Implementing a Social Enterprise Intervention

with Homeless, Street-Living Youths

in Los Angeles

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/sw/article/52/2/103/1909527 by Hong Kong Baptist University user on 17 December 2023
Kristin M. Ferguson

Homeless, street-dwelling youths are an at-risk population who often use survival behaviors to
meet their basic needs. The traditional outreach approach brings services into the streets, yet
does not adequately replace the youths’ high-risk behaviors. Similarly, job training programs
often fail to address the mental health issues that constitute barriers to their productive
employment. Drawing on social development principles, the Social Enterprise Intervention (SEI)
model is proposed as an alternative approach. The SEI seeks the tripartite effect of employment,
service-related, and mental health outcomes for street youths. This article compares existing
intervention models and suggests that through the SEI, homeless youths can acquire vocational
and business skills, clinical mentorship, and linkages to services that otherwise would not be
available to them, given their street-dwelling status.

Key words: homeless youths; mental health; outreach; social enterprise; vocational training

I n Los Angeles, homeless, street-dwelling

youths are a barometer for social progress and
a conspicuous reminder that educational and
employment opportunities are often not a right
to all, but a privilege to some. The Institute for the
Study of Homelessness and Poverty (ISHP) (2004)
estimated that there are at least 10,000 homeless
youths, most of whom reside on the streets of Hol-
lywood. In census tract 2063, an eight-block area
of downtown in which the homeless population is
heavily concentrated, the 2000 census documented
that 529 children and youths younger than 18 were
homeless, up from the 13 reported in 1990. Service
providers within this census tract, however, estimated
that the number of homeless minors is closer to 700
(Dyrness, Spoto, & Thompson, 2004). Needless to
say, most studies seeking to quantify the homeless
youth population resort to head counting in shelters
and in the streets. As a result, many youths may be
overlooked, particularly if they are denied access
to shelters or do not seek services because of their
mistrust of authorities (Kipke, Unger, O’Connor,
Palmer, & LaFrance, 1997).
Myriad individual, familial, and structural fac-
tors precipitate the movement of youths into the
streets to meet their needs. Individual risk factors
include influences such as school difficulties and
dropout, unwanted pregnancies, gang involvement,
and alcohol and substance abuse (Greene, Ennett,
& Ringwalt, 1997; Halcon & Lifson, 2004; Kipke,
O’Connor, Palmer, & MacKenzie, 1995). Problems
with adults in the home are additional influences
related to youth homelessness. Across studies, familial
conflict, alcohol and substance abuse, and parental
strictness, abuse, and neglect have all been cited as
conditions present in the home environments of
runaway youths (Cauce et al., 2000; Kurtz, Jarvis, &
Kurtz, 1991). In addition, other family factors such
as poverty, residential instability, and homelessness are
implicated in the reasons youths run away (Halcon
& Lifson). Lack of affordable housing is another
major issue associated with homelessness in Los
Angeles.The gap between the number of affordable
housing units and demand is currently the largest
on record (Burns, Drayse, Flaming, & Haydamack,
2003).This crisis has had a particularly severe effect
on poor families with children, fueling the growth
in the numbers of homeless women and children
(Dennison, Mantley, Mendizabal, & White, 2001).
Earlier studies reveal that street-dwelling youths
are a heterogeneous group encompassing multiple
subgroups. As evidenced, youth homelessness can

