Partnerships for Prevention: The Story of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project 9781442678286

Table of contents :
Contents
PREFACE
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Part 1. Setting the Stage: The Context of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project (Better Beginnings Better Futures)
Part 2. The Programs and Their Development: A Partnership Approach to Prevention
Part 3. A New Way
Part 4. Changed Lives, A Changed Community
Part 5. The Future
APPENDIX: METHODOLOGY
REFERENCES
CONTRIBUTORS
INDEX

Citation preview

PARTNERSHIPS FOR PREVENTION

This page intentionally left blank

G E O F F R E Y N E L S O N , S. M A R K P A N C ER, K A R E N HAYWARD, RAY DEV. P E T E R S

Partnerships for Prevention The Story of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO PRESS Toronto Buffalo London

www.utppublishing.com University of Toronto Press Incorporated 2005 Toronto Buffalo London Printed in Canada ISBN 0-8020-8019-7

Printed on acid-free paper

Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Partnerships for prevention : the story of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project / Geoffrey Nelson ... [et al.]. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8020-8019-7 1. Poor children - Services for - Ontario - Toronto - Case studies. 2. Poor families - Services for - Ontario - Toronto - Case studies. I. Nelson, Geoffrey HV746.T6P48 2005

362.71'09713'541

C2005-901502-0

University of Toronto Press acknowledges the financial assistance to its publishing program of the Canada Council and the Ontario Arts Council. University of Toronto Press acknowledges the financial support for its publishing activities of the Government of Canada through the Book Publishing Industry Development Program (BPIDP).

We dedicate this book to our children Nicole, Laura, and Daniel Nelson Jordie and Matt Pancer and Rachel Woods Kendra, Gillian, and Jake Flude Jessica, Tim, Katie, and Johanna Peters and to all the members of the Highfield community who have served as volunteers for the Highfield Community Enrichment Project or Highfield Junior School to make their community a better place for children and families.

This page intentionally left blank

Contents

PREFACE

IX

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xiii

Part 1 Setting the Stage: The Context of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project (Better Beginnings Better Futures) 3 1 Putting Prevention in Context 5 2 The Research Process 21 3 The Highfield Community 40 Part 2 The Programs and Their Development: A Partnership Approach to Prevention 55 4 How Programs Got Started: From Ideas to Action through Partnership 57 5 Family Support Programs 77 6 School-Based Programs 100 7 Community Development 123 Part 3 A New Way 143 8 Project Organization and Management 147 9 Partnerships with Service Providers 171 10 Partnerships with Community Residents 191 Part 4 Changed Lives, A Changed Community 213 11 What Happened to the Children? 215

viii

Contents

12 What Happened to the Parents and Families? 231 13 What Happened to the School and Community? 248 Part 5 The Future 271 14 What Have We Learned? 273 15 Where Do We Go from Here? Critical Reflections on the Highfield Community Enrichment Project 300 Epilogue: Current Status of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project 309 APPENDIX: METHODOLOGY REFERENCES

321

CONTRIBUTORS INDEX 349

347

311

Preface

This book is about the Highfield Community Enrichment Project, one of the eight demonstration sites for an initiative in primary prevention and health promotion developed and funded by the government of the province of Ontario, Canada. This initiative, called Better Beginnings, Better Futures, was planned by government bureaucrats in consultation with teachers, service providers in the fields of child welfare and children's mental health, health promotion workers, community developers, and researchers. While those who planned the initiative reviewed the literature and used expert consultants from outside Canada, one of the goals was to create a prevention initiative for children and families that was uniquely 'Made in Canada.' From the beginning, the initiative was to be grass-roots, communitydriven, and friendly to families and children. Those of us who have been a part of the Better Beginnings, Better Futures project never refer to it as BBBF. For short, we call it Better Beginnings, because that is language that is friendly and understandable to everyone. Better Beginnings was meant to be different. In this spirit, we have intentionally written this book in a different way. We have constructed the book as a story of one prevention project. We tell the story of the project, share the stories of some of the key people involved, and reflect on how our stories and identities are intertwined with that of the project and its people. We want this book to be accessible and engaging to a wide readership, while conveying all essential information about the project. This book makes a contribution to theory, research, and practice in primary prevention and mental health promotion for children. In terms of theory, much of the previous work in prevention has been focused on 'high-risk' children and has involved professionally constructed theo-

x Preface

retical models of how problems develop and can be averted; these models also have focused on risk and protective factors for children's mental health at the micro level of analysis. In contrast, Better Beginnings is one of the few prevention initiatives that uses a universal, community-wide approach. Moreover, Better Beginnings is based on a partnership approach that involves multiple stakeholders: researchers, service providers, and community residents. This is one of the first prevention initiatives in which community residents have had a major voice in the development of prevention programs in their communities. Finally, Better Beginnings moves beyond the micro level of analysis and intervention to a truly ecological and holistic approach that encompasses the child, family, school (or preschool), and community. Better Beginnings has also pioneered an innovative research approach. The vast majority of research in prevention has been quantitative in nature, outcome oriented, and controlled exclusively by researchers. Though Better Beginnings also conducted quantitative, outcome research - gathering information on an annual basis from children, parents, teachers, and archival sources (e.g., census data from Statistics Canada, police records, records of child welfare organizations, school records) - this research was complemented by a rich, qualitative, ethnographic component. In each Better Beginnings community, site researchers became immersed in the projects, attended major meetings and events, took extensive field notes, and read site documents. For several years, they routinely conducted individual and focus group interviews with all the different stakeholder groups on a variety of key issues related to the development of the programs and the program models. The observational, archival, and interview data were used as well to generate site reports on a number of key topics (e.g., resident participation in the projects). In a recent article for a special section of the American Journal of Community Psychology on science and community psychology, one of the founders of the field of community psychology, Seymour Sarason, professor emeritus of Yale University, called upon practitioners in the field to tell the full story of their interventions. In his article, The Obligations of the Moral-Scientific Stance/ he argues that community psychologists need to develop 'the criteria by which a published report of an intervention be judged. The question will not have as its primary focus the outcomes of the intervention but rather what we need to know if we are to begin to understand how outcomes were influenced or not influenced by the ups and downs, errors of omission and com-

Preface

xi

mission, the predictable and the unpredictable, the adaptations and compromises that were made, all of these presented in as clear a way as possible' (Sarason 2003, p. 211). Sarason further indicates that community interventions need to be described in rich detail 'that will allow others to replicate the intervention' (p. 209), and that writers need to reflect on how the intervention was shaped by the different stakeholders, and in turn how the stakeholders were shaped by the project. Having been familiar with and influenced by Sarason's many writings on this subject for years, we wrote this book with these considerations in mind. We not only wanted to describe the impacts of the intervention at the Highfield Community Enrichment Project, which we evaluated with a very rigorous research approach, but we also wanted to tell the story about how these outcomes were achieved. Finally, the way the Better Beginnings research was done was different than previous prevention research. Better Beginnings researchers worked in a highly collaborative manner with community stakeholders who not only provided information but participated in many different ways. At each site, a research committee comprised researchers, project staff, community residents, and local service providers. These committees met regularly (as often as once a month), and they reviewed and approved all research activities and reports. Researchers from the community were hired to assist with data collection. All in all, the Better Beginnings research engaged the communities and consulted extensively with stakeholders about all aspects of the research. This book also makes a contribution to the practice of primary prevention. As we noted above, much of the research on prevention has focused on program outcomes. The qualitative data gathered for this project has enabled us to provide a detailed description of the setting and its programs, as well as a great deal of rich information about how programs were planned and implemented at the Highfield site. As a result of their experiences, project participants learned many lessons about how to plan successful prevention programs. Thus, there is in this book a wealth of practice knowledge that will be of interest and use to policy-makers, program planners, practitioners, and community residents who want to embark upon future prevention journeys. Why write a book about one prevention program in one community? The simple reason is that the Highfield Community Enrichment Project is in many ways a model prevention program. The project was innovative, community-driven, and community-wide; it was situated in a lowincome community with a great deal of cultural diversity; and most of

xii Preface

its residents were born outside of Canada. The project was a successful example of an ecologically oriented program; positive outcomes were found for the children, the parents and families, the school, and the community. Finally, the rich qualitative data have provided a great number of insights and lessons learned about how prevention programs can be planned, implemented, and managed in a multicultural context with a high degree of participation on the part of community residents and other stakeholders. The book takes the reader inside an innovative prevention program to show not just that the program worked, but how it worked. So enough introduction, let the journey begin.

Acknowledgments

Many people helped us with the material presented in this book. First, all the individuals who have been associated with the Highfield Community Enrichment Project. Over the years, many people served as members of the site's Research Committee or as community researchers, and many others gave their time to participate in individual and focus group interviews. We are very grateful for their time and contribution. Several people stand out, those who contributed a great deal to the research at the Highfield project. These individuals are Rick Kelly, the former project manager; Joan Wand and Ruth Cairns, who both served as principal of Highfield Junior School during the demonstration period of the study; Tina D'Souza, community researcher; and, last but not least, Barb Dearing, a community resident who was a community researcher, chair of the Research Committee, and much more. We thank all these people for their contributions to the research on which this book is based. We are indebted as well to staff and members of the Research Coordination Unit at Queen's University. In particular, several people deserve specific acknowledgement: Dr Bob Arnold, who played the leading role in the analysis of the quantitative data; Andy Currie, for managing the quantitative data and the computing; and Kelly Petrunka, for overall coordination of the research. We also want to thank Craig Bell for his assistance with the preparation of the final manuscript. Thanks to these people for helping to make this book happen. Finally, we acknowledge the financial support of Wilfrid Laurier University in the form of a book preparation grant. The research for this book was funded by the Ontario Ministries of

xiv Acknowledgments

Health and Long-Term Care, Education and Training, and Community and Social Services. The information presented in this book reflects the views of the author and not necessarily those of the aforementioned ministries.

PARTNERSHIPS FOR PREVENTION

This page intentionally left blank

Parti

Setting the Stage: The Context of the Highfield

Community Enrichment Project (Better Beginnings, Better Futures) This is the story of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project, one of eight Better Beginnings, Better Futures sites in Ontario. Better Beginnings is an initiative, funded by the provincial government through three different ministries, which was designed to prevent problems in living for young children and their families and to promote child, family, and community health and wellness. The approach to Better Beginnings is multi-year, multi-component, universal (albeit focused on lowincome communities), and community-driven, with residents playing a significant role in the development of the project's programs. In Part 1, we set the stage by providing background information. The goal is to answer the question: What was the context for the Better Beginnings, Better Futures initiative, the Better Beginnings research, and the Highfield Community Enrichment Project? In Chapter 1, we put the field of prevention and health promotion in context, briefly reviewing the history of prevention and providing a state-of-the-art summary of current prevention programs and research. The Better Beginnings initiative is situated within this review. We move from the 'big picture' concerning prevention, in Chapter 1, to the research context and process, in Chapter 2. Better Beginnings was a research demonstration project, and our primary role was as researchers within the project. We describe the overall framework for the research and the research components and methodology. To implant a research project within an emerging community development, prevention initiatives in a low-income, culturally diverse community that is hosted by a school and school board require a highly participatory and collaborative approach. Here, we provide an in-depth description of the research process within the Highfield community and discuss our roles

4 Part 1: Setting the Stage

and experiences with the project, the community, and the school. In Chapter 3, we describe the specific context of Highfield, and we take you inside this multicultural neighbourhood to tell the story of how the community came together to develop its proposal to become a Better Beginnings site.

1

Putting Prevention in Context

In this chapter, we put prevention in perspective by providing a brief historical review of the concept and its evolution to the present day. We then describe current approaches to prevention and research evidence regarding the effectiveness of prevention programs for children. We end the chapter with the story of the development of prevention programs in Ontario and of the Better Beginnings initiative. Primary Prevention and Health Promotion: History, Concepts, and State-of-the-Art A Brief Historical Review

The story of prevention concerning health problems began in the eighteenth century, when people believed that some diseases resulted from noxious odours, or miasmas, that emanated from swamps or polluted soil (Bloom 1984). Improving sanitation resulted in a decline in the rates of many diseases (e.g., typhoid fever, yellow fever). George Albee (1986), one of the key present-day proponents of prevention, has highlighted an important story in the history of prevention, that of John Snow and the Broad Street pump. In London, England, John Snow determined that an outbreak of cholera was traceable to one source of drinking water. People who drank from the well at Broad Street, but not other wells, were the ones who became sick. Removing the handle on the Broad Street pump and providing an alternative water source prevented the spread of the disease. No one knew exactly what caused this disease, but that did not stop Snow and others from engaging in community action that led to successful prevention outcomes. Simi-

6 Part 1: Setting the Stage

larly, some nutritional diseases were reduced without knowledge of disease etiology. According to another well-known prevention fable, British sailors, or Limeys, learned to prevent scurvy by eating citrus fruits long before it was known that scurvy was caused by a vitamin C deficiency. Prevention moved into the realm of natural science in the nineteenth century with the development of a research approach called epidemiology, which focuses on the distribution of disease in a population. Public health researchers began to develop a language of prevention, using terms such as 'host' (the person who contracts the disease), the 'environment' (including factors that lead to or protect people from disease), and 'agent' (the manner in which the disease is transmitted from the environment to the host). These concepts provided a language for understanding public health problems like smoking and the diseases that result from smoking. For example, the person who smokes is the host; some of the environmental influences on smoking are cigarette advertising and availability, peer pressure to smoke, and media influences; and the mode of disease transmission (the agent) involves tar and nicotine when the smoke of cigarettes is inhaled. The thrust of the public health approach to prevention is to reduce harmful environmental factors and to enhance host resistance to those factors. In the case of smoking, policies and programs have been used to restrict advertising and sales to young people, and to teach ways of resisting peer pressure and commercial exploitation. Current Perspectives: An Ecological Analysis of Risk and Protective Factors

Although prevention began in the public health field with a focus on physical health problems, its scope has been broadened in more recent years to adult mental health, psychosocial problems and competencies, and children's mental health and child development. In the 1980s, the ecological perspective was introduced as a framework for understanding child development (Belsky, 1980; Bronfenbrenner, 1986; Garbarino, 1982). An ecological perspective on children's well-being situates the developing child in the context of his or her multiple social environments. Figure 1.1 depicts an ecological perspective of children's wellbeing, with the child in the immediate context of his/her family and school. Surrounding the family and school are two larger systems, the community and society. All of these systems impinge directly or indirectly on the child.

Putting Prevention in Context 7 Figure 1.1 An Ecological Perspective on Children's Well-being

Over the past 20 years, a substantial amount of research has confirmed and elaborated the original work of Belsky (1980) and Garbarino (1982) that different facets of child development and well-being are associated with many different risk factors (Peirson, Laurendeau, & Chamberland, 2001). A risk factor is one that is related to the occurrence of a problem (Rae-Grant, 1994). The effects of risk factors may be exponential. This means that most children can withstand one or two risk factors without being adversely affected, but when there is a 'pile up' of risk factors, the impact is are particularly devastating. For example, Rutter (1979) found a 24-fold increase in subsequent rates of psychiatric problems when four risk factors were present in childhood. Some individuals, however, demonstrate resilience in that they are able to withstand exposure to many risk factors (Cowen, 2000). For these individuals, protective factors help to buffer the negative impacts

8 Part 1: Setting the Stage TABLE 1.1 Examples of Risk and Protective Factors at Different Levels of Analysis

Early onset of target problem Problems in other areas Poor quality schools Parental mental health problems Poor parenting skills

Individual child Preschool/school Family/parent

Community Society

Protective factors

Risk factors

Ecological level

• Impoverished or violent neighbourhoods • Ineffective social policies

Social skills Self-efficacy High quality schools Positive parenting skills Good parent-child relationships • Communities rich in social capital • Effective social policies

Source: Durlak (1998a)

of risk factors. For example, a child with a positive relationship with one parent and good social skills may adjust well to a stressful life event such as the separation of his or her parents. The formulation of both risk and protective factors is ecological and transactional in nature. As Rae-Grant (1994) and Durlak (1998a) have shown, risk and protective factors can occur at multiple levels of analysis. For example, risk factors can occur at the level of the individual child (e.g., low self-esteem), school (e.g., poor-quality school), family/parents (e.g., marital discord or separation), community (e.g., a violent community), and society (e.g., ineffective social policies). Similarly, protective factors can be at the level of individual (e.g., good coping skills), school (e.g., high-quality preschool education program), family/parental (e.g., a warm and loving relationship with a parent), community (e.g., opportunities for socialization, recreation, or skill development) or societal (e.g., effective social policies). Durlak (1998a) has identified a number of common risk and protective factors for a variety of children's problems (see table 1.1). Albee (1982) views the incidence (i.e., the number of new cases) of problems in child development or mental health as an equation: Incidence +

Risk factors Protective factors

+

Organic causes + Stress + Exploitation Coping skills + Self-esteem + Support systems

According to Albee and others, this equation and the formulation of risk and protective factors suggest that problems can be prevented by

Putting Prevention in Context 9

reducing risk factors and enhancing protective factors at one or more levels of analysis (e.g., family, school, community). Key Concepts and Definitions PREVENTION

Gerald Caplan, a community psychiatrist, is an important figure in the history of prevention: he introduced the concept of prevention into the field of mental health in a book entitled The Principles of Preventive Psychiatry (1964). Caplan talked about different levels of prevention: primary (reduction of the rates of a mental health problem in the community), secondary (early detection and treatment), and tertiary (treatment and rehabilitation to reduce disability resulting from problems). Since Caplan introduced these levels of prevention, many people have taken exception to his terms, arguing that the term 'prevention' should be reserved for primary prevention programs that strive to reduce the onset of a disorder (e.g., Klein & Goldston, 1977). For example, Peters (1988) has argued that the term 'early intervention' should replace 'secondary prevention/ and treatment or rehabilitation replace 'tertiary intervention.' Noted prevention researcher and theorist Emory Cowen (1977) similarly argued that there has been considerable 'definitional slippage' in the use of the terms prevention or primary prevention, which can lead to confusion about what constitutes prevention and what constitutes treatment. Today, a somewhat different language of prevention has become popular. The Institute of Medicine (IOM, 1994) and the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH Committee on Prevention Research, 1995) in the United States have defined two types of primary prevention: universal and selective. 'Universal preventive interventions are targeted to the general public or a whole population group that has not been identified on the basis of individual risk ... Selective preventive interventions are targeted to individuals or subgroups of the population whose risk of developing problems is significantly higher than average' (NIMH Committee on Prevention Research, 1995, pp. 6-7). In this book, we use the term prevention to mean primary prevention, which includes both universal and selective (or high-risk) approaches. There are three key features in our definition: 1. With successful prevention, new cases of a specific mental health or health problem do not occur.

10 Part 1: Setting the Stage

2. Prevention is not aimed at individuals but at populations; the goal is a decline in rates of the problem. 3. Preventive interventions intentionally focus on preventing mental health and psychosocial problems (Cowen, 1980). HEALTH AND WELLNESS PROMOTION

More recently, the concept of prevention has been complemented by the concept of health (or wellness) promotion. Where prevention, by definition, focuses on reducing specific problems, promotion focuses on enhancing functioning and well-being (Nelson, Prilleltensky, & Peters, 2003). Health promotion has a holistic emphasis, striving to enhance people's physical, psychological, social, and spiritual wellbeing (Cowen, 2000; Prilleltensky, Nelson, & Peirson, 2001a). Cowen (1994) has identified several ways of promoting health and wellness: (a) promoting secure attachments between infants and their parents or caregivers; (b) enhancing skills and competencies (e.g., social, cognitive); (c) changing social environments so that they become more healthenhancing; (d) providing opportunities for empowerment, control, and the use of one's strengths; and (e) helping people cope effectively with stress. In practice, health promotion and prevention are closely related. The State-of-the-Art of Primary Prevention and Health Promotion Programs

Research is a key part of the prevention story. If research is not conducted on prevention programs, then we can't know how effective these programs are in preventing problems. In his review of the research literature on primary prevention and health promotion more than 25 years ago, Cowen (1977) referred to progress as being made in 'baby steps.' In a review two decades years later, the same writer (1996) spoke of 'lengthy strides.' Indeed, the past two decades have seen tremendous growth in the research and practice bases of prevention and promotion. At around the same time as Cowen's early review, two psychiatrists, Lamb and Zusman (1979), argued that there was no evidence that primary prevention works. Proponents of prevention (e.g., Nelson, Potasznik, & Bennett, 1983) rebutted this critique with the evidence that was available at the time. Today, there is much more evidence to put the argument of Lamb and Zusman to rest. Recently, meta-analyses of prevention research have supported the effectiveness of prevention and promotion programs. On the basis of a meta-analytic review of 177 eval-

Putting Prevention in Context 11

uations of prevention programs for children and adolescents, Durlak and Wells (1997) reported that a number of different types of intervention have proven to be effective in preventing emotional and behavioural problems in children. More recent meta-analyses have demonstrated that prevention programs have positive impacts on children, parents, and families both in the short-term and the long-term (MacLeod & Nelson, 2000; Nelson, Westhues, & MacLeod, 2003). Moreover, prevention programs for children, youth, and families have been effective in preventing a wide range of problems, including child maltreatment, child behaviour problems (including both internalizing and externalizing problems), substance abuse, risky sexual behaviour, teen pregnancy, academic underachievement, school non-attendance and drop-out, delinquency, and violence (Durlak, 1995; Greenberg, Domitrovich, & Bumbarger, 2001; Greenberg et al., 2003; Weissberg & Greenberg, 1998). Focusing Preventive Interventions on Different Ecological Levels of Analysis

Preventive interventions can be targeted at one or more ecological levels. We briefly highlight here some of the research pertaining to preventive interventions targeted at different ecological levels of analysis. PRESCHOOL/SCHOOL INTERVENTIONS

A number of prevention programs have been implemented in preschool settings and schools. Preschool education programs provide direct educational activities for young children to promote their cognitive development (Ramey & Landesman Ramey, 1998). These programs are typically selective in nature and were initially implemented and evaluated during the 1960s in poor, urban communities in the United States under the auspices of the Head Start program. In other words, preschool settings were created to provide disadvantaged children with a 'head start.' Research has shown that this program had positive impacts on children's cognitive development, although the magnitude of cognitive gains diminished with the passage of time (Lazar & Darlington, 1982; Nelson, Westhues, & MacLeod, 2003). Universal preschool interventions have not been implemented widely in North America. The ecoles maternelles in France, in which children attend preschool beginning at age 3, are an example of a universal preschool intervention for children (Peters, Peters, Laurendeau,

12 Part 1: Setting the Stage

Chamberland, & Peirson, 2001). There are, however, a number of universal preventive interventions in elementary school whose impacts have been well-researched (Greenberg et ah, 2001; Weissberg & Greenberg, 1998). Overall, universal school-based interventions focus on the promotion of children's social-emotional development, whereas preschool programs have been aimed more at improving children's cognitive development. FAMILY/PARENT INTERVENTIONS

A wide range of family/parent interventions have been designed to promote family well-being (Nelson, Laurendeau, & Chamberland, 2001). Universal family/parent programs include home visitation and parent training that are available to all parents in a community. More typically, however, home visitation and parent training programs have been implemented at the selective level with at-risk families. One example of a selective home visitation program is the Prenatal/Early Infancy Project, which was originally implemented in a semi-rural Appalachian community in upstate New York with low-income, unmarried, teenage mothers (Olds, 1997). Consistent with the idea of targeting, in a meta-analysis of the 34 preschool intervention programs that had a follow-up when the child was in elementary school (kindergarten to Grade 8), Nelson, Westhues, & MacLeod (2003) found that while family/parent interventions have an impact on indicators of family well-being and children's social-emotional functioning, they do not affect children's cognitive development. PRESCHOOL/SCHOOL AND FAMILY/PARENT MULTI-COMPONENT INTERVENTIONS

Because preschool education programs are targeted to enhance children's cognitive development and family/parent interventions are targeted to enhance family/parent functioning, and because both types of programs appear to realize these goals, there has been a conscious shift away from these types of single-focus programs to multi-component programs that provide both preschool/school and family/parent programs. For example, the Houston Parent-Child Development Center implemented both home visitation for low-income Hispanic families and centre-based educational activities for their preschool children. Using a control group design, both post-intervention and follow-up assessments when the children were in elementary school showed a positive impact of the program on children's cognitive and social-

Putting Prevention in Context 13

emotional outcomes and parenting behaviour and attitudes (Johnson, 1988). These findings illustrate the importance of targeting multiple settings to improve multiple outcomes. Not only do multi-component programs achieve results in several outcome domains (Nelson, Westhues, & MacLeod, 2003), but they may also lead to stronger outcomes. In a meta-analysis of family support programs, MacLeod and Nelson (2000) found that universal or selective multi-component programs had greater impacts on family well-being than single-focus programs such as home visitation. COMMUNITY INTERVENTIONS

Many of the selective preschool/school and family interventions reviewed in the previous section have been implemented in communities that are beset with poverty, violence, and crime. Community interventions aim to change community conditions that give rise to psychosocial problems in living. Boutilier, Cleverly, and Labonte (2000) have made an important distinction between community-based programs and community development approaches to community intervention. Community-based approaches include health promotion and prevention programs of the type reviewed in the previous section. In the community-based approach, promotion/prevention programs are implemented in the community (as opposed to clinical settings), but the programs are conceived and implemented by professional researchers and service providers. The problem with these types of programs is that they may not be what disadvantaged community members want and need, and decision-making power rests in the hands of professionals. On the other hand, community development involves a partnership between professionals and community members, with community members having a major voice in deciding what the intervention will be and playing a major role in its implementation (Nelson, Prilleltensky, & MacGillivary, 2001). Broad-based community development and neighbourhood transformation projects, including community economic development and the creation of affordable housing, are used to revitalize communities (Eisen, 1994; Schorr, 1988), building on the strengths of the community and its members. A key characteristic of the community development approach is the active participation of community members in the process (Campbell & Jovchelovitch, 2000). Community development interventions are designed to enhance what has been variously referred to as 'community capacity/ 'commu-

14 Part 1: Setting the Stage

nity empowerment/ 'social cohesion/ or 'social capital' (Labonte & Laverack, 2001a, 2001b; Putnam, 2000). All of these terms refer to similar social processes of trust, norms, and networks that enable people to achieve collective goals (Putnam, 2000). Indicators of social capital can be aggregated at many different levels of analysis and related to other social indicators. Research by Putnam (2000) and others (e.g., Willms, 2001) has found that social capital is related to health, crime, educational performance, and the psychological well-being of children and youth. Based on these findings, it has been suggested that one strategy for promoting the well-being of children and families is to strengthen the social capital, cohesion, and capacity of a community (Bouchard, 1999). The participation of community members in community development activities has been shown to be related to experiences of personal and community empowerment (e.g., Cameron & Cadell, 1999; Perkins, Hughey, & Speer, 2002). However, at this point in time, we don't know the conditions under which capacity-building community interventions strengthen social capital and whether community-level changes have positive ripple effects on the well-being of children and families. While many community-level interventions are universal in nature, there are also examples of selective community-level interventions. One example of a selective intervention is a program in which low-income families in Hamilton, Ontario, were provided with subsidies so that their children could participate in community-based child-care or recreation programs. The results of a controlled evaluation not only showed that the intervention led to increased participation in highquality programs, but also had positive impacts on the children (e.g., lower rates of utilization of health and social services) and parents (e.g., fewer anxiety problems, enhanced financial well-being) (Browne et al., 1999). SOCIAL INTERVENTIONS

In the language of the ecological perspective, the programs reviewed up to this point focus on micro- or meso-systems. However, the root causes of many problems that children and families experience lie in larger macro-systems at the societal level of analysis. Therefore, what is also needed are interventions that strive to transform larger social systems (Febbraro, 1994; Prilleltensky et al., 2001a). Socio-economic inequalities and poverty are strongly related to a variety of problems experienced by children and families; moreover, there has been a 'fern-

Putting Prevention in Context 15

inization of poverty/ with increasing numbers of women and children falling below low-income cut-off lines (Peirson et al., 2001). Single-parent women have also been affected adversely by cutbacks to social assistance. High levels of unemployment and inadequate child- care policies also contribute to the increased poverty that is affecting women and children. Barlow and Campbell (1995) have argued that increased poverty and socio-economic inequality is a direct outcome of neoliberal policies of globalization, which are designed to promote the interests of multinational corporations and a nation's most wealthy citizens. Neoliberal policies are based on the values of individualism and competition and the assumption 'that markets are the best and most efficient allocation of resources in production and distribution' (Coburn, 2000, p. 138). Tax cuts, which disproportionately benefit the most affluent; government cutbacks to health, education, and social services; the relocation of jobs to the developing world, where there are minimal labour and environmental standards, the imposition of structural adjustment policies on developing nations; and the development of 'free trade' agreements that give corporations the same rights as citizens are the strategies used to promote this ideological agenda (Barlow & Campbell, 1995). Goods and services are assumed to be provided best through the private sector. Such policies, which have been promoted aggressively in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada, have created tremendous pressure to dismantle the welfare state. To address poverty, economic inequality, and gender inequality, there must be an alternative social movement that fights to maintain the welfare state and to reduce the inequalities that result from unchecked market forces. Thus, social intervention addresses the root causes of child, family, and community problems by striving to create social policies for more just and equitable societies (Febbraro, 1994). Peters et al. (2001) have done a comprehensive review of social policies to promote the well-being of children and families. In their research, they point out that many countries in western and northern Europe have implemented tax and transfer policies that effectively reduce economic inequality. These same countries have universal policies that provide other benefits to families (e.g., parental and extended childcare leave policies, day care). At the selective level, child-support legislation can be used to protect single-parent families (which are typically headed by single mothers), a group that is particularly vulnerable to poverty and children's mental health problems.

16 Part 1: Setting the Stage Principles of Effective Prevention Programs Given the accumulating evidence that prevention programs are effective and that programs can impact on different ecological levels of analyses, more attention has been devoted to understanding the qualities of prevention programs that are important for success. Several recent reviews of the literature have begun to identify the principles of effective prevention programs (e.g., Nelson, Laurendeau, & Chamberland, 2001; Morrissey et al., 1997; Nation et al, 2003). Based on a review of the reviews, Nation et al. have identified nine principles of effective prevention programs. 1. Comprehensiveness: Multi-component programs that address different ecological domains (e.g., child, parents, community) are more effective than single-focus programs. 2. Varied teaching methods: Programs that use diverse teaching methods to enhance skills are important. 3. Sufficient dosage: The most effective programs are those that are long-term and intensive in nature. 4. Theory driven: Programs that have a strong theoretical base rooted in research tend to be the most effective. 5. Positive relationships: Programs that build social support and positive relationships with peers and adults are important for children's well-being. 6. Appropriately timed: Programs that begin early in a child's life and which are sensitive to the developmental level of children are valuable. 7. Socioculturally relevant: Programs must be sensitive to community and cultural norms to be effective. 8. Outcome evaluation: Programs need to have clear outcome goals and objectives, and to evaluate program effectiveness in reaching those goals. 9. Well-trained staff: The most effective programs have well-trained staff. Prevention and Health Promotion in Canada and Ontario Canada Canada has been a leader in promoting the concept of prevention. In 1974 the Lalonde report, A New Perspective on the Health of Canadians,

Putting Prevention in Context 17 recognized the influence of different risk factors (biological, lifestyle, and environmental) on disease rates and argued for an increased emphasis on prevention and health promotion. A decade later, the Ottawa Charter was an important document in introducing the concept of health promotion and a community-driven approach to health, calling for 'the empowerment of communities, their ownership and control of their own endeavours and destinies' (WHO, 1986, p. ii). Similar ideas were expressed in two federal health reports in the 1980s: Achieving Health for All (Epp, 1986) and Mental Health for Canadians: Striking a Balance (Epp, 1988). In spite of the rhetoric of these reports, there was little change in federal health policy. Moreover, beginning in the late 1980s, the federal government began to drastically reduce transfer payments to the provinces, which are primarily responsible for health, education, and social services policies and programs (Barlow & Campbell, 1995). Nelson, Prilleltensky, Laurendeau, and Powell (1996) surveyed the extent to which policies, programs, and funding were evident in prevention and promotion in the Canadian provinces and territories. As with federal policy documents, they found considerable rhetoric regarding prevention and many interesting projects, but little in the way of funding. Health funding has not been reallocated from treatment to prevention, and in all of the provinces and territories, funding for prevention remains very low. Ontario In Ontario, the Ministry of Community and Social Services (MCSS) was responsible for children's mental health and child welfare, while the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care is responsible for health. Since its inception in the 1970s, MCSS played a leadership role in advancing the concept of prevention with children and families (Nelson & Hayday, 1995). In the late 1970s, MCSS commissioned a state-of-the-art review of the prevention field with children and families (Rae-Grant, 1979), and it funded a large-scale epidemiological survey of children's mental health problems in the province (Offord et al., 1987). At the same time, MCSS began to provide some funding for prevention programs for children and for training in prevention. The first of a series of conferences, or Prevention Congresses, as they have been called, were held in the early 1980s. These conferences provided a much needed opportunity for networking and education for service providers working in services for children. An outgrowth of one of these conferences was the

18 Part 1: Setting the Stage

development of a proposal for a prevention clearinghouse. In 1985, MCSS and the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care funded the Ontario Prevention Clearinghouse, a province-wide centre for the dissemination of information about prevention and health promotion (Nelson & Hayday, 1995; Nelson, & Pancer, 1990; Pancer, Nelson & Hayday, 1990). Momentum for prevention was building in Ontario. BETTER BEGINNINGS, BETTER FUTURES

In the late 1980s, MCSS began a series of consultations to help the ministry develop the next phase of its policy and programming on prevention. In one of these consultations, they invited key individuals (people such as David Olds, George Spivack, and Larry Schweinhardt) from well-known U.S. prevention programs to come and talk to a large audience of Ontario prevention people in Toronto. All programs that were presented were developed, implemented, and coordinated by professionals, with relatively minor input from the community. By contrast, in Canada, 'professionals' and community members had become used to working together as partners. The end result of this consultation was a rebellion by the audience, who demanded a more participatory and community-oriented approach to setting the course for prevention in the province. The planned agenda for the consultation was thrown out the window, and, instead, the participants talked about how to involve communities in the process of developing prevention policies and programs. In 1988, MCSS created a Technical Advisory Group whose mission was to create the framework for a 'coordinated primary prevention initiative.' A multidisciplinary group of 25 people searched the literature and talked with personal at local prevention programs to compile information on outstanding prevention programs. The five subgroups within the Technical Advisory Group focused on the following areas: (a) infants, (b) preschoolers, (c) primary school-aged children, (d) research issues, and (d) community involvement (the last was a direct consequence of the 'revolt' during the earlier consultation). A key person in formulating this initiative was Dr Carol Russell, a senior staff member with MCSS, who shepherded Better Beginnings through its various phases for over a decade. The final report of the Technical Advisory Group recommended a model of prevention that was different than current prevention practice at that time (Rae-Grant & Russell, 1989). First, unlike the majority of prevention programs, which focus only on high-risk groups, the Better Beginnings program was to be universal and community-wide,

Putting Prevention in Context 19

one that did not stigmatize children by calling them 'at risk.' At the same time, the Better Beginnings community sites were to be characterized by having a number of 'risk factors' for children, such as higher than average proportions of families with a lone parent and a low income. Second, while most prevention programs are professionally driven, Better Beginnings was to be community-driven, with parents and residents having not only a voice, but also being in control of the project's programs. Third, while most prevention programs have a short time frame, Better Beginnings was to be a four-year demonstration project. Fourth, in contrast to most prevention programs of the time, which provided one main program component (e.g., a school-based, social problem-solving program, or home visitation), Better Beginnings was to be an integrated, multi-component project. Emphasis was placed on service integration and partnerships among service providers that cut across different sectors (i.e., health, education, social services). Services, schools, and communities were expected to change, not just individuals. Fifth, the report by the Technical Advisory Group emphasized high-quality programs with some basis in research evidence. Sixth, Better Beginnings was to serve one of two groups: children from birth to 4 years of age, or children from 4 to 8 years of age. For both the preschool children and the school-aged children, an educational program was to be provided. In 1990, seed money was provided to more than 50 communities that were interested in developing a proposal to become a Better Beginnings site. The initiative was to be funded by three provincial ministries: MCSS, the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, and the Ministry of Education and Training. Twenty sites were short-listed, and teams of appraisers visited each of these sites and rated each site on several criteria, including a demonstrated need for programming in the community and a potential for developing high-quality programs, as well as a potential for involving local residents in every aspect of program conceptualization and development. Then, following a series of meetings at the provincial government offices to consider the results of the site visits and to decide which sites would receive funding, seven urban sites were selected, three preschool (birth to age 4) and four school sites (ages 4 to 8). Additional funding from the federal government (Indian and Northern Affairs and Secretary of State) enabled four First Nations sites to be included. However, only one of the First Nations sites continues to be funded. At the time the sites were being selected, there was a competition for

20 Part 1: Setting the Stage

the research component to this demonstration project. The Better Beginnings Research Coordination Unit (RCU) was to be responsible for conducting a 25-year longitudinal study of the demonstration sites. A research team led by Dr Ray Peters of Queen's University and partners from several Ontario universities was selected to form the RCU. One of the first tasks of the RCU was to hire site researchers for each of the demonstration sites. As well, site liaison personnel from the RCU were matched with each of the sites. We elaborate on the RCU in the next chapter. Summary In this chapter, we have introduced the concept and practice of prevention. We have noted its roots in public health and its current applications in children's mental health. We have also provided some back-ground information on the context in which the Better Beginnings initiative emerged in Ontario. Having provided you with an overview of the 'big picture' of prevention, in the next chapter we introduce the research approach that was used in Better Beginnings, Better Futures.

2 The Research Process

In this chapter, we describe the way in which we conducted research on the Better Beginnings initiative. We begin by describing the different kinds of research that were used to understand the project: the (primarily quantitative) outcome research, which looked at the project's impacts on the children, parents, families, and the community as a whole; the (primarily qualitative) project development research, which examined the ways in which the project's programs were developed, and how the different partners in the project learned to work together; and the economic analysis of the project, which focused on the costs of mounting the project. We also describe how the research process was managed and organized, and discuss the ways in which community residents participated as research partners. The Better Beginnings, Better Futures project was designed to achieve three major goals: reduce the incidence of child and family problems (a prevention goal), enhance child and family wellness (a health promotion goal), and make communities and neighbourhoods healthier places in which children and families could live, learn, play, work, and grow (a community development goal). One major purpose of the Better Beginnings research activities was to determine, in as rigorous a way as possible, the extent to which these goals were achieved. Was there a reduction in child and family problems as a result of Better Beginnings becoming a part of the community? Were children and families healthier and happier because Better Beginnings programs were available to them? What kind of impact did the project have on the community as a whole? These questions were at the core of the outcome research that was undertaken at all Better Beginnings sites. This part of the research was

22 Part 1: Setting the Stage

primarily quantitative, and involved administering standardized scales and measures to children, parents, teachers, school administrators, and others at regular intervals throughout the life of the project. The same measures were also administered to individuals in a nearby comparison community, whose members did not have any comparable project operating within its bounds; as well as to parents and children within the Highfield community, before the project began most of its programs. By comparing children and families who participated in Better Beginnings with those in the comparison community, and with children and families from the Highfield community who were assessed before the project began, we could get a good sense of how Highfield children and families were benefiting from the project. Research that focused solely on the project's outcomes would have given us only part of the picture, however. What if the outcome research had shown that the project had not produced any benefits for the children, families, and communities in which they operated? If the project failed, how would we know why? Even if the project was successful, how would we know what had made it a success? Each of the Better Beginnings communities represented a unique and complex meld of history, politics, interactions among groups and individuals, and a myriad of other factors that could only be guessed at by researchers. Ultimately, we wanted these programs to help us launch successful programs in other communities throughout the province. This required that we understand not only what happened to children, families, and communities as a result of Better Beginnings' interventions, but also how groups and individuals in these communities were able to work together to enhance the lives of children and families, and how and what kinds of programs were developed. In order to answer these 'how' questions, we undertook rigorous and extensive project development research. This research was primarily qualitative in nature, and involved attending meetings, interviewing individuals and groups, and reading program documents and reports from many different sources, all of which gave us some sense of how the project developed and achieved its major goals. A final element of the research involved looking at how much the projects cost to operate and how these costs compared to those incurred by similar programs. This economic analysis was crucial, particularly for government policy-makers, who were interested in assessing the value of the project relative to other kinds of programs that might have been implemented.

The Research Process 23 Figure 2.1 Organizational Structure of Highfield Research Research Coordination Unit (RCU) Highfield Site Liaison Highfield research committee Site researchers Teachers Health & social service providers Parents Highfield Executive Team

Managing the Research Process The organizational model used to manage the research process at each Better Beginnings site is presented in figure 2.1. All research for the entire initiative was coordinated by the Research Coordination Unit (RCU). The RCU comprised a group of academics with a wide variety of expertise, from several Ontario universities and various academic disciplines, including psychology, economics, social work, education, sociology, family studies, human nutrition, and child care. These individuals developed the major 'designs' for both the quantitative outcome research and the qualitative project development research. They selected the scales and measures that would be used to assess children and families, and developed the major procedures for collecting and analysing the qualitative program development information. At the project level, each community had a site researcher (or researchers, as in the case of Highfield), who coordinated all research activities; a site liaison, a member of the RCU who served as a link between the RCU and all site researchers; and two or three site research assistants hired on an hourly, fee-for service basis to conduct parent interviews, administer measures (e.g., achievement tests) to the children, and to assist in other research activities. One of the key distinguishing features of Better Beginnings, Better Futures was that community residents were to be involved as partners in every aspect of the initiative, including the research. This kind of

24 Part 1: Setting the Stage

stakeholder-based or participatory approach to program planning and evaluation has been shown to improve the evaluation research process, and, at the same time, to empower the participants in the research (Nichols, 2002; Papineau & Kiely, 1996; C.H. Weiss, 1983). At the project level, the inclusion of community residents and other stakeholders happened primarily through Highfield's Research Committee, comprising site researchers, a site liaison, project manager, teachers from Highfield Junior School, education and social service professionals working in the Highfield community, and parents who lived in the community and had children in the school. Parents on the committee were encouraged to chair or co-chair the meetings (which were held about once a month. This, however, was sometimes not possible to accomplish because of difficulties in filling the parent positions. The Research Committee oversaw every aspect of the research, reviewed all interview questions and measures used to assess children and families, and relayed committee members' comments and concerns to the RCU via the site liaison. The parents on the Research Committee made a particularly valuable contribution to this process. For example, a South Asian parent on the committee pointed out that South Asian parents have a very different style of dealing with young children compared to their North American counterparts: they are not nearly as concerned with discipline and control. Consequently, a number of statements on one of the key parenting measures was revised and greater caution taken in interpreting results relating to this measure. Committee members read all reports produced by the research team, and made suggestions for improvements before these reports went on to be approved by the site's Executive Team, which coordinated all the major activities and set major policies. The site researcher and site liaison served as non-voting members of the Executive Team, which gave them the opportunity to report on the research at the site, and to serve as a link between the site's Research Committee and the Executive Team. The parents on the Research Committee served an invaluable function. They were the experts on how parents would likely react to the questions that they would be asked; they told the researchers when the conclusions and interpretations they had made were off-base or illinformed. Community residents influenced the research process in other critical ways, as well. The site researcher was selected by a hiring committee comprised of the site liaison, the RCU director, and community residents. The residents on the committee had a strong sense of what they

The Research Process 25

wanted in their site researcher: someone who would be able to relate to community members and who cared about the community, as well as being knowledgeable about the technical aspects of research. This had a powerful impact, both on the kinds of questions asked during the interviews, and on the person who was hired. In addition, the Executive Team approved all major research initiatives before they were undertaken at the site, and research was a main item on the agenda of every monthly meeting. Community members also influenced the research process during the hiring of site research assistants: the Research Committee worked very hard to ensure that individuals from Highfield or neighbouring communities filled research assistant positions. This way the research assistants, who helped recruit residents to participate in the research, interviewed residents, and assessed their children, would be people who were knowledgeable about the community and known to community members. As well, given the multicultural nature of the Highfield community every attempt was made to find research assistants who would be able to interview parents in their own language. Thus, in conducting the research on the Highfield project, we tried as much as possible to follow a community-based prevention research process, in which 'status differences between the "expert" and "client" are consciously blurred/ and where 'the research staff and the community participants work collaboratively to identify the social environmental factors that create resources within the community which may achieve or attain mental health' (Kelly, 1988, p. 7). However, while we were able to do this to a considerable extent, we were constrained by the fact that Highfield was part of a larger initiative, and was expected to follow the research protocol established by the RCU for all the projects. The Highfield project had input into this protocol, but only to a limited extent. The end result was a research process that was a balance between being 'expert-driven' and 'community-driven.' Outcome Research Research Designs

The purpose of the outcome research was to assess the extent to which the changes in children, families, and communities specified in the program's major goals (i.e., reducing child and family problems, enhancing child and family wellness, enhancing communities) were

26 Part 1: Setting the Stage

actually achieved as a result of Better Beginnings program activities. The most rigorous way of determining whether or not a program has achieved its outcome goals is to use a 'true experimental' design in which individuals are randomly assigned either to participate (in the 'intervention' or 'project' group) or not to participate (in the 'control' group). Measures of the key outcomes anticipated by the program would be taken before and after the program had been established, and changes in the outcomes made by those in the project group would be compared to changes made by those in the control group. In community-level interventions such as Better Beginnings, where many of the programs are designed to affect the entire community (socalled 'full coverage' programs, Lipsey & Cordray 2000), random assignment of resident families to an intervention or control group is impossible. Consequently, a quasi-experiment must be employed, in which individuals who participate in the project are compared with those who do not, but they are not randomly assigned. Two types of quasi-experimental research design were used to assess the impact of each Better Beginnings projects. The baseline-focal cohort design involved administering a series of measures relating to child, parent, and family functioning within the families of 56 eight-year-old children in Grade 2 of Highfield school in 1992-93, before the Better Beginnings programs were in operation. Five years later, the same measures were administered to the families of 81 eight-year-old children (the 'focal cohort') who had participated in Better Beginnings programming from the time they were in Junior Kindergarten (JK) (in 1993-94, when Better Beginnings programs had just begun) until they were in Grade 2 (1997-98). Thus, the baseline-focal design compared children who were in Grade 2 before Better Beginnings was implemented with children who were in Grade 2 five years later, and had participated in Better Beginnings from JK to Grade 2. The key advantage of the baseline-focal cohort design is that children in the 'focal,' or project, group come from the same community as children in the baseline group. Consequently, any differences between the groups are more likely due to the fact that one group (the project group) participates in the program, and the other group (the baseline group) does not, and are less likely to be due to things such as differences in communities from which the project and control families come. A key problem with this design is that communities change over time, sometimes quite rapidly, and this certainly happened in the Highfield community with its very transient population. Because of

The Research Process 27 these changes, the community in which families in the focal cohort lived when their children reached Grade 2 may have been quite different from the community in which the baseline families lived when their children were in Grade 2 five years earlier. This meant that differences between the baseline and focal cohort may have been due to changes in the community which occurred over time, rather than to the effects of the program. To deal with some of the difficulties inherent in the baseline-focal cohort design, a second design was employed in the Better Beginnings research. The longitudinal comparison site design involved comparing children and parents from the Highfield community with children and families from a matched comparison community, also in the Etobicoke area of Toronto, which did not receive Better Beginnings programming. This comparison was made over the four-year period (JK to Grade 2) during which programs were provided, as well as the year after when the children were in Grade 3. This research involved annual assessments of children and families, including in-home interviews with parents, measures administered to the children by site researchers, and teachers' ratings of the children. The number of children and parents from the project group who were assessed ranged from 52 to 89 over the five years of measurement, and the number of children and parents from the comparison community ranged from 59 to 118. The longitudinal comparison site design does not suffer from the key problem associated with the baseline-focal design, since the children of the Better Beginnings project were compared with children from the matched community on outcomes assessed at the same points in time. The major problem with this design is that it is difficult to find communities that are exactly matched in terms of ethnic and cultural mix, and other community characteristics. While the community selected for comparison with Highfield was similar in terms of the mix of ethnicities and cultural backgrounds of community members, there were some key differences between the communities that may have accounted for any differences between families from the project and comparison sites on key outcome measures. Measures and Sources of Information There were three major sources of information concerning the outcomes of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project. One source was an extensive parent interview, conducted with one of the parents of each

28 Part 1: Setting the Stage

child in the focal cohort every year from junior kindergarten until the year the child was in Grade 3. Administered by one of the site research assistants under the supervision of one of the site researchers, this interview was 90 minutes to two hours in length, and covered a wide range of topics, including the parents' health, parenting practices, marital relations, their children's health and behaviour, and their perceptions of the community. A second source of information was a child assessment of each child in the focal cohort (for whom permission was obtained from the parent), also undertaken by one of the site researchers or research assistants. The child assessments took place around the same time as the parent interviews, in a space designated for this purpose in one of the Highfield school portables. Each assessment took about half an hour, and included measures of height and weight, dietary intake, cognitive development, and academic achievement. The final major source of information was teacher ratings of each of the children in the focal cohort. The teachers rated the children primarily on their behaviour, adjustment, and academic achievement. Table 2.1 lists the major kinds of information collected through the parent interview, child assessment, and teacher ratings. The time periods for the collection of these data are outlined in table 2.2. Note that an additional sample of Grade 3 students was added in 1998-99 to bolster the sample sizes for the long-term (25-year) follow-up. School and Community-wide Outcomes

Another way of assessing a program's impacts at the community level is to examine statistics that are available from organizations such as schools, the police, and child welfare agencies. Three sets of statistics were obtained for Highfield and the other urban Better Beginnings sites. Police reports on the incidence of vandalism and breaking and entering were obtained for both Highfield and the rest of the jurisdiction in which Highfield is located. It was reasoned that if there were fewer reports of these crimes in the Highfield neighbourhood than in the surrounding area, this might be attributable to the presence of the Better Beginnings project in the Highfield community. Another set of statistics that was examined was provided by the local Children's Aid Society (CAS). It was reasoned that if Better Beginnings was successful in reducing child and family problems, this might result in fewer children needing protection or care from the local child welfare agency. In order to assess the impact of the Highfield project on CAS

The Research Process 29 TABLE 2.1 Outcomes Assessed through Parent Interviews, Child Assessment, and Teacher Ratings Type of outcome assessed

Examples of specific outcomes assessed

Children's emotional and behavioural Ratings of emotional problems (e.g., overproblems anxiousness, depression) and behavioural problems (e.g., bullying) by parents and teachers Children's general/cognitive development and academic achievement

Receptive language (for younger children); reading and mathematics ability (for older children)

Children's health and nutrition

Height-for-age and weight-for-height (for younger children); dietary recall (for older children)

Parents' health and nutrition

Self-rated health; self-rated frequency of health promotion activities such as exercise; self-rated frequency of health-risk behaviours such as smoking

Parenting practices and parent-child interactions

Researcher ratings of quality of parent-child interactions (younger children); parent ratings of hostile/ineffective parenting (older children)

Parent/family social and emotional functioning

Self-report of family functioning using the Family Assessment Device

Quality of local neighbourhoods

Parent ratings of neighbourhood, using items derived from Buckner's (1988) measure of neighbourhood cohesiveness

Neighbourhood schools

Parents' ratings of their relationship with their children's teachers, using items modified from the National Longitudinal Study of Children and Youth

involvement, the number of 'case openings' (i.e., the number of cases assigned to a CAS worker after initial review), and the number of children-in-care, were recorded for families in the Highfield community and were compared to the numbers of case openings and children-incare for the rest of the Greater Toronto Area from the time Highfield first began its operations in 1991. Statistics were obtained as well from the Highfield school records on the percentage of students who received special education instruction, and this was compared to the percentage of students from schools in the Etobicoke comparison site who required special education. The

30 Part 1: Setting the Stage TABLE 2.2 Time Periods for Data Collection School Year

Data Collection

1992-93

Grade 2 Highfield students (comparison group for the baseline-focal cohort design) JK Highfield students and comparison group students (for the longitudinal comparison site design) SK Highfield students and comparison group students (for the longitudinal comparison site design) Grade 1 Highfield students and comparison group students (for the longitudinal comparison site design) Grade 2 Highfield students and comparison group students (for the longitudinal comparison site design and the baseline-focal cohort design) Grade 3 Highfield students and comparison group students (for the longitudinal comparison site design) An additional sample of Grade 3 Highfield students and comparison group students (to bolster the sample sizes for the longitudinal comparison site design)

1 993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1 996-97

1997-98 1998-99

logic here was that children who went to schools that were in Better Beginnings communities would received enriched school programming in their early years at school that would obviate the need for special education later in their school careers. Project Development Research From the beginning, it was understood that Better Beginnings was to serve as a model of how similar projects could be developed in other communities around the province. That meant that research which focused only on the outcomes produced by the project would not be sufficient. Other communities that might want to implement similar projects would need to know much more than what happened as a result of Better Beginnings. They would want to know how the different programs implemented during the project were selected or developed, what services or activities constituted the different programs, who offered the services or activities, when they were provided, how the project was managed, and so on. One of the key functions of the project development research, then, was to provide this information. Another purpose of the project development research was to help the

The Research Process 31

project grow and develop in the best way possible. This kind of research, in the program evaluation literature, is referred to as 'formative' in its intent, in that it is used to help form, develop, or improve the program (Scriven, 1967). By documenting the way in which the project developed and the way the major stakeholders were perceiving and reacting to its development, the project could be given feedback that would help guide its future development. Feedback about how volunteers, staff, and program participants were feeling about the project and its programs provided information that was critical to the way in which programs were designed and run, staffed and managed. Indeed, the feedback the Highfield research staff provided to the project and its director through reports and personal communication had a significant impact on several aspects of the project's design and operations. As we have noted, one of the key features of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project, and other Better Beginnings projects, was that they were to be developed, implemented, and managed by a partnership of community residents, professional social and health service professionals, educators, and others. Community residents, in particular, were to have as much of a role in decision-making as any of the other partners in the Better Beginnings enterprise. Indeed it was this 'community-driven' feature of Better Beginnings that differentiated it from most other community-based prevention programs across North America. Another purpose of the research, then, was to help us understand this unique approach to the involvement of community residents as true partners in the development of the project, and, more generally, to examine the ways in which groups and individuals in the Highfield community were able to work together to develop project programs. Better Beginnings was also conceived as policy research. Conceptualized originally by a government-sponsored task force, one of the major purposes of the project was to help inform government policy-makers about those project characteristics and development approaches that would be most conducive to producing effective programs. This information could then be used in formulating policies and making funding decisions with regard to the expansion of community-based prevention programs into other parts of the province. A final purpose of the project development research was to generate knowledge and theory about the development of community-based primary prevention. It was hoped that not only other communities around the province, or government policy-makers, would benefit from understanding how such projects are conceptualized and developed, but also

32 Part 1: Setting the Stage

that the whole field of prevention and community development might benefit from the theories and models that were conceived in the process of developing Better Beginnings projects such as those at Highfield. Some of the more specific questions that were addressed by the project development research were the following: • The Highfield program proposal was produced by a coalition of individuals who came together with the aim of bettering their community. How did this coalition develop? • How did the group change as time went on? How were people added? Under what circumstances did they leave? • How were tasks and duties assigned to group members? • How were community residents involved in the development process? What were the major barriers to participation of community residents? • How did representatives from the different community agencies work together? • What were the major problems and issues encountered by the programs in their development? • How were the different program activities decided upon? • How was the program organizational structure decided upon? How were program staff hired? The project development research was designed to answer these and other questions that would help not only the project and its participants, but also other communities around the province, government policy-makers, and the prevention field as a whole. Qualitative Approach

In achieving the major purposes of the project development research, it was decided that a qualitative approach to data collection and analysis would be the most useful and informative way to proceed. This qualitative approach was situated within a 'multiple case-study' research strategy, in which each site would serve as a single case study, but also be part of a multiple case analysis of all the Better Beginnings sites (Yin, 1989). A qualitative approach involves the collection of data by means of direct observation, interviews (either individual or group), and the examination of written documents (Patton, 2002). The two site researchers took primary responsibility for data-gathering at Highfield, often assisted by the site liaison.

The Research Process 33 FIELD NOTES

The major source of information was the set of field notes compiled by the site researchers and site liaison. These notes consisted of a semi-verbatim account (i.e., using participants' own words) of what had transpired during the meetings of the site's main decision-making group (Highfield's executive team'), summary notes of what had gone on at other meetings and events (e.g., visits to the site by government representatives), and summaries of major documents such as proposals, minutes of meetings, interviews, and so on. The field notes also contained analytic comments that summarized the researcher's personal impressions and reflections of what occurred at the meetings. At every meeting of the executive team, at almost every meeting of the other major committees that managed the project's programs, and at key project events, a member of the site's research team sat with a laptop computer, in an effort to capture as much as possible of what people were saying and doing. The field notes gathered at each site then were entered into a computer database via The Ethnograph' software package (Seidel, Kjolseth, & Seymour, 1988). This package allowed for the coding of the field notes into major categories (e.g. resident involvement, government relations), and the quick extraction of all notes relevant to a particular code or topic. For example, when it came time to write a report on resident participation, all notes coded with the label 'resident participation' were selected from among the thousands of pages of field notes that had accumulated over years of note-taking, to make the analysis more manageable. Throughout this book, quotes from the field notes are used to illustrate different aspects of the project's development and its impacts at the child, parent, family, and community levels. INTERVIEWS A number of the aspects of the project which were of interest were often not available, or could be inferred only from information contained in the field notes. For example, one issue of great interest to all of those involved in all of the Better Beginnings sites was what had motivated residents to get involved in Better Beginnings in the first place. Residents did not often talk about this during meetings, and so it was necessary to ask them about issues such as this, in either an individual or group interview, in order to supplement the information contained in the field notes. At most of the sites, both individual and group interviews were conducted using an interview guide approach (Patton, 2002), in which a set

34 Part 1: Setting the Stage TABLE 2.3 Sample Questions from Resident Participation Individual Interview Nature and Amount of Participation 1 . How did you first get involved with Better Beginnings? 2. What kinds of Better Beginnings activities have you been involved in? 3. How much time do you spend on Better Beginnings activities each week, on average? Motivation to Participate 1 . Why did you get involved in this project? 2. What kinds of things are you hoping to get out of your involvement with Better Beginnings (cue: eg., training, job, meet other people, relief from child-rearing)? Barriers to Participation 1 . Is there anything that makes it difficult for you to get involved in Better Beginnings activities (cue: e.g., lack of adequate child care, time, spouse doesn't like you spending time away from home, cost)? 2. Can you think of some reasons why people might not want or be able to get involved in Better Beginnings? 3. Are there things that the project could do to help people get involved, to overcome any barriers to their participation? What are they? Outcomes of Participation 1 . How do you think your participation, and the participation of other community members, has helped in developing the Better Beginnings project in this area? 2. How have you benefited personally from your participation in the project? 3. Have there been any negative aspects of your participating in Better Beginnings (e.g., too time-consuming)?

of topics or subject areas was provided for the researchers to cover, but which the interviewers were free to 'explore, probe, and ask questions that will elucidate that particular subject' (p. 343). Table 2.3 shows some of the questions asked of individuals taking part in the interviews, including the nature and extent of each respondent's involvement in the project, her/his motivation to participate, and perceived barriers to participation; structures that had been established to encourage participation at the site; outcomes of participation; and the relationship between residents, staff, and service providers. In many instances, groups of individuals were interviewed, using a focus-group format (Stewart & Shamdasani, 1990) and covering many of the same subjects included in the individual interviews. Questions asked in focus group interviews are typically much fewer in number

The Research Process 35 TABLE 2.4 Group Interview on Resident Participation

1. What kinds of Better Beginnings activities have community members been involved in? 2. Why do you think community members get involved in a project such as this? 3. What are some of the reasons why people might not want, or be able, to get involved in Better Beginnings? 4. Are there other things that the project could do to help people get involved, to overcome any barriers to their participation? What are they? 5. How do you think the participation of community members has helped in developing the Better Beginnings project in this area? 6. How have community members benefitted personally from their participation in the project? 7. Have there been any negative effects of community members' participation in the project, either for the people themselves, or for the project (e.g., too time-consuming)? What are they? 8. How would you describe the relations between community members and the service providers involved in the project?

than those asked in individual interviews. The major benefits of a focus group interview are their efficiency and the fact that group members often stimulate each other to think of things that individuals might not have thought of on their own. Table 2.4 shows the group interview guide, which suggested questions concerning the nature and amount of resident participation in the project; people's motivation for participating; barriers to participation; how participation of residents had benefited the project, the community, and the residents themselves; negative outcomes that residents had experienced; and the relationship of residents, staff, and agency personnel involved in the Hlghfield project. The individual and group interviews that were conducted to generate reports were often supplemented by more informal interviews and conversations with those involved in the project. Throughout the book, quotes from individual and group interviews are used to illustrate and support our description of the project's programs, development, and outcomes. Procedures for Generating Site Reports

Topics for the initial site reports were decided by the Research Coordination Unit, and these reflected some of the key concerns of government when the project was initiated: How are the projects organized

36 Part 1: Setting the Stage

and managed? Can community residents be involved meaningfully as partners in this process? What kinds of programs result from such a process? Later on, the topics selected for examination in the site reports began to reflect the concerns and interests of the sites (and the residents) themselves, as well. In the end, the order in which the different report topics were addressed, and the topics themselves, reflected a balance of government and community concerns and interests. In generating individual site reports, the research team followed a framework which had been developed collaboratively by the site researchers from all the Better Beginnings projects and the RCU. Typically, these researchers met together and generated a list of questions and topics that would be addressed with regard to the topic at hand. A subgroup of the RCU then organized these questions and topics into a report framework, and developed interview guides based on the framework. After the initial framework was developed, it was then reviewed by the research committees at each of the sites. Revisions then were made to the framework, and the final framework went to each site's steering committee for approval prior to the collection of data. This framework ensured that a core of relevant information was gathered and reported on in all the sites in a consistent format, and allowed for efficient collation of information from the individual Site Reports, thus generating a cross-site report that focused on a particular topic and discussed this topic in relation to all Better Beginnings sites. The end result of the program development and program model research was a series of reports on a variety of topics relating to the way programs were conceptualized and put into place at Highfield (and across all Better Beginnings sites). These included reports concerning how the different partners at Highfield first came together and produced a successful proposal to become one of the Better Beginnings sites (the 'coalition development' report); resident involvement in the project (the 'resident involvement' report); the programs offered at the site (the 'program model' report); how professional service providers from the Highfield area were involved in the project and the roles and functions they served (the 'service provider' report); and how the project was managed and organized (the 'program management' report). One of the other major reports produced as part of the project development research was referred to as the 'stories' report. This report evolved in a somewhat different manner from all of the other site reports. It came about as a result of a meeting of community residents, Better Beginnings staff, researchers, and government representatives, in which the need to convey how life had changed for those involved in

The Research Process 37 TABLE 2.5 Project Development Reports and Updates Report

Year Produced

Coalition development Resident involvement Program model Service provider Program management & organization Stories Building Rainbows

1992 1992 1993 1994 1996 1997 1999

Year Updated

1998 1998 1998 1998

Better Beginnings was recognized. In this report, an attempt was made to tell the stories of each of several individuals who were involved in different ways in the Highfield project. The information was gathered from in-depth individual interviews, in which the people interviewed recounted the history of their involvement, from the time before the project came into their community until the time of the interview. Another report generated for the site was entitled 'Building Rainbows: A Community of Hope and Diversity/ The purpose of this report was to summarize some of the key findings of the research at Highfield from 1990 to 1999, in a form that would be accessible to community residents. The Building Rainbows report was filled with pictures, maps, and diagrams that described the school and its neighbourhood, the various ethnic and language groups that lived in the neighbourhood, the programs that made up Better Beginnings, and the ways in which teachers, social service professionals, parents, and others had learned to work together to build the project at Highfield. The report ended with the stories of two residents, and how their lives had been changed by Better Beginnings. Table 2.5 lists all reports generated as part of the project development research at Highfield, and when they were produced. An update report was then generated for several of the earlier topics, to record any developments that had taken place since the initial report, and any significant issues that had arisen during that time. Each of the various project development reports contained as much detail as possible, to give the reader a sense of how the project had developed at Highfield, how the major stakeholders worked together and how they felt about the project. The data on which this 'thick description' (Patton, 2002) were based on the things people said during meetings and conversations, their responses to the questions asked in

38 Part 1: Setting the Stage

interviews, the events and reactions that were described in various site documents and reports, and the events that the site researchers and site liaison witnessed and described in the field notes. In all reports, quotes from the people involved were used frequently, in an attempt to bring the reader of the report into the setting, to give her/him a full appreciation of what it was like to be involved in Better Beginnings. Economic Analysis The final major component of the Better Beginnings research was its economic analysis. Several different kinds of economic analysis of a project can be undertaken. The kinds of analyses one hears about most frequently are cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis (Levin, 1975). Cost-benefit analysis involves looking at the program costs and outcomes using the same units (usually dollars), whereby, one can determine whether a program's costs outweigh its benefits. Cost-effectiveness analysis also involves looking at a program's outcomes in relation to its costs, but in this type of analysis, a program's outcomes are not in the same units as its costs. For example, it would be difficult to put the outcomes of a program designed to enhance mental health in terms of dollars and cents. Critical to both cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses is of course a detailed accounting of a program's costs. Consequently, one of the major data collection activities of each Better Beginnings site was the documentation of how costs were incurred, broken down by major program activity. Highfield, like other Better Beginnings sites, kept detailed accounts of how much money was spent on programming in four major categories: classroom enrichment activities, other child-focused activities, family/parent-focused activities, and community development activities. These records, in combination with records of how many children and families participated in project programs, allowed for a calculation of the average costs per child and family involved. All Better Beginnings projects also kept a record of 'service-in-kind' expenses, the amount of unpaid time donated by the projects' many volunteers. Summary In this chapter, we have described the research methodology used to assess the impact of Better Beginnings on the children, parents, and families who participated in the project's programs, as well as the effect of

The Research Process 39

the project on the community as a whole. We have also described the research approach that was used to document and describe the way in which the project developed and changed over time. All quotes, descriptions of events and milestones, and stories throughout the remainder of this book come from the field notes and interviews generated as part of the research process. Look for further details on the methodology of the study in the Appendix. As Sechrest and Sidani (1995) have stated, 'No such thing as an errorfree method of enquiry exists' (p. 84). This is certainly the case with the research on the development and impact of the Highfield Better Beginnings project. For example, as described earlier in this chapter, both the baseline-focal and the longitudinal comparison design have significant problems associated with them. Similarly, though great care was taken to select measures that were psychometrically sound, each of the key outcome measures had some drawbacks associated with it. As well, there were difficulties associated with both the quantitative and qualitative approaches to the research (Sechrest & Sidani, 1995). The best approach to dealing with such difficulties is 'triangulization by plural methods/ the use of multiple methods of inquiry (Fielding & Fielding, 1986; Rossman & Wilson, 1985; Sechrest & Sidani, 1995). In the research for the Highfield Better Beginnings project, multiple research designs were employed (the baseline-focal and comparison site design), different sources of ratings and information were obtained (from parents, children, and teachers, as well as from community records), and different approaches to data gathering and analysis (quantitative and qualitative) were used. This use of multiple methods allows for more confidence in attributing outcomes to a project when there is a convergence of findings, and provides more complete information from different perspectives.

