help identify local post-conference opportunities to engage participants in the statewide event, include having youth conduct research and evaluation; having youth develop and present policy recommendations to city and county officials; and having youth plan and facilitate educational forums. She thinks youth participation can help create a positive climate in each community among youth and adults. Contact: Priscilla Geigis, 617 626-1131; Priscilla.Geigis@state.ma.us

State of Georgia’s Department of Community Affairs (Atlanta, Georgia): The Quality Growth specialist for the Department says they have talked about engaging youth, but would like some advice on how to proceed.  They think that youth might provide adults with ideas and perspectives that otherwise might not be considered.  The organizations top priority is promoting quality growth among the general public and community leaders, and providing the tools best suited to achieve that goal in each community. She thinks they might be willing to consider including youth in official planning processes; having youth conduct research and evaluation; and develop policy recommendations to city, county and state officials.  Contact: Dee Dee Quinnelly; dquinnel@dca.state.ga.us 

Texas Transportation Institute (College Station, Texas): The Senior Research Engineer at the Institute is not sure how his organization will respond to the idea of youth engagement, but he thinks that both youth and the planning process might benefit. He believes it is crucial to take the time to help youth become knowledgeable about the issues before they participate.  Although he says he personally does not have the time or desire to start a youth program, he would participate. He thinks the Institute might be most likely to consider including youth in official planning processes; having youth conduct research and evaluation; and having youth present policy recommendations top local or state elected officials. Contact: Brian Bochner, 979-458-3516; b-bochner@ttimail.tamu.edu

REGIONAL COUNCILS AND ASSOCIATIONS

Metropolitan Planning Council (Chicago, Illinois) is a coalition of business, civic and government organizations in Chicago conducting a Campaign for Sensible Growth in partnership with the Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission.  They are focusing on preservation of agricultural land, watershed protection, and economic development.  The co-chair persons of the campaign had not previously considered working with youth, but they are willing to consider engaging youth in a public education, advocacy or media campaign related to the sensible growth effort. They think the Illinois Student Environmental Network might be a prospective partner.  Contact: Ellen Shubart, 312-863-6009; eshubart@metroplanning.org

Central Savannah River Area Regional Development Association (Augusta, Georgia) is a public sector, non-profit planning and development agency that serves a 14 county and 46 city region in the Eastern portion of Central Georgia.  Their Planning Director believes that including youth can help improve the planning process and that youth participation can help create a more positive climate between youth and adults. They have engaged youth before but want to improve what they do.  She thinks they might be willing to consider including youth in planning processes including committees; as well as having youth develop and present policy recommendations to adult planners and policy-makers. Contact:  Lori Sand (706) 210-2017; lsan@csradc.

North Central Illinois Council of Governments (Princeton, Illinois):  A representative of this regional council says they have never discussed youth engagement before, and he is not sure how others might respond.  However, he thinks that the ideas and perspectives provided by engaged youth could help improve the process and might inspire adults to work harder to make progress.  He says a big issue in their area is the “need to create jobs so that youth will return to rural areas after college.”  He thinks they might be willing to include youth in planning processes; and thinks youth might provide valuable research and evaluation of their community and specific programs.  Contact: Kevin Lindeman; 815 875-3396; ncicg10@theramp.net

COUNTY GOVERNMENT

Lancaster County Planning Commission (Lancaster, Pennsylvania):  A Senior Planner with the says they might consider inviting youth to participate in policy and planning conferences, to participate in official planning processes, or create seats for youth on non-profit and government boards and commission.  The Commission is concentrating on growth management, livable communities, and preservation of agricultural land.  She thinks planning processes might benefit from participation of youth, and that this will contribute to the healthy development of those youth.  Contact: Mary Frey, 717-299-8333; frey@co.lancaster.pa.us

Delaware County Transportation Management Association The Outreach Coordinator thinks youth will benefit as individuals while contributing new ideas and perspectives that improve the planning process.  Top priority issues for the Association include encouraging youth to use public and school provided transportation, and the promotion of safer driving by youth. They are willing to consider inviting youth to professional policy and planning conferences, and to provide support for youth who plan and conduct educational forums and advocacy campaigns.  They would like to attend a regional or national training conference to build a youth engagement plan. Contact: Susan Young, 610-892-9440; syoung@dctma.org

CITY GOVERNMENT

Community Planning Department (Orange, California): The Senior Planner with says they have not previously discussed youth engagement. She thinks this might benefit youth and the process, and that they might be willing to consider forming youth advisory committees to official boards, commissions or the department; having youth develop and present policy recommendations to elected officials; or having youth serve on existing school or workplace committees. She thinks cities need to do more to promote commitment to smart growth principles; and that cities should not be afraid to insist on high quality development.  They would be interested in participating in a regional or national training conference to develop a youth engagement plan. Contact: Anna Pehoushek, 714-711-7228; apehoushek@cityoforange.org