Ferguson
CCC / Implementing
Code: 0037-8046/07 a Social
$3.00 ©2007 Enterprise
National Intervention
Association with Homeless,
of Social Workers Street-Living Youths in Los Angeles 103
be triggered by both short- and long-term crises.
Thus, youths on the streets comprise those who
have substantial street histories as well as those who
are temporarily homeless (Halcon & Lifson, 2004).
They may include runaways from families in which
physical and sexual abuse occurred; throwaways who
are discarded by their families; youths who are drawn
to the streets by gangs, drugs, or alcohol; youths who
live on the streets as part of homeless families; or
even undocumented youths with families in their
countries (Halcon & Lifson; Kipke et al., 1997).
Emancipated foster youths are also disproportion-
ately represented in the homeless youth population.
In Los Angeles and Alameda counties, of the 1,500
youths who exit the foster care system each year,
an estimated 50 percent will be homeless within six
months (Covenant House California, 2004).
Street-living youths are commonly involved in
high-risk survival behaviors to meet their basic
needs (Greene et al., 1997; Halcon & Lifson, 2004;
Kipke et al., 1997). These behaviors may include
prostitution or survival sex (participating in sexual
acts in exchange for money, food, lodging, clothing,
or drugs), pimping, pornography, panhandling, theft,
selling stolen goods, mugging, dealing drugs, or con-
ning others for goods. In an epidemiologic study
of 752 homeless youths and their subsistence and
service use patterns in Hollywood, Kipke and col-
leagues (1997) explored the multiple ways in which
homeless youths financially support themselves.
Among the most common means of subsistence were
panhandling (73 percent), followed by survival sex
or prostitution (46 percent), some form of employ-
ment (34 percent), drug dealing (32 percent), and
stealing money or goods (29 percent).
Street-dwelling youths generally have limited
service engagement outside of frequenting local
drop-in centers for food, clothing, and showers.
Their distrust of adults and institutions, transient
nature, low self-esteem, lack of documentation, and
concern for daily survival are all reasons that can
contribute to their disconnection from services (De
Rosa et al., 1999; ISHP, 2004). Their low service
use combined with high-risk subsistence street
behaviors make street-dwelling youths a popula-
tion at risk of physical and mental illnesses as well
as social deterioration. Common physical illnesses
of homeless youths include respiratory and skin
infections, gastrointestinal problems and malnutri-
tion, HIV/AIDS, and other sexually transmitted
diseases (Bailey, Camlin, & Ennett, 1998; Epstein,
104
1996; Halcon & Lifson, 2004). Homeless youths
are subject to a variety of mental health problems
as well, such as depression, suicidal ideation, trauma,
and substance abuse (Cauce et al., 2000; Halcon &
Lifson; Kipke et al., 1997; Molnar, Shade, Kral, Booth,
& Watters, 1998). Socially, homeless youths are often
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/sw/article/52/2/103/1909527 by Hong Kong Baptist University user on 17 December 2023
unemployed, have limited formal job skills, and have
low literacy and educational levels (Epstein).
Service providers must have a dual understand-
ing of the influences and implications of youth
homelessness as well as the youths’ street subsistence
behaviors so that they may develop programs that
address the push-pull factors that precipitate youths’
movement into the streets and perpetuate their
existence once there. This article examines the
prevalent approach to service delivery with homeless
youths—the outreach model—and its limitations
are identified and discussed. Drawing on principles
of social development, a social enterprise model of
service provision is presented as an alternative to the
outreach model for street-dwelling youths.
The Outreach Model
The traditional method of making agency services
available to this hard-to-reach population is through
the outreach model. In this model, providers ap-
proach homeless youths in nontraditional settings
(that is, the streets, train and bus stations, parks, and
other public spaces) to provide them with basic ser-
vices including food and clothing, counseling, health
care, and referrals to additional services. Proposing
the “continuous relationship” model, Morse and
colleagues (1996) highlighted the importance of
building trust with clients through outreach. With
this strategy, workers acknowledge that homeless
individuals often require intensive assistance to use
and maximize the services and resources offered to
them. Providers also recognize that their ability to
work effectively with such clients depends on hav-
ing established a trusting relationship with them.
Through this open relationship, workers are able
to obtain clients’ cooperation and engage them in
needed social, health, and mental health services.
Outreach programs are generally of two types.
In the mobile outreach approach, providers trans-
port physical, mental health, and social services
and resources into the street environment where
homeless youths congregate and reside.The services
are offered by workers who are already trusted by
the youths (Morse et al., 1996). A second outreach
strategy is the fixed-site approach. Nonresidential
Social Work Volume 52, Number 2 April 2007
drop-in centers and comprehensive resource centers
offer street youths a daily haven in which they can
have access to regular meals, clothing, laundry facili-
ties, and showers. Case managers are also available to
provide them with referrals to other services, such
as health care, HIV/STD counseling and testing,
family planning, substance abuse treatment, mental
health services, educational training, and employ-
ment assistance (Kipke et al., 1997).The role of the
outreach worker in both approaches is to connect
youths with services and resources, provide coun-
seling, and foster an open and trusting relationship
with them.
In reviewing the service use of homeless youths in
Los Angeles, only half of the youths surveyed sought
shelter services; more than three-fourths chose out-
reach services (mobile and fixed) (Kipke et al., 1997).
Using services simultaneously to meet their needs
is common among street-living youths. Faced with
multiple agency services, these youths frequently use
different services concurrently, or arrange services
during the day and evening, depending on agency
hours. In their study of Hollywood homeless youths,
Kipke and colleagues found that 79 percent of the
youths surveyed used drop-in centers, 76 percent
acquired services from a street outreach worker, and
52 percent used residential shelter facilities.
One criticism of the traditional outreach model is
that given the array of services available to homeless
youths, many are able to meet their basic needs but
still maintain their high-risk survival behaviors and
continue to live in the streets. Although the outreach
model aims to mitigate the physical, mental, and
social problems of homeless youths, outreach fails to
address the lure of lucrative profits in the streets for
many of these youths. Focusing on meeting street
youths’ basic needs by alleviating hunger, addiction,
and illness, the outreach model does not offer youths
an alternative to replace their profitable street-sur-
vival activities with other legal, income-generating
activities. Given traditional outreach’s focus on cor-
recting faults or deficits in the youths and on meeting
the youths’ basic needs, this model is characteristic
of the remedial or maintenance-consumption ap-
proach to social work (Midgley, 1997).
Alternative Social Development
Approach to Youth Homelessness
The social development approach, which seeks to
harmonize social and economic processes for vulner-
able populations, is an alternative to the conventional
Ferguson / Implementing a Social Enterprise Intervention with Homeless, Street-Living Youths in Los Angeles
outreach approach of service provision to home-
less youths. According to Midgley (1995), social
development consists of a planned process of social
intervention that aims to promote human well-
being in conjunction with the process of economic
development. Social development strategies seek
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/sw/article/52/2/103/1909527 by Hong Kong Baptist University user on 17 December 2023
to enhance the learning and earning capacities of
individuals through strengthening human capital,
building interpersonal skills, facilitating access to
financial capital, and enhancing social networks
(Midgley, 1997). The underlying philosophy is that
one’s economic well-being influences all dimensions
of personal well-being. According to the World
Health Organization and the International Labour
Organisation, employment provides time structure,
social contact, social context, and social identity—all
of which affect people’s health and mental health sta-
tus (Harnois & Gabriel, 2000). In catering to socially
and economically disenfranchised populations, social
development interventions expand upon remedial
services by incorporating marginalized individuals
into the formal economy (Midgley, 1997).
As one type of social development strategy, social
enterprises can refer to a nonprofit organization, a
socially minded business, or a revenue-generating
venture established to create positive social impact
in the context of a financial bottom line (Virtue
Ventures, 2005). Common social enterprises used
with vulnerable populations include vocational
and social cooperatives, microenterprise assistance
programs, peer lending, and technical training pro-
grams. Drawing on social development values such
as empowerment, equality, social justice, and asset
development, these income-generating activities
aim to alleviate poverty and increase economic op-
portunities (Midgley & Livermore, 2004).Vocational
cooperatives and microenterprise assistance pro-
grams have assisted disenfranchised and low-wealth
people around the world (for example, gang youths,
unemployed women, homeless adults, and recover-
ing addicts) who lack access to income-generating
opportunities in their effort to achieve economic
and social self-sufficiency (Counts, 1996; Midgley &
Livermore;Wood Wetzel, 2004).Vocational training
can also help participants transition from the second-
ary to the formal labor market (Sanders, 2004).The
well-known Grameen Bank and replications have
been used throughout the world with groups of
poor women and men to increase their household
income and participation in the productive economy
(Yunus, 2003).
105

