Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Good Life Guidebook For Impact Measurement
Good Life Guidebook For Impact Measurement
Good Life Guidebook For Impact Measurement
Guidebook
For Impact Measurement
Guidebook
For Impact Measurement
v 1.0
intrODUctiOn
research
Ravi Hanumara Robert Taunton Seth Olsen
White PaPers
Ravi Hanumara Rachel Goldman
Partners
Better Tomorrows Project Access Life Steps
sPecial thanks
John ODonnell Caleb Roope Geoffery Brown Steve White Jon Webb William Hirsch Jim Silverwood John Huskey Aaron Mandel Gary Downs David Reznick Suzie Hsieh
Listed above are some of our most notable recent accomplishments. This information is compiled by Center for the Greater Good 430 East State Street Eagle, ID 83616 See contact page for full disclaimer. All rights reserved 2012 Center for the Greater Good
contents.
enD P.94
SECTIOn 1
OutcOme evaluatiOns
OUtcOme evalUatiOns criteria
The charts in this section describe the thought process behind Center for the Greater Goods Outcome Evaluations Criteria. The first step toward measuring outcomes is to identify a broad problem. Broad problems (such as Economic Instability, Poor Education, or Deteriorating Health) typically have multiple causes and require a variety of interventions. Our process breaks each broad problem into sub-concerns and identifies a positive outcome for participants. Through research and strategic partnerships, Center for the Greater Good has identified one or more interventions for each sub-concern. We intend to use the identified interventions to communicate with social service providers the best methods for impacting residents in a meaningful and measurable fashion. Measurement indicators provide insight on the progress of interventions and feedback on how to move forward.
methODOlOGy
Our process behind developing our Outcomes Evaluations Criteria began with countless hours of research and numerous interviews with housing developers, social service providers, onsite resident coordinators and other field experts. We eventually identified four main concerns which act as barriers to ending transgenerational poverty. After identifying the concerns, we created an information matrix of sub-concerns cross-referenced with our database of articles; this allowed us to identify indicators which have been linked to the concerns. Through a year long collaboration with leading national and regional non-profit social service providers we have identified interventions to address each of the indicators we set out to study.
YOUR COMMUnITYS
ecOnOmic staBilitY
Concerns associated with the individual economic household stability effect the community including youth, adults and seniors.
Current Conditions
Service Intervention
Crisis prevention; partnering with local stores for employment; food banks; relocation counseling; referrals to agencies.
The number of unemployed persons increased 60% from 2008-2009. Less affluent Adults households are more likely to have unmet needs, less stable employment, and less Seniors comprehensive medical coverage. Three Community quarters of all households with incomes below the poverty line spend over 50% of their Primary Outcome incomes on rent, eliminating funds for fresh food, utilities, medical care or childcare. About Families and individuals 26% of renters spent more than half of their stabilized/successfully pre-tax incomes on rent and utilities in 2009. housed.
Current Conditions
Service Intervention
Credit counseling; financial literacy and family savings courses; home ownership educational courses.
Low-income residents saddled with low savings, poor credit and lacking the understanding of the pathway to home ownership.
Primary Outcome
Increased income, improved credit scores, readiness for home purchase through increased savings and contributions to IRAs.
Current Conditions
Service Intervention
Van pools or vouchers for tickets on public transit.
Low-income residents who rely on public transportation lack access to jobs, educational opportunities and needed services, if transportation is not available or has limited service.
Primary Outcome
Increased income and educational achievement.
Current Conditions
Service Intervention
Jobs skills and job readiness training; ESL courses; financial literacy and family savings courses; income supplements to further education; child care; partnerships with local businesses to hire graduates of computer training courses.
Adult outcomes are far worse for poor children than non-poverty children. The likelihood of not completing high school is three times greater. The likelihood of having a non-marital birth is 3 times greater. A third of poor children spend half their early adult years in poverty. Only a third of poor boys go on to have consistent employment in early adulthood.
Primary Outcome
Removes barriers to continuing education. Improved job skills and job readiness. Increased employment and average wage and income. Improved English test scores. Child care allows single parents to be employed and gain education. Increased educational level correlates to higher standard of living, improved lifestyle and higher self-esteem.
Current Conditions
Service Intervention
Emergency assistance; eviction prevention counseling; resident advocacy and counseling; temporary cash assistance; mediation services for tenants in housing; referrals to other support services; supportive housing; partner with local stores and agencies to provide provisions and employment.
Homelessness is a condition that erodes a familys sense of security, privacy, stability, control and emotional and physical health. Homelessness increased 3% from 2008-2009 and homeless families increased 4% (highest of all subpopulations). About one quarter to one third of homeless individuals have serious mental illness. Homeless children suffer from malnutrition, lead poisoning and other serious medical conditions. 30% of parents report chronic medical issues.
Primary Outcome
Lower eviction rate and family stabilization. Reduced frequency of unwanted moves disrupting educational instruction and academic performance.
three quarters of all impoverished households spend over 50% of their incomes on rent.
-national Alliance to End Homelessness
l i
ack of shelter is one of the five elements that define poverty. The classification of severe burden is defined as spending over 50% of ones income on shelter. A variety of factors contribute to the disproportionate cost of housing. Personal choice might be a component, but do public policies also need to be re-examined? n 1937, the national Housing Act created the public housing program. It was designed to serve low-income families. The Brooke Amendment to the 1968 Housing and Urban Development Act established the rent threshold of 25
percent of family income. The threshold has been raised to 30 percent, which is the rent standard for most government housing programs today. ndividuals on the lowest rungs of the income ladder suffer the most from high housing costs. Whereas most Americans can plan for the unexpected, the future, and take vacations, those in poverty are often unable to enjoy a high quality of life after paying housing expenses. Because of this, households at the bottom rungs of income ladder are more likely to be severely housing cost-burdened. Michael Stone coined
the term shelter poor in the late 1980s for households that cannot meet their needs for food, clothing, medical care and transportation at an adequate level after paying for housing. isproportionate housing costs mainly contribute to suppressing the success potential of lowincome individuals. The consequences to a high cost of living shows in the health, happiness, education level and relationships of the inflicted individual. Without adequate housing, children of low-income individuals are doomed to follow in their parents footsteps.
