Lancaster Community Library VISIONS YouthWorks Program

The program initiated last year, then called the Summer Jobs for Youth program, has been funded for the next three years by duPont and renamed the YouthWorks program.

The program summary for last year, prepared by Lindsy Gardner, is linked below:

http://tinyurl.com/33kzvcy

Report to the Northern Neck Housing Study Group

The Northern Neck Housing Study Group has asked that we make the Report, prepared by czbLLC in partnership with Virginia Tech and presented in March of 2009, available to all on this blog. This housing study, made possible by the duPont Fund, was an effort to assess the situation in the Northern Neck with an eye toward possible solutions.

http://tinyurl.com/22tdhlk

Please be warned that it is quite long and it may take a few minutes for the pdf image to sharpen up to a readable level. Patience, please!

Summary report on evaluation results

“I am so proud of our community for doing this and proud to have participated. Thank you!”
The first round of Community Conversations on Reducing Poverty in the Northern Neck concluded with an Action Forum on March 27, 2010. This was just one of many positive statements made on participant evaluations at that meeting.

In collecting data from participant registrations and from these evaluations, we can make some observations about who chose to commit to this dialog-to-action process – and, more importantly, who was not included.

The registration forms indicated that we had more than 50 people who signed up formally, although more actually participated. About 60% were female, and 40% were male. They ranged in age from 22 to 80+ years, with a remarkably even distribution between the age range of 40 to 60 or more. However, very few participants were younger than 40, resulting in a mean age of 59. In response to a question about racial/ethnic background, about 25% identified themselves as African American and 75% as Caucasian. The religious affiliations were diverse, with 11 different religions or churches represented. Their stated political views also showed variety. “Moderate” views dominated, with even distribution of conservative and liberal stances.

All but one participant had some college or more education, with 14 having graduate or advanced degrees. Many of them indicated they engaged in volunteer and political activities and, not surprisingly, they were very involved in the community.

Most telling of all the statistics was the annual income. Only two reported incomes under $25,000 per year. The largest number of participants came from the range of $25,000 to $100,000 per year. A few even reported higher incomes.

What does all this mean?

It means we need to get more people who actually experience poverty directly into our conversation. It means we need to recruit more African Americans to contribute. And it means we need to hear from younger people.

But it also means that we were able to get about 60 people to care enough about poverty in the Northern Neck to commit 2 hours a week for 5 weeks! And the surprising thing is that many of them said that wasn’t enough time, they wanted more. Their ideas were presented with passion and energy, and many had comments to share about the process and the problem. Most of all, they wanted to see changes.

“I will be very disappointed if some action to ameliorate poverty in the Northern Neck does not occur.”

Some sample comments from the evaluations!

What they liked:
• Hearing others viewpoints, ideas and opinions
• Open communication
• Getting to know people they might not have known otherwise
• Enthusiastic, concerned people willing to work on the issue
• The opportunity to discuss a vital topic
• Atmosphere where everyone’s views and ideas were valued
• “Involving so many in this grassroots discussion is excellent for its educational value as well as ‘buy in’ value when solutions are implemented.”
• The intensity of the conversations, the ability to have some really difficult but meaningful conversations.

What they didn’t like:
• Not enough time, not long enough, needed more meetings
• Needed to delve deeper in the issue of race.
• Shock at the extreme level of racism still openly present in our community, on both sides.
• Not enough diversity, not a good cross section. Poor, poorest were not included.
• Did not differentiate between short-range and long-range projects.
• Not enough emphasis on action, need more time to talk about actions and going forward. Strike while the iron is hot!
• Really need a mechanism to welcome and include more marginalized people.
• Need to change the word “poverty” – Very negative and will not attract the voices we need to hear from.

Discussion guide:
In general, they liked the discussion guide, with some reservations. Very few had negative ratings, but many were neutral responses.

Facilitators:
They loved their facilitators! Very few negatives and neutrals, overall agreement that the facilitators did a good job of making them welcome, did not try to influence the group, and explained the process well.

Overall evaluation:
Despite their comments otherwise, they rated the length of each meeting, number of meetings, and number of people in their group “just right” most of the time. The overall rating of the program as a whole was an astonishing mean of 4.4, with 5 being “very good” and 4 as “good.”

Last, but not least, of the Lancaster proposals!