The SEI model consists of a preventive
intervention to provide street-living youths
with vocational training, small business
skills, clinical mentorship, and linkages to
existing health and mental health services.
Using social enterprises as a poverty-reduction
strategy has its criticism as well, and the extant litera-
ture has proffered mixed results on its effectiveness.
Several authors contend that microenterprises can
actually perpetuate poverty by offering low-pay-
ing jobs and maintaining existing power structures
(see Sanders, 2004).This is the case in particular for
women, who often work in small-scale and home-
based businesses that operate on the periphery of
the formal economy, such as child care, tailoring,
and food preparation. A recent study by Sanders
comparing microenterprise assistance programs to
self-employment and wage labor for low-income
women suggests that microenterprise participation
does not appear to assist low-income women in
moving out of poverty any better than involvement
in other forms of employment.
Despite the criticism, there are multiple examples
of using microenterprises and other social enterprise
interventions with marginalized populations to
develop niche markets for particular products or as
portals to the formal economy where these indi-
viduals can learn and hone business and job skills
(Midgley & Livermore, 2004; Wood Wetzel, 2004).
In the case of homeless youths, effective strategies to
move youths off the streets require more than mov-
ing them into low-paying positions (for example,
service-sector and construction industries), as formal
labor-market participation by homeless youths is
often hindered by the challenges inherent in living
on the streets (lack of permanent address, difficulty
maintaining personal hygiene, limited job skills,
and mental health issues, for example) (Cauce et al.,
2000; Gaetz & O’Grady, 2002). Also, given home-
less youths’ use of often lucrative street activities to
meet their basic needs, effective strategies must also
offer them an equally profitable substitute to their
street-survival behaviors.
Cooperatives are suggested as one effective
approach with clients with special needs, such as
homeless youths, who learn the value of recipro-
cal support and teamwork with peers (Midgley &
Livermore, 2004). Because of the current gap in
106
the literature regarding available social enterprise
strategies for homeless youths, I designed an alter-
native approach to working with these youths.The
Social Enterprise Intervention (SEI) model draws on
principles of social development and seeks the tri-
partite impact of employment, service-related, and
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/sw/article/52/2/103/1909527 by Hong Kong Baptist University user on 17 December 2023
health/mental health outcomes for street youths. I
propose that the social enterprise approach is relevant
to street-living youths and can be particularly useful
when implemented in conjunction with supportive
mentoring and engagement with health and mental
health services.
Social Enterprise Intervention Model
The SEI model consists of a preventive interven-
tion to provide street-living youths with vocational
training, small business skills, clinical mentorship,
and linkages to existing health and mental health
services that otherwise would not be available to
them because of their street-dwelling status. The
target population is optimally street-living youths
with limited engagement in existing services, who
consist largely of unidentified cases for traditional
service providers. The intervention is designed to
prevent the youths’ disengagement with existing
services, delinquency, substance use, participation in
high-risk behaviors, and development of new and
exacerbation of existing health and mental health
problems.The SEI serves as a portal into the formal
economy by training homeless youths in market-
based skills and providing a supportive environment
in which to hone them. Similarly, the SEI serves as a
portal to existing mental health services for youths
by providing them with referrals, follow-up, and sup-
portive mentorship from trained clinical mentors. A
logic model of the SEI is depicted in Figure 1.
The SEI model is designed to equip youths with
vocational skills—Photoshop training and graphic
design for apparel—along with marketing, budget-
ing, and accounting skills to facilitate their involve-
ment in a vocational cooperative. Graphic design for
apparel was selected as an appropriate and marketable
skill for these youths following interviews with
the director and staff of the host agency. Given the
agency’s arts-based approach, their recent donation
of computers, and the established fashion industry in
Los Angeles, staff identified graphic design and Pho-
toshop as pertinent training to increase the youths’
employability. Initial focus groups with interested
youths at the drop-in center helped determine the
specific types of apparel (beanies, or wool caps) and
Social Work Volume 52, Number 2 April 2007
 Figure 1: Logic Model for the Social Enterprise Intervention Model
Population & Theory &
Environment Assumptions Intervention Outcomes