The national poverty rate is the highest it has been for the last 11 years.
-2010 US Census
15
Financial Freedom
Many low-income communities have social services provided on site. However, most of these services do not reach full effectiveness as they are often underfunded and lack real outcome measurements. These services are sustained mainly on periodic grants, which means services are typically the first thing to go when cash flow becomes tight. The Continuum Fund speaks to many of the problems that both service providers and non-profits encounter. The fund seeks to provide a social services budget of $80,000 per 100 units per year; funding one Community Coordinator full time per 100 Units. By including the funding for on-site services and Community Coordinators in our model we are able to supply reliable cash flow for the organizations we work with; allowing them to serve the community rather then search for grant funding. With reliable funding Community Coordinators are able to: Reach out and collaborate with other non-profits in the surrounding areas to bring in even more services. Partner with small businesses and entrepreneurs to provide job opportunities as well as financial education to residents. Leverage technology to incorporate resident and investor feedback. Leverage technology to track and measure outcomes.
liFe skills
The issues we all deal with in life are diverse, and so to are the skills we need to navigate through our path everyday. Life skills are a key component to an individuals success in life; promoting a greater sense of competence, usefulness, power, and sense of belonging. Ranging from practical skills to communication, the broad scope of life skill programs offered is truly dependent on the specifics of each community. It is here that we support the essential elements true to everyones lives: decision making and values clarification.
entrePreneUrshiP
Center for Greater Good recognizes the research and policy work of the Kauffman Foundation on the subject of entrepreneurship. The foundations efforts to advance education, training and grants to support this subject are invaluable. Education prepares one to become an entrepreneur, and the economic system gives a person the opportunity to be one. Entrepreneurship not only breaks individuals out of the cycle of poverty, but also promotes job creation, and solves many economic and social services concerns. We support entrepreneurial opportunity and foster potential through education and training programs.
YOUR COMMUnITYS
childhOOd educatiOn
Educated children someday grow into educated adults. The strongest strategy for poverty alleviation is to end it before it begins; before it becomes a cycle.
Current Conditions
Service Intervention
Early childhood education; after-school programs and learning centers; computer training; resident scholarships; student employment in the community.
A 1995 longitudinal study revealed that poor children who did not attend afterschool programs are six times more likely to drop out of high school, three times more likely to be suspended, twice as likely to be arrested by senior year, and are 75% more likely to have tried smoking or drugs by senior year. A 2011 study found that one in six students not reading proficiently in third grade dropped out; a rate four times that of proficient readers. 22% of children that lived in poverty do not graduate versus 6% that have never been poor.
Primary Outcome
Reduced grade retention rate, improved rate of high school completion, better scholastic placement and more years of completed education or vocational training. Lower rates of suspension, juvenile arrest, and violent arrests. Improved physical and psychological health.
23
Current Conditions
Service Intervention
Relocation counseling; financial literacy and family savings courses.
Low-income children can be trapped in noisy and over-crowded home environment not appropriate for academic performance.
Primary Outcome
Improved study environment and academic performance.
Current Conditions
Service Intervention
Eviction prevention counseling; resident advocacy and counseling; temporary cash assistance; mediation services for tenants in housing court.
The lower the family income, the more likely the family is to move. This contributes to poor achievement, grade retention and dropout rates through disruption of academic performance. Mobile children must change teachers, curricula and friends; more likely to receive poor assessments and incomplete school records. Children suffer from anxiety and depression, making it difficult to keep friends.
Primary Outcome
High rate of eviction prevention; family stabilization. Reduced frequency of unwanted moves. Improved academic achievement. Improved physical and psychological health.
children from low-income families are raised in environments that do not promote their cognitive and social development
-Jane Waldfogel, Columbia University School of Social Work
ducation is an integral component contributing to transgenerational poverty. To thouroughly examine concerns of education and indicators of student success, one must consider the entirety of a students life; especially his or her home environment. Conditions such as over-crowded living conditions, lack of study space, chronic illnessess, or reduced parental support can affect whether or not a child is successful in school. here is an undenyable correlation between poor housing conditions and less than average education.
For children who are raised in poor conditions, it is common to miss school due to housing related illnesses or drop out of high school all together; both of which will cause a student to achieve less throughout his or her lifespan than higher income counterparts will. The inevitable next step for impoverished children is to continue on the path of trans generational poverty in adulthood. he U.S. Census Bureau reports on individuals who never achieve a high school diploma, saying on average they make $18,734 annually; whereas a high school graduate would
make $9,000 more. In contrast, college graduates make an average salary of $51,206; which increases to $74,602 upon completion of a masters degree.
n order to be a financially successful adult, proper education is crucial. In order to be successful in school as a child, it is neccessary to have a stable home environment. Through strategic interventions early in life, lowincome children will eventually become financially self-sufficient in adulthood; lessening their potential burden while increasing their positive influence to society.
All children should have the basic nutrition they need to learn and grow and to pursue their dreams.
-Michelle Obama
27
YOUR COMMUnITYS
Current Conditions
Service Intervention
Relocation counseling; household maintenance education.
Because of the great number of hours spent inside the house, housing conditions are key factor in determining physical and mental health. Overcrowding, poor repair, or health hazards cause family stress. Children are most vulnerable because they cannot choose their living conditions. Lowincome children are disproportionately disadvantaged by lead paint contamination.
Primary Outcome
Improved health, IQ and lifetime earnings.
Current Conditions
Service Intervention
Transportation to health services; medical house calls; cleaning service; home delivered meals & groceries; guardianship; senior center; adult day care; financial management and assistance.
Seniors particularly rely on a fragile arrangement of paid and unpaid help to maintain independence. A 2006 AARP study indicated 36% of Section 202 residents over 62 years and 38% in LIHTC were frail or disabled. Many suffer from loneliness and depression, and lack treatment for chronic conditions.
