Aurora Youth Options Annual Report

Aurora Youth Options Annual Report Update

Fiscal Year 2014

PROCESS MEASURES

PROCESS MEASURE / COLLECTION SCHEDULE
Staffing notes to document that staffings occur as schedule. Notes document the general themes and topics covered during meetings. / Weekly
Referrals the number of youth nominated/referred to AYO. / On-going
Frequency of gatekeeper trainings / Quarterly
Fundraising and promotional events / Quarterly
Community Partnerships the community providers and organizations with which AYO has developed successful relationships. / On-going
Youth and Family Leadership youth who have been referred to and placed in youth and family leadership programs in the community. / On-going
Homework Help and Tutoring number of HHT sessions held and attendance rate / Quarterly

Team Staffings

Twelve (12) team staffing meetings were held during the quarter. Attending staff include: Vicki Scott, Program Director, Ken Broermann, Mentor Program Coordinator, Natalie Kaiser, Mentor Enhancement Program Coordinator, Youth Specialist, Mentor Specialist, Roy Voliton, Mentor Specialist, Brett Weatherhead, Youth Specialist, Rachel Ahern, Mentor Specialist, Elise Zakroff, Homework Help and Tutoring Supervisor, Arely Castillo, Youth Specialist Assistant, and Lynzie Rowland, Program Evaluator. During each team meetings staff reported on program status and progress, new issues or developments and upcoming team events. Other topics included:

·  Planning of team events including Family Dinner Day, AYO Mentoring Campout, and staff trainings and workshops

·  Discussion of AYO Transition to Hoffman Building.

·  Team retreat in Idaho Springs—rafting and team building exercise.

·  Mentor recruitment updates on meeting MEP goal of 75 matches.

·  Updates on CRM software and expected transition date

Program Referrals

AYO receives referrals from a variety of community organizations and individuals who have regular contact with local youth from the City of Aurora. Once a youth is referred to AYO s/he will be asked to complete a Communities that Care (CtC) youth survey. AYO uses the CtC to assess youth’s individual risk and protective factors and to identify youth’s interests, strengths and weaknesses. Once the CtC assessment is complete and after consultation with the youth and their family, AYO Youth Specialists will refer the youth to existing community resources and/or AYO support programs that best meet the youth’s needs.

Youth are referred to AYO from all over the City of Aurora who live in and/or attend school within the City of Aurora which encompasses Aurora Public School District and some of the Cherry Creek School District. Youth Specialists collect school district and zip code data on youth which can be seen below.

Table 1: Number of Youth Served by Zip Code – FY2013 - 2014

Number of Youth Served / 124 / 84 / 91 / 75 / 64 / 61 / 50 / 63 / 10 / 78 / 622
TOTAL PERCENT / 20 / 14 / 15 / 12 / 10 / 10 / 8 / 10 / 2 / 13 / 100
Zip Code / 80010 / 80011 / 80012 / 80013 / 80014 / 80015 / 80016 / 80017 / 80018 / Other* / Total

* In several zip codes there were 20 or fewer youth who participated in AYO. These zip codes were combined into a larger category called, “Other”.

Table 2: Number of Youth Served by School District

School District / FY2013 -2014 / Total
Aurora Public School District / 364 / 2217
Cherry Creek School District / 274 / 1556
Other / 16 / 83
Total / 654 / 3856

Table 3: School District Zip Codes

Aurora Public School District and Cherry Creek School District
80010
80011
80012
80013
80014
80015
80016
80017
80017
80018
80019
80110
80111
80112
80113
80121
80122
80222
80224
80231
80246
80247

http://www.eachtown.com/Colorado/City/Aurora;4599/areacode_zip.html

Gatekeeper Trainings

The Aurora Youth Options (AYO) program uses the Gatekeeper Case Finding and Response System developed by Raymond Raschko to target youth in the community who are eligible to participate in and receive AYO services. AYO staff recruits adults in the city of Aurora and Denver Metro area who often come into contact and interact with local youth to be Community Gatekeepers. Gatekeepers are typically school faculty and staff, coaches, scout troop leaders, police officers, school resource officers, social workers, faith-based leaders and parents. AYO staff holds Gatekeeper trainings as needed throughout the year so that new Gatekeepers can learn about the programs, how to identify appropriate youth and how to refer youth to AYO.

Organizations and individuals involved in Gatekeeper trainings this quarter include: the Aurora Key Community Response Committee, the Aurora Police Department, Aurora School Resource Officers, The Aurora Gang Task Force, Arapahoe Douglas – Youth in the Works and Tri-County Health. In addition to these organizations, AYO holds many of their Gatekeeper trainings for Aurora Public School and Cherry Creek School District employees.

Community Partnerships

Aurora Youth Options (AYO) works very closely with other programs and staff at the Aurora Mental Health Center (AuMHC) including: child intensive services, outpatient services, children and family services, adolescent intensive serves and Hampden Academy. Many AuMHC employees participate in AYO’s Gatekeeper trainings and nominate youth to the AYO program.