Target Population Concept of Problem Components of SEI Job-Related Outcomes

• Youths (ages 18–24) Homeless, street youths are an at-risk
• Homeless, street-dwelling population for physical illness, mental
• Histories of trauma, physical illness, and social deterioration.
abuse, sexual abuse, self-harm Traditional outreach model brings
basic services into streets. Drop-in
• High risk of HIV/AIDS, STDs, substance
centers address basic human needs
abuse, unplanned pregnancies, mental illness
of youths. Street-dwelling youths
• Limited engagement in services (drop-in,
employ high-risk survival behaviors
outreach only)
to meet basic needs in the street
• Service-aversive environment. There is a lack of job
• Unidentified cases for traditional service
substitution programs that equip
providers
youths with vocational skills, replace
street activity with income-generating
activity, and provide service linkages
Environmental Context to local resources.
• Poverty
• Lack of affordable housing
• Low educational attainment Concept of Intervention
• Unemployment The Social Enterprise Intervention
Model (SEI) consists of vocational
• Lack of documentation
training and supportive mentorship as
• Issues around sexual orientation
a strategy for increasing economic op-
• Access to drugs
portunities and improving the mental
• Limited shelter space health of street youths. The SEI
• Abuse and exploitation serves as a dual portal to the formal
• Emancipation from foster care economy and to existing health/men-
tal health services. The SEI seeks to
train youths in vocational skills and
Environmental Resources
to treat them for existing health/
• Federal, state, county funding
mental health conditions to reduce
• Private foundations the likelihood of them moving from
• Local homeless youth organizations situations of high risk to manifest
• Human capital of youth mental health conditions.
• Local universities (social work and business
students)
A. Outreach, Engagement, and
Assessment
B. Job Skills Component
• Vocational skills/mentoring
• Small business skills
• Management skills
• Budgeting skills
C. Service Linkage
• Assessment
• Prioritizing issues
• Connection with resources
Key Mechanisms of Influence
• Engage youths in industry
• Substitute street-based
activity with market-based
activity
• Engage street-dwelling
youths in peer cooperative
• Vocational instruction
• Adult mentoring
• Engage youths in health and
mental health services
• Increased employment
• Increased income
• Increased savings
• Enhanced job skills
• Enhanced job responsibility
• Expanded social and labor networks
Service-Related Outcomes
• Increased service utilization
• Increased housing stability
• Increased access to traditional service
providers and mentors
• Expanded reach of services to street-
dwelling youths
• Increased connection of street-dwelling
youths with health and mental health
services
Health/Mental Health Outcomes
• Increased self-esteem/self-confidence
• Increased motivation
• Improved quality of life
• Improved relationships with family
and friends
• Reduced physical health symptoms
• Decreased high-risk behaviors
• Improved mental health status

