Brief Summary of Minutes of Annual Meeting

Decisions Made at the Annual Meeting of NCERA215: March 15-17, 2011 Washington, DC NIFA Headquarters Waterfront Centre, Conference Room 3455 A&B General Project Discussion: Research Group Process: A short discussion of best practices for involving others in the work included Joe's observations that successful multistate projects have members who want to be part of it and they find something they want to get out of it. Projects have value for the team and the team gets value out of them. It is important to be prepared to adapt to slight differences that each state will need. QSR International NVivo 9 one-hour Introduction to NVivo webinar by Stacy Penna, Cambridge, MA - Could we nest the server DV into ANR Collaborative Tools? Suzanne and Joe will look into USDA providing server space for multistate projects plus providing the software. Research Instruments and Research Questions: We reviewed results from our preliminary mapping pilot research in light of our two research questions: 1) What 4-H Program experiences contribute to the development of youths' social capital? Activities that seem to foster social capital: * Work on issues of concern to others & other organizations (bridging) * Youth decision making/choice/voice * Activities where youth see themselves and are seen by others as resources * Co-leading activities w/adults, teaching others * Community betterment (bonding) * Organizing & leading community efforts 2) How does the 4-H Program's community involvement impact the development of social capital within the community? Factors that seem to influence development of social capital: * Providing assistance to community members in need * Joining in collaborations or collaborative efforts * Projects/programs/activities influencing communities natural capital leading to financial capital leading to expanded recreation * Organizing & leading community efforts *Membership on boards leading to community betterment Overall approach to using mapping: * Engaging young people in reflection * Using the Community Capitals to map impact * Great information, difficult to analyze across maps * Activities that develop bonding social capital are very important to build trust and the capacity to work together * Activities that develop bridging social capital connect youth to community leaders and resource people * Often youth feel the most significant change in the community as a result of their work is cultural capital  ways of thinking and doing in regard to youth people We reviewed progress being made on the triangulation instruments: Social capital assessment tool * With youth participating in the mapping activity * Revised Univ. of Minnesota Extension survey * Approximately 15 minutes to complete Social capital interview questions * With youth participating in the mapping activity We discussed broader research design, including sample populations: Joining in collaborations or collaborative efforts Projects/programs/activities influencing communities natural capital leading to gains in financial capital and leading to increased recreation Organizing & leading community efforts Membership on boards leads to community betterment Approximately 20 states are currently participating There are approximately 3 million 4-H youth in the participating states. 1862 and 1890 Land Grant Institutions involve All 4 Regions represented Social capital assessment tool - Survey We will collaborate with University of Minnesota's Humphrey School of Public Affairs and Extension Program on their assessment youth survey tool to the point of developing a valid kid-friendly youth instrument and add questions for adolescents 12-18 years old. They will do the data analysis and report results. Our group has decided they will use these constructs: Bonding Engagement; Bridging Engagement; Linking Engagement; Bonding Networks; Linking Trust. Decided to discuss topics: At the end of the revision will the copyright be held by MN or with us because we invested our time or altered it substantially? Time frame and quantity needs to be fully discussed. **UNIT OF ANALYSIS is the club - FINAL DECISION We will use a Stratified Random Sample -diverse clubs with 2 youth interviews selected by community. A report about the diversity of youth will be in our survey. We may use a survey demographics model at back of the survey where researchers say they are more likely to be answered (provided by Suzanne). Joe suggested giving another group the survey as a control (schools). We may use Mary's 2x2 model to find the type of club that is more likely to build social capital for data collection. Positive Bridging - High Community Involvement Negative Bridging - Low Community Involvement High Positive Bonding Community Connection Focused interest Low Positive Bonding Connect to individual projects Fragmented Surveys get incredible and meaningful information about connections they had made and what happened as a result. We will use NVivo to find themes and will give them the survey and do mapping at the same time. Adult stakeholder surveys - confirm impact. Youth Survey from MN: Currently according to Scott, they are for 9th - 12th grade we want them to be flexible with ages - must add - 8th or below and beyond 12th . Social capital assessment tool - Interview Questions - Triangulation: Suzanne stated, triangulation is important for mixed method approach. Include the adults as the bridgers as well as the being-bridged-to. We will go back to maps to find out whom to interview: Rotary, Elks, Kiwanis, City Council, Parks and Recreation to see impacts. Have a list to pull from with roles i.e. Council, Civic, etc. One-on-one can probe to a deeper level. Common themes across the small rural interviews and urban communities, you would get a good understanding of the process. We do not all have to do the same things. At least four interviews per state or if getting same data, then less is ok. Make sure interviewer is trained and consistent. (This next part was not clearly decided :) If it is important do 4 in each cell (urban, rural, and suburban) for the entire nation IF it matters with 2 youth interviews selected by community. With interviewing, code the surveys and go back to code to find out demographic & cell information. We should do a pilot study first, to tease out information. Funding: We discussed several efforts underway to secure funding: GRANTS Who Due Other Kellogg Mary NIH  Richard will follow-up with Nicole; Suzanne gets info. UCANR Keith and Richard May 1 Stuart CA/WA Keith and Richard, Janet Edwards Kansas Health Foundation Elaine August Spencer Mtg. at CYFAR Ap. 29 WT Grant  Contacts by Suzanne Intro program officers Robert Wood Johnson Intro (by Suzanne) National 4-H Council Making a Pitch Soon Webinar/Training NCRCRD North Central Regional Center on Rural Development.  We know some things as a result of the research mapping pilot, here are some things that happened Elaine came to group; Steve Henness group; 4-H and Com teams  stimulated conversation Survey to members (Nancy Erbstein) Barb/Roger; Matt talking to someone takes time, can do by phone/email TASK** General: We discussed progress and proposals for disseminating results: PUBLICATIONS/who Purpose Audience Other *1 New Directions Publication Suzanne will co-author Roll Out national survey Youth Development Outline NOW 2012 or later 1 " CD Practice Article Barb Baker, Mary Emery, Matt " Elaine (read on plane) to Barb Mary & Matt for changes by March 31 How to Mapping Tool Community Dev folks For July issue Changes made by April 15. She will look at the instructions 2 White Paper Matt, Mary, & Elaine Deliverable for NCNCRD 6/30 General youth civic engagement (CIRCLE or Tufts ) 3 JOE Sharon & Keith, Elaine mapping = strategy or reflection Results Extension 4 Journal of Youth Development Barb mapping process Elaine around health. Steve July/Nov Impact; Research strategy; youth-driven 4-H/YD, conceptual framework; Case study vulnerable populations 5 *1 New Directions Publication series of smaller articles Invite authors, roll out project Youth Development Outline NOW 6 Webinar presentation, with writing possibilities Visibility State 4-H/CD Program Directors 75 seats Be mindful of authorship issues in teams See Richard's article revisit authorship. Webinar Citation: Authors in Alphabetical Order (Moved team along; graphics) WORK PLAN Literature Reviews: " Good research on the impact of engagement on youth's social capital " Little research on elements of programming that encourage the development of social capital " Lots of confusion in the literature about social capital - attribute of individuals vs part of the social structure. Most research on youth and social capital is informed by the individual approach. " Very little research on youth engagement and the social structure " Enormous difficulties in linking youth engagement to community social capital either amalgamation of individual attributes or impact on social structure " Need to tease out the elements that link to social capital versus program focus " Funders are interested in quantitative designs " Successful youth development efforts involve participating in and contributing to the wider community " Recent research on successful community change and sustainable community development identifies youth engagement as a critical element in the process Logic Model (Theory of Change - Mary): Input: Youth/Adult partnerships Identified Community Issues Activity: Kid focused projects -i.e. park/team Short-term: Bonding - interest leads to education to apply - Individual agency - Collective agency Short-term: Bridging (or dormant) Make use of capitals Mid-term: Impact policy system Long term: Social study and individual Community - Capitals What starts What moves it along Types of projects & activities What do for adults & community? (Argument = community is better because kids are involved) Additional Project Tasks: Project Timeline & Assignments for next 12 months: Ready by WHAT Steps WHO Finished product ASAP Who owns the results MOU for IRB each state own all results? Amy will help with the results MOU - One month BEFORE May/June Spring Survey Validation w/IRB from CA copy to KS, ME & WI. Need 300 15 min w/grades 9th to 12th Elaine and Richard will sample KS, ME & WI Survey Validation by June publish and help with funding. Fall Single State Pilot go thru whole process-rural, urban, & suburban CA will do it looking for the money Pilot Results CONFERENCES/PRESENTATIONS AEA  early November Anaheim CA - teaching actual mapping process - skill building category; Suzanne, Keith, Mary, Barb kcnathaniel@ucdavis.edu. Due Friday Mar 18 send to Suzanne, she will apply (Early November) NECV Idaho Barb April 18-21 CYFAR DoD Barb Richard, Matt Mary April 27-29 Urban Extension Conference Sharon workshop/poster May Community Dev Conf in Boise Mary (panel spot?) July 28-30 (Steve?) SRA Society for Research on Adolescents civic engagement Matt July call for papers 2012 Mar/April REVIEW OF THE STRUCTURE OF THE GROUP: 1) OVERALL PROJECT MANAGEMENT- coordinator/co-coordinator (Richard and Mary) including spending time looking for resources for the project. (Barb Secretary) a. Review NIMSS members who is active in our group and how to keep people involved? 2) RESEARCH/PROPOSALS COORDINATING COMMITTEE a. Literature review b. Instrument design - have a job description for each one c. Survey, interview and mapping d. Analysis 3) GRANTS/FUNDING COMMITTEE a. NCRCRD - more methodological in focus (Matt, Mary-completed w/Wisconsin) b. NIH - more outcome-oriented (Nicole/Penn State) c. NSF - more methodological in focus (Mary) d. See chart for additional funding 4) OUTREACH/EXTENSION a. Sharing of best practices, models 5) PUBLICATIONS/SCHOLARLY ACTIVITY a. Article in JOE about the process of putting a multi-state workgroup together/NIMMS b. Article on mapping and presentations (see chart) 6) SUZANNE'S ROLE IN THE PROJECT a. Can work with our group in a capacity-building mode - assist with meeting space, coordination, etc. b. Suzanne cannot assist with proposal development for AFRI, for example.

Accomplishments: Short-term outcomes: " Mapping Pilot  NCNCRD funding secured, pilot mapping projects completed, analysis by group in Madison, Wisconsin July 2011. Outputs: " Webinar  How to do mapping " Presentations  See chart Future directions: " Review NIMSS members  who is active in our group and how to keep people involved? " Prepare a paragraph or two about expectations to see who is committed and for what phase? " Show people whats in it for them and be part of the team. " Richard will decide the minimum common core of data elements needed across states in order to do analysis based on the numbers of clubs; communities; etc. Richard will work on this and get it out to those around the table. NUMBERS for Research Youth Surveys - REEIS State State Totals Surveys Needed Kansas 69,000 345 Maryland 47,509 California - 1,009 Illinois 300,000 Maine 30,000 Broader research design, including sample population(s) " Reasonable number: # Proportional to youth in the states. Variables of interest: urban rural, type of club, ethnicity, service-learning, average age of members, intensity and duration (matrix), " If scores are high where youth who do maps are present, then, we know something about whether we the activities/strategies are related to building social capital. " Need 10 more maps to test. If nothing new shows up, then any maps that move forward would be linked to the survey. " We need the directions to be completed and used by 10 people who didnt do the mapping to do the mapping  here is a methodology that kids need to celebrate and USDA can collect data for what they need. Then, roll the mapping out as part of our research design. " Make guide for how to do it. Process for going through this had meaning in itself. At same time put data into national system to report. Mapping can be stand-alone activity. " Adding a purpose to the survey. Create comparisons between high involvement clubs and low involvement clubs. Ask as observer in the community to evaluate involvement. " 6 sites (non - community) " 6 sites (yes - community) " 250 surveys " 250 surveys " 10 Youth interviews " 10 Youth interviews " 10 Adult interviews  community stakeholders " 10 Adult interviews Activities: " We are planning a webinar for state 4-H program leaders and Community Development program leaders, pulling people together to connect the dots. RYD (Rural Youth Development) group has opportunity to learn about community capitals and is laying out measurements for social capital. Future directions: " Count the assets and the capitals to analyze the trajectory that leads toward social capital. Move from evidence-based programming toward evidence-based strategies. " Survey Validation Pilot  get 350 kids to fill it out to see if constructs still hold up. Nancy Erbstein (and Katherine from California) will do cognitive testing before survey is ready. Single State Pilot  choose one state and go through whole process  selection of clubs in rural, urban, and suburban. Package for this process that our team can use across the states. " Challenge our methodology. Run up against explicit or implicit bias. Pull for the qualitative and quantitative. Milestones: We convened project and research teams with over 75% attendance on monthly calls and 55% attendance at the yearly meeting (counting the core team of movers and shakers). We completed the application and are authorized by NCERA. Our team identified five possible funding sources (NIH - National Institutes of Health, AFRI - Agricultural and Food Research Initiative, NIS  National Institutes of Science, and W.T. Grant). We submitted proposals to two funding sources (W.T. Grant, and the North Central Regional Center for Rural Development). At our annual meeting, we developed selection criteria for research sites and, finalized plans for research instruments. We completed work on research protocol and completed the Institutional Review Board application and approval procedure with the University of Wisconsin leading to the approval of the Mapping Study for the initial piloting institutions. We collaborated with University of Minnesotas Humphrey School of Public Affairs on re-purposing a Youth Survey.

Baker, B., Calvert, M., Emery, M., Enfield, R., Kinsey S., (listed alphabetically) (April 2011). Capturing Positive Youth Contributions Using the Community Capitals Framework. Workshop presented at 2011 DoD/USDA Family Resilience Conference, Chicago, IL. Published in conference proceedings http://www1.cyfernet.org/FRConf2011/ws/2011-Baker-Capturing.pdf Baker, B., M. Calvert, M. Emery, R. Enfield. (listed alphabetically) (March 2011). Contribution of 4 H Participation to the Development of Social Capital: What Are We Learning? Brownbag Seminar presented at NIFA Headquarters, Washington, D.C. Baker, B., M. Calvert, M. Emery, R. Enfield, B. Williams. (listed alphabetically) (December 2010)Mapping the Impact of Youth on Community Development Webinar. NCRCRD North Central Regional Center on Rural Development. http://breeze.msu.edu/p72418074/