143
The use of a formal model, like this YSE
model, both cultivates and monitors youth developmental skill areas, which lead to career paths.
The formalized structure also lends itself to
application with various organizations so that
common indicators can be used. When adapted,
this YSE model may be a model that holds promise with youth work training programs throughout American cities and rural areas and in other
OECD and non-OECD countries. Further study
and replication is required.
10.11 Recommendations: Ten
Lessons Learned in Creating
a Formal Youth Workforce
Development System Using
the SDG Framework
1. Creating collaborations that include youthserving providers, program designers and
practitioners increases networking, professional development, trust, and cooperation.
The resulting acceptance of common indicators coming from these nurtured relationships is of critical importance to the
successfully implement of SDG strategies
and indicators. It is very important that
these collaborations be sustained to encourage the collecting and reporting of data for
years after the initial training and
implementation.
2. Buy-in to the acceptance of a set of common
tools is a long process that must be curated.
A concern in the field of youth work is that
“many frontline staff begin with little training, and develop their professional skills in
isolation… with limited opportunity to
reflect, read research, or learn from peers or
expert practitioners” (Larson et al. 2015).
Aware of the fact that these grassroots nonprofits were growing in isolation from each
other, in 2013 we developed a collaborative
called the Youth Social Entrepreneurship
Collaborative. This was a way to convene
yearly summits, bring information about
advancing the youth social entrepreneurship
model, and allow organizational leaders to
learn from one another. Workshops, speakers, social media discussions, and morning
egg-bake breakfasts helped youth leaders
gather to learn strategic topics and
procedures.
3. Developing the infrastructure to collect
these indicators was more expensive, timeconsuming, and problematic than anticipated. Collecting data is often not viewed as
effective and efficient programming by
cash- strapped nonprofits serving youth in
low- income areas or youth from communities of color. The ability of many nonprofits
working with youth to collect yet another set
of indicators is strained by a number of factors: financial, personnel, and back office
capacity to capture and analyze data. The
back offices for most community-based
nonprofits may not include databases, or
consistent personnel. A summer intern is
often the designated accidental techie so that
change in personnel is common and disruptive. These informal systems must be
addressed and receive the capital needed
before a collective system can be developed.
While all programs funded with philanthropic or government dollars require evaluation, the requirements are not consistent.
As a result, nonprofits managers, like managers everywhere, are understandably wary.
The combination of working toward collective large-scale goals, such as creating a
specific youth workforce development strategy, brings philanthropy, governments, and
research to nonprofits to build capacity and
capture data that will enable multiple partners to develop policy solutions. This work
also enables nonprofits to document their
successes, reach for larger funding, and ultimately track alumni and support them with
innovations.
4. Putting youth first: nonprofit leaders are protective about burdening the youth they serve
with yet more indicators. Many youth face
daunting and invasive questionnaires in every
part of their lives. Gaining trust from these
youth requires that the youth have agency
about their personal information.
10 How the Youth Social Entrepreneurship (YSE) Model Supports Implementation...
The use of a formal model, like this YSE
model, both cultivates and monitors youth developmental skill areas, which lead to career paths.
The formalized structure also lends itself to
application with various organizations so that
common indicators can be used. When adapted,
this YSE model may be a model that holds promise with youth work training programs throughout American cities and rural areas and in other
OECD and non-OECD countries. Further study
and replication is required.
10.11 Recommendations: Ten
Lessons Learned in Creating
a Formal Youth Workforce
Development System Using
the SDG Framework
1. Creating collaborations that include youthserving providers, program designers and
practitioners increases networking, professional development, trust, and cooperation.
The resulting acceptance of common indicators coming from these nurtured relationships is of critical importance to the
successfully implement of SDG strategies
and indicators. It is very important that
these collaborations be sustained to encourage the collecting and reporting of data for
years after the initial training and
implementation.
2. Buy-in to the acceptance of a set of common
tools is a long process that must be curated.
A concern in the field of youth work is that
“many frontline staff begin with little training, and develop their professional skills in
isolation… with limited opportunity to
reflect, read research, or learn from peers or
expert practitioners” (Larson et al. 2015).
Aware of the fact that these grassroots nonprofits were growing in isolation from each
other, in 2013 we developed a collaborative
called the Youth Social Entrepreneurship
Collaborative. This was a way to convene
yearly summits, bring information about
advancing the youth social entrepreneurship
model, and allow organizational leaders to
learn from one another. Workshops, speakers, social media discussions, and morning
egg-bake breakfasts helped youth leaders
gather to learn strategic topics and
procedures.
3. Developing the infrastructure to collect
these indicators was more expensive, timeconsuming, and problematic than anticipated. Collecting data is often not viewed as
effective and efficient programming by
cash- strapped nonprofits serving youth in
low- income areas or youth from communities of color. The ability of many nonprofits
working with youth to collect yet another set
of indicators is strained by a number of factors: financial, personnel, and back office
capacity to capture and analyze data. The
back offices for most community-based
nonprofits may not include databases, or
consistent personnel. A summer intern is
often the designated accidental techie so that
change in personnel is common and disruptive. These informal systems must be
addressed and receive the capital needed
before a collective system can be developed.
While all programs funded with philanthropic or government dollars require evaluation, the requirements are not consistent.
As a result, nonprofits managers, like managers everywhere, are understandably wary.
The combination of working toward collective large-scale goals, such as creating a
specific youth workforce development strategy, brings philanthropy, governments, and
research to nonprofits to build capacity and
capture data that will enable multiple partners to develop policy solutions. This work
also enables nonprofits to document their
successes, reach for larger funding, and ultimately track alumni and support them with
innovations.
4. Putting youth first: nonprofit leaders are protective about burdening the youth they serve
with yet more indicators. Many youth face
daunting and invasive questionnaires in every
part of their lives. Gaining trust from these
youth requires that the youth have agency
about their personal information.
10 How the Youth Social Entrepreneurship (YSE) Model Supports Implementation...