One of the things to remember as you read over this one is that some form of an integrated resource directory for the Northern Neck is something that many groups have suggested and sought after. This proposal could be a part of several of the other suggestions for a more centralized or coordinated approach. Again, in the Lancaster Community Conversation group's own words:

Action Item
INTEGRATED DATABASE OF COMMUNITY RESOURCES
(Lancaster Visions Group: Proposed 3/27/10)

Goal:
To establish a comprehensive and accessible database of community resources (services & programs)

Reasons needed:
To match community resources to community needs
To encourage cooperation, collaboration and communication among providers
To assist in identifying gaps in services/programs
To decrease duplication of services and programs

Implementation
1.Identify what’s already in place and/or in development such as:
Connect Rappahannock
Visions Resource Sharing meetings
Northumberland/Lancaster Interfaith Services Council (has gathered
information with assistance from St. Andrew’s on 30-40
resources/providers)
Other organizations such as Bay Aging, DSS, CRS, etc. also have information
2.Determine contents/categories
3.Gather information of resources/programs
Specifics on service/program
Contact Person (ex. for future updating)
4.Create database
5.Maintain database including updates

Questions:
1.Limit to Northumberland and Lancaster Counties?
2.Leadership/task force to develop and implement?
3.Who will be responsible for compiling and maintaining the database?
Skilled volunteers to research and input data?
4.How to market this resource and make information available?

Financial Implications:
1.Part-time Database Project Coordinator (paid or volunteer)
2.Web Page design and maintenance (webmaster)

NOTE: This Action Idea may be a “stand alone” project or integrated into the Clearinghouse model Action Idea also proposed by the Lancaster Group.

"I Can, I Will" proposal from the Lancaster group

Here is another thoughtful proposal that came out of the Lancaster Community Conversation.

Action Item
“I CAN, I WILL”
Visions Lancaster Group: Proposed 3/27/10


Goal:
To form a grass roots partnership between Bay Aging and residents of local communities/neighborhoods, connecting Bay Aging Options Counselors with individuals and/or groups who desire to become empowered to advocate for and obtain resources in order to achieve and sustain self-sufficiency.

Description:
Options Counselors would identify trusted and natural leader(s) (patriarch/matriarch types, for example) in a neighborhood or local community who would be engaged to gather together those in the neighborhood/community with like needs and concerns. The counselor and local leader would develop a plan offering effective strategies to gather potential participants for exchange of information on resources at local gatherings. Gatherings would take place in the leader’s home (think “Tupperware parties”) or other accessible, friendly location with the leader as convener.

The desired outcomes would include: self identification of needs and ways to achieve self sufficiency; development of skills and knowledge for advocating for themselves or for a neighborhood/local community’s needs; effective and respectful partnering of providers and those seeking services. The local participants would have ownership of and control over the process. The concept is one of empowerment.

Background:
Bay Aging currently has Options Counselors who provide counseling and assistance to consumers through an emergency services program. The funding for this program ends in this fiscal year.

Bay Aging has noted success in a paradigm that sends Options Counselors in some cases into homes and local communities, partnering with the local resident(s) or family to assist in determining needs and goals and then helping match them with services.

The project proposed in this Action Idea would use and build on an already established and trained base at Bay Aging and their past experience in a process that appears to offer promise for the grass roots partnering we propose.

Financial Considerations:
•Partial funding for Options Counselors
•Stipends and expense reimbursement for local leaders
•Transportation made available to participants, as needed through Bay Transit or some other provider

Next Lancaster Community Conversation contribution

At left, Cathy Hemans goes into more detail as the rest of us listen carefully.

The Lancaster group had some great ideas. Here's another in their own words:


Action Item
NORTHERN NECK COMMUNITY ENRICHMENT CENTER
(Lancaster Visions Group: Proposed 3/27/10

Description:
The Center will be a centralized gathering place, initially for women and their children under school age, where Moms can meet and interact with each other in a comfortable environment. The Center will be a place to visit with each other, form support groups and participate in programs and planned activities, targeting needs and interests determined by participants. The goals of the Center include networking, building support systems and helping people who desire to improve their lives and the lives of their families. The Center will serve as a central resource to provide information concerning area events and programs that will enrich and enhance the lives of those coming to and participating in the Center as well as offering programs and events on site. Supervision, care and enrichment activities will be available for the children during parent participation in adult programs.

Programs and information may include, for example, such topics as:
1. How to start and develop a business
2. Education planning (how to prepare for and get a GED; becoming a CNA; exploring other certifications and/or technical programs; educational opportunities at the community college level, etc. including identifying sources of funding, etc.)
3. Resume building; interviewing techniques; job related issues.
4. Parenting
5. Nutrition; meal planning/preparation
6. Arts, crafts, photography, gardening
7. Budgeting; credit and debt issues; home acquisition planning.
8. Matching volunteer mentor and/or coaches with those interested in one on one or group mentoring/coaching.

