Duration: 10/01/2009 to 10/01/2014

Administrative Advisor(s):

NIFA Reps:

Non-Technical Summary

Statement of Issues and Justification

While the benefits of 4-H participation are well documented for youth, little is known about the impact of 4-H participation on community social capital. 4-H programs foster youth-adult partnerships that encourage active participation by youth and adults, often over many years. We wish to determine how these unique partnerships contribute to the well-being of youth and of the greater community in which the 4-H development program is based.

Does the 4-H Youth Development Program build connections between non-family caring adults and young people which foster social capital for both participants and the community? This is the overarching research question the proposed Multi-State Education/Extension and Research Activity project will explore. Robert Putnam (2000) defines social capital as the connections among individuals and the social networks and the norms of reciprocity and trustworthiness that arise from them. Two central tenets of social capital are that social networks have value and relationships matter. As well as being thought of as an important component in the equation for positive youth development, some theorists and researchers have suggested the presence of social capital is a predictor of community action and engagement, and therefore, community development (Agnitsch, Flora & Ryan, 2006). The multi-state project will examine these topics by studying 4-H programs across the country.

Social Capital and Individual Youth Development

Research on indicators of positive youth development (Benson, 1997; Blum & Rinehart, 1997; National Research Council Institute of Medicine, 2002; Perkins & Borden, 2003; Zeldin, 2004) demonstrates the importance and need for connecting young people to caring adults in their communities. Youth development researchers and professionals now know meaningful, supportive connections with non-family adults can positively influence the path and quality of young people's lives. James Comer, M.D., perhaps best known for the founding of the Comer School Development Program in 1968 at Yale University School of Medicine, has said, "Relationships are to youth development what location is to real estate" (Valentine, Kahler & Cippoletti, 2005). Regardless of what it is called, the connection of young people to non-family caring adults is viewed as crucial for positive youth development. In the area of resiliency, it is often thought of as one of the most important components or protective factors necessary for healthy adolescent development (Benard, 1991, 1997, 2004; Werner and Smith, 1992). Zeldin (2004) reported that as a result of connections made with non-family caring adults in the greater community, youth benefit in numerous ways; such as job offers, financial and scholarship advice, speaking engagements, internships, and offers of membership in community groups. Social capital not only connects young people to caring adults in the community; it builds norms of trust and reciprocity. In fact, some theorists have indicated social capital is a significant indicator in the equation necessary for the positive development of children and youth (Coleman & Hoffer, 1987; Ferguson, 2006; Putnam, 2000).



In a qualitative study of three youth-serving organizations, Jarrett, Sullivan and Watkins (2005) found structured youth programs can and do facilitate the development of social capital. Using the selection parameters of being youth-centered, attempting to connect youth and adults in the community, having youth work toward goals, and being well thought of by youth professionals, Jarrett, Sullivan and Watkins selected an FFA Chapter, an urban arts program and an urban civic program for their study. An extensive and open-ended interview process with teenage participants in the programs found youth-community adult relationships were developed because of participation in the organizations. As a result of the connections that were formed, the research revealed "... the adults that the youth met through the three programs provided them with information, assistance, and exposure to adult worlds, support, and encouragement" (Jarrett, Sullivan & Watkins, 2005, pp. 49-50). The youth described the newly gained social capital as helping them achieve their immediate goals and preparing them for transition into adulthood. Those familiar with the concept of positive youth development will recognize the value of relationships, connections and interlinkages as they relate to social capital as necessary components for the positive development, support, and well-being of all children and youth. Through ties and connections at the family, neighborhood, school and community levels, young people gain access to a multitude of opportunities, experiences, and forms of support, including those in the areas of education, jobs and careers, emotional growth, and life skill development; all of which help with a successful transition to adulthood (Benson, 1997; National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, 2002; Scales, Benson, Leffert, & Blyth, 2000). Social capital, according to the Committee on Community-Level Programs for Youth, one of the foremost groups of scholars in the country to study community programs and youth development during the past decade, is a practical method for examining the linkages and connections, and hence the developmental resources a young person experiences in a particular setting (National Research Council Institute of Medicine, 2002).