3

The Highfield Community

In this chapter, we take you into the Highfield community and describe the context in which the Highfield Better Beginnings project emerged. We describe the community, in words as well as with demographic information, as it existed prior to the initiation of Better Beginnings, Better Futures. Next we tell the story of how the community came together to develop the proposal for the project, including the nature of the school, the active role of the school principal, and the participation of a small group of parents - all critical elements in the development of the proposal. We also explore the motivation of the people involved in the process, their struggles, and their triumphs. A Look Back: The Highfield Community before Better Beginnings, Better Futures Community psychologist Seymour Sarason (1972) stated that when one is trying to create a new program or setting, one should consider the history of the community. The period 'before the beginning' often provides insights into how to create a better future. Similarly, Jim Kelly (1988) argued that prevention research begins with an understanding of the community, including informal and formal networks and the strengths of community members. Communities can be thought of in many different ways (see Heller, Price, Reinharz, Riger, & Wandersman, 1984, Chap. 5). Geography and Physical Environment

One can think of a community in terms of its geography and physical dimensions. The Highfield community is located in the Rexdale area of

The Highfield Community 41

the northwest end of Toronto. At the time of the original proposal, Rexdale was part of the former City of Etobicoke, in the western most part of Metropolitan Toronto. Since that time, the cities that constitute Metropolitan Toronto have amalgamated into the City of Toronto. The Highfield community is very densely populated and is composed of many highrise apartment buildings and subsidized townhouse units. Income and Employment Rates: An Economically Disadvantaged Community

A community can also be thought of in terms of the demographic characteristics of the population. In the original proposal for the Highfield Community Enrichment Project in 1990, the community was described as 'economically disadvantaged/ with many of the children coming from large families that had low incomes or that received social assistance. As we noted in Chapter 1, poverty and low income are major risk factors for children and families. According to census information provided in the 1990 proposal, approximately 18 per cent of Highfield families were headed by single parents, compared to 14 per cent for all of Etobicoke. The household size was larger for this area than other areas of the former City of Etobicoke. The average annual income for the Highfield community was also lower ($35,634) than that of Metropolitan Toronto ($43,300). The proposal also estimated (based upon census tract information) that 16 per cent of all Highfield area families, representing approximately 2000 households, could be categorized as low-income. As well, it was estimated that 85 per cent of the children enrolled at Highfield Junior School in 1990 were living in low-income or subsidized rental units. Further evidence of the economic disadvantages facing Highfield families was provided in research conducted in 1993 on 43 families of children in Grade 2. This group of children and families was to serve as a 'baseline' comparison group for the children in the 'focal' cohort group - that is, those group of children who would be participating in the Better Beginnings programs and who would be followed by the research from JK to Grade 3. The group of children in Grade 2 in 1993 had little or no exposure to Better Beginnings programs, and therefore served as a point of comparison when the focal cohort children reached Grade 2. The research conducted on these 43 families revealed that a large number of the caregivers interviewed in 1993 were living on low incomes. The research sample of Highfield parents, as compared to rest of the

42 Part 1: Setting the Stage TABLE 3.1 Average Annual Family Income for Highfield and the Province Year

Highfield

Province of Ontario

1991 1996

$43,841 $36,054

$57,227 $59,830

TABLE 3.2 Unemployment Rates for Highfield and the Province for Men and Women Year

Gender

Highfield

Province of Ontario

1991

Men Women Men Women

14.1% 12.6% 13.3% 17.5%

8.6% 8.4% 8.7% 9.6%

1996

city of Etobicoke, the province of Ontario, and all of Canada, had a much higher percentage of families whose annual income was less than $20,000. And, it should be noted that this research was conducted before cuts in social assistance rates (a 21.6 per cent cut in general welfare) were made by the provincial government in 1995. The mean monthly income for this sample of 43 parents was $2183; of that, almost 40 per cent of their income was spent on rent (an average of $857 per month), putting great financial pressure on families. Indeed, more than 39 per cent of the families reported having less than $250 per month after paying for food and rent. As well, 37 per cent of the 43 families indicated that they did not have enough money for daily living and did not have enough money to pay all of their bills. Moreover, census data gathered in 1991 and 1996 indicate that the low income levels of Highfield residents not only persisted, but they worsened over time. Moreover, income levels in the Highfield community are far lower than the provincial average (see table 3.1). Census data also show relatively high levels of unemployment for Highfield men and women, with rates for women becoming higher over time (see table 3.2).

The Highfield Community 43

A Multicultural Community Another salient demographic characteristic of the Highfield community concerns the enthno-racial background of residents. Highfield was, and still is, a very multicultural neighbourhood. Walking down the streets in Highfield, one sees people from all over the world with different religious affiliations: Chinese people, Punjabi people, Muslim people from Africa and the Middle East, and people from the Caribbean islands. Many people dress in clothing that is typical in their home country, although in the Canadian winter everyone also wears a winter jacket. Similarly, entering the Highfield school grounds, one is struck by the differences in the children, their diversity in appearance and clothing. The community is truly a cultural rainbow. According to the 1993 research sample, most of the respondents were not born in Canada. Census data indicate that 53.6 per cent of the residents of Highfield in 1990 were born outside Canada, and that this number increased to 59.8 per cent in 1995. Further, it was estimated by project staff and school representatives that about 40 different languages are spoken in the homes of children living in the neighbourhood. While immigrants and refugees often experience many needs when they settle into a new country (Amio, 1999; McKenzie, 1996), the rich diversity of cultural backgrounds is also a significant community resource (Trickett, Watts, & Birman, 1994). When the talents and strengths of people from different cultural backgrounds can be tapped and harnessed, communities can benefit in many different ways. Another important dimension of the Highfield community is a tremendous turnover in residents. In the 2001-02 school year, 253 new students entered Highfield Junior School, while 320 students left the school (out of a total school population of about 900). Highfield is a 'stepping stone' community for many new Canadians (Heller, Price, Reinharz, Riger, & Wandersman, 1984). It is a very short distance from Pearson International Airport and is the first place of settlement for many newcomers. However, once families become more established, many move on to other communities. Formal and Informal Resources

One can also think about community in terms of the formal and informal resources that are available to people in a setting. The Rexdale area

44 Part 1: Setting the Stage

lacked services at the time the Better Beginnings proposal was developed. For example, there was very little in the way of social and recreational services for children: There were a very large number of children and when they came from school on the other side of Kipling, they were not allowed out again because of the danger of crossing the road. There were no services for them on the east side of Kipling, (community activist, key informant interview, 1997) They never did anything that much for the kids ... There was nothing, nothing at all. (parent volunteer, key informant interview, 1997)

A local children's mental health centre initiated after-school recreational programs for children in one of the high-rise apartments in the area. Two community-based organizations worked to get the city's Parks and Recreation Department involved. Although it was a major challenge, the organizations were successful as well in persuading Parks and Recreation not to charge user fees: 'It was a real fight to get them to not charge our kids for services, because they had this thing that they would charge them 50 cents a day. Well, after the kids had been to school, no mom [at] home, they [would] arrive at the centre [and] they didn't have the 50 cents or 10 cents or 5 cents or anything ... It's a matter of it not being reasonable to expect small children to hang on to that kind of cash' (community activist, key informant interview, 1997). One of two community organizations that worked with Parks and Recreation during this time have offered their own summer recreation programs for children since the 1980s. Prior to the Highfield Community Enrichment Project, there were even fewer resources for parents. According to the original proposal, the only service that existed for the Highfield community prior to Better Beginnings was a very small Moms and Tots class that operated free of charge during the winter months: '[The project] was a good thing that happened for the parents because they really didn't have anywhere to go ... It was a chance for parents to meet other parents, because a lot of these parents really didn't have anywhere to go' (key informant interview, 1997). Further, despite the multicultural nature of the community the proposal did not mention any services for immigrants or refugees: There was obviously a need for English as a second language and extra sup-

The Highfield Community 45

port in the school because of the poverty that existed in the area, and the great mix of languages and cultures ... [A] large number of newcomers had arrived in the community and there was really a lot of different needs' (key informant interview, 1997). Yet, some services existed in the area prior to Better Beginnings. On the fringe of the Highfield community there was a library and a recreation centre, in addition to a large shopping complex with a medical centre, several churches, and good transit service (on the main streets). With the absence of formal resources in the community, newcomer families relied on their extended families and ethnic communities for support. However, as we shall see later, many parents, particularly women who were at home with their children, described themselves as socially isolated in high-rise apartment buildings and disconnected from the Canadian mainstream. Few gathering spaces or events were available to help parents break their isolation and meet people from other backgrounds. Summary: A Look Back

In the proposal for the Highfield Community Enrichment Project (Highfield School and Community Association, 1990), some of the risk factors facing children at that time were summed up as follows: 'In addition to economic disadvantage, high-risk factors and lack of available services, children in the Highfield school community face other real life challenges every day. They live in an environment where crime and drug use are commonplace, and where walking through areas littered with used syringes is part of their routine. Many face dangerous traffic situations and, as latchkey kids, a large number spend their time alone, fending for themselves' (p. 7). Despite the challenges facing children in the community, the Steering Committee for the project believed the community showed promise for community participation in Better Beginnings: the school had strong parent group, and many people turned out for a community planning meeting when the Better Beginnings proposal was being written. Coming Together: Developing the Proposal for the Highfield Community Enrichment Project Here, we describe how residents and service providers came together to develop the proposal to become a Better Beginnings' demonstration

46 Part 1: Setting the Stage

site. We begin with a brief review of the literature on the partnership approach to prevention-program planning. Next, we show how the planning for the Highfield project illustrates this partnership. A Partnership Approach to the Development of Prevention Programs

As we noted in Chapter 1, prevention demonstration programs are often driven by researchers. Moreover, researcher-driven approaches to the development of prevention programs tend to focus on developing a good program model. Building ownership for the program and working with stakeholders from the community to implement the program are not strongly emphasized. Researchers are basically in control of these programs, which are supported for a time-limited period by research grants, only to end when the research is completed. Moreover, while some prevention researchers collaborate with other service providers and teachers, the disadvantaged children and families who are to be the beneficiaries of such programs are seldom a part of the planning, implementation, and maintenance process. An alternative to the researcher-driven approach is one that we have called a partnership approach (Nelson, Amio, Prilleltensky, & Nickels, 2000). The partnership approach is one that is value-driven. Valuebased partnerships may be defined as 'relationships between community psychologists, oppressed groups, and other stakeholders that strive to advance the values of caring, compassion, community, health, selfdetermination, participation, power-sharing, human diversity, and social justice for oppressed groups' (Nelson, Prilleltensky, & MacGillivary, 2001, p. 651). To develop value-based partnerships for prevention, Nelson et al. (2000) suggest that three key steps should precede the delineation of program goals, activities, and evaluation (i.e., creation of the program model). First, it is essential to identify key stakeholders and to create a forum for stakeholders to come together to form a partnership. While prevention program developers typically involve service providers and teachers in community and school prevention programs, we believe that those disadvantaged community members for whom the program is designed should be integral members of the partnership. Partnerships with community residents should not consist of 'token' consultation or minimal input. Rather, consistent with the values of self-determination, participation, and power-sharing, residents should play a central role in programs that serve them. For us, value-based

The Highfield Community 47

partnerships are explicitly designed to advance the interests of disadvantaged people. Second, one of the beginning tasks of the partners is to clarify the vision, values, and working principles of the partnership. Values and ground rules about how those values will be enacted form the foundation of the partnership and have been shown to be important for the implementation of prevention programs in schools (Prilleltensky, Peirson, & Nelson, 1997). However, consideration of the values underlying the partnership is often neglected. Developing a shared vision and values is important for getting the partners 'on the same page/ but also as a guide for partnership activities. For example, the partnership values of collaboration, democratic participation, solidarity, trust, and reciprocity are vital in the creation of prevention programs. Third, the strengths of the different partners need to be identified and merged. The importance of the collaborative nature of the partnership that builds on the strengths and assets of all stakeholders cannot be underestimated. Prevention researchers and service providers typically bring scientific and professional knowledge to partnerships, while disadvantaged people bring experiential knowledge, which includes an understanding of their local context. All of these types of knowledge are valuable and need to be pooled in an equal partnership. As Kress, Cimring, and Elias (1997) stated, For this [the partnership] to work successfully, there must be a respectful balance for the expertise held by both parties; that is, the consultant knows certain techniques and approaches and used them effectively in many settings, whereas the consultee is the expert in this particular setting. It is the melding of these areas of expertise that is essential to a successful consultation ... the ecological approach reminds us that the work of the consultation is aided by all parties recognizing and exercising expertise, and this will extend to the content of the interventions themselves because they will work better when the children who receive them experience themselves as 'experts' in managing their own behavior and in having areas of expertise to contribute to their classmates, classrooms, school, families, and communities, (p. 244)

Once these three steps have been completed, the next steps of the partnership approach to prevention program planning include specifying the goals and outcome indicators, designing and implementing the program, and evaluating the program (Nelson et al., 2000). This

48 Part 1: Setting the Stage

process of program development is done collaboratively by the stakeholders in value-based partnerships with community residents playing an important role in the process. We describe the development of the prevention program model in detail in the next chapter. Who Was Involved and How Did They Get Together?

Highfield used the partnership approach to prevention planning described above. In March of 1990 an information session on Better Beginnings, Better Futures was held at Queen's Park, the seat of the provincial government for Ontario. At that meeting, two service-providers from the Etobicoke area - the principal of Highfield Junior School and a manager from the local branch of the Children's Aid Society (CAS) of Toronto - first met and began discussing the possibility of developing a proposal for a Better Beginnings project in north Etobicoke. Notably, the CAS has had a Community Development and Prevention Program since the early 1970s, whose mission involves 'developing, in partnership with others, prevention programmes, which encourage healthy and positive relationships among children and their families within their communities' (Lee & Richards, 2002, p. 97). The CAS had helped to initiate a number of community-based prevention programs across Metropolitan Toronto. The two began to meet and brought in others they believed should be involved in the process. In particular, they thought it was necessary to have representation from each of the three ministries funding the project (i.e., the Ministry of Community and Social Services, the Ministry of Education and Training, and the Ministry of Health and LongTerm Care). Other people that became involved in proposal development included a representative from the Public Health Department, a community development worker from the CAS, a parent from the school's parent group, the executive director of a local grass-roots organization providing social and recreational programs in the area, the executive director of a women's centre, a child-care coordinator from the Etobicoke Social Development Council, and a representative from the local community centre. The development of the proposal required a good deal of time and commitment from the members of the Steering Committee. During the two-month proposal development period, the committee first met biweekly, then weekly, and, as the deadline loomed, the group was meeting as frequently as twice a week. Indeed, the community worker from CAS worked full time on the proposal development, the principal of the

The Highfield Community 49

school and the manager from CAS contributed about 10 to 20 hours a month, while others on the committee contributed anywhere from 5 to 15 hours a month. In fact, the representative from the women's centre had to drop out of the project because she could not sustain the kind of time involvement necessary during the proposal development stage. Because of the amount of time and work required during this stage, the parent involved on the committee also reported that she had to take time away from the project because she 'burned out.' Why Did They Become Involved with the Project?

The two people who met originally to discuss the possibility of a Better Beginnings project in the area, as well as others involved on the Steering Committee, were motivated by the philosophy or orientation of the project and because they found the project interesting and compelling. For example: The philosophy and orientation of the program was in keeping with our attitudes ... it was something unique - collaborative, preventive, concerned about empowerment and other issues ... and the fact that it was triministerial. (key informant interview, 1991) It was something that I thought was interesting ... could benefit our community.' (key informant interview, 1991)

There were other individuals on the Steering Committee who became involved because their position was such that the project sort of 'fell into their laps,' or because they were asked to participate by their supervisors. Some of the service providers involved in the process reported that although their agencies or organizations were supportive of Better Beginnings, and of their involvement in the proposal development process, this did not translate into greater administrative support or time off from other responsibilities. Yet, their commitment to the project was so strong that they ended up working on their own time to ensure that the proposal was completed by the deadline. Highfield Junior School: The Focal Point

From the outset the school community was targeted as the site for the Better Beginnings project. It seems that this future site was not debated

50 Part 1: Setting the Stage

- it was obvious to those involved in the process initially that the Highfield community was in need of more services and resources. At that point in time, the school was becoming increasingly overcrowded, and the immigrant population in the community was also expanding. The school was experiencing a lack of space, growth in classroom size, and an influx of many more newcomers to Canada who spoke little or no English. Further, since the principal for Highfield Junior School was one of the first two initiators of the project and was extremely supportive of Better Beginnings, the school appeared to be the most logical choice as the project's hub. As well, given that the project required community involvement, it was also helpful that the school already had a well-established parents' group. Not surprisingly, Highfield Junior School became the focal point of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project. When developing project goals, objectives, and activities, parents in the community were consulted through the school (described in the next section). In the years since the initiation of the Highfield project the school has continued to be the heart of the project. The administrative offices, toy lending library, and Family Resource Centre are all located on school grounds. As well, most of the programming occurs in the school (e.g., in-class enrichment, nutrition) or on school grounds. The school became a hub of activity and a welcoming place in the community. However, as we describe in Chapter 4, the process of becoming a welcoming environment did take time. In partnership with the Better Beginnings project, the school provided more than a setting for the program, it was instrumental in bringing the resources, talents, and energies of teachers together with project staff and parent volunteers to provide an enriched setting for children and parents. I think there's been a real unleashing of the potential of teachers and I think there's just a whole host of things that... go together ... I think it just opens the door, in a way, to so much more, (key informant interview, 1995) The school has really opened up its doors to the community because of Better Beginnings being around. The school would have been more secluded from the community. Now it's wide open and it's more used, and I think people in the community are feeling now more pulled to the school. It's not off-limits. It's a space they can share and access ... The school is more accessible to parents and residents, (resident focus group interview, 1995)

The Highfield Community

51

Community Participation in the Development of the Proposal

Given that the Steering Committee had only two months in which to develop the proposal, the involvement of the community during this stage was a challenge. The first step: the principal from the school brought the issue to the parents group - already formed at that time discussed the project, and invited members of the group to participate on the Steering Committee. One parent did become involved and she acted as the representative from the parents group at committee meetings. The principal also spoke about the project with parents who were registering their children for junior kindergarten. Further, the school hosted community breakfasts where the project was discussed. To assess the needs of the community, a survey was distributed to parents to gather information about what issues should be addressed. The survey was written in English and Punjabi, the predominant language spoken by non-English-speaking community residents. Once the results from this survey were summarized, a letter was sent home to parents informing them about an evening community meeting, held at the school, to discuss the Better Beginnings project and the results from the survey. Translation and babysitting services were provided. The turnout for the meeting was estimated to be between 70 and 80 families. The results from the survey were discussed and this group of community residents divided into smaller focus groups, each facilitated by a Steering Committee member, to further discuss the issues raised by the survey. The results from the survey and the discussions helped form the basis for the project objectives and program activities. While parents were not well represented in terms of the core group that put the proposal together, input from parents did have considerable influence on the broad program areas that were identified. As one individual explained, 'A lot of [the program's components] came out of the parent's survey and meetings ... and from the service providers [in the group] ... The service providers had ideas, but I think the ideas that came through the strongest were the ones that were supported by parents' ideas, or ones that both the parents and service providers agreed on' (staff focus group interview, 1992). Issues, Challenges, and Triumphs

It is not surprising that during the development of the proposal the steering committee members faced some issues and challenges; yet,

52 Part 1: Setting the Stage

they experienced triumphs as well. The biggest challenge during this stage was the limited amount of time available (i.e., approximately two months) to develop and finish the proposal by the deadline: Time was the biggest factor ... We really felt rushed ... The big challenge was timeline ... and volume of information that we had to include, (key informant interview, 1991) I think one of the major frustrations was the pressure of the time ... I think at times [the individuals involved] just seemed to be overwhelmed with it. (key informant interview, 1991)

Barriers to the involvement of community residents were identified as challenges during proposal development. The time that meetings were held (i.e., during working hours) may have prevented working parents from becoming involved. In addition, class, cultural, and language barriers were also mentioned by some key informants as reasons why more parents did not become involved. Parents from ethnic minorities may not have spoken English or were intimidated by working with professionals, or, as one key informant explained, it simply may not have been their custom to volunteer their time to become involved in community initiatives. Nonetheless, one key informant did believe that the mainstream organizations involved at that time (e.g., the child welfare agency, the school board, public health) had little experience in reaching out to immigrant populations. The parent who was involved on the Steering Committee believed that some parents may have felt 'inadequate' and distrustful of the service providers involved: 'A lot of the parents were hesitant in coming on board because it seemed so big and overwhelming ... and "What are they talking about?" ... It had to be explained several times before parents really understood what the project was about and event then they were hesitant [about] coming on board because of all the agency people ... There's a lot of distrust with the [child welfare agency] and people were very hesitant... very leery' (parent key informant interview, 1991). An additional barrier was that the limited amount of time and resources available prevented more efforts being made to involve more community residents. Although most of the people involved during the proposal development phase felt that a serious effort was made to involve parents, given the limited amount of time and resources, some parents reported that they felt 'shut out' of this stage of the project. In general, bureaucratic red tape and agency/organizational politics

The Highfield Community 53

did not present too many barriers or challenges during the proposal development process. However, some committee members had to 'figure out what level their organizations were comfortable [with in] donating time' (key informant interview, 1991). And, as mentioned earlier, some of the individuals involved ended up working on their own time and on holidays to complete the proposal. Most of the key informants interviewed did not believe that agency politics hindered the process; however, there was one informant who thought that there were 'factions' in the group, but that 'it kept going ... because people [saw] it as a high-need community and [wanted] to see services despite the issue in process' (key informant interview, 1991). The main triumph during this process was that the proposal was completed and submitted by the deadline. Given the tight time frame, Steering Committee members had to work tremendously hard to accomplish that task. As well, the group was successful in cooperatively working together, especially since many of the committee members, or the organizations they represented, had little or no experience in working together prior to Better Beginnings. As one key informant reported, 'I was very interested to see organizations that we don't have a lot of work with ... I wasn't sure of their thinking and policy ... [but] their perspectives were similar - prevention, collaboration ... [There was] no difference of opinion on these policy approaches.' (interview, 1991). As the committee met more frequently the group became more focused on what it wanted to accomplish and the tasks became more clear. Most of the key informants interviewed were pleased with the process and what they accomplished. The final triumph, of course, was that the committee was successful in developing a project that was ultimately selected for funding. The Highfield Community Enrichment Project proposal was one of over 50 proposals submitted to the government for consideration. A provincial committee, composed of researchers, service providers, and policymakers reviewed all proposals. Of these, approximately 20 were visited by a team of three appraisers. The provincial committee then met and selected the final sites. Given the number of communities that submitted proposals, the Highfield community was justifiably proud of receiving funding for their project. Summary In this chapter we have painted a picture of the Highfield community prior to Better Beginnings, and provided an overview of how the

54 Part 1: Setting the Stage

Highfield Community Enrichment Project came into being. At the time the proposal was being developed, the Highfield community was confronted with serious economic disadvantages, the school was facing increasingly difficult issues with the growing number of newcomers to Canada and increasing class sizes, and there was a lack of resources and human services in the school and community to cope with the needs of a multiculturally diverse and low-income population. A small group of dedicated individuals came together in the spring of 1990 in response to a call for proposals from the Better Beginnings, Better Futures project, and Highfield Junior School became its focal point. This group of individuals logged a lot of hours, put in a lot of effort, and faced a number of challenges and barriers. Yet, they managed to pull together a proposal, one that ultimately was successful in its request for funding, all in a matter of two short months.

Part 2 The Programs and Their Development: A Partnership Approach to Prevention

In Part 2 we describe the programs of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project and the processes through which the programs were developed and implemented in the community. The goal of this part of the book is to answer the question: What were the main program components of the Highfield project and how were they developed? Each chapter is based on data gathered from the qualitative component of the research described in Chapter 2. Chapter 4 is concerned with how the programs got started. In this chapter, we outline the steps that were taken in the planning, implementation, and maintenance of the program components. We note the values set forth in the government document on the Better Beginnings, Better Futures' program that communities used as a guide in developing their proposals. We show how the Highfield program model, relates to the overall Better Beginnings' program model and describe the role of government in the process of conceptualization and implementation. We also emphasize the multi-level, ecological nature of the Highfield program model and the important role that community residents and service providers played in the design of the program's components. In the remaining chapters in this section, we provide a rich description of each of the three main components of the program model. In Chapter 5, we provide some background on family support programs and research that has been reported in the literature, and we describe the family support programs at Highfield. We note how parents have been the driving force behind the creation of the Family Resource Centre and its programs, and we indicate the key role that family enrichment workers, hired from the neighbourhood, have played in supporting families and linking families with the school and with other services. Chapter 6

56 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

focuses on school-based prevention programs. We briefly review some of the literature on these programs, and describe the many different programs that have been implemented within the school. The role of parents as volunteers within the school, the participation of teachers in the project, and the school as a 'hub' for different programs and resources within the community are some of the themes emphasized in this chapter. In Chapter 7, we give an account of community development activities undertaken by the project. Partnerships with other service agencies, advocacy by residents for the Highfield project, and a number of grassroots activities and programs are also described.

4

How Programs Got Started: From Ideas to Action through Partnership

In this chapter, we describe how prevention programs at Highfield were planned, implemented, and maintained. We begin by relating some of the literature on the creation of prevention programs, emphasizing a partnership approach to prevention, followed by the story of program development at the Highfield Community Enrichment Project. We conclude with lessons learned about the process of planning, implementation, and maintenance. Throughout the chapter, we place more emphasis on the process of program development than on the content of the specific programs. In the remaining chapters in this section, we provide a more detailed description of each of the main program areas. Creating Prevention Programs: A Life Cycle Model The study of the life cycle of organizations has been undertaken within the fields of program development and evaluation (Pancer & Westhues, 1989), organization development (Quinn & Cameron, 1983), community development (Jones & Silva, 1991), and community psychology (Bartunek & Betters-Read, 1987; Reinharz, 1984; Riger, 1984). As well, some research on the life cycle of organizations has focused specifically on prevention programs (Johnson, Malone, & Hightower, 1997). Most relevant to our purposes are a few articles and studies that have focussed specifically on neighbourhood organizations that emphasize prevention programs for children and families (Blum & Ragab, 1985; MTimkulu, 1982; Powell & Nelson, 1997). According to Johnson et al. (1997), the development of prevention programs in schools entails three stages: (a) planning and preparation, (b) implementation, and (c) maintenance. Similarly, in an explication of

58 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

a community development approach to prevention through the creation of neighbourhood centres, M'Timkulu (1982) identified four stages: (a) initiating, (b) building, (c) stabilizing, and (d) consulting. While these stages are similar to those proposed by Johnson et al. (1997), they are unique to Lutherwood Children's Mental Health Centre in the Waterloo region of Ontario. Lutherwood's former Community Services department emphasized the creation of centres in low-income neighbourhoods, and the stages suggest Lutherwood's role vis-a-vis those centres. Lutherwood saw its mandate as helping to start the centres, bring them to maturity, and then spin them off, so that they would operate independent of Lutherwood (M'Timkulu, 1982; Powell & Nelson, 1997). We have adopted the stages proposed by Johnson et al. (1997). These stages are meant primarily to indicate a timeline rather than fixed and inevitable stages of development leading towards some predetermined state. Sarason (1972) and Bartunek and Betters-Read (1987) have warned that while stage models can help to understand the process of organizational development, they may also distort these processes because stages are not neat, clean, and clearly bounded. Thus, we use the concept of stages with caution. Planning and Preparation

There are two different functions of planning when it comes to the design of prevention programs: (a) developing a sound prevention program model that specifies the program components and their intended outcomes, and provides a rationale that links program activities to intended outcomes and (b) building community ownership of the program through the development of partnerships. The first function is concerned with the task of planning, the second with the process of planning. Regarding the first function, there is a need to develop a theory or model about how a problem develops and how a program is intended to prevent the problem or promote wellness (Bickman, 1987; Bickman & Peterson, 1990; Chen, 1990; Rutman, 1980; Wholey, 1987). Recall from Chapter 1 that Nation et al. (2003) found that one of the principles of effective prevention programs is that they have a sound theoretical base. Furthermore, in Chapter 1 we reviewed some of the pathways that Cowen (1994) proposed can be used to promote wellness. These pathways include (a) developing secure attachments between infants and

How Programs Got Started 59

their caregivers, (b) teaching social and academic competencies, (c) changing social environments so that they are more likely to promote wellness, (d) promoting empowerment by focusing on people's strengths and rights to self-determination and collaborating with them, and (e) helping people to develop resilience so that they can cope effectively with stress. Not only is wellness enhanced through these processes, but problems can also be prevented (Cowen, 2000). In the development of a program model, evaluators often use what is called a program logic model (Rush & Ogborne, 1991; Rutman, 1984). There are three steps in developing such a model: (a) defining the outcome goals of the program (both short-term and long-term) in a way that is clear, concrete, and measurable; (b) specifying the components and activities of the program; and (c) providing a rationale that links the program components and activities with the program goals. A good program model indicates how the program should work; that is, how the program activities are supposed to lead to changes in the outcome goals that have been specified. The second function of planning is to build community ownership for the program. In this regard, numerous school consultants and researchers have pointed out the importance of collaboration between consultants and the different stakeholders from schools and communities (e.g., Cherniss, 1997; Johnson et al, 1997; Sarason, 1982). In a study of planning a school-based prevention program, Peirson and Prilleltensky (1994) found that planning and implementation, ownership of the change by different stakeholders, and attention to human factors were important factors for creating school change. Moreover, administrative support for school-based prevention programs has been found to be a critical factor for successful planning (e.g., Johnson et al., 1997; Sarason, 1982; Peirson & Prilleltensky, 1994). The process of planning is as important or more important than what is planned for community ownership of a prevention program (Johnson et al., 1997). We will say more about the process of program development in a subsequent section of this chapter. One further point regarding planning that should be noted concerns the issue of time lines. Collaborative planning is highly time-consuming. Johnson et al. (1997) suggest that the planning stage can take anywhere from six months to two years, while Juras, Mackin, Curtis, and Foster-Fishman (1997) similarly state that planning a prevention program can take a year or more. Juras et al. also note that there is a tension between time-consuming collaborative processes and the needs of

60 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

some stakeholders, particularly administrators and funders, to achieve tangible results. There are dangers in going too fast or too slow in the planning process. If partners move too quickly, they typically fail to adopt a long-term time perspective on change, and instead opt for 'quick fix' solutions that don't work in the long run (Peirson & Prilleltensky, 1994). On the one hand, moving too slowly can lead to 'planning to death' without making any changes. People become fatigued and frustrated when they feel that they are 'spinning their wheels' and not achieving anything concrete. Some kind of balance is needed between collaboration and action. Implementation

Implementation refers to how well the program components are put into practice. If a program is unsuccessful in achieving its outcome goals, this could be due either to a faulty program model or to a failure to implement the program in the way it was intended to be implemented. In a review of the literature, Durlak (1998b) found that adequacy of implementation is variable across prevention programs and that quality of implementation is directly related to achievement of outcomes. For these reasons, there is a growing recognition of the need to pay close attention to and to study implementation processes (Durlak, 1998a; Gager & Elias, 1997; Lynch, Geller, Hunt, Galano, & Dubas, 1998; Zins, Elias, Greenberg, & Pruett, 2000a, 2000b). It is not enough to know that programs are successful in reaching their intended outcomes. It is also important to understand how and why positive outcomes are achieved. What are the key program ingredients that lead to positive outcomes and how well are they implemented? Like planning, there are both task and process dimensions to implementation. It is not just important that programs are implemented according to plan; the processes and context of implementation are equally important (Biglan, 2004). Problems with the implementation may be due to resistance of those required to do the implementation (e.g., teachers), lack of training, support and ongoing consultation for those doing the implementation, and lack of administrative and financial support for the program (Chamberland et al. 1998; Cherniss, 1997; Durlak, 1998b; Gager & Elias, 1997; Lynch et al. 1998; Peirson & Prilleltensky, 1994). One tension in the implementation process is between fidelity to the original program model and adaptation to the local context (Blakely et

How Programs Got Started

61

al., 1987; Castro, Barrera, & Martinez, 2004). Research on the dissemination of innovative programs that have been shown to be effective has found that close adherence or fidelity to the original program model is directly related to subsequent demonstrations of success in new settings (Durlak, 1998b; Mayer & Davidson, 2000). Weissberg (1990) has suggested that program outcomes can be improved if those who implement the program 'introduced new strategies to augment the effects of faithfully implemented components' (p. 188). Similarly, Bauman, Stein, and Ireys (1991) and Mayer and Davidson (2000) have argued that while some adaptation to unique contexts is inevitable, what is crucial for the ongoing success of a program is adherence to the program model. In sum, most prevention researchers argue that there is some balance needed between fidelity to the program model and adaptation to local contexts. Rigid adherence can stifle local initiative, while adapting the program to such a degree that it no longer resembles the original program model can lead to a program that lacks the basic program components that have been shown to be important for success. Castro et al. (2004) advocate a middle-ground approach that they call 'hybrid prevention programs/ that "'build in" adaptation to enhance program fit while also maximizing fidelity of implementation and program effectiveness' (p. 41). M'Timkulu (1982) has further divided the implementation phase of program development into 'building' and 'stabilizing' periods. The period of building refers to the initial implementation of creating and building the programs. Inevitably, those who implement programs find that there are a number of implementation obstacles and issues that need to be addressed. With time and experience, they strive to 'iron out the wrinkles' and refine the program, so that the initial bumps in the implementation become smoothed out. Maintenance Once a program model has been successfully put into practice, the next task is to ensure that the program is maintained. According to Johnson et al. (1997), 'Several central elements should be sought in program maintenance: (a) district support and information networks, (b) integration of the program activities into the curricular structure and framework of the school, (c) site and district level commitment, and (d) program integrity and efficacy' (p. 85). All work that has been undertaken in the planning and implementation stages to build community

62 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

ownership for the program should be helpful in maintaining the program in the long run. In this regard, it is important to communicate with policy-makers about the value, importance, and effectiveness of the prevention program, as policy-makers are key stakeholders with regard to funding prevention programs. Moreover, the transition from the demonstration stage (and, oftentimes, its funding) to maintenance and ongoing funding is particularly critical for the longevity of prevention programs. Both research findings about the effectiveness of a program and community ownership can be useful tools in advocating for ongoing funding. For example, consider the wellknown prevention program using nurse home visitors in rural New York developed by David Olds (1997), mentioned in Chapter 1. When the research project ended, the caseloads of the nurse home visitors were dramatically increased, severely diluting the program. All of the nurse home visitors quit their jobs in frustration (Schorr, 1988). The lack of institutional ownership compromised the strength of the program model. More active support of policy-makers and local systems is needed to ensure the continuation of proven prevention programs, such as the one by Olds and colleagues. Creating Prevention Programs: The Experiences of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project In this section, we first briefly describe the Highfield program model. Next, we provide a describe the different stages in the evolution of the Highfield programs. We end this section with an analysis of the program development process in terms of the steps of the partnership approach to prevention programs introduced in Chapter 3. The Highfield Program Model

Here, we highlight the main prevention programs of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project, their goals, and the population served. We then devote one chapter to each of the three main program areas, visually depicted in figure 4.1: (a) family support, (b) in-school, and (c) community development. Each program area has a staff coordinator and staff. While the program areas have remained constant over time, there have been changes in particular programs within these areas. We note programs that were operational during the demonstration phase of the project (from September 1993 through to the fall of 1997), as well as

Figure 4.1 Overall Highfield Program Logic Model: Program Components and Intended Short-term and Long-term Outcomes Program components Family support programs Drop-in Toy lending library Parent relief Parenting groups, programs, and workshops Play groups for children Home visitation In-school programs Snack/nutrition/breakfast program Summer enrichment Educational assistants Classroom social skills intervention Professional development for teachers Release time for teachers Opportunities for parent involvement Community development programs Resident participation Leadership development Cultural events Community activities Traffic safety Before and after school program ESL classes Recreational events

Intended short-term outcomes Reduced social isolation Increased social support Increased parenting skills Enhanced personal growth Improved parents' self-esteem Improved relationships between parents and school Increased children's language development Improved children's motor skills Improved children's social skills Increased children's independence Improved children's nutrition Improved children's health Enhanced children's cognitive development Increased children's social skills Increased involvement of teachers in project Improved relationships between parents and school Increased resident participation Enhanced leadership of community members Improved sense of community Increased social support Improved ability to speak English

Intended long-term outcomes

Enhanced educational attainment Enhanced vocational attainment Enhanced socioeconomic success Enhanced social responsibility Decreased rates of teen pregnancy Decreased rates of criminality Decreased rates of mental health problems Decreased utilization of health and social services

64 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

programming for 1998 (i.e., at the end of the demonstration phase). The overall program logic model is depicted in figure 4.1. Descriptions of each of the three main program components are provided in greater detail in Chapters 5 to 7. FAMILY SUPPORT PROGRAMS

Family support programs revolve around the Family Resource Centre, which is located in a double portable on the grounds of Highfield Junior School. The Family Resource Centre was the first program to get started. It opened in 1992 and has provided and continues to provide a drop-in, a toy lending library, weekly parents' groups, a parent relief program, and workshops and parenting courses (conducted in different languages) for parents. Most parents who use the Family Resource Centre have preschool children or children in junior kindergarten (JK) or senior kindergarten (SK). All of these activities focus on mutual aid and peer support with a goal of reducing isolation of parents, mostly mothers, and promoting self-esteem and personal growth. As parents are giving and receiving support, play groups are provided for their young children. Initially these groups were for preschool children and children in JK and SK; currently, the emphasis is on children in JK. These groups are designed to increase children's language development, psychomotor skills, social skills, self-confidence, and independence. During the demonstration phase of the project, three family visitors provided outreach to parents. The family visitors provided informal support and information about the school and community to the parents, and also spent time in the classrooms getting to know the children. The family visitors concentrated on children in the focal cohort for the research (i.e., those children entering JK in 1993). After the demonstration phase had ended, the family visitor position changed, the new position becoming more focused in the school. The goals of the home visitation program were to improve parenting skills and knowledge as well as relations between parents and the school. IN-SCHOOL PROGRAMS

The nutrition program, the first program introduced into the school beginning in 1993, provided snacks, daily to all children from Grades 1 to 5. After the first year, the program was reduced to three times a week because of costs, an increase in the number of students, and difficulty in organizing volunteers to do this on a daily basis. A nutrition coordinator planned the snacks, adult volunteers prepared them, and students and teachers distributed them. The nutrition coordinator also

How Programs Got Started 65

conducted educational activities about nutrition and healthy eating in the classrooms and at community events using puppetry and music. A hot lunch program was initiated in January 1995 for the winter months (November to March), with a change to parents of 50 cents per lunch. A twice-a-week breakfast program was introduced in 1998 after the demonstration period had ended. All of these activities were designed to improve students' health and nutrition, as well as their knowledge in these areas. Summer enrichment programs were offered in the school for children in the research focal cohort in the summer prior to their entry into JK. Within the school, all classes in this cohort had one educational assistant, which lowered the adult-to-student ratio and allowed for more adult assistance with the children's language, self-help, cognitive, and social skills. The educational assistants 'followed' this group of children throughout Grade 2. An in-school coordinator was also on hand to arrange for students on placement and to hire professionals on a contract basis to provide storytelling, drama, and social skills intervention to help develop the social and problem-solving skills of children in the primary grades. In 1995, the school initiated a school-wide social skills training program: Lion's Quest Skills for Growing, which provided training and professional development for teachers, including project-funded teacher release time, which enabled teachers to attend meetings and conferences. Overall, the project has assisted in a variety of ways to improve the connection between home, school, and community, and to promote parent involvement in the school in a variety of roles. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

While the community development component does provide some specific programs, the overall thrust is 'one of residents and service providers working together to help themselves develop and sustain a healthy and safe community' (Highfield Community Enrichment Project Schedule A, 1993, p. 39). The community development coordinator, community residents, and service providers participated on a Community Development Committee to plan initiatives in the community. Special events included a forum on the culture of people from South Asia, an anti-racism event, activities during Black History Month, a community festival/rummage sale, and so on. A primary function of the project being to promote resident participation and leadership, Committee members, encouraged parents to become involved in project activities, events, and committees, and provided training in public speaking,

66 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

chairing meetings, and other aspects of community leadership. A Fun and Recognition Committee was struck to recognize the work of volunteers for the project. Residents also worked on traffic safety in the neighbourhood. Specific programs for children were developed as well, including a Before and After School program that would also help working parents with much needed child care. English as a second language (ESL) programs were also initiated because parents requested them, and March break and summer programs were organized through the Community Development Committee. Trips and outings, which might have been unaffordable otherwise, are organized for families living in the Highfield catchment area, with transportation provided during the summer. SUMMARY OF THE HIGHFIELD PROGRAM MODEL

The Highfield program model is ecological in nature, focusing on reducing risk factors and enhancing protective factors for children at the family, school, and community levels of analysis (Durlak, 1998b; Rae-Grant, 1994). The model is universal in nature, focusing on all children in the age range of 4 to 8 who attend Highfield Junior School, and their families. The program model also emphasizes mental health promotion and primary prevention. The attainment of short-term outcomes is presumed to lead to longer-term positive outcomes, such as the prevention of criminal behaviour and school drop-out, and the promotion of positive youth development, good citizenship, and academic and vocational success. Moreover, the program components that are designed to achieve these outcomes are based on a sound theoretical and empirical framework that includes many of the key pathways to wellness noted by Cowen (1994). These pathways include teaching social and academic competencies; changing family, school, and community environments so that they are more conducive to the promotion of child wellness; promoting resident empowerment by focusing on people's strengths and participation in the project's programs and helping children and their parents develop coping skills so that they can more effectively deal with stress. In the next section, we describe the process of developing the Highfield programs. Stages of Program Development PLANNING THE PROGRAM MODEL

The years 1991 and 1992 were devoted primarily to planning and organizing the Highfield Community Enrichment Project. During 1991, the

How Programs Got Started 67

project's Steering Committee and Personnel Committee, composed largely of people who worked on the proposal, were active (field notes, 1991). During the planning period in 1991 and 1992, the main vehicles for the participation of partners were the different committees: the project's Steering Committee, the various program committees which were struck to refine the different program components, a parents group, and the Research Committee. The Nutrition Committee eventually was subsumed under the In-school Committee. The one program area that was not represented with a program committee was that of family support. However, there was a parents group that met weekly in the project's Family Resource Centre, which planned family support programs. A Family Support Committee was struck in 1994 (field notes, 1994). Parent participation in the project increased and improved considerably during 1992. Although attendance did vary, more parents attended the Steering Committee and they became more vocal. Early on there was a small core group of approximately three to four parents. By 1992, approximately nine parents (eight women and one man) were actively involved in the project. These parents had an impact on the programs being planned: They have had a fair bit of input recently on the community development focus and in-school program, so their voice is being heard or at least recorded, so that's really having some impact, (service-provider focus group, 1992) I find that they [the service providers], in most of the meetings they try to ... as far as programming ... get the parents' input on ... like 'What do you do'... 'What do you see in the community'... and 'What do you feel would '[work]' ... that type of thing, (parent focus group, 1992)

Resident participation in the project was most notable in program planning and management of the Family Resource Centre, which continues to be the centre of the family support programs. Since the project's early years, parents have had a major impact on the kinds of programs that the site offers. The idea for new programs often begins with the residents. 'I think for a long time ... we pushed for the breakfast program, and now it is here and we're saying 'See, it's successful' ... So I think the parents

68 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development have stuck around to finally see the benefits of saying, 'We need a breakfast program, we need a breakfast program,' and now we have one here and its benefiting the project, and the teachers are liking it. (parent focus group, 1998)

Service providers also participated on the different committees and had an influence over what type of programs were developed. The three main program components stemmed largely from the wishes of three main stakeholder groups involved in the development of the original proposal. The Family Resource Centre idea came from the parents, who took the leadership in developing this program. The school principal, who played a central role in the development of the proposal, emphasized the need for school-focused programs to enrich and build upon activities already occurring in the school. Finally, service providers from other agencies asserted the need for a community development focus. A community development worker for the Children's Aid Society (CAS), along with two other representatives from small, grass-roots community agencies, played a central role in developing the proposal and in establishing its focus on community development. One group of service providers that was not active in the early days of program planning was teachers and school representatives. While the principal had an influence on programs for the school during the proposal writing, she did not attend the meetings of the In-school Committee until the fall of 1992, and she was not available for many of the Steering Committee meetings during this planning phase, commenting that the school was her first priority (site researcher, analytic comments, 1992; field notes, 1992). As well, there was a lack of teacher involvement in the program planning process. One other important stakeholder group in the planning process included representatives from the provincial government. While the government person assigned to the Highfield project did not participate directly in the planning process, this person was responsible for ensuring adherence to the guidelines set forth in the government document. Since the government stipulated in the call for proposals that submissions should outline a holistic approach, this no doubt influenced the general thrust to have an ecological focus on school, family, and community programs, but not necessarily the particular types of programs that were proposed. The planning period ended with a 'hiring blitz' conducted at the end of December 1992 and into early January 1993 (field notes, 1992; ana-

How Programs Got Started 69

lytic comments, 1992). During this time, the in-school coordinator was hired, as were many of the direct service staff (i.e., educational assistants, family visitors, the nutrition coordinator, before and after school workers, etc.). All stakeholder groups participated in the hiring process. Although the years 1991 and 1992 were devoted exclusively to program planning, planning and developing new programs has been an ongoing process throughout the life of the project. Not only has the project held annual planning days since its inception, but as we have noted in this section, community residents and partners also come up with new ideas for programs on a regular basis. IMPLEMENTING THE PROGRAM MODEL AND ONGOING PLANNING

Following the hiring of staff, program implementation started early in 1993. The reception by teachers, staff, and school administrators was not a warm one (field notes, 1993). The introduction of project staff into the school, the increased demand on school space for the nutrition and before and after school programs, the lack of involvement of teachers in the planning process, and the absence of an ongoing communication mechanism between the school and the project led to tension and friction (analytic comments, 1993. This issue surfaced quite prominently in the project's planning day held in March 1993 (field notes, 1993): 'At first, nobody even wanted to go into the school ... [We] couldn't even go into the staff room ... The feeling was very uncomfortable' (project staff focus group interview, 1995). The project and school decided to hire a half-time person so that teachers could be released on a regular basis to participate on the Inschool Committee. With this adjustment, teacher participation increased. On one hand, the involvement of teachers was a positive step that the project had sought for some time. We provide release time ... generally, it's the people who are more interested than others. These people are on all committees, so they know what's going on ... continuity ... but worry that it is a constant drain on them ... definite advantage for us because they are so informed, (staff focus group, 1995) They [teachers] have become part of the 'in-circle.' (school representative, key informant interview, 1996)

On the other hand, this transition also marked the beginning of a

70 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

period in which there were more teachers and service providers on some committees than there were parents. Hence, parents became less vocal on this committee. It's a very difficult committee. It's a very heavily weighted committee with staff from the school, so consequently there has to be a major ... effort to get more parents on there who feel that they can say something. Because I think one of the reasons they don't come is not because it's difficult for them to get away but more because they ... feel somewhat intimidated by the size of the group, (community representative, focus group interview, 1995) Largely teachers on In-school ... Teachers have a corner on the market. They're the experts ... some sense that we have to take the lead from them. What it means is that we have to support people better ... have to improve communication with the school, (staff focus group, 1995)

During the planning day in 1993, it was decided that the Steering Committee should be restructured into a smaller, more stable group with 51 per cent parent membership to conform to the guidelines of the Better Beginnings, Better Futures initiative (field notes, 1993). Further planning led to the creation of an Executive Team (ET), which was formally initiated in the fall of 1993. Within two months of this restructuring, a change in the climate of the ET was noted, with parents becoming more vocal and appearing more comfortable (field notes, 1993). Implementation of programs was done by all of the partners in the Highfield project. Some programs, such as those involving educational assistants working with the focal cohort for the research, were implemented by project staff. In this particular case, the educational assistants worked closely with the teachers. Some programs, such as workshops and courses for parents, were implemented by partners from other organizations (e.g., Metro Children's Aid Society). Other programs involved both project staff and other service providers in their implementation, such as summer programs for children. Teachers implemented some of the programs, particularly the Lion's Quest social skills program. As noted earlier, many of the programs have relied on volunteers: For example, since Better Beginnings' inception, parent volunteers have prepared the snacks for the children in the school. Also, many of the cultural events sponsored by the Community Development program were jointly planned by the program's coordinator and volunteers representing the different ethnic groups.

How Programs Got Started 71

Once the project had been fully operational for one year, many of the initial problems in implementation had been resolved. For example, teachers participated at the annual planning meeting for the first time (field notes, 1994). Moreover, there was a positive atmosphere at this meeting between parents, teachers, and staff. None of the anger or complaints about the school that had surfaced on the planning day the previous year were apparent: The relationships with the school ... the teachers are more receptive to what we're doing ... There's more of an appreciation of what we do and we have more appreciation of what they do. (staff focus group, 1995) I find it easier to talk to them [teachers] ... They're more open. They help. (staff focus group, 1995) [A school staff person] mentioned that there has been a noticeable improvement in the maturity of the before and after school staff. She reported that they were taking safety issues much more seriously and were acting upon advice she gave rather than taking it as a criticism. She said the staff were to be commended, (field notes, 1994)

A new in-school coordinator was hired early in 1994, and under this person's leadership, many new initiatives were undertaken. Also, a new principal arrived in the fall of 1994. The new principal and the vice-principal, who had joined the school the previous year, cooperated with and were available to the project on a regular basis, the principal participating on the ET and the vice-principal on the In-school Committee. Also, project staff were regularly invited and regularly participated in school staff meetings (field notes, 1994). These new developments, coupled with one year of experience in operating programs, led to greater stability of the programs. One person made the following comment: 'It took us awhile to get to the point where the programs were up and running ... Anything could start going but things came easier for us' (staff focus group interview, 1995). One side effect of the restructuring of the Steering Committee into the ET was that several service providers who had been involved since the early years of the project became less involved because of illness, job transfers, and project management restructuring. At the same time, however, increased collaboration with some service provider partners (i.e., a community development project) and the addition of new partners (e.g., a community health centre) occurred.

72 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development MAINTENANCE

The demonstration phase of the project ended in the fall of 1997. During the 1996-97 school year, there was considerable uncertainty about the future of the project and fear that funding would be discontinued. To the delight of everyone involved, the premier of Ontario announced permanent funding for all the Better Beginnings projects on 17 April 1997. Following the announcement of permanent funding, the project underwent an extensive organizational review. Part of this review entailed consideration of making the shift from a demonstration project to an incorporated agency independent of the sponsor organization, the Etobicoke Board of Education. There were also major changes in staff positions and job descriptions. The educational assistant and family visitor positions were amalgamated into one new position, child and family enrichment. During the demonstration phase, the educational assistants worked exclusively with the focal cohort for the research, and the family visitors worked primarily with parents in the focal cohort. Following the change in job description, the child and family enrichment workers spent 15 hours a week working with children in the JK classes. The remainder of their time was spent doing family support with the parents of these children, including home visiting, conducting parenting groups and play groups, and orienting new Canadian families. The community development coordinator position also shifted somewhat to emphasize more grassroots community development and resident participation in the project, as opposed to the organization of events and the operation of programs. Analysis of the Partnership Approach to Program Development at Highfield In the final section of this chapter, we analyse the Highfield planning and implementation process in terms of the steps of the partnership approach to planning prevention programs introduced in Chapter 3: (a) creating the partnership, (b) articulating the vision and values on which the partnership is based, and (c) pooling knowledge and strengths of the different partners (Nelson et al., 2000). Creating the Partnership

Several different partners were involved in the planning of the program model: service providers, parents, project staff, and government. It is clear that all partners had an influence on the program model. As

How Programs Got Started 73

we have noted, parents were initially under-represented and intimidated by the process, but they became more active and confident with time. However, on the In-school Committee, we observed, as did Gruber and Trickett (1987), that parents defer to the expertise of teachers. The school is the arena of expertise of the teacher, and it is very hard to reduce the power differential between parents and teachers. In contrast, parents were well represented on the Community Development Committee and in the Family Resource Centre, which was more their domain, and they had the most say about programs that were developed in these areas. While different people had a stake in different programs, one person expressed that there was nevertheless an overall shared ownership of the programs: 'But it's funny that we have that freedom but nobody feels, how you say, like ownership of the program. Like you have the freedom to do that, but at the same time it's not like it's mine ... like it's our program. It's Highfield's program and we are all like that' (staff focus group, 1996). Using the program committees to flesh out the program model provided different stakeholders with a great deal of input. These committees enjoyed a considerable autonomy which allowed for a highly participatory planning process: The committees have a fair bit of autonomy, know what their objectives are, what money they have ... Goes to Executive for approval... Openness to possibilities, picking up on opportunities, [the] atmosphere allows people to come up with stuff. It's implicit that program committees are representative of different stakeholders' (key informant interview, 1995). In the early days of planning and implementation, tensions between the project and the school developed because the school was not active in the planning process. After the proposal was submitted, even the school principal did not actively participate. Like others (e.g., Cherniss, 1997; Peirson & Prilleltensky, 1994; Sarason, 1982), we found that administrative support for the project was crucial. When release time to allow teachers to participate in the planning was provided and when the principal became re-involved, relations between the project and the school began to improve. The new principal and vice-principal then actively supported the program and further improvements were noted in the relationship between the school and the project. We also experienced tensions between the project and the government, because the government was pushing for implementation at a faster rate than the project was able to achieve. Like others (Juras et al., 1997; Johnson et al., 1997), we found that the process of collaborative planning was quite lengthy, lasting almost two years. There were also

74 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

some tensions between the project and the government with regard to the program model, but with time and negotiation these differences were overcome. One factor that could have helped speed up the process was to hire the project manager earlier. Volunteers reported feeling 'overextended' during the planning period. Hence, hiring a manager and full-time paid staff early in the process could have helped move the planning along at a faster rate. Vision and Values

As the reader will recall from Chapter 1, the design of projects, as outlined in the guidelines for proposals, was to emphasize inter-sectoral partnerships among service providers, a high degree of resident participation, and a multi-component intervention with programs for children, families, and the community (Rae-Grant & Russell, 1989). The Highfield project espouses a mutual aid philosophy in that children and adults are seen as having the opportunity both to receive and to give support. Thus, reciprocity and citizen participation are values of the project. Staff members have stated that the project's philosophy is all-embracing, and is reflected more in the way people work together than it would had this philosophy been written down formally. I think the philosophy has to do with a comprehensive approach ... and what happened here was the people gave life to that ... I think around kids, it's been holistic, so you look at not only [the] academic but the social life, and their basic health and caring and support... Another piece of the philosophy has been that any program you develop has to be based around the experience of the person closest to the child ... I would hope you could see it in the way things are done and the way things are planned. And the only reason I hesitate is because it hasn't been explicit, (key informant interview, 1994) It was really neat to see how people created this vision. It was wonderful how they were all interconnected and how the child was the focal point and everything else just grew from that, (staff focus group, 1996)

The child is viewed at the centre of a web of relationships and structures within the community, and the project philosophy is holistic and ecological. Since there are a variety of stakeholders who are involved in the lives of children, the project values the participation of diverse people.

How Programs Got Started 75 The bottom line is that we integrate and honour each person's perspective. People represent different perspectives - parents, school, service providers, staff - and we work trying to take all of these into account, both formally and informally. There is a melding of points of view of participants who don't necessarily speak the same language, (staff focus group, 1996) You learn to value everybody ... and respect, like honesty ... There's a lot of those values within the project, I think, and that's what makes us strong, (resident focus group, 1996)

Another important value is that of community empowerment. Project participants used terms like 'community-driven/ 'parent participation/ and 'power sharing' to describe the value placed on resident participation in project management. This value was reflected in the goal that parents constitute 51 per cent of the members of the project's committees and Executive Team: One of the visions - have as much parent involvement as possible; talk about having 51 per cent parent involvement on committees, and also get as many agencies involved as possible, (staff focus group, 1995) I think trying to develop community and community residents and trying to get them involved was a big vision in the management of the project, (focus group interview, 1995)

A related theme is that the project aspires to be very open to the community. Implicit in this openness is a recognition of the strengths of the community and its residents: 'We don't decide things for the community. We feel like we're part of the community. We do things for us, not for them' (staff focus group interview, 1995). In summary, the key values guiding the management of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project are: the central place of the child in the community, the valuing, honouring, and inclusion of each person's perspective, the emphasis on resident participation and empowerment, and the openness of the project to the community. Pooling Knowledge and Strengths

Kress et al. (1997) have argued that in partnerships for school-based prevention programs the expertise of all partners needs to be recog-

76 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

nized and melded in the shaping of a program model. The partnership approach used in the Highfield project illustrates this point quite well. Each program committee and the ET consist of parents, service providers, and staff, so that there is ample opportunity for a synergy of ideas. As we noted earlier, however, different partners have had a different influence on the different program components: residents have exerted the most influence over the nutrition, family support, and community development initiatives, while teachers appear to have had the most influence over school-based programs. Summary

The Highfield project provides a good illustration of the partnership approach to prevention program planning and implementation. Community residents and service providers were key partners in the design of the project, which was driven by the community, not professional staff or researchers. The government focus on a holistic, communitydriven approach was adopted readily by the project and its partners as their guiding vision. While there was never a formal written philosophy, the project partners lived a philosophy whose central focus was on children, the valuing of each partner's viewpoint and strengths, and resident participation. Finally, the committee and program structure provided opportunities for a pooling of the knowledge and viewpoints of the different partners. In the following chapters in this section, we turn to the specific programs that the staff and partners created.

5

Family Support Programs

Family support has been defined as 'community-based services to promote the well-being of children and families, designed to increase the strength and stability of families ... to increase parents' confidence and competence in their parenting abilities, to afford children a stable and supportive family environment, and otherwise enhance child development' (GAO, 1996). A 1994 survey of Canadian family support programs (Kellerman & Williams, 1994) identified the following as some of the more common services provided by family support programs: parent/caregiver/child drop-ins, playgroups, toy and resource libraries, information referral, parenting education, support groups, family events and activities, and outreach and home visiting. Other services and programs provided by family support programs include respite child care, information and referral services, language programs for recent immigrants and their children, and special events such as seasonal and holiday parties (Mayfield, 1993b; Nault, 1990; Regan, Mayfield, & Strange, 1988). Family support programs are distinguished as much by their values and philosophy as by the services they offer. These values include a non-deficit orientation with an emphasis on building on strengths to produce 'wellness'; an ecological perspective which 'views the child as part of the family and the family as part of the community' (Mayfield, 1993b, p. 46); accommodation to diversity in backgrounds and family structures; a recognition of the importance of the child's early years in fostering healthy child development; the need to address both child and adult needs; and the need for multiple programs that are responsive to local needs and involve the significant participation of community residents (Bennett, 1989; Kagan & Shelley, 1987; Layzer, Goodson, Bernstein, & Price, 2001; Mayfield, 1993b; Weiss & Jacobs, 1988; Weissbourd & Kagan, 1989; Zigler & Black, 1989).

78 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

Family support or family resource programs have their conceptual basis in developmental research and theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1987). One of the key elements of this conceptual basis is the importance of the family in enabling children to learn and succeed. Another key element is the need for social support from people outside the family: The capacity of families to function effectively, particularly under stress, depended to a significant degree on the availability and provision of social support from persons outside the immediate family' (p. xiii). The Family Resource Centre is one kind of family support program. Kyle and Kellerman (1998) have defined family resource programs, or centres, as 'multi-service, non-profit, community-based programs that promote social support, cooperation, collective responsibility (civic mindedness) and citizenship through offering a mix of education, information, activities, material support and other resources to family members and groups of families across a number of service areas.' (p. 55)

According to Mayfield (1993b), family resource centres are 'programs and facilities that provide families with opportunities for support, sharing, learning and relaxation in informal neighbourhood settings ... They directly respond to the social and environmental realities of present-day family life that affect the health and well-being of individual adults and children, and families of which they are a part/ (p. 47)

Layzer et al. (2001), who conducted a meta-analytic study of family support programs, estimate that there are tens of thousands of these programs across North America. Most, they suggest, are 'small-scale efforts with modest budgets/ In their study, they examined both published and unpublished evaluations of 260 family support programs. Overall, they found that family support services had a significant (though often small) effect on a wide range of child and parent outcomes. Results of their analysis indicated that family support programs had modest, but meaningful positive effects on children's cognitive, social, and emotional development, and on parenting attitudes and knowledge, parenting behaviour, and family functioning. Small but significant positive effects were also found for children's physical health and development, children's safety, parents' mental health, and families' economic self-sufficiency. Layzer et al. suggest that these modest

Family Support Programs 79

impacts are commensurate with the modest budgets within which most of these programs operate. Highfield's Family Support Programs Family support is one of three major areas of programming at the Highfield Community Enrichment Project. It was the first area in which programs were developed for the project, and its first programs - play groups, a parents' group, and a family resource drop-in - were conceived, implemented, and staffed (at the beginning) almost entirely by resident parents. Highfield's family support services began with a small group of parents who came together and decided that they wanted to see a family resource centre located on the school grounds. Parents were the driving force behind this program, which provided a setting where parents, particularly mothers, could get out of their homes and meet other parents whose children attended Highfield Junior School. Initially, a small group of parents attended the Family Resource Centre (FRC). Over time, this centre became a beehive of activity, with parents and pre-school children filling the double portable that houses the programs offered by the centre. Through the years, a number of changes occurred in the project's family support programs. The number of programs offered increased, paid staff (many of them community residents) were hired to coordinate several of the programs, and the number and diversity of those attending the programs increased substantially. At the time of writing, family resource/support programs account for about 20 per cent ($77,083) of the project's total expenditures ($393,879) on programming. The family support component of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project operates six major programs: a drop-in for parents/caregivers and children, parent groups, a toy lending library, a home visiting program, play groups, and a parent relief program, as well as some smaller programs such as a preschool computer program and a literacy program. The overall model of family support programs, including resources and staffing, programs, and intended short-term outcomes, is shown in table 5.1. Family Resource Drop-in RELEVANT LITERATURE

Drop-in centres for parents and their children are a common feature of family support programs. Kellerman and Williams (1994) identified

TABLE 5.1 Family Support Programs and Intended Outcomes Resources and staffing

Family support programs

Intended short-term outcomes

Free play Snacks Crafts & stories Special events (e.g., halloween) Summer outings Education regarding women's & children's health

Reduction in family stress Enhanced parenting skills Enhanced social support Increased frequency of cross-cultural relationships Enhanced development of children's skills in language & play, psychomotor activities, problem solving & social interaction Improved adjustment of children to school

Social activities & crafts Informal support Workshops on topics such as women's wellness, child development

Improved parent social networks & social support Reduced stress & isolation Improved parenting skills Enhanced ability to cope with stress Enhanced competence & self-esteem

Toys, games, puzzles, activity sheets for children Parenting books & parent-child activity guides Theme boxes of activities for day cares & kindergarten teachers

Enhanced play skills, language development & school readiness for children Enhanced feelings of competence & confidence in parents Improved parenting skills

Family Resource Drop-in Space in portable at Highfield school Family support coordinator Nurse practitioner Parent and community volunteers

Parents group Space in portable at Highfield School Family support coordinator Workshop leaders from community organizations (e.g. Public Health)

Toy lending library Space in portable at Highfield school Family support program worker Parent volunteers

TABLE 5.1

(Continued)

Resources and staffing

Family support programs

Intended short-term outcomes

Home visits, during which information about area services, child's progress in school is given, & instruction on how to reinforce school learning is provided

Increased family support Reduced isolation & stress Enhanced personal well-being & parenting Improved child well-being & school adjustment Increased community involvement of parents

Unstructured play with games & puzzles Crafts Videos

Decreased family stress Enhanced social support & decreased isolation for parents Improved skills in language & play, psychomotor activities, social interaction for children

Parents drop off children so they can have time to spend on their own, accomplish daily living tasks

Reduced stress in parents

Home visits Family visitors (in 1998 the Family visitor & educational assistant positions were merged into child & family enrichment worker positions)

Playgroups Space in portable at Highfield school & in community Child & family enrichment workers

Parent relief Space in portable at Highfield school Parents on fee-for-service

TABLE 5.1

(Concluded)

Resources and staffing

Family support programs

Intended short-term outcomes

Children spend time on computer, supervised by adult volunteers

Improved knowledge of and familiarity with computers

Teachers model good reading, storytelling, play strategies, parent-child interaction at Family Resource Drop-In

Enhanced literacy in children

Preschool computer program Computer in toy lending Library area Parent volunteers Preschool literacy program Highfield school teacher/librarian JK/SK teacher

Family Support Programs 83

drop-ins as one of the more common program elements in family support programs in Canada. Layzer et al. (2001), in their meta-analytic examination of 260 family support programs in the United States, found that 28 per cent had drop-in-like programs which 'provided joint activities for parents and children in a group setting/ Their analysis indicated that these kinds of activities had a significant positive impact on child 'safety/ which they defined as risk of accidents, injuries, abuse, neglect, and removal from the home. Layzer et al. also found that programs which provided early childhood education directly to children (which is a component of Highfield's drop-in program) had a significant positive impact on children's cognitive development. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAM CONCEPT

The family resource drop-in is one of the core programs of the Highfield project, and was one of the first programs to be developed at Highfield. It was stimulated primarily by Better Beginnings funding and the early meetings held to bring together people from the different Better Beginnings sites. When Highfield received funding for a Better Beginnings project, the principal of Highfield Junior School approached one of the parents who had been volunteering in the school, and asked her to bring together some of the other parents who had children in the school, and who were involved at the school. These parents eventually became the Better Beginnings parents group. Two of these parents travelled to Sudbury for one of the early round-table meetings of individuals from the various Better Beginnings sites. At this round table, individuals from all the sites discussed a number of programs they were thinking of developing at their sites, and the drop-in was one of the programs discussed. The parents from Highfield decided this would be a good program for their own community. In the beginning, the drop-in was primarily a play group for the children of parents in the parents group. Parents were invited to come in to talk with other parents while their children played. One parent described it as being like a little 'party/ The parents prepared snacks for each other and for the children. There were no toys provided by the program initially, so parents brought toys from home. They washed the toys themselves each week, and cleaned the school portable in which the drop-in was held. Planning of activities was very informal. Most of the time, the parents and children stayed in the portable, though on occasion they would walk to a nearby park. After the play group had been operating for a while, the parents

84 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

decided to open it up to the community. They knew a number of parents who were isolated in their homes, with very little to do, either for themselves or for their children. They prepared a flyer (in a number of different languages) and went door-to-door throughout the neighbourhood to let parents know about the drop-in. With the help and guidance of local agency people, the drop-in officially opened its doors to the community on 13 January 1992. It experienced considerable growth after this date: one morning, more than 75 parents and children attended. A community breakfast resulted in even greater numbers of parents taking part. In addition, the core parents actively encouraged parents in the neighbourhood whom they met at school or in the community to come out to the drop-in. Until May 1992, the drop-in was coordinated and staffed by parents alone. In May 1992, a family support coordinator and a family resource program worker were hired. Both new staff people came with considerable expertise in family support services, and a knowledge of resources that could be used in developing the programs. One of the most important resources in this area was a guide developed by the Canadian Association of Toy Libraries and Resource Centres, entitled 'Caring for Families/ which provides information on how to develop a family resource centre from scratch. The new staff members also visited a number of other family resource centres in the city, to glean some ideas from them. With new ideas and staff the program underwent a number of changes. The program became much more structured, with a schedule of activities for each session, a craft session, and a circle time. Early on in the program's development, the drop-in had catered to parents of children from a wide range of ages. This made it difficult to program activities for the children. Consequently, the focus of the program shifted somewhat to concentrate on children from a narrower age range. In addition, the objectives became more focused and crystallized, a key objective being to prepare the children for JK. Children were now being prepared, in the drop-in, for school routines, stories, and activities such as drawing, cutting, and pasting. IMPLEMENTATION

The drop-in takes place in a double portable on the grounds of Highfield school. The portable is brightly decorated, with a number of activity centres, including a block centre, a home centre, and a dramatic centre (with dress-up clothes). There are also foam blocks, a plastic

Family Support Programs 85 house, wooden blocks, tables (for drawing, cutting, pasting, etc.), easels, water and sand tables, a doll house, and a well-used area containing a climber and mat for gross-motor activities. The program is designed for children up to four years of age, along with their parents or caregivers. The FRC program worker and a number of parent volunteers staff the program. In addition, students from the co-op programs at a local high school and community college have been assigned placements in the drop-in. A Family Resource Committee consisting of two staff and about eight parents coordinates all program planning. In the beginning the program was offered Monday mornings and Thursday afternoons, although during the summer of 1992, it was open every morning. In the fall of 1992, the program moved from Monday mornings and Thursday afternoons to Monday and Wednesday mornings. In 1994 the drop-in went to three days a week: Monday, Wednesday and Friday. This was made possible because one of the three parents involved in staffing the drop-in volunteered to act as a drop-in leader, freeing the staff person for office work. The program is a structured one, with a consistent schedule of activities from one session to the next: 9:00-10:00 10:00 10:20 10:45 11:00 11:10

Free play (toys and puzzles) Snack (fruit juice, cookies, vegetables and dip) Crafts (e.g., pasting, painting, glitter) Story (reading a book) Clean-up and more play Circle time (songs and finger plays)

Occasionally, instead of the structured program, the session revolves around special events (e.g., a Halloween party, making Christmas decorations) and trips (e.g., a March break trip to Riverdale Farm). During the summer, outings to places such as the zoo and the Canadian National Exhibition are organized for the parents and children, in place of one of the drop-in days. The program pays admissions to all events and activities. Initially, the trips were used as a means of attracting people to Highfield, to help them find out about other programs, and to get to know the staff. Their other major purpose was to reduce the social isolation experienced by many parents and children during the summer months, particularly families that could not afford such trips themselves. The drop-in attempts to achieve its objectives in a number of different

86 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

ways. The staff person and volunteers model appropriate play and interaction with the children, which helps to enhance the parenting skills of the parents and caregivers. Also, the staff person makes frequent referrals to a variety of programs and services in the community (e. g., day care, family services, services for assaulted women, library, English as a second language, etc.) when these are indicated, which helps decrease the stress in families who attend the drop-in. For the children, the opportunity to learn and practise skills they will need when they start school helps reduce their need for special help when they reach school age, and enhances their feelings of self-worth. INTENDED OUTCOMES

The primary goals of the family resource services as a whole are to decrease stress in families, to enhance the parenting skills of those parents and caregivers who participate, to build parents' social networks and support (so as to decrease isolation), and to increase the frequency of cross-cultural relationships (in order to decrease racial tension). Goals for the children who participate include the development of skills in language and play, psycho-motor activities, problem-solving, social interaction, and self-expression. It was hoped that the development of these skills would result in enhanced feelings of competence and self-esteem on the part of both parents/caregivers and their children. One of the additional objectives of the program was to enhance the children's adjustment to school, and to decrease the need for special education and treatment services once the children started school. While these objectives are common to many of the family resource programs, they apply particularly to the drop-in. PARTICIPATION

On an average day, up to 20 children and their parents/caregivers attend. This number increases substantially during the summer months, when the outings are planned. About 30 parents and 10 caregivers attend regularly. Since the project's inception, there has been much more integration of the project with the school, and more outreach, which has served to increase the number of parents attending the drop-in. People from both inside and outside the neighbourhood participate. Most participants are white or South Asian, though there have also been some parents and children from Vietnam, as well as families with Italian, Greek, and Yugoslavian backgrounds. Although West Indian and Hispanic parents and children constitute a significant proportion of

Family Support Programs 87

those living in the neighbourhood, they do not participate as much. Also, not many parents of children who attend the neighbourhood Catholic school have participated. Parents Group RELEVANT LITERATURE

Highfield's parents group provides a combination of support, recreation, and education. Lavoie and Stewart (1995) distinguish between self-help groups, which are run by the group members themselves, and support groups, which are facilitated by professionals. Highfield's parents group has functioned primarily as a self-help group. Earlier in the history of this group, no professional staff attended group meetings. This changed later on in the group's history, when a Better Beginnings staff person started attending group meetings, though more as a resource and support to the group than as a facilitator. While there have been few evaluations of such programs, the research literature indicates that these kinds of support groups can have a positive impact on parents. For example, Teleen, Herzog, and Kilbane (1989) found that support groups for parents of preschool children produced a decreased sense of isolation and fewer child-related stresses when compared to a control group of parents who did not participate in support groups. The research literature also supports the educational component of the parents group. Recent studies have shown positive impacts of parent training programs on parents' knowledge, skill, and self-confidence (Barlow, Coren, & Stewart-Brown, 2002; Spoth, Redmond, Haggerty, & Ward, 1995; Spoth, Redmond, & Shin, 1998). DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAM CONCEPT

As mentioned earlier, the parents group began with parents who were approached by the Highfield Junior School principal when Highfield received funding for a Better Beginnings project. These parents ran an informal play group, during which the children would play with toys that the parents brought, parents and children would have a snack together, and parents would have a chance to talk. With the growth in the drop-in after it was opened to the community, it became more difficult for the parents to find time to talk; the drop-in was becoming very crowded, and parents had to spend most of their time organizing activities for the children. When the family support coordinator and the family resource program worker were hired in May 1992, and the parents

88 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

were no longer needed to coordinate the drop-in, it was decided that the parents would meet weekly on their own, as a parents group. IMPLEMENTATION

When the parents group first began, meetings were mostly social events, with parents chatting over donuts and coffee. Babysitting was provided to free parents to attend. As the year progressed, staff attempted to organize workshops once or twice a month. Several workshops were organized, on a wide range of topics: health issues, parenting skills, facials, communication between spouses, wife assault, safety issues for women and children. However, after a number of workshops were held, parents began to feel that the workshops were preventing them from having needed time for socializing that the meetings once provided. It was therefore decided to leave the Friday mornings primarily for socializing, and to schedule any workshops on Wednesdays (and the occasional Friday). In addition to the parents group meetings and workshops, the parents group organized a number of special events throughout the year, including an annual rummage sale; Christmas party; and popcorn, pizza, and 'freezies' days. Every Friday meeting had a different flavour. In many of the meetings, the parents just got together to chat, or spent time preparing for an upcoming event. On some days a workshop was scheduled, or crafts organized for the occasional Friday meeting, in an attempt to bring out new parents. The parents group is a focus for support and self-help. It gives parents the chance to talk with one another without interruptions from their children or others. Parents get a chance to share their problems and frustrations in a non-judgmental environment, to get advice, and to see what other parents are doing. Often, parents or the staff person will provide information on services and activities available in the community, or help with a referral to one of these services when needed. INTENDED OUTCOMES

The major objective of the parents group is to enhance parents' social networks and social support by giving them time to talk with one another about their problems, fears, needs, and plans for the future. By experiencing the support of other parents, it is hoped that parents will feel less stress and isolation. An additional goal of the parents group is to help parents develop their parenting and other skills, to enhance

Family Support Programs 89

their ability to cope with stress and to build their feelings of competence and self-esteem. PARTICIPATION

Attendance at the Friday meetings has ranged from 4 to 15 participants. Typically, the same parents attend the parents group each week. The family support coordinator attends the parent group meetings, as staff support. Several of the parents in the parent group have been meeting since the project began, and have become very close friends. Because of their long involvement with the project, many of them have become active participants in other aspects of the school and Better Beginnings. Crafts and planning for community events are used to attract new members to the group. One of the difficulties in getting parents from the drop-in to come to the parents group is that some parents are uncomfortable leaving their children while they attend the parents group. This appears to be particularly prevalent in some cultures (e.g., among South Asian parents). While attendance at the parents group has been steady, attendance at workshops was initially more variable, with anywhere from 4 to 12 individuals attending. The family support coordinator often phones individuals who have indicated an interest in a particular workshop to remind them about the workshop, and to keep in touch with parents, and make them feel that the project has a personal interest in them. The workshops on communication, separation, and problem-solving within the family have been of particular interest. Workshops were provided by individuals from groups such as the Family Service Association, the George Hull Centre, the Children's Aid Society, Public Health, and the local division of the Metro Toronto Police Service. Toy Lending Library RELEVANT LITERATURE

The first toy library was established in Los Angeles in 1935, but it was not until the mid-1960s that they began to spread throughout Europe, and, in the 1970s and 1980s, to become common in Canada (Westland & Knight, 1982). Toy libraries act as resource centres for parents and their young children, providing toys and learning materials, as well as dispensing information, support, instructional activities, and sometimes counselling to parents (Mayfield, 1988). Two major models of toy libraries are the Swedish model, which caters primarily to families with spe-

90 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

cial needs children, and the English model, which is community-based and typically serves all children in a particular community. The community-oriented model is the most common in Canada (Mayfield, 1993a). Of 23 toy libraries surveyed by Mayfield (1988), the majority were located in public libraries or schools. The most common goal of these libraries is to provide developmentally appropriate toys to children who do not have access to such toys because of parents' limited financial resources, or parents' lack of knowledge about appropriate toys. The most popular toys include puzzles (such as jigsaw puzzles of varying difficulty); 'sets' such as farm, garage, or airport collections; and manipulative toys such as those that stack. While relatively little research has been conducted on the impact of toy libraries, the research that does exist suggests a number of positive effects on both parents and children, including increased parent-child interaction (Lehnhoff, 1976), a reduction in family isolation (Head & Barton, 1987), and enhanced child development in areas such as speech and reading (Rub, 1987). DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAM CONCEPT

The toy lending library at Highfield opened on 13 January 1993, on the first anniversary of the Family Resource Centre, with holdings of 50 catalogued toys. The basic ideas for this program came primarily from the guide developed by the Canadian Association of Toy Libraries and Resource Centres, Caring for Families, which also provides information on how to develop a toy lending library from scratch. In addition, many ideas (e.g., for cataloguing the toys) came from the Lakeshore Toy Library, one of the biggest and best toy lending libraries in Ontario. One of the activities provided by the library is something called RAP (Reading and Parents), modelled after the Kingston Literacy Program the coordinator learned about in one of the quality circles. Designed to promote parents reading with their children, it involves combining a high interest book that the parent and child can read together, along with a related craft or activity that the parent and child can do together. IMPLEMENTATION

The greatest difficulty in implementing the toy lending library was deciding how to arrange the limited amount of space available for the library. Only a portion of a school portable could be used; the rest was needed for programs. The space problem was alleviated to a large extent when a double portable classroom was made available to the project in 1994.