Primary Outcome
Increased independence for seniors. Improved medication and health management. Reduced burden on family members for transportation to medical services. Reduced hospital and emergency services visits. Reduced social isolation improves psychological health. Improved fitness.
31
Current Conditions
Seniors living alone are at risk for injury and death.
Service Intervention
I am OK Committees (Red Cross seniors program); emergency preparedness.
Primary Outcome
Safety net of a tight community saves lives.
Current Conditions
Service Intervention
After-school programs; learning centers; parenting classes; job skills training; youth employment in community.
Young persons affected by reduced stability and safety are vulnerable to further victimization and negative behavioral choices.
Primary Outcome
Current Conditions
Service Intervention
Relocation counseling and services; diabetes and obesity prevention programs; after-school programs.
Primary Outcome
Asthma prevalence in 2009 was 8.2% of the population. Households with family incomes below the federal poverty level have higher asthma prevalence than those with higher incomes.
Reduction in diabetes and obesity rates. Decrease in respiratory related diseases from better air ventilation and higher quality living environment.
tobacco users who die prematurely deprive their families of income, raise the cost of health care and hinder economic development.
-World Health Organization
ue to the association between a lack of education, poor health, and decision making, individuals in poverty are more likely to smoke compared to high income individuals. According to a 2008 Gallup survey, 34% of individuals in the $6,000$12,000 income range are smokers. In contrast, only 22% of individuals who make $30,000 more are smokers; this number is consistent with the worldwide average. As income reaches $90,000 per year, the number of smokers drops to 13%.
ow-income communities become particularly burdened by smoking and its effects. Cancer Research UK reports that children whose parents smoke are three times more likely to become smokers than children who grow up in smoke-free homes. Due to increased exposure, they are also more burdened by the consequences of second hand smoke. ot only are low-income earners more likely to become smokers, but they are also less equipped to deal with the effects of smoking due to lack of quality healthcare and less
y identifying and implementing effective interventions including health education, health clinics, and healthy behaviors incentives, the degredation of health and eventual death of tobacco users in low-income communities can be avoided. The best ouotcome is to educate the children to prevent them from becoming smokers in the first place, but measures must also be taken to free current users of their addiction so they can live longer, healthier lives with less health expenses.
the poorest among us suffer most because they lack quality health care and live in highrisk environments.
-Susan H. Babey, PhD, senior research scientist at the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research
Current Conditions
Service Intervention
Health fairs, resident activity programs; health insurance education.
Primary Outcome
Increased access to health services and information. Seniors age in place.
There are direct links between income level and health. A childs health decreases dramatically when their parents are uneducated. It has been shown that a child is six times more likely to suffer form poor health when his or her parents have not completed high school, compared to children of parents with at least one college degree.
Current Conditions
Service Intervention
nutritional courses for school-age children; grocery delivery to seniors; on-site food banks; food co-ops.
Three fourths of all households with incomes below the poverty line spend over 50% of their incomes on rent, eliminating funds for fresh food, utilities, medical care or childcare.
Primary Outcome
Improved health. Increased fresh food access and options, especially for seniors. Healthier fast foods choices more consumption of whole grain foods, fruits and vegetables. Children more willing to try new foods.
Instead of simply treating health conditions caused by poor nutrition, we are looking into the root of the problem. Improved nutrition leading to reduced obesity is just one of the many ways in which we are realizing our vision for healthy, stable communities in the United States.
this disparity. Residents are sometimes forced to shop for groceries in convenience stores and other small stores, which do not offer the wide variety of fruits, vegetables, whole grains and lowfat dairy products necessary to maintain a healthy diet.9 When healthy foods are offered, they are often higher cost and lower quality than similar items in larger stores.10 Due to the high cost and low quality of produce and dairy products at small grocery stores, households with limited resources are sometimes forced to rely on cheaper, more densely caloric, non-perishable low-nutrition foods (such as products containing processed sugar, refined grains and added fats) in order to minimize cost and maximize caloric density.11 A 2009 study examining neighborhood disparities in food access found that, neighborhood residents with better access to supermarkets and limited access to convenience stores tend to have healthier diets and reduced risk for obesity.12 Low-income neighborhoods not only lack affordable sources of quality nutritious foods, they commonly contain disproportionate amount of fast food restaurants (sometimes twice as many)13 which offer a low cost, convenient yet nutritionally void alternative to fresh, perishable foods. According to a study conducted by UCLA, when asked, 46 to 49 percent of low-income teens reported eating fast food on the previous day, compared with 37 percent of more affluent teens.14 The scarcity of fresh, affordable, nutritious food makes it difficult for an individual with restricted income and limited transportation to maintain a healthy diet. Unfortunately, nutrition is only half the battle in the war on obesity. not only do low-income neighborhoods commonly lack community supporting retail such as fullscale grocery stores, studies also show residents have less opportunity for physical activity. In middle and upper class communities, it is easy to take for granted the presence of parks, trees, bike paths and quality recreational facilities because they are abundantly available. In both urban and rural low-income communities, green space is hard to come by and trees are few and far between. When a park does exist, it is often ill equipped for safe inhabitance by children and even adults. Crime, traffic, unsafe playground equipment, visual signs of trash and disrepair, and noise15 are just some of the factors driving individuals away from public parks. Such conditions make it difficult for them to lead active lives16, and in turn contribute to obesity.17 With parks in a state of disrepair and the absence of bike paths, people end up spending more time engaging in sedentary activities such as reading, watching TV, playing video games and using the computer.18 An excess of sedentary activities can be detrimental to the development of children and teens who should be growing, learning and exploring, socializing, developing new skills and establishing healthy habits before transitioning into adulthood. The same UCLA study also found that, 56 percent of low-income teens watch more than two hours of television per day, compared with 46 percent of more affluent teens.19 Some might argue a sedentary after school lifestyle is not alarming for a teen, especially if he or she attends public school with mandated Physical Education classes; but schools in low-income communities have been reported to have less recess and lower-impact PE classes than other schools.20 In fact, of low-income teens surveyed, nearly one fifth of them admitted to not getting at