Social Capital and Community Development



Jarrett, Sullivan & Watkins (2005) state since they were studying youth and did not collect any data from the community adults, the findings led them to focus solely on "social capital as an individual good for the youth" (p. 53). However, the researchers postulate adults may have gained some type of capital from their involvement with the youth, and that the new relationships would benefit the community as a whole since the networks of exchange formed by youth and adults build and strengthen networks of trust, something Putnam (2000) viewed as vital for engaged citizenry and effective communities. Jarrett, Sullivan and Watkins (2005) suggest further research would add to the knowledge of how social capital develops in youth development organizations.



Ferguson (2006) provides a critical synthesis of the international literature on social capital in relation to young people's well-being and reports, "The social capital literature indicates that this social resource [social capital] can facilitate positive outcomes with respect to children's and youth's well-being, including reducing adolescent pregnancy, delinquency, academic failure, and child maltreatment" (2006, p. 2). Ferguson concludes it can be beneficial to utilize a "social capital theoretical lens...to further explore various outcomes related to children and young people's well-being" (p. 9). This conclusion is based on two findings from her review: 1) social capital contributes to the welfare of children and youth, and 2) social capital is second only to poverty in having the highest influence on children's development and future success. Putnam said "Social capital keeps bad things from happening to good kids" (2000, p. 296). In stating this, Putnam was referring to his study comparing a state-level Social Capital Index with the Kids Count Index (Annie E. Casey Foundation), a well-known measure of child well-being developed by using a number of indicators that contribute to positive child development. "Statistically, the correlation between high social capital and positive child development is as close to perfect as social scientists ever find in data analysis of this sort" (2000, pp. 296-297). Putnam acknowledges the +.80 correlation between a state's high social capital and a high Kids Count index does not imply causation, but the statistical techniques used to explore the specific links between social capital and child well-being make it clear social capital is a significant indicator in the equation necessary for the positive development of children and youth. A "state's social infrastructure is far more important than anyone would have predicted in ensuring the healthy development of youth" (2000, p. 298).



Issues Addressed by the Proposed Research



The project will study different forms of social capital including bonding social capital (Gittell & Vidal, 1998; Putnam, 2000) which creates strong ties among people who already know each other and/or have a sense of common identity. We will also investigate the impact of 4-H involvement on bridging social capital (Putnam, 2000) which is outward looking and provides links beyond a shared sense of identity, and encompasses people across diverse groups. Putnam and other theorists (Field, 2003/2008; Gittell & Vidal, 1998; Halpern, 2005; Lin & Erickson, 2008) have said bonding social capital is a form of "sociological superglue" and bridging social capital provides a "sociological WD-40." Another viewpoint suggests bonding is good for "getting by," e.g. through relationships that provide support in times of trouble, and bridging is essential for "getting ahead," e.g. through relationships that link people to new resources and networks. Does 4-H foster bonding, bridging, or neither? To address the questions raised by researchers and practitioners and found within the literature, the project will focus on the following three research questions:


1. What 4-H Program experiences contribute to the development of youths' social capital?


2. How does the 4-H Program's community involvement impact the development of social capital among youth and adult volunteers?


3. How does the 4-H Program's community involvement impact the development of social capital within the community?


The proposed project, along with its research questions, aligns with the National priority areas of the CSREES Family Science program (CSREES/USDA, 2008), including strengthening family relationships, fostering healthy child development, and emerging issues in adult development and aging. Networks can help older citizens stay physically and mentally healthy (OECD, 2001; Schneider, 2004), or in other words, social networks have value for older citizens. Social capital is also an important tool to help promote family strengthening by raising children to become responsible, productive, and caring adults.