Planning Services Department (Hamilton County, Ohio): The Planning Administrator says they would like to build on the success of a Youth Forum they conducted in October 2001 that engaged high school students in planning for the future. One hundred-sixty students and 31 faculty members from 32 Hamilton County high schools met to attend sessions led by students from University of Cincinnati’s graduate planning school.  Top priority issues for the youth included education, youth programs, race issues and revitalizing their downtown. Specifically, they would like to create opportunities for youth to participate on advisory committees to the commission and planning department, by forming a regional youth council, and by placing youth on existing school and workplace committees. She thinks broader participation of youth might inspire adults to work harder to resolve differences and make progress on difficult issues.  Contact: Caroline Statkus; 513 946-4461; caroline.statkus@Hamilton-co.org

Planning Commission (Leitchfield, Kentucky):  The Chairman of Leitchfield’s Planning Commission, who owns an Insurance Agency, is dismayed at the terrible input from adults.  He says, “Maybe if we begin with the youths of the community, those youth will learn the value of their thoughts and opinions and will become proactive citizens.”   He says they have considered youth engagement and think that youth participation could improve the process while enabling those youth to develop into healthy, well-rounded individuals who become leaders in their community.   He thinks they might like to partner with local high school classes and elected officials to consider including youth in planning processes; advocacy campaigns; as well as on existing school and workplace committees alongside adults.  Contact: Steve Kinkade; 270 259-5465; Steve@Kinkadecornell.com

Town of Breckenridge (Breckenridge, Colorado):  This town is considering engaging youth but wants advice about how to proceed.  They believe involving youth will create a positive climate for change and that youth ideas might improve the planning process.  They are most likely to consider including youth in official planning processes such as the development of a neighborhood or master plan.  They might also consider creating youth seats on boards and commissions or creating a youth grant-making program.  Contact:  Laurie Best; PO Box 168; Breckenridge, CO 80424 

City Manager’s Office (Joliet, Illinois):  The City Manager, who also serves as the Secretary for Joliet’s Historic Preservation Commission--thinks youth might help improve the planning process by providing fresh ideas and perspectives, and that participating youth will benefit. Top priority issues include affordable housing, job creation and health care. Joliet is most likely to consider creating youth seats on boards and commissions, or preparing youth to conduct research and evaluation or surveys and focus groups. They might consider a partnership with community service programs at high schools, and would welcome support and guidance.  Contact: Barb Newberg; BNEWBERG@jolietcity.org

Radnor Township (Wayne, Pennsylvania): Their Town manager says that “youth engagement is a relatively new idea that their community can benefit from”, but that it will need “some shepherding from elected officials.” Affordable housing and land preservation are top priority issues, and the town is currently wrestling over whether to re-build a middle school in town or on the outskirts where there is more land for a larger school.  He says they are most likely to consider inviting youth to participate in policy and planning conferences, to participate in official planning processes, and to form youth advisory committees to support boards, commissions and department. Contact: Dave Bashore, 610-688-5600; dbashore@radnor.org

COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS

Campaign for Sustainable Transit (New Orleans, Louisiana): This community advocacy organization in New Orleans is concerned that with “decaying schools, impoverished communities and corrupt officials, young people feel hopeless and not entitled to a better life.”   They are willing to consider youth engagement because it might inspire adults to work harder to resolve differences, and because youth might provide ideas and perspectives that will improve the process.  They are most likely to consider including youth in official planning processes; creating youth seats on boards and commissions; and having youth develop and present policy recommendations to elected officials.  Contact: Jason Neville; 505 945-2835; transit@rox.com

SPECIAL DISTRICTS OR AUTHORITIES

Lower Colorado River Authority (Austin, Texas): The Authority’s Community and Economic Development Director says they have engaged youth in the past, but with mixed results. Nevertheless, she believes youth engagement can help create a positives climate among youth and adults in the community.  The Authority provides education and community services on environmental and economic issues and she says they might consider expanding and improving their work with youth to include having youth participate in professional policy and planning conferences; in official planning processes; as well as advocacy campaigns. Contact:  Amy Minnzer; 512 473-3382; aminzner@lcra.org

OTHER COUNTRIES

Voluntary Foundation for Peace, Democracy, Health and Non-Violence (Central African Republic of Burundi): A representative of this faith-based organization, affiliated with the United Pentecostal Church thinks that engaging youth in planning processes might inspire adults in his country to work harder to resolve differences to make progress towards common goals.  He says his country has many youth and that they are at the mercy of politicians engaged in tribal conflicts.  He thinks youth engagement might help build a more positive climate in the wake of a 12-year civil war.  He thinks his Country’s youth should be included in official planning processes; that youth should develop and present policy recommendations to their National Assembly; and that youth could help conduct public education and media campaigns to promote peace and cooperation.  Contact: Ntashimikiro; +257(820107); ntashimikiro2001@yahoo.fr

Handout #5:
HOW READY AND WILLING ARE YOU TO ENGAGE YOUTH?	