Family Support Programs 91

The initial budget provided for the library was quite adequate. The FRC program worker began buying toys for the library about two months before it opened. At the time of writing, there were over 300 toys, games, and puzzles catalogued, along with activity sheets to encourage children's learning in areas such as reading and math, and a resource library of parenting books and activities for parents to do with their children. The toys and games cover a number of different categories: active, dramatic, musical, contruction, and transportation. Care is taken to ensure that all toys are durable, safe, non-sexist, nonracist, non-violent, and aesthetically pleasing. In addition, staff and volunteers have developed a number of 'theme boxes' containing toys chosen around a particular theme (e.g., measuring, dinosaurs), which include everything pertaining to that subject, such as ideas for snacks, crafts, and activities. The library hours are between 10:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. on Mondays, and from 1:00 to 5:00 p.m. on Thursdays. In addition, the library is open on Wednesdays and Fridays when the drop-in is open. Materials can be taken from the library for two weeks; the limit is one game or puzzle, and one toy, per child. One staff person is always present when the library is open. Two parent volunteers help catalogue the toys, and check toys in and out. In addition, a co-op student helps with the program, and a Family Resource Committee oversees the planning and decision-making. INTENDED OUTCOMES

The primary family support goals addressed by the toy lending library have to do with enhancing the child's play skills and language development, thereby enhancing readiness for and adjustment to school. In addition, many of the toys and activities (e.g., those in the RAP component of the program) are designed for parents and children to do together, thereby enhancing feelings of competence and confidence in the parents, as well as improving their parenting skills. PARTICIPATION

The toy lending library has the largest membership of any program. It includes most of the people who attend the drop-in, as well as many others. In its first year of operations over 70 families from both inside and outside the Highfield community had taken out materials from the library. In general, parents and children have responded very positively to the library. However, some of the parents appear to have the

92 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

attitude that once their children reach school age, they don't need to play with toys as much as they did when they were younger. Consequently, the library has been somewhat underutilized by parents of older children. Home Visits RELEVANT LITERATURE

Most home visiting programs are focused on parents of newborn children and children in the first months of life. Research on these home visit interventions in early infancy indicate positive impacts on both the parents and children (Macleod & Nelson, 2000; Olds et al, 1997; Olds, Henderson, Chamberlin, & Tatelbaum, 1986; Olds & Korfmacher, 1998). There appear to be relatively fewer home visiting programs for parents of older preschool children. One example is the Family Matters program (Cochran, 1987; Cochran & Henderson, 1986), in which parents with 3-year-old children received home visits and attended cluster-building meetings (i.e., neighbourhood networks) for two years. Follow-up research on this program indicated that children from families in the intervention program showed greater improvement on their school report cards over time compared to children from families in a control group which did not participate in the intervention. Another is the Home Instruction Program for Preschool Children (HIPPY), a twoyear, home-based, early education intervention program developed in Israel and brought to the United States in 1984 (Baker, Piotrkowski, & Brooks-Gunn, 1999). Now operating in more than 120 sites across the United States, HIPPY is designed to help prepare children from lowincome families for school (Westheimer, 2003). Bimonthly home visits by paraprofessionals who live in the same neighbourhoods are a core component of the program. The home visits occur during a two-year span, the second year being the child's kindergarten year. The home visitors instruct the parents in the use of special story books and educational activities, which the parents are then expected to teach the children themselves. Evaluations of the program conducted in several different countries indicate that the children of families participating in HIPPY perform better at school than children that do not participate in the program (Westheimer, 2003). DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAM CONCEPT

Home visits to parents of children entering JK in September 1993 (the

Family Support Programs 93

focal cohort) began in May of 1993. Discussions about the program, and planning for the program, began in November 1992. The basic intent of the program was to make contact with parents who would have children beginning school, and to help ease the transition from home to school. The concept of such a program came from other Better Beginnings projects, particularly those involving younger children, in which home visiting was a core program of the project. The project in Regent's Park in Toronto was particularly helpful. The ideas from this project and others were then adapted for families with older children. IMPLEMENTATION

A number of challenges were experienced in implementing this program. One of these concerned staffing. It was hoped that neighbourhood residents could be hired and trained to conduct the home visits; however, it became clear as residents were being trained and were beginning to conduct visits that individuals with more experience and training would be needed. In the end, non-residents were hired to staff the program. Another challenge had to do with the fact that the Freedom of Information Act prevented Better Beginnings staff from obtaining from the school the names and phone numbers of families with children entering JK in the coming year. Staff therefore had to rely on other means to recruit families for this service. They knocked on doors in the neighbourhood, met parents at the front door of the school when they were dropping off their children, and they attended JK registration at the school in April. JK registration was a particularly good time for enlisting families for home visits. When parents were registering their children for JK, they were given two 'welcome' packages, one from the in-school program, and one from family support. Also, two of the home visitors were available to help families with the language difficulties often encountered when registering their children. At first, contacts with families were very informal. An initial list of 42 families of JK registrants was created; only 4 indicated that they were not interested in a home visit. An additional 8 to 10 families who were not part of the JK cohort were also visited. All of the JK families received their first visit by the end of August prior to their children's entry into JK. The program model changed considerably over time, partly due to changes in staffing, and partly due to the needs of the families involved. When the program began, the focus was on visiting the families prior to

94 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

their children starting school, to help ease the transition from home to school. Follow-up visits were scheduled only if the parents had questions they wanted answered, or issues they wanted to discuss. At times, some of the family visitors working on the project at the time were at a loss as to what they would plan to do during follow-up visits. After the program had been in operation for a while, and with changes in staff, it was decided that family visitors would help out in the JK classroom for part of their week, so that they would then be able to provide a link between home and school when they made a home visit. The program was initially staffed by three part-time family visitors who each represented and had particular sensitivity to one of the dominant ethnic groups in the community (South Asian, Carribean, and Spanish). During the visits, parents and caregivers were told about services in the area, provided with encouragement, and given referrals to various services and agencies in the community (e.g., legal services, play groups, ESL programs, the local women's shelter, day care, the Salvation Army Food Bank, various Better Beginnings programs). The family visitors provided a key link between home and school, and this link was given further priority when, in September of 1997, the roles of the family visitor and educational assistant were amalgamated. Thereafter, these workers were called child and family enrichment workers. In 1998, the project had four child and family enrichment workers who were under the supervision of the in-school coordinator. Their work is described in the following chapter on school-based programs. INTENDED OUTCOMES

A number of the goals of Family Resource Services are addressed by this program. It is intended to increase family support, and thereby reduce reelings of isolation and stress. It provides parents with resources that will enhance their personal well-being and their effectiveness as parents. By empowering families to deal more ably with day-to-day issues, it is hoped that they will be able to devote time and attention to their children. By providing information about parenting, the school, the community, and other Better Beginnings programs such as the drop-in, the program attempts to enhance children's overall well-being, and, in particular, their ability to adjust successfully to school. Additionally, this program also serves to bring people out to other programs; it provides for a first contact with the project; and it allows the program to reach more families. This contact often provides the additional motivation that residents need to take an important step in getting more

Family Support Programs 95

involved in the community by registering in an ESL class or taking a course. Many of the families contacted this way may get involved, whereas they wouldn't have come voluntarily to other programs because of their discomfort with the language. A description of one family's experience with the home visiting program illustrates some of the ways in which the program can assist families: X and her husband and their four young children (ages 4, 8, 12, and 13) had been sponsored by an agency on their arrival to Canada from Libya. However their sponsorship was cut off. In their own country they had been relatively well off since both had been employed. Here they found themselves with cupboards that were bare and unable to find an ESL program that would accept them since they did not have landed immigrant status. The Family Visitor had become somewhat of a familiar face to the family, and the mother in particular. Initially the Family Visitor connected the family to the local Salvation Army Food Bank. She then encouraged her to come with her son to the Resource Centre Drop-in. She supported the mother to enroll her son in the Summer Program and arranged for a subsidy. She also directed the mother to the out-trips which were going to take place over the summer for caregivers and young children. X became a regular participant in the Drop-in program as well as a regular parent workshop attendee. She is now a volunteer at the North Albion Community Project three times a week and interested in other volunteer roles within the Highfield Project. (Project summary for 1 April 1993 to 30 September 1993) PARTICIPATION

As of 30 September 1993, 89 of the 105 to 110 JK registrants had been contacted about receiving a home visit. Sixty-three of these received one visit, and 26 more than one visit. The family visitors also, on occasion, visited non-JK families, but these were usually one-time visits designed to inform families about other Better Beginnings programs, or other programs in the community. The number of family visits increased substantially over time, particularly for those families whose designated family visitor worked as an educational assistant in their child's JK classroom. Program participation rates after 1997, when the home visiting and educational assistant roles were combined, are discussed in the next chapter on in-school programs.

96 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development Playgroups RELEVANT LITERATURE

Play can serve a number of important functions in young children (Weininger, 1990). Certain kinds of play (e.g., sensorimotor play involving things such as drawing or cutting) help develop physical skills; pretend play assists in the development of cognitive skills such as symbolizing, anticipating, and problem-solving; and social play helps the child develop important social skills such as learning to share. Given the developmental opportunities that play provides, it is not surprising that research has shown an association between play and positive child development. For example, there is a significant correlation between play and level of cognitive development (Trawick-Smith, 1989). As well, Rubin, Maioni, and Hornung (1976) provided evidence of enhanced social development in children who had engaged in frequent social play. They found that preschool children who had more experience playing with similar aged peers (in facilities such as day-care centres) were more likely to interact cooperatively with peers than children who had not had the same opportunity. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAM CONCEPT

Play groups began as a result of discussions among staff and the coordinator about what kinds of programs to offer to children in the 4- to 6year-old age group. When the range of programs was originally conceived, there appeared to be a gap in programming for this age range. IMPLEMENTATION

As conceived initially, play groups were to be held in people's homes, or in other space available in the community. The idea of holding the play groups in people's homes, however, was not well received, possibly due to parents' concerns about maintaining their privacy, or perhaps, their lack of familiarity with such groups. Consequently, all play groups were held at the Highfield project or at another community facility. Playgroup activities - games and puzzles, with the occasional craft or video - are relatively unstructured. Group sessions take place weekly. The number of groups in operation has fluctuated due to staff turnover. At one point in time, there were four groups in operation in various locations; at the time of writing, three play groups were in operation: one at the local high school in the evening, one at the North Kipling Community Centre on Saturday morning, and one at the

Family Support Programs 97

Highfield Resource Centre on Thursday evening. One of the longest running play groups centres around East Indian dance. INTENDED OUTCOMES

The primary goals of the play groups are very similar to those of the drop-in: to decrease stress in families; to enhance the parenting skills of parents and caregivers who participate; to build parents' social networks and support to decrease isolation; and to develop children's skills in language and play, psycho-motor activities, problem-solving, social interaction, and self-expression. These skills are expected to lead to enhanced feelings of competence and self-esteem on the part of both parents/caregivers and their children. As mentioned above, another key goal for this program is to help children adjust successfully to school. PARTICIPATION

Monthly attendance varies from one group to another. The numbers of children attending play groups varies from three or four to five or six children. These numbers have been increasing with the hiring of new staff. A record is kept of all those attending each session of the play group, as well as the activities that take place. Parent Relief RELEVANT LITERATURE

All parents undergo periods of stress, but stress is almost a fact of life for single parents, and for those with limited economic resources. 'Poverty creates stresses that compound the already difficult task of raising children. Low-income parents run a greater risk of encountering problems that erode their capacity to parent competently' (A Choice of Futures, 1989, p. 6). Immigration has also been associated with high levels of stress, as newcomers face the challenges of a new language, different community structures, and a lack of resources and support (Berry, 1992). The Highfield community, with its high percentage of low-income families, immigrants, and single parents, is one in which high levels of parenting stress can be expected. Parenting stress, in turn, has been related to inadequate parenting, the risk of abuse (Burrell, Thompson, & Sexton, 1994; Cadzow, Armstron, & Fraser, 1999), and behaviour problems in children (Gross, Sambrook, & Fogg, 1999). Parent relief was conceived as a program that might help reduce stress in the parents of young children in the Highfield community.

98 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAM CONCEPT

The idea for a parent relief program came from other family resource programs, and had been discussed for some time among program staff and volunteers as a means of dealing with family stress and isolation. IMPLEMENTATION

Planning for the program started in October 1993, and the service started in January of 1994, Thursday mornings from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. Parents must book ahead for the service. Five children can be accommodated at a time. Two parents (who are paid for their time) staff the program. The program appears to be quite popular, and the number of residents using the service has been increasing. The only difficulty experienced thus far is that parents/caregivers occasionally do not show up for the time they have booked, and do not call to say they will not be coming. A record is kept of who comes to the program, and, in addition, the children's health card numbers are recorded in case of any medical emergencies. The Parent Relief Program has remained essentially the same since its inception in 1994. INTENDED OUTCOMES

The major goals of the program are to reduce the stress and isolation that many parents are experiencing, by allowing them to have some time away from their children, either on their own or doing something with other adults. Preschool Computer and Literacy Programs

In addition to the major programs listed above, most of which started early on in the life of the Highfield project, there have been two programs within the family resource area that were implemented later in the project's development. The first, which began in the summer of 1995, is the preschool computer program, which is offered during the parent-child drop-in, and allows young children to work on an ageappropriate computer activity under the supervision of an adult volunteer. The second, which began in January 1998, was intended to encourage preschoolers to read. The in-school coordinator, family support coordinator, the school teacher/librarian and one SK teacher were involved in getting the program operating. In this program, the school

Family Support Programs 99

teacher/librarian and a SK teacher take turns coming to the drop-in on Wednesdays; they spend time modelling good reading, storytelling, play strategies, and ways for parents to best interact with children to encourage and stimulate learning. It was hoped that this initiative would support families, help bridge the gap between home and school, and assist with the transition to JK by familiarizing the children and their parents with school personnel. Summary The family resource area of the project offers families a wide range of programs for parents, caregivers and children, both on their own and together. Parents and caregivers are offered support, information, respite, and fun through the parent groups, home visits, and the parent relief program. Their children are prepared for school, and acquire learning and social skills through the play groups, toy lending library, and computer and literacy programs. Finally, parents and children learn and have fun together in the drop-in. The programs are offered to all families within the neighbourhood, and so parents do not have to feel any stigma about attending any of them. Staff and volunteers come from a variety of ethnic backgrounds, so that residents will find someone who can speak their language and who knows their customs. Consequently, many of the programs attract individuals from a range of ethnic and cultural backgrounds, providing opportunities for cultural exchange and learning. Highfield's family support programs offer many of the services that Layzer et al. (2001) identify as being associated with positive child and parent outcomes in their meta-analysis of family support programs. Layzer et al. found that programs which had an early childhood education component (such as Highfield's Family Resource Drop-In, computer, and literacy programs do) show positive impacts on children's cognitive development. They also found that programs which use professional staff to help parents 'to be effective adults/ and provide opportunities for parents to meet in support groups (as Highfield's parents group, home visits and parent relief programs do), were effective in producing positive outcomes on parenting behaviour.

6 School-Based Programs

Most of us have spent a lot of time in schools. If we complete high school, we have spent about 15,000 hours in school (Rutter, Maughan, Mortimore, & Ouston, 1979), an investment in time that is bound to have a major impact on people's lives. For this reason, it is important to try to understand the dimensions of schooling that promote learning and well-being, and how schools can be changed or transformed to promote a positive culture of learning and development (Moos, 2003; Rutter et al., 1979). But improving schools has proved difficult. Based on his many years of experience in observing and consulting with schools, psychologist Seymour Sarason (1982,1990,1996) has borrowed the following phrase to describe efforts at school reform: The more things change, the more they remain the same/ Sarason (1996) has argued that the reason reforms typically fail is that they do not address issues of power imbalance that exist in schools: 'Reform efforts have left untouched existing power relationships within the classroom, among layers of the school system's hierarchy, between the schools and the university where educators are selected and prepared, and between school and parents community ... Changing power relationships is a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for establishing contexts of productive learning for students and teacher, not only students. Teachers cannot create and sustain contexts of productive learning for students if those contexts do not exist for teachers' (pp. 253-254). Power relations and traditional ways of doing things in schools are often 'invisible' because they are taken for granted by everyone. Sarason (1982) has observed that teachers, administrators, and parents seldom question basic assumptions about whether schools, as they are currently arranged, offer the best conditions for learning.

School-Based Programs 101

Over the past 30 years, there have been many efforts at transforming educational and school environments (Bartunek & Keys, 1982; Fullan & Stiegelbauer, 1991; Oxley, 2000; Schmuck, Runkel, & Langmeyer, 1969). Educational reform is typically directed at changing school structures (bureaucratic, hierarchical), processes ('top-down' decisionmaking) and goals (which emphasize student achievement on standardized tests), towards alternative structures (smaller, more informal, and personal environments), processes (collaboration, shared decisionmaking, participation), and goals (which focus on the whole child, not just academic outcomes) (Oxley, 2000). Introducing school-based prevention programs is one way of creating such change (Peirson & Prilleltensky, 1994). Prevention consultants have come to realize that if prevention programs are to be fully adopted and embedded within schools that teachers, parents, and even students should be involved in developing such programs (Cherniss, 1997; Prilleltensky et al., 1997). When this occurs, unequal power relations can be reduced, traditional assumptions and practices questioned, and innovation and school change possible (see Prilleltensky & Nelson, 2002, Chap. 7). In this chapter, we describe prevention programs that were developed and implemented in Highfield Junior School as part of the Better Beginnings, Better Futures initiative. We begin by providing the reader with some background on Highfield school and its students, noting the multicultural composition of the student body. The greater part of the chapter is devoted to a description of the particular prevention programs that were developed within the school. Highfield Junior School As noted in Chapter 2, Highfield Junior School is located in the northwest part of the Metropolitan Toronto area, in the former city of Etobicoke. The original Highfield school, built in 1874, was in a rural environment. The current school is located in a densely populated, urban area, and is surrounded by many high-rise apartments and single-dwelling homes, just a block away from a main north-south thoroughfare and the local high school. The school serves children from junior kindergarten to Grade 5. When the Highfield project became a Better Beginnings site in 1991, there were about 500 students attending the school. Over the years of the demonstration project, during the 1990s, the school population increased dramatically, reaching more than 1,000 students by 1999. As a result of the growing number of stu-

102 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

dents, several portable classrooms were added. With increased enrolment, parents involved with the Better Beginnings project pressured the local school board to build an addition onto the school. The addition created several classrooms, a new gymnasium, and a new kitchen. As a result, many of the portable classrooms were removed from the site, and students, teachers, and parents enjoyed a much more spacious environment in which to work. Highfield Junior School serves a very culturally diverse community, as the Highfield community has become the first home for many new Canadians from countries around the world. It is not uncommon to see elderly Punjabi grandfathers walking their grandchildren to and from school, or Muslim women accompanying their children. As noted in Chapter 2, there are more than 40 languages spoken in the homes of children attending Highfield school. Whenever we approach and enter the school, we see children from different racial and ethnic backgrounds on the playground and in the classrooms. When the project began in 1991, Highfield Junior School was one of the schools operated by the Etobicoke Board of Education. As noted earlier, in the late 1990s the provincial government decided to merge the different boroughs of Toronto, including the city of Etobicoke, into one mega-city. Along with this city merger, the different school boards were merged, so that Highfield is now a part of the Toronto District School Board. Prevention Programs at Highfield Junior School There are several different in-school programs, all of which are overseen by an in-school coordinator for the Better Beginnings project. There is also an In-school Committee comprised of parents, teachers, service providers, and project staff. This committee met roughly every month during the school year throughout the demonstration phase of the project to plan and review program activities. In 1998, the total budget for programming was $393,879. Of that total, $204,570, or 52 per cent (slightly more than the other two programming areas [family support and community development] combined) was allocated to in-school programs and staffing. There are six main school-based prevention programs: (a) health and nutrition, (b) academic/language assistance, (c) classroom social skills intervention, (d) home-school connection and parent involvement, (e) community and ethnocultural relations, and (f) professional development for

School-Based Programs 103

teachers. In this section, we describe each of these programs in detail, focusing on the following aspects of each program: relevant literature, development of the program concept, implementation, intended outcomes, and participation. The overall model of in-school programs, including resources and staffing, the programs, and intended shortterm outcomes is shown in table 6.1. Health and Nutrition Program RELEVANT LITERATURE

Durlak (1995) has reviewed school-based programs with a health education focus. There is a growing recognition that the emphasis on fast food, junk food, and sedentary lifestyles (e.g., children sitting in front of a television or computer screen) in North American culture has led to obesity and other risk factors (e.g., elevated cholesterol levels) for physical health problems (Resnicow et al., 1992). At the same time, research has shown that many children come to school without having eaten anything for breakfast (Bidgood & Cameron, 1992). These needs have led schools and community groups to develop nutrition education; snack, breakfast, and lunch programs; and physical education and activity programs for schools. Research on such programs has reported improved nutrition and increased physical activity for children (see Durlak, 1995, Chap. 5). DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAM CONCEPT

Initially, a parents group at Highfield Junior School came up with the idea for some type of nutrition program through a brainstorming exercise. After the project was selected for funding, a Nutrition Committee was formed, which included the various stakeholders in the project, parents, school staff, and other service providers. The school's public health nurse and the nutritionist from the Public Health Unit gave important input to the Nutrition Committee in its early stages (key informant interview, 1993). The Nutrition Committee also gathered information from other snack programs in schools and agencies (field notes, 1991). This committee decided that it wanted a program for the entire school, not just for children in the 4 to 8 age range, and that the program should have an educational emphasis as well as the provision of snacks for the children (field notes, 1992). The main challenge in conceptualizing the program, according to one key informant, was limited space in the school (key informant

TABLE 6.1 In-school Programs and Intended Short-term Outcomes Resources and staffing

In-school programs

Intended short-term outcomes

Snack program Education regarding nutrition Community breakfasts Breakfast Club Snacks for before and after school program Lunch provided for children with no lunch Hot lunch program during winter months Fitness activities (Active Living, skating)

Improved eating habits Improved nutrition Improved academic performance Improved self-esteem

Education assistants followed the focal cohort from JK to Grade 2 Reduced adult to student ratio to 1 :10 Focus on language development for a population of primarily ESL children Summer enrichment classes offered to focal cohort from JK to Grade 2

Enhanced use of language Improved academic skills Decreased language-related stress Reduced numbers of children requiring remedial assistance Increased attendance at school

Health and Nutrition Kitchen space provided by school Grant money from other sources Parent donations Part-time nutrition coordinator Parent and community volunteers Parents paid for hot lunch program Student volunteers help with snack distribution Resources for fitness provided by project (e.g., 150 pairs of used skates) Academic/language development Funding for educational assistants from the school board (3 FTEs) and the project (2.5 FTEs) Educational assistants (in 1 998 the educational assistant and family visitor worker positions were merged into child and family enrichment worker) Parent volunteers assisting in classroomsFocus on language development for a population of primarily ESL children

TABLE 6.1

(Continued)

Resources and staffing

In-school programs

Intended short-term outcomes

Storytelling and drama in 10 primary classrooms (1993) Lion's Quest social skills program beginning in 1995

Improved problem-solving skills Improved self-esteem and self-confidence Reduced behavioural problems Reduced need for special assistance Increased social networks, community participation and school attendance

Parent participation on project and school committees Parent participation as volunteers and employees in the project and in the school Leadership training for parents

Increased parent participation in the school and community Enhanced competence and confidence of parents Improved relationships between home and school Increased academic success of children resulting from parent-teacher partnerships

Classroom social skills intervention Volunteers from community college to do storytelling and drama Training in the Lion's Quest program for all teachers

Home-school connection and parent involvement Better Beginnings and school staff Volunteers

TABLE 6.1 (Concluded) Resources and staffing

In-school programs

Intended short-term outcomes

Special events, including South Asian holidays, Black History Month, community breakfasts, multicultural caravan at the school, etc. Students volunteering in the community Guest speakers from different cultural backgrounds in the schoo

Increased knowledge of other cultures Enhanced ability to relate to people of other cultures Improved race relations Increased participation of children and residents in community events Increased sense of community pride Increased sense of neighbourhood safety

Special events and workshops held for teachers Teacher recognition dinner Lion's Quest training

Enhanced teachers' professional development Increased teachers' skills in implementation of prevention programs

Community and ethnocultural relations Better Beginnings and school staff Volunteers

Professional development for teachers Project staff Lion's Quest trainers Guest speakers

School-Based Programs 107

interview, 1994). This person noted that there wasn't a functional kitchen for the nutrition program, and that the vice-principal's office had to be converted into a kitchen. Years later, when the addition to the school was built, a new, more spacious kitchen was added for volunteers to prepare the snacks. The government funded the snack program only for the children ages 4 to 8 (those in the age range for Better Beginnings' programs), so the project had to raise money to provide snacks for the older children (field notes, 1993). IMPLEMENTATION

In March 1993, a snack program was started. A universal program serving all the children in the school, it was the first program implemented in the school by the Better Beginnings project. (A variety of nutritious snacks is prepared - for example, fresh fruit, cheese and crackers, and vegetables.) At the beginning of the program, parents were surveyed to determine if their children had any allergies or if there were dietary restrictions relating to religion. This was done at a community breakfast held on the school grounds, which was attended by roughly 300 people (field notes, 1993). Since the inception of the Better Beginnings project, three to four community breakfasts have been held per year. In 1998, the project added a Breakfast Club, run primarily by service club volunteers. The project has also assisted the school with the purchase of resources to promote physical fitness activities, including used skates for the children and fitness kits for teachers. Regarding challenges, two key informants noted that time was a challenge (key informant interviews, 1993,1994). Parents had been discussing getting a breakfast program started early in 1991 (analytic comments, 1991), but the program did not begin until two years later due largely to the problem of finding appropriate space in the school to prepare the snacks. Another challenge was the need to raise funds so that snacks could be provided for all children in the school, not only the children in the Better Beginnings' age range (4 to 8). INTENDED OUTCOMES

The goals of the nutrition program are to improve eating habits and nutritional status, overall physical health and well-being, academic performance, and self-esteem. The idea underlying the nutrition program is that by improving children's eating habits, the children will be better able to learn and to get along with others.

108 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development PARTICIPATION

The snack program and educational activities regarding nutrition are universal in the school. Some children don't want a snack, and some parents prefer to provide their own. However, project staff believe that more than 95 per cent of the children have the snack on a regular basis, although there is no official record-keeping on participation rates for this program. Academic/Language Development through the Use of Educational Assistants and Parent Volunteers RELEVANT LITERATURE

There are a number of controlled longitudinal studies which have examined the impacts of preschool education programs, such as Head Start in the United States (as noted in Chapter 1), on disadvantaged children's academic and social competence. In a review of this literature, Slavin, Karweit, and Wasik (1994) reported that one-year preschool programs and full-day kindergarten interventions promote academic and cognitive outcomes in the short-term, but that these gains fade over time. To address this problem of diminished impact over time, several 'Follow Through' projects have been implemented to provide additional educational support for children through the primary grades in elementary school after the children have completed the preschool programs. Overall, these programs have been found to have superior impact compared with preschool interventions in which no 'Follow Through' support is provided (Becker & Gerstein, 1982; Meyer, 1984; Nelson, Westhues, & MacLeod, 2003; Seitz, Apfel, & Efron, 1978). Of particular relevance to the Highfield project is research conducted on the Success for All program, which began in public schools in Baltimore and has been disseminated to about 300 schools throughout the United States (Slavin et al., 1994). This program utilizes educational assistants in kindergarten through Grade 3 to provide intensive academic support to disadvantaged children who are at risk for academic problems. The idea is to reduce the teacher-student ratio so that children can receive intensive support when they begin school, with the goal of preventing the children's academic failure and their falling behind early in their school experience. Research on Success for All has shown positive impact on reading achievement, as well as a reduction in placement rates in special education classes. Moreover, the program

School-Based Programs 109

has worked well for children who have a limited knowledge of the English language when they enter school. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAM CONCEPT

The idea for hiring educational assistants to help teachers in JK and SK classrooms through Grade 3 came from the school principal (key informant interview, 1994). Based on her experiences as a kindergarten teacher and her knowledge of research on the Success for All program, the principal of Highfield Junior School thought that having additional assistants would be a good prevention strategy. A major reason for proposing the use of educational assistants and parent volunteers in the primary grades was to focus on language development. In an early planning session, members of the Steering Committee discussed the need for 'teaching resources, translation materials, language stimulation, and outings' to promote language development (field notes, 1991). IMPLEMENTATION

Educational assistants were deployed in all the JK and SK classrooms, one for each of the 11 classes. The equivalent of three full-time assistants were funded by the Etobicoke Board of Education, while the equivalent of two and one-half full-time assistants were funded by Better Beginnings. The assistants reduced the adult-student ratio to about 1:10. In addition, the project and school recruited parent volunteers to assist teachers with classroom activities. As previously noted, at the end of the demonstration phase, the positions of educational assistant and family visitor were merged into one new position, the child and family enrichment worker, who assisted in the classrooms as well as visited in the homes of families. According to the Etobicoke Board of Education's job description, the educational assistant at the kindergarten level were 'responsible for providing guidance and emotional support to kindergarten children and for assisting the teacher in preparation of instructional materials and in supervising students.' At Highfield Junior School, the assistants helped with yard supervision, child management, reading, snack preparation, and a variety of other classroom activities. The educational assistants came from the ethnic groups which are predominant in the community (South Asian, West Indian, and Spanish), thus providing adult role models from diverse backgrounds for the children. Another advantage of hiring people from the community is that they

110 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

are familiar to other parents, thereby increasing the potential for informal support and reducing the distance between parents and the project. As well, children receive additional instruction in cognitive, language, social, and self-help skills. The educational assistants and some of the parent volunteers received in-service training in the Hanen language approach in 1994. INTENDED OUTCOMES

Many of the goals related to the educational assistants deal with language skills, such as enhanced use of language, improved academic skills, decreased language-related stress, reduced numbers of children requiring remedial assistance, and increased attendance in school. PARTICIPATION

The educational assistants served all children in the focal cohort for the research from JK to Grade 2, and parent volunteers assisted in some of the other primary classes. The educational assistants 'followed' the focal cohort to provide the same type of intensive and continuous intervention of the Follow Through programs in the United States, which have been found to be important for maintaining children's cognitive and academic gains. Classroom Social Skills Intervention, Storytelling, and Drama RELEVANT LITERATURE

A variety of social skills and social problem-solving training programs in schools have been used to promote students' social and emotional learning (Elias, 1995; Elias & Tobias, 1996; Greenberg et al., 2001; Greenberg et al., 2003; Weissberg & Elias, 1993). Formalized curricula have been developed for these programs and teachers have been trained to use these approaches in their classrooms. There is a great deal of literature demonstrating that school-based social and emotional learning programs have beneficial impacts on positive youth development, mental health, substance use, antisocial behaviour, school attendance, and academic performance and learning (Greenberg et al., 2003). While such programs have tended to focus on individual students, more recently such programs have included a focus on changing the classroom environment, changing school norms and discipline policies, and providing service-learning opportunities for students in both the school and the community (Greenberg et al., 2003; Hawkins, Catalano,

School-Based Programs 111

& Associates, 1992; Peters, 1990; Weissberg & Elias, 1993; Weissberg & Greenberg, 1998). Moreover, such programs have evolved from singlefocus, time-limited interventions to multi-component, multi-year programs which address a number of different life issues faced by students from grades K to 12 (Graczyk et al., 2000; Greenberg et al, 2003). A growing body of research points to the importance of this broadened and expanded approach to children's social and emotional learning (Durlak, 1995; Greenberg et al., 2003; Weissberg & Greenberg, 1998). DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAM CONCEPT

After Highfield was chosen as one of the Better Beginnings sites, the Steering Committee set priorities for outcome goals for the project. Children's coping, social, and problem-solving skills were a clear priority of the committee's members. Subsequently, the In-school Committee was formed to examine strategies and program ideas for achieving the goals set by the Steering Committee. Initially, this committee consisted of parents and project staff. At a brainstorming session of this committee, the idea of having a curriculum on social skills training in the classroom was put forward. After the in-school coordinator was hired in January 1993, she surveyed teachers to see what they would like developed for children in the school. The need to develop a school-wide social skills program was identified by teachers as an important area for development by the school in their strategic planning. The school had a conflict managers program in operation, which comprised Grades 4 and 5 students who were trained and supervised by a teacher to help mediate conflicts on the playground. The in-school coordinator and teachers reviewed four social skills programs in the spring of 1993 and selected the Lion's Quest Skills for Growing program. There are several positive attributes of the Lion's Quest program which warranted its adoption (Peters, 1990). First, the Lion's Quest is a 'comprehensive school-based program that deals with skills and attitudes that are relevant for a variety of developmental issues including healthy lifestyles, social relationships, drug and alcohol prevention, and community involvement' (Peters, 1990, p. 218). Secondly, the program can be implemented on a school-wide basis. There are instructional materials available for teachers at every elementary grade level, continuing throughout high school. Age-appropriate activities also have been developed for social skills enhancement, so that each successive level builds upon earlier levels. Third, the program emphasizes a theo-

112 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

retical approach which recognizes the interdependence of children's social skills and the social environment. To this end, there is an emphasis on commitment and bonding with family members, the development of a positive school climate, and the promotion of projects and activities to enhance the community. Students, teachers, and parents all have a role to play in this program, so that many different people in the lives of the children can work together to help students develop their social skills and improve family, school, and community environments. IMPLEMENTATION

Prior to the selection of the Lion's Quest program, students from a community college were recruited in the spring of 1993 to use storytelling and drama to teach social skills in 10 primary (JK to Grade 3) classrooms. During the 1994-95 school year, members of the School Climate Committee of Highfield Junior School, which included the in-school coordinator, teachers, and parents, received training in the Lion's Quest program, and they were charged with responsibility for implementing this program. This committee was formed by the school to try to ensure a safe and pleasant environment for school staff and students. Committee members decided it would be helpful to survey Highfield teachers about their perceptions of students' social skills before the program was implemented, and then again after the program had been in operation for a year. This implementation evaluation was conducted in 1995 and 1996. The library/resource teacher on the School Climate Committee, who has a research background, designed the survey questions in consultation with one of the authors. In June 1995, before the Lion's Quest program was implemented on a school-wide basis, 27 regular classroom teachers and 10 other teachers (ESL, communications) were sent a cover letter with instructions and a five-page questionnaire, consisting of both closed-ended and open-ended questions. A total of 22 of the 37 teachers (59 per cent) returned the questionnaires. The Lion's Quest program was implemented in some classrooms on a limited basis by teachers who were on the School Climate Committee in June 1995. In August 1995, all of the teachers at Highfield Junior School were trained in the use of the Lion's Quest program, and teachers began to implement the program in their classrooms during the 1995-96 school year. The activities of Lion's Quest follow a standard curriculum for each grade level and include presentations, discussions, and role-playing. All of the teachers used a curriculum guide book to

School-Based Programs 113 Figure 6.1. Global Social Skills

implement the program in the classroom. Also, children engaged in service learning to improve the school and community. For example, some children volunteered at a senior citizens' home. In June 1996, 28 regular classroom teachers and 12 other teachers were asked to complete the same survey regarding students' social skills. A total of 19 of the 40 teachers completed the survey (48 per cent). Teachers were asked to rate the following four aspects of Highfield students' social skills for the current academic year on a scale from 1 (very weak) to 10 (very well developed): (a) ability to exercise self-discipline, (b) ability to behave in a responsible manner, (c) ability to demonstrate good judgment, and (d) ability to get along with others. As figure 6.1 shows, students' global social skills improved from 1995 to 1996 (p < .005). Teachers were asked several questions about the importance of the Lion's Quest program at Highfield Junior School. As shown in table 6.2, the majority of teachers in both 1995 and 1996 agreed that social skills training should be a part of the curriculum at Highfield. In the 1996 survey, teachers made the following comments about the implementation of the program. An assembly explaining the programme and its goals would help. Decide what are 'key' areas of the programme and where greater focus could be placed. The particularly poor activities could be removed to streamline the programme ... Increased use of 'outside' guest speakers to reinforce ideas may help. Children who have attended Highfield since JK are mostly well behaved.

114 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development TABLE 6.2 Level of Teacher Support for the Lion's Quest Program and Its Implementation at Highfield School Level of teacher support for the establishment of the program

Level of teacher support for the way the program is being planned and introduced

Teacher Response

1995

1996

1995

1996

Strongly against Against Neutral/Uncertain In favour Strongly in favour

4% 0% 27% 37% 32%

0% 5% 16% 42% 37%

0% 0% 41% 47% 12%

6% 0% 35% 47% 12%

Problems come during the adjustment period of some new to the school... Need more 'togetherness' and support on keeping on track. Positive examples are outlined; concrete examples of decision-making are given ... The program must continue to be implemented on a school-wide basis. There must be an overall school focus. Encourage more classes to get involved in service projects ... Thanks to the climate committee! We have degrees of commitment to this project ranging from 0 to 100. Once all the teachers are on board and committed 100%, then I believe results will be substantial. How can we expect such changes from children when we, as role models, don't exhibit these changes [expectations]. It must start in each individual class and then progress to the whole school. The teachers deserve credit. They are very hard-working ... I hope children will learn self-discipline and responsibility. We are now planning how we can train the staff members who are not trained. The climate committee needs a big pat on the back. Second year will allow for kinks to be worked out.

As is shown in table 6.3, significantly more of the teachers in 1996, as

School-Based Programs 115 TABLE 6.3 Percentage of Teachers Who Believe the Lion's Quest Program Will Benefit Students at Highfield School Teacher Response

1995

1996

Yes No Uncertain

57% 1 0% 33%

90% 0% 10%

compared with 1995, believed that the Lion's Quest program would benefit the children at Highfield, x2 (2) = 5.55, p < .06. Overall, the findings of the implementation evaluation indicated a high level of commitment and ownership on the part of teachers towards this school-based program. INTENDED OUTCOMES

The goals of the social skills program are to improve children's problem-solving skills, self-esteem, and self-confidence, to reduce behavioural problems and the need for assessment and treatment, and to increase children's social networks, participation in community activities, and school attendance. PARTICIPATION

The storytelling and drama were offered in the primary division of the school to children in the mandated age range for Better Beginnings during the spring of 1993, while the Lion's Quest program was implemented at all grade levels. Home-School Connection and Parent Involvement RELEVANT LITERATURE

While parents are sometimes involved in school-based prevention programs, more often than not they are targeted by professionals to be the recipients of service, rather than agents of change (Nelson et al., 2000). One exception is the Yale-New Haven School Development Program, which began with two elementary schools in Black, low-income neighbourhoods in New Haven, Connecticut (Comer, 1985), and has since been implemented in more than 550 schools in the United States

116 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

(Weissberg & Greenberg, 1998). This program is based on four key elements: '(a) a representative governance and management group, (b) a parent participation program and group, (c) a mental health program and team, and (d) an academic (curriculum and staff development) program' (Comer, 1985, p. 155). There is a strong emphasis on parent participation in school programs and school governance in this program. A three-year longitudinal evaluation of the project found significant improvement on measures of school achievement and social competence for children participating in the intervention compared with children in control schools (Cauce, Comer, & Schwartz, 1987). DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAM CONCEPT

One of the goals set by the Steering Committee was to enhance the collaboration between parents and teachers in the school. In the fall of 1992, the project manager and the school principal met with all the primary division teachers about the project, and the teachers emphasized the importance of parent-teacher collaboration as a key component of the project (field notes, 1992). Also, arrangements were made for a teacher to attend meetings of the In-school Committee on a regular basis (field notes, 1992). IMPLEMENTATION

The project assisted in a variety of ways to improve the connection between home and school and to promote parent involvement. Parents participated on both the In-school Committee and Nutrition Committee (while the latter was in operation); key parents in the project, including its chairperson, participated in the school's strategic planning; parents were recruited to assist in the classrooms and with the snack program; and parents were hired as educational assistants or research assistants. The project collaborated with the school and the Public Health Unit to create a very inviting, child and family-centred JK registration for the research focal cohort in the spring of 1993. The project also provided a summer program for children in JK and SK to ease the transition between home and school. One person made the following comment about parent involvement in the school: 'We participated with the school in their first-time effort at a strategic plan. The project had one-third of the participants in attendance: three parents and two staff. This was a significant event because once again teachers and parents were together as equals and as people. The process component of this event has had a number of positive relationship spin-offs which

School-Based Programs 117

have led to more acceptance of the project. At the level of the strategic plan, the project was seen to be the defining characteristic of the school. As well, a key objective is to establish a universal social-skills program throughout the school.' (field notes, 1993). Another major activity to promote the connection between the home and school was the collaboration between the project and school to recruit translators for parent-teacher conferences. Because of the many different languages spoken in the homes, and the fact that some parents did not have strong English language skills, many parents did not attend parent-teacher conferences before the project began. The project and the school recruited translators for the parent-teacher conferences so that parents could speak in their native languages when they met with teachers. Like many other school initiatives, this was advertised to the parents in several different languages. Throughout the project, parents were highly visible throughout Highfield Junior School. Moreover, they had their own spaces in the school, including the community lounge and the kitchen. They worked in the kitchen preparing the snacks; they volunteered in the classrooms and accompanied children and teachers on field trips; and parents attended meetings in the school and worked as paid staff for the project or school. One challenge that the project experienced was turnover in parents participating in key roles in the school. For example, two key parents participating on the In-school Committee during the early years moved out of the area, leaving a gap to fill (field notes, 1993). Finally, as we noted earlier, as teachers became more involved on the In-school Committee, parents became less outspoken and the meetings were dominated by teachers. This is similar to what others have reported in school management groups involving parents and teachers (Gruber & Trickett, 1987). INTENDED OUTCOMES

The goals of this parent-teacher involvement included enhanced feelings of competence and confidence in their role with respect to their children's learning, development of positive parent-teacher relationships, and increased academic and school success for children: '[The] whole project should promote parents feeling more comfortable about using the school, start using the school equally as we use the space here (e.g., for evening meetings). That's our vision ... we want to make ourselves more into the school, as well as in here ... we have to have that kind of attitude' (field notes, 1992).

118 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development PARTICIPATION

While the project did not keep track of parent participation levels in the school, parents were highly visible throughout the school. Community and Ethnocultural Relations RELEVANT LITERATURE

At the time the Highfield project was planned, there was not a great deal of literature on how schools can promote positive community and ethnocultural relations. The one exception mentioned in the previous section is Comer's (1985) School Development Program, in which the parents from low-income, Black communities are encouraged to participate in the school. Nation et al. (2003) and Weissberg and Elias (1993) have also noted the importance of culturally sensitive and relevant approaches to school intervention, as well as hiring staff from the racial and ethnic backgrounds that are predominant in a community. Potts (2003) has provided an excellent example of African-centred education at the Benjamin E. Mays Institute, a middle school serving AfricanAmerican boys in Hartford, Connecticut. This school 'incorporates principles from African-centered emancipatory education in its programs for students, parents, and the surrounding community' (Potts, 2003, p. 179). In its five-year history, it has been found that students at this school outperform African-American students at mainstream middle schools in the same city on academic achievement tests, grade point average, and measures of ethnic and racial identity. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAM CONCEPT

The original project proposal called for 'a variety of activities ... to be directed to language and cultural sensitivity,' including 'expansion of ESL services, language and cultural sensitivity training for staff, including incorporation of teaching strategies from the child's country of origin, and enhancement/extension of the school board's cultural sensitization program to students, parents and community groups as part of an anti-racial strategy' (Highfield School and Community Association, 13 July 1990, p. 19). The emphasis on ethnocultural and race relations from those who developed the proposal stemmed from the fact that the Highfield neighbourhood is very diverse in terms of culture and race; moreover, many immigrants and refugees come from countries where there is civil strife and impoverished conditions. According to the project's contract with the government, there are at

School-Based Programs 119

least 43 language groups in the Highfield community. The predominant cultural groups are those from South Asia and the West Indies. At an early planning meeting, members of the Steering Committee suggested the following ideas for promoting cross-cultural relations and community development: 'things kids could do to find out about their own culture and presenting it'; 'parents doing a lunch, cooking foods from their own culture'; 'having community outreach; having cultural ambassadors'; and 'cross-cultural training' (field notes, 1991). IMPLEMENTATION

Parents from the West Indies were involved in the project from its inception. People from South Asia subsequently became involved on the project's Executive Team and other committees during the demonstration phase. Representatives from the South Asian community translated project materials and helped the Research Committee develop culturally sensitive research instruments. Also, members of different ethnocultural groups within the community were hired as project staff. Most program activities in this area consisted of special events held at the school, such as an anti-racism event, part of an association meeting on Black history; and a forum on South Asian culture. Foods from various countries and cultures became a routine part of both the snack program and association meetings. The school also hosted a Multicultural Caravan once a year; tables were set up in the gym where representatives from different cultural groups could display information about their culture. As well, the in-school coordinator worked with the library/ resource teacher from the school on a program called Stories of Our Lives, in which speakers from different cultural backgrounds told stories to the children, thus serving as cultural role models for them. INTENDED OUTCOMES

The goals of this part of the program are increased knowledge of other cultures, enhanced ability to relate to other cultures, improved race relations, increased participation of children and residents in community events, increased sense of community pride, and increased sense of neighbourhood safety. PARTICIPATION

Exact figures on participation are not kept by the project. However, various special events have drawn in 80 to 250 people with participation from the diverse cultures of the community.

120 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development Professional Development for Teachers RELEVANT LITERATURE

Sarason (1993) has argued that education and professional development for teachers is often inadequate. As he has noted, Teachers cannot create and sustain contexts of productive learning for students if those contexts do not exist for teachers' (Sarason, 1996, p. 254). In their review, Weissberg and Elias (1993) also have noted the importance of training and professional development for teachers to implement prevention programs in schools: Teachers who are trained before teaching health education feel more prepared to do so, implement the curriculum with greater integrity, and have greater positive effects on students. These findings highlight the importance of providing high-quality training, supervision, and monitoring for teachers who implement health education programs' (p. 185). DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAM CONCEPT

The idea of professional development for teachers grew out of discussions between the in-school coordinator, the school principal, and teachers. Professional development for teachers is not a prevention program, but it is a vital part of prevention programming, because it provides for teacher training and support in the implementation of such programs. IMPLEMENTATION

In June 1993, six professional development activities were planned for teachers by the in-school coordinator, to be held during lunch hours and on professional development days. Topics included anti-racism, stress management, and home-school communication. Organized and paid for by Better Beginnings, a teacher appreciation dinner featuring a guest speaker was held in November 1993; teachers also received a two-day training session in the Lion's Quest program. INTENDED OUTCOMES

The goals for this program component were to enhance teachers' professional development and increase their skills in implementation of programs. PARTICIPATION

Participation rates varied at these events from a small to a large num-

School-Based Programs 121

ber of teachers. Most teachers attended the recognition dinner and the Lion's Quest training. Summary Many of the first school-based prevention programs were limited to single focus, time-limited, child-focused interventions, often with little involvement of parents and community members and inadequate training and support for teachers. A growing awareness of these limitations led to an increased emphasis on school interventions that are multi-component and multi-year with a focus on school change, parent participation, and adequate support for teachers, parents, and other stakeholders to implement the interventions (Greenberg et al, 2003). In the United States, 'full-service schools' are one example of this shift in emphasis. In full-service schools, there is a school-community partnership which brings a range of family support services, preschool education and child care, community development, and job training into schools, all intended to meet the multiple needs of children and families (Dryfoos, 1994). As recent reviews have shown, multi-component, multi-year programs have been found to have both positive short-term and long-term impacts on children and families (MacLeod & Nelson, 2000; Prilleltensky & Nelson, 2000). The school-based programs that were implemented at Highfield possess several noteworthy characteristics. First, they were universally accessible to all children in the research cohort, and many of the programs were provided to all children in the school. Second, there was a focus on the whole child, with program components addressing different facets of children's competence and well-being (e.g., academic, social, nutrition, fitness). Third, the programs lasted for the four years of the demonstration project. Fourth, there was a strong emphasis on teacher, parent, and community participation in the school, including in decision-making roles. Fifth, the project and school made efforts to address the unique cultural and racial characteristics of the students and their parents. Finally, professional development training was provided to teachers and educational assistants for the different prevention programs that were implemented. Taken together, these different characteristics provide a rich school environment that is warm and welcoming to students, teachers, parents, and community members. Highfield Junior School is a different place than it was before the project began. Not only has the physical lay-

122 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

out of the school changed, but also there has been a change in the ethos of the school. The school is a hub of activity for the community. Parent volunteers and community members are in evidence throughout the school, and there are a variety of initiatives conducted in and out of the school that never existed before. We began this chapter by discussing how difficult it is to create change in schools. The experience of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project is an excellent example of how schools can be changed, so that they provide a warmer, more accepting environment for everyone who enters their doors.

7

Community Development

If asked to imagine a community that is 'child- and youth-friendly/ one might think of tree-lined streets, parks with playground equipment and lots of green space, children playing under the watchful eyes of caring adults, and neighbours talking with one another. One might also think of other resources that would be available in such a community - a library, a community centre, a community garden, schools, and shopping, as well as programs, activities, and meeting places that are easily accessible to everyone. Beyond these images, community also means a place that residents are proud of and attached to, a place where residents feel safe and secure. Unfortunately, many communities do not possess a lot of these ideal attributes. Instead, they are often characterized by community-level adversity (Perkins, Crim, Silberman, & Brown, 2004). Perkins et al. describe four different kinds of adversity that many low-income communities experience: economic adversity (such as the replacement of unionized manufacturing jobs with low-wage service jobs and welfare); political adversity (such as the lack of organized groups to fight for better housing and recreational programs); social adversity (such as crime and conflict between cultural groups); and environmental adversity (such as the deterioration in roads, bridges, and water and sewer systems brought about by financial neglect). How does one begin to deal with these kinds of adversity, and transform a community so that it becomes a place that is more child- and youth-friendly? The answer, according to many who work with such neighbourhoods, is community development. Perkins et al. (2004) define community development as 'a process whereby government, nonprofit organizations, voluntary associations, or public-private partnerships

124 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

ameliorate adversities in a community's economic, political, social and/ or physical environment and prevent future adversities' (p. 323). The research literature suggests a number of principles that underlie community development (Derksen & Nelson, 1995; Jones & Silva, 1991; Perkins et al., 2004; Rothman & Tropman, 1987). First, the community development process is directed by residents rather than professionals. Residents do more than consult in the creation of programs or participate in such programs when they are created. They become empowered, and they begin organizing and acting collectively to create programs and services and to improve their communities. Second, even in the most troubled communities, the strengths, assets, and capacities of the community and residents are emphasized. When a strengths orientation is adopted, people feel empowered to participate in changing their communities. Third, community development is goal-directed and purposeful in nature. Residents come together to create change in their communities, to make them better places in which to live. Fourth, community development is more than the development of programs. It is an ongoing process of need identification, action, and reflection. Once one issue is successfully addressed, the community moves on to address other issues; that is, the process of community development is as important as the specific goals that are achieved. In the process of community development, relationships and networks of mutual support are developed, and the community becomes more cohesive through the process of community mobilization. Fifth, community development involves the building of capacity, the 'development of skills, information and other resources, or the development of organizations or coalitions within the community' (Perkins et al., 2004, p. 324), to produce self-sufficiency and sustainability so that the community does not need regular infusions of outside capital, or other kinds of outside assistance, to maintain improvements. Overview of Community Development in the Highfield Community Unlike most prevention projects, Better Beginnings, Better Futures was meant to be driven more by community residents than by professionals. Also, rather than focusing exclusively on changing individual children and families, Better Beginnings was aimed at creating change in the communities that hosted the specific prevention programs that were developed. For these reasons, the Highfield Community Enrichment Project, along with the other Better Beginnings' projects, engaged

Community Development 125 in community development activities, with citizens striving to change their communities. At Highfield, there are a variety of activities grouped under the 'community development' (CD) component of the project. All activities are overseen by a community development coordinator. There is also a Community Development Committee, which met roughly every month during the demonstration phase of the project. In 1998 the total budget for community development activities was $112,226, about 28 per cent of the program budget. From early on in the life of the Better Beginnings project, and as articulated in their contract with the government, the goals of community development were to increase resident participation and leadership; language and prevocational skills for residents; neighbourhood safety; social and recreational opportunities; and community responsiveness to, and respect for, ethnocultural needs and differences. The areas in which community development activities were focused tried to address each of the above goals. Nonetheless, although there are five main areas of CD 'programming/ community development is viewed more as 'process' than a component of the project. Therefore, in this section we describe the development of the concept, and the implementation barriers and challenges faced in the early stages, as a whole rather than broken down into the five main areas of the CD focus. The relevant literature and major activities undertaken to achieve each of the five goals are discussed in subsequent sections of the chapter. Development of the Community Development Concept

Community development was one of the components of the program from the initial conceptualization of the Better Beginnings project (field notes, 1991). One of the project's guiding philosophies was to incorporate a holistic view of the child: 'We couldn't just work on developing the child in school or at home, we had to involve the whole community in order to create a program that would deal with the whole child ... [The project] had to include the community because the kids just weren't in school, they were involved with their families, [and] they were involved with the community as a whole' (key informant interview, 1994). The limited amount of community development activity in the Highfield area also convinced stakeholders that such programming and activities were a necessary component of the project. As one service provider reported, the lack of community development ser-

126 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

vices made it 'really difficult to deal with all the needs here [in North Etobicoke] ... that's one of the big concerns we had when we put the proposal together; we knew there was a need for community development up here' (key informant interview, 1994). The initial process of conceptualizing community development did not seem to present any barriers or challenges. One key informant, involved in this stage of program development, reported that the group shared similar ideas about community development and 'came to consensus fairly quickly' (key informant interview, 1994). Nonetheless, although the group may have shared similar views on the need for community development and the areas of programming on which to concentrate, there were challenges that arose at the point of implementation. These are described below. Implementation

With the exception of some of the social and recreational activities, the community development component of the Better Beginnings project was viewed more as a process than a specific program; thus, there was no specific date when this component of the project was implemented. During the early stages of the project, a number of barriers and challenges in trying to initiate community development were identified by key informants. Perhaps these challenges arose because community development lacked the clarity of the more tangible components of the project - the process of trying to bring the community together may have been very alien to people (analytic comments, 1992,1993). It also seemed apparent that the community development focus of the project received less attention than the other areas of programming. One early challenge in the implementation phase was hiring the right community development (CD) coordinator. The first CD coordinator hired was a poor fit for the community - she lacked skills in working with parents and residents. After several months, and complaints to the project manager about her performance, her employment was terminated. The project was then left to undergo another hiring process for this position and try to correct any 'damage' the previous worker may have caused. The residents and parents in the community seemed to like the new CD coordinator that was subsequently hired. The CD coordinator was responsible for ensuring that the activities were a good fit with the objectives established in the contract with the government (reported in

Community Development 127

a later section). However, the CD Committee as a whole never looked at the stated objectives, though its members then agreed upon what activities would fulfil these objectives. One key informant reported that 'At some point the committee needs to look at community development as a component of the whole Better Beginnings model - what does it mean? How do we accomplish objectives?' (interview, 1994). The committee struggled with developing a conceptual understanding of 'community development' and this impeded the committee's progress in establishing common objectives and implementing activities and events early on in the demonstration phase (key informant interview, 1994). For example, ... challenges we face? ... [developing] a conceptual understanding of what community development is. The Community Development Committee knows where it wants to go, but is unsure how to get there ... we know the types of outcomes we want to see, but what accomplishes that? (key informant interview, 1993)

Key informants also reported that it took some time for the CD coordinator and the CD Committee to build a relationship and to clarify their roles: There was a period of [time for] me [to understand] the job and understanding the committee and what the project is all about - and that took some time. Also, getting in with the Community Development Committee and working out what my role is and what their role is took a while. It was tough at first, but now we understand what our roles are.' (key informant interview, 1994)

For example, it was unclear to the CD coordinator what he could work on autonomously and what needed to be approved through the committee: 'Sometimes the committee has had problems in deciding on how decisions are made ... I'm not sure when to go ahead and when I should wait and speak with [the committee]' (interview, 1993). The process of clarifying roles took longer than anticipated, and slowed the process of planning and implementing community development activities. The CD coordinator's lack of time also impeded the community development process in the early stages. Very early in the demonstration phase, the CD coordinator was responsible for doing outreach as well as coordinating the Before and After School program and other community

128 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

development activities. In addition, the coordinator assumed the role of support person to staff who were inexperienced in working in the community. The resulting workload did not permit him to do all of the outreach and coordination that was necessary. The addition of a community outreach worker to the staff allowed the coordinator more time to plan and organize events. Before and After School program personnel also experienced some difficulties because of 'turf issues in the school. During the period of implementation many of the Better Beginnings programs began simultaneously with very little input from, or communication with, school personnel. The number of changes made so quickly, in combination with the limited amount of communication between the school and the project, resulted in many implementation problems for the Before and After School program. Some teachers were territorial and reacted negatively to the staff, and access to space and resources was a problem for the project (key informant interview, 1993). However, in these early stages, the project and the school worked diligently at establishing good relationships and good communication processes; after that occurred, the problems were minimized. Lastly, many Highfield residents speak little or no English, and this was also identified as an implementation challenge (key informant interview, 1994). The Highfield community has been described as very fragmented and this made implementing activities and events challenging as well: 'We're quite fragmented ... don't have a sense of community here in Rexdale or the most northern part of Etobicoke. Everyone just goes about their business. The area is quite diverse and spread out [which makes] it difficult to get anything cohesive going. We can work with pockets but it still hasn't... developed to the extent that we envisioned.' (key informant interview, 1994)

This impression was echoed by another key informant who reported that the community has a 'suburban mentality' that is a barrier to community development: 'Given the structural barriers in a suburban community, we have to become more strategic around social animation ... get them to do something collectively and break through the isolation' (key informant interview, 1994). The divided nature of the community resulted in limited resident participation in community development planning, as well as at some community events (key

Community Development 129

informant interviews, 1994). This made it difficult to do further program planning and implementation, and resulted in scaled-back expectations: 'We envisioned a lot more community things. I think we had a lot of grand ideas, and great ideas and we just had to scale back and realize that maybe what we wanted and how we wanted to see things maybe isn't how the community is made up' (key informant interview, 1994). The result has been that the approach to community development changed. Experience taught the CD Committee, as one key informant reported, that more effort in 'preparing the community' was necessary: We realized that we can't do it all by ourselves and we also realized that we have to do a lot more preparation with the community ... [we] have to bring the community to a certain point. We have to do a lot of building up ... a lot more ground work before you can take the community further. Community spirit has to be nurtured. Because people come and go so often we have to keep that in the back of our minds. We need to get a sense of community, welcoming them in and say, 'This is what we have to offer/ developing their knowledge and then go on to trying to build. I don't think we thought on that level before. We started out thinking we'd have a lot more people involved and we realized that it is just really, really difficult to get people past their basic needs.' (key informant interview, 1994)

Overall, the community development component of the project lacked the clarity and focus of the other two major programming areas. Although the CD component of the project did enjoy some successes for example, the recruitment of some very committed residents who developed strong leadership skills, the implementation of a successful Before and After School program, as well as a variety of different multicultural events and activities (discussed in more detail later in this chapter), this component of the project continued to flounder throughout the demonstration phase of the project. As mentioned in Chapter 4, a major challenge during the planning phase was striking a balance between collaboration and action. The CD coordinator and the CD Committee did struggle in striking this balance, and the lack of clarity about how to achieve their goals further hindered the process. In the implementation phase, resistance due to lack of training, support, and ongoing consultation also may have impeded progress (as discussed in Chapter 4). Again, the CD compo-

130 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

nent of the program seemed to struggle with these issues. The CD coordinator's lack of training, and perhaps lack of support, resulted in a failure to recruit a large number of residents/parents in the community who were committed and enthusiastic. Intended Outcomes

Many of the goals for community development were established on a planning day for the project in 1992 (field notes, 1991). As mentioned previously, the project wished to focus on five main areas: (a) resident participation and leadership, (b) language and pre-vocational skills for residents, (c) neighbourhood safety, (d) social and recreational opportunities, and (e) community responsiveness to, and respect for, ethnocultural needs and differences. The goals established by the project were echoed by other key informants, with most reporting that the objectives of community development were to '[get] the community together' and to 'make the community better for everyone' (key informant interviews, 1994). The project, through the community development process, hoped to achieve a sense of community identity and pride, as well as to empower the residents to become more involved in the community. As described by one key informant, 'I hope that the community will be more self-help [oriented] ... more aware of what's out there, and if it's not there, how to get it. To become more vocal and in charge of their own lives. [Also], to create avenues into the school and a partnership between the school and the community' (interview, 1994). Each of the five main programming areas is discussed below, including relevant literature and a description of activities. The overall model of community development programming, including resources and staffing, programs and activities, and intended short-term outcomes, is presented in table 7.1. Areas of Focus of Community Development in the Highfield Community Resident Participation and Leadership RELEVANT LITERATURE

According to Heller et al. (1984), citizen participation can be defined as 'a process in which individuals take part in decision making in the institutions, programs, and environments that affect them' (p. 339).