9 10 11 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Beaulac , 2009 Andreyeva, Tatiana, Michael W. Long, and Kelly D. Brownell. The Impact of Food Prices on Consumption: A Systematic Review of Research on the Price Elasticity of Demand for Food. Government, Politics, and Law. American Journal of Public Health, Feb. 2010. Web. 15 Nov. 2011. <yaleruddcenter.org>. Drewnowski A. Barratt-Fornell A. Do healthier diets cost more? Nutrition Today 2004:39:161-168. Larson, N.I., M.T. Story, and M.C. Nelson (2009). Neighborhood Environments: Disparities in Access to Healthy Foods in the U.S., American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 36(1): 74-81.e10. Driscoll, Gwendolyn. Obesity among States low-income Teens Nearly Triple That of More Affluent Peers / UCLA Newsroom. Home / UCLA Newsroom. Web. 15 Nov. 2011. <http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/obesity-among-california-s-low-72532.aspx>. Driscoll, Gwendolyn Neckerman, K.M., M. Bader, M. Purciel, and P. Yousefzadeh (2009). Measuring Food Access in Urban Areas, National Poverty Center Working Paper, www.npc.umich.edu/news/events/food-access/index.php Powell, Lisa M., Sandy Slater, and Frank J. Chaloupka. The Relationship between Community Physical Activity Settings and Race, Ehtnicity and Socioeconomic Status. Evidence-Based Preventative Medicine I.2 (2004): 135-44. Open Mind Journals. Web. Singh, G. K., Siahpush, M., & Kogan, M. D. (2010). Rising social inequalities in US childhood obesity, 2003-2007. Annals of Epidemiology, 20(1), 4052. Singh, 2010 Driscoll, Gwendolyn Barros et al., 2009; UCLA Center to Eliminate Health Disparities, 2009.
13
least 60 minutes of physical activity per week, as recommended by the Federal Dietary Guidelines for Americans.21 Schools in low-income communities are often underfunded and do not offer the variety of after school sports opportunities as one would find at an affluent school. Barely one third of low-income teens were reported to be active participants in school sports teams, when almost half of affluent teens do participate.22 The combination of poor quality food and sedentary lifestyles is leading to an epidemic of obesity in low-income communities, causing children to become overweight and obese at an alarming rate. As the children become teenagers and later adults, they lack the tools and education to help their own children achieve a higher level of physical health.
21 22
eDUcatiOn anD access tO inFrastrUctUre are key tO BreakinG the cycle OF POOr nUtritiOn
The obesity epidemic in the United States is a growing concern in all communities, but low-income communities produce a disproportionate percentage of overweight and obese individuals. Our neighborhoods are literally making us fat, said Susan H. Babey, one of the authors of UCLAs policy brief. We need better strategies and more thoughtful urban planning if we are going to make our towns and cities livable, not just places where we live.23 Fortunately, Center for the Greater Good offers an innovative financial model for community revitalization projects, bundled with community support services to ensure success.
23
Driscoll, Gwendolyn
43
burden of asthma and other preventable health concerns for communities; the greatest challenge is completing renovation and demolition of existing structures without releasing harmful chemicals and dust particles into the air and soil.
imPrOve the QUality OF the air, imPrOve the QUality OF the liFe
Asthma affects one out of five Americans, but it affects the low-income population at a far higher rate, partially due to hazardous living conditions. Society will benefit from a reduction in asthma among the low income population because it can recover some of the $18 Billion spent annually on asthma treatment. Individuals and society will also benefit financially by missing work less due to asthma symptoms. Children living an asthma free life will develop more active lifestyles and miss school less often. The Center for the Greater Good, alongside our developer partners and foundations, is investing in proactive solutions to poor health in communities.
9 Natural Lighting Strategies and Benefits | One Green Planet. One Green Planet | One Green Planet | One Green Planet Is an Online Ecosystem That Draws Links between the World of Ecology, the Environment, Animals and Vegan Living. Web. 13 Nov. 2011. <http://www.onegreenplanet.org/lifestyle/natural-lighting/>.
YOUR COMMUnITYS
sOcial OBligatiOn
Households of lower income have higher levels of stress which is damaging to a child; especially when paired with criminal activity, neglect, or substance abuse.
lower-income youths can be susceptible to illegal forms of income, leading to grave effects on families.
-Childrens Environmental Learning and the Use, Design and Management of Schoolgrounds
i i
n low-income households where the head of the family is lacking the education and opportunity to make a decent living to support his or her family, some resort to illegal activities to bring money into the household. Though the short term justification for criminal activity may keep a family off the streets, the long term effects for children growing up in an unstable household are almost immeasurable. nfants in homes with criminal activity, such as meth lab homes, are more likely to be severely neglected and physically abused. The effects on a
childs social behavior due to criminal activity in the home is the consequence most readily observable. According to the Office of Justice Programs, children growing up among the chaos of illegal activity exhibit disorderly behavior and experience delays in cognitive functioning, including low self-esteem, a sense of shame, and poor social skills.
mental health problems, delinquency, teen pregnancy, school absenteeism and failure, isolation, and poor peer relations. Children from these homes are also more likely to follow in their parents footsteps, engaging in criminal activity themselves.
bserving illegal activities in the home as a child and growing up in an unstable environment can lead to undesirable teen behaviors. Consequences include emotional and
Single parent households experience high stress due to lower income and lack of support.
- Child Welfare Information Gateway
51
Current Conditions
Service Intervention
After-school programs; youth volunteer programs.
Lower-income youths can be susceptible to illegal forms of income generation, leading to potential incarceration, or death, with grave effects on families.
Primary Outcome
Youths engaged in productive activities leading to reduced vandalism, violent crimes and drug use. Enhanced self-esteem.