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/sw/article/52/2/103/1909527 by Hong Kong Baptist University user on 17 December 2023
application procedure (embroidery of logos) used.
In replicating the SEI in other agencies and cities,
staff interviews, focus groups with youths, and a lo-
cal market analysis are useful strategies to select the
most appropriate training for youths. A host agency
with staff members who have been involved in the
inception of the model is also fundamental to the
model’s success.
Combining vocational skills and service linkage
for street-dwelling youths, the SEI model is distinct
from traditional street outreach services and job-skills
training programs. Outreach efforts succeed in trans-
porting basic services (that is, food and clothing) to
the street milieu, yet to date are deficient in provid-
ing youths with market-based, income-generating
alternatives to their street activities. Homeless youth
shelters and drop-in centers, conversely, frequently
offer job-skills training programs within their instal-
lations. However, given street-dwelling youths’ lack
of engagement with agency-based services, many are
unlikely to benefit from these services. Also, many
traditional job-training programs, such as Job Corps,
do not have a mental health component, and thus
fail to address many of the health and mental health
issues that constitute barriers to homeless youths’
productive employment.
As an alternative to existing services, the SEI
differs from these traditional programs in two re-
gards. First, the SEI aims to build upon the street
youths’ existing entrepreneurial skills and strengths
by teaching vocational and business development
skills so that this population can pursue market-
based employment as a substitute for their existing
street-based, income-generating activities. Second,
the SEI makes comprehensive health and mental
health services from existing agencies available to
the youths through mentors who are trained in
clinical assessment.
SEI Model Phases and Methods
From 2005 to 2006, I conducted a 12-month pilot
study of the SEI with 28 street-living young adults
(ages 18 to 24) at a drop-in center for homeless
youths in Los Angeles. Seed funding was obtained
from a social work endowment for innovative re-
search. At the time this article was written, baseline
data on 16 SEI participants and 12 control-group
youths had been collected, and four focus group
discussions had been conducted with the SEI youths.
Data comparing SEI and control group participants’
outcomes will be reported in a separate article. For
108
the SEI group (N = 16), the participants were largely
male (N = 13). The youths’ ethnicities and racial
makeup were African American (N = 6), Hispanic
(N = 4), Caucasian (N = 3), mixed race (N = 2),
and Asian (N = 1).The mean age of the youths was
21.4 years. On average, participants had a high school
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/sw/article/52/2/103/1909527 by Hong Kong Baptist University user on 17 December 2023
diploma or GED, had been living on the streets for
24.8 months, and were receiving services from one
agency in addition to the host drop-in center.
The SEI model consists of five phases, which are
detailed in Table 1. Youths were selected on the basis
of two screening criteria:They had used the agency
drop-in center two or more times a week for the
month before implementing the SEI project and
they verbally committed to attending the program
to receive vocational training for four months and
business training for three months. Existing agency
screening criteria (that is, youths may not use drugs,
steal, or fight on premises) were also considered to
ensure the safety of the youths, mentors, and instruc-
tors. To address issues of attrition, agency staff and
mentors replaced youths who dropped out of the
program with other youths selected under the same
criteria. To obtain the full benefit of the vocational
skills training, youths who dropped out of the pro-
gram were only replaced during the first month of
the vocational training course.Youths’ attendance in
the training course was rewarded monthly with $25
gift cards to local stores and bus tokens to eliminate
possible transportation barriers. Participants who
successfully completed the four-month vocational
seminar and three-month small business seminar also
had the incentive of being eligible to participate in
the vocational cooperative, which was formed after
completion of the skills-training phases.
The mental health component of the SEI was
woven throughout the model’s five phases. Once
the youths committed to the SEI, mentors tracked
them over the course of the project by scheduling
regular check-in meetings with them outside of class
to address their identified health or mental health
needs, initiate and monitor referrals, and increase
participant retention. Mentors used a goal-contract-
ing form with the youths during the first month
of class participation to identify and prioritize the
youths’ areas of focus. The SEI youths took own-
ership of their identified focus areas and worked
with the project mentors to locate needed services.
Various harm-reduction strategies (for example, safe
sex practices, health education, and counseling and
substance abuse referrals) were used by the mentors
Social Work Volume 52, Number 2 April 2007
 Table 1: Phases of the Social Enterprise Intervention Model
Phase Timeframe Characteristics Objectives
I. Clinical mentor 1 month Mentors are trained in clinical assessment, motivational interviewing, youth engage- • Mentors acquire clinical skills needed to develop trust
training ment, street outreach, harm-reduction strategies, and data-collection techniques. with youths, engage them in SEI, assess health and mental
health needs, and track them throughout SEI.
II. Outreach, engage- 1 month Mentors participate in street outreach in agency drop-in center and public spaces with a • Mentors develop trust with youths.
ment, and assessment high prevalence of street-dwelling youths. Mentors track interested youths by targeting • Mentors explain SEI to youths.
them over multiple visits and incorporating them in pre-class activities (for example, • Mentors engage youths in SEI.
drawing, painting on apparel, collages). • Mentors track interested youths.
III. Vocational skill 4 months Vocational skill classes are taught by a qualified instructor to a small group of street-liv- • Youths learn vocational skills needed to form a vocational
acquisition ing youths. Mentors assist the instructor with classes, assess youths’ health and mental cooperative.
health needs, and connect them with appropriate resources. Mentors meet with youths • Mentors prioritize health and mental health needs with
at pre-determined times to prioritize goals, develop service plans, and follow up on youths and refer to appropriate services.
referrals. • Mentors track youths throughout class.
IV. Small business 3 months Youths participate in a seminar on small-business skills (for example, accounting, • Youths learn small business skills for cooperative
skill acquisition budgeting, saving, marketing, management, communication skills, etc.). MBA students formation.
from a local university assist youths in conducting a feasibility analysis of the coopera- • Youths develop a business plan.
tive, and in exploring product marketability. Mentors continue to work with youths on • Youths identify local market for target product(s).
health and mental health needs. • Mentors address youths’ health and mental health needs
and track progress.
V. Cooperative 6–12 A vocational cooperative is established in the host social services agency for youths to • Youths have increased opportunities for applying voca-
formation and months develop and market their target product(s). Youths design Web site to showcase their tional and small-business skills.
implementation artwork and apparel. Youths participate in local flea markets to sell apparel. Mentors • Youth cooperative works toward self-sufficiency with sales
continue to address youths’ health and mental health needs and provide guidance to the from target product(s).
cooperative throughout the final phase. • Mentors provide guidance to youths.