Benefits to Stakeholders


In accordance with the distinctive land-grant mission of teaching, research, and extended public service, this project will be conducted by Extension and AES faculty at the campus and state level, along with Extension educators at the regional and local levels. Project outcomes will help Extension educators at all levels, families, and other community members make informed decisions that enhance their quality of life and well-being through the development and enhancement of social capital and other capital forms, such as human, cultural, and political capital. This project has importance for all geographic areas; rural, suburban, and city. Furthermore, the findings will aid 4-H and other Extension educators in providing varied programming opportunities for youth and will also contribute to the development of social capital within the community.


James Comer, MD, in a recent keynote address to CYFAR attendees said, "I'm convinced we can create the kinds of social capital inner city kids, rural kids, and all kids...need to be successful in school and then in life (2008)." It is the intent of this study to address whether the 4-H Youth Development Program contributes to the development of individual and community social capital, thereby fostering and enhancing positive youth development as well as community development.

Objectives

Procedures and Activities

The purpose of this research project is to study whether the 4-H Youth Development Program builds connections between non-family caring adults and young people which foster social capital for both participants and the community.


As of May 1, 2009, nine states have signed-on to participate in this project (California, Kentucky, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, New Jersey, New York, Oregon and Wisconsin). The participation of these states and possibly others, from all regions of the country, will allow the study to take place in varied communities throughout the country. AES and Cooperative Extension faculty/educators involved in this research project will be responsible for recruitment of 4-H programs in their respective states to be part of the research study (numbers of sites within states to be determined). Some members of the project have been meeting informally and working together for 16 months, with at least monthly teleconference calls and meeting three times at conferences (CYFAR & Galaxy III); new members have joined the groups, some since the project was announced via NIMSS, and have been welcomed and brought into team discussions. A diverse and committed team, with the capacity to plan, implement, conduct and complete the research has been assembled. As a result of this time to discuss and formulate the general idea of the project and to develop the research objectives, there has also been good discussion on the research approach, including research methodology and protocol. The results of the work of the project members is presented below; however, not all of the research and measurement instrument design, methodology and specific data-analysis plans have been formulated and completed. By the official start date of the project, all of the research methodology and protocol will be finalized, and the research instruments (open-ended interviews and survey) will be ready for pilot testing.


Research Approach


A multi-method research approach will be used for this research study, with both qualitative and quantitative methods used as appropriate. The multi-method research approach for this project includes three primary components: (a) youth and adult stakeholder interviews & surveys (b) surveys of community members, and (c) document review. Information obtained in the interviews and surveys of will be enriched through the review of various documents prepared by the 4-H Programs and 4-H participants. Together these research methods provide a more comprehensive view of the community collaborative and its impacts than one approach alone (Creswell, 1998).


Data Collection and Analysis


The survey, interview protocol and other measurement tools developed by the team-members for use in this project will be pilot-tested in locales that will not be part of the research-study. Development of all data collection instruments will be done by a research team formed from committee members with input and feedback from all members of the project. Development of the instruments will be informed by:


* The small but growing field research on social capital, especially those studies exploring youth and community;


* Review of pertinent literature on social capital and youth development; and


* Discussions with researchers, practitioners and others in the field of positive youth development and social capital.


All data collected will be pooled for project-wide analysis, but data sets and at the state level (and possibly at additional levels) will be available to the project members for use in their states. All of these scenarios will be addressed in the research proposals submitted to the Institutional Review Boards (IRB) at the various universities.


Youth & Adult Interviews


One-on-one guided interviews will be conducted with randomly selected youth and adult stakeholders in each community. Interviews were selected as a data collection method in order to try to obtain people's real and rich experiences as 4-H members, volunteers and community members. As Seidman (1991) says, " . . . interviewing is most consistent with people's ability to make meaning through language. It affirms the importance of the individual without denigrating the possibility of community and collaboration" (p. 7).