Current Conditions
Service Intervention
neighborhood Watch; Safe neighborhood Action Programs; neighborhood volunteer programs; youth volunteer programs.
High rates of resident mobility results in a lowered sense of community commitment and attachments among residents, contributing to increased crime and drug use.
Primary Outcome
Improved community safety from increased social relationships and trust.
Current Conditions
Service Intervention
Family education and life skills training; child protective services referrals.
Children in low-income families are more likely to be maltreated due to parental stress.
Primary Outcome
Reduction in number of victims.
SECTIOn 2
methODOlOGy
Our process for creating the Core and Enhanced Programs List included taking all the priority interventions and classifying them into the four categories previously listed. With the help of Project Access, LifeSTEPS, and Success Measures, we matched each intervention with every affected indicator and significant research data. The evaluation method we created is different than the methods already being implemented throughout the industry because it utilizes a variety of data collection methods and types. We not only record how many residents are receiving each service, but we also analyze resident surveys and factual data, such as death rate or change in GPA.
55
PROGRAMS FOR
seniOrs
This section is a description of our concerns, measurable indicators, and interventions. These strategies are to be implemented at low-income family housing facilities.
Community Library
Access to books
enhanced services
Intervention
ESL Classes
Growth Programs Grocery Delivery Insurance Education Household Education nutrition Classes
Self-reported improvement number of residents receiving service number of residents with health insurance Cleanliness of residence number of residents attending
number of nutrition related health issues Self-reported health improvement Healthy Cooking Classes number of residents attending Self-reported diet improvement Drug and Alcohol Awareness number of residents attending Substance abuse rate Fitness Classes number of residents regularly attending Obesity rates Self-reported health improvement Community Gardens Self-reported diet improvement Community pride Household Maintenance number of residents receiving service Percent of residences considered clean Health Fairs number of residents attending Self-reported health improvement Health Clinic On-Site number of residents served Self-reported health improvement Transportation to Practitioners Food Banks and Donations Fresh Fruit and Vegetables Counseling number of residents transported number of residents served Self-reported diet improvement number of residents served Self-reported improvement in stress reduction
enhanced services
Intervention
Health Adult Day Care
61
Eviction rate number of residents served number of residents attending mandatory counseling Percent repayment
number of residents attending Default rates Credit scores Savings rate Financial literacy
Entrepreneurship Programs
number of residents completing number of businesses started number of businesses that are going concerns
number of partners number of residents attending & completing number of residents that purchase homes
enhanced services
Intervention
Linkages to Discounts
Mediation Services
Percent of cases successfully resolved Supportive Housing number of residents served number of hospital visits number of ER visits Guardianship Services Partnerships with Local Stores Van Pools/ Bus Vouchers number of residents served number of residents served number of residents served Percent increase in access to education and employment Translation and Interpretation number of residents served
neighborhood Watch
Special Events
Personal Safety
PROGRAMS FOR
Families
This section is a description of our concerns, measurable indicators, and interventions. These strategies are to be implemented at low-income family housing facilities.
number of youth employed number of mentors number of youth participating Positive influence on youth Vandalism Substance abuse Reading scores of students Math scores of students
Parenting Classes
Special Events
Personal Safety
After-School Tutoring
number of children/youth attending Math scores Reading scores Report cards-GPA Vandalism rate Substance abuse number of juvenile arrests High school graduation rate Grade retention rate
Computer Training
number of children with supplies number of children/youth attending Substance abuse Vandalism rate number of juvenile arrests
Access to books Stress levels of single employed parents Parent access to education and employment
Percent admittance to community colleges and universities High school graduation rate Standardized test scores
GED Classes
enhanced services
Intervention
ESL Classes
49 percent of American babies born into poor families will be poor for at least half their childhoods.
-Urban Institute, 2010
71
number of resident with health insurance Cleanliness of residence Self-reported diet improvement number of nutrition related health issues
Fitness Classes
Community Gardens
Health Fairs
Transportation-Van Pools Food Banks and Donations Fresh Fruit and Vegetables Counseling
number of residents transported number of residents served Self-reported diet improvement number of residents served Self-reported improvement and stress reduction
Home-Ownership Education
number of residents attending and completing number of residents that purchase homes
enhanced services
Intervention
Linkages to Discounts
Medication Services
number of residents served Percent of cases successfully resolved number of graduates employed after 1 year
Supportive Housing
number of residents receiving products number of residents served Percent increase in access to education and employment
Interpretation Services
trUe imPact
While we do track attendance, our measurements are designed to measure the effectiveness of the programs. Each of the outcomes are mapped with specific indicators to assess the true impact and effectiveness of the social services. For example, in the case of an after-school program, math scores, reading scores, report cards (GPA), vandalism rates, substance abuse rates, juvenile arrest rates, high school graduation rates, and grade retention rates are measured.
accOUntaBility
Based on the metrics, progress towards outcomes can be accurately assessed. In case a particular social service program does not show significant progress towards the desired outcomes, the program can be re-analyzed, reinforced with additional resources, or replaced by another more effective program. This keeps the providers accountable for ensuring the efficiency and efficacy of the programs they provide.
transParency
Measurements also serve the purpose of making the outcomes of any community completely transparent. Technology tools coupled with scientific data analysis will be used to provide regular progress reporting to foundations and investors. In addition to providing these reports, Center for the Greater Good will also make the process of creating the integrated social service plan, as well as the resulting measurements, publicly available so that the model can be replicated in other communities.