TABLE 7.1 Community Development Programs/Activities and Short-Term Outcomes Resources and staffing

Community development program/activity

Intended short-term outcomes

Parent involvement on project committees Outreach to community residents Community Action Committee Better Beginnings Network Public speaking engagements Fun & Recognition Committee

Increased resident participation Empowerment of residents Enhanced leadership skills & more community leaders Enhanced sense of community & community pride

ESL classes Job-training forum Hindi class for children

Improved English language Improved job skills & employment levels

Neighbourhood safety forums Neighbourhood safety committee

Improved neighbourhood safety

Before and After School program for children March break & summer enrichment program Volunteer recognition dinner & adult recreation programs

Reduced family stress Increased fitness & social skills in children Increased self-esteem, empowerment, social networks, & support

Resident participation and leadership Community development coordinator Resident volunteers

Language and pre-vocational skills Space in portable at Highfield school ESL instructor provided by school boards

Neighbourhood safety Community development coordinator Resident volunteers Metro Toronto Housing Authority Police Social and recreational opportunities Part-time project staff Staff contributed by community agencies Volunteers

TABLE 7.1 (Concluded) Resources and staffing

Community development program/activity

Intended short-term outcomes

Ethno-cultural celebrations & events (e.g. Diwali, Black History Month) Community festival/rummage sale Community breakfasts

Increased knowledge of cultural, ethnic, & national groups in community Improved inter-group relations Enhanced sense of community

Ethno-cultural programs/activities Project staff from different ethnic, language, & cultural backgrounds Space provided by Highfield School & Highfield Better Beginnings project

Community Development 133

Research has pointed to a variety of ways that residents have participated in prevention programs. These include helping to design and build community parks (Francis, 1982), establishing toy lending libraries and clothing exchanges (Pancer & Alcalde, 1992), initiating crime prevention programs (Washnis, 1976), and organizing parent advisory councils in schools (Comer, 1976; McClure & Depiano, 1983). Arnstein (1969) constructed a 'ladder' of citizen participation that differentiates the amount and depth of participation. According to Arnstein, resident participation can range from minimal and token levels of participation to meaningful citizen control and decision-making power. Research has also documented numerous barriers to citizen participation, including professional power and control issues; inaccessible meetings and costs; residents' lack of training, knowledge, and information; professionals' lack of skills for involving residents; and ineffective communication patterns between professionals and citizens (Cameron, Peirson, & Pancer, 1994). Various authors have offered suggestions of how to involve residents effectively in prevention programs based on their experiences and on research concerning resident participation (Cameron & Cadell, 1999; Cameron et al., 1994; Nelson, Prillelteusky, & MacGillivary, 2001). These strategies include developing shared values and norms; mandating minimum levels of participation (a quota for residents in committees); encouraging professionals to share power and resources; enhancing accessibility and providing concrete supports; providing many different avenues for participation; training and supporting residents in their roles; enhancing the interpersonal skills, sensitivities, and openness to change of professionals; and improving communication. The key to all these strategies is that they break down the social distance and power differentials between professionals and residents, and build relationships and trust between these two groups (Derksen & Nelson, 1995). In spite of the many obstacles to resident participation, some research has suggested that participation in the creation and operation of community programs is associated with the personal and collective empowerment of residents (Cameron & Cadell, 1999; Pancer & Cameron, 1994; Prestby, Wandersman, Florin, Rich, & Davis, 1990; Wandersman & Florin, 2000). Indicators of personal empowerment include enhanced self-confidence and self-esteem, skills and knowledge, and social support and benefits to children; indicators of collective empowerment include improved programs, an enhanced sense of community, and increased social action and self-help activity. Negative

134 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

outcomes of resident participation have also been noted, including stress and burnout of active volunteers, feelings of frustration, opposition from male partners, and the creation of divisions in the community. While apparent, these negative outcomes have been outweighed by positive outcomes in studies conducted to date (Pancer & Cameron, 1994; Prestby et al., 1990). ACTIVITIES

A major goal of the project, and a major component of the Better Beginnings model, was to have parents and residents involved in project management and program planning. To achieve this goal, the project endeavoured to have 51 per cent parent/resident participation on all project committees, as well as to involve residents/parents in all aspects of the project and to develop their leadership skills. To some extent the project was successful in achieving these goals. A core group of parents was very active in project management and programming, developed their leadership skills, and became involved with other advocacy initiatives and with speaking engagements. However, the project was unsuccessful in reaching out to the wider community - the number of parents who became involved was quite small (about 10) and these parents were involved generally in more than one committee. Community development staff, as well as other project staff, tried to encourage a greater number of parents to join committees and get involved in planning community events, but it was difficult to get new parents involved at the committee and organizational level. In order to ensure that parents who took part in committees were not passive, non-participating members, all committees (with the exception of the Research Committee) had a parent chairperson. (The Research Committee did have two parent chairpeople, but they moved out of the community.) Later on in the project's development, the CD coordinator's job description was changed to place greater emphasis on developing a more grass-roots approach to community development, community outreach, and the recruiting of more parent volunteers for Highfield programs and activities. Another initiative that was part of the effort to promote resident participation, involvement, and leadership in the Highfield Community occured in 1995, when the local city councillor developed a Community Action Committee (CAC) in the Highfield Community to address issues such as lighting, safety and bus shelters. The CD Coordinator and several parents became involved with the CAC, and the committee was successful in convincing the city to erect a bus shelter at a local bus

Community Development 135 stop. This committee disbanded when the original councillor ended her term in office. Highfield residents have been active on behalf of both the Better Beginnings project and other community organizations. Several parents, and even some of the children from the project, have spoken publicly on its behalf. For example, one parent made a presentation to the Metropolitan Toronto City Council, and two parents became involved with the Better Beginnings Network, which connected all Better Beginnings communities across the province. A number of parents who had been involved at Highfield went on to serve on the boards of other agencies and organizations in the community. In order to provide further support and recognition to parent volunteers, the Fun and Recognition Committee was established to oversee and coordinate an annual recognition dinner to show appreciation to volunteers and community partners for their work with the project. This committee also looked into honoraria and other ways in which to recognize volunteers. INTENDED OUTCOMES

Activities within the resident participation and leadership area were designed to increase resident participation in every aspect of program design, implementation and decision-making. It was hoped that participation in developing, as well as using, program services would empower residents, provide them with leadership skills, and consequently, increase the number of indigenous leaders in the community. It was also expected that by becoming involved in this way, residents would begin to develop a sense of community, and pride in what their community had to offer. Language and Prevocational Skills RELEVANT LITERATURE

According to the findings of a federal task force on issues facing immigrants and refugees, language and employment skills are major barriers to successful adaptation into the Canadian milieu (After the door has been opened, 1988; Review of the literature on immigrant mental health, 1988). This issue was particularly apparent in the Highfield community because of the large population of new Canadians. The need for English as a Second Language (ESL) classes and training and networking opportunities to help secure employment are important interventions to assist newcomers in their adaptation to the host culture (After

136 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development the door has been opened, 1988; Review of the literature on immigrant mental health, 1988). Language skills training for parents is particularly important, since it is well known that children acquire the language and culture of the host country faster than their parents, which can serve to undermine parental authority and strain family dynamics (Beiser, Dion, Gotowiec, Hyman, & Vu, 1995). ACTIVITIES The project was not able to devote much of its time and effort to developing this aspect of the CD component. Although some minor initiatives were implemented - for example, a workshop on job training, and a Hindi class that operated for approximately one year - the development of these skills in the community is no longer an objective for the CD component. After permanent funding was announced, as discussed previously, the CD coordinator's job shifted in order to place much more emphasis on developing resident participation and leadership. However, the project does continue to provide space for an ESL program run by the school board. INTENDED OUTCOMES

The major intended objectives of this aspect of CD programming was to improve the English language skills of community residents who were new to the country, and for whom English was not a first language; and to improve residents' job-related skills, and thereby enhance their job prospects and earning potential. Neighbourhood Safety RELEVANT LITERATURE

Concerns about crime have motivated an interest in strategies for the prevention of crime and the promotion of neighbourhood safety (Gilling & Barton, 1997; Tonry & Farrington, 1995). Community-based crime prevention and safety promotion strategies can follow a community development approach in which neighbourhood residents identify salient crime and safety issues in their communities and develop approaches to address these issues (Washnis, 1976). Strategies can range from changes focused on the physical environment (e.g., improving lighting, lobbying for the installation of traffic lights or crossing guards on busy streets, constructing or improving park and recreation facilities to engage youth in positive behavior) to changes in

Community Development 137

the social environment (e.g, creating programs and activities that youth and families want in their communities, encouraging shopping malls to develop youth drop-in centres). ACTIVITIES Throughout the demonstration phase the CD committee identified a number of different safety issues. The focus of much of the attention was the nearby public housing complex. The CD coordinator and several parents worked with the Metro Toronto Housing Authority (MTHA) to make several safety changes, including having security guards on site, installing locks on building doors, improving lighting, removing derelict cars, and installing a chain-link fence to replace a brick fence. The committee also identified a crosswalk in the neighbourhood as a safety issue; consequently, a crossing guard was placed at that intersection. Several neighbourhood safety forums were held as well. Overall, however, the promotion of neighbourhood safety was not a sustained focus of the project. INTENDED OUTCOMES

The major intended outcome of this area of the project was to improve the safety and security of neighbourhood residents. Social and Recreational Programs RELEVANT LITERATURE

The beneficial impacts on children of after-school recreational programs have been noted in recent research (Browne et al., 1999; Danish & Gullotta, 2000; Jones & Offord, 1989). For example, Browne et al. (1999) conducted a randomized trial examining the impacts of subsidized recreation for children from low-income families. They found that two years after the intervention began, children who had subsidized recreation were involved in more activities of better quality and were less likely to see a physician or social worker than children who did not have subsidized recreation. There were also positive impacts (e.g., fewer nervous-system, sleep, and anxiety disorders) on the parents of the children whose recreation was subsidized. ACTIVITIES A main focus of the CD component throughout the demonstration phase was the Before and After School program, designed to offer fun

138 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

and enriching activities to the children. The project was successful in operating the program, free of charge, throughout the demonstration phase. The Before School program runs from 7:45 to 9:00 a.m., and the After School program from 3:45 to 5:15 p.m. It is staffed by three parttime Better Beginnings workers, two women and one man who had experience with recreational programs and were community residents when they were hired. As well, March break and summer programming was also made available to children in the community. The March break and summer programs were run jointly with the North Albion Community Project (NACP) until 1997, when NACP's funding was cut. In later years, the programs were run with the assistance of the North Albion Neighbourhood Services (NANS) and the Community Health Centre (CHC). NANS and the CHC also provided staff on an occasional basis to supplement Better Beginnings staff when needed. A number of other social and recreational activities have been offered throughout the years, all of these additional activities implemented at the request of community residents. Beginning in 1994, the project began an aerobics class, twice a week, in the gym. An instructor was paid on a fee-for-service basis, and approximately 10 to 15 people from the community attended. In 1997, a ballet class for children in Grades 1 and 2 was implemented. The class was held once a week and no fee was charged; an instructor was hired on a fee-for-service basis. As of 1998, the attendance for this program was down, and it was unclear whether it would continue. Finally, the project arranged several bus trips to the United States. As of 1998, about three of four of these trips had taken place for a fee of $25 each to cover the rental of the bus. (e.g., to Pennsylvania, Rochester, and Buffalo). This activity was very popular - all 47 seats were usually filled. In addition to the above social and recreational programs, there have been several additions to this area of programming. Early on in the demonstration phase, the project began an annual event to recognize all volunteers and partners associated with the project. The event, usually held at the local community college, includes dinner, dancing, and a slide show presenting photographs of project events taken throughout the year. As well, each project coordinator gives a small presentation, thanking all volunteers and partners, and presenting each with a certificate and small gift, usually a mug bearing the project's logo. The events are always fun, very well attended (100 to 150 participants), and appreciated by all.

Community Development 139 INTENDED OUTCOMES

The Before and After School program was designed to enhance children's fitness levels and social skills, and to reduce family stress by providing a safe and healthy activity outlet for children whose parents were not available to them before or after school because of work responsibilities. The recreational and fitness programs for adults, including the annual volunteer recognition dinner, are designed to improve residents' social networks and social support, and to give them a sense of empowerment and self-esteem. PROGRAM PARTICIPATION

The typical participants in the Before and After School program are children aged 4 to 8. About 60 children were registered in the program as of writing; approximately 15 participated in the morning program and 30 in the afternoon. Approximately 100 children aged 3 to 14 attend the March break program. Children aged 6 to 14 who attend Highfield school or who live in the Highfield neighbourhood are eligible for the summer program. Approximately 200 children attended the program from its inception until 1997. In the summer of 1997 there were two 3week sessions with approximately 80 children taking part in each. Ethnocultural Programs and Activities RELEVANT LITERATURE

In the literature on race relations, a distinction has been made between approaches that affirm ethno-racial and cultural identity, and approaches that have an anti-racism focus (Mukherjee, 1992; Trickett et al. 1993; Watts, 1992). The former approach is more celebratory of the strengths, accomplishments, and potential of a racial, cultural, or ethnic group. Examples of this approach include celebrations of events such as Black History Month, and the religious holidays of the different ethnic groups. The focus is on sharing one's own culture with people from different backgrounds, and promoting pride of one's cultural identity. The latter approach is more radical and political in naming racism as a structural problem in society that is manifested in communities at many different levels. Examples include anti-racism workshops in which individuals examine the history and root causes of racism, and workshops in which dominant groups (white people) examine the privileges that are bestowed upon them solely as a function of their skin color (Mclntosh, 1990). Mukherjee (1992) has suggested that in the

140 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

school context, an anti-racist approach strives to create a curriculum that reflects the ethno-racial diversity of the community and to promote the hiring of teachers and school administrators from minority backgrounds. ACTIVITIES For the most part, the Highfield project focused on the cultural celebration approach to diversity, which reflects the preferences of the staff and residents from the different ethnic backgrounds who participated. Until permanent funding was announced in 1997, different cultural celebrations and events had been held throughout the years. At the announcement of permanent funding, a review ensued (as described earlier), and it was decided that because of the time and expense involved in planning large community-wide events, the project would no longer host these celebrations. Prior to the review in 1997, cultural celebrations of Diwali, Holi, and Vaisakhi; Black History Month; and community festivals/rummage sales had been hosted by the project. These celebrations were very successful, attracting hundreds of participants. As well, throughout the years, several community breakfasts each year have been jointly planned by the school and the project. The breakfasts have been happy community events that have highlighted the importance of nutrition and provided an opportunity for service providers to meet community residents. (Also see Chap. 6.) Finally, in its effort to address the ethnocultural needs of the community, the project has continued to hire staff from cultural backgrounds similar to the residents. INTENDED OUTCOMES

The major intended outcomes for the ethnocultural programs and activities were to increase residents' knowledge about the different cultural, religious, and ethnic practices and customs of residents in the Highfield neighbourhood, to improve relations among the different ethnic and cultural groups, and to increase the sense of community and community pride that residents felt. PARTICIPATION

The Diwali and Holi and Vaisakhi celebrations each attracted over 300 participants in the years that they were held. Black History Month attracted more than 150 participants. The community festival/rummage sale, which grew to become a community-wide festival known as Pride Rexdale, regularly attracted 1,000 or more participants.

Community Development

141

Summary

The original Better Beginnings program model stressed the importance of involving the community in developing, implementing, and managing its programs. The project sought to focus community development on five main areas: increasing resident involvement and building leadership skills in the community, developing language and prevocational skills, increasing neighbourhood safety, providing social and recreational opportunities for residents, and responding to the community's ethnocultural needs. Over the years, the project did indeed enjoy some successes in these areas. A core group of parents became involved in the project and developed strong leadership skills. Several of these parents went on to become involved in other community advocacy initiatives and speaking engagements. The project continues, as well, to operate a very successful Before and After School program, as well as March break and summer programs. The project has also hosted many popular cultural events, and addressed several safety concerns in the community. Nonetheless, the CD component is probably the project's 'weakest link.' Although it has appeared that project staff recognized the importance and value of community development, the lack of clarity about how to achieve their goals, in addition to a lack of focus on this aspect of the project, hindered the project's progress in this area. The literature on community development may be useful in providing more focus and clarity to Highfield's community development initiatives. Perkins et al. (2004) outline an ecological framework for community development that provides some guidance concerning the future direction that community development at Highfield might take to produce more substantial and sustainable community improvement. This framework views community development as taking place simultaneously in four interrelated environmental contexts - economic, political, social, and physical - and suggests that initiatives are necessary in all these areas for significant community development to occur. Community members acting together can do much to develop their communities in all four contexts. For example, they can implement programs such as local 'exchange trading systems/ whereby community members exchange goods and services with each other so that they can forego the costs that would be incurred if they had to pay for these services (an econcomic development initiative); they can come together in community organizations and larger coalitions to advocate

142 Part 2: The Programs and Their Development

for neighbourhood improvements, such as better street lighting to ensure greater safety and security (a political development initiative); they can gather together to hold public events that celebrate diversity and help residents learn about the different ethnic and cultural groups in their community (a social development initiative); and they can create community gardens and playgrounds to beautify their neighbourhoods (an environmental initiative). For community development programs to be successful, however, efforts must also be made at the larger public policy level, as well as at the smaller-scale, citizen/community level described above (Perkins, Hughey, et al., 2002; Perkins, Crim, et al., 2004). For example, governments can stimulate community development by doing things such as providing block grants to poor neighbourhoods to stimulate the building of low-cost housing (an economic development initiative), giving renters the opportunity to become home owners through programs such as community land trusts (a political development initiative), establishing community-oriented policing such as neighbourhood mini-precincts (a social development initiative), or providing adequate public transit so as to reduce pollution and the reliance on cars (an environmental development initiative). These kinds of larger-scale, public policy initiatives require a shift in the way governments at the federal, provincial, and municipal levels focus their creativity, attention, and resources away from wealthier communities and towards communities that are more disadvantaged.

PartS A New Way

In Part 3 we show that the Highfield project is illustrative of 'a new way' in prevention programs. As noted in Part I, there was a 'revolution' in the government planning for Better Beginnings, in which the stakeholders who participated in formulating this initiative rejected the researcher-driven programs that had dominated the prevention field up until that time. Instead, Ontario stakeholders wanted an initiative in which local communities played a more active role in the formulation of prevention programs that they would host. A key part of this new way involved partnerships among service providers, community residents, project staff, and researchers. These partnerships were to be highly collaborative, rather than researcher-driven. In this part of the book, we describe these partnership processes. Chapter 8 is devoted to project organization and management. In this chapter we outline a theoretical framework for understanding community-based organizations. Jones and Silva (1991) have asserted that community-based organizations address (a) problem-solving, (b) systems interaction, and (c) community building. We use this framework throughout this section of the book. Chapter 8, on organization management, focuses on problem-solving; Chapter 9, on service-provider involvement, focuses on systems interaction; and Chapter 10, on resident participation, focuses on community building. The key question addressed in Chapter 8 is, What kind of project organization and management is best suited to developing partnerships with service providers and community residents towards the goals of prevention, promotion, and community development? Obviously such an innovative project cannot function with the usual type of bureaucratic, top-down management strategies that have dominated most

144 Part 3: A New Way

organizations, including human service organizations, for decades. Such an alternative setting seems to call for some type of participatory management style and a more informal, collaborative approach to working with people. But how does one actually put such an idea into practice and guard against reverting back to the more familiar forms of organizational hierarchy and control? These are the issues and questions that we address in Chapter 8. Partnerships were also developed with service providers, and these are described in Chapter 9. Better Beginnings was meant to be a multisectoral partnership with existing community agencies, not a completely new program 'parachuted' into a community without consultation. Since the project was to be closely linked with Highfield Junior School, the question of how to embed a multi-focused, resident-driven prevention project into a school needed to be addressed. Moreover, how does a small, grassroots project, such as the Highfield project, function as a program of a large, bureaucracy such as board of education (the sponsor agency)? And, how does one work in a meaningful way with a variety of other service providers who are not used to or skilled in working collaboratively with one another? These are some of the questions and challenges that we address in Chapter 9. Chapter 10 is concerned with the partnerships with residents of the Highfield community. In this chapter, we show that Highfield residents were not passive recipients of a program conceived somewhere else by someone else. Rather, they were active agents who participated in a variety of ways to shape what became and remains today the Highfield Community Enrichment Project. This was not an easy process. Residents initially found their involvement unnerving. Sentiments such as the following were common. 'Why are they asking me, a single mother on welfare, what this project should do? Half the time, I can't even understand what these professionals and researchers are talking about!' Over time this uneasiness and 'partnership shock' turned into feelings of empowerment and control (Lord & Church, 1998). Residents owned the project and did not want to give it up when the demonstration funding ended. And they were willing to speak up, organize, and fight to keep it going. In Chapter 10, we analyse how residents moved from a state of shock to ownership, describing not only why residents got involved, but also some of the barriers to participation that they experienced, and the benefits and problems that resulted from their participation. This part of the book is important because utilizing a participatory approach to management and developing partnerships with service

Project Organization and Management 145

providers and residents is not the norm. Moreover, in the field of prevention there is next to nothing in terms of writing or research on these issues. So, in this section, we provide an in-depth description of this new way in prevention. We present what happened at Highfield; we discuss candidly what worked and what didn't work; and in the process we provide many important lessons for others who wish to take the collective wisdom of the Highfield experience and put it into practice in their communities.

This page intentionally left blank

8

Project Organization and Management

In the vast literature on prevention programs and school-based interventions, very little has been written about how such programs are organized and managed. In this chapter, we describe the internal dynamics of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project. This chapter is a 'behind the scenes' look at what really goes on in the life of a communitybased prevention program, including the difficulties in implementing the vision and values in day-to-day decision making and practice. It is quite clear from the Highfield experience that the way prevention programs are organized and managed is far from a straightforward, linear process. As you will learn in this chapter, project organization and management often involves struggles, challenges, and conflicts on many different fronts. We begin this chapter with an overview of the Jones and Silva (1991) framework for understanding community-based organizations. After the theoretical overview, we discuss five main issues in project organization and management: (a) the vision, values, and philosophy of the project; (b) administrative structures; (c) decision making; (d) staffing and supervision; and (e) relationships with the sponsor organization and project independence. We begin with the theoretical overview. A Theoretical Model of Community-Based Organizations We have adopted the theoretical framework proposed by Jones and Silva (1991) for understanding community-based organizations. According to this model, there are three key issues that are addressed by community-based organizations: (a) problem-solving, (b) systems interactions, and (c) community building. Problem-solving is purpose-

148 Part 3: A New Way

ful activity that is task and goal-oriented; it seeks to accomplish some type of change in the community. The focus on systems interaction brings a systems perspective to community development. Engaging all of the relevant stakeholders in the project, forging partnerships with other service-provider organizations, securing a project sponsor, and linking with funders and planners are all a part of systems interaction. Community capacity building entails the recruitment and involvement of residents, developing relationships with community members, and operating in a highly participatory and democratic style (Kretzmann & McKnight, 1993). Powell and Nelson (1997) summarized the Jones and Silva (1991) model as follows: 'Problem-solving generates action; community building assures ownership of the action; systems interaction provides a broad base for the action' (p. 28). The rationale for adopting this framework is twofold. First, the issues identified by Jones and Silva (1991) provided a good fit for the data from a previous cross-site qualitative study of somewhat similar communitybased prevention projects in Ontario (Powell & Nelson, 1997). Second, the key features of the Better Beginnings initiative are a good fit with these components. A key problem-solving task in Better Beginnings is the development of a strong organizational base from which prevention programs can be planned and implemented - the focus of this chapter. Systems interactions encompasses the involvement of service providers and partnerships with other organizations, covered in Chapter 9, and community building refers to the promotion of resident participation, covered in Chapter 10. We now turn to the main issues in project organization and management. Vision, Values, and Philosophy In Chapter 4, we noted that vision and values play a key role in developing partnerships for prevention. The vision and values of an organization are also very important for alternative settings and innovative organizations. Alternative settings are organizations that are born out of a dissatisfaction with mainstream organizations. These grass-roots organizations often have a strong ideological character and are part of a social movement that strives to change the status quo (Reinharz, 1984; Riger, 1984; Rothschild-Whitt, 1976). Feminist movement organizations, ex-psychiatric patient self-help groups, and alternative schools are examples of alternative settings. Alternative settings place a high value on member participation and typically adopt a collectivist as opposed to a hierarchical structure.

Project Organization and Management 149

Recent developments in organizational theory, such as the concept of the 'learning organization/ have also underscored the key role that vision and values play in organization development and change (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1999). According to Senge et al., in learning organizations the mission statement of the organization is not relegated to some statement that is framed, posted on a wall, and forgotten about. Rather, the vision and values that are embodied in the mission statement become the lifeblood of the organization, guiding the day-to-day actions of organizational members (Racino, 1991). In fact, the main challenges for members of learning organizations are to develop a common purpose and shared vision and to confront contradictions between espoused values and the constraints posed by everyday problems. The degree to which the shared vision and values are implemented should result in an organizational culture and atmosphere that fosters participation, trust, respect, personal growth, and team development (Peter R Drucker Foundation for Nonprofit Management, 2001; Senge, 1990). In the case of the Highfield project, the vision and values were clearly articulated from the beginning of the project. The key values guiding the management of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project were (a) the central place of the child in the community, (b) prevention, (c) valuing, honouring, and including the perspectives of different stakeholders, (d) emphasizing resident power and empowerment, and (e) embracing ethnoracial and cultural diversity. These values are quite consistent with the values that have been described in the literature as important for value-based partnerships between professionals and researchers on the one hand, and low-income community residents on the other (Nelson, Prilleltenshy, & MacGillivary, 2001). Atmosphere and Management Style The vision and values of an organization need to be translated into an atmosphere and management style that promotes the implementation of the vision on a day-to-day basis. Living the values and 'walking the talk' is a major challenge of learning organizations. Maton and Salem (1995) have identified four qualities of empowering organizations that are congruent with the philosophy underlying learning organizations: (a) a belief system (i.e., values) that inspires growth, is strengths-oriented, and focuses on the organization; (b) a role structure that provides members with different ways of participating in and contributing to the organization; (c) peer support and a sense of community; and (d) leadership that is inspirational, talented, shared, and committed. Maton and

150 Part 3: A New Way

Salem argue that such qualities facilitate the self-determination, social support, and socio-political awareness of all the stakeholders in an organization (staff, consumers, partners). The metaphor for the role of the leader in alternative settings and learning organizations is one of stewardship. Leaders do not direct members of the organization; rather they strive to involve organizational members, share information, and provide opportunities for people to participate, contribute, grow, and learn (Berquist, 1993; Block, 1993; Handy, 1995; Kluger & Baker, 1994; Lincoln, 1985; Senge, 1990). This means that all stakeholders in the organization should have a say about what goes on within the organization (Bond & Keys, 1993; Handy, 1995; Toulmin & Gustavsen, 1996). According to Prilleltensky (2000), 'Leaders have four main roles in promoting value-based practice: (a) clarify values, (b) promote personal harmony among values, interests, and power, (c) enhance congruence of values, interests, and power among citizens, workers, and leaders, and (d) confront people and groups subverting values or abusing power to promote personal interests' (p. 139). Block (1993) argues that the degree to which power is shared within an organization is key to organizational change. Participatory management is a key feature of alternative settings (Reinharz, 1984; Riger, 1984; Rothschild-Whitt, 1976). In an alternative setting that served people with developmental disabilities, Bond and Keys (1993) found that power-sharing and collaboration were important organizational processes for creating change in this organization. Nelson, Lord, and Ochocka (2001) described how participatory management was one key component of creating organizational change in three community mental health organizations. In this section, we describe the atmosphere of the project and show how it changed during the transition from the demonstration phase to the period of ongoing funding. Demonstration Phase NON-BUREAUCRATIC APPROACH

First, while one person noted that 'there is a hierarchical structure, everybody has a supervisor/ project participants experienced the project as 'more flat, not hierarchical' (staff focus group interview, 1995): We don't have to go through a lot of bureaucratic levels. Things are pretty understandable, and only a few things need to go to higher levels, (staff focus group interview, 1995)

Project Organization and Management 151 It's sort of organized around power-sharing. That's sort of implied in the structural set-up, (key informant interview, 1995) The way it works is more like there is not somebody up here and somebody there, it's more like we are in the same level and we are working together, (staff focus group interview, 1996) FLEXIBLE ROLES

Within this flat organizational structure, the roles that people played in the project tended to be flexible: ... loose and flexible around some people in roles, no rigid boundary between project and community, (key informant interview, 1995) Sometimes you can't even put a line between staff and volunteers/community residents. We're all in there. You couldn't tell who the staff person and who the volunteer is. (staff focus group interview, 1995) If you looked at one of us and you saw somebody else on the street, you wouldn't be able to tell, okay this is somebody who's working in the project and this is a community member. It's not like I'm a family visitor and this is my client, it's like we're both at the same level... It doesn't give you that hierarchy, (focus group interview, 1996)

One staff person noted that because roles are fluid, it provided residents with choice as to how they wanted to participate in the project. They could participate as volunteers, as participants, or as paid individuals (either on a part-time or fee-for-service basis), without one role posing limitations on the opportunity to play other roles. Allowing for flexible roles within the project has also helped to build cooperative working relationships among diverse stakeholders. A representative from the school thought that the flat structure and flexible roles had helped to get rid of an 'us and them' mentality, 'which was obvious when I came (to the school)' (key informant interview, 1996). LEADERSHIP STYLE

Also, the leadership style of the project manager during the demonstration phase was a key component in the overall climate or style of the project. He strived to foster a culture of trust, support, openness, respect, and sharing. He also related to people using a great deal of humour and was very informal. Staff were given opportunities for pro-

152 Part 3: A New Way

fessional development, and team-building was encouraged through informal get-togethers. The project manager approached staff management, in his words, from 'trust, openness, responsibility, and autonomy/ rather than through 'control mechanisms/ This approach was echoed and appreciated by staff. [He] gives me all the rope that I need. He hired me, he trusts me. I don't have to wait for him to tell me how to do my job. I have the freedom to sort of do what I can or go back say 'I need help' or 'I don't understand.' We let him know what we're doing, (staff focus group interview, 1995) I must say, I give [the project manager] a lot of credit. He has created an environment where people can grow. Each individual in their own area has lots of room to grow and, you know, and he created this ... He's a project manager but he doesn't watch anyone. He leaves you alone with your ideas, you know, and abilities ... to do your thing, and there's room to make mistakes, but there's lots of room to grow. And he's a good sounding board, you know, (staff focus group interview, 1996)

Project staff also thought that the project manager modeled and encouraged clear communication: T think the communication lines are really open and that's what makes that work so well' (focus group interview, 1996). INFORMALITY AND 'FAMILY'

It was also noted that relationships and meetings tended to be informal. While there were written agendas for committee meetings, people were on a first-name basis and the meetings had a very informal tone. People laughed and shared personal experiences, so that many friendships were made. Feelings of warmth infused the project: The mood or tone (of the planning day) was very positive. People were laughing and smiling and seemed to be enjoying themselves. There were no signs of tension or anger like last year, (analytic comments, 1994) We love each other. There's lots of hugging and kissing, (parent focus group interview, 1995)

One person mentioned how this friendly atmosphere helped to make

Project Organization and Management 153

residents feel welcomed into the project. A representative from the school stated that open displays of affection and laughter had 'really infected the school ... and it's even passed off to the kids, which is amazing given the concerns about litigation for touching children' (key informant interview, 1996). A climate of enjoyment and recognition for work was also cultivated among the staff and the project as a whole. Food was a key ingredient in celebrations and gatherings hosted by the project. The food was prepared by parents and staff who come from different ethnocultural backgrounds, thus providing opportunities for cultural exchange and sharing. Since 1992, the project had a Fun and Recognition Committee (field notes, 1992), which planned an annual volunteer and staff recognition dinner and other recreational events, all of which added to the informal nature of the project and built esprit de corps. A representative from the school noted that 'putting scarce resources into the recognition dinner to make it happen sends a powerful message to project participants that they are valued' (key informant interview, 1996). After the Demonstration Phase

The demonstration phase of Better Beginnings was to come to an end in the fall of 1997, with no assurances of future funding. During the 1996-97 school year, project members engaged in planning for different scenarios, including having no funding or some funding. While programs continued as usual, there was an underlying anxiety about the potential end of the project. To the delight of everyone, however, the Premier of Ontario announced permanent funding for the eight Better Beginnings projects in 1997. Since that time, the project worked to become independent of the current sponsor organization, the public school board. To plan for independence and amalgamation, the project embarked on a major organizational review process, which addressed issues related to establishing secure job positions, positioning the project to deal with structural changes occurring in Metropolitan Toronto (e.g., the merger of all boroughs of Toronto into one mega-city, and the merger of the school boards of the different boroughs), project independence, and setting priorities (Highfield Community Enrichment Project: Six Month Progress Report, 1 April 1997 to 30 Sept. 1997). A broad-based consultation process was initiated which included more than 10 meetings. During these meetings, participants provided input into how programs

154 Part 3: A New Way

should be restructured. The project's Executive Team met over the summer of 1997 to review all of this input and to make final decisions about changes in programs, staffing, and job roles. Decisions about changes were communicated to staff and others early in September 1997, and staff were hired for only four-month contracts because of what the Executive Team thought would be impending separation from the Etobicoke Board of Education and amalgamation with a different community agency. Also, the Executive Team never met with staff to explain why changes in staffing and job descriptions were being made. Thus, there was limited communication between the Executive Team and direct service staff during this time period. All of these changes were associated with major negative changes in the project's atmosphere. STRESS, STRAIN, AND LOSS OF TRUST

In contrast to the project's atmosphere during the demonstration phase, this period of time was quite tense and stressful. Project participants described feelings of distrust and tension between staff and management. In particular, there was a loss of trust, the development of tension, a lack of group cohesiveness and fun, and poor communication. This was felt most strongly by direct-service staff, who perceived a rift between themselves and management, which included the project manager, the Executive Team, and, to some extent, the program coordinators. I think for about two weeks following that [staff] meeting it was really tense and nobody was talking. People came in, did what they had to do, and just left. The tension was running really high. Then after that there was another meeting ... It wasn't as tense but people still felt like it could never be the same again, (key informant interview, 1998) The climate has changed and with that, trust, support and respect is no longer there the way that it used to be. (staff focus group interview, 1998) HIERARCHICAL DECISION-MAKING

Some believed that the project's 'deflated' and 'weighty' mood stemmed from perceptions that decision-making ignored the input of project members (key informant interview, 1998). Rather than the 'flat' decisionmaking process characteristic of past project management, some participants described a hierarchical decision-making process: 'It started being seen as ... two-tiered ... there were decisions ... being made on one

Project Organization and Management 155

level... a lot of people didn't have an equal voice in those decisions' (program coordinator focus group interview, 1998). Since there were more decisions made by the Executive Team, especially with regard to staff positions, the decision making was more hierarchical. However, the Executive Team reviewed a great deal of input from different stakeholders in coming to its decisions. On the other hand, some of the managers believed that the two-tiered decision making was related to external constraints that the project was facing: 'A lot of it [hierarchical decision making] was perception, because I don't think the people in that other layer [project management] had as much choice or option about what was happening either, because those decisions were once again being made by people who didn't know the project and didn't understand its dynamic, so it sort of stretched the structure up instead of being flat' (program coordinator focus group interview, 1998). HEALING AND MOVING FORWARD

While the process of project review following the announcement of permanent funding led to problems in the atmosphere of the project, this crisis was eventually resolved through discussions between staff, the project manager, and the Executive Team. As one staff member said, 'I feel that things are more back to the way they were before, and like I am okay with the way things are now. I am fine' (staff focus group, 1998). One concrete change reported by staff was that more information and better communication about changes were provided: [There is now] more explanation of why things are being done and why they need to be done, (staff focus group, 1998) There is a reality of a better line of communication and interaction going on. The atmosphere is more fun. And we're getting our work done. But, you know, that pleasant feeling, you know, the high spirit, it's back. I think both management and staff have tried to make that work, or have made changes to bring about that kind of atmosphere again. You know, so we're kind of back and doing our little parties and things, fun stuff. I like that, (staff focus group, 1998) Summary: Atmosphere and Management Style

In brief, the non-bureaucratic structure of the project, flexible definition of roles, the empowering leadership style of the project manager, and informality were instrumental in creating an atmosphere of coop-

156 Part 3: A New Way

eration, informality, and fun in the project. People also noted that this structure and atmosphere helped the project act quickly on ideas for change that were generated by community residents, thus promoting innovation. The vision and values orientation of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project are consistent with the ethos of alternative settings (Reinharz, 1984; Riger, 1984), recent developments in the management and organizational studies literature regarding 'learning organizations' (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1999), and the qualities of empowering organizations (Maton & Salem, 1995). The long-term time perspective of the research also enabled us to see how these positive organizational qualities can be upset. The transition from a demonstration project to a project with ongoing funding, and the organizational renewal process that accompanied that transition, created a great deal of stress within the project that was manifested as a lack of harmony among values, interests, and power among leaders, workers, and residents participating within the organization (Prilleltensky, 2000). While the project was able to overcome this difficult period and restore harmony, we learned that such transition periods may be particularly difficult for the organization and management of prevention programs. Administrative Structures The literature on alternative settings (Reinharz, 1984; Riger, 1984) and recent thinking about organization development (Berquist, 1993; Block, 1993; Handy, 1995; Kluger & Baker, 1994; Maton & Salem, 1995; Senge, 1990; Toulmin & Gustavsen, 1996) have underscored the importance of creating vehicles to maximize member participation in organizational management. As noted in the previous section, learning organizations strive to implement a 'bottom up' approach to management, in which all members of an organization, not just senior management, chart the direction of the organization (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1999). Consistent with this approach, the administrative structures of the Highfield project were organized to provide many different opportunities for front-line staff, service providers, and community residents to participate and have a voice in the management of the project. In this section, we briefly describe the main administrative structures and processes of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project: (a) the Executive Team (ET), (b) sub-committees, (c) Leadership Team and staff meetings, (d) annual planning days, and (e) hiring teams.

Project Organization and Management 157 The Executive Team

The ET, formerly the Steering Committee, was and continues to be the management board of the project. As such, it has been responsible for overseeing the project as a whole and for giving direction to the project manager. During the demonstration phase of the project, the ET included four parents, one of whom was the chair; the principal of Highfield Junior School; and two community service providers. All of these people were voting members of the ET. The project manager and administrative assistant also attended ET meetings, as did one or more members of the Research Team, who attended to take field notes for the research. Meetings were held once a month, with the exception of July and August. Project Sub-committees

The project had a number of sub-committees: In-school, Community Development, Family Support, Letter of Agreement, Personnel, Research, and Fun and Recognition. It is within these sub-committees that much of the planning and decision-making for project activities occurred. Moreover, the sub-committees had considerable autonomy to make decisions. In a focus group interview (1995), project participants noted that most of the decisions, including budget allocation decisions, were made at the committee level, with major decisions or changes being referred to the ET for approval. Staff Meetings and Leadership Team Meetings

There are meetings of the entire staff approximately once per month. These meetings have provided an opportunity for input into project development and management. Since 1994, the program coordinators, the administrative assistant, and the project manager formed a Leadership Team which met roughly once a month. Planning Days

Since 1992, the project has hosted an annual planning day. The planning days were held off the project site, and they provided an opportunity for all stakeholders to look at what had been accomplished in the previous year and to develop a strategic plan for the upcoming year. These

158 Part 3: A New Way

retreats typically involved the staff coordinators reviewing their respective program objectives and activities and reporting on related work and future directions. As well, wider project issues were discussed and team-building exercises conducted. Ideas generated on planning days were followed up by the various sub-committees. Finally, the planning days were used to examine and modify the organizational structure of the project. A school representative noted the importance of the planning days: The planning days are very effective. Teachers who participated in the planning day this year came back very excited. They asked "why can't we as a school do that?" People value them (the planning days)' (key informant interview, 1996). Hiring Teams

When new staff were to be hired, service providers, teachers, and parents were invited to participate in the hiring process. Hiring teams reviewed resumes, selected candidates for interviews, conducted interviews, and decided who should be hired. Residents and other project participants reported feeling very privileged to be a part of hiring teams (parent, key informant interview, 1996). Decision Making The literature on alternative settings (Reinharz, 1984; Riger, 1984; Rothschild-Whitt, 1976) and learning organizations (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1999) strongly emphasizes a consensus approach to decision making. Moreover, alternative settings and learning organizations adopt a collectivist, grass-roots, power-sharing approach to management, as opposed to the hierarchical, 'chain of command' type of approach that is found in large, bureaucratic organizations (e.g., Nelson, Lord, & Ochocka, 2001). The decision-making style of the Highfield project was the consensus model that is characteristic of alternative settings and learning organizations. How Decisions Are Made

Most program planning and decision making was done by the subcommittees, which had a fair amount of independence. However, any major decisions that arose at the sub-committee level had to be brought forward and approved at the ET. In principle, it seems, deci-

Project Organization and Management 159

sions were to be made by consensus in the ET, as well as in the subcommittees. Moreover, in most cases, reaching consensus about decisions at ET and sub-committee meetings was not difficult. Although the 'how' of decision-making did not changed much over the years, the 'who' of decision making did evolve. In the early years, the decisions were made almost entirely by the service providers involved with the project, whereas in later years, decisions were made more by the parents and the staff. This occurred with the restructuring of the Steering Committee into the ET and the formation of sub-committees, most of which had more resident members than service providers. Once the three main program components were developed and implemented, the project was primarily in a steady state of fine-tuning those program components for the remainder of the demonstration period. Thus, there were not a lot of major decisions to make. However, after the demonstration had ended, the number of major changes that were made increased. This resulted partly from the decision to amalgamate with another community agency: We had to make decisions around staffing and what we wanted to do. I think that was also a change, and probably quite difficult for people to work with. People would have a certain degree of input but not the final decision; that would go to the Executive Team. And I think even some members of the Executive Team found that very difficult to have to make decisions on staffing and who should be involved, and salaries and those sorts of things. So if I got to highlight it, what are our limitations in order to make those sort of decisions. That's what I would say would have been a significant change there, those sort of events, and that would have caused us to have to deal with issues we haven't dealt with before, (project manager interview, 1998) Managing Conflicts of Interest

The project has had a conflict of interest policy since 1995. This policy became necessary because of the blurred lines between project staff and volunteers. In several cases, residents who were members of the ET or who played other volunteer roles within the project applied for paid positions within the organization. It was decided that staff could not participate as community members on the ET as well. Conflict of interest situations were very stressful for project members, both for those who were directly involved in the conflict and for

160 Part 3: A New Way

others. Two examples demonstrate the stress of conflict of interest situations. The first: the project manager and the in-school coordinator announced their decision to marry, which staff members said created a certain awkwardness in the group's relationships. While alternative supervision arrangements were made (the project manager would not make any recommendations about the in-school coordinator position), eventually (in 1998) this couple decided it would be best for everyone if the in-school coordinator resigned from her position. This was a very difficult and emotional decision. A second situation arose when a parent volunteer and member of the ET initially applied for a project position and was not chosen. This person raised concerns about this issue during an ET meeting. Again, this was a very difficult and emotional situation for the individual, for staff, and for ET members. The dual role of the person as a job applicant and an ET member created a conflict of interest. Eventually, this issue was resolved in two ways. First, a more clear policy for hiring community residents was established, and, second, the person was successful in a subsequent application for a position with the project. Summary: Decision Making

Like other non-bureaucratic collectives, the Highfield Community Enrichment Project utilized a decentralized, consensus style of decision making, which was used to maximize the voices of community residents in the management of the project. While the informal, grassroots nature of the project was an important component of power sharing and decision making, this same structure did blur role boundaries within the project. This boundary blurring (Curtis & Hodge, 1994) can and did lead to interpersonal and ethical dilemmas in the life of the project. While establishing a conflict of interest policy was helpful in resolving these issues, these conflicts were experienced as very painful both by the parties involved and by other project members (staff and volunteers). Staffing and Supervision In alternative settings, there is often an emphasis on hiring staff who share the vision and values of the project and who bring 'insider' experiential knowledge to the position, rather than formal professional credentials (Reinharz, 1984). Moreover, there is a strong emphasis on staff

Project Organization and Management 161

empowerment and participation in organizational decision-making. Foster-Fishman and Keys (1997) have argued that there are two preconditions of staff empowerment: (a) power and control and (b) inclusion and trust. Furthermore, they have asserted that these two factors exist at both the individual and organizational levels of analysis. Thus, power and control includes both the willingness of an organization to expand the power structure (organizational level) and the desire of employees for greater control (individual level). Similarly, inclusion and trust involves both effective communication and meaningful opportunities for staff to participate in decision making (organizational level), and employees' trust in the leaders and belief in the possibility of empowerment (individual level). In a study of organizations serving people with disabilities, FosterFishman and Keys (1997) found that 'when power differences were modest - as in some cases at the local level between a site supervisor and staff members - and a participatory organizational culture existed, then employee empowerment was possible' (p. 364). In another study, Spreitzer (1995) found that organizational culture was related to innovation on the part of employees, and that employee empowerment mediated the relationship between organizational structure and innovation. These findings are consistent with the observation of Sarason (1996), noted in Chapter 6, that 'changing power relationships is a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for establishing contexts of productive learning for students and teacher, not only students. Teachers cannot create and sustain contexts of productive learning for students if those contexts do not exist for teachers' (pp. 253-254). That is, an organizational culture of power-sharing and support is important for staff empowerment and innovation. We now turn to an examination of the staffing at the Highfield project and whether or not staff experienced empowerment and personal growth. Staff and Management Positions There were and continue to be three program coordinators (Family Support, In-school, Community Development) and a project office coordinator, who, along with the project manager, constitute the Leadership Team. The front-line staff include a nutrition programmer, an assistant community development worker, a toy librarian, and four Before and After School staff. After the demonstration period ended, the home visitor and educational assistant positions were rolled

162 Part 3: A New Way

together into child and family enrichment worker positions. In addition, individual residents were hired on a fee-for-service basis to provide specific services, such as child care, translation, interpreting, cooking, language enrichment in the classroom, and instruction in activities such as aerobics and dance. Hiring and Firing

Once a need for a certain position was identified for the project, a job description was developed by the Personnel Committee in consultation with other individuals involved with the project. For each position advertised, a selection committee was struck, consisting of at least one staff person, one resident parent, and one service provider (usually from the ET). In general, the impression of staff, project managers, and ET members was that the hiring process had worked very well: The first challenge has been finding the right person, and I would say that basically we've had really good luck with that ... good experience' (program coordinators' focus group interview, 1995). And, one of the important considerations in hiring, especially for the management positions, was finding individuals who shared the vision and values of the project: 'So much depends on getting the right staff person in place ... that's really important, finding the person who can share the vision ... and then make things happen, which helps to give a sense of accomplishment and then brings other people along. My sense is that the process has been pretty good' (program coordinators' focus group interview, 1995). Turnover of staff at Highfield was relatively low during the demonstration period. Only three staff persons did not have their contract renewed for reasons relating to job performance. The Impact of Employing Community Residents

While there was no documented policy about hiring community residents, there was an implicit understanding that whenever a qualified community resident was available for one of the positions in the project, he or she would receive preferential consideration: The original vision was to have the community have this 51 per cent ownership ... and that is [happening] in the staff [as well] ... It creates that circle [between the project and the community] and it could not have been

Project Organization and Management 163 done any other way ... if there weren't people from the community who were part of the staff, (staff focus group interview, 1996)

Of particular concern in employing community residents was the desire to have people on staff who would mirror the cultural and ethnic mix within the community, and who would be able to speak to community members in their own language: What we try to do is to hire people that reflect the community. So for example the family visitors, there was a West Indian, someone from the Black community, the South Asian community, and there's someone from the Spanish community ... so we have a number of different people from different backgrounds working within the project and that was what we set out to do. (staff focus group interview, 1995)

The hiring of community residents was seen as particularly important in order to have a staff that could relate to community members on an equal basis. This helped break down perceived differences in status between project staff and community members, and aided in the empowerment of the community members with whom the staff people worked. It also provided a staff that had a good understanding of what community residents were going through, because they had been through many of the same experiences themselves. The diversity of the staff is a very [important] part of [the project] because if ... all of us were white, and our community isn't, no one was gonna come and relate to you. And ... if somebody that I'm working with sees me in a position like this, [the person thinks] if she can do it then maybe I can do it. And I think that ... it's a very big thing to empower somebody by just having your presence there, and I think ... this community is represented by everybody in our staff ... and management-wise, I think management and our executive understand the diversity' (staff focus group interview, 1996)

While the project manager and Coordinators came from outside the community, the majority of front-line staff came from within the community (either the Highfield school district or the surrounding community), and represented a wide range of ethnic and linguistic groupings. Ethnic groups that were represented among the staff included Caribbean, Indo-Caribbean, South Asian, South American,

164 Part 3: A New Way and Afro-American. Languages spoken by the staff included Spanish, French, Hindi, Punjabi, and a wide range of other languages. The Experience of Being a Staff Person Overall, staff expressed very positive feelings about their involvement with the project. Many of the staff indicated that being a member of Better Beginnings had promoted deep personal growth. It has been very profound for me. It's helped me find myself. I got sort of lost in my family and it was nice to come out of that and find who I was again, and to be able to create with that, and this project has been instrumental in my accomplishing what I've been able to accomplish ... the support from the community and from the teachers, it's been tremendous. I've got on the board of directors for my day care and I've been able to impact the community and make other changes all over. It's been phenomenal for me. (staff focus group interview, 1996) I've learned, I've grown. This was the best thing I ever did. The project has moulded me ... I would say that I had good instincts, abilities, but the project just went deep and then just yanked them out to the surface. I've totally gotten an education on this job ... I would bypass college to work here any day ... Never in a million years would I be where I am today had I not been involved with the project... It has been an enormous wealth of information for me. I just know that I'll always be grateful for all the things I've learned, and ... it has brought me to a point where I know I can go anywhere, in any community and actually do lots of stuff ... It's just been a lifesaver/ (staff focus group interview, 1996) Empowering and freeing. Those are the two words I think of when I think of my experience here, (staff focus group interview, 1996) Much of this growth appears to have come from staff's sense of the importance of the work they are doing, and their identification with the goals and values of the project: 'It's like a chain - each one of us has been affected, we affect our families, we affect the community, the community affects their families, and it goes on and on and on and on. It's not only the people that are in direct contact with the project that are affected; it's much more than that' (staff focus group interview, 1996).

Project Organization and Management 165 The Experience of Being a Manager The open and autonomous nature of the Better Beginnings project presented some unique challenges to those in a management or coordinating position. The 'flat' or 'round table' type of organization at Highfield meant that anyone in the organization was free to seek support, advice, assistance, and action from the project's managers. At the same time, the Leadership Team was responsible for ensuring that tasks were completed, and that the project's programs met reasonable standards of quality: It's sort of filled with expectation to be sort of all things for all people ... so it can get a little bit crazy, especially if you're sensitive to what's going on with people, but also aware that you might not be able to get there. So you can get... caught with sort of a gap between what people want and what they're able to do. I think there's that constant frustration ... it's neverending, (project manager interview, 1995)

The project management positions were highly demanding. The coordinator's workload was especially so when the project was seeking its first contract with the government. In addition to the volume of work required, the nature of the work is such that it is not easy to get away from, either physically or emotionally: It tends to be too much work ... and too stressful, but for me I kind of thrive on the exhilaration so the stress goes hand in hand with that, (project manager interview, 1995) This becomes your life ... you really get drawn into it... It's hard to separate from it.' (program coordinators' focus group interview, 1995)

Supervision The supervisory relationship at Highfield was based upon mutuality, trust, respect, openness, and a frank and honest expression of ideas and opinions. In the supervision process, the supervisee was provided with a job description, and was given the opportunity to participate in refining the job description through priority-setting and clarifying job expectations. Goals were set for the supervisee, and these formed the basis for ongoing and regular constructive feedback. In addition, each

166 Part 3: A New Way

project employee received an annual performance appraisal related to her/his goals and job description. Both the supervisee and supervisor had responsibilities in the supervision process. The supervisee was responsible for identifying her/his strengths and areas in need of improvement, being open to feedback and suggestions, and being prepared for supervision sessions. The supervisor was responsible for being available for regular supervision sessions, providing timely and constructive feedback, providing guidance and emotional support, and preparing fair summary appraisals on time. In terms of actual practice, the model for the supervisory style used in the project was one of 'openness and responsibility and autonomy' (staff focus group interview, 1995). Staff were given the freedom and trust to develop their own jobs and to act responsibly in the best interests of the project. At the same time, if staff experienced difficulty, they were encouraged to seek the support of their supervisors or other project managers:' [supervisor] gives me all the rope that I need... he trusts me ... I don't have to wait for to tell me how to do my job ... [I have the] freedom to sort of do what I can or go back and say I need some help or I don't understand' (staff focus group interview, 1995). The project also had a policy regarding annual performance appraisal. According to this policy, employee job performance was to be evaluated in relation to the job description and to the goals which were set collaboratively by the supervisor and supervisee. Performance was evaluated by the employee, her/his supervisor, and key stakeholders. The stakeholders involved always included both resident parents and service providers involved with the project. The end result of the appraisal was a summary, written by the supervisor, which contained a recommendation regarding the employee's work status (e.g., successful completion of probation, renewal of contract). Summary: Staffing and Supervision

As has been reported in previous research (Foster-Fishman & Keys, 1997; Spreitzer, 1995), the organizational culture of the Highfield project, which emphasized power-sharing and social support, was related to the empowerment of staff members. Staff members described their experiences working in the project as growth-promoting. FosterFishman and Keys (1997) found that many of the organizations they studied did not create the conditions of power-sharing and inclusion that are necessary for employee empowerment. One factor that impeded the creation of these conditions was poor leadership (i.e., inef-

Project Organization and Management 167

fective, authoritarian, punitive). In the case of the Highfield project, staff spoke very positively about the leadership provided by the project manager, and its role in fostering their personal growth and empowerment. Another noted benefit was the fact that community residents representing diverse ethno-racial backgrounds were hired as staff. These individuals served as role models for other community members, and helped to break down the cultural and language barriers between the project and the community. The similarity in background to community members enabled staff to connect easily with the community and enhanced the credibility and approachability of the staff and the project. Relations with the Sponsor Agency, and Project Independence One aspect of prevention project management and organization about which very little has been written is the nature of the relationship that prevention projects have with sponsor agencies. This could be because many demonstration projects in prevention have been operated and managed by the researchers who evaluate these programs. Sponsor agencies are those that provide an organizational base of support for the prevention project. They are the 'flow through' organization for funding; they provide the organizational infrastructure for staffing and project management; and they often set various parameters for the way projects work. The sponsor agency for the Highfield project was the Etobicoke Board of Education, a logical choice for the project since it took place on the grounds of one of the schools operated by that school board. However, unlike the Highfield project, which is small and grassroots, the sponsor agency was a large, bureaucratic organization. As we will see, this posed a number of issues for the project. Relations with the Sponsor Agency In the planning years of the project (1991 and 1992), considerable time and energy was spent trying to negotiate a formal contract, or a letter of agreement (LOA), as it was called, between the project and the Etobicoke Board of Education. This was a long, drawn out, frustrating process that never did result in a formal LOA that was signed and ratified by the project and the board of education. In the end, one project participant questioned whether the energy the project expended on this process was necessary. Having to follow board regulations did pose some issues for the project in terms of finances, hiring, and personnel:

168 Part 3: A New Way One of the dilemmas we have without a LOA with the board of education is that we have to use their salary rates ... Hiring a community person at $16 rather than $12 ... will affect all our attempts to hire a community person, (field notes, 1992) A lot of the board's policies and procedures affect us ... It filters down to us ... invoices, and so on ... have to play by their rules ... length of contracts, salaries, all how the board wants to do things ... Right now we have to do everything the way the board person wants it... had to change feefor-service arrangements ... things have changed since a new person on board ... and she's changed the way we do things and it takes an incredible amount of time, (service providers' focus group interview, 1995)

Having the school board as a sponsor also posed some dilemmas for the project with respect to advocacy. For instance, an advocacy organization invited the project to formally join as a member organization. School representatives on the project expressed some reservations about joining this organization because they were board employees and thus were in a conflict of interest position (field notes, 1993): '[I feel] a little funny about the formal relationship with the [advocacy organization]. Like it's going against one of our partners ... have a little trouble with it ... How would it be if it was turned around, the board questioned the project? ... I find it a little bit of an adversarial stance ... If it comes across as an advocate then I don't have a problem with it (field notes, 1993). This issue of advocacy continued to be an issue for school personnel. For example, when a member of the ET proposed advocating with the school board concerning charges of user fees for community groups using space in community centres, a representative from the school stated that she was constrained in what she could do because of the limits the school board placed on her. Similar concerns were raised by school staff about the appropriateness of the project conducting an educational session about a political election, even though the project did not advocate for particular parties or candidates (analytic comments, 1994). One key informant noted that a board of education cannot support a political activity, and that teachers 'have a sense of being watched by the community' (interview, 1996). Project Independence

With the difficulties that the project experienced in negotiating a LOA with the board of education, the project considered seeking alternate

Project Organization and Management 169

sponsors. '[The project manager] reports that he's explored alternatives and has talked to and/or examined possibilities from a number of agencies. He concluded that (a) there is, as of yet, no clear alternative model; (b) incorporation is not felt to be acceptable to the ministry due to our level of development, and it is felt to be a year down the road; and (c) establishing another host agency is a suggestion from our ministry rep/ (analytic comments, 1992). While the project eventually amalgamated with another agency after the demonstration period, this process took several years and involved consideration of several possible new sponsor organizations. This process also took much energy on the part of the project, and staff were uncertain and anxious about whether a new sponsor would provide the same benefits as the board of education. Summary: Relations with the Sponsor Agency, and Project Independence

The Highfield project was unsuccessful in negotiating a LOA with the Etobicoke school board. Board officials did not seem to be able to provide the project with the autonomy and type of support it desired. Moreover, the rules and regulations of the school board, particularly with regard to staffing and advocacy issues, posed a number of problems for the project. After the end of the demonstration phase, the project was eventually successful in securing a relationship with another sponsor agency that it believed would be more compatible with the vision and values of the project. Summary In this chapter we have described (a) the vision and values of the project, (b) administrative structures, (c) decision making, (d) staffing and supervision, and (e) relationships with the sponsor organization, and project independence. We have provided an in-depth examination of the many issues the project faced with regard to these different aspects of project management and organization. One key theme that emerges from this research is that the overall vision and values of the project provided an ongoing framework and language for the development of future prevention programs and for working through conflicts and difficult decisions. As noted earlier, alternative settings (e.g., Reinharz, 1984) and learning organizations (Senge, 1990; Senge et al., 1999) emphasize the importance of vision and values in creating organizational change and innovation. From its inception, the Highfield project had a clear vision, values, and mission

170 Part 3: A New Way

that was shared by the various stakeholders who participated. The vision and values were in fact the glue that held the different facets of the Highfield project together. A second important theme is that a highly participatory approach to management is a way of making the vision and values a reality (Handy, 1995; Lincoln, 1985; Senge, 1990). This style of management requires strong, value-based leadership (Prilleltensky, 2000), as well as a number of administrative structures that promote high levels of participation from a diverse array of stakeholders (e.g., community members, teachers and school staff, project staff, service-provider partners). Moreover, the program committees at the Highfield project were given considerable autonomy in selecting what prevention programs to offer and in shaping the direction of each. This participatory management style consisted of both power-sharing regarding decision-making and an inclusive approach in which everyone could participate (Bond & Keys, 1993; Foster-Fishman & Keys, 1997). Third, the synergy of this power-sharing and inclusive approach to management resulted in a positive organizational culture, climate, and atmosphere (Bond & Keys, 1993). Staff and residents experienced the project as empowering and supportive. The culture of the Highfield project incorporated the core elements in empowering organizations that have been identified by Maton and Salem (1995): (a) values that inspire growth and are strengths-oriented, (b) a flexible role structure that provides multiple mechanisms for member participation and contribution, (c) a supportive climate, and (d) leadership that is supportive and empowering of member participation and growth. Members described the project as a 'family'. Finally, it is important to note that like many organizations, the Highfield project did experience stress and conflict, particularly during its transition from the demonstration phase to its new role as an organization with ongoing funding. However, in spite of the difficulties experienced during this transition, a strong value base, a participatory management style, and a positive atmosphere provided a solid foundation that enabled the project to weather this transition and regain its organizational equilibrium. All in all, the Highfield project created a strong organizational basis for problem solving and the creation of innovative prevention programs.

9

Partnerships with Service Providers

The Highfield Community Enrichment Project was designed to provide high-quality prevention programming for children and families in a disadvantaged urban community, as well as to foster community involvement and development. The project's mandate also required 'service integration' with other organizations serving the area. The mandate for service integration was due to a growing political interest in the potential advantages of greater collaboration and integration between health, social service, and educational organizations. The intention of the Better Beginnings integrated model was that 'within a given community, services to children and families must blend and unite' (Ministry of Community and Social Services, 1990). Policy-makers wished to create a 'seamless' day for a child and his/her family. Early on, when a call for proposals for the Better Beginnings, Better Futures project was announced, the principal of Highfield Junior School approached a manager at the Etobicoke branch of the Children's Aid Society about possibly working together on this proposal. Their initial collaboration grew to include other partners (as discussed in Chapter 3), a proposal was submitted, and funding for the project achieved. That first triumph (among many) was the result of the good relationships that developed among the service providers involved - relationships that would continue for years to come. In this chapter we tell the story of how these service providers worked together, developed successful working relationships, and managed to plan, develop, and implement the Highfield Community Enrichment Project.

172 Part 3: A New Way

Understanding Service Integration: What the Literature Tells Us Approaches to Service Integration

Service integration is the systems interaction component of the Jones and Silva (1991) model introduced in the previous chapter. In order for a community-based program to meet its goals, it must link with other systems and create partnerships with other service provider organizations. According to the terms of reference established for Better Beginnings by the government, the projects were expected not just to link with other organizations but integrate their services with such organizations. But what does 'service integration' mean? Unfortunately, the literature regarding its nature is quite muddy. There is lack of agreement about the content of service integration, and the best ways to implement it. The most common understanding in the literature is that there are at least three different approaches to the process of integrating services: (a) voluntary integration (agencies voluntarily collaborate), (b) mediated integration (one organization takes responsibility for mediating collaboration or integration), and (c) directed integration (one agency has a mandate to direct the process) (Aiken, Dewar, DiTomaso, Hage, & Zeitz, 1975; Cans & Horton, 1975; Hastings, Roberts, Jodin, & Hung, n.d.). Although there is disagreement in the literature with respect to terminology, there is some agreement that service integration or collaboration is best conceived of as a continuum or hierarchy, from less to more service integration or collaboration. That is, as agencies or organizations move from cooperation to coordination to collaboration or integration, the inter-organizational relationships become more complex (Kagan, 1991). At one end of the continuum (i.e., cooperation), agencies or organizations may exchange information but remain completely autonomous. At the other end of the continuum (i.e., integration or collaboration) inter-organizational relationships become much more complex and interconnected - agencies and organizations lose some autonomy. Full integration, in this framework, involves previously autonomous organizations merging into a new structure (Adelman, 1993; Bruner, 1991; Deber, Rondeau, & Beatty,1990; Ellison & Barbour, 1992; Kagan, 1991; Melaville & Blank, 1991). Figure 9.1 illustrates the types of service collaboration/integration, as well as the approaches that have been used. Understanding these concepts will help the reader understand the nature of the collaboration effort that occurred at Highfield.

Partnerships with Service Providers 173 Figure 9.1 Types and Approaches to Service Collaboration/Integration TYPES Cooperation

Coordination

A set of organizations exchange information and discuss problems, activities, or programs that are of common interest. • Each organization acts autonomously in respending to the common interest either by creating its own independent initiative or by making a contribution under its own auspices to a larger initiative.

Organizations work together to solve a problem or to create a program. May involve setting common goals, the sharing of staff and other resources, and participation on joint structures to plan and monitor common activities. Each participating agency maintains control abut how it will participate.

Collaboration/integration The consolidation or merger over time of all or part of formally separate service units. Typically this would involve the creation of new authority structures, the pooling of staff and other resources, and the establishment of common goals and working methods,

Continuum from less to more integration

APPROACHES Voluntary integration A set of organizations are connected loosely and on a voluntary basis. There is no independent structure to provide coordination; each agency maintains its own autonomy.

Mediated integration

Dir ected integration

A set of organizations are linked through the efforts of one organization, which takes primary responsibility for guiding integration but may also provide direct services. Each organization is involved on a voluntary basis.

One organization has a mandate to direct the integration of a set of organizations, and has the authority to impose decisions on participating organizations.