The analysis of the interviews will be guided by the grounded theory approach as first espoused by sociologists Glaser and Strauss (1967) and further described by Charmaz (1983, 1995). The team will use NVivo 8 (QSR International, 2008), a qualitative data management program, to aid in the analysis of the interviews. This analysis will consist of coding and sorting text from the interview transcripts (Bazeley, 2007; Boyatzis, 1998; Gibbs, 2002). This coding will be performed for each of the primary questions posed to the interviewees. Members of the research team will verify the coding of responses through independent readings of the interview transcripts. After reviewing the coded and sorted text, a process of identifying themes and insights as discussed by Charmaz (1995), will occur. Any discrepancies or questions will be resolved by further review of original interview text.


Surveys


The quantitative multilevel survey will explore community knowledge or awareness of the 4-H Program, level of public visibility in community by a 4-H Program, and community involvement and support for the 4-H Program, all of which are variables important in the social capital equation. The questions on the survey will be informed by existing research on the factors that relate to development of social capital, including the ongoing work in Iowa on Community Capitals and the work of The World Bank (Grootaert, et al., 2004) and other researchers. Surveys will be also conducted with randomly selected 4-H youth and adult stakeholders in each community. The surveys will be ready for pilot testing by October 2009.


Document Review


There is a unique and exciting opportunity in this project to obtain and review documents assembled by 4-H participants that will aid greatly in determining and confirming both independent and dependent variables for each of the research objectives. Documents such as 4-H records or portfolios, 4-H reporter's books, 4-H secretary books and 4-H club annual memory or scrapbooks, will be reviewed by team members. When available, each 4-H program will provide the research team with copies of documents related to organizational structure (size of program, notes, and minutes of meetings including information on community involvement), communications with the public (posters, flyers, press releases, and newspaper clippings), pursuit of fund raising and other applications for monetary and in-kind support, and miscellaneous documents developed for different sub-groups, programs, and activities. There is currently an exciting research study being conducted in California using 4-H member's record books to assist in a life-skill development research project, which will inform this social capital study.


This information will be used by the research team to supplement the information provided by interviews and surveys. The documents will also be used to supplement what was garnered from the interviews about the themes and issues related to building connections between non-family caring adults and young people and the fostering of social capital for both participants and the community. The research team will place a primary value on the perspectives of program participants and community members as opposed to the records or documents. Weiss wrote "Program records and agency files are a 'natural' for evaluation data" (1972, p. 54) but also wrote that researchers cannot usually rely alone on such records for a complete picture. Thus, the documents will not be used to 'correct' what a person said in an interview or in a survey response. Instead, the documents will be viewed as additional collections of perspectives on what was going on in the 4-H Program and in the community and what it took to develop social capital.


The dependent and independent variables (to date) for each of the research objectives are listed below.


1. To determine 4-H experiences that contribute to the development of youths' social capital.
Dependent Variable: Social Capital (Bonding and Bridging Outcomes for Youth in 4-H)
Independent Variables:
* Member level of involvement
* Level of youth-adult partnerships (or youth-adult relationships)
* Length of involvement
* Size of local 4-H Program
* Number of active Volunteer Leaders


2. To identify and analyze how the level of the 4-H Program's community involvement impacts the level of social capital among youth and adult volunteers
Dependent Variable: Social Capital (Bridging and Bonding) Outcomes for Youth in 4-H & Adult Volunteers.
Independent Variables:
* Level of involvement in community by a 4-H Program
* Population of Community
* Size of local 4-H Program


3. To identify and analyze how the 4-H Program's community involvement impacts the development of social capital within the community.
Dependent Variable: Social Capital (Bridging and Bonding) Outcomes for Community Members
Independent Variables:
* Level of involvement in community by a 4-H Program
* Population of Community
* Size of local 4-H Program