hOUsinG
Supportive Housing Extremely Low Income. The goal of this program is to assist the homeless. Getting into a safe and healthy environment is the first step towards breaking the binds of poverty. In addition to providing housing, supportive housing is closely tied to the services that help people work through substance abuse, addiction/alcoholism, mental illness, HIV/AIDS, and other obstacles to living a successful life. Public Housing Very Low Income. This program helps the individuals at the borderline of homelessness. People often turn to illegal and dangerous activities in order to survive, by providing public housing we are able to keep families moving up and out of poverty. With the burden of paying rent reduced, individuals are able to focus employment and obtaining the life skills necessary to break the binds of poverty. Section 8 Housing Income Ranges. This program provides vouchers to low-income individuals or families so they can afford safe and decent housing in the private sector. This subsidized program requires participants to contribute no more than 30 percent of their income to housing expenses (rent and utilities). The participant is allowed to choose his or her own housing environment, as long as it is at or below the market average as determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Senior Housing Income Ranges. This category of housing is designed for seniors of many income levels, especially those living on a fixed income. Senior housing is commonly equipped with social services in the category of health and community involvement. Low-Income Student Housing Low Income. The purpose of this program is to open the opportunity of higher education to people with a wider range of incomes and situations than the current market. Low-income families typically face a barrier to entry when seeking to obtain self sufficiency due to a lack of education; leading to limited career progression potential. Low-income student housing is designed to meet the needs of individuals with or without families who seek to further their education. Workforce Housing Low Income. This program serves to bridge the gap between dependence and self sufficiency. Aimed at helping families and individuals with low cost housing when their incomes do not support the most basic of needs. Through this program, tenants are obligated to pay 30% of the given rent themselves. This ensures that families have a safe and healthy environment despite the fact that they could not afford it entirely on their own. Market Rate Average or Above Average Income. This is the ultimate goal. By improving health, education, and income we strive to have every individual move into market rate housing. It is at this point that we see people living self sufficient lives supported by themselves.
health
Our goal is to maximize health throughout the entirety of each persons life by focusing on the following areas: Prenatal Care Mental Health nutrition, Malnutrition, Asthma and Obesity Cancer End of Life Care/Funeral Services
eDUcatiOn
Poverty and poor education are a vicious circle. We encourage learning at every level by utilizing these programs: Early Childhood Education GED Assistance Job Training College Prep Income Development
It is a fact, that in order for families to be self sufficient and remain above the line of poverty, income has to increase. Our health and education programs heavily influence a persons ability to earn income, but that does not guarantee employment. To combat this, we equip individuals with the specific tools to move up in the work force and provide opportunities for adequate employment. Examples of programs that focus on employment are: General Education Degree/Certificate Assistance Interview Skills/Career Skills Job Preparation networking Opportunities Job Placement
There is no one-size fits all for eradicating poverty, but when housing, health, education, and income are addressed we will see improvements across the board. We aim to enable families and individuals to take more than a step away from poverty, we want them to keep moving and improving their lives until they are completely above the poverty line, which is why we choose to focus on the full continuum of factors related to poverty. Through the combination of all of our programs, we can help people throughout the entire process, and in time, we will see poverty in the United States destroyed.
SuPPORtivE HOuSing
Supportive Housing is a temporary solution to homelessness. Its purpose is to provide safety to high risk individuals and to help them find permanent housing. Services include encouraged sobriety and severe mental health interventions.
The purpose of Public Housing is to provide stability to individuals and families who are at risk of homelessness or were formerly homeless. Residents are reintroduced into society and interventions are used to inspire them to pursue financial self sufficiency.
PubliC HOuSing
SECtiOn 8 HOuSing
Section 8 Housing vouchers allow recipients to receive assistance, keeping the freedom to choose their own housing. Freedom lets recipients focus on friends, family and increasing their income.
SEniOR HOuSing
Low-Income Senior Housing is designed to allow seniors to age in place and live out their lives in a healthy and productive fashion.
Workforce Housing helps low wage employees live in the neighborhoods they work in, cutting commute time and cost, improving the quality of life for individuals and families. The time and money saved allows our the recipients to take full advantage of the interventions offered to them.
WORkfORCE HOuSing
StudEnt HOuSing
Low-Income Student Housing is designed to support children, families and individuals who wish to pursue higher education. Services focus on meeting students needs and increases the likelihood of completing school.
Market Rate Housing is the goal for all residents housed by the Continuum Fund. Once they achieve financial self-sufficiency, residents are educated, happy, sober and involved in the community. Residents no longer need supportive services.
accOUntaBility OF services
Outcome indicators not only track progress towards goals, but also serve as feedback to the process. If the feedback shows that some goals will not be met, the program will be reanalyzed and measures will be taken to adjust the services offered. Some possible measures are providing more resources, changing one or more programs responsible for the driving indicators, or selecting a service provider to offer services more effectively.
CGG InnOVATIOn In
sOcial services
startinG On the GrOUnD
Our social service plans are based on a framework where there is not a one-size-fits all set of services. Our services are developed individually for each community. Each community is unique, so the integrated social services offered should also be a unique combination based on the communitys needs. The chart on page 87 describes our unique method for social services delivery; it is how we insure constant effectiveness through Outcome Evauations Criteria. The steps are as follows: Step 1: Assess the Situation. Before prescribing a cure, it is important to diagnose the problem. Step 2: Non-profit and Resident Education. We educate the involved parties about the problem we diagnose, and solutions which have been effective in the past. Step 3: Non-profit and Resident Collaboration. As a team, we work with involved parties to help them identify the solution that is right for their particular community. Step 4: Coordinator Execution. The Coordinator creates a detailed assessment for each individual, provides access to the appropriate programs, removes barriers that might impede success and maintains contact with the Residents. Step 5: Tracking, Measuring and Evaluating. Using the methods described in Section 1, we track the success of the programs. Step 6: Report. We report our findings to all involved parties.
After the reports are published, we return to step 1 and reassess the situation.
eDUcate
assess
cOllaBOrate
cOOrDinate
rePOrt
evalUate
87
Together, we can make a better future for the 46,200,000 impoverished Americans.
89
community opportunity
Community Coordinators play a vital role in bringing the community together and serve as the link between resources and residents. For residents to learn about and take full advantage of the provided resources, they require the assistance of a trusted and dedicated coordinator.
cOmmUnity cOOrDinatOrs
To ensure the effectiveness of each community, choosing the right community coordinator is important. The following criteria are minimum requirements for our Community Coordinators: Available for full time employment. A minimum of 2 years of experience in community coordination. Strong background in case management. A history of empathy and passion to make a difference.