Service Integration: Rationale The most common argument for increased service integration is the perception that existing service networks are excessively fragmented, and as a result lack the capability of responding in the flexible, coordinated,

174 Part 3: A New Way

or comprehensive ways that people need (Adelman, 1993; Cans & Horton, 1975; Koppich & Kirst, 1993; Martin, Chackerian, Imershein, & Frumkin, 1983; Maxwell, 1990; O'Looney, 1994,1997; Wharf, 1995). Several authors highlight a range of difficulties that arise from this fragmentation of services, including inefficient use of resources, duplication of services, needlessly complex networks of bureaucracies, a lack of accessibility, limited service flexibility and responsiveness to people's needs, and an inability to coordinate efforts and provide appropriate service packages to people (Adelman, 1993; Martin et al., 1983; Maxwell, 1990). For example, if one family has preschool-aged children, as well as school-aged children, they may be required to contact different organizations to have their needs met. Many organizations that provide services to families with children aged six and under, do not have similar services for families with children older than six. Briar-Lawson, Lawson, Collier, and Joseph (1997) argued that collaboration among organizations serving children, families, and communities is necessary because 'if the dire needs of children, youths, families, neighbourhoods, and communities are interdependent, then the helping professions and their work and other relevant organizations must become more interdependent' (p. 136). The claims made about the expected benefits of service integration are ambitious. In general, it is claimed that integration will lead to less waste, better access, more responsiveness, greater fairness and consistency, and more helpful programs (Beatrice, 1990; Taylor, Brooks, Phanindis, & Rossmo, 1991). However, a number of authors decry the lack of evidence to support such claims (Frumkin, Imershein, Chackerian, & Martin, 1983; Pandiani & Maynard, 1993; Rotherum-Borus, 1997; J.A. Weiss, 1981). Resident Participation in Service Integration Efforts

In Better Beginnings, Better Futures, an emphasis is placed on empowering community residents, including their active involvement in collaborating with project staff and service providers to create and oversee the prevention programs. However, it appears that most of the literature focuses on making changes to service organizations in collaboration initiatives, with little mention of community or service-user participation. Nonetheless, there have been some discussions of involving service users and community participants in service collaboration/ integration endeavours. For example, Melaville and Blank (1991) suggested that

Partnerships with Service Providers 175

'participants should include not only those with the power to negotiate change, but also representatives of the children and families whose lives will be affected by the results' (p. 37). Adams and Nelson (1997) went one step further and argue that discussions of service integration should start with the community rather than the service network. They contended that formal human and social service professionals are only one element of a caring community, which also includes families, neighbourhood networks, informal groups, and so on, and that consumers of service and other residents should be full partners in the process of change to human service systems. Cans and Horton (1975) reported that there was some degree of participation by service users in more than 60 per cent of the 32 integration projects they evaluated. Although there was a wide variety in the types of roles played by service users, they found that the involvement of service users had observable influences on the integration projects, and in many cases had 'achieved positive, creative solutions to service delivery problems' (p. 58). MacAllan and Narayan (1994) found that community participation and ownership was the most important factor in the success of their project. Armstrong (1997) described the process of changing existing human service systems so that services were neighbourhood-based, family-centred, comprehensive, and involved in inter-agency collaboration. Armstrong argued that the collaboration was successful; that is, that it 'led to shared planning, shared operations, and mutually supportive communication' (p. 125), because it was neighbourhood-based and family-centred. Obstacles and Barriers to Service Integration

In implementing service integration or collaboration efforts, many authors have written about the sometimes daunting challenges and obstacles to overcome. From our review, it is possible to identify six groups of obstacles to service integration: Lack of a clear vision, goals, or clear definitions about integration, and/or lack of leadership and guidance from government funders (Aiken et al, 1975; Bruner, 1991; Koppich & Kirst, 1993; O'Looney, 1994,1997; J.A. Weiss, 1981); The resistance of existing organizational, administrative, financial, and legislative structures (Beatrice, 1990; Bruner, 1991; Deber et al., 1990; Hagebak, 1979; Koppich & Kirst, 1993; J.A. Weiss, 1981);

176 Part 3: A New Way

Difficulties in building relationships and developing trust, and conflicts in values (Beatrice, 1990; Bloomberg, 1995; Hagebak, 1979; O'Looney, 1997; Vander-Schie, Wagenfield, & Worgess, 1987); The amount of time and effort integration processes take, the need to develop an appropriate process, and the need for those involved to see the benefits of the integration/collaboration effort (Bloomberg, 1995; Bruner, 1991; O'Looney, 1997); Conflicts based on professional specialization (Aiken et al., 1975; Bruner, 1991; Koppich & Kirst, 1993; O'Looney, 1997; J.A. Weiss, 1981); and Issues around control and roles (Byles, 1985; Karp, 1990; Koppich & Kirst, 1993; J.A. Weiss, 1981). Facilitating Factors in Service Integration

Although the challenges and obstacles appear formidable, the literature also describes the factors that have helped facilitate collaboration and integration efforts. It should be noted, however, that interpreting the conclusions drawn in the literature about what worked well requires caution, since there is great diversity in the types of service integration described. Nonetheless, from our review of the literature it was possible to abstract five groupings of lessons learned in implementing collaboration/integration endeavours: Limit the focus and scope of the integration project. Many authors argued that integration efforts were more successful if the scope is limited to a single political or administrative jurisdiction, if the target population is narrowly defined, or if integration efforts focus on a limited set of services (Bloomberg, 1995; Deber et al., 1990; Ellison & Barbour, 1992; Taylor et al., 1991). Develop common goals and clearly defined achievable objectives. Common values, complementary technologies, and common modes of communication and interaction were also found to be important (Deber et al., 1990; Gray, 1985; Greenley, 1992; Hassett & Austin, 1997; Hastings et al., n.d.). Those primarily responsible for the integration effort should have access to sufficient resources, as well as the control and authority to influence organizational decision-making. More structured, formal, and mandatory mechanisms, rather than models that rely strictly on ad hoc, informal, and voluntary compliance, also appear to facilitate

Partnerships with Service Providers 177

integration (Deber et al., 1990; Greenley, 1992; Harbert, Finnegan & Tyler, 1997). There should be sufficient inducements made available to ensure the compliance of participants in the integration project. Key participants, including both management and front-line staff, need to see the benefits of their involvement, and need to be supportive of the process (Bloomberg, 1995; Deber et al., 1990; Hassett & Austin, 1997). Participants should recognize and understand the importance of time and process. That is, those involved should be aware that the venture will be very time-consuming and may require several years' commitment. Further, the governing structure should build in ongoing monitoring and evaluation, and be flexible enough to allow changes to occur in incremental, evolutionary steps (Ellison & Barbour, 1992; Greenley, 1992; Harbert et al., 1997; Vander-Schie et al., 1987). Lastly, Armstrong (1997) described a project directed to integrate existing human services and to make the services more family-centred and neighbourhood-based. In describing the success of this project, Armstrong argued that several criteria were necessary for changes to be made to existing systems: (a) commitment and leadership from the top levels of municipal or county government; (b) commitment and leadership from the community; (c) at least one person to keep an eye on the larger picture, bridge gaps, and keep the dialogue open; (d) new ways of thinking about government, communities, workers, purposes, and service provision, along with a thorough understanding of the technical information available on systems change and systems improvements; and (e) recognition on the part of participants, of the need to celebrate small changes as precursors to larger change. The Highfield Experience with Service Provider Collaboration Bringing Service Providers Together

As described in Chapter 3, one of the early successes of the project was the ability of a group of service providers, who had little or no experience working together previously, to come together, work intensively, and submit a proposal for Better Beginnings funding. The time commitment during that period was onerous, as the Steering Committee met bi-weekly, and then weekly, in order to complete the proposal in

178 Part 3: A New Way

time. Given that one of the mandates of the Better Beginnings project was service integration, and that the project was funded provincially by three different ministries, the two initial service providers involved (i.e., the school principal and a manager from the Children's Aid Society) sought to include representatives from those sectors. Education was represented by the principal of Highfield Junior School; residents were represented by a parent from the school's parents group; social services was represented by the Children's Aid Society (CAS) and a women's centre; and health was represented by a public health nursing manager. This small group of individuals represented the first foray into service provider participation by the Highfield project. The group became the Steering Committee, which committed a good deal of time to complete the proposal. Once funding was granted, this committee became the initial group of stakeholders who began working together to implement the project. Vision and Concept in Practice As mentioned earlier, the Highfield Community Enrichment Project was mandated by the government to develop an integrated model of service delivery. Yet, the government provided little in the way of practical advice to the project about how to make integration happen. When key stakeholders first submitted their proposal to the government, they envisioned three different levels of involvement from service providers in the community: Direct involvement as committee members: service providers from key community agencies and organizations would provide expertise and act as resources to project staff; Direct involvement through fee-for-service: the main service organizations involved with the project would provide employees' time to the project for program model development and delivery on a feefor-service basis; and Indirect involvement through coordination: social service agencies not directly involved with the project would have ties with the project and provide assistance as required. However, during the planning phase of the project, this vision changed. It became clear that the project was insufficiently funded to allow for other service providers to be involved on a fee-for-service basis. The project was successful in involving service providers as com-

Partnerships with Service Providers 179

mittee members - in fact, they were a key resource in program planning and development. Service providers were viewed by many as consultants, with expertise and advice to share: 'Well, ideally it's somebody who can give us information, and help us when we ... have a problem or a question regarding that area that they're in' (staff focus group, 1993). It was with the last vision of service provider involvement (i.e., indirect involvement through coordination) that the project had the most difficulty operationalizing. There was very little guidance provided by the government about how to coordinate and integrate services - and the Highfield project struggled in defining integration and coordination: I sort of feel like [the ministries] set us up a little bit when it come to integration, because they said to go ahead and do it, but they didn't have a clue as to how it would be done either ... There was no thought on their part to making sure that the ministries gave agencies sanction and a mandate to step outside of their role a little bit in order to make this happen, (service providers focus group, 1993)

As the project continued to evolve, so did the model of service provider involvement and collaboration. Relationships continued to grow and thrive between the Highfield project and other service providers. By the end of the demonstration phase of the project, in 1997, stakeholders had started to use the language of 'partners' and 'partnerships': Partnership ... Highfield now is more of an entity ... And so now we work with other partners, they work with other partners ... So they will come and ask us to deliver services they think [are] appropriate for us to do and we'll do the same with them, (service providers focus group, 1998) Now it's a presence of programs and [the service providers] tend to be part of that, and often are. So they're not just sort of consulting on an abstract level, they are part of the program, (project manager interview, 1998)

The project seemed to have given up trying to define 'integration,' as originally mandated by the government. Rather, the relationships that they had developed over the years with key service providers had matured and there was greater collaboration across organizations: 'I think Better Beginnings had a real struggle with integration in the beginning, but I think ... even without trying, found ourselves inte-

180 Part 3: A New Way

grated ... It's happening without any kinds of definition' (service providers focus group, 1998). Service providers from different organizations collaborated with Better Beginnings to provide programming - they shared their expertise (including staff training and technical advice) and their resources (including staff time, space, and materials). For example, one children's mental health centre provided training for the Better Beginnings staff around child-care issues. The Children's Aid Society staff did the same. Good working relationships developed between the project and individuals from several different organizations. Nevertheless, integration, as originally espoused by the government, did not occur. That is, all organizations and agencies involved with the project maintained their autonomy and decided whether or not to participate in the project. In most cases, the service providers were there because of their own personal commitment to the project, rather than because of a stated commitment from the agencies or organizations to which they belonged. That is, although the agencies or organizations may have understood the importance of Better Beginnings, this did not translate into policy changes or in freeing up staff members' time; for many service providers, their involvement in the project was an 'add-on' to their jobs. The agencies' or organizations' involvement with the project, therefore, could be jeopardized if that individual staff member left his/her position. Some of us are taking on extra and it's not really part of their mandate ... ... and that's really going to hurt when we start seeing some turnover in the service providers ... because you're going to start seeing some gaps and some things fall apart. If you're the only one maintaining an involvement and commitment from your agency ... then that disappears when the staff person leaves, (service providers focus group, 1993)

It is for these reasons that service integration in Better Beginnings can best be described, referring to the integration literature reviewed previously, as a combination of voluntary and mediated integration. That is, there were no significant changes to how existing organizations functioned, and only modest resource commitments were made. Further, service organizations volunteered to collaborate with the project, and the project, in most cases, was the mediating structure for collaboration.

Partnerships with Service Providers 181

On the continuum of service integration outlined earlier (figure 9.1), service provider involvement at the Highfield project is best seen as an example of service coordination and service collaboration. Collaborating Organizations Involved with the Highfield Community Enrichment Project

As shown in figure 9.2, during the developmental phase of the project the main service providers involved included: School board: the principal of Highfield Junior School Child welfare organization: a community development worker, in particular, as well as a senior manager Public health department: a nursing manager Public housing: a community development worker Community services organization: executive director Community advocacy/development organization: community activist. As described in Chapter 3, these service providers were critical in developing the initial proposal for Better Beginnings funding. As well, their role continued to be integral as they planned and developed the programs once funding was received. Once programs were implemented, less time was devoted to planning and development. As such, the roles of some service providers abated, and these people had difficulty finding a new role with the project. That is, some service providers lacked familiarity with program activities and volunteers, and, except for the local community services organization and the school, they were not directly involved in providing any services to the project. In many cases, service providers lacked the time and resources to be more hands-on because the service organizations did not view their contributions to the project as integral to their jobs. As well, there was some question about why certain, more bureaucratic-type organizations (e.g., child welfare and public housing) were involved. Given the value placed on resident participation, stakeholders were also concerned that the Steering Committee was too top-heavy with professionals. It was for these reasons that the project re-examined the level and types of service provider involvement early on in the implementation phase. It was decided to scale back the number of service providers on the Executive Team, to ensure that 51 per cent of its members were res-

182 Part 3: A New Way Figure 9.2 Model of Service Provider Involvement in the Highfield Community Enrichment Project Factors Facilitating Service Provider Involvement Administrative support Teacher release time and resources for training Personal motivation of service providers The project as a vehicle for outreaching to the community

Service Provider Partners

Nature of Service Provider Involvement

Highfield Junior School Children's Aid Society Public Health Department Community Health Centre Public housing Neighbourhood services organization Community advocacy/ development organization Child and family centre

Participation in planning and policy related to programs (e.g., Steering Committee and Executive Team, Inschool, Family Resource, and Community Development committees) Participation in direct services of the project (e.g., school nutrition program, Lion's Quest program, workshops, groups, and programs for parents, community development activities)

Obstacles/Barriers to Service Provider Involvement Lack of clear understanding of service integration Funding cutbacks Different philosophies Balance of service providers and community residents

idents of the community. As well, greater efforts were put into involving more school staff and recruiting other service organizations serving the area (e.g., the local community health centre; a family and child centre). By the end of the demonstration phase, the service providers most involved with Highfield included:

Partnerships with Service Providers 183

School board: principal, vice-principal, and several teachers at Highfield Junior School; support staff and coordinator of curriculum services at the school board; Community health centre: executive director, community development worker, and nurse practitioner; Neighbourhood services organization: A community services organization and a local advocacy/community development organization amalgamated with the neighbourhood services organization. Two individuals involved with the local grass-roots organizations continued their involvement with the project; Child and family centre: family support staff; and Child welfare organization: family support staff. The project's efforts in re-examining service provider involvement seemed to be well worth it. By the end of the demonstration phase, stakeholders reported that the types of service providers involved and their level of involvement had evolved into a good fit with the project: I think ... the partners we have now ... serve this community ... Whereas before it seemed like [the service providers]... were coming from afar and coming to sit on our ET. Maybe our programs [weren't] as developed at that point... Now we're seeing more places to fit people in ... We evolved, so we're going to share the work we have, (staff focus group, 1998) I think it's evolved in the way that it should have evolved. Service providers have certain skills to offer and services that they can offer. Therefore, they should be part of what we offer to people. That's what happened, (project manager interview, 1998)

The project manager also reported that by the end of the demonstration phase, a better balance in the involvement of service providers, staff, and residents had developed. Successes and Accomplishments INTEGRATION WITH HIGHFIELD JUNIOR SCHOOL

As described earlier, when Better Beginnings programs were first implemented there was some tension between the project and the school many programs were implemented at once, often with little or no communication with school staff. The need for better communication and

184 Part 3: A New Way

better relationships with the school was recognized by project staff, consequently, they worked hard at improving the relationship between the project and the school. Knowing the importance of having school staff involved, the project strived to share and exchange more information with school personnel. Success in establishing better communication was evident by the second year of program implementation: project staff began attending the Shared Visions meetings and joint planning of school-related events (field notes, 1994). Also, the school and the project collaborated on planning several different programs. By the end of the demonstration phase, there were weekly meetings between the project manager and the principal of the school, and between the in-school coordinator and the vice-principal. The project manager and in-school coordinator continued to attend school staff meetings, and the project organized information sessions for teachers. As the project manager observed, 'Communication is important so we've done different sorts of things like planning days with the school. Not only do we go to regular meetings, but we meet regularly with the principal and the vice-principal on a weekly basis. [There is] a lot of communication between [project] staff and teachers and ... twice a year [we organize] workshops with the teachers just around Better Beginnings and what that's all about' (interview, 1998). The in-school Coordinator also spoke of the need to create a welcoming atmosphere for teachers, especially through providing food and fun: 'Feeding them, whenever they come to anything. Always have good food handy. As long as there's food, they're there. Well... even if you laugh about it, it's a nice place to come to' (staff focus group, 1998). And the teachers also commented on the importance of communication, particularly for new teachers in the school: 'Well, I think that the communication thing is important to mention again, or whatever, because I think that a lot of things happen here that even some of the teachers aren't aware of what is going on ... So, I think that, and I know that once a year you guys have that lunch thing ... Especially because every year we get new teachers, A lot of new teachers, turnover, and they need to know about the project, the goings-on, and so on' (Inschool Committee focus group, 1998). The result of improved communication and relationships with school staff has been that the project and the school became much more integrated. I think it's almost become ... part of the culture of the school and so we just sort of ... take it for granted. (In-school Committee focus group, 1998)

Partnerships with Service Providers 185 What we've seen is the partnership with the school and the project... has grown ... We're here together and we do a lot of reciprocal kinds of things. (In-school Committee focus group, 1998)

The project manager believed the principal played a major role in increasing this integration: The current principal made an expressed point... that she would work to integrate what we were doing with the school. And [she] did many things to ... eliminate any of the barriers that were there ... She was a real champion in the program, (project manager interview, 1998)

'Integration' may not have occurred at a more macro level with other agencies and organizations, but the project did achieve greater integration with the school, so that a seamless day was created for families with children in the school: Tt's just been a matter of developing a variety of programs that, from a family point of view, they can't distinguish the difference between the school and Better Beginnings. It's all one' (interview with project manager, 1998). PARTNERSHIPS WITH OTHER SERVICE PROVIDERS

Throughout the demonstration phase the project was able to maintain good and consistent involvement from many service providers in project governance; that is, service providers from the main partnering agencies were represented on the ET as well as on each of the program committees. As described in an earlier section, staff believed that the partnerships that had developed over the years with several agencies fit well with the philosophy and goals of the project. The Highfield Community Enrichment Project succeeded in developing good relationships with other agencies, and consequently resources were shared to provide programming to children and family in the community. There are many illustrations of the partnerships that developed over the years. For example, a children's mental health centre provided some training to Better Beginnings staff and conducted several parenting workshops for parents. The project also worked with a local women's centre in providing Nobody's Perfect workshops to parents; the women's centre and Better Beginnings provided the staff, Better Beginnings provided the space, and Brighter Futures (a coalition of agencies and organizations that provide programs to children aged 0 to 6) provided the funding for training, child care, materials, and refreshments. As well, before amalgamation with a larger neighbourhood services

186 Part 3: A New Way

agency occurred, a local grass-roots organization worked hand-in-hand with the project in providing summer programming to children in the community. Both organizations provided the staffing, and Better Beginnings provided the space and materials. Further, child welfare family support staff conducted monthly workshops with the parents group at the project. Finally, the nurse practitioner at the health centre also conducted periodic workshops for the project. CHANGES IN ATTITUDE AND WAYS OF WORKING

Better Beginnings has also been successful, through its working relationships with various partners, in changing some attitudes and ways of working. For example, one teacher remarked that in all her 27 years of teaching, she had never been so committed to a school because of what was happening with the Better Beginnings project. A distinct benefit of working collaboratively with other agencies, organizations, and residents is the learning that occurs. Not only do agencies learn more about the community and its resources, but they also learn how to work more cooperatively with other service providers: 'In the last year, [there has been] a real pulling together around issues ... the health centre, George Hull of CAS. So many different agencies and people are coming to us' (field notes, 1995). As well, early on it was noted that Better Beginnings was the catalyst for the collaboration that was occurring in the community. As one stakeholder commented 'Better Beginnings has been the catalyst in working [together]... [and]... has enabled agencies to see that we all have the same agenda. I don't think right now they could deny that Better Beginnings is the reason why they've learned to really work together on issues. Better Beginnings has been very instrumental in making that happen. We're all working for the good of the community' (fieldnotes, 1995). Barriers and Challenges Some of the obstacles to involvement of service providers in the Highfield Community Enrichment Project are shown in figure 9.2 (see p. 182). LACK OF A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF SERVICE INTEGRATION

As we noted earlier, project members did not have a clear understanding of what the government meant by service integration. This lack of clarity initially hampered efforts at integration, which is consistent with what others have reported (Aiken et al., 1975; Bruner, 1991; Kop-

Partnerships with Service Providers 187

pich & Kirst, 1993; O'Looney, 1994, 1997; J.A. Weiss, 1981). Over time, the project and its partners focused more on partnerships and useful roles that service providers could play vis-a-vis the project, which facilitated integration. FUNDING CUTBACKS

Some partners of the project were forced to discontinue or lessen their involvement because of government cutbacks to social services that had financial repercussions for their agencies. For example, one grass-roots organization which had been a major partner with the project in providing summer and recreation programs lost most of its funding. Although this organization managed to merge with a local neighbourhood association, many dollars for programming were no longer available. Limited resources may strain established or potential partnerships. However, it was also recognized that lack of available funding may encourage more collaborative efforts: [Better Beginnings has] helped a lot of agencies to realize that... partnerships are encouraged because of lack of funding, (field notes, 1995) In the last couple of years every other agency we're working with, aside from the health centre, has probably lost funding ... So they are struggling more ... and we're kind of looked to as the ones who still have the resources to do things, so the load becomes a little heavier. I think that stresses any kind of integrated model of service-delivery to the point of not being able to do as much as you could do ... But I also think despite all the cutbacks and everything, I think there's more concentrated effort to partner, (staff focus group, 1998) DIFFERENT PHILOSOPHIES

As described earlier, one of the facilitating factors in developing good partnerships is having a common vision and goals. Conversely, partnerships or collaborations become strained when agencies or organizations have different philosophies or ways of working (Bloomberg, 1994; Deber et al, 1990; Ellison & Barbour, 1992; Nelson, Prilleltensky, & MacGillivary, 2001; Taylor et al., 1991). In particular, Better Beginnings was seen as having a more non-traditional way of working than many established organizations: 'In general, a barrier has always been [there], and probably [always will be] with any group that we've worked [with] ... just the very different style from which we work. I think that every-

188 Part 3: A New Way

one's unique, so you always have, you have more mainstream systems, who've been doing things for years. You have us who do things quite differently ... So I think every time you come together, there's a bit of a clash initially' (In-school Committee focus group, 1998). It is possible that perhaps more traditional agencies may perceive organizations like Better Beginnings as a threat. The Highfield project had a tremendous problem trying to involve representatives from the Parks and Recreation department of city government, and project staff really struggled trying to get them more involved in the community: ... like moving a mountain ... problem is that these people are not community minded ... really tough to shift them, (field notes, 1994) I think particularly for Parks and Recreation, they get a lot of direction from above and we tend to be more grass-roots, I guess, and try and do things that are needed directly ... I think they see us as a threat, maybe. (In-school Committee focus group, 1998)

By the end of the demonstration phase, Better Beginnings staff continued to note that there was some tension with the school and that some teachers lacked an understanding of the community development philosophy of the project. For instance, staff members noted that one teacher who had been involved with the project for several years persisted in requesting more money to be allocated to in-school programs, which would have meant taking money away from other parts of the project, such as community development: 'Well, I think they see it as very much a school project... I think oftentimes they don't understand the [community development] component. The family support, maybe a little bit more understanding ... You know, it's often said, "Well, why can't we help more kids directly in the classroom instead of where's all this going out into the community"' (staff focus group, 1998). BALANCE OF SERVICE PROVIDERS AND COMMUNITY RESIDENTS

The project has strived to involve service providers on the ET and on each of its program committees. As well, they have tried to ensure 51 per cent parent participation on each of its committees. Achieving a good balance has been a challenge throughout the years. Early on, the Steering Committee was too 'top-heavy' with professionals, and the committee was scaled down - service providers were asked to step down and 51 per cent parent participation was achieved. While the project has

Partnerships with Service Providers 189

been able to maintain the level of parent participation on the ET throughout the years, the ratio of parents to service providers on the other committees has varied considerably. The Community Development and Family Resource Committees had some success, with equal numbers of professionals and residents, more times than not. However, there were more teachers, school administrators, and service providers than parents on the In-school Committee for most of the demonstration phase. Consequently, the discussions at the In-school Committee tended to be like the discussions at the former Steering Committee, which also had a majority of service providers; that is, the service providers dominated the discussions. As a staff member noted, 'It's been tough getting people to come in ... it's kind of intimidating for them' (staff focus group, 1998). A similar pattern was evident in the Research Committee, on which there were more researchers than parents. Factors Facilitating Service Integration ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT

As was noted earlier, a major factor that facilitated the integration between the project and Highfield Junior School was the support of the principal of the school. Other researchers have found that administrative support is important for facilitating integration (Cherniss, 1997; Peirson & Prilleltensky, 1994; Sarason, 1982). The new principal and vice-principal actively supported the project during its demonstration phase. TEACHER RELEASE TIME AND RESOURCES FOR TRAINING

When release time to allow teachers to participate on the In-school Committee was provided, relations between the project and the school quickly improved. The project had the budget to pay substitute or supply teachers to cover the classes of teachers who were members of the In-school Committee. As well, the project initially provided the funding to train all teachers in the Lion's Quest social skills program. The importance of having sufficient resources to support service integration has been noted by others as well (Deber et al., 1990; Gray, 1985; Greenley, 1992; Hassett & Austin, 1997). PERSONAL MOTIVATION OF SERVICE PROVIDERS

Previous research on service integration has focused on organizational factors that facilitate integration. We found that another important fac-

190 Part 3: A New Way

tor is the personal motivation of service providers: some did not have an organizational mandate or tangible support for participating in the project, but did have a great deal of personal interest and motivation to participate. This motivation stemmed from their identification with the project's values, goals, and philosophy, which others have noted are important factors for enhancing service integration (Bloomberg, 1994; Deber et al., 1990; Ellison & Barbour, 1992; Nelson, Prilleltensky, & MacGillivary, 2001; Taylor et al., 1991). THE PROJECT AS VEHICLE FOR OUTREACHING TO THE COMMUNITY

Some agencies, such as the CAS and the Community Health Centre, had a mandate to do community development. The project provided a vehicle for this type of work for these partners. Because of its strong connection to the community, the project provided these service provider partners with a natural entry point into the community. It would be difficult for these agencies to make these links in the absence of such a grass-roots community organization. The project's location on the grounds of a school serving more than 1,000 students enabled the school to become a hub for a variety of different service providers to connect to the community. Summary As with any good relationship, communication and taking the time and making the effort to work together were key ingredients in the successful partnerships that developed at the Highfield Community Enrichment Project. The project recognized the need, and indeed were committed based upon their mandate, to partner with various agencies and organizations serving the community. Through the development of good working relationships, a sharing of resources occurred that provided needed programming to residents of the Highfield community. Indeed, stakeholders agreed that programming in the community was enriched by these partnerships and interactions with other systems. Moreover, the Better Beginnings project played a key role in securing additional funding and services .for the community. The project was successful not only in becoming more integrated with the school and blending and uniting school and project resources, but also in becoming a catalyst for other service providers to work together for the common good of the community.

10

Partnerships with Community Residents

Foremost among the processes that contribute to successful programs and healthy community development is the active participation of residents in all matters affecting their community (McNeely, 1999). The need for significant and meaningful participation of community residents in Better Beginnings, Better Futures was recognized at the outset. Indeed, the document which outlined the major themes and principles underlying the initiative (Rae-Grant & Russell, 1989) stated that 'It is important that members of the community have key responsibilities for decision-making about the design, implementation and evaluation in community-based primary prevention programs' (p. 70). But achieving this kind of resident participation is neither easy nor straightforward. In this chapter, we describe how resident participation developed through the early years of the project, when residents were shy and apprehensive about participating, to the current state of the project, where residents are active partners in all the project does. We discuss the factors that motivate resident parents to become involved in Better Beginnings, and some of the barriers that had to be overcome to achieve meaningful resident involvement. Finally, we describe some of the outcomes of resident participation for the project. What the Literature Tells Us about Resident Participation Resident participation is the key element in the community-building component of the Jones and Silva (1991) model introduced in Chapter 8. Building community capacity requires the active and wholehearted participation of community members in a collaborative, democratic process (Kretzmann & McKnight, 1993). When this kind of process

192 Part 3: A New Way

occurs, positive and sustainable changes can be made in communities. The research literature provides many examples of the ways in which the active and meaningful involvement of residents in project and program development and decision-making have helped build communities. Residents have helped design and build community parks (Francis, 1982), established toy lending libraries and clothing exchanges for their communities (Pancer & Alcalde, 1992), initiated crime prevention programs (Washnis, 1976), organized parent advisory councils in the schools (Comer, 1976,1980; McClure & Depiano, 1983), and lobbied for schools, traffic lights, and a whole host of services needed in their neighbourhoods. Residents can be involved at many levels. They can participate in community programs, attend meetings and information sessions, chair committees, organize programs and events, and lobby officials from government or human service agencies, among other things (O'Neill, Duffy, Enman, Blackmer, & Goodwin, 1988). In her seminal paper on resident participation, Arnstein (1969) distinguished different levels of citizen involvement in the programs, initiatives, and activities that go on in their communities. At the lowest level, citizens are only involved as participants in these programs, and may have, at most, token representation on the bodies that coordinate these programs; they have little say in which programs are offered, or how they are managed and implemented. At the highest level, residents drive the process; they are the ones who ultimately determine what kinds of programs are offered in their communities and how those programs operate. Wandersman (1984) defined this kind of resident participation as 'a process in which individuals take part in decision making in the institutions, programs, and environments that affect them' (p. 339). The crucial element in this kind of resident participation is that it involves the resident as an initiator and a creator of programs and services, not merely a recipient of such programs or even a consultant in the process of creating services (Burke, 1979). It is through the active participation of community members in program decision-making that they develop a sense of control or empowerment (Prestby et al., 1990; Zimmerman & Rappaport, 1988). Moreover, the literature is replete with examples of instances in which a failure to involve community members has resulted in inferior programs (Wandersman, 1984), and instances in which citizen participation resulted in improved programs and services and a better match between the needs of the community and the kinds of services provided (e.g., Comer, 1976, 1980; Hodgson, 1984; Iscoe, 1974; Pancer & Nelson, 1990).

Partnerships with Community Residents 193

Initiating the involvement of community residents in building communities, however, is widely acknowledged as a difficult endeavour (Hodgson, 1984; Kaye, 1990; Pancer & Cameron, 1994; Wandersman & Giamartino, 1980). Kaye (1990), for example, described how efforts in community building through an initiative called the Block Booster Project were hampered by poor attendance of community members at meetings, and a general lack of motivation among residents to get involved. While it may be easy to blame such difficulties on the residents, a number of individuals have suggested that the true failing, if one must be found, is in the settings themselves. Cameron et al. (1994), for example, suggest that residents may find it difficult to participate because social service and other professionals who are also involved in community-building efforts are unwilling to share power over and control of the process with residents. Fawcett et al. (1995) and Cameron and Cadell (1999) identify other setting characteristics that may impede participation, such as those that stem from racism and economic disparities, or the demands that participation may make on residents' time and resources. To counteract these impediments to resident participation, settings need to be changed so that they empower participation (Cameron & Cadell, 1999; Maton & Salem, 1995). This can be accomplished by having a number of different roles that residents can take on (and moving them to different roles as their capacities and confidence develop), making education and training opportunities available, and providing support and nurturance to those participating, among other things. The Changing Nature of Resident Participation Resident Participation in the Project's Early Years

As we have seen, when the Highfield Better Beginnings project began parents were generally shy and cautious about getting involved. They were uncomfortable with meetings and contributed little to meetings they did attend: The first time I sat on [the Steering Committee], I didn't say anything because I was scared if I said anything it might come out wrong ... so I just sat because I was so scared if I said anything they would laugh at me' (parents focus group, 1992). The level of participation improved over the first 18 months of the project, to the point that some residents were very actively involved. These were mostly women who had children at Highfield school, and who tended not to work outside the home. However, there was still a

194 Part 3: A New Way

problem in terms of the numbers of parents involved; a relatively small number of parents were doing a lot of the work. Also, there were few men involved in the project, and relatively few people representing some of the major cultural groups within the community. The initial goal for resident involvement, to have 51 per cent or more residents on all committees, had been achieved on some committees but not on others. On three major committees only about one-third of the members were parents. In the first 18 months of the project, residents participated in a wide variety of activities. Roles that residents took on included: membership in the parents group, which took responsibility for planning for the Family Resource Centre and community events (e.g., rummage sale); active membership in the project's Steering Committee (the key decision-making body for the project); active membership in all sub-committees, which were responsible for developing program model ideas, developing program management ideas, and monitoring all research activities; participation on the interview committees for hiring the site researcher, project coordinator, community development worker, Family Resource Centre program support worker, and parent support worker; and volunteering for various activities, including outreach (talking informally to other residents, distributing flyers, volunteering at community events) and preparing food for meetings. Even in the earliest stages of the project's development, residents were becoming much more vocal and active in their participation in the project, and no longer had to be solicited for their comments. Whenever possible, parent representatives from each of the sub-committees were asked to report to the Steering Committee about issues/activities discussed at the sub-committees. As well, parents were encouraged to cochair Steering Committee and Research Committee meetings with one of the service providers involved in the committees. The parent co-chair of the Steering Committee became quite comfortable and skilled with this role (analytic comments, 1992). Community members were also involved quite actively in project development and program planning. Parents were involved on each of the working committees, where most of the ideas for programs origi-

Partnerships with Community Residents 195

nated, for example, several parents were responsible for putting together a proposal for a snack program in the school. Three parents worked on the proposal and presented it to service providers and parents involved at the site during a planning meeting (field notes, 1991). Two parents were also part of a group that made a presentation on the project and research components to all Highfield school teachers (field notes, 1992). Parents were also actively involved with the Family Resource Centre. They assumed the role of arranging donations of clothing and articles for the toy lending library, planning activities in the Family Resource Centre, and arranging the room used at the centre. Changes in the Nature and Amount of Participation of Community Residents

After the project had been in operation for a few years, there were several changes in both the number of residents participating and the groups in the community that they represented. In interviews, project staff, residents and the project manager indicated that there were more residents involved in every aspect of the project, particularly those serving as volunteers in program activities. Not only did levels of participation increase, but so did the participation of individuals from different groups within the community. For example, there was greater participation of men from all age groups: 'What is noted by anybody who goes to the drop-in is the large number of male caregivers; grandfathers, but also fathers' (project manager interview, 1998). The project also made a conscious and active effort to involve more individuals from the various cultural groups within the community in Better Beginnings activities. This produced much greater representation of individuals from different cultures, both as program participants and as volunteers on the project: 'We had a little bit of language problem ... we have a lot more [people who speak different languages] now ... The ones that speak the language ... will spread the word about the programs, events, and things that are coming up' (staff focus group, 1998). One of the reasons given for the enhanced level of parent and resident participation was the effort the project made to build a strong relationship with school staff, and the resulting support that the teachers have given to the project over recent years: Tn the early days, the teachers themselves didn't really understand what the project was all about, so there was a lot of confusion around roles, and I think they were a little suspicious about why we were here. And I think in the last few years, they've managed to more or less differentiate their roles

196 Part 3: A New Way

from ours, and see that we do have a role, and it's one that supports them in their roles. They can see clearly and they know exactly why we're here ... A lot of our staff formed some relationships with the teachers and that helped; it breaks down a lot of the barriers' (staff focus group, 1998). While volunteering increased following the early years of the project, it continued to struggle to involve parents, in a consistent and meaningful way, on committees: No parents attended today. The [In-school] Committee noted the lack of parent participation and did some brainstorming about how to involve parents, (analytic comments, 1995) Only one parent was present today [at the In-school Committee], and when the committee evaluated its work at the end, various strategies to involve parents were discussed. I think it is hard for new parents to come into leadership roles because they have so much learning to do to catch up. Instead they seem to get more involved with various service activities, (analytic comments, 1996)

It was also noted by members of the research team that when there were more parents present, or, conversely, when there were fewer service providers present, parents were much more likely to be vocal. This was noted particularly regarding the Executive Team and the Inschool Committee, where there tended to be more service provider involvement: With only the vice-principal from the school at the meeting today, and four parents, the meeting had a different feel to it. The parents participated much more. [One parent] spoke up for the first time, saying how hard it is for her as a single parent to find the money to pay for all the requests that come from the school (e.g., photos, hot lunch, school trips, etc.). Experiences like this were not being shared with all the teachers present, (analytic comments, 1998)

With regard to the kind of participation community residents had in the project (see figure 10.1), residents continued to be engaged in all activities they were involved in during the first two years of the project. They continued to serve as volunteers in programs and activities, sit on (and chair) committees, plan and implement programs. However, the

Partnerships with Community Residents 197 residents, rather than being reluctant to take the lead in project decisionmaking, began to take on a more dominant role in the process: I think they're taking on more of a role than, say, in the past. I think in the past, for instance, a committee would be dominated more by service providers, and now, I think, you have probably more resident involvement than service providers, (staff focus group, 1998) 1 think the parents have taken on a lot more leadership roles. With chairing and co-chairing and taking responsibility - especially when you have principals and teachers at the meetings, in trying to keep them on time and keep them on topic, and that's kind of hard. It can be intimidating, (parent focus group, 1998) However, with the improved relationship with and support from the teachers and the school, more parents began to volunteer in the classroom: 'We've seen a lot of parents participate in the classroom, the volunteers, even more come together' (staff focus group, 1998). One activity residents became involved into a much greater extent as they gained in confidence and skills was advocacy. Parents increasingly became involved in lobbying politicians and others: [One parent] did the Policy Forum with four children's ministries. Quite incredible. [This parent and a parent from another Better Beginning site] had a room of 80 senior officials in tears. Reality of what life's like. Really good presentation ... [This parent] also did a Poverty Conference. The approach [this parent] took was to talk about her riches, even though she doesn't have any money. She did that on her own. (field notes, 1997) This was particularly true at the end of the 'demonstration' phase of the project, when parents thought the project's funding might come to an end or be drastically reduced: We've had a number of parents who have spoken at presentations to different government officials, and we were surprised that the various parents would come out and speak. We've had so many parents, actually, and people who we hadn't even thought of. We had people from the Serbian women's group and a Somalian representative, as well as others that have been involved for a while. Another level of involvement around those sorts of activities would have been letter writing ... part of our advo-

198 Part 3: A New Way cacy around the funding for Better Beginnings. Many parents from the drop-in wrote letters to the premier and Ernie Eves [then finance minister of Ontario] ... probably upwards of 80 letters - often written in their own language. So that was very significant, (project manager interview, 1998)

Motivation to Participate and Barriers to Participation Motivation to Participate

A number of factors motivated people to get involved in Better Beginnings in its first few years of operation: Participation helped relieve boredom and gave residents something meaningful to do. They wanted to meet new people and have their children meet other children with whom they could play. Residents wanted to do something to help their children and their community. Residents thought there might be a possibility that they would get a job with the project through their volunteer work. Relieving boredom and participating in enjoyable activities continued to be a significant factor in individuals becoming involved over the years, especially with the wide range of programs and activities that the project came to offer: There's lots of programs now that people come out to for fun, and sort of because there's interesting things going on' (staff focus group, 1998). The many programs available for children have been a significant motivating factor as well. When parents bring their children to school, or to Better Beginnings programs, they see other parents volunteering, and this makes them think of participating themselves: 'What stands out is, I think for parents it's a real graphic and concrete way of being involved and being involved around children. They either come to the school or they drop in and there's something definitely really happening around kids' (project manager interview, 1998). The comfortable atmosphere of the programs also seems to attract people to the project. This appears to be particularly important for individuals from the various cultural groups in the community. If they see activities that are popular in their culture offered in their own language to people of their own culture, this motivates them to take part: 'With the increase in the various cultures that are involved ... people

Partnerships with Community Residents 199

see it as a comfort zone, like you come in and it's not a strange place to be ... you come in and you're very comfortable, so that's another reason why I think people are so involved and we have a lot of programs now' (staff focus group, 1998). From the beginning, a number of residents became involved with the project because they thought they might be able to earn some extra money, or that the project might help them get a job. These notions about gaining employment through Better Beginnings proved to be true: 'There are a number of people that started as volunteers and then moved into, if it's not a staff job [they were] at least compensated financially in some way. And I think that has a lot to do with the involvement, the increased involvement. Somewhere along the line there might be the possibility that you get some money out of it' (staff focus group, 1998). Barriers to Participation

As can be seen in figure 10.1, several barriers needed to be overcome in order for people to participate in the project at a decision-making level: Residents often felt intimidated and uncomfortable interacting with teachers and agency people: 'I remember one of the first ones (Steering Committee meetings), two parents came, I won't mention names, and they sat through committee and they never said one word, and as soon as it was over they said, "Don't ever ask me to go to that again." They were really bowled over by how formal it was' (parents focus group, 1992). There were language and cultural barriers that prevented many people from participating: 'A Somali woman who didn't speak English came into the Family Resource Centre, but no one spoke her language. In that sense she participated, but it was quite difficult for her ... Now I'm sure she's not going to come back again' (service providers focus group, 1992). Parents were unclear about what was expected of them as volunteers. A lot of the work fell on the shoulders of a few volunteers: 'People didn't realize the amount of commitment that was going to be expected of them when they volunteered to sit on a committee; they didn't realize it was going to be quite so heavy ... They just decided to back out all together ... I think what happens is they just say, "Oh, forget it," and that's it; they don't bother coming back' (parents focus group, 1992).

200 Part 3: A New Way Figure 10.1 Model of Resident Involvement in the Highfield Community Enrichment Project Factors Facilitating Resident Involvement Provision of child care & transportation Informal meeting formats Flexible meeting times to accommodate working parents Recognizing residents' contributions Focused effort on outreach Following through on residents' requests & recommendations Having 51% residents on all key committees

Nature of Resident Involvement Planning community events & programs Sitting on (and chairing) key project committees & sub-committees Participation on committees hiring project staff Outreach to other residents Volunteering with project programs Preparing food for meetings & events Making presentations on behalf of project & community Work as staff members

Impacts of Involvement (Project Level) More & better programs that are more successful meeting community needs Increased program attendance Changed organizational structure (less formal, 'flatter/ more open to change) Freeing up of staff time Improved image of community Feelings of burnout in heavily involved residents Conflicts around hiring of residents as staff

Obstacles/Barriers to Resident Involvement Formal meetings, too many professionals Language & cultural barriers Financial barriers Work overload Heavy demands on those willing to do committee work Transient nature of population

Partnerships with Community Residents 201

• Volunteers came from a very narrow age group because most had children in their early school years. Over the years, the project attempted to deal with all of these barriers. Many, however, are ongoing concerns. Some parents have continued to feel that isolation, a lack of understanding of the project as a whole, and residents feeling intimidated are still barriers to their participation as volunteers. Some residents have felt that perhaps not as much effort was being put into making new parents feel comfortable and useful, as had been done during the start-up phase of the project: At the beginning the parents were so much more encouraged to come and were nurtured and stroked ... It's now the same group of parents over and over again. They're kind of taken for granted, and the new people come along [and] they're just kind of 'whoosh/ they're pushed right in, and that nurturing and that adjustment hasn't occurred, and I think it might not have been as easy for them, (parents focus group, 1998) I think lately we just haven't been as successful in pulling in people and drawing what's of interest to them, in making it important to them. It kind of got lost... And I think the language is a big thing. The words that are used. [For example] 'resolution' and a couple of other ones, and you're like, 'What the heck does that mean?' You feel ... embarrassed, (parents focus group, 1998)

These parents also reported that babysitting was no longer provided consistently at committee meetings, and that was also a barrier. Age was another barrier to participation. Much of the difficulty in getting people with children of different ages to participate was based in the project's mandate to serve children in the 4- to 8-year age range. This made the project less interesting to parents of children who were not within that age range: One of the things that is a barrier and will probably continue to be a barrier for a while is the types of programs that we run, and I'm thinking more in terms of the age group. Because as much as we have a lot of programs, we're still bound by our mandate, which is 4 to 8. So, one of the things I'm thinking about now is that when you go out to do outreach, if we don't offer programs for kids that are beyond 8,1 mean we're hard-pressed to get those people involved. It's all, 'What's in it for me?' And very rare [who is]

202 Part 3: A New Way going to come that doesn't have a child here, or their child has never been here, or that they're not getting something out of it. To become a volunteer, to get involved just for the sake of it, that is very rare. Because most people have a connection somehow, (staff focus group, 1998)

Although there were many more men participating in the project than there were in its early years, some gender-related barriers continued to exist. For example, husbands were often reluctant to have their wives participate in certain project activities: A lot of husbands don't want their wives [to take part]; they want them home ... We've had people tell us that 'He wants me home.' (parents focus group, 1992) The role of men in the family is still an issue. We just... set up an outreach committee; one woman said her husband wouldn't let her do that. It wasn't appropriate for her to go to other people's houses, (project manager interview, 1998)

Another barrier to participation towards the end of the demonstration phase was the uncertainty over funding. Many expected government funding to be cut completely at the end of the demonstration period, which made it difficult for staff and others to encourage residents to get involved: The last couple of years was the uncertainty of the project and whether or not it was going to be around ... even in how we were conducting ourselves, I mean, as staff we were more or less winding down, sort of, well what's the use kind of thing. So our attitude may have been a part of why and how we deal with people, how we encourage people to be involved. Because we were wondering about our own staff and our own selves' (staff focus group, 1998). While this was a barrier, it also was a stimulus for getting community members involved in lobbying and advocating for continued funding for the project: They [the residents] took most control of the situation because they started writing letters. We asked them, and they did, in different languages. They wanted the project to continue. So they [the government] were really surprised by the people who wrote in' (staff focus group, 1998). Overcoming Barriers and Enhancing Resident Involvement

To overcome some of the barriers and challenges that may have deterred

Partnerships with Community Residents 203

resident participation, service providers focused their efforts on finding ways to make volunteers feel more comfortable, and to be more sensitive to residents' needs. As early as May 1991, service providers noted that committee meetings were uncomfortable settings for many parents. Time was spent in a Steering Committee meeting (field notes, 1991) discussing how they might make volunteers more comfortable. They suggested that residents might become involved with concrete tasks they were comfortable with before participating in committees, and that perhaps residents could first become familiar with the committee process by participating on the smaller and less formal sub-committees before attending Steering Committee meetings. These, and many other suggestions, were implemented. Further, to make the parents feel they were an important part of the project, service providers made conscious attempts to solicit ideas and opinions from them directly and they took time to deal with concerns raised by parents in committee meetings (analytic comments and field notes, 1991). The Steering Committee also had liaisons obtain feedback from the parents group regarding how they would most like to participate in specific project activities (field notes, 1991). In addition, the In-school Committee, which was formed later than other sub-committees, was organized differently in an attempt to make parents more comfortable. As one service provider explained: 'We met first, got parents knowing what's going on, before school staff came on board ... because parents tend to defer to professionals ... We tried to build a solid basis' (field notes, 1992). To address the language barrier, the project attempted to make some written material available in different languages. For example, at JK registration, project material was available in four languages (English, Hindi, Punjabi, and Spanish). As well, the community development worker did outreach to different multicultural associations to try to involve some representatives from these different cultures. As well, service providers tried to arrange day meetings around the parents' schedules, so that they could drop off and pick up their children from school. During meetings, parents could also bring the children to the Family Resource Centre, where child care was provided. The project has always been committed to offering child care to parents as a means of increasing their participation: To accommodate parents ... commit to arranging day care, even for half a day... has always been a commitment we've had so that parents can be involved' (field notes, 1991). Site representatives also suggested evening and weekend programming and meetings, to involve more working parents (field notes,

204 Part 3: A New Way

1991, 1992). This flexibility in programming and meeting times was also designed to involve more men and representatives from different cultures (parents focus group, 1991; service providers focus group, 1992). Over the years, there- have been frequent discussions about strategies for involving more residents, particularly on committees. As early as January 1993, the Steering Committee (now called the Executive Team) discussed organizing 'a formal structure to seek out and get new people involved' (field notes, 1993). The issue of setting a policy and a formalized structure for volunteerism, including recruitment, orientation, and training, was raised again in February and April 1993, and again in March 1995 (field notes, 1993, analytic comments, 1993, field notes, 1995). As a result, the Highfield Partners Program was initiated to 'coordinate all of the activities, initiatives, and work involved in promoting and supporting volunteerism in the project and the school' (document review notes, 1995). A student from Ryerson University began the organization of the program. However, in July 1995 there was 'no common orientation' for volunteers and no 'one person who [could] do this alone' (field notes, 1995). It is unclear what became of this program. The project took other steps to recognize and encourage volunteers' participation. As noted earlier, one means of recognition that seemed important to community members was the annual dinner and other smaller events that recognized the contributions of resident volunteers. Honorariums also were given to volunteers based upon the number of hours they had served, and to encourage more residents to volunteer (field notes, 1994). However, with changes to the project once permanent funding was announced, the honorariums were discontinued. The various strategies discussed included going door-to-door, moving meeting times to accommodate more parents, hosting recreational events to get people interested in the project, and having alreadyactive parents invite other parents to sit in on committees to observe what goes on (field notes, 1993, 1995). It is unclear which, if any, of these strategies were actually employed. The project did, however, make presentations on cable television, including appeals to recruit more volunteers (field notes, 1993). A two-day volunteer recruitment forum at the local mall was also conducted (field notes, 1996), and the project encouraged parents and staff who knew other parents who might be willing and interested to join committees. The latter initiative appeared to be successful.

Partnerships with Community Residents 205

In October 1995, partly to address again the lack of volunteers, an assistant to the community development worker was hired whose responsibilities included volunteer recruitment. A member of the research team did note that it was probably due to her efforts that parent representation on the Executive Team improved (field notes, 1996). However, it is not clear if this level of parent representation was sustained. The issue of coordinating volunteer recruitment was addressed again in the summer of 1997 when roles were reviewed after permanent funding was announced. The community development worker's job description was modified to allow more effort and time to be devoted to recruiting and organizing volunteers. He was not, however, to be responsible for supervising all volunteers; rather, each program was to take responsibility for its own volunteers. As well, one of the child and family enrichment workers was to devote seven hours a week to support and train volunteers to work in the JK classes. The plan was to expand this in the future to include classes from JK up to grade 2 (field notes, 1997; In-school Committee minutes, 1998). Since the CD worker's job has changed, organization of volunteer recruitment has improved: a fact sheet on each volunteer is completed and put into a binder for use for the project and the school; a volunteer manual has been developed; and a Volunteer Appreciation Day has been held (field notes, 1998). As well, as part of the renewed effort for volunteer orientation and training, workshops for committee chairs and members were conducted. Through much of these efforts, it was noted that volunteerism had increased in the project - if not, perhaps, on the committees - on a consistent basis. In April 1994 the project manager noted that of the 27 parent seats on eight committees, 14 were occupied by different parents nine of whom were new parents to the committees (field notes, 1995). He further noted that 20 volunteers had received honorariums. In May 1998, it was observed as well that the project had managed to recruit eight or nine volunteers for the classrooms (field notes, 1998). In November 1998, the in-school coordinator reported 15 volunteers in the snack program. The project continued to reach out very actively to different segments of the community, particularly its various cultural groups: 'What we've done is worked with another agency to get 25 people trained as cultural interpreters, so a number of those people are on our staff (project manager interview, 1998).

206 Part 3: A New Way

All in all, the project staff made an effort, in as many programs as possible, to build a parent component into the activities, to ensure that parents were involved: '[we tried] to make all of our programs, as many as possible ... parent/child focused. Examples would be the March Break or the summer classroom. All [programs] have a parent component that we supported and built in' (project manager interview, 1998). Outcomes of Resident Participation The participation of residents had a profound impact on the project, the school, and the neighbourhood in which it operated, and the residents themselves. In what follows, we describe the way in which the involvement of residents affected the project, and some of the negative impacts of participation. In Chapter 12, we describe in more detail how the participation of residents affected the residents themselves. Impacts on the Project From the inception of the project, parent participation was central to Highfield's development as a Better Beginnings site. In the initial stages, however, parents were hesitant and uncomfortable with the project development and decision-making roles that they were expected to assume. This discomfort decreased over time, and, by the project's second year, parents were becoming more active in program development and decision-making. This hastened the implementation of many of the project's programs. Since the project's early years, parents have had a significant impact on the kinds of programs that the site offers. An idea for new programs often begins with the residents, and, consequently, the programs tend to be more successful, because they are what the parents want: I think for a long time ... we pushed for the breakfast program, and now it is here and we're saying 'see, it's successful'... So I think the parents have stuck around to finally see the benefits of saying 'we need a breakfast program, we need a breakfast program/ and now we have one here and its benefitting the project and the teachers are liking it. (parents focus group, 1998) The aerobics is one of them. The ballet, for little kids. Two of the programs [we] that have gotten provisions for, how that works is that some-

Partnerships with Community Residents 207 body will come to me and say, can you do this? And I will say, well for you, or do you know of other people that would want this program. And they'd say yes. They'd go away and ... I would get a list of all the people who want the program, so that then we'd know that there is a need, (staff focus group, 1998)

Resident participation not only affected the mix of programs offered at the site, it also affected the entire structure and organization of the project: 'People have become more vocal over the last few years, and that's probably [clarified] more of the restructures, the different roles, fee for service staffing, for volunteers ... So I would say ... also at the grass-roots level, it [resident participation] has affected us in different sorts of ways' (project manager interview, 1998). And because parents were more invested in the new programs they helped create, they also participated more in developing and running the programs. This took some of the weight off the staff in terms of planning and administering the programs, and also produced better programs: 'I think with residents involved in any program or any event that we do, it allows us [staff] to have not less to do, but less burden on our shoulders, so it allows us to have an even better program' (staff focus group, 1998). This enhanced level of volunteering in the parent-sponsored programs also allowed staff to spend more time communicating with parents and helping them: 'She [the staff person] had a couple of volunteers that she could rely on, and they would do little crafts with the children while she had more time to talk and give information' (staff focus group, 1998). The increase in volunteering also allowed for programs and events that would not have been possible without volunteers: 'In the kindergarten classes, they never went on trips, and now they have three trips planned for the year because they have the volunteers' (staff focus group, 1998). Resident participation also had a significant impact on the way the project is seen by the outside community. Residents were heavily involved in making presentations about the project, and lobbying, particularly when the project's funding was in jeopardy. This had a highly positive effect on the way the project was perceived: 'Another thing we rely a lot on residents for, again back to the advocacy stuff, where a lot of people have developed the skills to go out and do the public speaking, talking to politicians and other groups about what the project does. So, right now this project is held in high regard, and one of the

208 Part 3: A New Way

reasons is high parent or resident involvement' (staff focus group, 1998). Negative Impacts of Resident Participation

Early on in the life of the project, the major difficulty active residents experienced was a feeling of burnout; because relatively few residents were actively involved, a great many tasks fell on their shoulders. With the increase in numbers of volunteers as the project matured, feelings of burnout lessened. However, there were still times when residents felt that the project expected too much of them: 'I think sometimes they expect too much out of you. And it's the same core people doing the same sorts of things all the time, and I think I'm the type of person that I find it hard to say no ... You have single parents, and kids to look after, and working, and I find they expect too much. It's just sometimes negative. Sometimes it's positive. It just depends on how busy it is' (parents focus group, 1998). Nevertheless, the parents were quick to couch this criticism with remarks about how they still enjoyed their volunteering and felt it was important, both for themselves and for the children. Some of the difficulties with resident involvement occurred more at the organizational or systems level. One difficulty had to do with the fact that the decision-making process followed by the project's administrative bodies (such as the Executive Team) was not always accepted and understood by residents, particularly with regard to instances in which major changes were made in programs or personnel: I think one of the big challenges in wanting so much resident involvement is that it's sort of like, a clash of cultures ... The project is also an organization and has to have policies ... ways of doing things ... and I think that's probably been one of the sensitive points... When we had to make changes, major changes, there would be some residents who didn't understand why and also were not interested in them; they just wanted to believe that bad things were happening, and then went on to do what I would say is try to poison the atmosphere for other people. So I think that's one of the impacts. You draw people in and we have to make decisions and it can be really difficult communicating across the open system, (project manager interview, 1998)

Another difficulty had to do with the kinds of expectations people

Partnerships with Community Residents 209 had about what the project could do for the community. At times these expectations seemed unrealistic: I think another thing with negative impact is that it tends to raise expectations around what can happen in the community and what the project should be able to do, and, once again, those expectations may be unrealistic. I mean, there are certain things that we probably can't change about the community, but because we're here and doing other things, people expect that we can also change those sorts of things. And I think there are a number of unrealistic expectations; people see certain things were happening, so they want more, (project manager interview, 1998) For parent volunteers, applying for paid employment at the project was sometimes a difficulty. One key parent, who had been involved extensively in volunteering (on committees and elsewhere) as well as fee-for-service work, was quite disappointed and frustrated when she was not successful in securing a paid position at the project: I applied for [the recreational assistant position] along with 11 other people. [I] got a call the same night as the interview [and] was told [I] didn't get the job ... On my resume I did child care ... worked in the Before and After School program ... volunteered in the classroom, [and] ... in the kitchen. I know everything about the program. [The] woman [who was hired] has to be trained ... I thought I at least would stand a chance. I told [the project manager] if it was somebody else I'd seen volunteering around here, it wouldn't bother me ... It made me feel as though nobody respected what I am doing ... That's how it makes me feel ... I would like to see that any job that comes up, someone here should have a chance before an outsider ... So it upset me. Better Beginnings hurt me a lot. (field notes, 1997) The researcher who attended the meeting also reflected on the feelings that were shared: The most salient part of the meeting, and the most emotional that I can recall in years of attending the Executive Team meetings, was when [the parent] took to the floor to express her feelings about not being hired for the recreation assistant position for which she applied. She was quite vocal and emotional... more so than I have ever seen her. So I think that it is great that she spoke up ... [She reported] that the project 'hasn't hired

210 Part 3: A New Way people from the community for two years.' She also said that she felt that the project didn't value her contribution, (analytic comments, 1997)

Another parent, who had also applied for a paid position in the project, echoed these sentiments: You know a lot of people do start volunteering to hope that they can get their foot in the door to help them get hired, and sometimes it isn't recognized that you've done all this. You sit on different committees, and that kind of thing, and then when a job comes up and you don't get it and someone you don't even know [get's the job], and it's supposed to be a community thing ... and then you're like, 'Well, what am I doing this for then if it's not recognized?' (parents focus group, 1998)

The project's management team used this incident as an opportunity to review its policies and procedures with regard to hiring community residents. One of the parents involved eventually was hired as a recreation assistant. Summary In this chapter, we have described the nature of resident participation, what motivated residents to participate in the project, barriers to resident participation, strategies for overcoming those barriers and enhancing resident participation, and impacts of resident participation on the project. Figure 10.1 presents a grounded model of resident participation that combines these elements. Several challenges to involving residents in Better Beginnings still remain. One of the greatest is that the population of the community is very transient, making it difficult to have people involved for the long term, and to find ways to help individuals who will be in the community for a relatively short time: ... still lots of issues that we haven't solved. What do you do in a community that's incredibly transient? What can you have for those people? Can you do anything to make it any different? (project manager interview, 1998)

The transient nature of the community makes it difficult to recruit volunteers for committee work and leadership roles: It's an ongoing process to recruit, it's almost like a perpetual campaign,

Partnerships with Community Residents 211 but when it is done, it allows us to ensure we see some level of turnover for some committees. We do get new members and we just had research, CD, the Family Resource Committee set up a work group. CD just had to start looking for new members. Between meetings we found two other parents, so the challenge is always there, but I would think that it might be a little bit easier, (project manager interview, 1998)

Funding uncertainties also posed a problem with regard to getting residents involved in the project: The first thing that we would have learned is to eliminate any funding anxiety because that then sets the framework for how long you're going to be involved. And I think if people think things are coming to an end it will minimize their involvement, (project manager interview, 1998)

One of the most gratifying aspects of resident involvement in the project was the way the children who were involved in Better Beginnings from a young age were now beginning to become involved themselves. Over the long term, it is the children who are part of Better Beginnings who will learn to speak out and take a leadership role in their communities. There is some evidence that this is already occurring: What I'm suggesting to people now is to look at our leadership development from a 10-year point of view, because what we're finding now is you're getting children, who are now 13, who can speak up for the project. So if you look at it from that point of view and look at the kids you're dealing with that are 4, that would be a way to approach it. At some point they will be young adults, (project manager interview, 1998)

The participation of community residents is probably the key feature that has distinguished Highfield and other Better Beginnings, Better Futures projects from other prevention and health promotion projects across North America. Achieving a meaningful role for residents, and a true partnership between residents, service providers, and project staff took many years to accomplish, and there are many challenges that must be addressed in an ongoing way. The benefits of resident involvement, however - in terms of improved and better-attended programs, healthier and happier residents and children, and the development of a real sense of community - have been worth the considerable effort that all have expended to achieve it.

This page intentionally left blank

Part 4 Changed Lives, a Changed Community

In Part 4, we describe the impact of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project on the children, the parents and families, and the school and community. As noted in Chapter 2, the Better Beginnings, Better Futures project had three main outcome goals: (a) to reduce the incidence of child and family problems (a prevention goal), (b) to enhance child and family wellness (a health promotion goal), and (c) to improve the schools and communities in which the projects were situated (a community development goal). Unlike prevention programs that focus primarily on the children, Better Beginnings had a more holistic approach in striving to make changes at multiple ecological levels. Each of the three chapters in Part 4 is based on data gathered from the quantitative and qualitative components of the research. You may recall that the quantitative component of the research consists of two research designs: a baseline-focal cohort design and a longitudinal comparison group design. Findings from both designs are included. In each chapter, the quantitative findings are complemented by rich, indepth qualitative data regarding child, parent, family, school, and community changes as viewed by residents, project staff, service providers, teachers, and the researchers. Chapter 11 examines the impacts of the project on the children. Quantitative data were collected on three sets of outcome indicators for the children: (a) social, emotional, and behavioural problems and strengths; (b) cognitive functioning and academic achievement; and (c) nutrition and health. While Chapter 11 consists primarily of quantitative research findings, we do include some qualitative data from interviews with parents, teachers, and project staff, as well as stories from Highfield children.

214 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community

In Chapter 12, we describe the impacts of the project on parents and families. Quantitative data were collected on three sets of outcome indicators for parents and families: (a) parents' health, (b) parenting, and (c) parent and family social and emotional functioning. In addition to the quantitative findings, we present extensive qualitative data regarding the impacts of the project on residents and families, including the stories of some parents. In Chapter 13, we present quantitative and qualitative data regarding impacts on Highfield Junior School and the Highfield community. A wide range of quantitative indicators of school and community change were gathered from archival data (e.g., police statistics on crime, placement rates for child welfare agencies, special education placements in the school) and surveys of teachers and parents (e.g., regarding school climate and parent-teacher relationships, satisfaction with different aspects of the neighbourhood). Data were also gathered from qualitative interviews and observations with the different stakeholders regarding changes in the school and community. The Highfield project was successful in achieving all three of its outcome goals. Quantitative and qualitative data converged to demonstrate positive impacts on preventing child and family problems, promoting the strengths and competencies of children, parents, and families; and promoting school and community development. As the following chapters show, although many positive impacts were noted, we also observed a few negative impacts of the project.

11

What Happened to the Children?

