WSA_Youth and Family Master Plan Phase I - September 2009

Home Browse Search

Implementation: Increasing outreach for teen-serving programs and incentivizing organizations willing to provide evening and weekend programs can help to bridge the gap in services to teens in Santa Ana. Organizations must be sensitive to the timing and location of programs when providing programming for teens and young-adults. Furthermore, an increase in systematic mentorships is needed. Perhaps some kind of a database and quality-control software can be utilized to more effectively recruit and retain mentors to support young people throughout the teenage years. Rationale: At the beginning of each 5-year cycle, the City of Santa Ana sets priorities for CDBG funding. Each year, 15% of the CDBG funds are distributed as community program grants. Last year, that amounted to $1,022,832 spent on Public Services programs; of that, 73% was spent on direct youth services. Because Santa Ana is such a young city with a large need for services, the city can consider a goal of 75% of CDBG programmatic funds supporting youth programs that have an explicit linkage to either decreasing the obesity epidemic, or gang prevention. Only 8% of youth programs operate on weekdays after 6pm; only 25% operate on weekends. Through conversations and data analysis we understand that, although there are programs throughout the city- includingteen programs- focus group findings showed that there is relatively low knowledge about teen- specificprograms. In addition, teens themselves voiced a desire to connect with caring adults; mentorship is one mechanism to do this. There is currently a disconnect between the programming offered and the knowledge of these programs in the community. Consider tailored interventions to communities with high crime. Implementation: Conduct more athletic programming in areas of highest crime; consider replicating the SALUD Program and the Townsend Street Task Force in other communities as models of best practices for community engagement and crime prevention. In terms of identifying communities for implementation, if the SAPD and OC Probation can coordinate data to track juvenile offenders closely by neighborhood, this could allow for a clearer understanding of whether or not certain communities are in need of more services than others. Rationale: Youth focus group data indicated that certain streets are identified by youth as unsafe; combining this qualitative data and "on the ground knowledge" with the data from SAPD regarding calls for service could help to identify areas that could benefit from a Task Force similar to that at Townsend. This type of multi-stakeholder, resident-driven process would support communities most in need. Increase programming in city community centers by nonprofits. Implementation: City recreation centers should offer more community-based drop in services for youth & families. If the city cannot provide these program staff, partnerships with community-based nonprofit organizations should fill the gaps. This close relationship can be fostered and strengthened by a city- wide commitment to youth services and may involve the city taking on the role of coordinator and a clearinghouse of information on programs for Santa Ana. This would have the potential to decrease the duplication of efforts, thus making the best use of increasingly limited resources in the community. Rationale: There is a lack of drop-in services for youth & family; most youth programming requires signing up or meeting some type of referral criteria. Youth service-providers noted that this shift away from direct outreach and community programming has left a void in the role of community centers as drop-in centers for the local youth. Addressing this gap would increase the chances of youth to engage with positive adult role models in their community on a more regular basis.