Permanent FUnDinG
Community Coordinators are funded permanently and predictably through cash flow generated by the project rather than relying on grants. This allows the Community Coordinator to focus on and serve the communitys residents.
open Space
Community development projects supported by the Center for the Greater Goods The Continuum Fund undergo a rigorous due diligence to determine that they will achieve the goals and requirements for significant social impact. While the provision of social services is often treated as a check-the-box requirement or delivered as an underfunded set of interventions, Center for the Greater Good has established groundbreaking criteria and standards for environmental and social impact that create true change in the lives of the residents. Each community is evaluated from a physical and social perspective and is required to demonstrate the following minimum standards: Inclusion of a community facility meeting minimum space requirements and design features 3,000 square feet per 100 units with a minimum size 2,500 square feet. Community buildings constructed using high quality building materials that do not offgas; Indoor facilities that connect to outdoor community space in order to create an uninterrupted flow of community activities. Optimize the community physical and psychological benefits by having direct access to natural sunlight and fresh air. The facilities should be designed for maximum accessibility, beyond ADA standards, to foster a true sense of togetherness within the community which includes members of all abilities and mobility levels. The facilities should be designed to house a variety of activities in the most spaceefficient way possible through the use of flexible design.
Sufficient space for service providers also enables the facilities to act as an incubator, promoting collaboration and innovation. Open space coupled with healthy surroundings not only improves both the physical and mental health of residents, but also creates a strong sense of community. Thus, open space is indispensable in creating a healthy and happy community.
contact
PhOne
208 859 7057
cOmPUter
Contact@CenterGG.com www.CenterforGreaterGood.com
aDDress
410 East State Street Eagle, ID 83616
Disclaimer
This guidebook is provided for information purposes only. The Center for the Greater Good has released this research in order to promote a greater public understanding of the issues addressed by CGG in its ongoing assessment of poverty in the United States and its relation to best practices in the housing and social services industries. All the information in this guidebook is published in good faith and for general information purpose only. We do not make any warranties about the completeness, reliability and accuracy of this information. Any action you take upon the information in this guidebook is strictly at your own risk and Center for the Greater Good will not be liable for any losses and damages in connection with the use of our research. Although Center for the Greater Good has made every effort to ensure that the information in this guidebook was correct at press time, CGG does not assume and hereby disclaim any liability to any party for any loss, damage, or disruption caused by errors or omissions, whether such errors or omissions result from negligence, accident, or any other cause. Neither this guidebook, nor any opinion expressed herein, should be construed as an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to acquire any securities or other investments mentioned herein. The company accepts no liability whatsoever for any direct or consequential loss arising from the use of this guidebook or its contents. This guidebook may be reproduced, distributed or printed by any recipient for any purpose. All rights reserved 2012 Center for the Greater Good.
nUtritiOn
Family Living Programs Impact Report: nutrition Education Program Reaches Low-Income Families Across the State The Reinvestment Fund, 2008. The majority of supermarket jobs are part-time (84 percent of jobs analyzed in the study). The Reinvestment Fund. The Economic Impacts of Supermarkets on their Surrounding Communities, Philadelphia, PA Lavin, M. Supermarket Access and Consumer Well-Being: The Case of Pathmark in Harlem. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management 33, no.5 (2005): 388-398 Pristin, T. Harlems Pathmark Anchors a Commercial Revival on 125th Street, The new York Times, november 13, 1999 Sarah Treuhaft, Allison Karpyn. PolicyLink, The Grocery Gap: Who Has Access to Healthy Food and Why It Matters
mOBility
United Ways Impact Report CLC - Investing in Multifamily Excellence, Neighborwork Supporting national Advancement and Local Achievement in Resident Services. LLC neighborworks Wood, Michelle, Jennifer Turnham, and Gregory Mills. 2008. Housing Affordability and Family WellBeing: Results from the Housing Voucher Evaluation. Housing Policy Debate 19(2). Preventing Homelessness and Promoting Housing Stability: A Comparative Analysis Donna Haig Friedman, Jennifer Raymond, Kimberly Puhala, Tatjana Meschede, Julia Tripp, Mandira Kala, June 2007 Strategies for Preventing Homelessness U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Policy Development and Research, Burt and Pearson 2005
JOB skills
RealInvestmentsRealResults.pdf Youthbuild King Countys Job Initiative Connection To Work Case Study United Way Funded Workforce Programs Richmond Build Supporting national Advancement and Local Achievement in Resident Services. LLC neighborworks Overall Strategy Youth, Reentry, Green Jobs The Bayfair Employment Training Academy (BETA) program