Background: The following results are from a recent youth engagement survey conducted by the California Center for Civic Participation and Youth Development.  Respondents included community and national non-profit organizations (14), state, regional, county and city governments (17) and the remainder (6) either business, education or faith-based organizations.  An additional 15 persons participated in a follow-up focus group.  The results of this non-scientific process are designed to facilitate discussion and to develop tools and shape policies to support youth.

A.  SURVEY RESULTS - HOW READY ARE YOU TO ENGAGE YOUTH?   

(12) We are now successfully engaging youth. We would like to share information about what helped us be successful, and we might be interested in expanding what we are already doing.  
(12) We are currently engaging youth, with mixed results. We might benefit from some ideas and advice about how to improve.
(7) We have talked about, or might consider engaging youth. We might benefit from some clearly stated advice about how best to proceed.
(4) We have never discussed or considered youth engagement. I can’t say how we might respond to this idea.
(0) Our community/organization will be very skeptical about the value of engaging youth. Most adults will see this idea as a nuisance.  Only strong arguments will change their minds.

B.	WHAT LEVEL OF YOUTH PARTICIPATION WILL YOU TRY TO ACHIEVE?  

Handout #6:
WHAT OBSTACLES TO YOUTH ENGAGEMENT MIGHT YOU ENCOUNTER?	

Background: The following results are from a recent youth engagement survey conducted by the California Center for civic participation and youth development.  Respondents included community and national non-profit organizations (14), state, regional, county and city governments (17) and the remainder (6) either business, education or faith-based organizations.  An additional 15 persons participated in a follow-up focus group. The results of this non-scientific process are designed to facilitate discussion and to develop tools and shape policies to support youth.

SURVEY RESULTS - WHAT ARE THE TWO MOST LIKELY OBSTACLES TO EFFECTIVE YOUTH ENGAGEMENT?  

(22) Youth do not get the information, training and support needed to effectively participate in sophisticated policy-making and planning processes (and adults do not always know what is needed).
(16)  Many adults are not convinced it's worth the time to engage youth in planning and policy-making and they will resist these efforts, or patronize youth.
(15) Budgets are tight; therefore it will be difficult to find the necessary staff time and financial resources to support meaningful youth engagement.
(12) Adults tend to encourage “hot shot” youth while over-looking the average or struggling youth whose participation and perspectives are equally important to planning and policy-making.
(11) Transportation to meetings and training associated with youth engagement is difficult for many youth to find or arrange.
(9)  Youth lose their focus because their role is not meaningful or it is not clearly defined by their adult supporters.
(9) Youth are discouraged from missing class or homework for community service because of the current emphasis on academic achievement and standardized tests.
(3)  Youth perspectives are discounted because youth are perceived to be manipulated by adults promoting their own political or policy agenda.

Handout #8
SELECT AND DEFINE ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITY FOR YOUTH	

Youth Engagement Opportunity You Will Pursue:  _____________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Helpful Hints for Defining Opportunity for Youth:

•	Outline the specific, ways (see above) youth will be participating and effecting their community as a result of their participation. Specify what issues they will be addressing, and which adult decision-makers are committed to hearing their ideas. 
•	Cast youth as pioneers or as part of a broader “movement” to get respect for youth and create new opportunities for youth.
•	Make it clear (and make sure you are committed as an adult) that you will not manipulate the process, that it will be truly youth-driven
•	Be clear about time obligation; and if you can find the funds, provide a stipend for youth participants (even if only a small amount, it is a concrete way to honor their time and reinforce the commitments they have made).
•	Prepare, and have youth sign letter of agreement.

Handout #9:
KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS AND ATTITUDES YOUTH NEED TO BE EFFECTIVE	

Background: The following results are from a recent youth engagement survey conducted by the California Center for civic participation and youth development.  Respondents included community and national non-profit organizations (14), state, regional, county and city governments (17) and the remainder (6) either business, education or faith-based organizations.  An additional 15 persons participated in a follow-up focus group. The results of this non-scientific process are designed to facilitate discussion and to develop tools and shape policies to support youth.

SURVEY RESULTS – KNOWLEDGE YOUTH NEED TO BE EFFECTIVE? 