In this chapter we examine the impact of the project on the children. As described in the Part 2, the Highfield Community Enrichment Project developed a wide range of child-focused programs that were designed to have a direct impact on the children. In addition, the project developed a range of parent, family, and community programs that could have an indirect impact on the children by enhancing the lives of their parents and families and improving their communities (Nelson, in press). What Happened to the Children? Quantitative Findings Beginning in this chapter, and continuing in the next two chapters, we present findings from the quantitative data that are relevant to the impacts of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project. Recall from Chapter 2 that we used two research designs to examine quantitative outcomes. The first is the baseline-focal cohort design, which compares children in Grade 2 before the project began its programs (the baseline group) with children in Grade 2 who had been involved in project programs (some of whom had been involved in four years of programming). We used this design to test the hypothesis that children who participated in programs provided by the Highfield project should have better outcomes (lower scores on measures of problems and higher scores on measures of skills), on average, than children who did not participate. The second design is the longitudinal comparison group design, which compares children who participated in Highfield programs with children from a comparison community. Children in these two groups were followed from junior kindergarten (JK) to Grade 3. We

216 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community

used this design to test the hypothesis that children who participated in Highfield programs would show more improvement over time (a decrease in scores on measures of problems and an increase in scores on measures of skills or strengths), on average, than children who did not participate. Differences on the outcome measures between the baseline comparison group and the focal cohort in the baseline-focal design were tested for statistical significance. Significant findings are those indicating that the average differences reported between the groups are highly unlikely to be the result of a chance occurrence (a probability of less than 1 in 100, denoted as p < .01, or 5 in 100, p < .05). Differences on the outcome measures between the focal cohort and the comparison group in the longitudinal comparison group design were tested for statistical significance over time. Not only do we note statistically significant differences between the groups, we also report the magnitude or the size of the differences using a statistic called an 'effect size' (ES). An ES is calculated by taking the average difference between the groups and dividing by a measure of group variability called the pooled standard deviation. An ES of .2 is considered to be small, .5 moderate, and .8 large (Cohen, 1977). We calculated ESs because we wanted to know not just if the project had significant impacts, but also how large those impacts were. Thus, we report both significance levels and ESs in our presentation of the findings of the quantitative analyses. More detailed information about the samples, the measures, and the specific analyses that were performed can be found in the Appendix. Children's Emotional and Behavioural Problems and Social Skills EMOTIONAL AND BEHAVIOURAL PROBLEMS

Teachers and parents rated children's behavioural and emotional problems using the child behaviour problem subscales of the Revised Ontario Child Health Study (Boyle et al., 1993). This scale contains two behaviour problem subscales (attention deficit and oppositional behaviour) and two emotional problem subscales (overanxious behaviour, and depression) for both the teacher and parent ratings. The teacher rating scale also includes a measure of passive victimization. These ratings were completed when children at Highfield and the comparison group were in Grades 1,2, and 3. Sample sizes for the analyses can be found in table 11.1. The project had no significant impact on any of the behaviour or emo-

What Happened to the Children? 217 TABLE 11.1 Sample Sizes for Teacher and Parent Ratings of Children's Problem Behaviours and Prosocial Behaviours for the Highfield Sample and the Two Comparison Group Samples Group Teacher Highfield intervention Highfield Grade 2 comparison Longitudinal comparison Parent Highfield intervention Highfield Grade 2 comparison Longitudinal comparison

Grade 1

70 108

76 115

Grade 2

52 89 95

78 43 118

Grade 3

79 109

76 116

tional problem ratings by teachers in either the baseline-focal or longitudinal analyses. However, in all but one case the project did have significant impact on the four outcome measures rated by parents in both the baseline-focal and longitudinal analyses. The children who participated in the Highfield project showed lower mean scores on these measures of behavioural and emotional problems compared to children in the baseline comparison group (see figure 11.1). The ESs for baseline-focal comparisons for parent ratings were as follows: overanxious behaviour (.66), depression (.93), attention deficit (.48), and oppositional behaviour (.22). Also, the focal cohort showed decreased scores over time compared with children from the comparison community (see, e.g., figure 11.2). The ESs for the longitudinal comparisons for parent ratings were as follows: overanxious behaviour (.56), depression (.63), attention deficit (.52), and oppositional behaviour (.58). SOCIAL SKILLS

To measure children's positive social behaviours, ratings on three subscales (self-control, cooperation, and assertiveness) from the Social Skills Rating Scale (Gresham & Elliott, 1990) were also collected from teachers and parents when the children in the Highfield project and the comparison community were in Grades 1, 2 and 3. Children in the focal cohort showed significantly greater self-control and more cooperation, but not greater assertiveness, than children in the baseline comparison group on the teacher ratings (see figure 11.3). The ESs were .46 for self-control and .44 for cooperation. The longitudinal analyses showed statistically significant differences

218 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community Figure 11.1 Unadjusted Mean Scores of Parent Ratings of Children's Overanxious Behaviour, Depression, Attention Deficit, and Oppositional Behaviour in the Baseline-Focal Analyses

over time between the focal cohort and the comparison group on teacher ratings of self-control, cooperation, and assertiveness. In each case children in the focal group showed greater improvement over time than did children in the comparison group. The ESs were .55 for self-control, 1.21 for cooperation, and .59 for assertiveness. The overall pattern of results looks quite similar for parent ratings of children's social skills. As is shown in figure 11.4, children in the focal cohort have significantly higher mean scores on parent ratings of cooperation and assertiveness, but not self-control, than children in the baseline comparison group. The ESs were .38 for cooperation and .48 for assertiveness. For the longitudinal comparison analyses, there were no significant differences over time between the focal cohort group and the comparison group on any of the three parent ratings of children's social skills. DISCUSSION A major focus of this universal prevention project was on the social-

What Happened to the Children? 219 Figure 11.2 Unadjusted Mean Scores of Parent Ratings of Children's Overanxious Behaviour during Grades 1,2, and 3 for Children in the Focal Cohort and Comparison Groups

Figure 11.3 Unadjusted Mean Scores of Teacher Ratings of Children's Self-Control, Cooperation, and Assertiveness in the Baseline-Focal Analyses

220 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community Figure 11.4 Unadjusted Mean Scores of Parent Ratings of Children's Self-Control, Cooperation, and Assertiveness in the Baseline-Focal Analyses

emotional functioning of young children. School-based programming in Highfield Junior School, such as the Lion's Quest Skills for Growing program, was implemented in all the classrooms. Also at Highfield, educational assistants worked with the research focal cohort children in their classrooms from JK to Grade 2. In addition to these in-school programs, there were programs for parents to improve their parenting skills. The positive findings with respect to impacts of the project on children's emotional, behavioural, and social behaviour are consistent with those in similar universal, school-based, multi-year projects in the United States, such as the Child Development Project (Battisch, Solomon, Watson, Solomon, & Schaps, 1989), the Social Development Project (O'Donnell, Hawkins, Catalano, Abbott, & Day, 1995), and Fast Track (Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group, 1999a, 1999b, 2000). The findings showed positive impacts of the project on pro-social behaviours, as rated by both teachers and parents, but only on parentrated problem behaviours. It is unclear why teachers did not report a reduction in problem behaviours. Moreover, the pattern of findings was consistent between the two research designs (baseline-focal cohort and longitudinal), which strengthens the credibility of the findings. It is interesting to compare the improvements in children's social,

What Happened to the Children? 221

emotional, and behavioural functioning in the present study with those of the Helping Children Adjust Project, also funded by the Ontario government (Hundert et al., 1999). That project involved one year of teacher-provided social-skills training and enhanced reading instruction and parent-training in kindergarten through Grade 2 for 1,400 children attending 30 primary schools in disadvantaged neighbourhoods. Children receiving social skills training showed significant improvements in ratings of pro-social behaviours on the playground, as well as decreases in parent and teacher ratings of behavioural problems over a three-year period relative to comparison groups that received no socialskills training. However, the ESs for teacher ratings of children's emotional problems found in the Better Beginnings sites were nearly three times larger than those for the same measures in the Helping Children Adjust Project. In Highfield, the ESs for parent-reported decreases of both emotional and behavioural problems and improved social skills in their children also were substantially larger than those reported by parents in the Helping Children Adjust Project over a similar period of time. There are several possible explanations for these differences. Classroom programs in Highfield were provided for four years, compared with one year in the Helping Children Adjust study. This points to the potential value of continuous, longer-term programs (Nelson, Westhues, & MacLeod, 2003). A second relevant factor may be differences in the way the school-based programs were designed. In Helping Children Adjust, Hundert et al. (1999) report that there was very little contact between the research team and the teachers. Engagement of the principal and vice-principal, teachers, parents, and project personnel in developing the programs was central at the Highfield project. This community-based feature of the project may have been an important influence on the size of the desirable changes which occurred. Children's Cognitive Functioning and Academic Achievement MEASURES AND FINDINGS

Cognitive and academic performance measures, administered individually by site researchers, included: A measure of receptive vocabulary (the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Dunn & Dunn, 1981), administered to the children from JK to Grade 3; A measure of non-verbal problem-solving (the Block Design from the WISC-R; Wechsler, 1974), administered in Grades 2 and 3,

222 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community TABLE 1 1 .2 Sample Sizes for Children's Cognitive and Achievement Measures for the Highfield Sample and the Two Comparison Group Samples Group

JK

SK

Grade 1

Highfield intervention Highfield Grade 2 comparison Longitudinal comparison

74 58

81 111

83 114

Grade 2

81 56 117

Grade 3

89 114

Standardized measures of reading and mathematics achievement (Wide Range Achievement Test, Jastak & Wilkinson, 1984, and the Key Math Test, Connolly, 1991), administered in Grades 1 and 2; and A teacher-rated Scale of Reading Attitude (Rowell, 1972), completed by teachers when the children were in Grades 1, 2, and 3. Sample sizes for the analyses of these data can be found in table 11.2. There were no significant differences on any of the measures of cognitive functioning and academic achievement in either the baseline-focal analyses or the longitudinal analyses. DISCUSSION The lack of improvements in cognitive functioning or academic achievement is consistent with findings from some projects focusing on the early primary grades. For example, the Helping Children Adjust Project (Hundert et al, 1999), despite the enhanced reading instruction provided by the project, found no positive effects on the same reading achievement measure as employed in the present study. Likewise, the Abecedarian Project (Ramey & Campbell, 1984) reported no improvements on academic or intellectual measures in a group of children who received specialized in-school programming from school entry to Grade 2. One possible reason is that all children in these projects were receiving regular primary school programs throughout the implementation period. For a positive effect to show, programs would have to improve on what was accomplished by regular JK, SK, and Grades 1 and 2 educational activities. It may be that the Better Beginnings programs were not intensive enough to accomplish this. Other school-based intervention projects have reported academic gains for children in the early grades. For example, like the Highfield

What Happened to the Children? 223

project, the Success for All program in Baltimore utilizes educational assistants in kindergarten through Grade 3 to provide intensive academic support to disadvantaged children (Slavin et al., 1994). The idea with both of these programs is to reduce the teacher-student ratio so that children can receive more intensive support when they begin school. Research on Success for All has shown positive impacts on reading achievement. Perhaps the reason that positive impacts on academic outcomes were not achieved was that the nature of the more intensive support in the early grades was not focused explicitly on vocabulary and math, which were the specific outcome measures used. A more structured and focused, academically oriented program may have been necessary to produce positive outcomes in the academic domain. It is also possible that more positive outcomes may not become evident until the children are older. Recall that many of the children at Highfield need English as a Second Language (ESL), with a number not speaking any English until they enter the school. Since second language acquisition takes time, it will be important to examine children's cognitive and academic functioning as they move into middle school and high school (Cummins & Swain, 1986). Children's Nutrition and Health CHILD NUTRITION

Information on the intake of energy (calories, carbohydrates, fat, protein) and selected nutrients (vitamin A, thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, folate, vitamin C, calcium, iron, zinc) was obtained with a 24-hour dietary recall. For children in JK and SK, the interviewer asked the parent to recall what the child ate during the previous day. To ensure that the information was complete, the parent's permission was obtained to contact caregivers if the child had been away for any part of the day. This interview was conducted according to a standardized protocol, asking additional questions (snack, type of milk, cereal, use of butter or margarine, etc.) to obtain as complete a description as possible. For children in Grade 2, the interviewer asked the child to recall what s/he had eaten during the previous day. To ensure that the information was complete, whenever possible the parent was also asked to recall what the child ate. The 24-hour dietary recall data were analysed using the Candat Nutrient Calculation System. Sample sizes for these analyses can be found in table 11.3. From the baseline-focal design, we found significantly higher rates of

224 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community TABLE 11.3 Sample Sizes for Measures of Children's Health for the Highfield Sample and the Two Comparison Group Samples Group

JK

SK

Grade 1

Highfield intervention Highfield Grade 2 comparison Longitudinal comparison

67 59

67 110

76 108

Grade 2

78 43 95

Grade 3

76 109

intake for protein, niacin, riboflavin, and zinc for children in the focal cohort compared with children in the baseline comparison group. However, there were no significant improvements found over time for the intake of any of the nutrients in the longitudinal comparison group design. CHILD HEALTH

Each parent in the program and comparison sites was asked, 'In general, compared to other children the same age, would you say your child's health is excellent (1), very good (2), good (3), fair (4), or poor (5)?' (National Longitudinal Study for Children and Youth, 1997). This question was asked in the parent interviews from JK through Grade 3 and was gathered only for the longitudinal design. There was a significant improvement over time in the rating of children's health for Highfield parents relative to parents in the comparison community (see figure 11.5). For this measure, a lower score means better health. Moreover, the magnitude of this effect was large, with an ES of 1.02. Parents were also asked about a number of specific child health problems (health-related limitations, asthma, injuries), health promotion activities (immunization, improved parent sense of control over child health, bicycle helmet use), and use of health care services (National Longitudinal Study for Children and Youth, 1997). No consistent pattern of findings for these data favoured Highfield project children relative to children in either of the comparison groups. DISCUSSION Consistent with previous research on school-based health and nutrition programs (see Durlak, 1995, Chap. 5), we found that Highfield children who participated in Better Beginnings had a higher intake of a number of nutrients compared with children in the baseline comparison group.

What Happened to the Children? 225 Figure 11.5 Mean Scores of Parent Ratings of Children's Health from JK to Grade 3 for Children in the Focal Cohort and Comparison Group

This finding was not replicated in the longitudinal analysis. This may be due to the fact that the healthy snack program was already in operation during JK, when the research focal cohort was first assessed, and continued throughout the next four years in the project. While there were no significant differences between the groups on a number of health problems and health promotion activities, the finding of a significant and large improvement in parent ratings of children's health is encouraging as to the health promotion potential of the project. What Happened to the Children? Qualitative Findings

Box 11.1

Sara's mother was and continues to be an active member of the project. She has volunteered on almost every project committee, and she has devoted as many hours to the project as many of the paid staff. When the project took a delegation to Metro Toronto City

226 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community Council about the need for funding neighbourhood resource centres and community programs, Sara (who was 13 at the time) was a featured speaker, addressing city councillors, the mayor of Toronto, and many others in the audience. This is what Sara had to say: I am a child ... I am one of 6,000 children who walk my street every day to and from school. There are six schools on my street. I am the future of the community ... and our society. The school I went to two years ago [Highfield Junior School] is one of the largest inner city schools ... maybe in the city or the province or the country. When I was younger and not going to school I was one of 6,000 preschoolers in the area. Rexdale is a young community with up to 12 per cent of its residents under the age of 12 and a total of one-third under 24. Many of my friends have large families. Their grandparents also live with them. They and their families are new to Canada. The neighbourhood is not like the neighbourhoods my friends grew up in ... There is no central place for everyone to gather, you often don't see life on the streets; it appears unfriendly and sometimes there are scary things that happen. When I was younger sometimes my mom would take me to the Family Resource Centre. This was fun and I got to meet a lot of other children. But I hear that there is only one Family Resource Centre in Rexdale and 110 throughout the whole city. My math isn't too good but this doesn't seem to be equity to me. Now I go to a school. When I went to [Highfield] Junior School, there were many programs like a snack and breakfast program. But I hear that many of the schools in Rexdale don't have these programs. My sense of social justice isn't that well developed, but that doesn't seem fair to me. Maybe the new school board will be more encouraging of these programs. I hear that many politicians and businessmen would like me to be able to work in the global village where there is supposed to be a large free market. I have three things to say to that. First of all, I am from the global village and so are my friends... Second of all, I haven't found the free market yet... Nothing seems to be free these days. Lastly, if you want me to grow up capable, I learn all year round and all day long. So, I need something before school, as do my friends ... and something after school. I also really need something in the summer. I hear there might not be much again this summer by way of programs. Not only might I have nothing to do, but also many of my teenage cousins who need summer jobs won't have anything to do either.

What Happened to the Children? 227

Throughout the demonstration phase of the project, we interviewed parents at different points in time about their involvement with the project and what benefits or impacts they experienced from that involvement. Parents reported tremendous impacts for themselves - as will be told in Chapter 12 - but they often talked about the benefits to their children as well. Direct benefits to children from programming were reported by parents, as were indirect benefits resulting from the parents' own participation in program activities and project management. Staff and teachers also reported direct benefits to children from the variety of program activities offered. Direct Benefits

PARENTS' VIEWS OF DIRECT BENEFITS TO CHILDREN Parents reported that they had seen improvements in children's social skills, as well as cognitive skills, through their involvement in program activities. For example, several parents mentioned that having their children use the toy lending library, or the Family Resource Centre, gave their preschoolers and young children an opportunity to play with other children: This is somewhere to go, and, while I get to socialize, my son gets to do the same thing as well' (parents focus group, 1992). Parents reported many examples of ways in which they had seen children develop their skills and confidence. One very active volunteer with the project described how he had seen a lot of children benefit from the project, and gave two specific examples of how the programs had helped children: Seeing these kids come in from day one, and when the year ends, the improvement they've made ... You can see the difference. I mean you can see the difference in all the kids ... [One child] had a speech problem. We were talking ... and we couldn't understand the words. But then after we found out she had an ear problem ... I'm talking to her now, it's just like she's a normal kid ... You can tell the difference, because she had that oneto-one, she had other kids with her, and you could see the big difference ... Another one was a boy ... When he first came [here] he was ... his mother couldn't leave the building. He would scream and holler, and every toy was his. And now you look at him today, he's a different [kid], (parent personal interview, 1997)

Other parents also reported that the project was providing stimulating

228 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community activities and programs for children that had helped them further develop their skills: I have seen my son grow and achieve new challenges and skills, (parent, excerpts from community document, 1994) It's very good because ... my child gets familiar, too, before she joins the kindergarten class ... I had [my daughter] at home and she barely speaks, just a couple words, her vocabulary was so small, and you should hear her now. She is doing very, very well, (parents focus group, 1992) STAFF AND TEACHER VIEWS OF DIRECT BENEFITS FOR CHILDREN

Staff, too, reported that they had seen many children benefit from the programming and improve their social and cognitive skills: To watch the kids. When we started there were kids who couldn't even talk; they were having difficulty speaking ... The little ones that we had have grown up. They have moved on. (staff personal interview, 1997) The response that kids make, the way they ... glow ... with my involvement. It's so satisfying. It's the nicest thing that can happen, when I take a child, work with a child that was really behind, or didn't have their language, and then a year later, I'm looking, this is the same child? Or even going into the classroom in September, and by March these kids are saying 'I've got it, I've got it', (staff personal interview, 1997) Two teachers noted similar benefits: The support that it's given the Grade Is and 2s is certainly successful, and everybody thinks it's great. Well, the skills they're learning having another teacher [assistant] is really important.' (In-school committee focus group, 1998) I think that [parent volunteers] coming in the classroom is also a big benefit to the children. (In-school Committee focus group, 1998) PARENTS VIEWS OF INDIRECT BENEFITS TO CHILDREN

Parents also reported that because of their own active involvement in volunteering with the project, as well as participating in program activities, their children had indirectly benefited. That is, parents spoke

What Happened to the Children? 229

of their children being proud of their parents' accomplishments, or how the parents' growth in self-confidence, or development of parenting and other skills, had benefited their children. But doesn't it make your kids feel good ... don't you find? ... Because I know [my child] is very proud ... because he thinks his mom knows everybody. He'll tell kids in the school, 'Oh well, my mom knows, she calls [the principal by her first name] ... It's really a big deal... so it's given him confidence, too. (parents focus group, 1992) I have been a volunteer at the project for three years. As a parent I feel more encouraged to spend time with my kids because the project has taught me values and skills that make me better equipped to deal with the stress of being a single mom. (parent, excerpt from community document, 1994)

Parents also felt that their increased contact with staff, teachers, and other service providers in the school has been a valuable source of support for them, and again benefited their children. For example, one very active parent, who had been having some problems with her son's behaviour, felt comfortable approaching a service provider from a children's mental health centre who had been involved with the project. This service provider pointed her in the right direction and the parent was able to access services for her child. The parent reported that she would not have known what to do about her son, or where to go for help, if it wasn't for her volunteer activities with the project (parent personal interview, 1997). Other parents reported that because they were at the school more, they had more contact with their children, the teachers, and other people who provide services to their children. They believed that this increased contact not only improved problems that the children had been experiencing, but prevented further problems from occurring. For example, one active volunteer parent was told by his son's teacher that his son had been very disruptive in class. The parent checked in on his son one day and found (to his surprise and dismay) that the teacher's assessment of his son's behaviour had been correct. Because of his active presence with the project at the school, he periodically visited his son's class and found that 'it made a big difference, a big difference.' He also commented that this experience had taught him the importance of communicating with the teachers: The parents seemed

230 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community

to blame everything on the teachers. I said "No, you come and look at your kid, get involved, be here, and then you'll see how your kid is behaving, and then if there's a problem, you can talk with his teacher and you'll have no problems'" (parent personal interview, 1997). Summary This chapter spoke to the Better Beginnings project's success in achieving two of its three main goals: (a) to reduce the incidence of child problems (a prevention goal), and (b) to enhance child wellness (a health promotion goal). The quantitative and qualitative data collected revealed some positive impacts in both these domains. Parents' ratings of their children's emotional and behavioural functioning showed improvements in both research designs - comparing the research focal cohort to the baseline cohort, as well as to a comparison community in the longitudinal design. Further, parents' ratings of children's health improved over time relative to the comparison community. The research cohort also showed some nutritional advantages relative to the baseline cohort. Both parents and teachers noted improvements in children's social skills as well. There were, however, no significant impacts found on children's cognitive functioning or academic achievement. The positive findings on children's emotional and behaviour functioning in the Better Beginnings project are similar to other universal, school-based projects in the United States (Battisch et al., 1989; Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group, 1999a, 1999b, 2000; O'Donnell et al., 1995). Further, the effect sizes found in the Better Beginnings project in children's social, emotional, and behavioural functioning were considerably larger than in another school-based social-skills program implemented in Ontario (Hundert et al., 1999). Finally, parents and staff also provided some rich quotes about how they believed the program had benefited the children. Parents and staff thought that children involved in the programming had benefited by improving their social and behavioural functioning. They also asserted that the program stimulated the children academically and cognitively. In addition to these direct benefits, parents who were very active in the project also believed their children had indirectly benefited from the parents' own involvement; that is, they felt more confident and had developed new skills that they felt benefited their children and their families.

12

What Happened to the Parents and Families?

Research and common sense both tell us that we need to think of the whole family if we want to ensure a better future for the children. Parents, in particular, are critical to the development of healthy, welladjusted children (Landy & Tarn, 1996). If, for example, parents are suffering from financial or marital stress, if they lack support from family and friends, or if they have little knowledge of or experience in how to manage their children's behaviour, it is difficult to parent effectively. Consequently, the Better Beginnings project was designed to support and strengthen parents in their role of fostering healthy development in their children. Earlier chapters have described the many programs that the project provided to enhance the well-being and effectiveness of parents and families, as well as children. In this chapter, we describe the impact of the project on the parents and families of the Highfield Project. We first present some of the quantitative data that relates to the impact of the project on parents' health and parenting practices, as well as on the social and emotional functioning of the parents and families. We then present some of the qualitative data we have gathered about the impacts of the project on parents and families. What Happened to the Parents and Families? Quantitative Findings As with the data concerning the impact of the project on children, our data relating to the impact of the project on parents and families came from two kinds of research design and analyses. In the first type of analysis - the 'baseline-focal' analysis - we compared parents and families who had participated for up to four years of Better Beginnings program-

232 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community TABLE 12.1 Sample Sizes for Measures of Parent and Family Functioning for the Highfield Sample and the Two Comparison Group Samples Group

JK

SK

Highfield intervention Highfield Grade 2 comparison Longitudinal comparison

67

67

76

59

115

115

Grade 1

Grade 2

78 43 118

Grade 3

76 116

ming (these are referred to as the 'focal' group) with parents and families in the Highfield neighbourhood whom we had assessed before the project began in 1992-93, and who had not participated in Better Beginnings programming (the 'baseline' parents and families). In the second type of analysis - the longitudinal comparison analysis - we compared focal parents and families who had participated in the Highfield project with parents and families from a comparison community in the same region, as their children moved from JK to Grade 3. All results in this chapter are based on the measures and questions we administered annually in interviews with parents in the Highfield and comparison communities. The sample sizes (i.e., the number of parent interviews) on which our analyses are based are presented in table 12.1. As in the previous chapter on the program's effects on children, we report not only statistically significant differences between groups, but also the magnitude of these differences, in terms of effect sizes. Once again, more detailed information about the samples, measures, and specific analyses that were conducted can be found in the Appendix. Parent Health

Parents from Highfield (those in both the focal and baseline groups), and in the comparison community, were asked a number of questions related to their health. They were asked to rate their overall health in response to the following question: 'In general, compared to other persons your age, would you say that your health is excellent, very good, good, fair, or poor?' Parents also were asked to indicate the extent to which they experienced limitations, in the kind or amount of work they did or in other activities, because of physical health problems, physical and emotional health problems combined, or physical pain or discomfort (Charette, 1988; Statistics Canada, 1988). Those with limita-

What Happened to the Parents and Families? 233

tions were asked to describe their health problems in greater detail. To explore parental health as it affected their children, parents were asked, 'Does the condition of your health interfere with caring for your child?' In addition, parents were asked questions relating to their use of prescription medications, and their weight (to assess problems with being overweight or underweight). Analyses of parental health indicated that the project had no significant effects on overall parent health, limitations due to physical and mental health problems combined, pain, or in ability to care for their children due to health problems. However, results did show a significant difference between parents in the focal group and parents in the baseline group in terms of limitations due to physical health problems, with an effect size (ES) of .59. Fewer parents in the focal group reported such limitations than did parents in the baseline group, who had not had the benefits of Better Beginnings programming. Results also indicated that, when compared with parents in the comparison community, parents in the Highfield project showed a greater reduction in the extent to which they were prescribed medication for pain and their use of pain medication (ESs = 0.48, 0.40, respectively). Health is much more than the absence of pain or disability. Healthy individuals take active steps to increase good health (health enhancement) and to decrease their chances of developing problems (risk reduction) (Ontario Ministry of Health, 1990). Parents' health-enhancing and risk-reducing behaviours can have a strong impact on their children, who often model their parents' behaviours. Also, parents who engage in health-enhancing behaviours will be healthier and better able to provide optimal care for their children. Some behaviours, such as smoking, may pose a direct health risk to children, in this case from second-hand smoke (Youngkin & Davis, 1994). Parents were asked questions about a number of health promotion and illness prevention behaviours. They were asked how frequently they exercised, whether and how often they smoked, and how much alcohol they consumed. Mothers were asked whether they had had Papanicolaou (Pap) smears for the detection of cervical cancer and whether they did monthly breast self-examinations. Highfield parents who had participated in Better Beginnings programming showed a pattern of improved health promotion and illness prevention behaviour. Compared to baseline parents, focal parents showed significantly lower levels of alcohol consumption (ES = 0.46). Relative to mothers in the comparison community, focal-group mothers

234 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community Figure 12.1 Mean Scores for Exercise Behaviour for Parents from Highfield and the Comparison Community

showed greater improvements in the extent to which they took Pap smears. Focal-group parents also improved the extent to which they engaged in regular exercise (ES = .44), as is shown in figure 12.1. The figure shows that while individuals from the comparison community engaged in more regular exercise initially, their levels of exercise remained relatively stable, while Highfield parents' exercise levels did increase over time. While the differences were not significant, parents in the focal group reported having fewer smokers in their homes than did parents in the baseline group or parents in the comparison community. Parenting Behaviour

Many of the programs at the Highfield Community Enrichment Project were designed to help individuals become the best parents they could be, by reducing their stress levels, giving them the resources and support they needed to parent their children effectively, and by giving

What Happened to the Parents and Families? 235

them the opportunity to learn skills that they could use in parenting. In order to assess the impact of the project on parenting, a number of parenting measures were administered. Three parenting subscales used in the National Longitudinal Study for Children and Youth were used to assess different aspects of parent behaviour. These were adapted from Strayhorn and Weidman's (1988) Parent Practices Scale. Parents were asked to indicate how often (from 'never' to 'many times a day') they engaged in different kinds of behaviour with their child (e.g., 'How often do you get angry and punish your child?'; How often does your child get away with things that you feel should have been punished?'; 'How often do you do something special with your child that he/she enjoys?'). The subscales assessed hostile/ineffective parenting behaviour, consistent parenting, and positive interactions with children. In addition, parents completed the Parenting Sense of Competence Scale, developed by Gibaud-Wallston and Wandersman, 1978 (see also Johnston & Mash, 1989) and revised by the FAST-Track Project (Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group, 1992). This scale provides scores on two subscales, one which assesses satisfaction with parenting (e.g., 'Being a parent makes you tense and anxious' - this item is reverse-scored), and the other which assesses parenting efficacy (e.g., 'You know what you need to do to be a good parent'). Parents who were part of the focal group at Highfield showed consistently greater improvements in parenting practices than did parents in the Etobicoke comparison site. They showed significantly more improvement in consistent parenting, hostile/ineffective parenting, and parenting satisfaction than did parents in the comparison community (ESs = 0.80,1.73, and 0.40, respectively). They also reported greater increases in positive parenting and a greater sense of parenting efficacy, though differences in these subscales did not reach statistical significance. Figure 12.2 shows the level of hostile/ineffective parenting over the three years during which this was assessed. Parent and Family Social and Emotional Functioning

The home environment has an important effect on children's wellbeing. When parents experience the support of family and friends, and when they are in a satisfactory marital relationship, children benefit. Homes characterized by stress, parental depression, and domestic violence, on the other hand, are detrimental to children's well-being. Sev-

236 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community Figure 12.2 Mean Scores for Hostile/Ineffective Parenting for Parents from Highfield and the Comparison Community

eral measures were used in interviews with parents to assess various aspects of parent and family social and emotional functioning, and in general, the findings were very positive. Of 18 possible comparisons that could be made between parents in the focal group and parents in the baseline group or comparison communities, 17 were in the positive direction, indicating a positive impact of the project. SOCIAL SUPPORT AND MARITAL SATISFACTION

Social support was assessed by means of a brief, six-item version of the Social Provisions Scale (Cutrona & Russell, 1987). It contained items such as, 'I have family and friends who help me feel safe, secure, and happy/ Intimacy and marital satsifaction was assessed by means of a seven-item measure taken from the Quality of Life Survey (Institute of Social Research, 1977). Six of the items on this scale assess marital intimacy (e.g., To what extent does your marriage/relationship satisfy your needs for friendship and understanding?'). The seventh item ('All things considered, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your marriage/relationship?') assessed overall marital/relationship satisfaction.

What Happened to the Parents and Families? 237

Results indicated positive effects of the project on both social support and marital satisfaction. Parents in the Highfield focal group reported significantly greater improvements in social support (ES = .61) than did parents in the comparison site. Relative to parents in the comparison site, parents in the Highfield focal group also reported significantly greater improvements in marital satisfaction over time (ES = 1.60). PARENTAL DEPRESSION, LIFE STRESS, AND MARITAL VIOLENCE

Parental depression was assessed by means of the Centre for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (Radloff, 1977). This is a scale of 20 items, each of which is related to symptoms of depression. Parents indicated the extent to which they experienced the thoughts and feelings expressed by each item on the scale (e.g. 'I thought my life had been a failure'). Life stress was assessed by asking parents to indicate which in a list of 14 potentially stressful events had occurred in their lives in the previous year (e.g., losing a job or being unemployed, financial problems, separation from a spouse or partner, serious illness). Parents were also asked how much tension they felt juggling their job or studies, housework, family and child-rearing and other factors, on a scale from '0' (no tension) to '10' (a great deal of tension). The wording of this question was different for employed and unemployed parents, so the analysis of the responses to this question were done separately for these two groups. Marital violence was assessed by a version of the Conflict Tactics Scale (Straus, 1990), which asked parents to indicate methods they had used in the previous year (e.g., talking things over, pushing, hitting with a fist) to deal with conflict between them and their partners. Results suggested that the project also had an impact in terms of reducing parental depression, stress, and violence. Parents in the Highfield focal group reported lower levels of depression than did parents in the baseline or comparison groups, though results did not reach statistical significance. Parents in the Highfield focal group showed significantly lower levels of stressful life events, when compared to both the baseline parents and those in the comparison community (ESs = 0.48, 0.59, respectively). Figure 12.3 shows the levels of stress for the Highfield baseline and focal cohorts. When compared to parents in the baseline group, those in the Highfield focal group reported significantly lower levels of domestic violence in the home (ES = 0.66). While 10.7 per cent of parents in the baseline group had reported their partners had been violent with them,

238 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community Figure 12.3 Mean Scores for Stress Levels for Parents from Highfield Baseline and Focal Cohort Groups

none of the parents in the focal group reported violent behaviour by their partners. OVERALL FAMILY FUNCTIONING

To assess overall family functioning, we administered the 12-item General Functioning Scale of the Family Assessment Device (FAD) to parents (Epstein, Baldwin, & Bishop, 1983). This measure asks parents to rate the entire family on items such as 'In times of crisis, we can turn to each other for support/ and 'Making decisions is a problem for our family' (reverse-scored). Parents in the Highfield focal group reported better family functioning on this scale than did parents in the baseline and comparison community groups, but these differences were not statistically significant. Summary of Quantitative Results The quantitative results showed a large and profound impact on the parents involved in the project. Parents who participated in the High-

What Happened to the Parents and Families? 239

field project reported greater overall health, fewer health limitations, and less use of prescription drugs for pain. They were also more likely to practice positive health behaviours, reporting more timely Pap smears, more frequent breast self-examinations, more frequent exercise, fewer smokers in their homes, and less alcohol use. Highfield focal parents also demonstrated significant improvements in their role as parents, showing a decrease in hostile-ineffective parenting, more consistent parenting, and greater satisfaction with their parenting role. Finally, Highfield focal parents showed a general pattern of improved parent and family social and emotional functioning, with evidence of greater social support and intimacy with their partners; lower levels of depression, stress, and domestic violence; and improved general family functioning. It is instructive to compare the impact of Better Beginnings on parents with the impacts of other preventive interventions that have a significant parent support and/or education component. A review of evaluations of 10 major preventive interventions (Karoly et al., 1998), including the High Scope/Perry Preschool Project, the Chicago ParentChild Center and Expansion Program, the Houston Parent-Child Development Center, and Project Care, found only 'mixed' results in terms of impacts on parents (in contrast to the several significant impacts on children that were found for these programs). Only three of the seven programs which measured parenting behaviour found significant program effects. Fewer than half the programs assessed program impact on things such as parental economic well-being and health, but of those that did, the majority of programs showed no significant impacts. Layzer et al.'s (2001) meta-analytic study of family support programs (98 per cent of which had a goal relating to improved parenting) found that these kinds of programs typically had significant effects on parenting behaviour and family functioning, but that the effects were usually small, with effect sizes typically less than .20. In contrast, most of the effects on parenting and family functioning obtained for the Highfield Better Beginnings project were in the moderate to large range. What Happened to the Parents and Families? Qualitative Findings The quantitative data coming from standardized scales to which parents responded indicated that the project had had a profound impact on their lives. This is corroborated by the qualitative data that we obtained

240 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community

from parents and others throughout the life of the project. The qualitative data also indicated many other ways in which the project benefitted the parents and families who participated in Better Beginnings, especially those parents who were involved in volunteering and decisionmaking. Positive Impacts on Parents and Families ENHANCED SELF-CONFIDENCE AND SELF-ESTEEM

By far the most frequently mentioned benefit of participating in Better Beginnings for parents was an increase in self-confidence. Residents were asked to participate in a wide range of activities that they often had never experienced before: they attended (and often chaired) meetings with teachers and social service professionals; they planned programs; they interviewed candidates for staff positions and made decisions about who to hire; and they made presentations to teachers, politicians, professionals, and others. While residents find these activities daunting and intimidating at first, they almost inevitably become more comfortable and confident in these roles. Hand-in-hand with increases in selfconfidence, involved residents experienced pronounced changes in selfesteem. Several residents described how their participation in Better Beginnings, Better Futures made them feel more satisfied with their lives, and better about themselves generally: 'I must say that I have really tremendously enjoyed my involvement with the project. I've come to really love and respect people, and they've come to love and respect me. People pushing me. People like [the project manager] have made me feel quite tall. I didn't just give; I received in return. I've really gotten a lot out of it. I came with a certain amount of confidence, but it has grown, matured ... Without the encouragement it wouldn't have happened' (field notes, 1995). ENHANCED SOCIAL CONTACT AND SOCIAL SUPPORT

Another major consequence of participation for many residents came from the opportunity the project offered to meet other residents. This helped break the isolation many parents had been experiencing, giving them the chance to make new friends and develop a network of social support: 'It has made a difference because I have made a lot of very good friends that I could really depend on... that if I'm not there one day and something should happen to my kids, I could easily call the people here to take care of my kids before I get there ... We have made friends to the point that we're more like a family, like we're beyond friendship

What Happened to the Parents and Families? 241

... we work very closely together. Whatever problems we have, there's somebody there that we can talk to' (parent interview, 1997). This aspect of the project was especially important for individuals who had recently moved to Canada: I'm new to this country, right, and I came out to this program. I've met a lot of new people ... I met all these ladies who are so nice to me, and I call them my friends because I don't have any relatives or friends, right? These are the people I like being with, so I look forward to the days, you know, to come here. So, it's very good for me' (parent interview, 1993). REDUCED STRESS AND ENHANCED ABILITY TO COPE WITH STRESS

The enhanced level of social support that residents experienced, along with the many programs that offered them some respite from their daily tasks and concerns, reduced the stress that they felt in their lives, and enabled them to cope more effectively with stresses, problems, and challenges: Tt has helped to get out and talk ... to cope with things' (parent interview, 1993). IMPROVED INTERACTIONS WITH TEACHERS AND SERVICE PROVIDERS

In addition to giving residents the opportunity to get to know their neighbours better, Better Beginnings also brought residents into closer contact with teachers in the school and with many of the service providers and other professionals who worked in their community. Importantly, this contact occurred on a very different basis than it had in the past. Formerly, residents interacted with professionals as the recipients of services; now, they were collaborating with teachers and service providers on a more equal basis. Consequently, residents were much less apprehensive about talking to these individuals when a problem arose, and also had a better knowledge of how the school and other organizations in their communities operated: The community I live in has become closer ... I have become empowered to be an active community resident. I feel that I can approach teachers and community agency personnel with confidence and composure, (parent statement taken from community document, 1994) It has made me more comfortable being around the teachers in the school, because that's one of the things that's hard for parents, you know, if you're not involved in the school. It's like before you were involved in the school, to approach a teacher you always feel like they're high, and you ... And now you don't feel that way ... they're just a person who is teaching.

242 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community They're more approachable. Through Better Beginnings everybody knows everybody, (parent interview, 1997) ENHANCED PARENTING

Over the years, parents also talked about how their participation in the project helped them become better parents. This occurred not only through the project's parenting workshops, but also through the opportunities the project afforded parents to be with their children, talk with others, get advice, and be exposed to the positive philosophy that project staff espoused with regard to child-rearing: Going to the workshops helped a lot... the parenting workshops ... all the constant flow of information. All you have to do is leave your house and walk 10 minutes [to get to the project] ... There's been a vast highway of information and knowledge, (parent interview, 1997) I have been a volunteer at the project for three years. As a parent I feel encouraged to spend more time with my kids because the project has taught me values and skills that make me better equipped to deal with the stress of being a single mom in the nineties, (parent statement taken from community document, 1994) A year ago at this time I was a single mom on assistance with no idea of what to do with my life. Another parent and volunteer helped me to open a lot of doors I didn't know existed ... [This volunteering has] not only helped me to stay closer to my child who was attending the school, but also to stay above any problems that might occur in any single day. (parent statement taken from community document, 1994) ENHANCED SKILLS

In addition to the parenting skills that they picked up through their involvement with the project, parents learned many other useful skills, such as committee operations and public speaking: [One parent] is now on the board of the health centre, and probably through involvement here she got experience and confidence to do that... [Another parent has] been involved with the snack program and is very keen about the community. She decided to run for trustee. She did a remarkable job ... [She] has gone on to the board of the Etobicoke Social Development Council, (field notes, 1995)

What Happened to the Parents and Families? 243 In the last few months we have had training in the training of volunteers, in how to be a committee member, and help chair a committee, and stuff like that, (staff focus group, 1998) There's another meeting called Community Voices where we have a group of residents who are learning about the political system, and how to ... go out and talk for themselves, (staff focus group, 1998) For me, it's helped me further my education, because I'm trying to get my ECE. Being here, getting hands-on experience ... So I'm doing correspondence, (parent focus group, 1998) GREATER EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES

The skills that parents acquired in working with the project often translated into their obtaining paid employment within the project, or in an outside setting. I have become a healthier, stronger parent and all around a much better person. I have had the confidence and the skills needed to apply for and receive a part-time position with the Highfield project, (field notes, 1996) I work at [a neighbourhood project] as a nutrition programmer, and I'm absolutely sure I wouldn't be working there if it hadn't been for all I've learned [here at Better Beginnings], (field notes, 1995) ENHANCED KNOWLEDGE OF THE COMMUNITY

Getting involved in Better Beginnings also helped parents learn more about their community, and helped them learn to advocate on their own behalf: 'So they're learning about the community and how it works and how to advocate on their own ... who to contact and, you know, what to contact them for and all that' (staff focus group, 1998). GREATER APPRECIATION FOR DIVERSITY

In the beginning, parents who participated in Better Beginnings talked about the way their involvement had expanded their social networks by bringing them into contact with other residents, volunteers, professionals, and school staff. Given the multicultural nature of the Highfield community, this meant that they also came into increased contact with people from other cultures; consequently, they began to develop a much greater appreciation of other cultures, and what individuals

244 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community from these cultures had to offer the community: I get to meet lots of mothers from different backgrounds and we get to understand more of what other people are going through, especially if they are only a few years in the country, (field notes, 1994) Barriers have been broken. I learned to accept people for who they are, not what they look like, or what their cultures or races are ... They are people before they are anything else, (excerpt written by parent for the Etobicoke Social Development Council newsletter, January 1996, taken from field notes, 1996) Negative Impacts on Parents and Families While the great majority of impacts that parents mentioned were positive, there were some negative impacts, especially early on. These negative impacts, described in Chapter 10, include stress, burnout, and unmet expectations regarding employment with the project. One Participant's Response For one of our reports on the Better Beginnings project, we asked several parents to tell their stories. Rather than asking them specific questions about particular aspects of their involvement, we invited them to start at the beginning, telling us about their lives before their association with the project, and then to take us along with them as they experienced all the different dimensions of the project. One of the parents who told us her story was Jaspreet, who started as a newcomer to both the project and the country (see box 12.1).

Box 12.1 Jaspreet's Story When I came to Canada, I didn't have any parents, no relatives here, and my daughter was in the second grade. When she started school and when I came to drop her one day, I said to a Better Beginnings staff person, 'What should I do, because at home I just watch TV?' She said I should come and spend some time in some of the programs. I was

What Happened to the Parents and Families? 245 afraid, because my English was not so good, but she encouraged me. First I worked in the kitchen helping to prepare snacks for the children. Then I came to the Family Resource Centre, where I learned many skills. I made lists of all the books and toys in the Toy Lending Library, and learned more and more English. I loved this. I wanted to spend my whole time in the school so that I can learn more English and enjoy life. Soon I began spending my whole day volunteering in the school. So I learned many skills and my daughter was happy too that mommy's busy and she's with me in the school. I also volunteered to go on school trips with the children. Some of the parents were very happy to see a woman who spoke Punjabi working with the teacher and the students. These parents would sometimes come to me to ask for help because they knew that I knew what goes on in the school. I know how to do so many things now. Before I didn't know ... technical skills, learning skills, how to cooperate, how to aid hyper kids. Before I didn't know even with my kids. Now I know how to talk with them. Before I'd get upset. Now, no, no, no. If they are hyper, you have to be cool. Then you can handle these kinds of children. In the beginning, I didn't know that kind of thing. I learned all these kinds of skills here. I am spending my time in a good place and I was learning things. It was giving me peace, and I wasn't bored while I was doing these things because I was with so many good people with different kinds of tastes. When you are with different people, you learn different kinds of skills. So it is a really good thing that I am in the Better Beginnings project. I enjoy working with the kids. I want to spend most of my time with kids so that they can learn from me and I can learn from them. At the Resource Centre, I learned what kind of crafts kids need because they are beginners. So they just come to the centre. They don't know what to do, how to hold the scissors, how to glue the picture, how to colour the sheet. So I learn all those things to help those kids learn how to construct these things. The Better Beginnings staff is my family, my relatives, my friends, everything. Everyone is at the same level here. I think that I don't have so many words for this project because this project is great and there are no words that I can use to explain this project's importance. Before I came, I was shy. I didn't talk to men even. There were some bad things in me. After coming in this project, I feel self-confidence. I can speak to anybody. I can go anywhere. Before I was so scared. Now I have confidence. Better Beginnings gave me this confidence. It made me a different person.

246 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community Summary of Qualitative Findings The qualitative findings from the project corroborate a number of the quantitative findings. Both the quantitative and qualitative findings converge in providing evidence that parents who were involved in the Highfield Enrichment Project were able to become better parents, enhance their social networks and social support, and experience a reduction in stress. The qualitative data suggest, further, that parents and families benefited in many other ways through their involvement with the project. They experienced growth in confidence and selfesteem. They interacted more effectively with teachers and other professionals in their communities. They acquired many skills, which increased their employability and sometimes led to paid employment. They learned more about their community, and came to appreciate the diversity of cultures within their communities. While there were occasionally costs associated with these benefits - those heavily involved as volunteers at times experienced stress and burnout, and were sometimes disappointed about not being hired for staff positions - the benefits of involvement far outweighed the costs. The results of the qualitative analysis suggest similar positive impacts to those reported in a quantitative and qualitative evaluation of a largescale community development process involving citizens from churchbased organizations in California (Speer et al., 2002). In an evaluation of the Pacific Institute for Community Organization (PICO) California project, Paul Speer and colleagues compared state and local PICO leaders with people living in PICO communities, but who were not active in PICO projects. They found that the leaders scored significantly higher than the comparison group on a variety of measures of personal and political empowerment, leadership skills, and policy-making skills. Using qualitative data, they also found that PICO leaders had striking impacts on the policy-making process in the state of California. These impacts are quite similar to what residents and others reported, and what we observed at Highfield. Parents did become more personally and politically empowered through participation in the project. Summary Both stories and statistics tell us that Better Beginnings had a profound impact on participating parents. This was particularly true for parents who volunteered and were involved in decision-making. The evidence

What Happened to the Parents and Families? 247

from the rigorous quantitative design and analysis tells us that the stories and quotes which recount the many benefits of participation in Better Beginnings are not merely the testimonials of a few individuals. This evidence suggests that the project has had wide-ranging effects on the health and well-being of parents and families, and on individuals' abilities to be caring and effective parents. Healthy, well-adjusted, effective parents are more likely to raise healthy, well-adjusted children, and secure a better future for the whole family. There is growing recognition that, in order to enhance the lives of children, programs need to focus on parents and families, as well as on children (Greenberg et al., 2001). There now exists a wide variety of prevention programs that include significant parent and family components. The Seattle Social Development Project (Hawkins et al., 1992), for example, in addition to working with children in their school setting, provided training and support to parents throughout a six-year intervention period. Other examples of prevention programs with a significant parent component are the Strengthening Families Program (Molgaard & Kumpfer, 1993), the Montreal Prevention Experiment (Tremblay, Masse, Pagani, & Vitaro, 1996), and the FAST program (McDonald & Sayger, 1998). The Highfield Enrichment Project is similar to these other projects, in that it provides training and support to parents. It is unique, however, in the extent to which parents are involved, not only as recipients of training and support, but also as individuals who conceive, develop, and implement project programs, and provide support to others. Our results indicate that this kind of involvement can have a profound impact beyond that which a parent might experience as only a recipient of programs and services.

13 What Happened to the School and Community?

In this chapter we examine the changes that occurred in Highfield Junior School and in the broader community. Most prevention programs have focused on the micro level of the person and/or family. We first examine changes in the school environment, presenting both quantitative and qualitative data. Highfield Junior School was a major part of the project. As we noted earlier, people who are unfamiliar with the project, including many parents of children who attend the school, find it difficult to distinguish the project from the school. This is because the school and the project strive to provide a seamless, child- and familycentred approach to support. In the second part of the chapter, we examine changes in the Highfield community, again presenting both quantitative and qualitative data. Like the other Better Beginnings, Better Futures' sites, the Highfield Community Enrichment Project had a focus on community development and environmental change, as well as goals for the promotion of the well-being of children, parents, and families. What Happened to the School? Teachers' Views of the School QUANTITATIVE DATA

As we noted in Chapter 6, the researchers and the library/resource teacher on the School Climate Committee collaborated in the development of a teacher survey that was used to evaluate the implementation and outcomes of the Lion's Quest social skills program within the school. In June 1995, before the Lion's Quest program was imple-

What Happened to the School and Community? 249 Figure 13.1 Teacher Ratings of the School Environment

mented, 22 of the 37 teachers (59 per cent) completed questionnaires pertaining to their thoughts about the need for the program, children's social skills, and the school environment. In June 1996, after the teachers had been trained in and had implemented the program for one year, 19 of the 40 teachers (48 per cent) completed the survey again. On a 5-point scale from 'strongly disagree' (1) to 'strongly agree' (5), teachers rated the extent to which the school provided opportunities for children to contribute in meaningful ways, a sense of clear expectations, a feeling of warmth and caring, a predictable and emotionally safe environment, and the promotion of self-discipline and self-control. As is shown in figure 13.1, there was a significant improvement (from an average score of 4.03 to 4.31) on this measure of the school environment from 1995 to 1996. The higher the score, the more positive the rating of the school environment. QUALITATIVE DATA

Teachers made the following comments about the Highfield school environment in the 1996 survey after the Lion's Quest program had been implemented:

250 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community A very caring place, where teachers excel and really make a difference. The children regret vacation. That says it all. I feel the staff put forth a real effort to make it a positive learning environment ... The children as a whole who attended since JK have shown good success. The environment is exciting and stimulating, yet aimed at learning. Sometimes, however, there is a little too much going on all at once so that teachers get frazzled and kids get off their routines. Much safer than it was six years ago - warmer, more caring. With the tremendous support of our vice-principal, we have created with her guidance a very supportive, secure environment for the children. As we described in Chapter 9, when the project was first introduced to the school, there was some resistance to the project. Better Beginnings staff and parents did not feel welcome in the school. However, by the end of the first year of the project, teachers became more positive about Better Beginnings. In part, this was due to the many benefits teachers saw in having Better Beginnings in the school: I think it's almost become ... part of the culture of the school and so we just sort of take it for granted, (teacher, In-school Committee focus group, 1998) Certainly, from a JK teacher's point of view, I [can] do almost double my programming having [the Better Beginnings teaching assistant] in my room, (teacher, In-school Committee focus group, 1998) Teachers also attributed the improved relationship to better communication between the project and the school, the development of relationships, common experiences, and the helpfulness and support of Better Beginnings staff: Well, I think that the communication thing is important to mention again, or whatever, because I think that a lot of things happen here that even some of the teachers aren't aware of what is going on ... So, I think that, and I know that, once a year you guys have that lunch thing ... Especially

What Happened to the School and Community? 251 because every year we get new teachers, a lot of new teachers, turnover, and they need to know about the project, the goings on, and so on. (teacher, In-school Committee focus group interview, 1998) Well, Better Beginnings sure pitched in and helped out with keeping us together, like taking the snacks over, and they really helped with the skating organization during last year. So, they really helped in that, being a part, (teacher, In-school Committee focus group interview, 1998) When we were walking on the picket line there [during the teachers' protest against the government's Bill 160], Better Beginnings staff were there. They were there; they didn't have to be. (teacher, In-school Committee focus group interview, 1998) [We've] been through a lot of changes together over the last couple of years ... And that probably helped bring us together, (teacher, In-school Committee focus group, 1998)

A key informant from the school noted that there was a large staff turnover in the school in 1995, and that the teachers who remained at the school and the new teachers coming into the school held more positive attitudes towards the project than those who left the school (interview, 1996). The principal of the school noted a concrete change in the school that parents helped to create - having a much-needed addition built onto the school. Based on resident input, school board representatives decided to build a one-storey addition, consistent with the wishes expressed by the residents (field notes, 1995). Parents' Views of the School QUANTITATIVE DATA

When their children were in Grades 2 and 3, parents of children in the focal cohort for Highfield and the comparison site were asked a series of questions about their children's school, their relationship with their children's teachers, and their involvement with the school. These questions were based on similar questions asked in the National Longitudinal Study of Children and Youth (NLSCY, 1997). For the baseline-focal cohort design, these questions were also asked of parents of children in the Grade 2 baseline sample. The four school ratings include, 'Most children in this school enjoy being there' and 'School spirit is very

252 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community TABLE 13.1 Sample Sizes for Parent Ratings of Child's School and Relationship with Child's Teacher for the Highfield Sample and the Two Comparison Group Samples Group

Grade 2

Highfield intervention Highfield Grade 2 comparison Longitudinal comparison

78 43 95

Grade 3

76 109

high'; parents rate these items on a scale from 1 to 4: strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (4). Examples of the 11 parents' ratings of their relationship with their child's teacher and involvement in the school include, 'You enjoy talking with your child's teacher'; 'You feel your child's teacher pays attention to your suggestions'; and 'You volunteer at your child's school.' Parents rate these 11 items from 0 ('not at all') to 4 ('a great deal'). Sample sizes for these analyses can be found in table 13.1. As shown in figure 13.2, the Highfield project had positive effects on parents' ratings of the school climate and their ratings of their relationship with their child's teacher. Parents of children in the focal cohort have significantly higher mean scores than parents of children in the baseline comparison group. The effect size was .37 for the ratings of the school and .56 for the ratings of the relationship with the child's teacher. There were also significant improvements from Grade 2 to Grade 3 in the ratings of these two variables for the parents of children at Highfield, relative to the children of parents in the comparison community. The ESs were .22 for the ratings of the school and .47 for the ratings of the relationship with the child's teacher. The Ontario Ministry of Education and Training collects information from the principal of every school in Ontario concerning registration numbers, types of special education programs, and number of students receiving instruction for various types of special education needs. This information is provided for the school as a whole and does not distinguish one grade level from another. Thus, although the Highfield project emphasizes programs for children registered in junior kindergarten through Grade 2, the principal's report data cover all grades in a school, usually JK to Grade 6 or Grade 8. Information on special

What Happened to the School and Community? 253 Figure 13.2 Unadjusted Mean Scores of Parent Ratings of the School and the Relationship with Their Children's Teachers for the Baseline-Focal Analyses

education services from the principal's reports from 1992 to 1997 was analysed for Highfield and the school in the comparison site. These different analyses were done on data pertaining to children in all grades who were receiving special education instruction. There was a significant decrease in the percentage of children at Highfield Junior School receiving special education, relative to children in the comparison school. QUALITATIVE DATA

Parents indicated that there were great differences among the teachers in their receptivity to parent involvement in the school. Most teachers welcomed parents with open arms, but some were quite closed or even rude to parents in the school (field notes, 1995). One parent who was involved with the project for several years indicated that most of the problems between teachers and parents occurred during the first year of the project, and that since then the relationships between teachers and parents have been mostly positive (key informant interview, 1996).

254 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community Parents feel welcomed and feel part of the school. Would challenge any school [regarding] the number of parents who said that they feel welcomed, (field notes, 1995)

Another parent stated: Better Beginnings has given teachers an opportunity to see themselves in a different role in relationship to the community and teachers have a better sense of community because they're going on committees with other parents, (field notes, 1995) Project Staff and Service Provider Partners' Views of the School QUALITATIVE DATA

Project staff members also stated that the relationship between the project staff and teachers improved over time: I think as time went by, everybody just started understanding each other and trusting the people around them and they built up relationships of closeness, and they're so comfortable and work so well together ... Before the teachers would pass by the gym and something would be going on at the beginning, and they would just pass by. Now we don't have to invite them; they just drop in. They're so comfortable, they just walk right in. (staff focus group interview, 1996)

The project manager also believed that providing teachers with information and regular communication contributed to the improved relationship with the school: 'Communication is important, so we've done different sorts of things like planning days with the school. Not only do we go to regular meetings, but we meet regularly with the principal and the vice-principal on a weekly basis. [There is] a lot of communication between [project] staff and teachers and ... [we organize] twice a year workshops with the teachers just around Better Beginnings and what that's all about' (interview, 1998). Just as the teachers indicated, project staff also mentioned that one of the factors that appeared to be most effective in developing a positive relationship between school and project staff was for the school staff to see the actual benefits of the project as they began to occur: It takes successful programs ... I know for the educational assistants ... when they were inside the classrooms they always had a better relation-

What Happened to the School and Community? 255 ship with the teachers, and anybody else, who wasn't in school, they always had a little bit of a weaker relationship with the school, and over time, the programs that have been successful here, through us, have given the staff in the school the acceptance, (staff focus group interview, 1996) There is a lot of appreciation, like they appreciate the stuff that Better Beginnings does for them, (staff focus group interview, 1996)

With the improved relationship between the project and the school, the school became more than a setting for the program, it was instrumental in bringing the resources, talents, and energies of teachers together with project staff and parent volunteers to provide an enriched setting for children and parents. 'The school has really opened up its doors to the community because of Better Beginnings being around. The school would have been more secluded from the community. Now it's wide open and it's more used, and I think people in the community are feeling now more pulled to the school. It's not off limits. It's a space they can share and access ... The school is more accessible to parents and residents' (service provider focus group interview, 1995). The relationships between the project manager and the principal and between the in-school coordinator and the vice-principal were particularly important for the partnership between the school and the project. In terms of my role with the school, what I found really worked well was having someone in that position ... the vice-principal. So we knew that there was a mutual and beneficial reason for coordinating and organizing stuff together. And that had a lot of implications for the project. And I think [the project manager] and [the principal] at this level are often involved in issues, like personnel issues, big decisions around ET [Executive Team] stuff ... And if we wouldn't just get together once a month or once a week for 15 minutes checking in, so what are you doing, what I'm doing, what do I need permission for, that kind of thing ... But [the viceprincipal] and 1 would hash things out and we would spend two hours trying to figure something out and what are we going to do about it. We'd sit down and our heads would fit together and we'd figure it out. (inschool coordinator interview, 1998)

The relationships between direct-service workers and school staff were also seen to be positive and important. Relationships with people, for myself, have come a long way. There are

256 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community areas where there's differences, but not personally with myself or with my program, (staff focus group, 1998) In that sense, with relationships I think we have with the school, there are a lot of personal relationships. We have built friendships. I can say for myself, I have friends. A lot of people can just go off and say, 'I'm friends with the vice-principal.' (staff focus group, 1998) Research Team Members' Views of the School

As the project moved from the planning phase to the implementation phase, participation from school staff increased considerably. As reported earlier, four teachers and the vice-principal regularly sat on the In-school Committee. As well, a JK teacher and the school librarian did literacy work at the Family Resource Centre, and teachers participated in project planning days and other events. Beginning in 1994, the project manager and the new school principal arranged weekly meetings for communication, and the project manager and the new inschool coordinator were invited to participate in monthly school staff meetings. Also, the orientation to the project that the project manager and the in-school coordinator provided for the new principal was perceived as very helpful, and was used with all school staff as well. Moreover, Better Beginnings staff members reported on project activities at school staff meetings, and staff and parents participated on school committees and the joint planning of events (field notes, 1994). For example, teachers, parents, and Better Beginnings staff jointly researched and selected the Lion's Quest Skills for Growing program, and they jointly planned and implemented this program on a schoolwide basis. Another example of school-project cooperation was the introduction of interpreters to assist parents whose first language was not English, so that they could participate meaningfully in parentteacher interviews. This increased parent participation in these important interviews. We concur with the principal's observation, noted earlier, that advocacy by parents with the school board put pressure on the board to build the addition onto the school. The parents also were able to influence the design of the addition. During the 1996-97 school year, major construction was done on Highfield Junior School to build this addition, which resulted in a substantial number of children and teachers in the upper-level grades being relocated to another school for the entire

What Happened to the School and Community? 257

year. In spite of this disruption, the relationship between the school and the project continued in a positive vein. What did the school look and feel like after the addition was built? Upon entering many schools, parents and other visitors are usually met with a sign that states 'Visitors Must Report to the Office Immediately/ While Highfield Junior School may have such a sign somewhere, what is most prominent as one enters the school is the incredible ethnoracial diversity of the children, the fact that parents and Better Beginnings staff can be seen everywhere, and the overall welcoming atmosphere to everyone who enters the doors. Parents are in the classrooms working with children; they are busy preparing snacks in the kitchen; or they might be in the 'community lounge/ a space devoted exclusively to community members, attending a meeting or having a conversation and enjoying a cup of tea or coffee. The school is a home away from home. Summary: What Happened to the School?

The quantitative and qualitative data from teachers, the principal, parents, Better Beginnings' staff, and service provider partners, as well as our observations, converge in showing dramatic changes in the school climate and environment with the introduction of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project. These changes coincided with a new principal and vice-principal for the school, both of whom worked closely with the project and contributed a great deal to all the joint school and project initiatives. One project that was somewhat similar to Highfield in terms of parent participation was the Yale-New Haven Prevention Project (Comer, 1985). Like Highfield, the Yale-New Haven project developed a School Advisory Council for parents, teachers, and service providers to plan and implement prevention programs for the children in the school. Parents also functioned as paid teacher aides and volunteers in the classrooms in the Yale-New Haven Project. Anecdotal data suggested an improved school climate and increased parent participation in the school. Also like the Highfield project, the Child Development Project was implemented in elementary schools from kindergarten to Grade 4 and focused on cooperative learning and teamwork, and a language arts program concerned with multicultural, social, and ethical issues, democratic teaching and conflict resolution, school-wide communitybuilding, and bridging the home-school connection (Battisch et al.,

258 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community

1989). A longitudinal evaluation showed more improvement on these dimensions of the classroom environments of intervention schools relative to comparison schools that did not receive the intervention. The Seattle Social Development Project was implemented for six years in elementary schools and had similar goals and interventions. An experimental evaluation of this project found significantly improved attachment and commitment of the children to the schools (O'Donnell et al., 1995). Another multi-year, multi-component intervention project for elementary school children, Fast Track, which was implemented in four U.S. communities, resulted in an improved classroom atmosphere (Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group, 1999a, 1999b, 2000). While all of these programs have suggested some school impacts, usually at the classroom level, the data on the impacts of the Highfield project on its school show several different impacts (e.g., school climate, relationship between teachers and parents, level of parent participation), according to several different sources (teachers, parents, project staff, service providers, researchers), from different types of data (quantitative and qualitative). The effects on the Highfield school environment are an important addition to the literature on the impacts of school-based intervention programs (Greenberg et al., 2001; Greenberg et al., 2003; Weissberg & Greenberg, 1998). What Happened to the Community? Parents' Views of the Community QUANTITATIVE DATA

Parents were asked a series of questions about their use of community resources, sense of community cohesion, and perceptions of their neighbourhood. In addition, statistics from local police and local Children's Aid Societies were gathered to compare Highfield with the comparison community. The sample sizes for these analyses are the same as those reported in table 13.1. To examine their use of community resources, parents were asked at every data collection point, 'Have you or your child participated in any of the following activities in the past 12 months: toy-lending library; library; playground or recreation program; sports, crafts, or clubs; parent/child drop-in centre; or a parent resource centre?' For the longitudinal comparison group design, there were significant increases for

What Happened to the School and Community?

259

families in the Highfield project, relative to those in the comparison site, in use of all of the community resources: toy lending library, library, parent-child drop-in centre, parent resource centre, and sports/clubs. The effect sizes for these indicators of use of community resources were very small, with the exception of playground or recreation programs, which was quite large (ES = 1.55). For the baseline-focal comparisons, there was less support for increased involvement in community resources. The only significant positive change was for use of the parent-child drop-in centre. There was also a significant difference in terms of use of the library that unexpectedly favoured the Grade 2 comparison group. Parents were also asked a series of questions about the degree of involvement shown by people in their neighbourhoods. These seven items were drawn from a larger measure devised by Buckner (1986). Examples include their sense of belonging to the neighbourhood, their willingness to get involved to improve the neighbourhood, feelings of pride in being a community member, and feelings that different races and cultures were accepted in their neighbourhood. Each item is rated 1 ('strongly agree') to 4 ('strongly disagree')- These questions about community cohesion were asked at every data collection point. There were no significant findings on the Buckner cohesion measure in either of the two designs. Parents were also asked to rate their satisfaction with their own housing, the number of parks and playgrounds in their neighbourhood, and safety walking on the street at night. Also included was a general neighbourhood satisfaction scale consisting of five questions (e.g., 'How would you describe the other people who live around here as neighbours? How about safety from crime in your home or building?'). The fifth question, rated on a scale from 0 to 10 was, 'All things considered, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with this neighbourhood as a place to live?' These questions were drawn from the Quality of Urban Life surveys conducted by the Institute for Social Research at York University (1977, 1979, 1981). As can be seen in figure 13.3, there was a significant increase in residents' satisfaction with their dwellings in both designs, favouring Highfield residents, with moderate effect sizes for this measure. There was also an increase in general neighbourhood satisfaction in the longitudinal comparison group design for the Highfield residents. A final set of five questions consisted of parents' perceptions of the prevalence of alcohol and drug use, violence, and theft in the neighbourhood. Parents were asked these questions when their children

260 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community Figure 13.3 Mean Scores of Parent Ratings of Satisfaction with the Neighbourhood and Their Dwelling for the Baseline-Focal Analyses

were in SK and Grade 2. There were no significant findings on these indicators in either the baseline-focal or longitudinal comparison site analyses. For another view of the neighbourhood, police statistics were obtained on vandalism and breaking and entering. Police statistics reflect the frequency with which events are reported to the police, not the actual occurrence of such crimes, so one must interpret police statistics with caution. Two time periods were compared for these data: 1991 to 1993 (before the project began) and 1994 to 1998 (the demonstration period for the project). There were significant decreases in both break-and-enter and vandalism rates over time for these two time periods (see figure 13.4). While statistically significant, the effect sizes were very small (ES = .02 for both indicators). One other social indicator that we analysed for the Highfield community was the number of open child protection/family service cases per year for the years 1987 to 1998. A child protection/family service case is opened when, after an initial review, an ongoing case is given to a family service/child protection worker in a Children's Aid Society.

What Happened to the School and Community? 261 Figure 13.4 Incidents of Vandalism and Break and Enters as Reported to Police for the Highfield Community, 1991-8

We calculated a trend line for 1987 to 1993 (prior to the Highfield project), and another for 1993 to 1998 (during the demonstration period of the project), and found a significant decrease on this indicator (see figure 13.5). QUALITATIVE DATA

As we noted in Chapter 3, prior to the Highfield Community Enrichment Project, parents reported that there were very few resources available in the community for children, parents, or families. From the information provided in Chapters 5, 6, and 7, it is clear that the project developed a wide range of family support and in-school programs, as well as a number of community development initiatives and programs. With the school and the project portables as the hub, parents and families were drawn into a number of these programs and initiatives. Recall from Chapter 7 that the goals of the community development activities were to increase resident participation and leadership, increase residents' language and prevocational skills, increase neighbourhood safety, increase social and recreational opportunities for fam-

262 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community Figure 13.5 Number of Open Family Service Cases for the Children's Aid Society for the Highfield Community, 1987-1998

ilies, and increase community responsiveness to and respect for ethnocultural needs and differences. As was reported in the previous chapter, resident participation and leadership in the Highfield community became more pronounced with the growth of the project. For example, one parent who worked with another community project as a nutrition programmer commented, 'I am absolutely sure I wouldn't be working there if it hadn't been for all I've learned [through the project]' (parent focus group interview, 1995). This parent also reported that because of her 'preaching' about Better Beginnings, a community resident started to teach leather crafts to teens in the community. She said, 'It took two years before he just said to me, "I'm so delighted listening to you and seeing you so involved. I want to become involved/" When asked about some of the contributions this very active parent had made to the community, she remarked, 'I could sit here for the rest of the afternoon and talk about all the things I've done and where I came from and where I'm at and where I'm going. I'm a direct example of what people get from Better Beginnings' (parent focus group interview, 1995). Other residents noted that some parents who had limited English improved their skills through working in the

What Happened to the School and Community? 263

kitchen of the school preparing snacks for the children and having the opportunity to talk with people more fluent in English (parent focus group interview, 1995). Through community development activities, the project strived to improve neighbourhood safety. For example, across the street from the project there was a problem with young men hanging around a wall in a housing complex and intimidating residents. Through the project's intervention, this wall was removed and replaced with a wire fence, and more lighting was added. This had the effect of deterring the presence of these youth (resident focus group interview, 1995). Parents stated that they thought the project helped offset the risk posed by the number of portables by establishing more activities, programs, and events that maintained a steady flow of people around the school area. 'In the summer, after project hours, there is more vandalism because people aren't around' (focus group interview, 1995). As noted earlier, parents and Better Beginnings staff took action with the city to have a crossing guard at a crosswalk on a busy street next to the school. The project also organized self-defence courses for women. The women met with the police and were given small batons and alarms that could be used for self-protection (parent focus group interview, 1995). One parent thought the workshop on safety for women provided her with some very specific things to do to help her feel more safe (parent focus group interview, 1995). Residents also became more involved in social and recreational opportunities provided by the project, including family trips in the summer and other special events organized by the project. Parents noted the absence of overt conflict between people from different ethnic or racial backgrounds, and thought that the project and the school played a large role in preventing ethnic/racial conflict and promoting positive ethnic and race relations. Parents asserted that formal events (e.g., ethnic celebrations, anti-racism workshops) were important in achieving this outcome. For example, one parent reported that having the opportunity to enjoy food from different cultures really helped to build relationships between people: 'It's something that can be shared.' She stated that the various cultural events had given people a taste of something different and 'helped to bridge cultural gaps' (parent focus group interview, 1995). Although parents thought these formal events were important, they also underscored the importance of the informal education that happens when people from different ethnic and racial backgrounds work together in a community project. One parent

264 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community

stated that the Highfield project provided opportunities to interact with and get to know individuals from different backgrounds simply as people: The average person would not have these experiences; it's a better way of reaching people.' Another commented that the project helped to 'break down stereotypes.' One active parent reported, 'I've never seen and been associated with so many people from so many other cultures. It's like one big happy family' (parent focus group interview, 1995). Project Staff and Service Provider Partners' Views of the Community

Project staff and service provider partners also saw an increase in resident participation and leadership. One indicator of this was the involvement of parents in advocacy activities on behalf of the project and the community. Within the last couple of years we have gotten residents involved in advocacy. And I'm thinking specifically about last year when we thought that we were coming to the end of the project, in terms of community residents [getting] involved in helping us keep the project alive. So they're lobbying and writing letters. And even when the deputy ministers came out, they were more or less involved in that stuff. So, I think that's a little different than they were a few years ago. (staff focus group, 1998)

In terms of language skills for residents, the project identified the need for English as a Second Language (ESL) classes, and advocated for this with the Board of Education. The board agreed to support this, and offered classes in one of the project portables (staff focus group interview, 1995). Regarding the goal of neighbourhood safety, one staff member commented, 'People feel safer because they know their community better, the people, because they're coming out to different things ... People have said that just knowing people that they see on the street [makes them] feel that they're not completely alone as [they] are making their way out to things in the evening' (staff focus group interview, 1995). Staff and service provider partners noted other ways that the project has contributed to neighbourhood safety. As was mentioned by the parents, through the efforts of the school and the project, a crossing guard was placed at a crosswalk in front of the school. The community development (CD) coordinator facilitated contact between parents and city council to discuss concerns and plan solutions to this problem (staff

What Happened to the School and Community? 265

focus group interview, 1995). Also, the project sold bicycle helmets to children and residents to comply with a new law promoting bicycle safety. With regard to ethnic relations, a representative from the school reported that in the past there was tension between the Black and South Asian communities. She thought there had been a positive impact on the relationship between these two groups because the CD worker was Afro-Canadian. She explained that the South Asian community had the opportunity to see the CD worker 'as a person, and [this] helped to break down tensions and build respect between people. [The tension] has certainly changed - I don't feel that kind of tension the way I did before' (school staff, key informant interview, 1995). Research Team Members' Views of the Community Like the parents, school teachers, project staff, and other service providers, we the researchers observed many changes in the community, such as resident participation and leadership. Several parents involved in the project became involved in a parent group in the school that was independent of the project. This group did fund-raising and dealt with current issues in the school. One parent joined the board of directors of the Community Health Centre. Another project participant joined the Etobicoke Social Development Council and ran for trustee of the school board. Some parents who started out volunteering for the snack program went on to volunteer in the classrooms. We also observed parents becoming more involved in lobbying politicians and others. This was particularly true at the end of the 'demonstration' phase of the project, when everyone thought that the project's funding might come to an end, or be drastically reduced: [The project manager] reported how he [and two parents] went to Guelph, Ontario, to present to [the] deputy minister of the Ministry of Community and Social Services on Better Beginnings, along with [the Guelph site]. He said the parents were very powerful, (analytic comments, 1996) Next there was a slide show followed by five parents: (1) [The parent chair of the Executive Team] read [another parent's] story about how the project had transformed her life [the parent was ill and could not attend]; (2) a white woman spoke nervously but bravely with [the family resource

266 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community worker] about the importance of the Family Resource Centre and Toy Lending Library; (3) a South Asian woman spoke about how the before and after school program had enabled her to keep her job and meet her needs for child care; (4) an Assyrian woman spoke about the Assyrian women's support group and how the project had enabled people from diverse cultures to meet one another and get along; and (5) a Somali woman talked about how the project had facilitated the transition of her family to Canada ('I am blessed to be in Highfield'). (field notes and analytic comments 1996)

Another impact we observed was the increased skills of community residents. Residents received training, experience, and support in their roles in managing the project, which in turn led to the development of other skills. For example, one person noted how she and another individual enrolled in an assertiveness training course at a university (the project paid for this). On another occasion the same person participated in a workshop on how to chair meetings. She said that the skills she acquired in these training sessions were transferable to and had helped in her daily life (parent interview, 1996). A major change in the community, which has not been described so far but which we witnessed on a regular basis once the project became stabilized, was the development of partnerships with other services and organizations, new services, and wider community development activities. As one project member stated, 'Relationships have been formed that weren't there before' (staff focus group interview, 1995). We provide below an incomplete list of these partnerships and initiatives. • The project manager was a member of the board of directors of the local community health centre and chaired its Program Committee. • The project was also a member of the Children and Youth Services Committee, which formerly had representatives only from the child welfare and children's mental health sectors. • The project created a link with a new organization in the community - the Youth Resource Centre, located in the nearby mall. • The project teamed with Metro Children's Aid Society (CAS) and another community project to create North Albion Creative Kids (NACK), a recreational program for children aged 9 to 12. This was done to address the needs of older children in the community who fall outside of the age range for the Highfield project (ages 4 to 8). The Metro Children's Aid Society Foundation provided a grant in

What Happened to the School and Community? 267

the amount of $30,000 for this program in its first year, with decreasing funding over the next two years. The project worked collaboratively with the local women's centre, the Etobicoke Board of Education, another board of education, and a community college to conduct a needs assessment of the South Asian community in the neighbourhood. The Community Support Team of Metro CAS was recruited to lead a series of workshops for parents and caregivers on various topics related to child management. The project worked with the Etobicoke Nutrition Network to obtain financial partners (the Canadian Living Foundation, Canadian Airlines, the Etobicoke Men's Teachers Federation, the Canadian Federation of University Women, and local parents) to support the school nutrition program so that all children in the school, not just those in the Better Beginnings age range, could participate. The project also helped to develop a partnership between Albion Lodge (a seniors' home) and the school - to look at service learning opportunities for children. The Better Beginnings project took a leadership role in the community regarding the Brighter Futures program, a federally funded project providing programs for families of preschool children. A coalition of representatives from across Etobicoke oversaw the services provided to the area, and the project manager chaired the North Team of Brighter Futures. Through the project's involvement with the coalition, stronger ties were made with both a nearby children's mental health centre and the local women's centre. A children's mental health centre provided services to Better Beginnings (e.g., training for staff, periodic workshops for parents). The project teamed up with the women's centre in providing Nobody's Perfect workshops for parents, with the assistance of Brighter Futures funding. Under the umbrella of Brighter Futures, the project became involved in several new initiatives, including the Healthy Babies, Healthy Children home visitation program (provincially funded), a Speech and Language program (also provincially funded), and the Healthiest Babies Possible (municipally funded) and Success by Six (United Way funded) initiatives. The project participated in the Etobicoke Alliance for Equity in Education, a coalition concerned with promoting educational equity. Specifically, the alliance advocated to the Etobicoke Board of Educa-

268 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community

•

• • •

tion on behalf of schools that serve a high proportion of economically disadvantaged families and children. The project formed a new partnership with several community organizations to develop a Healthy Communities proposal. The goal of the proposal was to address the needs of youth in the community by involving youth in the identification of needs/problems and action steps to address the needs/problems of youth. Concretely, the project involved the development of a Youth Council funded by the Ontario Ministry of Health. In partnership with two other community organizations, the project organized a forum on entrepreneurism for Afro-Canadian youth. A Welcome Basket program was developed in partnership with two community organizations. The creation of a provincial Better Beginnings Network for all demonstration sites was spearheaded by the Highfield project manager and Highfield residents.