In addition to working with AuMHC, AYO has also developed many close partnerships with other organizations in the community. These community partnerships include youth serving non-profit agencies like, the Asian Pacific Development Center, City of Aurora Youth Services, Wings Over the Rockies, America’s Promise, Aurora Community Connections, Metro Community Provider Network, the Youth Mentoring Collaboration, the Conflict Center, Big Brothers Big Sisters, the Denver Foundation, Families First, the Arapahoe County Department of Human Services, Kidstek the Trails Recreation Center and the 18th Judicial District Juvenile Assessment Center (JAC).

Another common community referral for AYO youth are local non-profits and faith-based organizations. AYO refers youth to athletic teams and clubs, arts and recreational programs that youth would not otherwise have the opportunity for involvement. These programs include: ATT Altitude, A1 Boxing, Aurora Youth League, Aurora Youth Rugby, Downtown Aurora Visual Arts (DAVA), Morehead Recreation Center, Mile High Football and the Junior Athletes of the Midwest (JAM).

Homework Help and tutoring

Homework Help and Tutoring (HHT) is an optional, free support service that is offered to all youth involved with AYO. HHT is a drop in program meaning youth may stop in at any time during any HHT session. HHT sessions are held twice per week for 2 hours at two different locations, the Aurora Public Library and the Martin Luther King Library. Community volunteer adult and youth tutors provide assistance with homework and/or tutor them in specific subjects. Between August 2013 and June 2014, 36 and 35 HHT sessions were held at each site, respectively. Thirty-three (33) youth attended at least 1 HHT session at Site 1 and 13 youth attended at least 1 session at Site 2. Youth spent a cumulative 608 hours between the two sites at Homework Help and Tutoring over the past fiscal year.

Youth Demographics Measured at Baseline

Seventy-seven (77) new youth were enrolled in AYO during Quarter 20 (April - June 2014) and began receiving services. Throughout the course of the entire fiscal year, 532 new youth were enrolled in the program.

Table 4: New AYO Participants by Quarter for the FY 2013-2014

NEW PARTICIPANTS
Quarter 17 / Quarter 18 / Quarter 19 / Quarter 20 / FY2013 - 2014
199 / 205 / 219 / 81 / 704

The following CtC data were collected during this fiscal year:

Table 5: CtC Date Collected between July 2009 – June 2014

FY2013 - 2014 / Total
Baseline / 704 / 3,229
Follow-Up / 224 / 1,090
Total / 928 / 4,319

The table above shows that the number of follow-up data collected during the fiscal year is only 32% of the number of baseline surveys collected. The difference in these numbers can be explained by the discrepancy in the length of the programs to which youth are referred. Follow-up surveys are collected 6-months following baseline or upon program completion. Many of the programs that AYO youth are referred to are less than 6 months and can complicate scheduling follow-up data collection. In addition, follow-up data collection is scheduled according to the youth’s availability and program staff found that many youth who have completed their program are unwilling or unable to schedule time to complete their follow-up surveys.

Summary of Youth Demographics

·  The majority of youth (66.4%) are male

·  More than one third of youth (34.9%) identified as being of Spanish/Hispanic/Latino descent

·  14.8% of youth identified as being multiracial

·  The average age of youth was 14.29 years

·  Over 80% of youth speak English as their primary language at home

Table 6: Gender, Race and Language at Baseline July 2009 – June 2014

Gender / N / Percentage
Male / 1142 / 66.4%
Female / 577 / 33.6%
Race
White / 1,016 / 57.9%
Black or African American / 516 / 29.4%
American Indian/Alaska Native / 63 / 3.6%
Asian or Pacific Islander / 76 / 4.3%
Other / 83 / 4.7%
Ethnicity / N / Percentage
Hispanic or Latino / 612 / 34.9%
Non-Hispanic or Non-Latino / 1,142 / 65.1%
Language used at home
English / 1,412 / 83.5%
Spanish / 226 / 13.4%
Other / 54 / 3.1%

Table 7: Age and School Grade at Baseline July 2009 – June 2014

School Grade / N / Percentage
6th / 191 / 10.9%
7th / 266 / 15.2%
8th / 271 / 15.5%
9th / 305 / 17.4%
10th / 297 / 17.0%
11th / 246 / 14.0%
12th / 175 / 10.0%
Total / 2503 / 100%
Avg. / Range
Age (years) / 14.29 / 10 - 19

OUTCOMES MEASURES

Communities that Care (CtC) Youth Survey

The Communities that Care (CtC) Youth Survey is a 207 question needs-assessment tool that is meant to help communities design and implement prevention programs. The survey was designed to be administered to youth in grades 6 through 12 and measures a variety of risk and protective factors[1]. Research has shown these factors are effective predictors of drug use, delinquent and/or criminal behavior, teen pregnancy, school dropout and violence. The CtC also measures reports of the use of alcohol, tobacco and other drug use and involvement in other antisocial behaviors like fighting, school suspension and selling drugs.