(22)    Fundamental elements of public policy process including the concepts of stakeholders, advocates, administrative and legislative decision-making, and the difference between the private and public sector.
(17)    The process, protocol and nuances of the particular planning or policy-making opportunity they are engaged in, such as a formal board or commission, planning process or informal committee.
(17)    Role and responsibilities of each level of local government, including cities, counties, and schools, as well as a few major issues facing each branch.
(13)    The political “landscape” of the particular public policy issue(s) they are working on, including how that issue is framed, related jargon, policy options, recent or proposed actions and the perspectives of key stakeholders.
(12)    Youth development concepts and ideas and the variety of ways youth can and are engaging in planning and policy-making processes.
(9)    Ideas and concerns of a cross-section of their peers (other youth) so that they can effectively represent their interests during planning and policy-making processes.
(7)    Concept of power, types of power, and its affect on the outcome of planning and policy-making processes.
(4)    Key state or federal laws and regulations as well as key court decisions that affecting the issue(s) they are working, as well as planning and policy-making decisions on a local level, 
(3)    Budget-making processes on all levels of government and the idea that these processes affect policy-making and community planning decisions.

SURVEY RESULTS - SKILLS AND ATTITUDES YOUTH NEED TO BE EFFECTIVE?

(22)  Confident in their abilities and ideas and respected by adults and other youth.
(21)  Able to work effectively with adults as political partners or adversaries, and to respond and communicate appropriately when adults are patronizing, not providing support, or not fulfilling a commitment.
(20)  Able to communicate information and ideas succinctly in a variety of formats and venues. 
(15)  Able to ascertain, understand and acknowledge the key perspectives, and who are the decision-makers relevant to a given issue. 
(11)  Capacity to ascertain the concerns of their peers and community through surveys, focus groups, needs assessments.
(10)  Able to overcome conflicts and challenges to work effectively as a team.
(6)    Able to plan and conduct a meeting, project or campaign.
(5)    Able to assess personal strengths and weaknesses, and how they can continue to develop as an individual.
(5)  Familiar with strategies for getting information about (researching) a new topic or issue. 

Handout #10
CALIFORNIA CENTER TOOL-KIT
Preparing Youth for Participation in Policymaking and Community Planning	

How has this tool-kit been used? The tool-kit outlined on the following pages—with minor variations--has been employed successfully by the California Center For Civic Participation And Youth Development to prepare young people who have participated in the following types of youth engagement opportunities:
•	Youth delegates participating and presenting recommendations at national, statewide and regional planning and policy-making conferences.
•	Youth stakeholders participating at all levels of local and regional planning processes.
•	Youth participating in the process of revising a municipal charter.
•	Youth conducting a year-long local and statewide advocacy campaigns.
•	Youth who presented  recommendations to city councils, county supervisors, and state legislators.

How else might this tool-kit be used?
•	For youth participating in the development of a neighborhood, regional or master plan for their city.
•	For youth who participate on boards, commissions and advisory bodies.

Can I Get this Tool Kit?  Yes the tool kit will be available (FREE) this fall in the form of a handbook and CD Rom to be produced by the California Center and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.  It will also include a step by step guide for getting started, “turn-key” template materials for all correspondence, activities and agenda; supplementary skill-building activities; and a resource guide of organizations and materials supporting other forms and models of youth engagement.  

THE TOOL KIT!

Things that Happen before the Training Session:

1.	Recruitment Documents Circulated
2.	Letter Of Agreement
3.	Permission Slips
4.	YOUTH SURVEY (Multi-purpose Tool) 
5.	Community Leader Interview

Sample One-Day Training Session Agenda: 

1.	Welcome And Introductions
2.	Materials Review  (With End Result Defined)
3.	Human Bingo (Ice-Breaker with Embedded Information)
4.	Keynote Speaker (Sets the Tone; Honors Youth)
5.	Interview-Introduction Activity (Key Skill Building Activity with Emerging Youth Concerns)
6.	IDEAL COMMUNITY ACTIVITY (Multi-Purpose Tool)
7.	Youth Movement Briefing (Puts it all into broader context)
8.	Youth Survey Analysis (Connects youth to peers; Accelerates policy knowledge)
9.	Preliminary Youth Priorities (Creates sense of movement and accomplishment)
10.	POLICY-MAKING 101 (Several Tools)
11.	JARGON (Extremely helpful and confidence-building)
12.	Process and Protocol of Specific Youth Engagement Opportunity
13.	Examination Of Policy Concepts and Proposals (Elastic; Many Ways to Do)
14.	Select Top Youth Priorities (Becomes Portable Youth Platform)
15.	Prepare And Practice Presentations (Acknowledging Opposing View Crucial)

Our Organization:

A nonpartisan, nonprofit organization established in 1972, the California Center is a recognized leader in the movement to engage youth in the political process. Our mission is to encourage and provide opportunity for teens to shape their communities and public policy. The work of the California Center is distinguished by our ability to mobilize adults to support youth.  Each year we involve about 500 volunteers in our programs, including policymakers, teachers, lobbyists, journalists, and other mentors. We enable youth to view themselves as integral parts of society and to understand perspectives different than their own.  