Not only did the Highfield project work with others to create all of these new projects, but it helped community service providers come together to work cooperatively in partnerships and coalitions. One parent remarked that 'Better Beginnings has been the catalyst' in improving the relationships between agencies in the community (parent interview, 1995). She went on to say, 'When I look back four years ago, agencies came to the table but everyone had their own agenda. Better Beginnings has enabled agencies to see that we all have the same agenda. I don't think right now that they could deny that Better Beginnings is the reason why they've learned to really work together on issues. Better Beginnings has been instrumental in making that happen.' Further, one staff member noted that when issues arise now in the community - for example, around government cutbacks to services - agencies look to Better Beginnings for leadership in mobilizing around these issues (focus group interview, 1995). Summary: What Happened to the Community? The quantitative and qualitative data converge to show that the Highfield community changed in many ways as a result of the Better Beginnings, Better Futures' project. While a variety of different community changes were reported, it is noteworthy that the effect sizes, from the quantitative data, for many of the community changes were smaller

What Happened to the School and Community? 269

than those obtained for children, parent, family, and school changes. This may be due to the fact that the project devoted more resources to child-focused programs, family support programs, and in-school programs than it did to community development. Perhaps larger changes on these measures would have been observed if more intensive community-focused programs and community development initiatives had been undertaken by the project. There are other explanations as to why larger effect sizes were not observed for the community outcome measures. It may be more difficult to improve community outcomes. Also, community change may be more difficult to measure. The qualitative data show a number of different changes, such as the increased partnerships and programs that resulted from the leadership of the Better Beginnings' project, that were not captured by any of the quantitative indicators of community change. To our knowledge, our evaluation of the Highfield project is the first controlled study demonstrating community-level impacts of a community development approach to health promotion and prevention. Community development approaches to health promotion have become quite popular. Health promoters have argued that community development interventions can improve the health of community members by enhancing social capital (Campbell & Jovchelovitch, 2000), community capacity (Labonte & Laverack, 2001), and community empowerment (Eisen, 1994). Social capital, community capacity, and community empowerment are community-level constructs that refer to positive social conditions of neighbourhoods and communities, including cohesion, networking among community members, local leadership, and local control and decision-making. It is through processes of resident participation (Campbell & Jovchelovitch, 2000) and collaborative partnerships (Roussos & Fawcett, 2000) that these positive community qualities are fostered. While there are numerous examples of community development initiatives that strive to change community conditions (e.g., Eisen, 1994), evaluating the outcomes of these broad-based initiatives has proved difficult. For example, Boutilier, Rajkumar, Poland, Tobin, and Badgley (2001) have argued that it is difficult to separate processes and outcomes in community development research, and that it might be more fruitful to focus on project milestones. Roussos and Fawcett (2000) suggest that community-level change can consist of new or modified programs, policies, and practices. In the Highfield project we demonstrated, through

270 Part 4: Changed Lives, A Changed Community

both quantitative and qualitative data, improved neighbourhood satisfaction, increased resident leadership and advocacy, enhanced safety and decreased crime, improved multicultural relationships, and new programs and partnerships. Summary

As we noted at the beginning of this chapter, most promotion/prevention programs aim to change individuals or families. Better Beginnings has a more holistic focus on changing social environments, as well as promoting child, parent, and family change. In this chapter, we showed how the school and the community changed following the introduction of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project. Both quantitative and qualitative data demonstrated numerous changes in Highfield Junior School and in the broader Highfield community.

PartS The Future

In Part 5 we reflect on the lessons learned from the Highfield project and consider the future of prevention and promotion programs. The goal of this part of the book is to answer the questions, What did we learn? and What are the implications of those lessons learned for the future development of community-based prevention and promotion programs? In Chapter 14, we argue that the Highfield project represents a new perspective on prevention programs for children and families, noting that this perspective is characterized by power-sharing and an emphasis on a multi-level, ecological approach to change. We outline seven dimensions of this new perspective on prevention: (a) universal, ecologically oriented prevention, (b) participatory community research, (c) a partnership approach to prevention program development, (d) partnerships with community residents, (e) partnerships with professional service providers, (f) a participatory approach to project organization and management, and (g) community ownership and sustainability. Lessons learned about each of these dimensions of the new perspective on prevention are also described in Chapter 14. In the final chapter, Chapter 15, we put the Highfield project in the larger context of how communities and society can and should serve families living in poverty. In our critical reflections on the Highfield project, we note three tensions: (a) prevention/promotion vs. community development, (b) wellness vs. social justice, and (c) the fine line between empowerment and exploitation. Uncovering these tensions is vitally important, because different strategies to assist low-income families with children have different emphases, and when one side of an issue is emphasized, another side is typically neglected. We outline the implications of these tensions, what is emphasized and what is not, and what needs greater emphasis in strategies to assist families living in poverty.

This page intentionally left blank

14

What Have We Learned?

The renowned educator John Dewey is reported to have said, 'You can make one of two choices in your life - build a building or go on a journey' (Newborough, 2005). The metaphor of constructing a building suggests that some kind of end state is reached, while the metaphor of going on a journey emphasizes an ongoing, dynamic process that is filled with opportunities for learning. Throughout this book we have related the story of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project and its many components and constituents. The project has never reached an end state, and it is much more than the buildings in which it is housed. Rather, the project can be described more aptly as a journey of a group of people and a community. And there is much that we have learned from this journey. The main message of this chapter is that the Highfield project represents a new perspective about community-based prevention programs for children and families. In Chapter 1, we noted the qualities of many past and existing prevention programs and prevention research. We also described the 'revolution' against traditional models of prevention programs by the Ontario stakeholders who developed the Better Beginnings' initiative. In table 14.1, we contrast the traditional perspective and the new perspective on prevention that emerged from the Highfield project and Better Beginnings, along a number of different dimensions. In this chapter, we reflect back on the journey of the project and draw out the lessons learned about the seven dimensions of this new perspective, outlined in table 14.1. There are two overarching themes of the new perspective on prevention. One is that, in the new perspective on prevention, the relationship between professionals and researchers on the one hand, and disadvan-

274 Part 5: The Future TABLE 14.1 Traditional and New Perspectives on Community-Based Prevention Programs Dimension Type of program

Nature of research

Program development

Relationships with community residents Relationships with service providers Project organization and management Sustainability

Traditional Perspective High-risk Short-term Narrow focus Researcher-driven Focus on outcomes Use of quantitative methods Professionally-driven Focus on 'fidelity' to an existing program model Children, families, and communities as objects of intervention Collaboration with service providers Lack of attention to project organization and management Research, development, and dissemination

New Perspective Universal Long-term Comprehensive Participatory approach Focus on process and outcomes Use of quantitative and qualitative methods Partnership approach Focus on community participation in program development Children, families, and communities as agents and objects of intervention Collaboration with service providers and residents Participatory approaches to project organization and management Community ownership as a key factor in sustainability

taged community residents on the other, is transformed, with community residents gaining more power. Residents come to see themselves not as incapable 'clients' with deficits, but as citizens with strengths (McKnight, 1995). Moreover, in this new perspective, professionals recognize that community residents are the 'experts' about their community and come to view residents as capable partners. Community residents become the agents of change, rather than functioning exclusively as the objects of change. A second theme of the new perspective is that change is ecological in nature, occurring at multiple levels of analysis. When residents become empowered and professionals depowered, change occurs not just in the lives of individual community members or families, but in their social environments as well. In partnership with professionals, residents strive to change their schools and community. We now turn to the lessons learned about each of the dimensions of the new perspective.

What Have We Learned? 275 Lessons Learned about Universal, Ecologically Oriented Prevention and Promotion Programs for Children, Families, and Communities Lesson 1: Programs Should Be Comprehensive and Long-term As we pointed out above, Highfield and the other Better Beginnings projects were unique in many ways. Rather than focusing on 'high-risk' children and families, the projects were universal in that they provided programming and activities for all families that lived in the project's communities. In contrast with most other prevention programs across North America, Better Beginnings had a long-term involvement in children's lives. In the 'older cohort' Better Beginnings sites, programs and activities spanned four critical early school years, from JK to Grade 2. Highfield and the other older cohort projects were also comprehensive, in that they concerned themselves not only with what happened to children while they were in school, but also with what happened to them before and after school, whether they were at school, at home, or about in their neighbourhood. Importantly, the project provided programs, services, and activities to parents and families, as well, and to the communities in which they lived. The Highfield Enrichment Project was one of the three 'older cohort' sites that focused on families of children in their early school years. There were a number of commonalities among these three sites: much of the programming was based in local schools, each had staff working with teachers and children to enhance the kind of educational and/or social experiences the children were having in school, and all three sites had snack or meal programs for the children, based in the school. Other common elements included parent relief and training programs, and community development activities such as cleaning up parks, lobbying for community resources, and establishing cooperative foodbuying groups. Lesson 2: Programs Should Be Focused and Intensive Of the three older cohort sites, and indeed of all eight Better Beginnings projects, Highfield showed by far the greatest impacts on children, parents, and communities. Why did this happen? Why were the results for Highfield so much better than those for the other Better Beginnings projects on the measures that were used to assess program impact? How did Highfield differ from the other sites? An examination of the differ-

276 Part 5: The Future

ences among the older cohort sites, in particular, yields some lessons in terms of what makes for a successful prevention project. One key difference between Highfield and the other older cohort sites was that the Highfield project was located in one neighbourhood that centred around one elementary school, the Highfield Junior School. The Sudbury Better Beginnings project served three diverse neighbourhoods, in which a number of schools were located. Similarly the Cornwall project had several schools within its project boundaries. This meant that whatever resources were allocated to classroom enrichment were spread among several schools. 'I think that comes back to that whole idea of a hub system ... I think if we look at that model, I think a school is the ideal place, and I think maybe one of the differences between our project and some of the other projects [was]... having it at a single school in a single community. It's almost like we've come full circle, that really increased [feelings of] ownership' (Executive Team focus group interview, 2003). Another key difference between Highfield and the other older cohort sites is that Highfield concentrated its resources on the children who were in the focal cohort. That meant that when these children were in JK, a larger allocation of resources was given to programming at the JK level. When these children moved to SK, the resources followed them, with a larger budget allocation being given to kindergarten programs and support. At the other two older cohort sites, budgets were allocated across the four early school years (JK to Grade 2) every year, and were not concentrated on the focal cohort. Consistent with previous research (Nelson, Westhues, & MacLeod, 2003), these comparisons suggest that, in order for a prevention program to be successful, the program's resources should be focused on a single community and a single school, so that a program of sufficient intensity can be provided that will have a greater likelihood of producing an impact. Lesson 3: Programs Should Utilize the Human Resources of the Community

When one compares the costs of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project (and the other Better Beginnings projects) with the costs of other well-known prevention projects across North America, a startling finding emerges: Better Beginnings was much less expensive than any of these other projects. Table 14.2 shows the annual costs per family for a number of prominent prevention programs. Costs for the Highfield project were obtained from the quarterly

What Have We Learned? 277 TABLE 14.2 Costs per Child per Year for the Highfield Community Enrichment Project and Other Prevention Programs

Programs Highfield Community Enrichment Project Perry Preschool Project (Schweinhart & Weikart, 1997) Prenatal/Early Infancy Project (Olds, Henderson, Chamberlin, & Tatelbaum, 1986) U.S. Comprehensive Child Development Project (CCDP: St. Pierre, Layzer, Goodson, & Bernstein, 1997) U.S. Head Start program (Lazar & Darlington, 1982) U.S. Infant Health Development Program (Infant Health and Development program, 1990)

Costs in 1997 Canadian dollars per family per year $991

$8,600 $4,300

$21 ,000 $6,400

$14,300

financial reports and audited statements submitted each year to the government. All costs were converted to 1997 dollars (the last year of the demonstration period). The total costs were then divided by the number of families in the age cohort served by the project, to yield a cost per family. A similar process was used to obtain costs per family for the other projects listed in table 14.2. Costs for the U.S. programs were converted to Canadian dollars using the 1997 exchange rate and adjusting for inflation. The costs per child per year were much lower for Highfield than for these other programs. We also calculated the costs for those children who were in the focal research cohort, who received a greater share of the resources than the other children in the age range of 4 to 8. The annual costs per child for this group were $2,000, still substantially less than all other programs listed in the table. Moreover, the Highfield project produced short-term outcomes that were either comparable or superior to these other projects. One key difference between Highfield and the other projects is that the others used professionals to design, develop, and deliver their programs. Highfield, on the other hand, made extensive use of community residents in designing, developing, and delivering its programs. Indeed, Highfield and the other Better Beginnings sites kept track of the amount of 'services-in-kind' provided by community members - the

278 Part 5: The Future

dollar value of the time community members spent volunteering. This amounted to approximately $175,000 per year for Highfield. These comparisons suggest that for prevention programs to be successful, they need to make use of the human resources in the community. Community members not only contribute valuable knowledge, skills and experience; they also help increase the project's workforce. In comparing costs, it is also instructive to compare the costs of prevention with the costs of treatment. Highfield showed a reduction in the number of children in child welfare over the years that Better Beginnings was operating, and lower levels of vandalism and breaking and entering. This means fewer youth in youth court and youth custody facilities. What are the annual costs for each youth in residential care or in a young offender's custody facility? In 1997-98 the cost of residential care for a child in the child welfare system was approximately $140 a day, an annual cost of over $50,000. The cost of having one youth in a custody facility was around $250 a day, an annual cost of over $90,000. These costs do not reflect the pain and suffering that the children and families undergo through these processes. If fewer children end up in the care of the state, huge savings can be made, and great pain avoided. Lessons Learned about Participatory Community Research in Prevention and Promotion As we described in Chapter 2, the research on the Highfield project and the other Better Beginnings' sites was a blend of outcome evaluation, which is a tradition of prevention research, and an in-depth and up-close qualitative, ethnographic study of how the Highfield programs were developed and managed. However, the most novel feature of this prevention research was that it was highly participatory in nature. As researchers, we were intimately involved, not just with the research but with the Highfield project and all the people associated with it over nearly a decade. This prolonged involvement on our part gave us a rich understanding of the project. From our experiences, we have learned several lessons about conducting this type of research. Lesson 1: It Is Important to Involve Residents in the Research Process As we have written elsewhere (Nelson et al., 2000; Nelson, Ochocka, Griffin, & Lord, 1998), the essence of participatory research is that community members are 'at the table' in the research process. While initially hesitant to become involved in something as unfamiliar and

What Have We Learned? 279

scary as 'research/ community members became active participants in the research at Highfield. Some residents participated as volunteers on the project's Research Committee, with residents as co-chairs for much of the time that it operated. We also hired community members as researchers to help recruit participants for the research, conduct parent interviews, and do child testing. Finally, we collected information from community residents through individual and focus group interviews. Not only were residents represented in the research, but their participation also facilitated communication about the research to other community members. Research team members and Research Committee members spread the word in the community about the research and encouraged residents to get involved. Residents also worked with us to communicate findings about the research in both oral and written formats. We held a research party at the school gymnasium that included all parents of children in the focal cohort in order to feedback the findings, and we presented short-term findings to government officials when the project held education and advocacy sessions designed to maintain the funding of the project. We also put together written summaries of the research for community members. Our final report told the story of project. This report was filled with photos and graphics and was written in plain language thanks to the help of Research Committee members who ensured that the language of the report was jargon-free. Lesson 2: Relationships and Reflexivity Are Important Aspects of Participatory Community Research

More than anything else we learned about the importance of the researcher as a person. While research training emphasizes methodological and technical skills, community members relate to researchers as people, not as experts in research approaches. Developing trusting relationships with community members is critical for participatory community research (Nelson et al., 1998). To develop such relationships, researchers must have a regular presence in the setting. For a decade we were part of the routine functioning of the project, attending meetings and gatherings of the project on a weekly basis. We listened to everyone and formed relationships with a large number of people, and we continue to be friends with some project members. Critical psychologists and feminist psychologists have introduced the concept of reflexivity to highlight the fact that the subjectivity of the community researcher is an important part of participatory com-

280 Part 5: The Future

munity research (Parker, 1994; Wilkinson, 1988). According to conventional wisdom, the researcher is assumed to be a detached, objective expert. But detached objectivity reinforces the power imbalance that typically exists in the relationships between researchers and community members. Just as there is value in objectivity, so there is value in subjectivity, the human and relationship side of the research. Reflexivity suggests that we must acknowledge our subjectivity and share the interpretation of research findings with community members (Alvesson & Skoldberg, 2000). Reflexivity also suggests that we should write about our experiences of the research process, as we have attempted to do in this book. Lesson 3: Decision-Making Power and Conflict Resolution Are Important Aspects of Participatory Community Research

In participatory community research, researchers and community members share power and decision-making (Ochocka, Janzen, & Nelson, 2002). For example, through the Research Committee community members had input on what the focus of the qualitative reports would be and on the measures that were to be used in the outcome evaluation. Community members also read, gave feedback on, and approved all research reports. We also found that this type of research can both uncover conflict and play a role in the resolution of conflict. As described in Chapter 10, through a focus group interview with staff, Geoff learned that staff had experienced serious conflict with the project manager in 1998. At the staff's request Geoff met with the project manager about this issue, and Geoff and Mark played a role in facilitating a successful conflict resolution process that restored the positive climate of the project. Lesson 4: Researchers Play Multiple Roles in Participatory Community Research

We learned that participatory community research is complex and that researchers play multiple roles in this type of research. The traditional role of the researcher is to formulate the research, gather the data, and analyse, interpret, and report the findings. We did all that, but in a very collaborative way with project stakeholders. We also played a number of other roles. As community researchers we played the role of consultant. As we will describe shortly, we helped the project to clarify the goals, activities, and logic of the programs that it was developing. We also stressed the need to ensure that the children and families in

What Have We Learned? 281 the focal cohort, who would be the focus of the longitudinal research, received substantial intervention. As noted previously, we played the role of conflict resolution mediator in one instance. Throughout the project, we played the role of friend and confidant to key people who were involved in the project. We also assisted with advocacy, by providing information that could be used to argue for continued funding. Lesson 5: Qualitative Research Is a Valuable Addition to Research on Community-Based Prevention Programs Prevention researchers seldom utilize qualitative methods. The bulk of the research in the field is quantitative in nature and focuses on the outcomes of prevention programs. We incorporated a qualitative, ethnographic component into the research to understand program development and program processes. This qualitative research provided a great deal of valuable information about the development of the proposal for the project, resident participation, the involvement of service providers, the development of the program model and the different program components, and project organization and management. The field notes and qualitative interviews yielded a great number of insights about these issues, as we have shown throughout the book. Lessons Learned about Developing Prevention and Promotion Programs How do programs come into being? What is the best way to plan and implement a new program? Program planning and development are critical processes in producing any program (Pancer & Westhues, 1989; Rossi, Freeman, & Lipsey, 1999). When a program is needed, wellplanned, and carefully implemented, it is more likely to have a positive impact. Our work on the Highfield Community Enrichment Project provided us with a number of lessons on how to plan and develop new prevention and promotion programs. Lesson 1: Planning Successful Prevention Programs Requires a Partnership between Community Residents and Professionals Our experience at Highfield taught us that planning was best accomplished as a partnership between residents and professionals (Nelson et al., 2000). Professionals who develop programs without the guidance of

282 Part 5: The Future

community members are working without the intimate knowledge that community members have of their fellow residents. Residents are the experts on what it is like to live in the community. They have a sense of what people's needs are, what kinds of programs might appeal to them, and how to encourage their participation. But program development also requires professionals - individuals who are knowledgeable about research, theory, programs that are described in the research and other literature and are being implemented in other communities, and project management. When these two kinds of expertise are combined, programs that are popular and effective result. Lesson 2: Planning Programs Takes Time

When Better Beginnings, Better Futures was first conceived as a provincial project, it was thought that two years would be more than sufficient to plan and develop programs and bring the project to a stable state of operations. As with other prevention and promotion projects, this proved not to be the case. Pancer and Nelson (1990) suggest that it takes two to three years to develop an effective community intervention. It took at least three years for Highfield to develop a set of core programs and get them running. Several things added to the time it took to plan and develop programs. For one thing, the partnerships between residents and professionals took a long time to develop. An effective partnership required the building of trust, comfort, and a common language before residents and professionals could work together effectively. The relationship between project staff, residents, and teachers, in particular, was a critical element in the development of new programs in Highfield Junior School. This relationship took a long time to develop, as it was a very new way for teachers to relate to community residents, and for residents to relate to their children's teachers. It was also the case that participation levels in new programs took time to build. Residents needed time to become comfortable with new programs, and needed to be encouraged to take part. Often only a few people came out initially for programs that eventually proved to be very popular. This was one area in which volunteer residents and staff were extremely helpful - indeed masterful - at encouraging their fellow residents to try new programs. Lesson 3: Planning New Programs Requires a 'Model' or a 'Theory'

One key step in the development and evaluation of a program is to gen-

What Have We Learned? 283

erate a program 'model' or 'theory' (Bickman, 1987; Bickman & Peterson, 1990; Chen, 1990; Rutman, 1980; Wholey, 1987). In order for a program to be focused and effective, a clear description of the program's goals, major activities, and the logic linking the activities to the accomplishment of these goals (the program's 'theory') needs to be developed. One way of putting these elements together is to develop a 'logic' model of the program (Rush & Ogborne, 1991). One of the first steps in developing such a model is establishing the goals of the project or program. Patton (1997) offers some excellent suggestions about how to frame program goals. One of the earliest meetings that we had with residents from Highfield centred around developing project goals, though we never used the term 'goal/ We framed it more as a kind of visioning exercise. We asked residents to tell us what kinds of changes they would like to see in their children, in their own lives, and in their communities, as a result of the Better Beginnings project. We then used these to formulate a set of project goals, and circulated them among the residents, staff, and professionals associated with the project. The goals really resonated with people, primarily because they were the ones who generated them, and these goals provided the project with a clear sense of where it was going, and how it might get there. That [Highfield's success] goes back again to the strength of the foundations that were laid, and the fact that the vision was so clear because of having dealt with the other projects, you know. None of them really had such clarity about what Better Beginnings was about, and I think the disparity in our research results shows that. It was always very clear here, what the Better Beginnings mandate was and what it meant and how it translated into action in the community and in the school. (Executive Team focus group, 2003). Lesson 4: Prevention and Promotion Programs Need to focus on Building Strengths and Capacity, Not Treating Problems

It requires a conceptual leap for people to begin thinking in terms of building strengths and capacity through prevention and promotion programs, rather than dealing with problems (Kretzmann & McKnight, 1993). Neither the residents nor the professionals had a clear sense of what prevention and health promotion really meant when the project first started in the Highfield community. They were too used to thinking in terms of all the problems in the neighbourhood, itself and

284 Part 5: The Future

all the problems of the people in the neighbourhood. They didn't think of residents as having skills, or the community as having strengths. The change in thinking that was required was achieved in a number of ways. The Ontario government representative who oversaw the project played a crucial role in distinguishing between prevention and treatment programs, and helped project staff and residents remain aware of this distinction. We think that we, as researchers who were in touch with the literature on prevention and health promotion, helped people understand this distinction, as well. The Management Team the project manager and program coordinators - probably played the most important role, however, in constantly reminding everyone about how the project was designed to mobilize and build upon the assets of the residents and the community. Lessons Learned about Partnerships with Community Residents There are few projects in which professionals have involved residents in the development and implementation of community-based prevention programs (Bouchard, 1999; Normand, Vitaro, & Charlebois, 2000; Utting, Rose, & Pugh, 2001). Based on the experiences of the Highfield project in involving community residents, valuable lessons were learned about how to develop partnerships with residents in the context of community-based prevention programs. Lesson 1: Mandating Resident Participation Is Important for Engaging the Community in Community-Based Prevention Programs One of the distinguishing features of the Better Beginnings' initiative was that of resident participation. From the outset of the project, the government placed a strong emphasis on resident participation, mandating 51 per cent resident participation on the projects' main decisionmaking bodies and on other project committees. Before the Highfield project was selected as one of the demonstration sites, resident participation was limited. This continued through the early days of the project in which there were more service providers than residents on the project's Steering Committee. The government mandate clearly had. an impact on the project's decision to move to a smaller Executive Team with 51 per cent resident participation. While not all of the committees achieved this mandated level of participation at all times, the project clearly strived to involve as many residents as possible: The

What Have We Learned? 285 original vision was to have the community have this 51 per cent ownership ... and that is [happening] in the staff [as well] ... It creates that circle [between the project and the community], and it could not have been done any other way' (service provider interview, 1998). Lesson 2: Time, Process, and Building Interpersonal Relationships Are Important for Developing Collaborative Partnerships with Service Providers Over the years, one of the fundamental lessons that the project learned about involving residents was to listen to them and think about how the project could be used to meet the residents' needs, rather than thinking about how residents could serve the project's needs: Meet the parents where they are. Fill a need. Find a need and fill it. The free babysitting, the perks we talked about. Find a way to get them involved that they really, really like, (parent focus group interview, 1998) We have to bear in mind that they have needs, and to figure out what their needs are and not just the needs of the project, because I think that was one of the mistakes in the past. We're always thinking that we need residents to do this, but we didn't think about what we were going to do for them. And in the last few years, we've gotten really good at this, in giving back, making sure that they get what we want and they want, (staff focus group interview, 1998) As parents became more familiar and comfortable with the project, their level of participation increased (Nelson, Pancer, Hayward, & Kelly 2004). Residents moved from minimal levels of participation to substantial participation and decision-making (Arnstein, 1969). A lot of the parents were hesitant in coming on board because it seemed so big and overwhelming ... 'What are they talking about?' ... and they didn't really understand ... It had to be explained several times before parents really understood what the project was about, and even then they were hesitant of coming on board because of all the agency people. There's a lot of distrust with the CAS [child protection agency] and people were very hesitant... 'We don't know those big words, we're not government people' ... 'We can't talk with them' ... We were also feeling, 'What if our personal lives are dug into?' ... So there was a lot of fear, (community resident interview, 1995)

286 Part 5: The Future

Two factors were critical to helping residents become more involved. One was the encouragement and support of professionals. Residents indicated that the relationships they developed with professionals were instrumental in overcoming their doubts and fears about participation. Service providers, researchers, the project manager, and staff tried to make residents as comfortable as possible by presenting themselves as people rather than as professionals; for example, not dressing in expensive clothing, and being friendly and welcoming. Project members found that making the meetings informal, avoiding professional jargon, and bringing professional sensitivity to residents helped to create a comfortable, family-like atmosphere conducive to resident participation: T am asked for my opinion and feedback... I found the service providers went out of their way to make you feel comfortable... They didn't treat you as if they're above you' (community resident interview, 1997). The second critical factor was that a few community members stepped up and assumed leadership roles. These highly active residents not only served as role models for other residents, they also connected informally with their friends and neighbours and encouraged them to become involved in the project. Lesson 3: Provide Multiple Ways for Residents to Participate

Another approach that proved very successful in getting residents involved was to provide many different ways that residents could participate. Residents could simply participate in programs offered by the project, such as English as a Second Language classes, family trips in the summer, home visitations, and so on. They could also become involved in the project as volunteers. Residents volunteered in school and project activities, with many of the programs (e.g., the school snack program) depending upon parent volunteers. Residents also jointly planned special events with project staff, such as South Asian holidays and Black History Month. Another important strategy was hiring community residents as project staff. In 1996,11 of the 17 full-time and part-time paid/project staff were community residents: T think what has helped too is that a lot of the project staff were made up of people from the community, I think that is very important, because I think they relate better. I don't think there are any negative experiences between the residents and staff because there is an understanding, and mostly we see ourselves on the same level. There isn't this, I'm from wherever, so there's little

What Have We Learned? 287 of that. I think that's important' (staff focus group interview, 1998). Finally, residents participated in a decision-making capacity on committees or on the project's Executive Team. Some of the highly active residents who participated at this level also became outspoken advocates for the project and became involved in other community activities as well. Lesson 4: Practical Strategies Can Be Implemented to Overcome Barriers to Resident Participation The project recognized a number of different barriers to resident participation, including lack of awareness of the project, language and cultural barriers, financial barriers, and volunteer overload and burnout. The project developed practical strategies that were designed to reduce each of these barriers (Nelson et al., 2004). Engaging in community outreach through knocking on doors, making information available in different languages, offering child care and covering travel costs so that parents could attend meetings, providing financial honoraria, and setting up a Fun and Recognition Committee to acknowledge and appreciate the volunteer work of parents, were all helpful in encouraging resident involvement. Lessons Learned about Partnerships with Service Providers The experiences of the Highfield project provide valuable information about what worked well in efforts to collaborate with service agencies. If all the lessons could be summarized in one sentence if would probably be this: Take the time and make the effort to develop good working relationships with service providers who share common goals and values in providing needed services to residents in the community. That being said, a more detailed discussion on the specific lessons learned is presented below. Lesson 1: Time, Process, and Building Interpersonal Relationships Are Also Important for Developing Collaborative Partnerships with Service Providers Just as time, process, and relationship-building were important for developing partnerships with residents, they were important as well for developing partnerships with service providers. Taking the time to get to know one another and fostering good communication and ways

288 Part 5: The Future

of working facilitated the involvement of committed service providers. Moreover, relationship-building took time and led to mutual trust and respect. Working on things together, where everybody feels part of something, so that can be small or large, but whenever that happens, that seems to draw in a lot of people .... The more things are on an equal footing, everything has something to offer, (project manager interview, 1998) Time. We've gotten to know each other better. So just the involvement of five years. (In-school Committee focus group, 1998) Building a relationship is the most important part, (staff focus group, 1998)

This process is also key to the successful partnering of residents and service providers. Respectful partnerships between local residents and professionals can develop by getting to know one another personally and having safe environments in which to interact: Tm just thinking of the times where I've connected with them, like [when] we had a potluck lunch at Christmas and [the service providers] all participated They didn't have to, but they did, and that was seeing them [on] a whole different level ... it was just one-on-one and you got to know them on a personal level' (parents focus group, 1992). Under the leadership of the project manager, the project forged new relationships with service organizations in the community. The project manager, as well as other Highfield staff and residents, sat on the boards and committees of other community agencies and were involved with different community coalitions. It was through this type of relationshipbuilding that stronger ties were made to these various organizations. The importance of time and process has also been recognized in the literature as important in developing inter-agency collaborations. That is, those involved in these initiatives should be aware that the venture will be very time-consuming and may require several years to develop good relationships (Ellison & Barbour, 1992; Greenley, 1992; Harbert, Finnegan, & Tyler, 1997; Vander-Schie et al., 1987). Lesson 2: Successful Partnerships with Service Providers Are Based on Common Goals and Values

Stakeholders also reported that it is important to partner with other agencies and organizations who share a common vision and goals:

What Have We Learned? 289 I think what we've learned is sort of confirming some of the things we started doing ... having a common vision, and it's a vision that has room for everybody, (project manager interview, 1998) There's some common goals and objectives. For example, with the health centre ... we know that there are health and nutrition issues that we definitely have in common. So, by their staff being here on site, they can reach the community with the issues if they need to, and it just enhances our program, (staff focus group interview, 1998) Better Beginnings has been the catalyst in working [together] ... Better Beginnings has enabled agencies to see that we all have the same agenda ... We're all working for [the] good of the community, (field notes, 1995)

The importance of common values and goals has also been highlighted in the literature as a facilitating factor in service collaboration (Deber et al., 1990; Gray, 1985; Greenley, 1992; Hassett & Austin, 1997; Hastings et al., n.d.; Nelson, Prilleltensky, & MacGillivary, 2001). Lesson 3: Specific Formal Mechanisms Can Facilitate Partnerships with Service Providers

Having specific mechanisms in which service providers could be involved also facilitated collaboration. The project was committed to having service provider representation on its main decision-making committee (the ET), as well as each of its program committees. Thus, each committee had service provider representatives from their partnering agencies. Given that the project is located on-site at the school, the involvement of school staff was critical to its success. To help increase the involvement of teachers on the In-school Committee, the project provided funding for teacher release time, so that substitute teachers could cover the classes of teachers involved on the project. Since the project began funding teacher release time, there was consistent and substantial teacher participation on the committee and in project activities. Lesson 4: Partnerships with Service Providers Require Not Just the Commitment of Individual Service Providers, but also the Commitment of Partner Organizations

One lesson learned over the years is the importance of organizational

290 Part 5: The Future commitment. Partnerships between agencies should not be based solely on the interests or motivations of individuals. Rather, host organizations need to demonstrate commitment for successful partnerships. In terms of school-based projects, you would need some minimum requirements for developing school-based programming ... Minimum requirements ... You need to [have] the buy-in, education about primary prevention and community development, and involve all teachers and inform them ... Itemize the amount of time that will be involved ... Can't be vague, because it leads to heartache later on. (field notes, 1994) Organizational commitment. I think, be clear [about whether there is] organizational commitment or not. So is it just the individual [service provider's] interests? (service providers focus group, 1998) I guess I questioned when the project first started whether it would have really gotten off the ground if the school board hadn't owned it to some degree. I mean, you hear the old principals, people, talking about [how] it used to be their program, although I get my back up when I hear that. In some ways I think, without them owning it initially, I don't know if it really would have gotten off the ground. (Executive Team focus group, 2003) As discussed in Chapter 9, both management and front-line staff need to be supportive of the collaborative process (Bloomberg, 1995; Deber et al., 1990; Hassett & Austin, 1997). Lessons Learned about Project Organization and Management Through the qualitative research, we also learned many important lessons about project organization and management. Lesson 1: Participatory Project Management Has an Upside and a Downside As described in Chapter 10, the project employed a participatory approach to project management and organization in which there was a great deal of power-sharing among the project manager, the coordinators, staff, and community residents. Project participants experienced the project as 'more flat, not hierarchical' (focus group interview, 1995).

What Have We Learned? 291 It's sort of organized around power-sharing. That's sort of implied in the structural set-up, (key informant interview, 1995) The way it works is more like there is not somebody up here and somebody there, it's more like we are in the same level and we are working together, (staff focus group interview, 1996)

Within this flat organizational structure, the roles that people play in the project tended to be loose and flexible:'... loose and flexible around some people in roles, no rigid boundary between project and community' (key informant interview, 1995). The upside of participatory management is that power-sharing and flexibility can lead to a very supportive, family-like atmosphere for the staff, community members who participate in the project, and service provider partners. Project staff members described the social climate of the project as very warm and supportive: 'I think that we became a family, that we became so close that it's almost like a family' (staff focus group interview, 1996). In particular, staff and management saw the importance of paying attention to the 'little things,' including noticing and taking the time to appreciate one another's work and any stressors that a person may be experiencing. Taking time to have fun and celebrate one another was seen as an important to balancing the focus on work tasks. The downside to participatory management occurs when difficult decisions must be made regarding evaluating staff performance, the hiring and firing of staff, and planning and organizational change. Not surprisingly, the major conflicts at the Highfield project arose around these issues. What made these issues particularly difficult to deal with at Highfield was the fact that staff in particular perceived that the decision-making was inconsistent with the participatory style of management. Applicants who were not hired for a staff position, and staff who did not like management decisions, sometimes experienced this as a betrayal, leading to a loss of trust and hurt feelings. Similar problems with participatory management and programs have been noted in the field of community mental health (Curtis & Hodge, 1994). The problem of the blurring of boundaries between work and friendship has been noted as particularly problematic. The project manager and one other staff member questioned the 'family myth' of harmonious relationships, personal rewards, and financial security that existed in the first years of the project. The project manager

292 Part 5: The Future

argued that the demonstration phase was like a honeymoon period, and that when the project obtained status as a permanently funded agency it experienced some of the inevitable conflicts that come with a longterm relationship like a marriage or family: 'I think the idea of positive working relationships and feelings about their family is along the lines of a family myth. So part of it is true, but also there's the reality, given my experiences with families. You could say we're still like a family just like a real family' (project manager interview, 1998). So one of the main lessons about participatory management is that it is very messy. Staff relationships may feel all warm and fuzzy at one moment, but the blurred boundaries and power-sharing can also entail strained relationships and conflict. Lesson 2: Managing a New Perspective Prevention Project Requires a Project Manager Who Has Multiple Skills

A second important lesson is that it takes a highly skilled project manager to make a participatory management style work. Staff, service providers, and residents spoke with great admiration and respect about the talents of this project manager in fostering a culture of trust, support, informality, openness, respect, and sharing. Encouragement, support, guidance, training, and humour are some of the important 'people skills' that were mentioned as important for this type of management style. In addition to these important interpersonal skills, a project manager must also have 'the big picture' of the project and how all the pieces fit together, including a knowledge of community development, programming, prevention concepts, research, and how systems work. It's a lot to expect the project manager to be aware of external environment cutbacks, sponsorship and issues internal to the project (supervision, programs), a lot to expect from one person, (analytic comments, 1998) If you're managing the project, you have to be someone who is really into people and how people react to things and deal with reaction, anticipating how people are going to react. And I think you have to be patient, very tolerant... I think you have to be open-minded, (key informant interview, 1998) [He] can find connections and webbing. He's got that overview to connect

What Have We Learned? 293 all the pieces together. I look at that with envy, (school representative, focus group interview, 1995)

The success of the Highfield project, in terms of the programs that were created - the partnerships with residents and service providers that were formed; the positive climate that was fostered; and the child, family, and community outcomes that were achieved - can be attributed in no small measure to the skills of the project manager. The importance of leaders and the skills they bring to innovative programs has been noted in research in other settings (Nelson, Lord, & Ochocka, 2001; Senge, 1990). As member of the Executive Team focus group (2003) observed: 'I think what was so remarkable about it, and the thing that kept it alive, was the strength of the foundation that was laid in the very beginning of the project, and the fact that it was so focused on the research, and that there was such strong leadership in the beginning from [the project manager and program coordinators], and that they kept things so focused on insuring that there would be quality, that there would be quality of outcomes.' The project manager shared some of his insights (see box 14.1).

Box 14.1 Insights from the Manager of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project 1 was asked to look back on my experiences with Highfield Better Beginnings and reflect. This reflection naturally leads me to think about the meaning of what we did, why we did it, and what made it so effective. For me this is very simple to identify, but not often seen by the outside observer. We, this large collective of diverse people of diverse backgrounds and walks of life, did what we did because of three powerful forces that came together. They were children, relationships, and caring. I think that naturally when an effort such as Better Beginnings is analysed, the eye tends to look at the visible: programs. However, I believe that programs have power only in a context of a caring relationship. This is what gives them their intelligence and also places them well in the lives of children.

294 Part 5: The Future Children live their lives across a continuum of time and development. The only thing that I believe will mitigate the challenges, adversity, and, for many children, situations of risk, is the foundation of a caring relationship that spans like a bridge over time and spreads underneath the trajectory of their development. What seems to be not given its full due is the fact that many of the key individuals in these children's lives, besides their families, were a number of workers who were 'with' these children for a period of four, five, six, and seven years. In this way workers became part of the fabric that wove itself through the school, into the classrooms, into the homes, and into most of the hours and days and seasons of these children's lives. And to support this tapestry were a legion of volunteers and a number of seers (teachers, parents, community activists) on the various committees who also committed themselves to a lengthy involvement in the lives of these children. If we are to wrap ourselves around the lives of children it has to be essentially limitless and provide the unconditional care that all children require. Children can certainly be resilient if there is a springboard to bounce up from. This to me was the power of what we did ... in one community. Rick Kelly, Project Manager Lesson 3: Communication Is Essential to Participatory Management Project staff also thought that the project manager modelled and encouraged clear communication: '[The project manager] is always sending memos to make sure we're all up to date on what's going on' (staff focus group interview, 1996). But a project manager is primarily a catalyst for good communication. That individual can model communication, but communication depends on all of the partners and systems involved. One lesson is that it is important to recognize the ecological nature of communication and to organize communication links between individuals from different structural levels (Kelly, 1988). For example, at the Highfield project, linking the various levels consisted of communication between teachers, vice-principal, principal, the school board, and those from the project, such as the volunteers, project staff, program coordinators, and the project manager.

What Have We Learned? 295

There were several mechanisms that facilitated communication. The Executive Team, the management team, staff meetings, the various program committees, meetings between the project manager and the school principal, and meetings between the in-school coordinator and the viceprincipal of the school provided multiple vehicles for constant communication. Clear communication was seen as especially important during times of stress and change. Lessons Learned about Sustaining a Prevention/Promotion Project Over the Long Term In retrospect, it is rather remarkable that the project survived the turmoil that occurred in the neighbourhood, the school, the community, and the province during its developmental years. During that time: • Three different parties formed the provincial government, each requiring a major review of the whole Better Beginnings initiative. • There were three different principals of Highfield Junior School, each with very different styles of leadership. • A major addition was added onto the school, requiring half of the school's students to attend a different school for nearly two years, during construction. • The province's teachers went on strike for nearly six weeks. • The provincial government, under the Conservatives, cut welfare payments by more than 20 per cent, producing a dramatic drop in income for many Highfield residents; at the same time the government made huge cuts to social services. • The Etobicoke Board of Education, the project's sponsoring organization, disappeared when all of Toronto's boroughs were amalgamated into one mega-city. • The project's funding was scheduled to be terminated, at the end of its 'demonstration' phase. How did the project manage to sustain itself through these turbulent times? Lesson 1: Sustained Prevention Programs Require Secure, Long-Term Funding

The greatest threat to the continuity of the Highfield Enrichment program came towards the end of its 'demonstration' phase. Originally, the

296 Part 5: The Future

province's plan for Better Beginnings provided for seven years of funding (two years for planning, and five years of programming), after which the province would terminate its funding of the project. It was expected that the projects would find replacement funding to enable them to carry on their programs as the demonstration phase came to an end. This proved unrealistic. While Highfield and the other Better Beginnings projects worked feverishly to secure alternate funding, given the political climate of the times, in which the province had made drastic cuts to all social services, there was simply too much competition for support from non-governmental resources, such as foundations and corporations. If the provincial government had not decided to provide permanent funding to the project, it is highly doubtful whether it would have continued to exist in anything similar to its current form. Lesson 2: SustainaUlity Requires Leadership and a Vision

The key leaders of the project - the project manager and the program coordinators, the residents who sat on project committees, the service providers who helped plan and develop the project (and the researchers, too!) - all had a sense of what Better Beginnings was, and how it was meant to differ from other social service programs. They took every opportunity to convey this to all participants. This feeling of being different and special helped engender strong feelings of pride in the project, and a strong connection among all those involved. The project's stakeholders cared about its long-term survival. This commitment was communicated to the government representatives who oversaw the project, and to public officials who visited the project, and was instrumental in securing long-term funding. It also carried the project through some of the other critical periods, such as when the addition was put onto the school. One of the major considerations in planning the new addition was how to make it least disruptive to the Better Beginnings programming and research. Lesson 3: Sustainable Projects Need to Be Visible in the Community

In order for a project to become a lasting part of a community, it must be visible to community members. The Highfield project made itself visible in the community in many ways. There was a constant stream of articles about Highfield activities and events in community newspapers and other publications. Highfield staff, parents (and children),

What Have We Learned? 297

and involved service providers attended events outside the project, making frequent presentation to a wide range of audiences. Individuals from Highfield worked with others in the community to seek additional funding and services for its children and families. From its earliest days as a project Highfield sponsored community events, such as a community barbecue and a community breakfast. All of these activities made Highfield recognized as a key part of the community, and helped sustain the project through turbulent times. Highfield was a very major player, one of the original founding groups, part of Brighter Futures (a collaborative children's project also operating in the region), and I was part of that group. So I've always watched Highfield from a little bit of a distance. And the piece that, for me, really stands out is that they always had the complementary piece of being very well rooted in the immediate community of Highfield. They always, always were very well branched out in the community; they were a leader in the community and that was always very noticeable. It wasn't an isolated program, so that it had both the complementary piece of the locally rooted, and the specific mandate of Highfield, the school, but always stayed, was always a leader in the Rexdale community in the larger total community. Highfield was always a leader in the Brighter Futures North team and was always a leader at the coordinating committee that oversaw the whole coalition and [was] always counted on. (Executive Team focus group, 2003)

Lesson 4: Sustainability Requires Individuals Who Will Champion the Project Better Beginnings would not have continued to exist had it not had a champion working within government to fight for its survival. This was critical to the sustainability of all the Better Beginnings projects. There were government staff whose main responsibility was overseeing the Better Beginnings projects, and there was a government committee to which the projects were accountable. The support of the school principal was also critical in sustaining the program. Teaching staff and parents place a great deal of trust in the principal. When the principal showed faith in and commitment to the Highfield project, teachers and parents became more comfortable with it themselves. Another set of champions for Highfield were the residents who became community leaders, sitting on boards and committees of other

298 Part 5: The Future

organizations in the neighbourhood, making presentations on behalf of the project, and taking jobs in community organizations, where they served as ambassadors for the project: 'Its survival has a lot to do with the strength of the foundation, and that was what provided, sustained us through that difficult time, and [the fact that] that there were people who had been around for a long time who were very clear about the vision, and maintained the continuity, and said, "No we're not going to lose it"' (Executive Team focus group, 2003). Lesson 5: Community Ownership Is a Key Factor in Sustainability

Arguably the most important factor in sustaining the Highfield Enrichment Project through all the difficulties and challenges it faced was that community residents felt it was their project. They had developed the programs, hired the staff (including the project manager), served as paid staff and volunteers, talked about what the project had meant to their lives in both informal and formal settings, attended (and often chaired) committee meetings, and really got to know the people in their neighbourhood, regardless of their ethnic and national background. This made everyone feel like part of a family, and families are difficult to break apart. It also gave participants a sense of empowerment and hope for the future. These kinds of feelings, once they are kindled, are not easily doused. I can remember when... funding almost got axed ... and I can remember the front-line volunteers and staff, being very, very motivated [to] get out to the community, share that with the community, discuss it with the community, and get them to raise up in arms, sort of thing. And they were so convinced that this program had to stay around, that those front-line people were out there motivating, getting the community on their side and really trying to pull them in so that whoever, the ministry, would see very clearly that this is a community project and not a school project. It's not a Highfield, it was a community project. (Executive Team focus group, 2003) When I first arrived... there was a profound sense of ownership in the community, and, I'll be honest with you, if that didn't exist I don't think this project would have survived ... It just existed everywhere, that this project belonged to this community. And I think that that maintained the sense of keeping it going no matter what. I never ever got the sense that this project was in jeopardy of dying from the inside ... There were external forces that

What Have We Learned? 299 were certainly threatening it, but I never ever got the sense that there was a lack of will in the community, ever. And when you consider what they went through ... that's pretty remarkable. (Executive Team focus group, 2003)

Summary We in Highfield learned many valuable lessons about partnership approaches to community-based prevention research and programs for disadvantaged children and families. As you can see, long-term, comprehensive, universal, community-based prevention programs are a complex undertaking. A great deal of skill and community support is needed to launch and sustain such programs in the face of many challenges.

15

Where Do We Go from Here? Critical Reflections on the Highfield Community Enrichment Project

In this final chapter, we critically reflect on how communities and society can and should serve families living in poverty. Based on our experiences with the Highfield project, we note three tensions: (a) prevention/promotion vs. community development, (b) wellness vs. social justice, and (c) empowerment vs. exploitation. Exploring these tensions is important in determining the future of policies and prevention programs for low-income families. Prevention/Promotion versus Community Development As we noted in Chapter 1, Better Beginnings had both a prevention/promotion goal and a goal of community development. Yet, as Boutilier, Cleverly, and Labonte (2000) have articulated, prevention/promotion and community development are conceptually and practically different. As noted by Boutilier et al. community-based programs include health promotion and prevention programs that are implemented in the community, but which have traditionally been conceived by professional researchers and service providers, the 'experts/ with little to no consultation with the people who are served. Prevention programs for children and families that follow this approach are theory-driven or evidencedriven, rather than community-driven. Community-based prevention programs are typically designed to prevent some particular problem (e.g., substance abuse, child maltreatment, crime, bullying, teen pregnancy, heart disease). While there is a rapidly growing, impressive body of research attesting to the effectiveness of community-based prevention/promotion programs (see Chapter 1), critics have noted several problems with this

Where Do We Go from Here? 301

approach. First, such programs tend to be 'parachuted' into low-income communities and pulled out once the research demonstration grant, which is attached to a researcher, ends (Schorr, 1998). Second, focused prevention/promotion programs may not be what disadvantaged community members want and need. Third, these professionally driven programs unintentionally may perpetuate the power imbalances between disadvantaged people and professionals. Boutilier et al. (2000) contrast community-based prevention/promotion programs with community development, which involves a partnership between professionals and community members, whereby community members have a major voice in deciding what the intervention will be and play a major role in its implementation. Broadbased community development and neighbourhood transformation projects, including community economic development and the creation of affordable housing, are used to revitalize communities (Eisen, 1994), building on the strengths of the community and its members. A key characteristic of community development is the active participation of community members in the process (Campbell & Jovchelovitch, 2000). Community development is designed to enhance what has been variously referred to as 'community capacity/ 'community empowerment/ 'social cohesion/ or 'social capital' (Labonte & Laverack, 2001a, 2001b; Putnam, 2000). All of these terms refer to similar social processes of trust, norms, and networks that enable people to achieve collective goals (Putnam, 2000). Problems with community development approaches include the following. First, a potential problem is that they may not have an adequate theoretical or empirical basis for the prevention of community problems. Second, while community development can enhance community capacity and social capital, there is little evidence that it has trickle-down effects on children and families (Beauvais & Jenson, 2003; Bouchard, in press). Third, while community development in Canada dates back to the Antigonish movement in the 1930s, it does not have the same research base or tradition as the field of prevention, which has a history in epidemiological research in public health and is highly research-oriented. Better Beginnings, like other recent community initiatives such as 1, 2, 3 GO! (Bouchard, 1999, in press) in Canada and Communities that Care and Investing in Children in the U.K. (Utting, Rose, & Pugh, 2001), have strived to link prevention/promotion programs and community development, with residents in low-income communities actively par-

302 Part 5: The Future

ticipating in the planning and implementation. However, there are as yet few models that have been successful in combining these approaches. For example, some of the Better Beginnings' sites emphasized community development, while others emphasized prevention/ promotion programs. To be true to the processes and goals of both approaches requires both a sound conceptual framework for prevention/promotion programs and a sound conceptual framework for engaging community members in the development, implementation, and evaluation of programs. As outlined in Chapter 3, we (Nelson et al., 2000; Nelson, Prilleltensky, & MacGillivary, 2001) have developed a framework for partnerships in prevention/promotion programs that emphasizes both the development of sound prevention /promotion models and the active participation of citizens in whose community the programs are developed. Key to this partnership approach is a process of negotiation and a melding of the strengths and knowledge of community members and professionals in the formulation and implementation of prevention/ promotion programs. Such value-based partnerships create a process that is inclusive, participatory, and empowering for community residents (Cameron & Cadell, 1999) and result in a program that is neither exclusively top-down (professionally-driven) nor exclusively bottomup (community-driven), but rather one that is partnership-driven and represents a creative synthesis based on the collaboration of many different stakeholders (Nelson et al., 2000). The Highfield project is a testament to the fact that a successful program model can be developed with a high degree of resident participation. Not only did the Highfield project have positive impacts on children, families, and communities, but it was done in a highly participatory, empowering way with community residents taking the lead. The Highfield project suggests that rather than thinking of prevention/promotion and community development as existing in some kind of dialectical, either-or tension, that it is possible to integrate them in a 'both-and' fashion so as to achieve the best of both approaches. Wellness versus Social Justice It is important to distinguish between programs that are designed to promote child and family wellness, like the Highfield project and the other Better Beginnings' programs, and broader social policies that are aimed at creating more just societies (Prilleltensky et al., 2001 a; Nelson

Where Do We Go from Here? 303

& Prilleltensky, 2005). Wellness can be defined ecologically as the satisfaction of personal, relational, and collective needs (Prilleltensky et al., 2001b). Concretely, wellness means that a child, parent, or family has resources that are personal (e.g., self-esteem, life skills), relational (e.g., supportive parent-child relationships), and social (e.g., housing, education, income) in nature (Epp, 1986,1988; World Health Organization, 1986). Social justice, on the other hand, refers to a fair and equitable allocation of resources within society (Prilleltensky & Nelson, 1997). In a just society, everyone has access to resources that meet one's personal, relational, and collective needs. Traditionally pro motion/prevention programs strive to promote wellness by helping children, parents, and families to acquire resources to meet their needs. However, such programs change neither the distribution of resources in society nor the power to decide how resources are allocated. Moreover, they typically ignore collective resources. Prevention advocate George Albee (1986) has argued that promotion/prevention needs to focus on social change, as well as on wellness. In this regard, Albee (1982) has proposed an equation for prevention (see Chap. 1, p. 8) that differentiates between risk and protective factors. As we noted in Chapter 1, risk factors give rise to psychosocial problems, while protective factors help to offset or buffer risk factors. For example, a person with a good social support network or good coping skills may adjust well to the stressful conditions of living in poverty, but that person remains poor. Most promotion/prevention programs strive to promote wellness by focusing on the promotion of protective factors. Broader social policies that reduce societal risk factors, such as income inequities, unemployment, and lack of access to affordable and quality housing, for example, are aimed at creating a just society. Programs tackle the bottom half of Albee's equation through a focus on micro and meso levels of analysis, whereas policies tackle the top half of the equation by focusing on social change at the macro level of analysis. As was the case with the previous tension between promotion/prevention programs and community development, it is not a question of opting for wellness or social justice as the overarching value for assisting lowincome families. Rather, we need both programs and policies to promote both wellness and social justice. However, more emphasis needs to be placed on policies that create social justice, as this approach is deemphasized in the current social-political context in Canada. Socio-economic inequalities and poverty are the major structural

304 Part 5: The Future

risk factors that threaten child and family wellness, as they are strongly related to a variety of problems experienced by children and families (Peirson et al, 2001). Thus, following Albee's (1982, 1986) lead, in addition to promotion/prevention programs that focus on wellness, we need social policies that create greater socio-economic equality (Febbraro, 1994; Prilleltensky et al., 2001a, 2001b). It is quite remarkable that during the time period in which the Highfield project achieved its positive outcomes, the Highfield community experienced declining income. While the average family income for the province rose from about $57,000 to $60,000 from 1990 to 1995, the average family income for Highfield residents dropped substantially, from $44,000 to $36,000, during this same time period. In other words, the economic conditions of the community actually worsened over the demonstration period. Barlow and Campbell (1995) and Griffin Cohen (1997) have shown that increased poverty and socio-economic inequality is a direct outcome of neoliberal policies of globalization. These policies are designed to promote the interests of multinational corporations and a nation's most wealthy citizens. Neoliberal policies are based on the values of individualism and competition, and the assumption 'that markets are the best and most efficient allocation of resources in production and distribution' (Coburn, 2000, p. 138). Tax cuts, which disproportionately benefit the most affluent, government cutbacks to health, education, and social services; the relocation of jobs to the developing world where there are minimal labour and environmental standards, the imposition of structural adjustment policies on developing nations; and the development of 'free trade' agreements that give corporations the same rights as citizens are the strategies used to promote this ideological agenda (Barlow & Campbell, 1995). Goods and services are assumed to be provided best through the private sector. Such policies, which have been aggressively promoted in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada, have created tremendous pressure to dismantle or 'hollow out' the welfare state (Evans & Wekerle, 1997). The progressive notion that the state should be responsible for how well its citizens fare has degenerated to a sense that "welfare" means government handouts to the unfortunate or the lazy' (G. Cohen, 1997, p. 48). To address poverty and economic inequality, there must be a social movement that fights to maintain the welfare state and to promote social policies that reduce the inequalities that result from unchecked market forces. In the Canadian Family Wellness Project, Peters, Peters, Laurendeau, Chamberland, and Peirson (2001) conducted a compre-

Where Do We Go from Here? 305

hensive review of social policies to promote child and family wellness. In their research, they found that many countries in western and northern Europe have implemented tax and transfer policies that effectively reduce economic inequality. These same countries have universal policies that provide other benefits to families (e.g., parental and extended child-care leave policies, day care). This research shows that it is possible to create more just societies by reducing socio-economic inequities. In contrast, Canada has done a relatively poor job in promoting social justice for children and families over the past 15 years. In 1989, the Canadian federal government voted to end child poverty by the year 2000. However, by 2000, 16.5 per cent of Canadian children lived in poverty, up from 14.4 per cent in 1989 when the pledge was made (Campaign 2000, 2002). It is also important to note that Highfield and the other Better Beginnings sites were policy research demonstration sites. While the findings of the research were intended to inform social policy, the Better Beginnings model has not been disseminated past the demonstration phase to other needy communities in Ontario. In other words, Highfield and the other sites are the exception, not the norm. In fact, most low-income communities in Ontario and Canada more closely resemble the comparison site in this research than they do the Highfield site. Thus, while there are a handful of Better Beginnings programs in Ontario, there is no social policy supporting the dissemination of Better Beginnings on a larger scale across the province. Governments must show the political will to create policies that support the widespread demonstration of proven prevention models, like the Highfield project. Empowerment versus Exploitation A third and related issue to those already discussed is the participation of low-income community residents in the project. The vast majority of volunteers in these types of projects are women, and, in the case of Highfield, most of these volunteers are women of colour and immigrants to Canada. As we have shown throughout this book, many of these women described their experiences with the project as personally empowering and satisfying. However, one can interpret this phenomenon through another lens and ask whether these women are being empowered or exploited (Febbraro, 1994). Paradoxically, both may be true. Women traditionally have been responsible for raising children, managing the household and doing most of the housework, and kinkeeping - all jobs that are unpaid and socially devalued (Eichler, 1997).

306 Part 5: The Future

Projects like Highfield, which add community development to this job description, depend heavily on women to volunteer their time. While some women were successful in obtaining a job with the project and others used their project experience to help them gain employment elsewhere, the Highfield community has not been immune to the 'feminization of poverty' that is occurring across Canada. More and more single-parent familes headed by women are falling below low-income cut-off lines (Peirson et al., 2001), and these women also have been adversely affected by cutbacks to social assistance. As we have noted, when the Conservative government was elected in 1995 in Ontario, its first major policy change was to cut social assistance rates by 21.6 per cent. High levels of unemployment and inadequate child-care policies also contribute to the increased poverty that is affecting women and children. As we noted in Chapter 3, unemployment rates for women in the Highfield community increased by 5 percentage points, from 12.6 per cent in 1991 to 17.5 per cent in 1995. Unemployment rates for women in the province as a whole also increased by 1 percentage point, from 8.4 per cent in 1991 to 9.6 per cent in 1995. While there were perceived personal benefits for participating as a volunteer in the Highfield project, these benefits were tempered by the negative economic changes noted above. Do community-based prevention programs promote women's empowerment, or, inadvertently, do they contribute to exploitation and sexism? In the future, those who formulate policies and programs for low-income families need to take a hard look at issues of pay and gender equity in community-based prevention projects. Failing to do so will lead to the perpetuation of low-income (and immigrant) women's disadvantaged position in society. Once again, from our perspective, the answer to this dilemma of empowerment vs. exploitation is that opportunities for participation in promotion/prevention programs should be accompanied by adequate basic resources, including adequately paid employment, financial benefits, housing, and child care. Summary We cannot continue to ignore government cutbacks that increase economic and gender inequalities, because they have enormous implications for the promotion of child and family well-being. Our prescription for the future is for increased social intervention to reduce structural inequalities. We need (a) to advocate vigorously for initiatives like Bet-

Where Do We Go from Here? 307

ter Beginnings, so that the benefits that accrue from such programs can be enjoyed by many more children and families; (b) to engage more in social intervention by advocating for social policies that benefit lowincome families; and (c) to take a hard look at issues of pay and gender equity in projects like this, lest we perpetuate low-income (and immigrant) women's disadvantaged position in society. Also, future policies need to promote a balance of community participation and the development of high-quality promotion/prevention programs such as the Highfield Community Enrichment Project.

This page intentionally left blank

Epilogue: Current Status of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project

This book covered the project's development, implementation, and the five-year demonstration project. Since the end of the demonstration phase, there have been some changes. The biggest change has been that the sponsor organization for the program is no longer the local school board, but a children's mental health centre. Throughout the demonstration phase, a letter of agreement between the school board and the project was never finalized. The board had difficulty giving the project the autonomy it needed to respond to the needs of the community, though affiliation with a smaller organization was desired by the Executive Team. In addition, there have been a number of staffing changes since the end of the demonstration phase. The project coordinator left to pursue other opportunities and was replaced, after several months, in July 1999. The in-school coordinator and community development coordinator also left and were replaced shortly thereafter. As well, the principal of the school, who was there for much of the demonstration phase, left for other opportunities at the end of this phase. The project continues to focus programs around their three 'hubs': in-school, family resource, and community development. Enrichment workers continue to work in the classrooms with the children, and the project continues to offer nutrition programming to the whole school. The Family Resource Centre has recently been renovated and the materials and toys have been updated. It still offers programming for parents and children. For the community development component, the project continues to respond to the needs of the community. Among other activities, they advocated for and received a crossing guard for a dangerous intersection, they have organized community clean-ups, a clothing exchange, and welcome baskets for newcomers.

310 Partnerships for Prevention

All in all, the project continues to operate in much the same way it did during the demonstration phase. There were some challenges to overcome, including staff changes and a new sponsor agency. Nevertheless, throughout some difficult times the programs seemed to be, for the most part, unaffected. It is a credit to the project, the Executive Team (now the Steering Committee), and the many volunteers that the needs of the community continue to be met.

Appendix: Methodology

This appendix is intended primarily for researchers who are interested in learning more about the methodology for the quantitative component of the research, as the qualitative research is described in detail in Chapter 2. Much of what we report in this appendix is also available from a technical report on the short-term findings of the project (Peters et al., 2000). For more information on Better Beginnings research, see the website, http://bbbfcjueensu.ca/, which includes all technical reports

written about Better Beginnings research, plus the short-term findings. Sampling Issues: Recruitment, Sample Sizes, Potential Bias, and Attrition Three different samples were recruited to participate in this research: (a) the baseline comparison group of Grade 2 children attending Highfield school and their parents (collected in 1992-93), (b) the longitudinal focal group of Highfield children who began JK at Highfield Junior School in 1993-94, and (c) the comparison group of children who began JK in 1993-94. Grade 2 Highfield Baseline Comparison Group

This sample was recruited in 1992-93 from Grade 2 children attending Highfield Junior School. This was a comparison group, because Better Beginnings programs at Highfield had not yet started when these children attended grades JK to Grade 2. Letters explaining the research were sent home to parents, inviting them to participate in the research and requesting that they sign an enclosed consent form. The letter was

312 Appendix

translated into Punjabi because of the large number of Punjabi families whose children attended Grade 2 at Highfield. Parents were also recruited during parent-teacher interviews. Researchers were stationed at a table, and Grade 2 teachers directed parents to visit the researchers to learn about the study. Out of a total population of 89 Grade 2 children, interviews were completed with 43 parents (48 per cent); child testing was completed on 56 children (63 per cent); and teacher reports were completed on all 89 children. The Grade 2 teachers completed teacher reports on almost all of their students. The school boards allowed us to have teacher report data on non-identified students (those whose parents did not consent that either themselves or their children would participate in the research), which enabled us to compare the identified students in our sample with the non-identified students on the teacher measures. There were almost no statistically significant differences between these two groups on any of the teacher-rated measures of behavioural or emotional problems (e.g., attention deficit), social skills (e.g., cooperation), or single-item ratings of academic skills. Thus, there does not appear to be any bias in the baseline comparison sample. This sample appears to be comparable to the population of Grade 2 Highfield students in 1992-93. Highfield Longitudinal Focal Group

Recruitment for this sample began at Highfield Junior School in the spring of 1993 during the JK registration. Members of the research team and staff from the Better Beginnings project met with all parents who were enrolling their children in JK in September 1993. These face-to-face meetings helped to facilitate the recruitment of children, parents, and families into the research and the Better Beginnings programs. Recruitment continued as parents came in to register their children for JK at later times, as well as through parent-teacher interviews as described above. The parents of students who were new to the school continued to be recruited into the research from JK through Grade 2. The sample sizes for the different sources of data for the different years for the focal group are reported in table A.I. There was a total of 105 children in JK. Thus, in JK, 67 (64 per cent) completed the parent interview; and 74 (70 per cent) completed the child testing and had teacher reports completed. At the initial interview, the interviewers discussed ways of keeping in touch with the participants. All participants were given a fridge

Methodology 313 TABLE A.1 Sample Sizes for the Highfield Longitudinal Focal Cohort by Year for Different Sources of Data Source

JK

SK

Grade 1

Grade 2

Grade 3

Parent Child Teacher

67 74 74

67 81 69

76 83 70

78 81 52

76 89 79

magnet with the name of the researcher and his/her phone number, and they were asked to contact the interviewer if they moved. They were also provided with a prepaid change of address card, which they drop in the mail so that the researcher could continue to contact them. Participants were asked to provide the names of people who could assist the interviewer in contacting the person should he/she move and not leave a forwarding address or phone number. Parents were sent thank you cards after completing each interview, also birthday cards and season's greetings cards each year, as well as periodic summaries of the research. Whenever cards were returned by the post office as 'addressee unknown/ the researcher would try to locate the participant by using the contact names and checking for new listings in the phone book. We continued to gather information from parent interviews, child testing, and teacher reports for those families who moved and could be contacted. For parents who moved to a new location, interviews were conducted in person if the parents stayed within Metro Toronto or a nearby city, and child testing was usually done in the home. For those who moved further away, including out of the province and out of the country, telephone interviews were conducted with parents, but child testing could not be completed. The schools to which the children had moved were contacted; the study was explained, including the parents' consent for the children to participate; and teachers were asked to complete the teacher reports. This often required phone contact or inperson meetings to clarify the nature of the study and the fact that the parents had consented. Of the 67 parent interviews conducted in JK, 13 (19 per cent) completed only that one interview, and of the 74 children tested in JK, 14 (19 per cent) completed only that one testing. A total of 72 parents and children completed at least three of the parent interviews and child

314 Appendix testing sessions across the span of five years (JK to Grade 3). Of those 72 families, 35 (48 per cent) moved to a different school sometime between JK and Grade 3. Thus, the sample attrition after JK is remarkably low given the high level of mobility of the sample. This is a testament to the quality of the relationships that the families had with the project and the researchers, as well as the researchers' persistence and skill in tracking the families. We were also able to compare those who dropped out after one interview and those who remained in the study, and we found almost no statistically significant differences on any of the JK socio-demographic measures. Once again, we compared the identified students in our sample with the non-identified students on the teacher measures. Similar to the analysis of the Grade 2 baseline comparison group, there were almost no statistically significant differences between those who participated in the research and those who did not participate in the research on any of the teacher-rated measures of behavioural or emotional problems (e.g., attention deficit), social skills (e.g., cooperation), or singleitem ratings of academic skills. Thus, there does not appear to be any bias in the longitudinal focal sample. This sample appears to be comparable to the population of Grade 2 Highfield students in 1996-97. Longitudinal Comparison Group Using 1986 census data from Statistics Canada, a comparison community that was similar in terms of socio-demographic characteristics and geographically adjacent to the Highfield community was selected for the longitudinal comparison group design. When 1991 and 1996 census data became available, comparisons could be made between the Highfield community and the comparison community. Like Highfield, the comparison community was home to many new Canadians and had a relatively high percentage of single parent families and a relatively low average family income (see table A.2). The comparison community does have a higher average family income level than does the Highfield community, but both were well below the provincial averages in both 1991 and 1996. The participation of children and parents for the longitudinal comparison group was sought through three elementary schools in the comparison community beginning in 1993. Recruitment procedures were similar to those used at Highfield Junior School. The total population of children in JK at the three schools was roughly 230 children.