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/sw/article/52/2/103/1909527 by Hong Kong Baptist University user on 17 December 2023
to address the youths’ high-risk behaviors. Respect-
ing client confidentiality, mentors met regularly with
agency clinical staff when appropriate to discuss
clients’ progress and to gather information on suit-
able referrals.To facilitate ongoing communication
with the SEI youths, mentors used e-mail and the
agency note-board to send participants reminders
about meetings and to check in with them when
they had missed classes.
The host agency sponsored the project and pro-
vided space, computers, and clinical and case-man-
agement staff support.The graphic design instructor
was recruited through a local arts’ institute and hired
by the principal investigator with grant funding.Two
project mentors, an MSW and a PhD student, and
two research assistants were recruited through the
local university from the schools of social work and
education and trained by the principal investigator.
Additional collaborators with the project included
faculty and MBA students from the business school
at a local university. Three MBA students worked
with participants on developing a feasibility analysis
of the vocational cooperative. Among other items,
the feasibility analysis identifies a market for the
youths’ products, cooperative marketing strategies,
capitalization needs of the cooperative, cooperative
organizational structure, and cooperative members’
roles and responsibilities. The agency executive
director and I are currently exploring additional
funding opportunities from the National Institute
of Mental Health and local foundations. In the sub-
sequent phase of the project, the host agency seeks
to institutionalize the SEI model as its vocational
program and will hire a graphic design instructor,
teaching aide, and MSW case manager or project
coordinator to implement the program.
Global and Domestic Case Examples
of Social Enterprise Interventions
with Homeless Youths
At present, social service agencies in the developing
and developed world have designed innovative in-
terventions to address youth homelessness under the
social enterprise framework. Mexico currently uses
a model of triangular solidarity, which brings together
different sectors (nongovernmental organizations
[NGOs], public institutions, and corporations) to
address the street youth phenomenon. In this model,
nonprofit organizations (that is, Casa Alianza and
related NGOs) assist homeless youths in exiting
the street milieu and receiving the necessary health,
110
mental health, and social services to lead self-suf-
ficient lives off of the streets.The public sector (that
is, the Ministry of Education) then provides these
youths with vocational training and certification
programs to teach them trade skills and increase
their employability. Finally, local and national cor-
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/sw/article/52/2/103/1909527 by Hong Kong Baptist University user on 17 December 2023
porations agree to hire youths who have completed
the training program (Covenant House, 2001).The
SEI model is similar to the model of triangular
solidarity in that both seek to support street-living
youths with mental health services and equip them
with market-based vocational skills to facilitate their
entry into the productive economy.
In the United States, social enterprises provide
at-risk, gang-involved, and homeless youths with
opportunities to become self-sufficient by learning
and applying labor skills in the formal economy
and by receiving the mental health support needed
to reintegrate into society. Homeboy Industries is
a nonprofit organization in Los Angeles that assists
at-risk and former gang youths in developing social
and vocational skills to facilitate their re-entry into
society and the productive economy. By combining
counseling, case management, education, vocational
training, and job placement, former gang youths
become contributing members in their families,
communities, and society at large (Homeboy Indus-
tries, 2005). Ashbury Images (AI) in San Francisco
is another social enterprise that specifically targets
individuals in recovery from homelessness and
substance abuse for employment. Working in co-
ordination with AI’s nonprofit parent organization,
Golden Gate Community Inc., vocational training
in embroidery and silk-screening, together with
mental health workshops in self-esteem, is offered
to individuals in recovery. Graduates are currently
employed in a variety of industries, including mul-
timedia, retail, law enforcement, and youth counsel-
ing (Roberts Enterprise Development Fund, 2005).
The dual focus of productive employment and
mental health support of both Homeboy Industries
and AI is consistent with the SEI model.
Conclusions
The SEI model consists of a preventive intervention
that aims to equip street-dwelling youths with the
necessary vocational training, small business skills,
mentorship, and health and mental health services
to facilitate their involvement in income-generating
activities as a replacement for their street behaviors.
The proposed model draws on principles of social
Social Work Volume 52, Number 2 April 2007
development and is supported by evidence of ex-
isting social enterprises that have been successful
in promoting economic and social self-sufficiency
among vulnerable populations.
Application of the SEI model to street-dwelling
youths in the United States is unique in two ways.
First, income-generation programs have limited
use in services provided to homeless youths in the
United States. Nonetheless, multiple case examples
exist in the literature illustrating their use with