We firmly believe in partnering with other organizations, and leveraging resources to maximize our contributions to California’s youth and their communities. Current partners include the California Adolescent Health Collaborative; Foundation Consortium; Cities, Counties, and Schools Partnership (CCS); Local Government Commission; American Planning Association; Great Valley Center and numerous state agencies, local governments, community organizations and schools. Our work is supported by contributions from many of California’s most respected associations and corporations, as well as the Robert Wood Johnson and California Wellness Foundations.  

Our Programs: 

Our Policy Leadership Series includes three programs: The Policy Leadership Program focuses on youth leadership and policymaking through in-depth research of current issues, such as adolescent health, education, and sustainable communities. Participants study the issues and make formal recommendations to policymakers during hearings, conferences, evaluation processes or televised events. The Youth-Full Government Program is a capacity-building training academy that promotes expanded youth governance opportunities and builds the skills of participating youth and their adult supporters. The Youth VOICES in Community Design program provides resources for adults who want to engage youth in designing sustainable, more active communities. 

Our Community Action Series includes the Youth Action League and Catapult, a leadership program for Central Valley youth. Both programs enable youth to learn about local issues and conduct advocacy or service projects in their communities. The Youth Action League works with over 100 Bay Area middle school youth a semester and includes four conferences annually. Catapult is a partnership with the Modesto-based Great Valley Center and serves 36 youth annually with in-depth leadership training. Participants in 18 counties complete policy-based service learning projects in their hometowns. 

Our Civic Education Series includes the Capitol Focus program (high school youth) and Political Discovery (middle school youth). These programs bring 75-100 students to Sacramento several times each year to learn about state government and a range of current issues. Back home, participants give reports to their communities and classrooms.  Capitol Focus has a 22-year track record and is respected by elected officials from both parties. 

Of Special Note:  
With support from the Sacramento City Unified Schools (via the Carnegie Foundation), the California Center recruited, trained and supported forty teens from ten high schools that led the youth engagement component of the E21 High School Reform process. Attracting national attention, the youth surveyed their peers, studied "expert" opinions, and presented recommendations before audiences of teachers, administrators, parents and other members of the community. The youth engagement in development of the reform proposal was recognized as a major factor in the award of an $8 million dollar grant from the Carnegie Foundation. 

The California Center hosts the prestigious California Roast, an annual fundraising dinner that is one of Sacramento’s most anticipated political events. Almost 800 people attended the 2000 roast of Governor Gray Davis. Previous roastees include State Senator John Burton, then Assembly Speaker Willie Brown, and former Governor Pete Wilson.

Handout
#11

Successful Models for Youth Engagement

Successful Models for Youth Engagement

Ways of Looking at Program Models:
Who Serves as the Primary Host for the Project?  Who are their Partners? 
Examples:  Academic Institution; K-12 School; Local Government; Regional Coalition; State Agency; National, Regional or Community-based Non-Profit; Faith-based.
What is the Primary Goal of the Project?
Examples: Educational; Empowerment-Social Justice; Advocacy; Community Service; Civic Engagement; Youth Development; Youth on Boards or Commissions; Research and Evaluation; Technical Assistance.
What tools and methods do they employ?
Charrettes; Service Learning; Peer to Peer; Mock Hearings; After School; Summits; Training Workshops; GIS Mapping; Mentoring; Surveys; Focus Groups.

>>> Academic Institution-School District Partnerships

YOUTH PLAN (University of California at Berkeley): A service learning partnership between the University of California Planning Department and McClymonds High School in Oakland, California. College students enrolled in the Youth PLAN (Plan, Learn, Act, Now) class of Professor Debra McKoy develop and conduct several planning “charrettes” for high school aged youth over the course of their semester. Planning Department students learn civic engagement skills crucial to good planning while participating high school youth develop confidence and communication skills as well as knowledge about their schools and community.  The semester culminates with a project or report by youth to school or city officials.  Contact:  Professor Debra McKoy.