4. To identify and analyze how public visibility of the role 4-H youth play in communities affect the opportunities afforded them by adults to participate in other community activities.
Dependent Variable: Social Capital (Bonding and Bridging) Outcomes for Youth in 4-H
Independent Variables:
* Level of public visibility in community by a 4-H Program
* Community Knowledge of the 4-H Program
* Population of Community
* Size of local 4-H Program


5. To identify and analyze how diversity among adult volunteers and 4-H youth impacts the level of social capital within the community.
Dependent Variable: Social Capital (Bridging and Bonding) Outcomes for Community Members
Independent Variables:
* Level of diversity (race, religion, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, etc.) of members and adult volunteers
* Population of Community
* Size of local 4-H Program


6. To identify and analyze how the level of the 4-H Program's community involvement impacts the level of the various capitals (as identified in the Community Capital Framework) within the community.
Dependent Variable: Community Capital (natural, cultural, human, social, political, financial and built capital) outcomes related to 4-H Program Activities.
Independent Variables:
* Level of involvement in community by a 4-H Program
* Length of involvement
* Size of local 4-H Program
* Population of Community


Milestones:


(2010): FOR OBJECTIVES 1 and 2: Convene project and research team(s) with 75% attendance on monthly calls and 60% attendance at yearly meetings; Complete application for NCERA; Identify at least 5 possible funding sources and submit proposals to two funding sources; Develop selection criteria for research sites and secure initial research sites; begin work on research protocol and begin Institutional Review Board application and approval procedure at Wave 1 institutions.


(2011): FOR OBJECTIVES 1 and 2: Project and research teams continue with 75% attendance on monthly calls and 60% attendance at yearly meeting(s). Submit additional proposals to two funding sources.


FOR OBJECTIVES 3 through 8: Research team creates successful research design and data collection techniques and tools; Team begins data collection for Wave 1 locations and begins to analyze data; provides feedback to project team members and receives input on process; and complete Institutional Review Board application and approval procedure at Wave 2 institutions.


(2012): FOR OBJECTIVES 1 and 2: Project and research teams continue with 75% attendance on monthly calls and 60% attendance at yearly meeting(s). Submit additional proposals to two funding sources.


FOR OBJECTIVES 3 through 8: Team begins data collection for Wave 2 locations and continues to analyze data; Team continues to provide feedback to project team members and receives input on process; Team prepares preliminary report on research findings, including reports to practitioners; and complete Institutional Review Board application and approval procedure at Wave 3 institutions.


(2013): FOR OBJECTIVES 1 and 2: Project and research teams continue with 75% attendance on monthly calls and 60% attendance at yearly meeting(s). Submit additional proposals to two funding sources.


FOR OBJECTIVES 3 through 8: Team begins data collection for Wave 3 locations and continues to analyze data; Begin to:


* Characterize 4-H experiences that contribute to the development of youths' social capital;


* Characterize how the level of the 4-H Program's community involvement impacts the development of social capital among youth and adult volunteers;


* Characterize how the 4-H Program's community involvement impacts the development of social capital within the community;


* Characterize how public visibility of the role 4-H youth play in community affects the opportunity afforded them by adults to participate in other community activities;


* To identify and analyze how diversity of adult volunteers and 4-H youth impacts the level of social capital within the community; and


* To identify and analyze how involvement in community by the 4-H Program impacts the level of various capitals (as identified in the Community Capital Framework) within the community.


Team reports findings through white papers, reports to practitioners, and begins preparation of peer-reviewed journal articles.


(2014): FOR OBJECTIVES 1: Project and research teams continue with 75% attendance on monthly calls and 60% attendance at yearly meeting(s).


FOR OBJECTIVES 3 through 8: Completion of data analysis from all waves of the project; Document findings for all stakeholder groups in appropriate formats; Host conference to present research findings; Develop a booklet for 4-H Programs of practices and strategies to increase the development of social capital; prepare and submit final reports.