AYO uses the CtC Youth Survey as an assessment tool to determine youth’s risk and protective factors. All nominated youth are asked to complete a CtC Youth Survey prior to receiving AYO services. This initial survey serves as the youth’s baseline data to which all future CtC data will be compared to measure the youth’s overall change and progress in the program. AYO Youth Specialists use data from the survey in conjunction with other assessment tools to determine youth’s risk level, interests, strengths and weaknesses and create an individualized treatment plan.

The Aurora Research Institute (ARI) uses the CtC to measure change in youths’ risk and protective factors. Risk and protective factors are measured in four domains – community, family, school and peer-individual. Change scores are calculated by comparing youths’ baseline scores in these domains to follow-up data that is collected 6 months following baseline and/or program discharge. CtC outcomes are reported on a quarterly basis.

Summary of Risk Factor, Protective Factor and Outcomes Measures

·  The change in the Mental Health domain scores between Baseline and 6-month Follow-Up is significant at the .05 level, moving in the correct direction.

·  The change in the Peer-Individual Risk domain moved in the right direction, decreasing between Baseline and 6-month Follow-Up.

·  The change between Community Protective and Peer-Individual Protective domain scores between Baseline and 6-month Follow-Up moved in the right direction, showing an overall increase in scores at the 6-month Follow-Up.

·  The change in the Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement subscale in the Community Protective domain was significant at the .05 level.

·  There was a decrease in problem behaviors composite score from Baseline to 6-month Follow-Up, including substance use and delinquent activities.

Table 8: Change in Risk Factors and Domain Scores

RISK & PROTECTIVE FACTOR
DOMAIN SCORES
July 2009 – June 2014
N** / SCORES
Baseline Follow-Up Change
COMMUNITY RISK / 860 / 1.91 / 1.99 / .074*
Low Neighborhood Attachment / 883 / 2.15 / 2.13 / -.022
Community Disorganization / 376 / 1.58 / 1.56 / -.017
Perceived Availability of Drugs / 881 / 1.83 / 1.89 / .064*
Laws and Norms Favorable to Drug Use / 856 / 2.08 / 2.09 / .014
FAMILY RISK / 368 / 1.63 / 1.65 / .023
Family Conflict / 361 / 2.29 / 2.36 / .078
Parental Attitudes Favorable Toward Drug Use / 373 / 1.23 / 1.28 / .058*
Parental Attitudes Favorable to Antisocial Behavior / 375 / 1.26 / 1.29 / .029
Perceived Parental Control / 372 / 1.76 / 1.72 / -.040
SCHOOL RISK / 798 / 2.26 / 2.29 / .031
Attitudes Toward School / 903 / 2.29 / 2.32 / .037
School Engagement / 803 / 2.24 / 2.27 / .031
PEER-INDIVIDUAL RISK / 834 / 1.89 / 1.86 / -.031*
Friends’ Use of Drugs / 858 / 1.99 / 1.96 / -.026
Interaction with Antisocial Peers / 897 / 1.35 / 1.35 / -.005
Perceived Risks of Drug Use / 882 / 2.21 / 2.19 / -.021
Favorable Attitudes Toward Drug Use / 893 / 1.80 / 1.78 / -0.11
Favorable Attitudes Toward Antisocial Behavior / 894 / 1.83 / 1.81 / -.024
Rebelliousness / 612 / 2.17 / 2.24 / .064*
Sensation Seeking / 843 / 1.89 / 1.85 / -.048

*p< 0.05 level.

* *Represents the N for which both Baseline and Follow-Up data was available

Table 9: Change in Protective Factors and Domain Scores

RISK & PROTECTIVE FACTOR
DOMAIN SCORES
July 2009 – June 2014
N** / SCORES
Baseline Follow-Up Change
COMMUNITY PROTECTIVE / 299 / 2.82 / 2.89 / .069
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement / 307 / 2.94 / 2.97 / .023*
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement / 850 / 2.70 / 2.78 / .083
FAMILY PROTECTIVE / 341 / 3.07 / 3.07 / -.002
Attachment / 364 / 3.18 / 3.14 / -.040
Rewards for Prosocial Involvement / 350 / 2.90 / 2.93 / .023
Perceived Parental Support / 369 / 3.14 / 3.11 / -.031
SCHOOL PROTECTIVE / 334 / 2.96 / 2.93 / -.027
Association with Prosocial Peers / 352 / 2.97 / 2.91 / -.056
Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement / 884 / 3.18 / 3.13 / -.048*
Perceived Academic Support / 871 / 2.72 / 2.73 / .014
PEER-INDIVIDUAL PROTECTIVE / 839 / 4.29 / 4.29 / .006
Belief in the Moral Order / 867 / 4.09 / 4.12 / .024
Interaction with Antisocial Peers / 899 / 4.29 / 4.31 / .019
Perceived Norms Toward Antisocial Behaviors / 907 / 4.48 / 4.46 / -.026

*p< 0.05 level.