PINE JOG CENTER MARSHALL FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM (Palm Beach, Florida):  This three semester long fellowship program for high school aged youth begins with a week-long training session on the various growth management issues impacting South Florida, that helps them understand the social, environmental and economical interrelationships that are critical to addressing these issues. These young adults are also trained in an educational process that facilitates the exploration of community issues and provides them with the skills necessary for effective problem solving and civic engagement.  During the second semester the youth leaders complete a research or community service project. To conclude, during the third semester they facilitating middle school age youth in issue investigation and community problem solving. The program is conducted by the Pine Jog Center in partnership with Florida Atlantic University.  Contact:  Phone: 561-686-6600

>>> Fully Evolved Service Learning Program

KIDS CONSORTIUM (Lewiston, Maine): This regional (New England) non-profit educational organization utilizes a service learning approach that integrates active community engagement with academic study. KIDS Consortium (Kids Involved Doing Service) was formed by a former state planner and teacher Marvin Rosenblum in response to an initiative by the State of Maine twenty years ago encouraging communities to plan for the future. The K-12 program has expanded to school districts throughout New England who believe service learning can help meet educational reform objectives including standards-based learning; youth development; character education and school to career objectives.  Contributions by participating students range from community service to policy-making.  In Yarmouth, Maine high school students mapped a dangerous section of road where a pedestrian had been killed, information that led to a $300,000 grant to make improvements. High school students in Bath saved the city $25,000 by conducting an income survey that led to a $3,000,000 grant to improve their sewer system. Contact: Fran Rudoff, 207-784-0956; kap@kidsconsortium.

>>> School-Based Civic Engagement Effort by City to Shape Long-Term Development Plan

CITY OF HONOLULU (Honolulu, Hawaii):  In 1995, the City’s Planning Department used focus groups conducted at 10 middle and high school campuses to gather input to help shape a development plan to guide growth in the primary Urban Center through the year 2020.  Each school was free to structure the sessions the way they felt they would work best.  Some chose to conduct them with youth and parents together, others with youth only.  Participants were asked to visualize Honolulu 25 years in the future: What buildings and natural resources should be preserved?  What land should be developed?  What should neighborhoods look like?  The focus groups addressed issues including transportation, open space, aging citizens, affordable housing, recreation, jobs and quality of life.  The input from each  group was presented to the City and County Planning Commission of Honolulu and it was incorporated into a report that will help shape the final plan.  Contact:  Bob Stanfield; 808 527-6094

>>>  City and Non-Profit Partnerships for Comprehensive Youth Engagement and Advocacy

SEATTLE YOUTH INVOLVEMENT NETWORK (Seattle, Washington):  In 1991, with support from the Boeing Corporation, Seattle KidsPlace a youth lobby for an effective Seattle conducted three Youth Summits attended by more than 500 young people.  A second conference in 1992 for 700 participants gave birth to the Seattle Youth Involvement Network (SYIN), which has become a nonprofit community organization (supported by the Mayor and Boeing) dedicated to “advocating with youth to initiate positive change in the community through volunteer service and the political process.”   In addition to continuing to conduct the annual Summit, SYIN provides training for youth and young professionals, serves as a clearinghouse for youth programs and resources, and works to raise the public consciousness of  the value of youth and their contributions.  In 1993, SYIN collaborated with the Summer Youth Employment Program and Planning Department to train and support youth that surveyed youth to provide input on the development of Seattle’s comprehensive plan for the year 2014.  Youth recommendations included affordable housing near retail and other services, teen centers, extended public transit hours, more bike lanes, preservation of neighborhood views, and multi-cultural respect.  Contact: Jamie Flaxman; 206 325-7922; www.seatleyouth.org

TORONTO YOUNG PEOPLES ADVISORY BOARD (Toronto, Canada):  In 1991, the Kidsviews project mobilized 8000 Toronto area youth grades 1-13, for the purpose of gaining input for developing a master plan for the city.  A cross-section of schools and community groups helped recruit a cross-section of young people including 100 homeless youth.  Activities including a student conference on urban issues; a workshop to build a model city; a survey of neighborhoods, building and places; a role playing game to on the redevelopment of waterfront land; and a classroom-based planning exercise. Based on the success of this effort, the City Council and Healthy City office developed a Young People’s Advisory Board.  This Board consists of a true cross section of youth ages 12-24.  The by-laws of the Board mandated that it include youth in community groups, living in group homes, from the street, from Universities, from middle and high schools; as well as young people working in one or more city departments.   Through advocacy, educational workshops, participation in conferences the youth Board worked on issues including youth unemployment, affordable housing, youth empowerment, and education.  When the City of Toronto was amalgamated in 1998, the Advisory Board became the Youth Cabinet for the Children and Youth Advocates office under the Mayor.  Contact:  Councilor Olivia Chow; 416 392-4044. 