homeless youths in other countries as well as with
at-risk youths in the United States. However, in
cases in which the SEI model has been successfully
used with vulnerable populations to increase their
learning and earning capacities, evaluation data
are lacking that indicate the model’s impact on
the participants’ health, mental health, and social
outcomes. Second, recognizing homeless youths’
survival behaviors as their primary means of eco-
nomic subsistence, the traditional outreach model
is limited in that it fails to offer a replacement to
these activities. In contrast, the SEI equips youths
with vocational and business skills to facilitate their
involvement in the economy.
Future outcomes research is needed to identify
and evaluate existing social enterprise initiatives
with homeless youths to determine whether in-
corporating them in market-based activities (as a
substitute for their street-based activities) and link-
ing them to available health and social services can
positively influence their health, mental health, social
and economic well-being. One area that warrants
further empirical attention concerns the nature
of the relationship between street youths’ survival
skills and marketable job skills. It remains unclear
in the extant literature whether street survival skills
and marketable job skills are mutually exclusive for
the youths. Conversely, there may be an inverse
relationship between the two.That is, as the youths
learn competitive job skills and have opportunities
to apply them and be remunerated for such skills in
the productive economy, do they display fewer illicit
and self-destructive street behaviors that could jeop-
ardize their participation in the formal economy? To
answer this and similar research questions, random-
ized controlled trials are needed to better understand
the efficacy and effectiveness of social enterprise
interventions by comparing health, mental health,
social, and labor outcomes among homeless youths
in SEI programs, those in traditional vocational
training programs, and those in usual care.
Ferguson / Implementing a Social Enterprise Intervention with Homeless, Street-Living Youths in Los Angeles
At present, I am conducting a pilot feasibility study
of the SEI model with a treatment and comparison
group of homeless youths. In addition to assessing
the SEI’s effect on various client outcomes, my
current research aims to test whether street-living
youths are less likely to rely on street survival skills
Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/sw/article/52/2/103/1909527 by Hong Kong Baptist University user on 17 December 2023
in the underground economy the more they develop
marketable job skills and become involved in the
formal economy. Outcomes data from this study
will be reported in subsequent papers. Meanwhile,
the SEI model and its implementation described
here can serve as a guide for practitioners and re-
searchers interested in implementing and evaluating
alternative service delivery methods for street-living
youths.
References
Bailey, S. L., Camlin, C. S., & Ennett, S. T. (1998). Substance
use and risky sexual behavior among homeless
and runaway youth. Journal of Adolescent Health, 23,
378–388.
Burns, P., Drayse, M., Flaming, D., & Haydamack, B. (2003,
July). Prisoners of hope:Welfare to work in Los Angeles.
Los Angeles: Economic Roundtable.
Cauce, A. M., Paradise, M., Ginzler, J. A., Embry, L., Mor-
gan, C. J., Lohr,Y., & Theofelis, J. (2000). The charac-
teristics and mental health of homeless adolescents:
Age and gender differences. Journal of Emotional and
Behavioral Disorders, 8, 230–239.
Counts, A. (1996). Give us credit. New York: Times Books.
Covenant House. (2001). World economic forum in Mexico to
include a voice for street children. Retrieved September
20, 2003, from http://www.casa-alianza.org
Covenant House California. (2004). Statistics. Retrieved
May 25, 2005, from http://www.covenanthouseca.
org
Dennison, B., Mantley, R., Mendizabal, A., & White, P.
(2001, October). Downtown women’s needs assessment.
Los Angeles: Downtown Women’s Coalition.
De Rosa, C. J., Montgomery, S. B., Kipke, M. D., Iverson,
E., Ma, J. L., & Unger, J. B. (1999). Service utilization
among homeless and runaway youth in Los Angeles,
California: Rates and reasons. Journal of Adolescent
Health, 24, 449–458.
Dyrness, G. R., Spoto, P., & Thompson, M. (2004). Crisis
on the streets: Homeless women and children in Los An-
geles. Los Angeles: University of Southern California
Center for Religion and Civic Culture.
Esptein, I. (1996). Educating street children: Some cross-
cultural perspectives. Comparative Education, 32,
289–302.
Gaetz, S., & O’Grady, B. (2002). Making money: Explor-
ing the economy of young homeless workers. Work,
Employment & Society, 16, 433–456.
Greene, J. M., Ennett, S. T., & Ringwalt, C. L. (1997).
Substance use among runaway and homeless youth
in three national samples. American Journal of Public
Health, 87, 229–235.
Halcon, L. L., & Lifson, A. R. (2004). Prevalence and pre-
dictors of sexual risks among homeless youth. Journal
of Youth and Adolescence, 33, 71–80.
Harnois, G., & Gabriel, P. (2000). Mental health and work:
Impact, issues and good practices. World Health Organi-
zation and International Labor Organization. Geneva:
World Health Organization.
111
Homeboy Industries. (2005). Welcome to Homeboy Industries.
Retrieved on April 19, 2006, from http://www.
homeboy-industries.org/index.php
Institute for the Study of Homelessness and Poverty.
(2004). Homelessness in Los Angeles. Just the facts. Los
Angeles: Author.
Kipke, M. D., O’Connor, S., Palmer, R. F., & MacKenzie,
R. G. (1995). Street youth in Los Angeles: Profile
of a group at high risk for HIV. Archives of Pediatric