Expected Outcomes and Impacts

Projected Participation

View Appendix E: Participation

Educational Plan

This multi-state ERA project will benefit 4-H programs across the nation in a number of ways, including learning how the social networks formed as a natural outcome of 4-H involvement have value and that these relationships matter a great deal. The results of the multi-year project provided during the course of the study will show impacts and development toward proving or disproving hypotheses.


The project's membership consists of individuals representing multiple states from across the country. Many members are actively involved in education and outreach within their own states and institutions. Therefore, a great deal of outreach and education regarding the role and importance of 4-H for building social capital will occur naturally and informally through the many connections and collaborations of the project's membership. This will generate greater participation in communities that stand to benefit from improved community social capital. We will capitalize on strengthened relationships between land grant staff and faculty in those institutions in each state and/or tribal college who partner with the Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA/CSREES).


In addition, members will disseminate project findings though their state and national level networks through training that will ultimately benefit client groups. Specific action proposed by the project's membership to expand the awareness of the role building social capital plays within 4-H, and between 4-H and communities will include:


1. Publication of research findings within youth and community development journals such as Journal of Extension, Community Development Society Journal, or reports published by National 4-H Council or centers housed at land grant institutions.


2. Publication of articles through professional organizations like NAE4-HA newsletters, other periodicals and interactive websites like 4-H ACCESS or CYFERnet.


3. Presentation of findings at practitioner conferences such as the Children Youth and Families At-Risk (CYFAR) Conference, National Association of 4-H Agents (NAE4-HA) Conference and/or Community Development Society Conference.


4. Presentation of findings at youth-centered conferences such as National 4-H Conference, National 4-H Congress or Citizenship Washington Focus.


5. Creation of white papers that synthesize the research findings on the potential for social capital formation within different 4-H modes of delivery and programs, such as Youth in Governance, 4-H Tech Teams, and GIS Community Mapping.


6. Project member sharing of information in local forums emphasizing how youth development ultimately affects community development and social capital.

Organization/Governance

Project governance closely follows the recommended guidelines outlined in the Guidelines for ERA Projects.


The recommended Standard Governance for multi-state ERA Projects includes the election of a Chair, a Chair-elect, and a Secretary. The Chair and Chair-elect will be elected for two-year terms to provide continuity, and the Secretary will be elected for a one-year term. Administrative guidance will be provided by the assigned Administrative Advisor and the CSREES Representative.


The Chair is responsible for calling the meeting(s) and teleconferences, developing the agenda and conducting the meeting(s). He/she is also primarily responsible for coordinating with other regional committees.


The Chair-elect is responsible for meeting(s) program(s) and conducting the meeting(s) and teleconferences in absence of the chair.


The Secretary is responsible for keeping meeting minutes, including teleconferences, maintaining mailing lists, handling registration fees, and distributing meeting minutes to project members and other interested parties.

Literature Cited

Agnitsch, K., Flora, J. & Ryan, V. (2006). Bonding and bridging social capital: the interactive effects on community action. Community Development, 37(1), 36-51.


Bazeley, P. (2007). Qualitative Data Analysis with NVivo. London: Sage.


Benard, B. (1991). Fostering resiliency in kids: Protective factors in the family, school, and community. Portland, OR: Western Center for Drug-Free Schools and Communities.


Benard, B. (1997). Resiliency research: Foundation for youth development. Resiliency in Action, 2(1), 13-17.


Benard, B. (2004). Resiliency: What we have learned. San Francisco: WestEd.


Benson, P. L. (1997). All Kids Are Our Kids: What Communities Must Do to Raise Caring and Responsible Children and Adolescents. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


Blum, R.W., and Rinehart, P. M. (1997). Reducing the risk: Connections that make a difference in the lives of youth. Minneapolis, MN: Division of General Pediatrics and Adolescent Health, University of Minnesota.


Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.


Charmaz, K. (1983). The grounded theory method: An explication and interpretation. In R. Emerson (Ed.), Contemporary field research (pp.109-129). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.