Johnson, L. J., Zorn, D.,Williams, J., & Smith, J. (1999). 1998-99 School Year Program Evaluation: Urban School Initiative School Age Child Care Expansion. Cincinnati, OH: University of Cincinnati. Cardenas, J.A. (1992).The Coca-Cola Valued Youth Program: Dropout prevention strategies for at-risk students, Texas Researcher (Vol. 3, pp. 111-130). Campbell, P. B., Storo, J. & Acerbo, K. (1995). Math, Science, Sports, and Empowerment: Girls Incorporated Replication and Expansion of the Eureka! Model, Executive Summary. Groton, MA: Campbell-Kibler Associates. Fleming-McCormick,T. & Tushnet, n. (1996). 4-H After School Activity Program. Los Angeles: Southwest and West Regional Education Laboratory. Heath, S. B. & Soep, E. (1998).Youth development and the arts in non-school hours, Grantmakers in the Arts newsletter (Vol. 9, pp. 9-17). Baker, E. L. & Gribbons, B. (1998). Evaluating the Long-term Impact of After School Programs: Applying new Methodologies to Assess the Effects of LAs BEST on Student Performance. Los Angeles: University of California. Kahne, J., nagaoka,A., OBrien, J., Quinn,T., & Thandiede, K. (1999). School and after-school programs as contexts for youth development. In M. C.Wang & W. L. Boyd (Eds.), Improving Results for Children and Families: Linking Collaborative Services With School Reform Efforts. Oakland, CA: Mills College. Posner, J. K. & Vandell, D. L. (1994). Low-income childrens after-school care:Are there beneficial effects of after-school programs? Child Development (Vol. 65, pp. 440-456). Posner, J. K. & Vandell, D. L. (1999).After-school activities and the development of lowincome urban children: A longitudinal study, Developmental Psychology (Vol. 35, pp. 868-879). Riley, D., Steinberg, J.,Todd, C., Junge, S., & McClain, I. (1994). Preventing Problem Behaviors and Raising Academic Performance in the nations Youth. Madison,WI: University of Wisconsin. Marshall, N., Coll, C. G., Marx, F., McCartney, K., Keefe, N., & Ruh, J. (1997). After-school time and childrens behavioral adjustment, Merrill-Palmer Quarterly (Vol. 43, pp. 497-514). Pierce, K. M., Hamm, J.V. & Vandell, D. L. (1999). Experiences in after-school programs and childrens adjustment in first-grade classrooms, Child Development (Vol. 70, pp. 756- 767). Rodriguez, E., Hirschl,T. A., Mead, J. P., & Groggin, S. E. (1999). Understanding the Difference 4-H Clubs Make in the Lives of new York Youth: How 4-H Contributes to Positive Youth Development. Ithaca, nY: Cornell University. Vandell, D. L. & Pierce, K. M. (1999, April 14). Can After-school Programs Benefit Children Who Live in High-crime Neighborhoods? Paper presented at the Biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development,Albuquerque, nM. Vandell, D. L. & Pierce, K. M. (1997). Safe Haven Program Evaluation (1995-96). Madison,WI: Madison Metropolitan School District. Carlisi,A. M. (1996). The 3:00 Project Program Evaluation. Decatur, GA: Georgia School-Age Care Association. Huang, D., Gribbons, B., Kim, K. S., Lee, C., & Baker, E. L. (2000). A Decade of Results:The Impact of the LAs Best After School Enrichment Program on Subsequent Student Achievement and Performance. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for the Study of Evaluation. U.S. Department of Education. (2003). When Schools Stay Open Late:The national Evaluation of the 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program.Washington, DC: author. Brooks, P. E. (1995). Longitudinal Study of LAs BEST After School Education and Enrichment Program, 1992-1994. Los Angeles.
Huang, D. (2001). An after-school evaluation system for middle and high school programs,national Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin (Vol. 85, pp. 45-61). Roth, J., Brooks-Gunn, J., Murray, L., & Foster,W. (1998). Promoting healthy adolescents: Synthesis of youth development program evaluations. Journal of Research on Adolescence (Vol. 8, pp. 423-459). Schlegel, C. (2003). Citizen Schools: Evaluation summary. In B. M. Miller (Ed.). Boston, MA. Schwager, M., Garcia, E., Sifuentes, M., & Tushnet, n. (1997). Evaluation of the Los Angeles STARS program. Los Angeles, CA:WestEd. Baker, D. & Witt, P.A. (1996). Evaluation of the impact of two after-school recreation programs, Journal of Park and Recreation Administration (Vol. 14, pp. 23-44). Hamilton, L. S. & Klein, S. P. (1998). Achievement test score gains among participants in the Foundations School Age Enrichment Program (pp. 1-16). Unpublished manuscript. Hamilton, L. S., Le,V. & Klein, S. P. (1999). Foundations School-Age Enrichment Program: Evaluation of Student Achievement. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Education. Supporting national Advancement and Local Achievement in Resident Services. LLC neighborworks Integrating Community Technology and Community Building: Early Results from the Camfield EstatesMIT Creating Community Connections Project
Pre schOOl
Changed Lives: The Effects of the Perry Preschool Program on Youths through Age 19. Monographs of the High/Scope Educational Research Foundation, number Eight Longitudinal Results of the Ypsilanti Perry Preschool Project by D.P. Weikart, D.J Deloria, S.A. Lawser, & R. Wiegerink Home Teaching with Mothers & Infants: The Ypsilanti-Carnegie Infact Education Project An Experiment by D.Z. Lambie, J.T. Bond, & D.P.Weikart The Ypsilanti Perry Preschool Project: Preschool years and longitudinal results through fourth grade by D.P. Weikart, J.T. Bond, & J.T. Mcneil The Ypsilanti Preschool Curriculum Demonstration Project: Preschool years and longitudinal results by D.P. Weikart, A.S. Epstein, L.J.Scheinhart, &J.T. Bond An Economic Analysis of the Ypsilanti Perry Preschool Project by C.U. Weber, P.W. Foster, & D.P. Weikart The Ypsilanti-Carnegie Infant Education Project: Longitudinal Follow-up by A.S. Epstein & D.P. Weikart Young Children Grow up: The Effects of the Perry Preschool Program on Youths Through Age 15 by L.J. Scheinhart & D.P. Weikart Changed Lives: The Effects of the Perry Preschool Program on Youths Through Age 19 by J.R. BerruetaClement, L.J. Scheinhart, W.S. Barnett, A.S. Epstein, & D.P.Weikart Effects of a School-Based, Early Childhood, Intervention on Adult Health and Well-being. A 19-Year Follow-up of Low-Income Families Arthur J. Reynolds, PhD; Judy A. Temple, PhD; Suh-Ruu Ou, PhD; Dylan L. Robertson, PhD; Joshua P. Mersky, PhD; James W. Topitzes, PhD; Michael D. niles, PhD Long-term Effects of an Early Childhood Intervention on Educational Achievement and Juvenile Arrest A 15-Year Follow-up of Low-Income Children in Public Schools Arthur J. Reynolds, PhD Judy A. Temple, PhD Dylan L. Robertson Emily A. Mann, MSSW EARLY EDUCATIOnAL