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/sw/article/52/2/103/1909527 by Hong Kong Baptist University user on 17 December 2023
Adolescent Medicine, 14, 289–294.
Kipke, M. D., Unger, J. B., O’Connor, S., Palmer, R. F., &
LaFrance, S. R. (1997). Street youth, their peer group
affiliation and differences according to residential
status, subsistence patterns, and use of services. Adoles-
cence, 32, 655–669.
Kurtz, P. D., Jarvis, S.V., & Kurtz, G. L. (1991). Problems
of homeless youths: Empirical findings and human
services issues. Social Work, 36, 309–314.
Midgley, J. (1995). Social development.The developmental
perspective in social welfare. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Midgley, J. (1997). Social work and international social
development: Promoting a developmental perspective
in the profession. In M. C. Hokenstad and J. Midgley
(Eds.), Issues in international social work. Global chal-
lenges for a new century (pp. 11–26). Washington, DC:
NASW Press.
Midgley, J., & Livermore, M. (2004). Social development:
Lessons from the global south. In M.C. Hokenstad
& J. Midgley, J. (Eds.), Lessons from abroad: Adapting
international social welfare innovations (pp. 117–135).
Washington, DC: NASW Press.
Molnar, B. E., Shade, S. B., Kral, A. H., Booth, R. E., &
Watters, J. K. (1998). Suicidal behavior and sexual/
physical abuse among street youth. Child Abuse &
Neglect, 22, 213–222.
Morse, G. A., Calsyn, R. J., Miller, J., Rosenberg, P., Gil-
liland, J., & West, L. (1996). Outreach to homeless
mentally ill people: Conceptual and clinical consider-
ations. Community Mental Health Journal, 32, 261–274.
Roberts Enterprise Development Fund. (2005). Links. A
growing list of social entrepreneurs. Retrieved on May 26,
2005, from http://www.redf.org/links-se.htm
Sanders, C. (2004). Employment options for low-income
women: Microenterprise versus the labor market.
Social Work Research, 28, 83–92.
Virtue Ventures. (2005). What is a social enterprise? Re-
trieved on March 21, 2005, from http://www.
virtueventures.com/se.asp?expand=1
Wood Wetzel, J. (2004). Mental health lessons from abroad.
In M.C. Hokenstad & J. Midgley (Eds.), Lessons from
abroad: Adapting international social welfare innovations
(pp. 93–116). Washington, DC: NASW Press.
Yunus, M. (2003). Banker to the poor: Micro-lending and the
battle against world poverty. New York: Public Affairs,
Perseus Books Group.

Kristin M. Ferguson, PhD, is assistant professor, University

of Southern California School of Social Work, 669 West 34th
Street, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0411; e-mail: kmfergus@
usc.edu.
Original manuscript received June 14, 2005
Final revision received July 26, 2006
Accepted August 8, 2006

112 Social Work Volume 52, Number 2 April 2007