Location:
A suggested location might be the former Sears Roebuck store in the Lancaster Shopping Center which could be leased and divided into various spaces depending on type of use. Another possibility might be the development of such a center as an adjunct to the local library.

Staffing
Initially, one or two paid positions: Director, either full time or part-time. Part time would work if center initially open only on designated days. Part time assistant could be helpful. Develop and use volunteers for some functions. Community members with special areas of expertise used for programs.

Other Considerations
Parking
Transportation
Food Availability

Another Lancaster Community Conversation proposal

Again, the Lancaster group put a lot of thought and effort into their proposals and I'm going to respect that by including them verbatim. This is the second of their five proposed strategies.

Action Item
CENTRALIZED RESOURCE CLEARINGHOUSE FOR LANCASTER & NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTIES
Lancaster Visions Group: Proposed 3/27/10

Description

To establish an “umbrella” service organization for area churches in Lancaster & Northumberland Counties to serve as a clearinghouse to match county residents seeking services and programs to community resources. *

The purpose would be to coordinate and/or utilize church resources (money, volunteers, programs) targeted to social service needs and to provide an effective, coordinated process of interviewing and connecting people with resources. The clearinghouse would work in partnership with all components of the local social services infrastructure, including the local Departments of Social Services.

The clearinghouse could offer satellite intake locations on designated days to accommodate client access. Suggested satellite locations are feasible in locations near or adjacent to where County Courthouse/County DSS are located (for ex. Heathsville for Northumberland Co, Lancaster Courthouse for “Upper” Lancaster Co.).

Current effective “Clearinghouse” models/organizations exist all around the U.S. Examples include: ACTS in Richmond, VA; ACTC in the Baltimore, MD area; LOVE, Inc. in multiple locations, etc. Other models may vary as to emphasis : 1) simply connecting needs and resources; 2) providing some services (ex. Food Pantry, Thrift store) directly on-site; 3) facilitating/offering “relational” ministries/programming.

Provision of financial and programmatic resources as distributed by government funded agencies such as local Departments of Social Services (DSS) have criteria which limit accessibility, dependent on the funding program. Other non-profit organizations (ex. Bay Aging) that utilize government grants/funding also have limitations placed on distribution. A “privately” funded clearinghouse organization has greater flexibility to assist those who fall outside the “criteria” required by government funded programs.

Some features of the Clearinghouse Model:
The program would include a paid Director (part-time or full time). It would utilize trained volunteers:
To interview and screen clients
To manage and maintain computerized data base
Of clients and use of services
Of available resources (see Lancaster Group Action Plan re Integrated Data Base)

The duties of the Director would include:
•Train and coordinate volunteers
•Oversee data bases
•Maintain contact/communication with other public (i.e. DSS’s) and private service organizations
•Serve as liaison with churches and clergy
•Develop/implement marketing and publicity strategies
•Manage operations budget, subject to Board

Funding
•From grants
•From participating churches who are able to provide funding
•In kind provision of space by churches and of volunteers

Reasons Needed

•Churches who have financial resources to distribute to people in need and people desiring assistance to help them achieve financial stability could benefit from the coordination and centralization of certain functions that make screening and distribution most effective. It is a time consuming process when decentralized fraught with concerns that our distribution from church to church may not be reaching the people who are really in need and who desire to move into longer term financial stability.
•It is a way for smaller churches, less financially able, to participate in a network of service provision and be an integral part of the connection of area residents to services.
•It offers an opportunity for all the churches, whatever the denomination, whatever the population they serve, to come together, to develop relational ministries and to serve the common good.
•It eases the access challenges for potential clients, who at this time, go from church to church, service organization to service organization, as they seek assistance.
•The ministerial associations (Lancaster and Northumberland) have identified a need to examine some form of centralization of certain functions and greater coordination of identification and distribution of church and community resources.
•It would help reduce the overuse of financial assistance by those individuals who utilize the system to perpetuate a dependent lifestyle and model such to continuing generations.
•It would better assure that the limited financial resources are distributed in a way that would more effectively impact poverty in the Northern Neck and assist those who desire to achieve financial stability and independence.
•It could help decrease overlap and/or duplication of services.
•It could help identify gaps in services/programming that may be needed for area residents and stimulate the development of such.


*Alternative would be to develop this model within an existing non-for-profit organization, such as Church Resource Service (CRS) or Lancaster/Northumberland Interfaith Services Council