For more information on the model programs discussed, see Links , and contact Paul Shepard, Director for Communications at 202-234-8104.

There is evidence that nonprofit youth development initiatives have worked during the hours when high-risk children and youth are not in school and during summer months. We have found youth development programs to work when they are run by local unaffiliated, nonprofit organizations. Scientifically evaluated examples include Centro Sister Isolina Ferre in San Juan, PR, the Dorchester Youth Collaborative in Boston, MA and Koban, Inc. in Columbia, SC. We also have found youth development programs to work when they are run by local affiliates of national nonprofit organizations. Scientifically evaluated examples include Boys and Girls Clubs of America in Public Housing, the Quantum Opportunities Program and Big Brothers/Big Sisters of America. Do local unaffiliated nonprofits perform better than local affiliates of national nonprofits? In the Eisenhower Foundation’s experience, the answer has been yes. Ongoing comparisons are needed to better inform national policy. See the Citations at the end of this section. For more information on carefully evaluated youth development successes, see Publications. Also visit the web sites of the Academy for Educational Development, the American Youth Policy Forum, Big Brothers/Big Sisters of America, Boys and Girls Clubs of America, Opportunities Industrialization Center of America, the National Youth Development Information Center, the National Council on Crime and Delinquency and Public/Private Ventures.

Local, Unaffiliated Nonprofit Organizations

Illustrations include Centro Sister Isolina Ferre in San Juan, PR, the Dorchester Youth Collaborative in Boston, MA and Koban, Inc., in Columbia, SC. All have been evaluated by the Eisenhower Foundation. (See: Publications. Also see About the Foundation - and What’s New.)

Centro Sister Isolina Ferre
Centro Sister Isolina Ferre combines youth development and community regeneration. Begun in the 1960s in Ponce, the second largest city in Puerto Rico, Centro opened in San Juan in the late 1980s, Centro’s founding premise is that, "If family and community can be strengthened, and meaningful employment made available, it might be possible to make substantial progress in the struggle against neighborhood crime and violence."

In San Juan, Centro operates in the semi-rural Caimito neighborhood -- characterized by a very high dropout rate (averaging 30 percent), high unemployment of close to 50 percent among adults and 80 percent among youth, and extreme poverty in which 70 percent of the families receive public assistance. According to police reports, Caimito constitutes one of the highest delinquency and drug dependence communities in San Juan. Caimito also is the most remote part of San Juan, and so delivery of public services to Caimito has lagged behind the rest of the metropolitan area. For example, the first police station in 1985. There is no public health clinic in Caimito. The present day school system is overloaded, and school violence is common.

In the midst of this environment, Centro is located on a beautiful park-like campus. The campus includes a residential police ministation at its entrance way, a central building with classrooms and administrative offices at the bottom of the palm-tree lined driveway that begins with the ministation, a series of A-frame buildings that hold classrooms, workrooms and businesses, a tree nursery and a recreational area.

At any one time, Centro in San Juan has run up to 10 interrelated programs, with a staff of 56. During the day, an alternative school program successfully works with dropouts on school remediation and the acquisition of general education degrees. A computer literacy and office skills training initiative, using the IBM equipment, has students attending 30 hours per week. Adults attend cooking classes and other events. Young mothers can attend classes while their children are cared for in a baby nursery. Immunizations and screenings are provided on-site by the Health Department. After school, a special safe haven program for 6 to 12 year olds involves many youngsters in arts, remediation, sports, and culture.

Almost all programs are designed to increase the leadership, confidence and competence of community youth -- many of whom come to Centro while they still are gang members. The most important innovation at Centro are the "intercessors" or advocates -- young, streetwise, paid staff members drawn from the community. The advocates act as intermediaries and mediators among youth in trouble or on the verge of trouble, the community, the schools, the police and the rest of the criminal justice system. The role of advocates proceeds far beyond individual counseling or mentoring. Advocates are charged with "getting to know the youth and his or her peers and family, looking into the school, family and work situation, and understanding the day-to-day behavior of the youth." Advocates involve youth in the full range of developmental programs at Centro including job training, recreation, and tutoring. The police work closely with the intercessors, often calling them when a youth is on the verge of serious trouble. If arrests are made, advocates help youth in the court system.

The police ministation on the campus at its entrance is a pleasant looking 3 level structure modeled after the Japanese "kobans." Residential quarters are on the top floor, ministation offices are on the ground floor and an IBM computer training education center is on the lower level. The police pr of San Juan as a whole.

