Building Opportunity: Developing City Systems to Expand and Improve After School Programs

  • Martha A. Holleman
  • M. Jane Sundius
  • Eric J. Bruns
Original Paper
  • 341 Downloads

Abstract

A growing body of research is examining the strengths and weaknesses of specific after school programs and their effect on youth outcomes. Few reviews, however, have sought to examine the components of citywide system-building—to understand intentional efforts to develop, support and sustain high quality after school programming across a community. Beginning in the mid-1990s and continuing through the present, private funders, public officials and program practitioners in cities across America have joined together to build systems to support the expansion and improvement of after school programs at the city-level. This paper presents the community context and underlying principles that drove the development of Baltimore’s After-School Strategy; articulates a set of system components derived from this experience and the available literature; and lays out future work to expand high quality after-school opportunities for youth in Baltimore and in other distressed urban environments.

Keywords

After school programs Out-of-school time Human service systems Youth development Evaluation Community-based programs Community organizing 

References

  1. Abell Foundation. (1997). Baltimore area jobs and low skill job seekers, assessing the gaps. A report for the job opportunities task force. Baltimore: Author.Google Scholar
  2. Bruns, E. J. (2004). Baltimore’s After-School Strategy: Evaluation overview. Unpublished evaluation report. Baltimore: Safe and Sound Campaign.Google Scholar
  3. Bruns, E. J., Holleman, M. A., & Ferebee, H. (2005). Evaluating comprehensive community-based initiatives: Lessons learned from Baltimore City. Paper presented at the Eighth Annual Urban Health Seminar, Harvard University Kennedy School of Government, Boston.Google Scholar
  4. Center for Health and Public Service Research. (2002). State of the cities of the urban health initiative; An interim report. New York: Robert F. Wagner School of Public Service, New York University.Google Scholar
  5. Checkland, P. (1981). Systems thinking: Systems practice. Chichester: Wiley. (as cited by Foster-Fishman, Nowell & Yang, 2007).Google Scholar
  6. Checkland, P., & Scholes, J. (1990). Soft systems methodology in action. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (as cited by Foster-Fishman, Nowell & Yang, 2007).Google Scholar
  7. Emshoff, J., Darnell, A., Darnell, D., Erickson, S., Schneider, S., & Hudgins, R. (2007). Systems change as an outcome and a process in the work of community collaboratives for health. American Journal of Community Psychology, 39, 255–267.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Family League of Baltimore City. (2007). About us. Accessed http://www.flbcinc.org/index.htm. August 15, 2007. Baltimore: Family League of Baltimore City.
  9. Foster-Fishman, P. G., Nowell, B., & Yang, H. (2007). Putting the system back into systems change: A framework for understanding and changing organizational and community systems. American Journal of Community Psychology, 39, 197–215.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Halpern, R. (1999). After school programs for low income children: Promise and challenges. The Future of Children, 9(2), Fall 1999.Google Scholar
  11. Halpern, R. (2003). The challenge of system-building in the after-school field: Lessons from experience. Wellesley, MA: National Institute on Out-of-School-Time.Google Scholar
  12. Halpern, R., & Horton, C. (2003). The design and implementation of Baltimore’s After-School Strategy: An in-process look. Chicago: Erikson Institute for Graduate Study in Child Development.Google Scholar
  13. Jellinek, P. (2007). The urban health initiative. To improve health and health care, Volume XI. Princeton, NJ: The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.Google Scholar
  14. Marzke, C., & Bruns, E. J. (2003). Evaluating after school programs. Paper presented at the Third Annual After School Institute Conference, Ellicott City, MD.Google Scholar
  15. Marzke, C., & Pechman, E. (2003). The after school observation instrument. Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
  16. Marzke, C., & White, R. (2001). Evaluation of the Baltimore after school YouthPlaces initiative: An initial report. Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
  17. Neuman-Sheldon, B. (2006). Evaluation of Baltimore’s After-School Strategy, 20045: Summary report. Unpublished evaluation report. Baltimore: Safe and Sound Campaign.Google Scholar
  18. Open Society Institute. (1998). Internal memoranda and funding recommendations. Baltimore: The Open Society Institute.Google Scholar
  19. Open Society Institute. (2007). Internal memoranda and funding recommendations. Baltimore: The Open Society Institute.Google Scholar
  20. Petersilia, J. (1990). Conditions that permit intensive supervision. Crime and Delinquency, 36, 126–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Safe and Sound. (2007). Baltimore After School Strategy overview. Baltimore: The Safe and Sound Campaign.Google Scholar
  22. Sundius, M. J. (2007). Finding the resources for summer learning programs. New Directions for Youth Development, 114, 109–122.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Community Research and Action 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martha A. Holleman
    • 1
    • 2
  • M. Jane Sundius
    • 3
  • Eric J. Bruns
    • 4
  1. 1.Strategic Thinking for Social ChangeBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Baltimore’s Safe and Sound CampaignBaltimoreUSA
  3. 3.The Open Society InstituteBaltimoreUSA
  4. 4.Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral SciencesUniversity of Washington School of MedicineSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations