Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1989I I I vnifTU Anttnr.j..V rsnnrpAv ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING January 19, 1989 ; 7:00 P.M. Roca 2402 Members Don Colleton, Epifanio Reyther, Bob Roy, Dan Moses, ; Present: Bo Price, Fran Bukvey, Delores Holmes, Stan Payne, Manuel Isquierdo, Bob Rutledge, Kathleen Hargrove, hike DeVaul i Absent: John Lane, Jr., Rev. Zollie Webb Staff Carey Wright, Kate Kerrin, Helen McCarthy, Bernard Turner, Present: Corey Smith ; Presiding: Don Colleton, Chair Don Colleton called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. Don introduced Dan h Moans as a new member of the Co rai ttee. He reYor :ed that. Michael Murphy had f resigned from the Committee, due to professional and personal commitments. If anyone has suggestions for new members, let Don know. urutrTvc The minutes of the October 6, 1988 meeting were approved unanimously. The f minutes of the December 1, 1988 meeting were amended as follows: Page 3, paragraph 3, line 6 was a.-aended to delete "Bob Rutledge" from t„a subcc..;. 'A 'tea . With this change, the minutes were approved unanimously. ` SERVICE REPORTS FOR OCTOBE . NOVENB E3 z DECE`SBER. 1-988 Carey said that the October and November reports had been resubmitted because some information had not been complete when presented at the December meeting. :he Committee reviewed the December retort. Manny Inquierdo asked that the initial figures regarding number of referrals made, intake intarviews rafarral.3 a..:cs.ta:! Int: v6D be _I __ _ f aA e^ *hat- a � to _add be ww = n,,Mber C` mess not ,qt s*i"-rl and number not accepted into the program. He also asked whether "Cases Terminated" referred to cases terminated for reasons such as moving from Evanston or for a successful outcome where services are no longer neece:.. Ca= n j expla::cu that ►hero is a t,?--nination process which includes a to =ira_ior form which identifies the reasons for termination. No case would be terminated without the ad?v:_r Carey 'w:rb ;:e:_cc..._ w.rh tt initial referral agency. r.7 X7-777 Minutes of 1119/89 . . .�2 There was also discussion about the reasons for referral identified in the Service Report. Sometimes these reasons may be symptoms and not the underlying causes. The Committee agreed it would be interested in the underlying causes of problems as well as symptoms; however, it was agreed that this might be hard to include in a monthly report. These issues are included as part of the intake information and would be part of the eval;:ati ^ z2nd'_cted by Ken rhrensaft. The Committee requested that the YEAR-TO-DATE heading include a description of the time period covered, i.e., June 1 to the present. The Committee requested that the list of referring agencies only include those agencies who have referred cases. As new agencies refer cases, they can be included. In response to a question Carey clarified that the original proposal anticipated each advocate having up to 15 cases. Therefore, the total cases in the program would be 45. REVIEW QE DRAFT QUARTERLY REPORT TO HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE The Committee reviewed the draft report prepared by Carey for the time period of August 1 through December 31, 1983. Don acked the Cc=i ttee for comments - both on the content and the format of the report. The Committee had a lengthy discussion on the gaps in service delivery listed on page 4. Manny was concerned that some language appeared overly critical of existing programs. He questioned the statement ttat the "rer:-:ca da'_.re.y s ste= his r,3t L nga-Td y-.utt in fami' ,ag refer-4 to YAP." Don explained his understanding that .`.Lis statement 1t =eant to focus on these particular high risk youth referred through YAP. It is not meant to be critical of the overall youth service delivery system in its services to the overall youth population. Ratner, for this small group, something more needs to ce done. Others pointed out that the whole point of the Youth Advocacy Program is to serve families who have not been effectively served through existing programs. Therefore, this is merely a statement of what is already understood by t�:e Human services Committee. Concern was expressed that some of the statements regarding gaps may be developed based on only several cases and we may not to ready to =ahe these statements w:t":^u-t more information. Carey said that these are based on the YAP cases to date and that was his intention in including them now. Suggestions were made regarding rewarding some of the statements to make clear that they refer to a fairly small base of information and may not reflect the larger picture. Lu vat d `"at 4ti • ► ~ .d neutral in f`n Fran 3 �ey uoo_ste _.� �..e sta,.e�z:a..s .,e made more .. _ e rather than criticizing the agencies unduly. Sometimes there may be enormous problems in cave faadly whii:h mat' -.a the 'L=:_y a:t_=Gr�.-nar.j j The suggestion was made that we hold off communicating gaps in service delivery until we have more information, say in several :r w:.en tie O.r AI, -,Or inn is rnmIlated. Others strongly expressed the need to communicate gaps in service delivery indicated for the youth in the program right away, as this w=: ^_':_ ..« etc =--oi..}_ ma_ndat?5 cf ;Le YOUTH ADVOCACY ADVISO-E . CVMMi Si 2 Minutes of 1/19/89 . . . 3 It was agreed that a section regarding gaps in service delivery would be included in the report. Carey will redraft the statements to indicate the information on which they are based. At Nike Devaul's suggestion, Carey will share this section of the report with the Coalition of Youth Service ' Agencies to see whether the agencies would generally agree or disagree with these statements. The Committee made several suggestions regarding the statistical reporting format. The Committee agreed to review the entire report again at its February meeting with the intent of submitting it to the .4,-,man Services Committee for the February 27 meeting. CONTRACT CO.TSIDE°ATrp."t FOR ? 999-90 Don Colleton reminded the Committee that it will have to make a recommendation regarding agency contracts for the Marc- 1 fiscal year. He will prepare information for the Committee to review at its February meeting. SUBCO'M117 EE CIN NISSICN GOALS CF vna P CGaAW Don Colleton reported cn 3. subc_:-mittee meeting on de7eloping a mission of the program. He said that Carey had prepared a process for the Committee to participate in this evening. Dua to lack of t!me, t::is :ail? :.a~e to be postponed for ancth3r meeting. Each C^:^:»'ttee member r4id briefly state his � or her view of the mission of the Program. This will be expanded on at the � February meeting. L The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. ZC7 —4 1 pg/klcz(-� Helen McCarthy, Staff DRAFT - NOT APPROVED MINUTES YOUTH ADVOCACY PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING March 2, 1989 7:00 P.M. Present: Don Colleton, Fran Bukrey, Delores Holmes, Mike DeVaul, Manuel Isquierdo, Dan Hoses, Epifanio Reyther, Absent: Bob Roy, Kathy Hargrove, Stan Payne, Bob Rutledge, Bo Price Staff Carey Wright, Bernard Turner, Kate Kerrin, Helen McCarthy Present: Presiding: Don Colleton, Chair Don Colleton called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. He announced that this meeting was called to replace the February 19► 1989 meeting due to a lack of a quorum. MINUTES the minutes of the January 19, 1989 meeting of the Youth Advocacy Program (YAP) Advisory Committee were approved unanimously. ACTIVITY AND SERVICE REPORT (JANUARY 1989) Carey noted several corrections to the January report which will be corrected in the February report. He noted that there are 25 open YAP cases as of January 31, 1989. REVISED REPORT TO HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE The Committee reviewed the revised report (august through January) to be submitted to the Human Services Committee. Carey reported that the Coalition of Youth Service Agencies had reviewed the Draft - Gaps in Services and generally supported them. Carey had deleted 2 gaps included in the draft report in order to collect additional information in the coming months. The Committee approved the submission of this report to the Human Services Committee. YOUTH ADVOCACY PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of 3/2/89 . . . 2 REVIEW OF ADVOCATE AGENCY CONTRACTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1989-90 Don Coll.eton reported that he and Helen McCarthy had met with Delores Holmes, Don Baker and Ron Dombrowski regarding the continuation of contracts with Family Focus, Y.O.U., and Evanston Hospital respectively. He asked the Committee for a motion to recommend approval of these agencies to provide advocacy services for next year at the dollar level ($31,000) included in the YAP budget. He asked for staff to have latitude to negotiate special conditions with the agencies as staff sees fit. Manny asked for feedback regarding the current organizational structure and how the 3 agency model is working. Carey described certain continuing issues related to this program model, namely the time consumed with maintaining the communication necessary between all parties and the variation between the agencies in how services are provided to clients. Given this program structure, changes will be proposed to the agencies to improve the program functioning. For program year number two, he wants to create clear standards for the agencies to use in delivery of services. It is important to give the same message to all, three agencies and to the clients served by those agencies. Now that we have a Mission Statement, it can be communicated to them. Delores said the Advisory Committee and staff must decide and state clearly its expectations of agencies; then the agencies can decide whether they want to participate. Helen reminded the Committee that in December, 1988, it had met with the agency representatives to hear their views on the strengths and weaknesses of the structure. Then the Committee decided to spend time focusing on program mission because it might give some direction as to structure. Since a proposed mission statement has been developed, it makes sense to return the Committee's attention to the organizational structure issue. The Committee agreed to discuss this at a future meeting. We do not yet have enough information to assess the organizational structure. Mike DeVaul moved, seconded by Manny Isquierdo, to approve Family Focus, Y.O.U., and Evanston Hospital to provide the Youth Advocacy Services for the 1989-90 year. The motion was approved unanimously (Delores Holmes abstained). This recommendation will be presented to the Human Services Committee and the City Council on March 13. MISSION STATEMENT SUBCOnMITTEE REPORT Don Colleton reported that the mission subcommittee had developed a proposed Mission Statement. This statement was placed on the blackboard and the Committee members made changes. Mission Statement: "To facilitate the effective delivery of needed services to high risk youth (with multiple problems and without regard to severity) through advocacy based on an articulated plan YOUTH ADVOCACY PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE y Minutes of 3/2/89 . . . 3 which: 1) centers on the youth; 2) coordinates existing services; 3) identifies service gaps; 4) favors community delivery; S) accepts the need for non-traditional case management (including the delivery of concrete services as needed); 6) persists until..... The Committee discussed several examples of tough case problems, including the difficulty in "engaging" youth and families in services. The difficulty in serving a youth where the immediate living environment is so negative that it is clear that it must be changed if the youth is to have a chance. The Committee agreed that the Mission Statement will be considered a flexible statement that may be changed as the need arises. The Committee adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Helen McCarthy, Staff r CE9=11ZED A IUORITY Description Youth Services Coordinator (YSC) directs the Intake and initial case plan and directs the services pro- vided by Advocates. Agency Supervisor serves as resource person to Advocate in implementing this plan but Advocate's direction comes from YSC. Advantages 1. Clear line of authority - therefore minimal confusion. 2. More efficient use of time. 3. Cases will be handled relatively consistently-i.e., a YAP philosphy and practice will be followed more consistently with this model than others. Disadvantages 1. Role of Agency Supervisor is some- what nebulous. If Agency has minimal influence/direction over Advocate, then why have Advocate employed by Agency? 2. Liability concerns of Agency: What if agency disagrees with YSC direction? Who is responsible? 3. Extremely demanding on YSC - must provide supervision and support to 3 outposted Advocates, as well as administrative responsibilities. .4. Potential isolation of Advocates (advocates not part of agency and also hnve limited YAP team coatncts) Youth Services Coordinator (YSC) directs the Intake and initial case plan. YSC periodically (at least once per month) reviews the services pro- vided by Advocates and negotiates with Agency regarding needed changes. Advocate is supervised by Agency Supervisor and YSC on cases. 1. Maintains variety of input regarding difficult cases -maximizes brainstorm- ing and creative problem solving. 2. Promotes increased communication and coordination between agencies. 1. Very- time consuming, and therefore Inefficient. 2. Role confusion and blurred bound- aries. Advocate may be caught between Supervisor and YSC on day- to-day basis. 3. Lack of consistency between cases, because each case plan is negoti- ated individually. 4. Difficult to assure that standards for service delivery are met. 5. high stress for Advocates, YSC and supervisors. For Discussion re YAP Organizational Hodels for 1989--90 Youth Services Coordinator (YSC) directs the Intake and initial case plan. Agency is responsible for delivery of services according to the plan. YSC reviews service implementation every 3 months. Advocate is supervised by Agency Supervisor, with consultation provided by YSC, as needed 1. Relatively clear line of authority. After initial Case Plan, case directed by Agency. 2. Model allows for different agency styles and methods. 1. Lack of consistency between cases, since Agencies will make key service decisions. 2. Difficult to assure that standards for service delivery are met. 3. YAP identity is minimized - Advocate may identify more with agency than with YAP. 4. Although Coordinator is responsible for program, has very little direct authority over service decisions. 5. Potential high for "second guessing" by Coordinator after agency has handled case. . . e • DRAFT - NOT APPROVED Minutes YOUTH ADVOCACY PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING March 16, 1989 7:00 P.M. Present: Don Colleton, Fran Bukrey, Epifanio Reyther, Bob Roy, Mike DeVaul, Manuel Isquierdo, Dan Moses, Stan Payne, Bob Rutledge Absent: Bo Price, Delores Holmes, Kathy Hardgrove Staff Carey Wright, Helen McCarthy, Ken Ehrensaft (Consultant) Present: Presiding: Don Colleton, Chair Don Colleton called the meeting to order at 7:OS p.m. MINUTES The minutes of the March 2. 1989 Youth Advocacy Program (YAP) Advisory Committee were amended as follows: Page 3, paragraph 2. line 5 was amended to state: the Committee unanimously adopted the above Mission Statement. It will be considered a flexible statement that may be changed as the need arises. With this change, the minutes were approved unanimously. ACTIVITY & SERVICE REPORT FOR FEBRUARY. 1989 The Committee requested that the reference date for "year -to -date" figures be included on the report. In response to a question about Item F: Referring Agency under "Others," Carey Wright recalled that the Center for Public Ministry and Kaleidoscope had been two of those agencies. The Committee requested that when an agency had made a referral that it be added to the named Referring Agency list. Carey pointed out that as of March 1, we will be starting a new reporting year to coincide with the Citp's fiscal year. Future reports will be in a somewhat different format reporting cases based on the 1989-90 year but including information on on -going cases from the past year. He noted that there have been five additional case referrals in the month of March. . e 4 YOUTH ADVOCACY PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of 3/16/89 . . . 2 The Committee discussed how YAP should respond at the point that the caseload is considered full. From the outset it was planned that an Advocate would not carry more than 15 cases. Carey pointed out that some cases take considerably more time than others depending upon the need. It was agreed that it would be helpful to know approximately how many hours each Advocate is spending on each case. We will need to develop a process for carefully selecting cases based on how they fit the YAP criteria. This has been refined somewhat due to the development of the Mission Statement. Cases which may have been accepted at the start of the program may not need to be YAP cases; rather these cases could perhaps be served by existing agencies. The issue of how long a case remains a YAP case was also discussed. There were different views expressed as to whether a case should be considered on a long term basis even if significant progress was not being shade. Bob Rutledge said that it may be useful to make a distinction between situations where we are trying to fill a service gap for a client and where we are trying to engage a client to use existing services. There may be an "intractable agency" as well as an "intractable client." In such a situation the YAP mission may be to work with the agency to expand its ability to work with these clients. Fran spoke to the need for a "safety net" for these clients, either from the family, the agencies or the advocate. Don Colleton summarized the discussion to say that at this point we have not quite exhausted our ability to accept additional cases. However, this point will come. We will need to be more selective about the cases we accept. We will need to decide which cases can be moved off the caseload because we have filled a service gap. We will need to carefully review those cases which we can't engage and we will need to find ways to stretch our resources to serve our caseload, The Committee agreed to follow the caseload question carefully in the future months. UPDATE ON PROGRAM EVALUATION Bob Rutledge reported that the evaluation subcommittee had met on several occasions to review the program evaluation plans of the consultant, Ken Ehrensaft. Ken will review approximately variables. Ken Ehrensaft summarized the proposed study which is a 19 page survey instrument including a profile on the youth and the family, history of social service involvement, a summary of YAP activities and information regarding service outcome. The YAP advocate will complete the instrument regarding each youth. Concerns were raised by Committee members that the information as reported by the advocates needs to be verified by other sources. The advocate may have a natural need to see progress based on his or her involvement. Information from the schools and other agencies should be part of the evaluation. Committee members also recommended that the client and/or family have an opportunity to report their perception of the impact of the program. Perhaps a parent could be interviewed by someone other than the advocate to get this information. The subcommittee was asked to work with Ken on these suggestions. YOUTH ADVOCACY PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of 3/16/89 . . . 3 Ken reported on how he will evaluate the question of the effectiveness of this organizational structure. First he will diagram the structure. Then he will look at how this structure does or does not achieve the program mission and goals. He will interview Carey, the advocates, and a number of agency representatives to look at how communication occurs and how problems are solved. Bob Rutledge pointed out the need to not just look at whether the structure can achieve the mission and goals; but rather how to discern whether a success or failure in meeting the goals can be attributable to the organizational structure or to some other factor. DISCUSSION OF THE YAP ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE FOR FISCAL YEAR 1989-90 The Committee reviewed the chart prepared by Helen and Carey which outlined three models for operating within the current organizational structure of three agencies and the City. Due to lack of time, the Committee agreed that this will be the major item on the agenda for the April 27 meeting. Bob Rutledge suggested that a brief time be given for Carey to review the advantages and disadvantages listed in the chart and to give his perception of the structure question. Then each Committee member should be given an opportunity to briefly state his or her views on the question prior to a Committee decision being reached. The Committee agreed to this process. The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Kt. L�r�L' Helen McCarthy, Staff U . • . DRAFT - NOT APPROVED YOUTH ADVOCACY PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING May Is, 1989 7:00 P.M. Present: Don Colleton, Fran Bukrey, Kathy Hardgrove, Delores Holmes, Manuel Isquierdo, Epifanio Reyther, Bob Roy, Dan Moses, Stan Payne, Bo Price, Bob Rutledge Absent: Bike DeVaul Staff Carey Wright, Helen McCarthy, Corey Smith, Bernard Turner, Present: Kate Kerrin, Ken Ehrensaf t (Consultant) Presiding: Don Colleton, Chair Don Colleton called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. MINUTES The minutes of the March 16, 1989 Youth Advocacy Program (YAP) Advisory Committee were approved unanimously. Don Colleton announced that due to several last minute cancellations there was not a quorum at the April 27 meeting. Several Committee members present decided to form a subcommittee to review the question of organizational structure. A report from this subcommittee will be presented later in the meeting. ACTIVITY AND SERVICE REPORT/KARCH & APRIL 1989 Carey noted that in March and April seven new referrals had come to the program. If all of these referrals are accepted the program will be close to its maximum caseload. He noted that the statistical report for March, April and Kay will be distributed for the next Advisory Committee meeting. RECOKMENDATION FOR RESTRUCTURING YAP ORGANIZATIONAL STRUC*17RE Don Colleton summarized the recommendation of the subco=ittee including Bob Rutledge, Manny Isquierdo, Fran Bukrey, Kathy Hardgrove and himself. The subcommittee had reviewed the various problems associated with the current structure including the time spent by Carey, the Advocates and the agency supervisors in communicating about cases and in making decisions; the lack of consistency in how cases are handled by the three agencies; the continued lack of clarity of roles of the Youth Services =oordinator and the supervisors and various administrative issues associated with the varying agency administrative styles. Based on the above, the subcommittee makes a YOUTH ADVOCACY PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTES Minutes of 5/18/89 . . . 2 two pronged proposal: 1) All three advocates should be moved under the direct supervision and authority of the Youth Services Coordinator, with no direct supervision being provided by agencies. This may mean placing the advocates on the City payroll and placing them either together or separately in neighborhood locations. 2) The YAP Advisory Committee should ask all of the service agencies to join us in the mission to better serve high risk and hard to reach families. We have recognized that YAP cannot affect change by itself; all agencies need to commit to this effort. He used the example of the successful HMO which is successful to the extent that it 1) practices good management and 2) is successful in achieving changes in the practice patterns of physicians. YAP can not and should not replace agencies; rather, it should assist in influencing agencies to change practice patterns in relation to hard to reach families. Bob Rutledge, as a subcommittee member, summarized his view of the short term and long term goals of the YAP program. Short term. YAP's goal is to provide consistently effective services to the families in the program. Long term, YAP's goal is to help serving giving agencies gear themselves toward serving these families better. The YAP families are unique, very difficult to reach, and require innovative approaches and solutions. YAP can serve as a good pilot program to develop a plan for accomplishing the long term goal. :canny Isquierdo noted Carey's unique perspective on the youth system. Since he is looking at the total youth/family needs from a general perspective and not in relation to a particular need or vantage point such as school, counseling, housing, etc. He emphasized the important of maintaining a community -wide commitment to serving high -risk youth. He added that the recommendation that the advocates not be supervised by the host agencies is in no way a poor reflection on the agencies, but rather an attempt to increase efficiency and effectiveness and not spend so much time building consensus between the various parties. Bob Roy said that this proposal is not a significant change from his original understanding of how the program should operate. He always saw Carey as having authority over the actions of the advocates. He believes that some form of contract with the agencies should be maintained, since it is important to maintain their involvement. If advocates are City employees, other agencies may view this program as just another City program and not be as involved. Also, the host agencies provide important resources to the advocates. Finally, if the program is just a City staffed program, it may be more vulnerable to potential budget cuts. He added that even if all service agencies have a commitment to these hard to reach fani!:es, this will not be enough. The schools, churches and community need to take a part as well. Ken Ehrensaft, consultant for the program, reported on his findings regarding program structure. He will have a written report available next week. He has conducted ten interviews with Carey, the advocates, and agency supervisors regarding the structure issue. In addition, he has reviewed intensively 17 cases. (Incidentally, his findings regarding the case reviews are that staff are doing a fine job. This will be _eported on in greater detail in his subsequent evaluation reports) Based on his interviews, he found that the current structure creates a high 'level of stress for employees, role confusion, and a slow down in decision making. He had the YOUTH ADVOCACY PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of 5/18/89 . . . 3 following recommendations regarding the organizational structure: 1. All advocates should report to the Coordinator 2. Coordinator should have greater authority and flexibility for directing the program. He had additional observations including a question about the narrow profile of the YAP client (generally black, low income); question about why most referrals come from only a few agencies; a recognition that all service agencies will need to outreach more to this client population, which will require a change in delivery practices; and that, possibly, City funding should be tied to new service initiatives to high risk families. Stan Payne said that some of these problems in the organizational structure could have been prevented by having the title of the "Youth Service Coordinator" position "Youth Services Director". Then there would have been no doubt about who is in charge. He expressed some concern about breaking the contracts with the host agencies. Don Colleton and Helen McCarthy clarified that based on the lack of resolution regarding the organizational structure issue, the City had not provided the host agencies with contracts for 1989-90; rather the agencies have been paid on a month -to -month basis. Fran Bukrey pointed to the need for a strong YAP point of view and philosophy. That philosophy needs to be communicated in a concrete way to the agencies. This will affect how agencies look at services to other clients. Manny Isquierdo moved, seconded by Fran Bukrey, report to the Coordinator for all management and will be no supervisory responsibilities for the moved, seconded by Kathy Hardgrove, an amendment the title of the Youth Services Coordinator be Director. On the amendment Dan Moses pointed ou could create an impression that the Director dii the community. This would create a problem for s all Three advocates should supervision and that there host agencies. Stan Payne to the motion to add that changed to Youth Services that the title "Director" ects all youth services in any of -he agencies. 'canny talked about the threatening nature of that title to other agencies. Bob Rutledge said he does not favor that change because the Job is too big to be titled "Director". The "Director" role should be clear in relation to the advocates; however, this is only a piece of his responsibility, the other responsibility being to coordinate and influence other agencies. The Coordinator title speaks to this better. Kathy Hardgrove noted that the position will clearly direct the advocates but will coordinate other youth services. Carey said that it is clear that the position will become threatening as the Coordinator brings issues to the foref:3nt and attempts to change ways service is delivered. He noted that ti:'_es often affect how other people respond to a position. YOUTH ADVOCACY PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of 5/18/89 . . . 4 The motion to amend the motion was defeated; 2 ayes, 8 nays, 1 abstention (Delores Holmes abstaining). The main motion was approved unanimously (Delores Holmes abstaining). The Committee then discussed how to implement having the advocates directly report to Carey. The advantages and disadvantages of having the advocates employed by the City were reviewed. One alternative is to cancel the current contracts with the agencies, have the advocates become City employees and then outpost them to other agencies; possibly even having alternating outposts. The other alternative is to change the contracts with the existing agencies to clarify the relationships. (Epifanio Reythev was excused from the meeting) Manny Isouierdo moved, seconded by Kathy Hardgrove, that host agencies serve as City fiduciary agents to provide a standardized salary and benefit package in accordance with City direction, and to provide an outpost for some period of time for a youth advocate. The motion was approved: 8 ayes, 0 nays, 2 abstentions (Delores Holmes and Stan Payne abstained). Don spoke to questions which still need to be resolved in this new relationship, namely that we need to clarify who is the employer and who incurs the liability. He asked Helen to pursue this with the Corporation Counsel. It was agreed that there should be some reduction in the contract amount for the overhead costs since the agencies will not be providing supervision. With the notion that the host agencies will have fiduciary and not programatic responsibilities and will be there primarily as an outreach outpost, it was agreed that Evanston Hospital would no longer be an appropriate outpost agency. Bob Rutledge moved, seconded by Manny Isquierdo, that the contract with Evanston Hospital not be continued and that Carey return to the Advisory Committee at its next meeting with other options for an outpost agencv. At that time, Carey can present his recommendation for how the advocates should be housed including whether the advocates and Carey should have some central location for part of the time with other outposts for the remainder. The motion was passed unanimously (Delores Holmes abstained). The Committee agreed that these recommendations should be taken to the Human Services Committee at their June 12 meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Helen McCarthy, Staff C I Members Present: Members Absent: Staff Present: DRAFT - NOT APPROVED YOUTH ADVOCACY PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING JUNE 18, 1989 7:00 P.M. Fran Bukrey, Don Colleton, Chairman; Micheal DeVaul, Stan Payne, Epifanio Reyther, Boy Roy, Bob Rutledge Kathleen Hardgrove, Delores Holmes,Manny lsquierdo, Dan Moses, Bo Price Ken Ehrensaft (consultant), Kate Kerin, Carey Wright Presiding Official: Don Colleton, Chairman (Prior to the beginning of the meeting Ken Ehrensaft distributed a revised copy of his "Evaluation of the Youth Advocacy Organizational Structure".) CALL TO ORDER Don Colleton called the meeting to order at 7:20 p.m. MINurEs The minutes of the May 18, 1989 meeting were amended as follows: Page 2, paragraph 3 was amended to clarify and state Bob Roy's concern with restructuring YAP as a City program: 1) it could be perceived as being competitive with other agencies for funding. 2) we may lose community (agency) Investment in the program. With this change, the minutes were approved unanimously. tICTIVITY AND SERVICE REPORTS As promised in the March 16 YAP Advisory Committee Meeting, Carey noted that the monthly service report format had been revised to provide only the most relevant information. Bob Rutledge stated the new format was much easier to follow and was an Improvement even though there was less Information. Other Committee members concurred and agreed to sanction this format for reporting cilent Information. Bob Roy wondered If YAP was considering purchasing a comou=er to analyze cilent data that would be obtained as the program continues to progress. Helen McCarthy stated as one of her last acts she Informed Youth Advocacy Program Advisory Committee, June 18, 1989 3 entertain a motion to open discussion for reconsidering the Youth Advocates as City employees. The motion was made and seconded by Bob Roy for the purpose of getting the discussion on the floor. Bob Roy shared at length many of the concerns of the orginal group of service providers that developed the initial organizational structure. The biggest concern now Is the perception that one entity (YAP) could be in competition with another City agency (Youth Outreach). Helen Injected that the functions of the two programs are distinctly different. Bob said that the perception has to be addressed because it was previously a major concern of the original group. He added that If there are budget cutbacks, these Issues will be of significance. On the other hand, Bob commented that the viewpoints of YAP staff (Youth Service Coordinator and Youth Advocates) should be considered as wail as the findings of the evaluation conducted by Ken Ehrensaft. in summing up his remarks, Bob said the management question of how to run the day to day program should be considered and our long range plan should be defined. Bob Rutledge stated that he joined the Advisory Committee for several reasons: 1) to help create an entity that was a pilot to discuss ways to reach troubled youth; 2) to facilitate ideas that we (Committee) generated that would be adopted by the service providers; 3) create a platform involving service providers in a process of addressing the issues of high risk youth. Involving community agencies needs to be a part of the plan. What the Committee needs to determine Is a mechanism and plan by which we can share our insights with others. Don Colleton agreed and concluded the next task of the Committee is to develop a strategy to organize our efforts more closely with the Coalition. Carey mentioned that the Coalition has sanctioned YAP to provide monthly reports on issues relevant to serving high risk youth. At the next meeting, YAP Is scheduled to make a case presentation on the dynamics of serving high risk youth. Ken Ehrensaft reported on the final outcome of this study on the organizational structure. Ken summarized the report by restating that In spite of the efforts of YAP staff, there were truly problems In the current structure that needed to be addressed and resolved. After discussing several areas of concern, he added that there is evidence to Indicate the technology or services may not exist to .-neet their needs. Ken recommended the Youth Advocates should report 3o cne supervisor In order to Increase consistency throughout t;ie grogram because some inequities currently exist. Don Collation questioned whether there was a motion to .take the Youth Advocates City employees. The motion was moved and seconded. The motion to recommend Youth Advocates to become City employees was approved with (6) six ayes and (i) one nay from Bob Roy. However, he stated that he would fully support the motion of the Committee. Stan stated that anyone that followed our minutes would think we donIt know what we want to do. One month we vote one way and then co another way Youth Advocacy Program Advisory Committee, June 18, 1989 2 the City Manager of a memo she received Jointly from YAP, The Mental Health Board and the Commission on Aging regarding their collective computer needs. She Insured the Committee that the matter would be evaluated and addressed. Don Colleton questioned whether future service reports would be floating or quarterly? Carey stated his initial intentions were to make them quarterly but he,would assess the feasibility of a floating report. QUARTERLY ACTIVITY AND SESM ICE REPORT Carey informed the Committee that we are scheduled to provide a quarterly report on YAP to the Human Services Committee on July 10, 1989. Don Colleton requested. members share comments on the "draft" of the quarterly report which was Included in the monthly packet. Stan Payne asked how many more clients could be referred to the program. He also wondered once a client is In the program, what were some of the reasons a client would be terminated. Several Committee members stated it would be useful to discuss some of the reasons for termination as well as accomplishments with clients. Stan said maybe we could have clients come to a meeting and share their impressions of the program or perhaps YAP staff could relate some of the aspects of t their work that have been meaningful. The Committee approved the Quarterly Report for submission, but, Carey stated he would like to make several additions to the section "Goals for the Next Quarter". REASSESSMENT OF MOTIONS TO CHANGE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE Uon Colleton recalled his excitement over the motions adopted by the Committee on May 18 recommending: 1) all three advocates should report to the Youth Services Coordinator for all management and supervision and there would be no supervisory responsibilities for the Host Advocate Agencies. 2) that Bost Advocate Agencies (Family Focus and Y.O.U.) serve as City fiduciary agents to provide a standarlxed salary and benefit package in accordance with the City direction and to provide an outpost for the Advocates. Don went on to explain the rationale for recommending fiduciary contracts was established In order not to create the perception that YAP would be a free standing agency competing with other youth service providers for funding and clients. Rather we were In fact interested in providing the best possible program that Gould get the job done In helping high risk youth and changing the systems that deliver services to them. He went on to state that we all knew there was an unknown element In recommending fiduciary contracts and had been Informed by Carey and Helen that under the City health Insurance plan only employees of the City are eligible for benefits. With the problems of establishing tiducIary contracts Don asked if the Committee would 19 Youth Advocacy Program Advisory Committee, June 18, 1989 4 the next month. He said the vote should have went this way the first time. Fran Indicated that the coalition needed to be informed regarding changes in YAP structure. Committee members said it was the Advisory Committee's responsibility to address questions regarding decisions it had ,made. In no way should this change In structure be perceived as coming from the Youth Services Coordinator. Rather the Youth Services Coordinator's power works through the Influence of the Committee. Members agreed that the function of the Committee must be clarified if YAP is truly going to make a difference in the community. Fran said the Youth Services Coordinator needs to be visible because It conveys a message even if It is symbolic. Don Colletcn said the sanction for YAP and the changes it recommends should come from agencies within the coalition. Mike DeVaul said YAP can bring a different atmosphere and perspective to agencies serving high risk youth. He Informed the Committee of how the YMCA has been Impacted by its involvement with YAP. The meeting concluded with Bob Rutledge stating the Committee must be more involved in a leadership role. The Commitee also sanctioned Don and Carey to prepare the necessary documentation to be submitted to the Human Services Committee. Due to the lack of time, the discussion of the Year End Report was postponed to a future meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. A farewell reception for Helen McCarthy Immediately followed. Carey Wright, Staff DRAFT - NOT APPROVED YOUTH ADVOCACY PROGRAM ADVISORY COl-%I I TTEE MEETING - JULY 20, 1989 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Don Colleton, Chairman; Kathleen Hardgrove, Delores Holmes, Stan Payne, Bo Price, Epifanlo Reyther, Boy Roy Members Absent: Fran Bukrey, hllcheal DeVaul, Dan loses, Bob Rutledge Staff Present: Ken Ehrensaft (consultant), Kate Kerin. Bernard Turner, Corey Smith, Carey Wright, Jeanne Fox, ( -lenta I Health Board) Presiding Official: Don Colleton, Chairman CALL TO ORQER The meeting commenced at 7:15 p.m. fMir,TES A quorum of the Committee unanimously approved the minutes of the June Ib 22, 1989 meeting. ACTIVITY AND S RVICF REPO Don Colleton asked Carey Wright to point out items in the reports that Committee members should be made aware of. Carey requested that the Committee review and address the issue at the end of the report that asks, "How much does It matter where YAP is centrally located and outposted?" He stated that he has explored potential sites at Reba Fellowship (South Blvd.), First Baptist Church (Lake an! Chicago Ave.) Family Focus -Our Place, ETHS, and the Civic Center. The Committee agreed that YAP should remain located in the community and that the Civic Center should not be considered due to the perception people may have. Delores Holmes advocated that the program must remain in the community if it is to be successful over the long run. ,cn Colleton asked Carey for his recommendation. Carey indicated thaT if YAP is located in areas with a concentration of high risk ycutn, It Aculd increase the opportunities for contact with YAP clients. Therefore, ETHS and Family Focus would Initially be prime sites for an outpost. Carey stated that he has discussed this idea with Delores Holmes and Manny Isquierdo. Although a site in South Evanston Is also desired as an outpost, Carey infcried the Committee that Reba Fellowship Is having zoning problems and it is not feasible for them to have their site approved for youth services at this time. In response to a question from 'Manny, Carey stated that if YAP is outposte� at ETHS and Youth Advocacy Program Advisory Committee, July 20, 1989 2 Family Focus, he would continue to maintain his current office In addition to being at Family Focus 2-3 days a week. Kathleen Hardgrove asked Manny where would YAP be located at ETHS. ;Manny stated that the -decision has not been approved by the Superintendent, but, he was thinking of pIacIng YAP in the area next to Heairh Services and the School Outreach workers. After further discussion which addressed the need for YAP to remain visible to all segments of high risk youth in Evanston, the Committee voted and approved Family Focus and ETHS as initial sites for the program pending approval by the Human Services Committee. Carey announced that Eernard Turner was resigning his position as a Youth Advocate effective July 31 to accept a position at a higher rate of pay with less stress. Due to the fact that three Youth Advccates have resigned In the first eighteen .,aonthS of operatics, Carey asked Bernard to share his thoughts on the position. Eernard commented on the stress he experienced with some of the youth and their families. He stated, however, that he was encouraged with the plans to change the structure of YAP because it would create a more supportive tear-4 among the staff. Bernard's final comment addresssed his desire to participate, but he was not sure he would be allowed to verbally participate at Advisory Committee meetings. Don Colletcn and other Committee members aff'Irmed that the Comm Ittee greetings were an open forum and Ycuth advocates as well as others are free to involve themse I ves in the process. July 10 f•ieetina with Human Services Don Colleton summarized the July 10 meeting with the Human Services Committee and the City Council. He indicated that the recommendation to restructure YA.R was approved through the consent agenda. Seven Advisory Committee members attended this meeting and were acknowledged for their support. Manny Isculerdo stated that the Committee needs to address several questions raises by Tne Hunan Services Committee especially wnether the program .;as achieving the goals It Set out to accomplish. He said there needs to be measures of what we are accomplishing even If the outcomes are different than what We axpacTec. Con ColleTen nac the impression that the Human Services was supportive of YAP, put wanTed to get acre feedack for the "bucks" they were putting into the Program. Stan Payne restaTed that he would aT some poin- liKe to Know how cases are terminated and if this process .was ever ,ju_ 4o successful outcomes versus some other reasons. The Committee requested that Carey bring up major service and program issues for discussion aT the next meeting. Carey was also requested tc reviem the minutes of the July 10 Health and Human Services meeting and identify the specific issues Alderman Feldman and other Human Services Committee members identified. Youth Advocacy Program Advisory Committee, July 20, 1989 3 Don Colleton asked Carey for his impressions on the Human Services meeting. Carey expressed that he had been surprised that the restructuring Issue had passed so smoothly, but, he has received a directive from the aldermen requesting "minutes" from previous and future Advisory Committee meetings. Carey asked whether the Committee would sanction him using the Advisory Committee's name on particular memos and written communications he has to address to various sources. After a discussion which included some points of clarification by Jeanne Fox, Director of Mental Health, the committee recommended that Carey should bring all matters that effect policy to their attention and all other matters should be addressed using the Youth Advocacy Program label. However, 1t was agreed that certain communications (i.e. letters of support) should Indicate the Advisory Committee's name. Delores Holmes went on record to caution Advisiory Committee members to help the Human Services Committee not to become overzealous regarding the ;cork done by YAP and how it gill effect other agencies in the community. They need to understand the distinction between what Is existing now and what service providers were designed to do versus what YAP Is designed to do. YAP exists basically because service providers screed that the high risk population needed specialized services that did not already exist. However, one entity should not replace the other. Role of Advisory Committee Don Col leton stated the next phase is to see if we can get agencies to commit or buy into addressing the needs of high risk youth which in Itself is not an easy task. Don questioned whether Carey has received any feedback from the Coalition regarding their response to the change In structure, Carey commented that although no one In the Coalition has personally con-Iac�ed him, he had been told that several memoers were upset at not knowing the structure was going to change prior to City Council approval. Rather than have anyone think that the changes were made discreetly, Carey stated that he would accept the responsibility to apologize to the Coalition for not being more sensitive to this issue. However, he thinks there is still some confusion rarardinc '..hat accountability the Youth Services Coordinator has to the Coalition versus the Advisory Committee. Manny Istiuierdo interjected that when YAP initially was approved, there was a sensitivity not to have the Coalition play an active role with YAP. The Advisory Committee was the place information should be shared and not the coalition. ;that evolved as the program became less threatening was an expectation that because of his role it would not beneficial for the Youth Services Coordinator to share with the Coalition. -Manny said he thought Carey has been given mixed messages by both groups. However, he recommended that a motion be passed for Carey to give monthly updates at Coalition meetings. Youth Advocacy Program Advisory Committee, July 20, 1989 4 Delores stated that the Coalition should look back in Its minutes because she was sure that the possiblity for the change In structure had been mentioned around March. Manny agreed, but stated that he was not sure at what meeting it had been mentioned. Nonetheless, It was felt this Issue must continue to be addressed. Committee members d,.zcussed the issues at length and agreed that times had changed and the program was evolving. Don Colleton suggested that we develop a subcommittee to discuss how the Advisory Committee can relate to the Coalition and decide what is the best way to address gaps that will be Identified by Ken Ehrensaft's report. Ken Ehrensaft added that the problems of these youth and families are larger than what people may expect. There Is a question regarding whether there is enough technology out here to address the problems If existing services alone are the answer. Committee members said YAP Is not a panacea for al sigh risk youth problems, but that we should be able to make recommendations which would address the major causes and the solutions to solve them. Don Colleton closed the meeting by commenting that the Advisory Committee has much work to do in the next 3-5 months. Once again he suggested that this work Initially be discussed and worked on in subcommittees. Several members stated that they would not be available In august due to vacations and also probably could not attend the regular scheduled meeting. It was recommended that Carey check with members to discuss their availability. Year End n4Rort Due to the lack of time, the Committee agreed that Year End Report would be the first Item discussed at our next scheduled meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Carey ;lrignt, Staff . r : 0 YOUTH ADVOCACY PROGRAM ADVISORY COMM I TTEE MEETING SEPTE14BER 21, 1989 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Fran Bukrey, Don Colleton, Chairman; 141cheal DeVaul, Kathleen Hardgrove, Delores Holmes, Manny Isquirerdo, Dan Moses, Stan Payne, Bo Price, Epifanlo Reyther, Bob Roy, Bob Rutledge Members Absent: None Staff Present: Jay Terry, Carey Wright, Ken Ehrensaft (consultant), Elizabeth Edelen Presiding Official: Don Colleton, Chairman CALL TO ORDER Don Colleton called the meeting to order at 7:13 p.m. Don Introduced Jay Terry, the new Director of Health and Humar, Services, The committee members each introduced themselves to Jay. MINUTES The minutes of the July 20, 1989 meeting were amended as follows: Manny Isquirerdo and Dan Moses were present. 111th this change, the minutes were approved unanimously. P.DF I IF Don explained that since Carey 1•lrIght will be making a presentation, the Committee will need to meet again to discuss the new budget and other matters. He stated that Carey would present an aggregate profile of the types of clients being referred to YAP. Carey showed the Committee excerpts from the movie, "Shoot the 1-loon" to illustrate an example of a high risk youth. Followin; the movie excerpt, he asked the Committee, '".1hat is this youth high risk of?" The committee agreed that the youth was high risk of family violence, school dropout, pregnancy, drugs, runaway, police contact and nissing adolescent development. He stated that in June, 1988 the Committee discussed who they wanted to serve. It was determined at that ti.mo that, the clients, high risk youth, presented a dilemma for the program. He feels that what a youth Is high risk of dictates the type of service that the youth need. Carey indicated that YAP should be moving to a second phase. He said they have learned abo=.,r who is being referred and now they should try to pro\,ide the best possible Youth Advocacy Program Advisory Committee, September 21, 1989 2 program to address needs. Carey distributed a profile of the types of youth served by YAP. He asked the Committee to consider whether the type of program we have now serves the profile types. The following discussion pertained to the profile descriptions. Stan Payne asked what was meant by "outside placement". Carey stated that it was placement in places like Joseph Academy. Manny Isquirerdo asked why evening school was not mentioned. Carey stated that very few high risk youth have been referrred from evening school. He added that the profiles may be skewed. Stan asked how many students come back to regular school from outside placement. ?-fanny stated that hardly any came back and those who do return to regular school do not usually last. Fran Sukrey added that many youth are not in places (schools etc.) from which referrals are made. Manny stated stated that If referrals could come from evening school, then YAJO would get more high risk youth involved In the program. Carey Indicated that there were differences In serving white, middle income families versus black low Income families. He said that a black, low income family was not likely to utilize some of the existing services. There are some people who will not take advantage of existing, traditional services. lie asked the Committee to consider If they really want to work with these type of people. Don asked "Can the existing service organizations deal sucessfully with these youth". Carey stated that the existing services were very short on serving the most high risk youth because a different approach may be indicated. While there Is some success serving others, the most high risk youth are on their way to disaster. $o Price asked Carey hoer many of those he has served are on their way to disaster. Without giving a number, Carey answered that many of then appear to be. Kathleen Hardgrove asked does it make a difference if you serve them earlier in life? Carey stated that it would make a difference if there is some early service for young people to keep them from becoming high risk, but YAP may not be the answer for then. 5o stated that there have been students who were diagnosed as "not making it" but they have become sucessful. He Indicated that the schools are too quick to "cross off a acid:'. He stated that the problem may be with the school system. gab Rutledge stated that court involvement seems to be the primary difference between 91, the most high risk youth on the profile and 2, the youth who had less risk of Incarceration. Delores Holmes state tnat the discipline problem of the less high risk youth may be mc;re managable than the most hi,h risk. Fran added that the most high riSK youth cannot be managed in the schools due to discipline problems. In answer to a question she said that 10-12 students are re.oved from District 65 and sent for outside placement each year. 'Fanny said that he never believed that YAP was the end to everything. He Indicated that schools, City government, welfare programs will never give everyone equal opportunity. However, YAP Is one more part of the system that has to do a better job to help. He Indicates that It does no good to argue about who is to blame. Youth Advocacy Program Advisory Committee, September 21, 1989 3 Carey stated that people are asking him where YAP Is going. Manny stated that he was concerned about redefining the mission for YAP when they have not reached the first one. He thinks it Is premature to do so. He indicated that the existing service agencies sheuld be asked 1f they are helping the at -risk family to have a better chance at success. There may be a need to show families how to use the services if necessary. Delores stated that service agencies have admitted that they were not designed to meet the needs of high risk. 'canny stated that agencies need to be wlIIing to meet these needs. Dan %loses stated that the police department has reorganized its services to better serve the "hard-core youth". He indicated that they are taking steps to redefine outreach. Bo stated that budget cuts effect high risk so the problem becomes finances. Also many give lip service but they are not serving the high risk youth. Fran added teat what happens over time is that people are defined out because service cannot be afforded. Don summarized the previous discussion by stating that we do have a hard core who vie have not been served due to economic problems. There is a service gap which needs skill to overcome. However, we do not need to change the mission. The biggest task Is to gain a concensus within agencies and agree on the nature and service needed for high risk youth. Bob Rutledge said that after a year we should know what works. He added that outreach is needed for the high risk family. Mike DeVaul added that all agencies have attempted to serve the high risk youth but there Is a drop off point for every agency for those youth whose actions they cannot tolerate. Delores stated that for most agencies outreach is a luxury. It works but It Is expensive. Don Indicated that existing agencies are trying to stretch their services but there are still some youth that cannot be reached. Dan indicated that there was a Crime Intervention Program which trys to impact on the younger people because so often the youth at 16 Is already lost. Don stated that as he sees It, the Committee has the task of motivating the existing agencies to reach the hard core youth. The committee needs to stategize on how to do it including Increased finances. Consultant_StuAy Ken Ehrensaft discussed the report he Is currently writing on the families and the agencies. He stated that the information is still on spreadsheets. The report will be available on October 11, 1989. He has interviewed service agencies and attempted to gather information from a different prospective. Some families are utilizing services all over the City. The agencies are frustrated because although they do serve minority high risk youth, they are not serving the high risk families. Cost is the main factor. The agencies find that they can help a family with only 1 problem at a time. However, the families have multiple problems and need help in many areas. Agencies have not been successful with overall famlly problems. The families need to be well prepared. The agencies need more money to do outreach. Some people cannot be saved because the technology needed does not exist. Youth Advocacy Program Advisory Committee, September 21, 1989 4 There is a need to work with some families on a theraputic basis. Each family has Its own set of pathologies. There is no family cohesion with high risk families so normal methods do not always work. The agencies need to use the trial and error method. They could make an impact if they tried the right thing. Carey stated that high risk families need to be worked with for a long time In order to bring them up to normal. Ken added that the high risk youth and their families are socially isolated. The youth are not In a normal classroom situation. They have disabilities. There Is an isolation of groups by class and benaviors. These youth need mentors. The problems of some of these families can be overwhelming. Carey Indicated that there needs to be a primary person responsible not only for implementing and coordinating service to the high risk youth, but is also accountable for the outcomes. Under the current system it is difficult to ascertain where accountability for outcomes rest. If Advocates do not provide direct services to the client and agencies work In their present manner there remains a concern whether successful outcomes can be achieved strictly through coordination. Much of the literature would suggest that there needs to be a person or program that has the ability to intervene on many levels for the family. This is not to say other services are not needed but someone who could provide or address some of the "hard" (housing, food) and "soft" (counseling) needs of the family might improve the outcomes of youth. As we know more about our clients the program should evolve. Manny stated that there was a need for an all purpose agency to serve all groups. He gave an example of a comprehensive service agency he visited in New York. !•fanny added that he did not think a "super advocate" would be practical because one person would suffer burn -out. Carey stated that people need someone working with them over a long period of time on a consistent basis, addressing both the family and youth referred for service. YAP" s INVOLVEMENT WITH COALITION A14D OTHER NETI-IORKS Delores reminded the Comnittee that the Youth Coalition was expecting YAP to respond to some concerns raised at the July meeting. Don stated he would attend and the Committee dialouged about the issues. Carey Indicated that he would not be able to attend du_ to a personal comnittment which conflicted with the meeting. it was =ecided to discuss this matter futher at the next meeting. Don stated that this meeting has been one of the best. The budget, quarterly report and other statistics will need to be reviewed at the next meeting. The Committee decided to hold a meeting on Thursday, October 12 at 7 p.m. This meeting would be in addition to the regularly scheduled meeting which Is October 19. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.n. A APPROVED AS CORRECTED YOUTH ADVOCACY PROGRAI`1 ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING October 19, 1989 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Fran Bukrey, Don Col leton, Chairman; Micheal DeVaul, Kathleen Hardgrove, Manny isqulerdo, Stan Payne, Epifanlo Reyther, Bob Roy, Bob Rutledge Members Absent: Dan Moses, Bo Price Staff Present: Jay Terry, Carey Wright, Elizabeth Edelen, Terri Drews Presiding Official: Don Colleton, Chairman CALL_ TO OM ER Don Colleton called the meeting to order at 7:16 p.m. M i NUT1= S Don stated that the October agenda should read "Minutes of September 21, 1989. The minutes of the September 21, 1989 meeting were amended as follows: Page 2, paragraph 2 was amended by Fran Bukrey to state 10-12 students have been removed from District 65 and sent for outside placement In total. Each year they send 3-4 students for outside p I acement. Page 3, paragraph 3, was amended by Don who stated that he did not state that there was a "hard core who have not been served due to economic problems". With these changes, the minutes were approved unanimously. INTRODUCTION Don introduced Teresa Drews who is an Intern from the Social Service Administration (5SA) Program at University of Chicago. EYALUATION OF f:ONSULTAHTI5 REP^PORT Don led a discussion concerning the report submitted by Ken Ehrensaft. Don stated that there was nothing written on the structure of YAP. He Indicated that Chair Feldman (Human Services. Committee) had wanted the report to evaluate the stucture. The report also does not describe the Advisory Committee. Also missing from the report Is an evaluation Youth Advocacy Program Advisory Committee, October 19, 1989 2 of YAP screening or staffing. There is no measurement of hard endpoints, no analysis of the ability of YAP to service youth, no analysis on the question of effectiveness of the Coordinator, no discussion of coordination. The Service Gap List on page 31 is not credible. Jay Terry stated that he received a draft of the report on 1=riday, October b and the final on Tuesday, October 10. Although Ken had planned to attend the Committee meeting, Jay suggested that he not attend. Carey Indicated that Ken will be available for questions concerning the report. Bob Roy stated that he did not think the report was written for comments. Don stated that Ken was given a commission and the report was clearly his (Ken's) thinking. Don felt it was appropriate for the Committee members to give their reactions. Bob Rutledge indicated that the Committee needs to discuss the report In order to pass It along to the Human Service Committee who will need to know what effect the report has. Don stated that he expected the Human Services Committee to make some conclusions based on the report. Don indicated that he felt the general conclusions made in the report were as follows: 1. Advocates and Coordinator are doing a good Job. 2. There are some service successes. 3. There has been little change in the overall family (see pages 28, 30, and 34. 4. E+SOts are not effectively engaging. Don stated that he was not happy with the organization of the report. Manny Isquirerdo stated that the report lacked in identifying the coordination of services. He indicated the report needed more comments on the structure. As the discussion continued Don made a list of Items missing from the report: 1. Discussion about coordination. 2. Structure discussion. 3. It was mentioned that the Advocates needed skills In assessments, but no examples were given. 4. Screening and staffing procedures 5. Supported measurement of hard -end points. b. Complete service gaps list. Bob Roy stated that Ken may have left out any discussion of structure because he had made an earlier report which concerned the structure of YAP. Bob Rutledge stated that he felt one of the main problems was that the report was Incomplete. Bob Roy Indicated that In the original proposal it was requested that the focus be child -centered. Youth Advocacy Program advisory Committee, October 19, 1989 3 The focus in the report has been changed to family -centered. He also stated that perhaps a year Is too short of a time to know If a change has occurred. Don stated that it has not been proven that the existing service system does not work. There is a need to design a way to really give the existing system a chance to work. Fran stated that the report Is pretty hard on the existing system and she wonders if these statements could set up a gap with the existing system (coalition). Don stated that he is not sure if Ken means what he says In the statement at the bottom of page 33 of the report because the data base Is not broad enough to support the statement. Bob Rutledge referred to the table on pages 29-30 of the report. He said that It cannot be concluded that agencies are not successful because the table shows that they are successful. Bob said he finds that many conclusions In the report are unsupported by the data. Bob Roy indicated that the report does not show that part of the problem is that no agency exists to overcome all the problems of high risk families. The individual agencies may solve one problem, but It Is not within their mission to deal with more problems. Therefore, families are treated for one problem at a time as it comes up. Manny indicated that he questions the methodology used for the report. He stated that only talking to Youth Advocates or a few agencies does not give the whole picture of service In Evanston. Manny stated that the report can be useful to help the Committee pose some questions. The following questions were determined: 1. Why a YAP Advisory Committee? What is its unique role? 2. How can YAP work with the Coalition to make it's uniqueness work? 3. What factors beyond resistance to service make effective overall service difficult? a. Which agencies are not in the business of treating high risk families? 5. How is productivity Interpreted In the report? b. How does the report document existence and characteristics of high risk families? 7. How does the report document that high risk youth and families are very difficult to treat? 8. How does the report measure YAP's coordinating efforts? Delores Holmes stated that the focus should be on the families because the service agencies need to help the families so that the high risk youth can go back to healthy family environment. Don stated that the high risk youth served by YAP are part of high risk families with multiple problems. He said we cannot assume that this Idea would be self-evident to the Human Services Committee. Carey stated that the Youth Advocacy Program Advisory Committee, October 19, 1989 4 past concept of family needs to be extended. Some families can be worked with more than others. Some youth make it depending on the services they receive. For high risk families, different services help with different needs. Delores added that the families really depend on the agencies to supply services. Manny indicated that YAP needs to document their referrals to other agencies in other to take a bigger look at the problems. Carey stated that there was a limit to what agencies can do. Bob Roy Indicated that there was a need to bring parts of the community together. Coordination Is a link. Bob Rutledge stated that he found one problem with the report was that rather than taking the data as evidence of coordination, Ken seemed take a left turn Into service delivery. Don asked how should the report be transmitted to the Human Services Commission? Manny stated that they needed to speak to Ken's conclusions. Don summarized the discussion with the following: 1. Reason for the report - requested by Human Services Committee. 2. The report documents the existence and complexity of high risk, multiple problem families. 3. The report concludes that treatment of high risk youth necessarily Involves treatment of high risk families. 4. Treatment Is very difficult and costly and It requires non-traditional methods. 5. YAP Is doing a good Job. 6. Insufficient analysis of nature and effectiveness of coordinating role. 7. The Committee does not endorse the report's analysis of existing service agencies (ESA's) as inadequate. The report does not scientifically or well document this Idea. Jay stated that Table 16 does not show a high rate of resistance or refusal. Manny indicated that resistance to service is not the whole problem. Bob Rutledge stated that it should be a goal for the Committee to Interpret the report to Human Services. The material In the report should be viewed as important because it represents new knowledge In terms of a community problem. The report answers questions about data and proves that the high risk families really exist. Manny stated that we need to use the report to Identify issues. Manny Indicated that In terms of Intake and assessment of clients, there was a need for a more indepth identlflcation of problems. Service agencies cannot probe too deep because they get resistance, however, Advocates are In a position to probe more effectively. Manny II Youth Advocacy Program Advisory Committee, October 19, 1989 5 also stated that because high risk families are difficult to serve. Therefore YAP needs to serve them differently, I.e. with non-traditional approaches. Manny stated that he has good reason to believe that the agencies will not agree with the report. He added that the agencies were still sensitive regarding the stucture change. Delores Indicated that no one knew how the report would come out. Bob Rutledge Indicated that the Committee should split with the bias statements In the report and align with the one they can agree with. Jay Indicated that the Human Service Committee will be looking at the amount of funds expended for the report ($6000) and trying to determine if it was worth It. Don stated that next year the Advisory Committee should focus on the coordinating role of staff for evaluation purposes, in order to gain more insight on effectiveness. Carey stated that he will make recommendations of how YAP can better coordinate and Improve at the next meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 9:20. Carey Wright, Staff