Part of the precinct-level increase may have been due to a police crackdown on drug dealers in central San Juan at the time. Some dealers may have relocated to distant Caimito with its steep rugged hills and narrow twisting valleys. It is easier to hide there. If this interpretation has some merit, then the data suggested that, an exodus to Caimito notwithstanding, the police, intercessors and community had some success in keeping dealer-related crime out of the immediate Centro neighborhood of Caimito.

For statistical analysis, the data from San Juan were combined with data from three similar community-police programs (in Boston, Chicago and Philadelphia.) For the aggregate, the reduction in the target neighborhood was significantly greater statistically than for either the surrounding precinct or the city as a whole.

We attributed the success not only to the comprehensive interdependent mix of program solutions, but also excellent management -- by an intelligent, no-nonsense, tough charismatic, caring, politically savvy, problem-solving nun who assembled a committed, loyal, competent and flexible staff. The director had the skill to both exercise power through personal relationships and to create sound organizational, time, financial and personnel management on a day-to-day basis.

In 1999, the founder of Centro, Sister Isolina Ferre, received the Presidential Medal of Freedom from President Clinton.

The Dorchester Youth Collaborative
The Dorchester Youth Collaborative (DYC) was established in the late 1970s, in Field’s Corner, Dorchester, a low income, rapidly changing Boston neighborhood. Today, Field’s Corner is racially and ethnically mixed, with large Hispanic, African-American, Asian-American (Vietnamese and Cambodian) and white populations. An extended family safe haven and sanctuary after school and in the summers, DYC provides nontraditional services, activities and advocacy for local youth deemed to be at high risk of delinquency, teen pregnancy, school failure and substance abuse. DYC fills an important prevention gap in Dorchester -- between programs for youth who will make it anyway and youth who are deep into the juvenile justice system.

In the early 1990s, the Eisenhower Foundation subgranted 3 years of funds from the Justice Department and matched them against local resources to create an initiative that combined the civilian counseling; advocacy and prevention that DYC had developed in the 1980s with new roles for police.

Civilian prevention and youth development was led by a full-time, paid Neighborhood Services Coordinator, who also served as counselor for "near-peers." This staffer was an adult, but the near-peers he supervised were younger adults who worked for pay part-time, a minimum of three days per week. These near-peers served as role models for the youth in the program. The near-peers were teenagers 2 to 6 years older than the targeted youth who had already successfully resolved many of the crises that the target youth faced -- such as recruitment from gangs and from drug dealers. In groups and one-on-one, the near-peers interacted with youth in positive ways and monitored their behavior. The near-peer concept had been employed by DYC for a number of years, and the new initiative simply extended past operations by adding more.

In addition to help with acting them out through, for example, violence. Adult staff and near-peers sought to reduce episodes in which youth would "tear down" each other. Such behavior was particularly common among younger kids who began at DYC -- who really didn't know how to fight fairly. Their behavior often was a natural result of the trauma and desensitization they experienced by being exposed to violence. By contrast, older youth had successfully graduated to making jokes about each other, but not doing it in a negative, "tearing down" way. The older youth could laugh at themselves without becoming defensive or self-defeating. They expressed themselves through love rather than disregard.

In turn, such skill building was related by DYC staff to pre-employment training, employment training and placement. Over the summers, about two-thirds of the targeted youth were placed in summer youth employment programs, coordinated by the City of Boston, a community development corporation and private-sector businesses. During the summer, DYC also functioned like a camp, operating from 9:00 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. The scheduled activities included pool, bowling, art, Afrocentric and multicultural education, basketball, swimming, breakfast and lunch.

Police then were brought into the process of outreach, counseling, mentoring, and skill development. This was a radical innovation for Fields Corner, because, in the past, police had always been viewed as the enemy. Two young African-American officers became, in effect paid, part time adult staffers and near peers, making regular visits to the safe haven three times a week. Initially, there was a considerable degree of mistrust by the youth of the police, and vice-versa. Yet bonds formed, and the officers ended up counseling youth on personal matters and receiving calls from the young people during off hours. Often relationships became deeper as a result of crises, as when a local teenager was killed and the DYC youth and officers sat down to discuss their feelings.

Nationally, the NBC Today show covered the program in 1994, and the President and Attorney General featured it that same year in a Washington, D.C. rally at the Justice Department for the Crime Bill. One youth, Eddie Kutanda, was asked to speak:

I’d like to thank President Clinton and Attorney General Reno for being here. I’d like to introduce community police officers Harold White and Tony Platt. And I’d like to introduce two friends of mine, Tyrone Burton and Fung Du Ung. They’re in my acting group, Extreme Close Up, at the Dorchester Youth Collaborative. We do writing and acting. Back in the days, I used to hate the police...Harold and Tony have changed all that.