>>> City that Conducted “Asset” Mapping – Installed Voting Youth Members on Several Boards and Commissions as one of core Youth Development Strategy

CITY OF BOISE (Boise, Idaho):  In June of 1999, the Mayor of Boise announced that he wanted to appoint youth as full voting members of city board and commissions.  In September, the City Council passed an ordinance allowing for youth to serve as voting members of the Airport, Arts, Historic Preservation and Public Works Commissions; as well as the Development Impact Advisory Board, Mayor’s Transit Advisory Committee, and Parks Board.  The ordinance also provided for non-voting youth members of the Library Board and Planning and Zoning commission.  The Mayor also recommended that youth be appointed to the Design Review Committee and County-City Housing Authority. The City’s Healthy Community-Healthy Youth Initiative in the Mayors office supports this youth governance effort. This project is using the Search Institute Model to map and create community “assets” that support youth.  Contact:  Office of the Mayor, Boise Idaho

>>> Mature City-County Youth Commission Supported by Line Item in Budget

SAN FRANCISCO YOUTH COMMISSION (San Francisco, California):  Established in 1995 through a proposition approved by the voters.  Its purpose is to advise the Board of Supervisors and Mayor on issues pertaining to children and youth.  It is a youth-run, youth-led organization that consists of 17 members ranging from 12-23 years old.  It is supported by the city and has a line item budget and an Executive Director. Youth Commissioners meet monthly in a variety of venues.  They receive leadership training and conduct an annual youth-led conference.  They form task forces, conduct surveys and  have developed neighborhood-based youth councils to engage greater numbers of youth.  Other projects include development of a “Youth-Line” telephone and on-line resource for youth; helping to plan skateboard parks and advising the Mayor and Supervisors on various issues.  Contact:  Susan Kim, Executive Director; 415 554-6654; youthtemp@ci.st.ca.us

>>>  Regional-County Coalitions or Commissions that Engage Youth

ATLANTA REGIONAL COMMISSION (Atlanta, Georgia): In an effort to incorporate the youth of the region in planning the city's future, the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) -- the official planning agency for the 10-county Atlanta region -- in conjunction with the State YMCA of Georgia (Y Clubs), established a dynamic leadership program in 1998 called the Model Atlanta Regional Commission (MARC). It is designed to involve and inform metro area high-school students about key issues affecting the Atlanta region. In the first half of the program, MARC participants learn about past, present and future regional issues from both community and ARC leaders. The students learn about the challenges of transportation, air quality, human services, land use, water supply and quality, as well as a regional planning agency's structure and function in the region. During the second half of the program, the students explore regional issues further by forming committees and developing possible solutions to challenges. Their final meeting is mock ARC board meetings in which they present and vote on the resolutions they have drafted to create a stronger, healthier Atlanta region. The students then present their resolutions to the official ARC board for consideration. Contact: Call: 404.463.3192 (ARC) or 770.455.9622(YClubs).

SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER AUTHORITY (Las Vegas, Nevada): This Las Vegas area water authority has formed a youth advisory council consisting of one youth representative from each of thirty high schools.   Each year’s advisory council is excused from school for two days to participate in a two-day training conference to learn about water-related issues and decision-making processes from expert speakers and through field trips. In addition they participate in team-building and leadership development workshops. To conclude, the youth council picks one or two issues to address through community services and policy recommendations. Youth council members have made recommendations to the Water Authority’s Board concerning water taste and quality.  Recently they even dove into (pun intended) the controversial debate surrounding transfers of Colorado River water.   Community service projects by the youth include production of a public service announcement on water conservation and presentations to elementary students.  Contact: Hilarie Hicks Robison; 702 258-7149; hilarie.robison@lvvwd.conm 

THE PARTNERSHIP TMA (North Wales, Pennsylvania): This regional Transportation Management Association is a regional coalition of communities and businesses that conduct an annual Livable Communities Camp engaging K-12 students as part of its civic engagement mandate. During the camp, participants learn about neighborhood and municipal processes.  Then, using actual maps from their own neighborhood, they develop a plan for an ideal community.  The program concludes with youth presenting their ideas to a “mock” planning commission composed of members of actual planning commissions, and other adult stakeholders and decision-makers.  Contact: Janine Warnas; 215 699-2733; warnas@ptma-mc.org   

RUTHERFORD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (Murfreesboro, Tennessee):  This city supports an annual program that combines a service learning approach with an APA (American Planners Association) youth education model called “KIDS CITY”. Conducted in partnership with local schools, 3rd graders first partake in a classroom-based planning curriculum over the course of several weeks.  After first focusing on organizing birthdays and field trips, they learn about different types of land use before mapping out and planning their own community.  The project concludes with a two-day event at the local gym, during which high school aged youth who have been studying local government assume the roles of neighbors, developers, planning commissioners and other stakeholders and decision-makers.  Working with the high school youth, the 3rd graders present their plans, negotiate with stakeholders, receive permits (or not) and move forward with their plans.  Adult stakeholder and decision-makers are present to observe the process.  Contact:  Phyllis Fultz; 615 898-7730; jdavis@rutherfordcounty.org.