Charmaz, K. (1995). The logic of grounded theory. In J. A. Smith, R. Harré & L. van Langenhove (Eds.), Rethinking methods in psychology (pp. 27-49). London: Sage.


Coleman, J. S. & Thomas, Hoffer, T. (1987). Public and private high schools: The impact of communities. New York: Basic Books.


Comer, J. (2008, May). Parents, Educators, and Community Collaboration to Promote Student Success in School and in Life. Keynote Address, CYFAR 2008, San Antonio, TX. Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES), USDA. Retrieved November 2008 from http://www.cyfernet.org/cyfar08/keynotes.html.


Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.


Ferguson, K. M. (2006). Social capital and children's well-being: A critical synthesis of the international social capital literature. International Journal of Social Welfare, 15(1), 2-18.


Field, J. (2003). Social Capital. London: Routledge.


Field, J. (2008). Social capital: Second edition. London: Routledge.


Gibbs, G. R. (2002). Qualitative data analysis: Explorations with NVivo. New York, NY: Open University Press.


Gittell, R. & Vidal, A. (1998). Community organizing: Building social capital as a development strategy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.


Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publications.


Grootaert, et al. (2004). Measuring social capital: An integrated questionnaire. (World Bank working paper; no. 18). Washington, D.C.: The World Bank


Halpern, D. (2005). Social Capital. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.


Jarrett, R. L., Sullivan, P. J., & Watkins, N. D. (2005). Developing social capital through participation in organized youth programs: Qualitative insights from three programs. Journal of Community Psychology, 33(1), 41-55.


Kress, C. (1999). 4-H Essential Elements. Retrieved October 2008 from http://4htools.cals.arizona.edu/cssSite/essentialElements.cfm


Lin, N., & Erickson, B. (2008). Social capital: An international research program. New York: Oxford University Press.


National Research Council Institute of Medicine. (2002). Community programs to promote youth development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.


OECD. (2001). The well-being of nations: The role of human and social capital. OECD Policy Brief, November, Paris: Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development.


Perkins, D. F., & Borden, L. M. (2003). Positive behaviors, problem behaviors, and resiliency in adolescence. In R. M. Lerner, M. A. Easterbrooks, & J. Mistry (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Vol. 6. Developmental psychology (pp. 373-394). New York: Wiley.


Putnam, R.D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon and Schuster.


QSR International. (2008). NVivo 8 for Microsoft Windows. Melbourne, Australia.


Scales, P. C., Benson, P. L., Leffert, N., & Blyth, D. A. (2000). Contribution of developmental assets to the prediction of thriving among adolescents. Applied Developmental Science, 4(1), 27-46.


Schneider, J. A. (2004, November). The role of social capital in building healthy communities. Policy Paper produced for the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Retrieved August 2007 from http://www.aecf.org/upload/PublicationFiles/CC3622H755.pdf.


Seidman, I. E. (1991). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in educational and the social sciences. New York: Teachers College Press.


Valentine, N., Kahler, J., & Cippoletti, S. (2005). Issues facing rural youth: A compendium of research, reports, and public opinion polls. A document produced for the National 4 H Headquarters, Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES), USDA. Retrieved August 2008 from http://www.national4-Hheadquarters.gov/library/ruralresearch.pdf.


Weiss, C. H. (1972). Evaluation research: Methods for assessing program effectiveness. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.


Werner, E.E., & Smith, R.S. (1992). Overcoming the odds: High risk children from birth to adulthood. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.


Zeldin, S. (2004). Youth as agents of adult and community development: Mapping the processes and outcomes of youth engaged in organizational governance. Applied Developmental Science, 8(2), 75-90.

Attachments

Land Grant Participating States/Institutions

CA, IA, IL, IN, KS, KY, ME, MI, MN, NE, NJ, NY, OR, PA, VA, WI

Non Land Grant Participating States/Institutions

Auburn University, National Program Leader, University of Missouri - Columbia