The one-on-one and group counseling of youth was complimented by community-based foot patrols in Fields Corner and joint DYC-police planning and neighborhood outreach to businesses and community organizations.

Over the 4 years of Eisenhower evaluation serious (FBI Index) crime declined by 27 percent in the target Field’s Corner neighborhood, 20 percent in the surrounding precinct -- compared to only 11 percent for the city of Boston as a whole. For statistical analysis, the data from Boston were combined with data from three similar community-police programs (in San Juan, Chicago and Philadelphia). For the aggregate, the reduction in the target neighborhood was significantly greater statistically than for either the surrounding precinct or the city as a whole.

Throughout the program, there were regu was more than double the average number in the previous 3 years. Then, starting in 1996, the year after the safe haven-ministation opened, reports steadily decreased, even while increasing at the precinct level -- again, as anticipated. Police, residents and crime reports also agreed that there was a dramatic decrease in drug use. From 1995, when the safe haven-ministation opened, to 1998, police reported a 61 percent reduction in drug crimes.

The future of the safe haven-ministation program in Columbia is bright. The formation of Koban, Inc. and the expansion of the program to more sites are 2 factors that helped program staff secure significant resources for the continuation and expansion of the program. The safe haven-ministation program has been replicated in 2 other Columbia public housing developments. Koban, Inc. has plans for further expansion in the future. It hopes to establish a safe haven-ministation in at least one school in every area, which has a safe haven-ministation in the community. Given the 1999 killings in Colorado and Georgia high schools, and given the criticisms of the federal Safe and Drug Free Schools program, the expansion of safe haven-ministations to schools may help develop new options for dealing with school violence. Koban, Inc. wants to extend services to rural communities, reach more teens with more supervised activities, remain open until midnight, and add a sports component. The program at Gonzales Gardens served as a model to the other sites.

In an article in Marketplace, a publication of the Federal Reserve system, much of the success of Koban, Inc. was attributed to the Columbia, SC police chief:

Columbia Police Chief Charles Austin, a minister and "modern day saint" ... views KOBAN as "more than a crime tool." Austin believes the KOBANs provide community residents "a place to turn for a variety of resources outside traditional law enforcement concerns." This requires that all directors possess the "essentials" according to Austin: a strong value system, a caring spirit, patience, and kindness in dealing with diversity. His belief in the program is evidenced by his embodiment of all these same traits and his extensive personal involvement; he also serves as the co-Chair of the Eisenhower Foundation Trustee Board and as Chair of the KOBAN Committee. The decrease in Columbia’s crime rate has been largely attributed to Austin’s leadership.

Austin remains "cautiously optimistic" when it comes to statistics, but is "most encouraged by the improvement of the overall quality of life in the KOBAN communities."

To ... Austin, it’s more about souls than statistics... It is the "good feeling impact" that Austin says has the power to outweigh the tangible measurements. He modestly describes himself as "a servant, who feels blessed to have been chosen," and feels it is his obligation to do the best he can do.

Local Affiliates of National Nonprofit Organizations

Notable recent youth development successes among national non an amount equal to their total earnings, which accrued toward college or post-secondary training. The financial rewards became an incentive for students to continue in the program and welcome extra income for financially strapped families. Over 4 years, students spent an average of nearly 1,300 hours in program activities. The average cost per participant was $10,600 over 4 years, or about $2,650 per year.

By the end of the program, a Brandeis University evaluation found that 63 percent of the Quantum Opportunities Program participants graduated from high school, 42 percent were enrolled in a post-secondary program, 23 percent dropped out of school, 24 percent had children and 7 percent had arrest records. By contrast, of the control group, 42 percent finished high school, 16 percent went on to post-secondary schools, 50 percent dropped out, 38 percent had children and 13 percent had arrest records.

Importantly, we believe, the Brandeis evaluation concluded:


[T]he varying success of the programs in recruiting youngsters has more to do with the quality of the staff, the availability of an effective service concept, and mundane management considerations than the nature of poverty in the community, the characteristics of the children, the service design or other "external" variables.

For example, of the four sites, the most successful was Philadelphia. The difference between Philadelphia and the other sites could not be attributed to the program model, the characteristics of participants or the neighborhood setting. The distinguishing factor appeared to be greater by-in by the host organization in Philadelphia and greater staff commitment at all levels.

With Ford Foundation and Labor Department funds, Quantum Opportunities now is being replicated in 5 new sites by the Opportunities Industrialization Centers of America.