>>> Youth at Policy Conferences

FOUNDATION CONSORTIUM YOUTH DELEGATES (Sacramento, California):  This consortium of several of California’s most influential Foundations was formed to study and promote best practices for providing services for Children, Youth and their Families. The Consortium provides funds each year to recruit, support and house 20-30 “Youth Delegates” who participate at an annual, statewide conference called Pilots to Policy.  Academics, elected officials, program managers and youth service providers who attend the conference have praised the participation, information and energy provided by the youth.  Youth delegates are drawn from foster homes, juvenile institutions, high schools, as well as neighborhoods and families facing struggling circumstances. Youth delegates participate in an orientations session before the conference to study the results of a peer survey, study jargon, decision-making and issues, and they develop a youth platform based on balanced information they study.  After participating alongside adults in conference sessions, youth develop and present recommendations at the conclusion of the conference.  Youth delegates return to their communities informed, confident and able to contribute to the policy process.  Contact:  James Muldavin; California Center; 916 443-2229; muldavin@californiacenter.org.

>>> National Non-Profit with Planning Charrette Infused with Youth Participation

WALKABLE COMMUNITIES, INC. (High Spring, Florida): The national non-profit organization encourages communities to include teenagers among other stakeholders invited to participate in a five-day planning charrette they offer. This activity is designed to help each community create common visions useful in developing corridors, village centers, or community plans.  Their step by step guide for this comprehensive charrette emphasizes the importance of including youth, who “have insights that adults often lack” and who encourage adults to reach “consensus on issues that can be mired in self interest.”  In addition to including youth in the full length charrette, communities are encouraged to conduct “mini” charrettes for elementary and middle school children who are provided with the opportunity to present their results at the conclusion of the adult’s charrette.  Contact:  386 454-3304; walkable@aol.com  

>>> City that Got Good Ideas From Youth Engaged in Developing Master Plan

CITY OF CLAREMENT (Claremont, California):  With support from the City of Claremont’s Human Services Department, young people conducted research and participated in focus groups leading up to the development of  “Youth Master Plan” for youth. Elementary school participants created visual models of their community using murals, collages, and posters.  Older youth participants helped drive the development of the plan’s top ten goals.  According the director, youth participation helped create two original ideas adopted by the city including a mobile recreation program and the development of small parks near apartment complexes.  In addition, the city’s four high schools participated in the development of a comprehensive teen center.  Contact:  Dick Guthrie; 909 399-5493; dguthrie@ci.claremont.ca.us.
>>> Youth Empowerment And Social Justice
YOUTH FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE PROJECT (Huntington Park California):  A project of Communities for a Better Environment that supports environmental justice organizers aged 13-21 from predominantly Latino communities in Southeast LA.  They just won a campaign to stop the Nuevo Azalea power plant from being built in their community despite the “hype on the recent California Energy crisis”.  They are now engaged in researching oil and energy industries, zoning and land use policies.  They also convene a Youth in Action conference.  Contact:  Yuki Kidokoro; 323 826-9771; yuki@cbecal.org. 
21ST CENTURY YOUTH LEADERSHIP (Selma, Alabama):  This regional non-profit organization has thirty-five chapters in Alabama.  Participating youth, African Americans aged 13-25 work on issues ranging from youth development, as well as economic, racial and environmental justice.   Activities include “Super-Birthday Tuesdays” celebrating 18th Birthdays at Selma High each month.  The organization played a major role in electing Selma’s first Black Mayor in 1995, helped turn around a struggling middle school in a rural area; and won a campaign to reject a major landfill slated for Tuskegee.  Contact:  Malika Sanders; 334 874-0065; youth421c@aol.com.   

CHILDREN FOR A SAFE ENVIRONMENT (Phoenix, Arizona):  This is a multi-cultural community-based organization composed of Native American, Latino, African-American, and Anglo youth.  The organization supports Indigenous and other low-income communities affected by industrial waste contamination.  They are currently working to shut down a medical waste incinerator on the Heelah River by providing residents information about birth defects and health consequences related to dioxins.  Contact:  Keri Johnson; 602 279-5001; children4asafeenviro@prodigy.net
DEPARTMENT OF SPACE AND LAND RECLAMATION (Chicago, Illinois):  This is an autonomous city department “devoted to returning Chicago to those who work. live and play in it.”  The organization serves youth (age 13 and up) and young adults.  Their creative action teams stage imaginative interventions and art shows to promote dialogue about public space, gentrification and racial and economic policies,  They host gatherings and organize protests including bring 500 people to block MTV from conducting a Real World program they though would further gentrify Wicker Park.  Contact: Josh MacPhee:  spaceandland@hotmail.com