Big Brothers/Big Sisters
Public/Private Ventures assessed the largest one-on-one mentoring program in the U.S. -- Big Brothers/Big Sisters of America, which currently maintains through its chapters across the nation 75,000 active matches between a volunteer adult and a youngster. Public/Private Ventures undertook a control group evaluation of 959 10 to 16 year olds who applied to Big Brothers/Big Sisters in 1992 and 1993. Sixty percent were boys, and about half were racial minorities. Of the racial minorities, 70 percent were African American. Almost all lived with one parent. Many were from low income households. They were randomly assigned to treatment and control groups. Pre-post measures were taken 18 months apart. Youth with volunteer mentors met with their mentors for an average of about 12 months. The meetings averaged about 3 times per month and each lasted about 4 hours.

Youth with mentors were 46 percent less likely than controls to initiate drug use and 27 percent less likely to initiate alcohol use during the study period. They were nearly one-third less likely to hit someone and skipped half as many days of school as control youth. They felt more competent about their ability to do well in school and received slightly higher grades by the end of the study. They reported more positive relationships with their friends and parents. These effects were sustained for both boys and girls and across all races.

The evaluation found that, on average, it took about 6 months for trust to develop between a mentor and a youth. In addition averaged to about $1,000 per youth per year. The evaluators concluded that this $1,000 per youth was crucial for success.

The evaluation raises crucial issues about replication of success to scale. Public/Private Ventures observes, "By some estimates, there may be anywhere from 5 million to 15 million youth who could benefit from being matched with a mentor -- with about only one-third of a million mentors now in place." Given the limitations of volunteerism it is legitimate to ask whether 5 to 15 million qualified volunteer mentors who may be needed actually will come forward and be trained. Given the cost of $1,000 per youth per year of effective one-on-one mentoring, will we be able to come up with the $5B to $15B per year that may be the price tag for screening, orientation, training, supervision, monitoring and support? Would alternative uses of such funding -- like the $6B to $7B needed to provide Head Start to all those who qualify, or an effective employment program for out-of-school youth -- be more cost-beneficial? (For more on the limits of volunteerism, see: What Doesn’t Work?.)

Whether or not volunteers are involved, there also needs to be much more evaluation of mentoring. For example, the comprehensive review for the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention in 1995 edited by James Howell in collaboration with the National Council on Crime and Delinquency and Developmental Research and Programs, Inc. reached these conclusions on other mentoring programs:

The evidence from the 10 available evaluations [4 with control groups and 6 with comparison groups] consistently indicates that noncontingent, supportive mentoring relationships do not have desired effects on outcomes such as academic achievement, school attendance, dropout, various aspects of child behavior including misconduct, or employment. This lack of demonstrated effect has occurred whether mentors were paid or unpaid and whether mentors were college undergraduates, community volunteers, members of the business community, or school personnel. However, when mentors used behavior management techniques in one small, short-term study, students’ school attendance improved. This is consistent with the findings from studies of school behavior management interventions reported earlier. In another larger, longer term experimental evaluation by the same researchers, unspecified mentoring relationships significantly increased delinquency for youth with no prior offenses but significantly decreased recidivism for youth with prior offenses. However, more evaluations with randomized designs are needed to test these preliminary conclusions about mentoring.

The Quantum Opportunities Program, above, used mentoring, but only as part of a number of complementary interventions. Similarly, in the Eisenhower Foundation’s evaluations of Centro Sister Isolina Ferre, the Dorchester Youth Collaborative, Koban, Inc., and two other youth development-police partnerships (in Philadelphia and Chicago), we concluded that success was based on a complementary array of multiple solutions to multiple problems – including one-on-one and group counseling and mentoring of youth by paid civilians and police to provide social support and discipline, safe haven and police ministation settings, youth leadership and youth media enterprise, community-based education and remedial education,

The safe havens where counseling took place in our replications were not just hang-out rooms. For the most part, they were the headquarters of the grassroots nonprofit agencies that received the grants. These grants, and the publicity secured through the agreement of the police to work with the nonprofits as partners, helped the agencies to secure new grants and to build their institutional capacities. As institutions, they were financially empowered to better represent impoverished constituencies in a society where the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. (See The Millennium Breach.) In modest ways, the nonprofit organizations that were funded had more resources to address broader issues facing the United States. For example, the Dorchester Youth Collaborative (DYC) Clubs promoted racial integration at a time when America is becoming more segregated, and DYC’s youth media enterprises communicated what works to national audiences through Blockbuster Video and the motion picture, Squeeze. By contrast, initiatives that rely mostly on volunteerism usually do not build much institutional capacity in grassroots organizations.