Methodology 315 TABLE A.2 Percentage of Single-Parent Families and Average Annual Family Income for Highfield and the Comparison Community

Year

Variable

Highfield

Comparison community

Ontario average

1991

Percentage of single-parent families Average family income Percentage of single-parent families Average family income

22.8% $43,841 20.7% $36,054

23.1% $48,938 21.4% $48,378

12.6% $57,227 14.4% $59,830

1996

TABLE A.3 Sample Sizes for the Longitudinal Comparison Group by Year for Different Sources of Data Source

JK

SK

Grade 1

Grade 2

Grade 3

Parent Child Teacher

59 58 59

115 111 110

115 114 108

118 117 95

116 114 109

Not everyone could be recruited due to budget constraints. The sample sizes for the longitudinal comparison group for the different sources of information by year are noted in table A.3. With the exception of the JK year, about half the population of children and parents participated in the research. Of the 59 parent interviews conducted in JK, only one (2 per cent) completed only that one interview, and of the 58 children tested in JK, three (5 per cent) completed only that one testing. A total of 113 parents and children completed at least three of the parent interviews and child testing sessions across the span of five years (JK to Grade 3). In Grade 2, 30 of the 86 families (35 per cent) who provided data were no longer at one of the comparison schools. Once again, the sample attrition after JK is remarkably low given the high level of mobility of the sample. Demographic Characteristics of the Samples We compared the demographic characteristics of the two Highfield samples (the Grade 2 baseline comparison group and the Grade 2

316 Appendix TABLE A.4 Socio-demographic Characteristics of Respondents for the Different Samples

Variable Women respondents Average year of birth Born outside Canada Cultural group other than anglophone, francophone, or Aboriginal Ever married Living with husband/wife Some post-secondary education Women employed full time Men employed full time Average monthly income Families below low-income cut-offs

Highfield Grade 2 baseline

Sample Highfield Grade 2 focal group

Comparison community Grade 2

76.7% 1958 88.4%

81 .0% 1961 88.0%

87.3% 1962 83.5%

90.7% 76.3% 76.3% 18.6% 37.2% 74.1% $2205 86.0%

87.3% 82.3% 90.9% 52.6% 50.0% 78.7% $2490 72.2%

81 .4% 84.7% 71 .4% 56.6% 42.1% 81 .9% $2465 70.3%

longitudinal focal group) with the Grade 2 sample from the comparison community. These results are shown in table A.4. In all three samples, the vast majority of respondents were women. The average ages were quite similar; the three to four-year difference between the Highfield Grade 2 baseline sample reflects the fact that these respondents were interviewed four years earlier than respondents in the other two samples. All of the samples contain very high percentages of new Canadians who were born outside of Canada and who identify with a cultural group other than anglophone, francophone, or Aboriginal. The vast majority of all three samples had been married and were currently living with a husband or wife. One clear difference that was found between the samples was for educational attainment. Respondents in the Grade 2 Highfield baseline sample had a much lower level of educational attainment compared with respondents in the other two samples. Full-time employment outside the home was relatively comparable across samples for both women and men. The income levels were comparable across samples and was very low. In summary, the three samples are relatively comparable on a range of socio-demographic variables. As might be expected in this type of quasi-experimental design strategy, the comparability of the groups is

Methodology 317

far from perfect. However, all analyses included statistical controls for any group differences on the variables. Data Collection Strategies There were three primary sources of data for the study: parents, children, and teachers. Parent interviewers were hired from the host communities and underwent extensive training and practice interviews before beginning to conduct the interviews on their own. All interviewers throughout the study were women. Women from different ethnic and linguistic backgrounds were hired to provide opportunities to conduct interviews in the respondents' native languages. Most of the interviews done in languages other than English were conducted in South Asian languages (e.g., Hindi, Punjabi), and the interviews were translated into these languages. In a few cases, translators were hired to assist with the interviews. Most of the parent interviews were conducted in parents' homes, and most were done in English. Parents completed reports on their children (measures of behavioural and emotional problems and social skills) and provided information about themselves (their physical health, mental health, stress, demographic information, social support), their spouses and marital relationships (where applicable, demographic information, domestic abuse, marital satisfaction), their families as a whole (family functioning, families social participation, use of services, and recreational programs), the child's school (feelings about the school and their relationship with the child's teacher), and the community (sense of community, perception of community problems). Parents were reimbursed $25 for each interview. Almost all child testing was completed in the school in English, and included cognitive and academic achievement measures, height and weight measures, and a 24-hour dietary recall. Again, community residents were hired to assist with the child testing. After extensive training in the measures, these researchers began testing the children. In some cases, information was requested from parents about the dietary recall. Children received a small toy or gift for their participation. Most of the parent interviews and child testing were conducted at one time. In some instances, the interviews or testing were spread over more than one session. The parent interviews were about two hours in length, while child testing lasted about an hour. Teachers completed the same behaviour rating scales as were done by parents and some

318 Appendix

single item measures of children's academic achievement and educational difficulties. Teachers were reimbursed for their time in completing these reports, which took about 20 minutes per child. Not all of the measures were collected each year from the children and parents, in order to keep the length of the parent interviews and child testing within a reasonable time frame and to avoid being burdensome to the children or parents. Teachers completed the same reports each year. The same procedures for data collection were employed each year from JK to Grade 3 for the longitudinal focal cohort as were used for the Grade 2 baseline comparison group. Each year, interviewers added information on the children's height and weight to a Better Beginnings growth chart, which the children could proudly display on a wall or door somewhere in their home. We strived to have the same interviewer for each family across their years of participation. In many cases, the interviewers, who were hired from the Highfield community, got to know the families quite well over the years, and it became 'normal' to have the annual parent interview. Some parents even phoned before they were contacted to ask when the next interview would be. The children also appeared to enjoy the child testing, especially the toys. The data collection procedures for parent, child, and teacher information for the comparison community were identical to those used at Highfield. In fact, the one interviewer who completed the majority of parent interviews in the comparison community also interviewed parents in the Highfield community. The same keeping-in-touch procedures and data collection with families who moved were also employed. Data Analysis Strategies Construction and Psychometric Properties of Measurement Scales

The data were checked and cleaned very carefully before the analyses were performed. The median percentage of missing data was .2 per cent. An imputation strategy was selected for missing values in order to enable the construction of psychological scales (see Peters et al, 2000, pp. 6-14 for the details). To examine the psychometric properties of the measurement scales, confirmatory factor analysis was used to examine the number of factors per scale and the items that loaded on those scales. Following this, Cronbach's coefficient alpha (a measure of the reliability of a scale) and Tucker's (1951) coefficient of congruence were computed for all of the measurement scales. All scales used in

Methodology 319

this research have reasonable levels of reliability (.70 to .90 range) and high levels of congruence (.90 or greater). Analysis of Effects in the Baseline-Focal Cohort Design

Standard statistical software packages that are available to analyse the differences between groups or sites are not appropriate for the analysis of the data in this study, because the Highfield site and the comparison site were not obtained through random selection. The problem with standard analysis packages is that they make the assumption of generalizability to some population of potential sites. Due to non-random site selection, however, it was not possible to generalize beyond the sites. For this reason, SUPERCARP (Hidroglou, Fuller, & Hickman, 1980) was employed for the analyses. SUPERCARP can be used to generate meaningful standard errors for multiple regression equations, on the principle of generalization only to the sites from which data were gathered. These error terms were generated and used in the program RESAMPLING STATS (Simon & Bruce, 1987) to conduct multiple regression analyses of the differences between the two sites, controlling for the influence of demographic variables. (For more information about this analytic strategy, see Peters et al., 2000, pp. 6-16 to 6-17.) Analysis of Effects in the Longitudinal Comparison Group Design

To analyse data from the longitudinal comparison design, growth curve analyses were used. The basic idea underlying this approach was to determine if the participants in the Highfield site and the comparison site differed with respect to growth curves (patterns of change over time). Once again, standard errors were generated on the principle of generalization only to the two sites. A variety of demographic variables were used as covariates in the different growth curve analyses. (For more information about this analytic strategy, see Peters et al., 2000, pp. 6-18 to 6-20.) Analysis of Effect Sizes

In Chapters 11 to 13, we not only reported statistically significant differences between the focal cohort and the two comparison groups, but we also reported the magnitude or the size of the differences using a statistic called an 'effect size' (ES). As explained in Chapter 11, effect sizes are

320 Appendix

computed by subtracting the mean of the control/comparison group from the mean of the intervention group and dividing by the pooled standard deviation. Effect sizes are also adjusted for sample size. One can think about effect sizes in terms of standard deviation units. An effect size of 1.0 means that those in the intervention group score are, on average, one standard deviation unit higher than those in the control/ comparison group. On a standardized IQ test with a standard deviation of 15, for example, the intervention group would score 15 points higher than the control/comparison group. For an effect size of .2, 58 per cent of those in the intervention groups score above the mean for the control/comparison groups; for an effect size of .5, 69 per cent of those in the intervention group score above the mean for the control/comparison groups; and for an effect size of .8, 79 per cent of those in the intervention groups score above the mean for the control/comparison groups (see Lipsey & Wilson, 2001, p. 153, table 8.1). Effect sizes of .2 are considered to be small; .5 are considered to be medium; and .8 are considered to be large (Cohen, 1977; Lipsey & Wilson, 2001).

References

Adams, P., & Nelson, K. (1997). Reclaiming community: An integrative approach to human services. Administration in Social Work, 21, 67-81. Adelman, H.S. (1993). School-linked mental health interventions: Toward mechanisms for service coordination and integration. Journal of Community Psychology, 21,309-319. After the door has been opened. (1988). Report of the Canadian Task Force on Mental Health Issues Affecting Immigrants and Refugees. Ottawa: Ministry of Supply and Services. Aiken, M., Dewar, R., DiTomaso, N., Hage, J., & Zeitz, G. (1975). Coordinating human services. Jossey-Bass: Washington. Albee, G.W. (1982). Preventing psychopathology and promoting human potential. American Psychologist, 37,150-161. Albee, G.W. (1986). Toward a just society: Lessons from observation on the primary prevention of psychopathology. American Psychologist, 41, 891-898. Alvesson, M., & Skoldberg, K. (2000). Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research. London: Sage. Amio, J. (1999). Implementing school supports for the wellness of newcomer children. Unpublished master's thesis, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, ON. Armstrong, K.L. (1997). Launching a family-centred, neighborhood-based human services system: Lessons from working the hallways and street corners. Administration in Social Work, 21,109-126. Arnstein, S.R. (1969). Ladder of citizen participation. American Institute of Planners Journal, 35, 216-224. Baker, A.J.L., Piotrkowski, C.S., & Brook-Gunn, J. (1999). The Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youngsters (HIPPY), The Future of Children, 9(1), 116133. Barlow, J., Coren, E., & Stewart-Brown, S. (2002). Meta-analysis of the effective-

322 References ness of parenting programmes in improving maternal psychosocial health. British Journal of General Practice, 52,223-233. Barlow, M., & Campbell, B. (1995). Straight through the heart: How the liberals abandoned the just society. Toronto: Harper Collins. Bartunek, J.M., & Betters-Read, B.L. (1987). The stages of organizational creation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 15,287-303. Bartunek, J.M., & Keys, C.B. (1982). Power equalization in schools through organization development. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 18,171183. Battistich, V., Solomon, D., Watson, M., Solomon, J., & Schaps, E. (1989). Effects of an elementary school program to enhance prosocial behavior on children's cognitive social problem-solving skills and strategies. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 10,147-169. Bauman, L.J., Stein, R.E., & Ireys, H.T. (1991). Reinventing fidelity: The transfer of technology among settings. American Journal of Community Psychology, 19, 619-639. Beatrice, D.R (1990). Inter-agency coordination: A practitioner's guide to a strategy for effective social policy. Administration in Social Work, 14,45-59. Beauvais, C, & Jenson, J. (2003). The well-being of children: Are there "neighbourhood effects"? Discussion paper F/31, Canadian Policy Research Networks. Becker, W.C., & Gerstein, R. (1982). A follow-up of Follow Through: The later effects of the Direct Instruction Model on children in fifth and sixth grade. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 75-92. Beiser, M., Dion, R., Gotowiec, A., Hyman, I., & Vu, N. (1995). Immigrant and refugee children in Canada. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 40, 67-72. Belksy, J. (1980). Child maltreatment: An ecological integration. American Psychologist, 35, 320-335. Bennett, H. (1989). One common agenda: Children always come first. In F. Fearnley (Ed.), Strengthening families, cherishing children (pp. 92-94). Ottawa: TRLC Canada. Berquist, W. (1993). The post-modern organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Berry, J.W. (1992). Acculturation and adaptation in a new society. International Migration, 30, 69-85. Bickman, L. (1987). The functions of program theory. In L. Bickman (Ed.), Using program theory in evaluation: New directions for program evaluation, no. 33. (pp. 5-18). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Bickman, L., & Peterson, K.A. (1990). Using program theory to describe and measure program quality. In L. Bickman (Ed.), Advances in program theory (pp. 61-72). New York: Jossey-Bass. Bidgood, B., & Cameron, G. (1992). Meal/snack missing and dietary adequacy

References 323 of primary school children. Journal of the Canadian Dietetic Association, 53, 164-168. Biglan, A. (2004). Contextualism and the development of effective prevention practices. Prevention Science, 5,15-21. Blakely, C.H., Mayer, J.P., Gottschalk, R.G., Schmitt, N., Davidson, W.S., Roitman, D.B., et al. (1987). The fidelity-adaptation debate: Implications for the implementation of public sector social programs. American Journal of Community Psychology, 15, 253-268. Block, P. (1993). Stewardship: Choosing service over self-interest. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Bloom, B.L. (1984). Community mental health (2nd ed.). Monterey, CA: Brooks/ Cole. Bloomberg, L. (1995). Interorganizational policy development and implementation: An examination of the school-human services redesign initiative in Hennepin County, Minnesota. In J. Hudson & B. Galaway (Eds.), Child welfare in Canada (pp. 82-90). Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing. Blum, A., & Ragab, I. (1985). Developmental stages of neighbourhood organizations. Social Policy, 15, 21-28. Bond, M.A., & Keys, C.B. (1993). Empowerment, diversity, and collaboration: Promoting synergy on community boards. American Journal of Community Psychology, 21, 37-57. Bouchard, C. (1999). The community as a participative learning environment: The case of Centreaide of Greater Montreal 1,2,3 Go! Project. In D. P. Keating & C. Hertzman (Eds.), Developmental health and the wealth of nations: Social, biological, and educational dynamics (pp. 311-321). New York: Guilford Press. Bouchard, C. (in press). Searching for impacts - The case of a communitybased initiative: 1, 2, 3 GO! In J. Scott & H. Ward (Eds.), Safeguarding and promoting the wellbeing of children, families, and their communities. London: Jessica Kingsley. Boutilier, M., Cleverly, S., & Labonte, R. (2000). Community as a setting for health promotion. In B. D. Poland, L. W. Green, & I. Rootman (Eds.). Settings for health promotion: Linking theory and practice (pp. 250-279). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Boutilier, M.A., Rajkumar, E., Poland, B.D., Tobin, S., & Badgley, R.F. (2001). Community action success in public health: Are we using a ruler to measure a sphere? Canadian Journal of Public Health, 92,90-94. Boyle, M.H., Offord, D.R., Racine, Y, Fleming, J.E., Szatmari, P., & Sanford, M. (1993). Evaluation of the revised Ontario Child Health Study Scales. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 34,189-213.

324 References Briar-Lawson, K., Lawson, H.A., Collier, C.S., & Joseph, A. (1997). School linked comprehensive services: Promising beginnings, lessons learned, and future challenges. Social Work in Education, 8,136-148. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspectives. Developmental Psychology, 22, 723-742. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1987). For ward/Family support: The quiet revolution. In S. L. Kagan, D. R. Powell, B. Weissbourd, & E. F. Zigler (Eds.), America's family support programs: Perspectives and prospects (pp. xi-xiv). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Browne, G., Byrne, C, Roberts, J., Gafni, A., Watt, S., Haldane, S., et al. (1999). Benefiting all the beneficiaries of social assistance: The 2-year effects and expense of subsidized versus nonsubsidized quality child care and recreation. National Academies of Practice Forum, 1,131-142. Bruner, C. (1991). Thinking collaboratively: Ten questions and answers to help policy makers improve children's services. Washington, DC: Education and Human Services Consortium. Buckner, J.C. (1986). The development of an instrument and procedure to assess the cohesiveness of neighbourhoods. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47(6-6), 2669-2670. Buckner, J.C. (1988). The development of an instrument to measure neighborhood cohesion. American Journal of Community Psychology, 16, 771-791. Burrell, B., Thompson, B., & Sexton, D. (1994). Predicting child-abuse potential across family types. Child Abuse and Neglect, 18,1039-1049. Burke, E. (1979). A participatory approach to urban planning (pp. 65-68). New York: Human Sciences Press. Cadzow, S. P., Armstrong, K. L., & Fraser, J. A. (1999). Stressed parents with infants: Reassessing physical abuse risk factors. Child Abuse and Neglect, 23, 845-853. Cameron, G., & Cadell, S. (1999). Fostering empowering participation in prevention programs for disadvantaged children and families: Lessons from ten demonstration sites. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 18(1), 105121. Cameron, G., Pancer, S.M., McKenzie-Mohr, S., & Cooper, D. (1993). Communities coming together: Proposal development in the Better Beginnings, Better Futures Project. Waterloo, ON: Better Beginnings Research Coordination Unit, Wilfrid Laurier University. Cameron, G., Peirson, L., & Pancer, S.M. (1994). Resident participation in the Better Beginnings, Better Futures prevention project: Part I - Factors that facilitate and hinder involvement. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 13(2), 213-227.

References 325 Campaign 2000. (2002). Poverty amidst prosperity: Building a Canada for all children - 2002 Report card on child poverty. Retrieved 24 June, 2004, from http:/ / www.campaign2000.ca/. Campbell, C., & Jovchelovitch, S. (2000). Health, community and development: Towards a social psychology of participation. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 10, 255-270. Caplan, G. (1964). Principles of preventive psychiatry. New York: Basic Books. Castro, KG., Barrera, M, & Martinez, C.R. (2004). The cultural adaptation of prevention interventions: Resolving tensions between fidelity and fit. Prevention Science, 5,41-45. Cauce, A.M., Comer, J.P., & Schwartz, D. (1987). Long term effects of a systemsoriented school prevention program. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 57, 127-131. Chamberland, C., Dallaire, N., Lindsay, J., Hebert, ]., Frechette, L., Beaudoin, G., et al. (1998). Les conditions de reussite en prevention/promotion en enfance-famille-jeunesse: Une question de justification et de faisabilite. Revue Canadienne de Sante Mentale Communautaire, 17(1), 37-59. Charette, A. (1988). Special study on adults with an activity limitation. In Health and Welfare Canada, Canada's health promotion survey: Technical report series. Ottawa, ON: Health and Welfare Canada. Chen, H. (1990). Theory-driven evaluations. California: Sage. Cherniss, C. (1997). Teacher empowerment, consultation and the creation of new programs in school. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 8,135-152. A choice of futures: Canada's commitment to its children, Fact sheet no. 4: Poverty and the child welfare system. (1989). (Available from Canadian Council on Social Development, 55 Parkdale Ave., Ottawa, Ontario, ON, K1Y 4G1, or from Vanier Institute of the Family, 120 Holland Ave., Suite 300, Ottawa, ON, K1Y 0X6). Coburn, D. (2000). Income inequality, social cohesion and health status of populations: The role of neo-liberalism. Social Science and Medicine, 51,135-146. Cochran, M. (1987). Empowering families: An alternative to the deficit model. In K. Hurrelmann, F. X. Kaufmann, & F. Losel (Eds.), Social intervention: Potential and constraints (pp. 105-119). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Cochran, M., & Henderson, C.R. (1986, February). Family matters: Evaluation of the parental empowerment program - A summary of a final report to the National Institute of Education. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University. Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (Rev. ed.). New York: Academic Press. Comer, J.P. (1976). Improving the quality of continuity of relationship in two

326 References inner-city schools. Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry, 15,535545. Comer, J.P. (1980). School power: Implications of an intervention project. New York: Free Press. Comer, J.P. (1985). The Yale-New Haven Prevention Project: A follow-up study. Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry, 24,154-160. Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group (1992). A developmental and clinical model for the prevention of conduct disorders: The Fast Track Program. Development and Psychopathology, 4, 509-527. Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (1999a). Initial impact of the Fast Track prevention trial for conduct problems: I. The high-risk sample. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67,631-647. Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (1999b). Initial impact of the Fast Track prevention trial for conduct problems: II. Classroom effects. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67,648-657. Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (2000). Merging indicated and universal prevention programs: The Fast Track model. Addictive Behaviors, 25,913-927. Connolly, A.J. (1991). Canadian edition ofKeyMath - Revised: A diagnostic inventory of essential mathematics. Toronto: Psycan Corporation. Cowen, E.L. (1977). Baby-steps toward primary prevention. American Journal of Community Psychology, 5,1-16. Cowen, E.L. (1980). The wooing of primary prevention. American Journal of Community Psychology, 8,258-284. Cowen, E.L. (1994). The enhancement of psychological wellness: Challenges and opportunities. American Journal of Community Psychology, 22,149-179. Cowen, E.L. (1996). The ontogenesis of primary prevention: Lengthy strides and stubbed toes. American Journal of Community Psychology, 24,235-249. Cowen, E.L. (2000). Community psychology and routes to psychological wellness. In J. Rappaport & E. Seidman (Eds.), Handbook of community psychology (pp. 79-99). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press. Cummins, J., & Swain, M. (1986). Bilingualism in education. Longman: New York. Curtis, L., & Hodge, M. (1994). Old standards, new dilemmas: Ethics and boundaries in community support services. Psychosocial Rehabilitation Journal, 18,13-33. Cutrona, C.E., & Russell, D.W. (1987). The provisions of social relationships and adaptation to stress. In Advances on Personal Relationships, (Vol. 1, pp. 3767). New York: JAI Press. Danish, S.J., & Gullotta, T.P. (Eds.). (2000). Developing competent youth and strong

References

327

communities through after school programming. Annapolis Junction, MD: Child Welfare League of Canada. Deber, R.B., Rondeau, K.V., & Beatty, M. (1990). The integration and coordination of health and social service delivery: Evaluation of models, an annotated literature review. Unpublished manuscript. Derksen, B., & Nelson, G. (1995). Partnerships between community residents and professionals: Issues of power and social class across the lifespan of neighbourhood organizations. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 14(1), 61-77. Dunn, L.M., & Dunn, L.M. (1981). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test - Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services. Durlak, J.A. (1995). School-based prevention programs for children and adolescents. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Durlak, J.A. (1998a). Common risk and protective factors in successful prevention programs. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 68,512-520. Durlak, J.A. (Ed.). (1998b). Program implementation in preventive trials [Special issue]. Journal of Prevention and Intervention in the Community, 17(2). Durlak, J.A. (1998c). Why program implementation is important. Journal of Prevention and Intervention in the Community, 17,5-18. Durlak, J.A., & Wells, A.M. (1997). Primary prevention programs for children and adolescents: A meta-analytic review. American Journal of Community Psychology, 25,115-152. Eichler, M. (1997). Family shifts: Families, policies, and gender equality. Toronto: Oxford University Press. Eisen, A. (1994). Survey of neighbourhood-based comprehensive community empowerment initiatives. Health Education Quarterly, 21, 235-252. Elias, M.J. (1995). Primary prevention as health and social competence promotion. Journal of Primary Prevention, 16, 5-14. Elias, M.J., & Tobias, S.E. (1996). Social problem-solving interventions in the schools. New York: Guilford. Ellison, C., & Barbour, N. (1992). Changing child care systems through collaborative efforts: Challenges for the 1990s. Child and Youth Care Forum, 21, 299316. Epp, J. (1986). Achieving health for all: A framework for health promotion. Canadian Journal of Public Health , 77, 393-407. Epp, J. (1988). Mental health for Canadians: Striking a balance. Ottawa: Minister of Supplies and Services. Epstein, N.B., Baldwin, L.M., & Bishop, D.S. (1983). The McMaster Family Assessment Device. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 9,171-179. Evans, P.M., & Wekerle, G.R. (1997). The shifting terrain of women's welfare:

328 References Theory, discourse, and activism. In P. M. Evans & G. R. Wekerle (Eds.), Women and the Canadian welfare state (pp. 3-27). Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Fawcett, S.B., Paine-Andrews, A., Francisco, V.T., Schultz, J.A., Richter, K.P., Lewis, R.K., et al. (1995). Using empowerment theory in collaborative partnerships for community health and development. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23, 677-697. Febbraro, A. (1994). Single mothers "at risk" for child maltreatment: An appraisal of person-centred interventions and a call for emancipatory action. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 23(2), 47-60. Fielding, N., & Fielding, J. (1986). Linking data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Foster-Fishman, P.G., & Keys, C.B. (1997). The person/environment dynamics of employee empowerment: An organizational culture analysis. American Journal of Community Psychology, 25,345-369. Francis, M. (1982, Spring). Designing landscapes with community participation and behavioral research. Landscape Architectural Forum, 15-39. Frumkin, M., Imershein, A., Chackerian, R., & Martin, P. (1983). Evaluating state level integration of human services. Administration in Social Work, 7,13-24. Fullan, M., & Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University. Gager, P.J., & Elias, M.J. (1997). Implementing prevention programs in highrisk environments: Application of the resiliency paradigm. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 67, 363-373. Gans, S.P., & Horton, G.T. (1975). Integration of human services: The state and municipal levels. New York: Praeger. GAO/HEH-97-34 (18 February 1996). Child welfare: State's progress in implementing family preservation and support services. Washington, DC: General Accounting Off ice/Health Education and Human Services Division. Garbarino, J. (1982). Children and families in the social environment. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. Gibaud-Wallston, J., & Wandersman, L. P. (1978). Development and utility of the Parenting Sense of Competence Scale. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Toronto. Gilling, D., & Barton, A. (1997). Crime prevention and community safety: A new home for social policy? Critical Social Policy, 17(3), 63-83. Graczyk, P.A., Matjasko, J.L., Weissberg, R.P., Greenberg, M.T., Elias, M.J., & Zins, J.E. (2000). The role of the Collaborative to Advance Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL) in supporting implementation of quality schoolbased prevention programs. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 11,3-6.

References 329 Gray, B. (1985). Conditions facilitating interorganizational change. Human Relations, 38, 911-936. Greenberg, M.T., Domitrovich, C., & Bumbarger, B. (2001). The prevention of mental disorders in school-aged children: Current state of the field. Prevention and Treatment, 4, Article 1 posted March 30,2001. Greenberg, M.T., Weissberg, R.P., O'Brien, M.U., Zins, J.E., Fredericks, L., Resnik, H., et al. (2003). Enhancing school-based prevention and youth development through coordinated social, emotional, and academic learning. American Psychologist, 58,466-474. Greenley, J. R. (1992). Neglecting organization and management issues in mental health systems development. Community Mental Health Journal, 28,371384. Gresham, P.M., & Elliott, S.N. (1990). Social skills rating system manual. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services. Griffin Cohen, M. (1997). From the welfare state to vampire capitalism. In P. M. Evans & G. R. Wekerle (Eds.), Women and the Canadian welfare state (pp. 2867). Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Gross, D., Sambrook, A., & Fogg, L. (1999). Behavior problems among young children in low-income urban day care centers. Research in Nursing and Health, 22,15-25. Gruber, J., & Trickett, E.J. (1987). Can we empower others? The paradox of empowerment in the governing of an alternative public school. American Journal of Community Psychology, 15,353-371. Gruber, J., & Trickett, E.J. (1987). Can we empower others? The paradox of empowerment in the governing of an alternative public school. American Journal of Community Psychology, 15, 353-371. Hagebak, B.R. (1979). Local human service delivery: The integration imperative. Public Administration Review, 39,575-582. Handy, C. (1995). The age of paradox. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Harbert, A.S., Finnegan, D., & Tyler, N. (1997). Collaboration: A study of a children's initiative. Administration in Social Work, 21, 83-107. Hassett, S., & Austin, M.J. (1997). Service integration: Something old and something new. Administration in Social Work, 21, 9-29. Hastings, J.E.F., Roberts, J.D.T., Jodoin, E., & Hung, H. (n.d.). Rationalization of child and maternal health services: An alternative approach to coordination/integration across service barriers - an annotated bibliography. Ottawa: Health Services and Promotion, NHRDP Grant #6606-4008-HT. Hawkins, J.D., Catalano, R.F., & Associates. (1992). Communities that care: Action for drug abuse prevention. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Head, J., & Barton, P. (1987). Toy libraries in the community. London: Elton.

330 References Heller, K., Price, R.H., Reinharz, S., Riger, S., & Wandersman, A. (1984). Psychology and community change: Challenges for the future (2nd ed.). Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press. Hidroglou, M.A., Fuller, W.H., & Hickman, R.D. (1980). SUPERCARP. Ames, IA: Iowa State University, Statistical Laboratory. Highfield Community Enrichment Project (1993). Highfield Community Enrichment Schedule A. Highfield School and Community Association (1990, July). Highfield School and Community Enrichment Project: Proposal to Better Beginnings, Better Futures Project. Hodgson, S. (1984). Efficient and effective human services: Some assumptions about why and how to involve community residents. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 3(1), 27-38. Hundert, J., Boyle, M.H., Cunningham, C.E., Duku, E., Heale, J., McDonald, J., et al. (1999). Helping Children Adjust - a Tri-Ministry Study: II. Program effects. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 40,1061-1073. The Infant Health and Development Program (1990). Enhancing the outcomes of low-birth-weight, premature infants. Journal of American Medical Association, 263, 3035-3042. Institute for Social Research (1977,1979,1981). Social change in Canada series. Toronto: York University Press. Institute of Medicine. (1994). Reducing risks for mental disorders: Frontiers for preventive intervention research. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Iscoe, I. (1974). Community psychology and the competent community. American Psychologist, 29,607-613. Jastak, S., & Wilkinson, G.S. (1984). Wide Range Achievement Test - Revised. Wilmington, DE: Jastak Associates. Johnson, D. B., Malone, P. J., & Hightower, A. D. (1997). Barriers to primary prevention efforts in the schools: Are we the biggest obstacle to the transfer of knowledge? Applied and Preventive Psychology, 6,81-90. Johnson, D.L. (1988). Primary prevention of behavior problems in young children: The Houston Parent-Child Development Center. In R.H. Price, E.L. Cowen, R.P. Lorion, & J. Ramos-McKay (Eds.), Fourteen ounces of prevention: A casebook for practitioners (pp. 44-52). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Johnston, C, & Mash, E.J. (1989). A measure of parenting satisfaction and efficacy. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 18,167-175. Jones, B., & Silva, J. (1991). Problem solving, community building, and systems interaction: An integrated practice model for community development. Journal of the Community Development Society, 22,1-21.

References 331 Jones, M.B., & Offord, D.R. (1989). Reduction of antisocial behaviour in poor children by non-school skill development. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 30, 737-750. Juras, J., Mackin, J.R., Curtis, S.E., & Foster-Fishman P.G. (1997). Key concepts of community psychology: Implications for consulting in education and human services settings. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 8,111-134. Kagan, S.L. (1991). United we stand: Collaboration for child care and early education services. New York: Teachers College Press. Kagan, S.L., & Shelley, A. (1987). The promise and problems of family support programs. In S.L. Kagan, D.R. Powell, B. Weissbourd, & E. F. Zigler (Eds.), America's family support programs: Perspectives and prospects (pp. 3-18). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Karoly, L.A., Greenwood, P.W., Everingham, S.S., Hoube, J., Kilburn, M.R., Rydell, C.P., et al. (1998). Investing in children: What we know and don't know about the costs and benefits of early childhood interventions. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Karp, J. M. (1990). Strategies for successful early intervention coordinating councils. Remedial and Special Education, 11, 54-59. Kaye, G. (1990). A community organizer's perspective in citizen participation research and the research practitioner partnership. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18,151-157. Kellerman, M., & Williams, E. (1994). 1994 Status Report of Family Resource Programs Across Canada. Ottawa: Canadian Association of Family Resource Programs. Kelly, J.G. (1988). A guide to conducting prevention research in the community: First steps. New York: Haworth Press. Klein, D.C., & Goldston, S.E. (1977). Primary prevention: An idea whose time has come. Proceedings of the Pilot Conference on Primary Prevention, April 24, 1976 (Department of Health, Education, and Welfare Pub. No. ADM 77-447). Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office. Kloos, B., McCoy, J., Stewart, E., Thomas, E.R., Wiley, A., Good, T.L., et al. (1997). Bridging the gap: A community-based, open-systems approach to school and neighborhood consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 8,175-196. Kluger, M., & Baker, W. (1994). Innovative leadership in the non-profit organization. Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of America. Koppich, J.E., & Kirst, M.W. (1993). Editor's introduction. Education and Urban Society, 25,123-128. Kress, J.S., Cimring, B.R., & Elias, M.J. (1997). Community psychology consul-

332 References tation and the transition to institutional ownership and operation of intervention. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 8,231-253. Kretzmann, J.P., & McKnight, J.L. (1993). Building communities from the inside out. Chicago, IL: ACTA Publications. Kyle, I., & Kellerman, M. (1998). Case studies of Canadian Family Resource Programs: Supporting families, children and communities. Ottawa: Canadian Association of Family Resource Programs. Labonte, R., & Laverack, G. (2001a). Capacity building in health promotion, Part 1: For whom? And for what purpose? Critical Public Health, 11,111-127. Labonte, R., & Laverack. G. (2001b). Capacity building in health promotion, Part 2: Whose use? And with what measurement? Critical Public Health, 11, 129-138. Lalonde, M. (1974). A new perspective on the health of Canadians. Ottawa: National Health and Welfare. Lamb, H.R., & Zusman, J. (1979). Primary prevention in perspective. American Journal of Psychiatry, 136,12-17. Landy, S., & Tarn, K.K. (1996). Yes, parenting does make a difference in the development of Canadian children. In Human Resources Development Canada/Statistics Canada (Eds.), Growing up in Canada (pp. 103-118). Ottawa: Statistics Canada. Lavoie, F., & Stewart, M. (1995). Mutual-aid groups and support groups: The Canadian context. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 14,5-12. Layzer, J.L, Goodson, B.D., Bernstein, L., & Price, C. (2001). National evaluation of family support programs: Final report volume A: The meta-analysis. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates. Lazar, I., & Darlington, R. (1982). Lasting effects of early education: A report from the Consortium for Longitudinal Studies. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 47 (2-3, Serial No. 195). Lee, B., & Richards, S. (2002). Child protection through strengthening communities: The Toronto Children's Aid Society. In B. Wharf (Ed.), Community work approaches to child welfare (pp. 93-113). Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press. Lehnhoff, N. (1976). Early childhood education: Promising practices in rural areas. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. Ed 118288). Levin, H.M. (1975). Cost-effectiveness analysis in evaluation research. In M. Guttentag & E.L. Struening (Eds.), Handbook of evaluation research (Vol. 2, pp. 89-122). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Lincoln, Y.S. (Ed.). (1985). Organizational theory and inquiry: The paradigm revolution. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

References

333

Lipsey, M.W., & Cordray, D.S. (2000). Evaluation methods for social intervention. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 345-375. Lipsey, M.W., & Wilson, D.B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lord, J., & Church, K. (1998). Beyond "partnership shock": Getting to "yes," living with "no." Canadian journal of Rehabilitation, 12,113-121. Lynch, K.B., Geller, S.R., Hunt, D.R., Galano, J., & Dubas, J.S. (1998). Successful program development using implementation evaluation. Journal of Prevention and Intervention in the Community, 17, 51-64. MacAllan, L., & Narayan, V. (1994). Keeping the beat in Grampian: A case study in community participation and ownership. Health Promotion International, 9,13-19. MacLeod, J., & Nelson, G. (2000). Programs for the promotion of family wellness and the prevention of child maltreatment: A meta-analytic review. Child Abuse and Neglect, 24,1127-1149. Martin, P.Y., Chackerian, R., Imershein, A.W., & Frumkin, M.L. (1983). The concept of "integrated" services reconsidered. Social Science Quarterly, 64, 747763. Maton, K.I., & Salem, D.A. (1995). Organizational characteristics of empowering community settings: A multiple case study approach. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23, 631-656. Maxwell, J.A. (1990). Cultural values as determinants of service integration: Some examples in international perspective. International Social Work, 33, 175-184. Mayer, J.P., & Davidson, W.S. II. (2000). Dissemination of innovation as social change. In J. Rappaport & E. Seidman (Eds.), Handbook of community psychology (pp. 421-438). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press. Mayfield, M.I. (1988). Toy libraries in Canada: A research study. Canadian Children, 13,1-18. Mayfield, M.I. (1993a). Toy libraries: Promoting play, toys, and family support internationally. Early Child Development and Care, 87,1-13. Mayfield, M.I. (1993b). Family support programs: Neighbourhood programs helping families. International Journal of Early Childhood, 25, 45-50. McClure, L., & Depiano, L. (1983). School advisory council participation and effectiveness. American Journal of Community Psychology, 11, 687-704. McDonald, L., & Sayger, T.V. (1998). Impact of a family and school-based prevention program on protective factors for high risk youth. Drugs and Society, 12, 61-85. Mclntosh, P. (1990). White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack. Independent School, 31-36.

334 References McKenzie, A. (1996). Towards the well-being of immigrant and refugee children: A community-based approach. Unpublished master's thesis, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, ON. McKnight, J. (1995). The careless society: Community and its counterfeits. New York: Basic Books. McNeely, J. (1999). Community building. Journal of Community Psychology, 27, 741-750. Melaville, A.I., & Blank M.J. (1991). What it takes: Structuring interagency partnerships to connect children and families with comprehensive services. Washington, DC: Education and Human Services Consortium. Meyer, L.A. (1984). Long-term academic effects of the Direct Instruction Project Follow Through. The Elementary School Journal, 84,380-393. Ministry of Community and Social Services (1990). Better Beginning, Better Futures Project: Request for proposals. Toronto: Ministry of Community and Social Services. Molgaard, V., & Kumpfer, K.L. (1993). The Iowa strengthening families program for pre- and early adolescents. Ames, IA: Iowa State University, Social and Behavioral Research Center for Rural Health. Moos, R.H. (2003). Social contexts: Transcending their power and fragility. American Journal of Community Psychology, 31,1-13. Morrissey, E., Wandersman, A., Seybolt, D., Nation, M., Crusto, C., & Davino, K. (1997). Toward a framework for bridging the gap between science and practice in prevention: A focus on evaluator and practitioner perspectives. Evaluation and Program Planning, 20, 367-377. M'Timkulu, D. (1982). Primary prevention, mutual support systems, and neighbourhood development. In H. Campfens (Ed.), Rethinking community development in a changing society: Issues, concepts, and cases. Selected papers and proceedings from the Ontario Community Development Society conference, Geneva Park, Lake Couchinching. Mukherjee, A. (1992). Education and race relations: The education of South Asian youth. In R. Ghosh & R. Kanungo (Eds.), South Asian Canadians: Current issues in the politics of culture (pp. 145-161). Montreal: Shastri-IndoCanadian Institute. Nation, M., Crusto, C., Wandersman, A., Kumpfer, K.L., Seybolt, D., Morrissey-Kane, E., et al. (2003). What works in prevention: Principles of effective prevention programs. American Psychologist, 58,449^456. National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (NLSCY), Cycle 2. CDROM databases. (1997). Ottawa, ON: Statistics Canada. Nault, M. (Ed.). 1990. Caring about families. Ottawa, ON: TLRC Canada. Nelson, G. (in press). Promoting the well-being of children and families: What

References 335 is best practice? In J. Scott & H. Ward (Eds.), Safeguarding and promoting the wellbeing of children, families, and their communities. London: Jessica Kingsley. Nelson, G v Amio, J., Prilleltensky, I., & Nickels, P. (2000). Partnerships for implementing school and community prevention programs. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 11,121-145. Nelson, G., & Hayday, B. (1995). Advancing prevention in Ontario, Canada: Follow-up to a utilization-focused evaluation. Prevention in Human Services, 12(1), 43-68. Nelson, G., Laurendeau, M.-C., & Chamberland, C. (2001). A review of programs to promote family wellness and prevent the maltreatment of children. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 33,1-13. Nelson, G., Laurendeau, M.-C., Chamberland, C., & Peirson, L. (2001). A review and analysis of programs to promote family wellness and prevent the maltreatment of pre-school and elementary school-aged children. In I. Prilleltensky, G. Nelson, & L. Peirson (Eds.), Promoting family wellness and preventing child maltreatment: Fundamentals for thinking and action. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Nelson, G., Lord, J., & Ochocka, J. (2001). Shifting the paradigm in community mental health: Towards empowerment and community. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Nelson, G., Ochocka, J., Griffin, K., & Lord, J. (1998). "Nothing about me, without me": Participatory action research with self-help/mutual aid organizations for psychiatric consumer/survivors. American Journal of Community Psychology, 26, 881-912. Nelson, G., & Pancer, S.M. (1990). The Ontario Prevention Clearinghouse: Part II - program evaluation. Journal of Primary Prevention, 10, 251-259. Nelson, G., Pancer, S.M., Hayward, K., & Kelly, R. (2004). Partnerships and participation of community residents in health promotion and prevention: Experiences of the Highfield Community Enrichment Project (Better Beginnings, Better Futures). Journal of Health Psychology, 9, 205-219. Nelson, G., Potasznik, H., & Bennett, E.M. (1983). Primary prevention: Another perspective. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 2(1), 3-12. Nelson, G., & Prilleltensky, I. (2005). Community psychology: In pursuit of liberation and well-being. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Nelson, G., Prilleltensky, L, Laurendeau, M.-C., & Powell, B. (1996). The prevention of mental health problems in Canada: A survey of provincial policies, structures, and programs. Canadian Psychology, 37,161-172. Nelson, G., Prilleltensky, I., & MacGillivary, H. (2001). Building value-based partnerships: Toward solidarity with oppressed groups. American Journal of Community Psychology, 29, 649-677.

336 References Nelson, G., Prilleltensky, I., & Peirson, L. (2001). Beyond the boundaries: Themes for thinking and action in the promotion of family wellness and the prevention of child maltreatment. In I. Prilleltensky, G. Nelson, & L. Peirson (Eds.), Promoting family wellness and preventing child maltreatment: Fundamentals for thinking and action (pp. 419-448). Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Nelson, G., Prilleltensky, I., & Peters, R. DeV. (2003). Prevention and mental health promotion in the community. In W.L. Marshall & P. Firestone (Eds.), Abnormal psychology: Perspectives (pp. 462-479). Scarborough, ON: Prentice Hall. Nelson, G., Westhues, A., & MacLeod, J. (2003). A meta-analysis of preschool prevention programs for children. Prevention and Treatment, 6 (December), Article 31. Available at http://www.journals.apa.org/prevention/. Newborough, J. R. (2005). Commentary. In G. Nelson & I. Prilleltensky (Eds.), Community psychology: In pursuit of liberation and well-being. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Nichols, L. (2002). Participatory program planning: Including program participants and evaluators. Evaluation and Program Planning, 25,1-14. NIMH Committee on Prevention Research. (1995). A plan for prevention research for the National Institute of Mental Health: A report to the National Advisory Mental Health Council. Washington, DC: National Institute of Mental Health. Normand, C.L., Vitaro, R, & Charlebois, P. (2000). Involving parents in early prevention. Isuma: Canadian Journal of Policy Research, 1(2), 38^43. Ochocka, J., Janzen, R., & Nelson, G. (2002). Sharing power and knowledge: Professional and mental health consumer/survivor researchers working together in a participatory action research project. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 25, 379-387. O'Donnell, J., Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R.E, Abbott, R. D., & Day, L. E. (1995). Preventing school failure, drug use, and delinquency among low-income children: Long-term intervention in elementary schools. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 65, 87-100. Offord, D.R., Boyle, M.H., Szatmari, P., Rae-Grant, N.I., Links, PS., Cadman, D.T., et al. (1987). Ontario Child Health Study: I. Six-month prevalence of disorder and rates of service utilization. Archives of General Psychiatry, 44, 832-836. Olds, D.L. (1997). The Prenatal Early Infancy Project: Preventing child abuse in the context of promoting maternal and child health. In D.A. Wolfe, R.J. McMahon, & R. DeV. Peters (Eds.), Child abuse: New directions in prevention and treatment across the lifespan (pp. 130-156). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Olds, D.L., Eckenrode, J., Henderson, C.R., Kitzman, H., Powers, J., Cole, R., et al. (1997). Long-term effects of home visitation on maternal life course and

References

337

child abuse and neglect: Fifteen-year follow-up of a randomized trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 278, 637-643. Olds, D.L., Henderson, C.R., Chamberlin, R., & Tatelbaum, R. (1986). Preventing child abuse and neglect: A randomized trial of nurse home visitation. Pediatrics, 78, 65-78. Olds, D.L., & Korfmacher, J. (Eds.). (1998). Prenatal and early childhood home visitation: I - Evolution of a program of research [Special issue]. Journal of Community Psychology, 25(1). O'Looney, J. (1994). Modeling collaboration and social services integration: A single state's experience with developmental and non-developmental models. Administration in Social Work, 18, 61-86. O'Looney, J. (1997). Marking progress toward service integration: Learning to use evaluation to overcome barriers. Administration in Social Work, 21, 31-65. O'Neill, P., Duffy, C, Enman, M., Blackmer, E., & Goodwin, J. (1988). Cognition and citizen participation in social action. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18,1067-1083. Ontario Ministry of Health (1990) Healthy lifestyles program: Community health promotion in action. Toronto Queen's Printer for Ontario. Oxley, D. (2000). The school reform movement: Opportunities for community psychology. In J. Rappaport & E. Seidman (Eds.), Handbook of community psychology (pp. 565-590). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press. Pancer, S.M. (1997). Program evaluation. In S.W. Sadava & D.R. McCreary (Eds.), Applied social psychology (pp. 47-67). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Pancer, S.M., & Alcalde, J. (1992). Development and evaluation of a communitybased primary prevention program: The Greenway-Chaplin Project. Unpublished paper. Pancer, S. M., & Cameron, G. (1994). Resident participation in the Better Beginnings, Better Futures prevention project: Part I - The impacts of involvement. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 23(2), 197-211. Pancer, S.M., & Nelson, G. (1990). Community-based approaches to health promotion: Guidelines for community mobilization. International Quarterly of Community Health Education, 10,91-111. Pancer, S.M., Nelson, G., & Hayday, B. (1990). The Ontario Prevention Clearinghouse: Part I - History and program description. Journal of Primary Prevention, 10, 241-250. Pancer, S.M., & Westhues, A. (1989). A developmental stage approach to program planning and evaluation. Evaluation Review, 13,56-77. Pandiani, J.A., & Maynard, A.G. (1993). Vermont's local interagency teams: An

338 References evaluation of service coordination and system change. Community Alternatives International Journal of Family Care, 5, 85-97. Papineau, D., & Kiely, M.C. (1996). Participatory evaluation in a community organization: Fostering stakeholder empowerment and utilization. Evaluation and Program Planning, 19, 79-93. Parker, I. (1994). Reflexive research and the grounding of analysis: Social psychology and the psy-complex. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 4,239-252. Patton, M.Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Peirson, L., Laurendeau, M.-C., & Chamberland, C. (2001). Context, contributing factors, and consequences. In I. Prilleltensky, G. Nelson, & L. Peirson (Eds.), Promoting family wellness and preventing child maltreatment: Fundamentals for thinking and action (pp. 41-123). Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Peirson, L., & Prilleltensky, I. (1994). Understanding school change to facilitate prevention: A study of change in a secondary school. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 13(2), 127-143. Perkins, D.D., Crim, B., Silberman, P., & Brown, B.B. (2004). Community adversity and community development: Ecological and strengths-based theory, research and policies. In K. Maton, B. Ledbeater, C. Schellenberg, & A. Solarz (Eds.), Investing in children, youth , families and communities: Strengths-based research and policy (pp. 321-340). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Perkins, D.D., Hughey, J., & Speer, P.W. (2002). Community psychology perspectives on social capital theory and community development practice. Journal of the Community Development Society, 33,33-52. Peter F. Drucker Foundation for Nonprofit Management (2001). Leading in a time of change: A conversation with Peter F. Drucker and Peter M. Senge. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Peters, R. DeV. (1988). Mental health promotion in children and adolescents: An emerging role for psychology. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 20, 389-401. Peters, R. DeV. (1990). Adolescent mental health promotion: Policy and practice. In R. J. McMahon & R. DeV. Peters (Eds.), Behavior disorders of adolescence (pp. 207-223). New York: Plenum Press. Peters, R. DeV, Arnold, R., Petrunka, K., Angus, D.E., Brophy, K., Burke, S.O., et al. (2000). Developing capacity and competence in the Better Beginnings, Better

References 339 Futures communities: Short-term findings report. Kingston, ON: Better Beginnings, Better Futures Research Coordination Unit Technical Report. Peters, R. DeV., Peters, J., Laurendeau, M.-C, Chamberland, C, & Peirson, L. (2001). Social policies for promoting the well-being of Canadian children and families. In I. Prilleltensky, G. Nelson, & L. Peirson (Eds.), Promoting family wellness and preventing child maltreatment: Fundamentals for thinking and action (pp. 177-219). Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Potts, R. G. (2003). Emancipatory education versus school-based prevention in African American communities. American Journal of Community Psychology, 31,173-183. Powell, B., & Nelson, G. (1997). The cultivation of neighbourhood centers: A lifecycle model. Journal of the Community Development Society, 28, 25-42. Prestby, J.E., Wandersman, A., Florin, P., Rich, R., & Chavis, D. (1990). Benefits, costs, incentive management and participation in voluntary organizations: A means to understanding and promoting empowerment. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18,117-149. Prilleltensky, I. (2000). Value-based leadership in organizations: Balancing values, interests, and power among citizens, workers, and leaders. Ethics and Behavior, 10,139-158. Prilleltensky, I., & Nelson, G. (1997). Community psychology: Reclaiming social justice. In D. Fox & I. Prilleltensky (Eds.), Critical psychology: An introduction (pp. 166-184). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Prilleltensky, L, & Nelson, G. (2002). Doing psychology critically: Making a difference in diverse settings. London: Macmillan. Prilleltensky, L, & Nelson, G. (2004). Research and solidarity: Partnerships for knowing with community members. In D. Pare & G. Lamer (Eds.), Critical practice in psychology and therapy (pp. 243-258). Binghampton, NY: Haworth Press. Prilleltensky, L, Nelson, G., & Peirson, L. (Eds.). (2001a). Promoting family wellness and preventing child maltreatment: Fundamentals for thinking and action. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Prilleltensky, I., Nelson, G., & Peirson, L. (2001b). The role of power and control in children's lives: An ecological analysis of pathways towards wellness, resilience, and problems. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 11,143-158. Prilleltensky, I., Peirson, L., & Nelson, G. (1997). The application of community psychology values and guiding concepts to school consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 8,153-173. Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

340 References Quinn, R.E., & Cameron, K. (1983). Organizational lifecycles and shifting criteria of effectiveness: Some preliminary evidence. Management Science, 29, 33-51. Racino, J.A. (1991). Organizations in community living: Supporting people with disabilities. Journal of Mental Health Administration, 18,51-59. Radloff, L.S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-depression scale for research in the general population. Journal of Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 384401. Rae-Grant, N.I. (1979). The state of the art: A background paper on prevention. Toronto: Ministry of Community and Social Services, Children's Services Division. Rae-Grant, N.I. (1994). Preventive interventions for children and adolescents: Where are we now and how far have we come? Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 13(2), 17-36. Rae-Grant, N.I., & Russell, C.C. (1989). Better Beginnings, Better Futures: An integrated model of primary prevention of emotional and behavioural problems. Toronto: Queen's Printer for Ontario. Ramey, C.T., & Campbell, F.A. (1984). Preventive education for high-risk children: Cognitive consequences of the Carolina Abecedarian Project. American Journal on Mental Deficiency, 88,515-523. Ramey, C.T., & Landesman Ramey, S. (1998). Early intervention and early experience. American Psychologist, 53,109-120. Regan, E.M., Mayfield, M.I., & Strange, B. (1988) Canadian alternatives in early childhood programs. International Journal of Early Childhood, 20,3-11. Reinharz, S. (1984). Alternative settings and social change. In K. Heller, R.H. Price, S. Reinharz, S. Riger, & A. Wandersman (Eds.), Psychology and community change: Challenges of the future. (2nd ed., pp. 286-336). Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press. Resnicow, K., Cohn, L., Reinhardt, J., Cross, D., Futterman, R., Kirschner, E., et al. (1992) A three-year evaluation of the Know Your Body program in inner city children. Health Education Quarterly, 19,463-480. Review of the literature on immigrant mental health. (1988). Canadian Task Force on Mental Health Issues Affecting Immigrants and Refugees. Ottawa: Ministry of Supply and Services. Riger, S. (1984). Vehicles for empowerment: The case of feminist movement organizations. Prevention in Human Services, 3(2/3), 99-117. Rossi, PH., Freeman, H.E., & Lipsey, M.W. (1999). Evaluation: A systematic approach (6th ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Rossman, G.B., & Wilson, B.L. (1985). Numbers and words: Combining quantitative and qualitative methods in single, large scale evaluations. Evaluation Review, 9, 627-643.

References 341 Rothman, ]., & Tropman, J.E. (1987). Models of community organization and macro practice perspectives: Their mixing and phasing. In R Cox, R. Erlich, J. Rothman, & J. Tropman (Eds.), Strategies of community organization (4th ed., pp. 3-26). Itasca, IL: Peacock. Rotheram-Borus, M.J. (1997). Mental health services for children and adolescents. In R.P. Weissberg, T.P. Gullotta, R.L. Hampton, B.A. Ryan, & G.A. Adams (Eds.), Healthy children 2010: Establishing preventative services (pp. 124153). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Rothschild-Whitt, J. (1976). Conditions facilitating participatory-democratic organization. Sociological Inquiry, 46(2), 75-86. Roussos, S.T., & Fawcett, S.B. (2000). A review of collaborative partnerships as a strategy for improving community health. Annual Review of Public Health, 22,369-402. Rowell, C.G. (1972). An attitude scale for reading. The Reading Teacher, February, 442-447. Rub, S. (1987). The toy library service at Honeylands Family Support Unit: An assessment. Child: Care, Health and Development, 13, 33-39. Rubin, K.H., Maioni, T.L., & Hornung, M. (1976). Free play behaviors in middle- and lower-class preschoolers: Parten and Piaget revisited. Child Development, 47, 414-419. Rush, B., & Ogborne, A. (1991). Program logic models: Expanding their role and structure for program planning and evaluation. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 6, 95-106. Rutman, L. (1980). Planning useful evaluations: Evaluability assessment. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Rutman, L. (1984). Planning an evaluation study. In L. Rutman (Ed.), Evaluation research methods: A basic guide (pp. 15-37). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Rutter, M. (1979). Protective factors in children's responses to stress and disadvantage. In M.W. Kent & J.E. Rolf (Eds.), Primary prevention ofpsychopathology, Volume HI: Social competence in children (pp. 49-74). Hanover, NH: University Press of New England. Rutter, M., Maughan, B., Mortimore, P., & Ouston, J. (1979). Fifteen thousand hours: Secondary schools and their effects on children. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. St. Pierre, R.G., Layzer, J.I., Goodson, B.D., & Bernstein, L.S. (1997). National impact evaluation of the Comprehensive Child Development Program: Final report. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates. Sarason, S.B. (1972). The creation of settings and the future societies. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Sarason, S.B. (1982). The culture of the school and the problem of change (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

342 References Sarason, S.B. (1990). The predictable failure of educational reform: Can we change course before it's too late? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Sarason, S.B. (1993). The case for change: Rethinking the preparation of educators. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Sarason, S.B. (1996). Barometers of change: Individual, educational, and social transformation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Sarason, S.B. (2003). The obligations of the moral-scientific stance. American Journal of Community Psychology, 31,209-211. Schmuck, R.A., Runkel, P.J., & Langmeyer, D. (1969). Improving organizational problem-solving in a school faculty. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 5, 455-482. Schorr, L. (1988). Within our reach: Breaking the cycle of disadvantage. New York: Doubleday. Schorr, L. (1998). Common purpose: Strentheningfamilies and neighbourhoods to rebuild America. Toronto: Randon House. Schweinhart, L.J., & Weikart, D.P. (1997). The High/Scope Preschool curriculum comparison study through age 23. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 117-143. Scriven, M. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. In R.W. Tyler, R.M. Gagne, & M. Scriven (Eds.), Perspectives of curriculum evaluation (pp. 39-83). Chicago: Rand McNally. Sechrest, L., & Sidani, S. (1995). Quantitative and qualitative methods: Is there an alternative? Evaluation and Program Planning, 18, 77-87. Seidel, J.V., Kjolseth, R., & Seymour, E. (1988). The Ethnograph. Corvallis, OR: Qualis Research Associates. Seitz, V., Apfel, N.H., & Efron, C. (1978). Long-term effects of early intervention: The New Haven Project. In B. Brown (Ed.), Found: Long-term effects from early intervention (pp. 79-109). Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and science of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday. Senge, P., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, C., Roth, G., & Smith, B. (1999). The dance of change. New York: Currency/Doubleday. Simon, J. L., & Bruce, P. C. (1987). Resampling Stats: Probability and statistics a radically different way. User's guide. Arlington, VT: Resampling Stats. Slavin, R.E., Karweit, N.L., & Wasik, B.L. (1994). Preventing early school failure. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Speer, P., Armstead, T., Fox, T., Peterson, N.A., Rivas, R., & Van Alst, D. (2002, May). People making public policy in California: The Pacific Institute for Community Organization (PICO) California project. Nashville, TN: Department of Human and Organization Development, Vanderbilt University.

References

343

Spoth, R., Redmond, C, Haggerty, K., & Ward, T. (1995). A controlled parenting skills outcome study: Examining individual difference and attendance effects. Journal of Marriage and the family, 57,449-464. Spoth, R., Redmond, C., & Shin, C. (1998). Direct and indirect latent-variable parenting outcomes of two universal family-focussed preventive interventions: Extending a public health-oriented research base. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66,385-399. Spreitzer, G.M. (1995). An empirical test of a comprehensive model of intrapersonal empowerment in the workplace. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23, 601-629. Statistics Canada (1988). The Health and Activity Limitation Survey: Selected data for Canada, provinces and territories. (Catalogue 41034). Ottawa, ON: Disability Database Program Statistics Canada. Stewart, D.W., & Shamdasani, P.N. (1990). Focus groups. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Straus, M.A. (1990). The Conflict Tactics Scale and its critics: New data on reliability and validity. In M.A. Straus & RJ. Gelles (Eds.), Physical violence in American families (pp. 49-73). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. Strayhorn, J.M., & Weidman, C.S. (1988). A parent practices scale and its relation to parent and child mental health. Journal of Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 27, 613-618. Taylor, B., Brooks,}., Phanindis, J., & Rossmo, K. (1991). Services for Vancouver street youth: An integrated delivery model. Journal of Child and Youth Care, 6, 49-61. Teleen, S., Herzog, A., & Kilbane, T.L. (1989). Impact of a family support program on mothers' social support and parenting stress. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 59, 410-419. Tonry, M., & Farrington, D.P. (Eds.). (1995). Building a safer society: Strategic approaches to crime. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Toulmin, S., & Gustavsen, B. (Eds.). (1996). Beyond theory: Changing organizations through participation. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Trawick-Smith, J. (1989). Play is not learning: A critical review of the literature. Child and Youth Care Quarterly, 18,161-170. Tremblay, R.E., Masse, L.C., Pagani, L., & Vitaro, F. (1996). From childhood aggression to adolescent maladjustment: The Montreal prevention experiment. In R. DeV., Peters & R. J. McMahon (Eds.), Preventing childhood disorders, substance abuse, and deliquency (pp. 268-298). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Trickett, E.J., Watts, R., & Birman, D. (1993). Human diversity and community

344 References psychology: Still hazy after all these years. Journal of Community Psychology, 21,264-279. Trickett, E.J., Watts, R., & Birman, D. (Eds.). (1994). Human diversity: Perspectives on people in context. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Tucker, L.R. (1951). A method for synthesis of factor analysis studies. Personnel research section report No. 984. Washington, DC: Department of the Army. Utting, D., Rose, W., & Pugh, G. (2001). Better results for children and families: Involving communities in planning services based on outcomes. London: National Council of Voluntary Child Care Organisations. Vander-Schie, R.A., Wagenfield, M.O., & Worgess, B.L. (1987). Reorganizing human services at the local level: The Kalamazoo county experience. New England Journal of Human Services, 7,29-33. Wandersman, A. (1984). Citizen participation. In K. Heller, R. Price, S. Reinharz, S. Riger, A. Wandersman, & T. D'Aunno (Eds.), Psychology and community change: Challenges of the future (pp. 337-379). Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press. Wandersman, A., & Florin, P. (2000). Citizen participation and community organizations. In J. Rappaport & E. Seidman (Eds.), Handbook of community psychology (pp. 247-272). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Press. Wandersman, A., & Giamartino, G. (1980). Community and individual differences as influences on initial participation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 8,217-228. Washnis, G.J. (1976). Citizen involvement in crime prevention. Lexington, MA.: Lexington Books. Watts, R. (1992). Elements of a psychology of human diversity. Journal of Community Psychology, 20,16-131. Wechster, D. (1974). The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children Revised. Toronto: Psychological Corporation. Weininger, O. (1990). Play: For survival. In I.M. Doxey (Ed.), Child care and education: Canadian dimensions (pp. 13-31). Scarborough, ON: Nelson Canada. Weiss, C.H. (1983). The stakeholder approach to evaluation: Origins and promise. In A.S. Bryk (Ed.), Stakeholder-based evaluation (pp. 3-14). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Weiss, H.B., & Jacobs, F. H. (1988). Introduction: Family support and education programs - challenges and opportunities. In H. B. Weiss & EH . Jacobs (Eds.), Evaluating family programs (pp. xix-xxix). New York: Aldine de Gruyter. Weiss, J.A. (1981). Substance vs. symbol in administrative reform: The case of human services coordination. Policy Analysis, 7,21-45.

References 345 Weissbourd, B., & Kagan, S.L. (1989). Family support programs: Catalysts for change. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 51,20-31. Weissberg, R.P. (1990). Fidelity and adaptation: Combining the best of both perspectives. In P. Tolan, C. Keys, F. Chertok, & L. Jason (Eds.), Researching community psychology: Issues of theory and methods (pp. 186-189). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Weissberg, R.P., & Elias, M.J. (1993). Enhancing young people's social competence and health behaviour: An important challenge for educators, scientists, policy makers, and funders. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 2,179-190. Weissberg, R.P., & Greenberg, M.T. (1998). School and community competenceenhancement and prevention programs. In W. Damon (editor-in-chief), I. E. Sigel, & K. A. Renninger (volume editors), Handbook of child psychology (Vol. 4: Child psychology in practice) (pp. 877-954). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Westheimer, M. (Ed.). (2003). Parents making a difference: International research on the Home Instruction for Parents of Preschool Youngsters (HIPPY) Program. Jerusalem: Hebrew University Press/Magnes Press. Westland, C., & Knight, J. (1982). Playing, living, learning. State College, PA: Venture Publishing. Wharf, B. (1995). Organizing and delivering child welfare services: Contributions of research. In J. Hudson & B. Gallaway (Eds.), Child welfare in Canada (pp. 2-12). Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing. Wholey, J.S. (1987). Evaluability assessment: Developing program theory. In L. Bickman (Ed.), Using program theory in evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Wilkinson, S. (1988). The role of reflexivity in feminist psychology. Women's Studies International, 11, 493-502. Willms, J.D. (2001). Hypotheses about community effects on social outcomes. Isuma: Canadian Journal of Policy Research, 2(1), 53-62. World Health Organization. (1986). Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion. Ottawa, ON: WHO. Yin, R.K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Youngkin, E.Q., & Davis, M.S. (1994). Assessing women's health. In E. Q. Youngkin & M. S. Davis (Eds.), Women's health: A primary care clinical guide (pp. 33-59). East Norwalk, CT: Appleton & Lange. Zigler, E., & Black, K.B. (1989). America's family support movement: Strengths and limitations. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 51, 6-19. Zimmerman, M.A., & Rappaport, J. (1988). Citizen participation, perceived control, and empowerment. American Journal of Community Psychology, 16, 251-278. Zins, J.E., Elias, M.J., Greenberg, M.T., & Pruett, M.K. (Eds.). (2000a). Imple-

346

References

mentation of prevention programs [Special issue]. Journal of Educational and Psychology Consultation, 11(1). Zins, J.E., Elias, M.J., Greenberg, M.T., & Pruett, M.K. (Eds.). (2000b). Measurement of quality of implementation of prevention programs [Special issue]. Journal of Educational and Psychology Consultation, 11(2).

Contributors

Geoffrey Nelson is professor of psychology at Wilfrid Laurier University and a member and former director of the graduate program in community psychology, which has a strong emphasis on the development and evaluation of prevention programs for children and families. He is co-editor of Promoting Family Wellness and Preventing Child Maltreatment: Fundamentals for Thinking and Action (2001) and senior author of Shifting the Paradigm in Community Mental Health: Towards Empowerment and Community (2001), both published by University of Toronto Press. With Isaac Prilleltensky, he is author of Doing Psychology Critically: Making a Difference in Diverse Settings (2002) and Community Psychology: Towards Liberation and Wellness (2005) both published by Palgrave/Macmillan. Together with the Canadian Mental Health Association/Waterloo Region Branch, he was the recipient of the McNeill Award for Innovation in Community Mental Health from the American Psychological Foundation and the Society for Research and Action of the American Psychological Association in 1999. Geoff was Senior Editor of the Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health from 1990 to 1996. He was cosite researcher for the Highfield Community Enrichment Project from 1991 to 1999 and has been a member of the Research Coordination Unit for Better Beginnings, Better Futures since 2002. Mark Pancer is a professor of psychology at Wilfrid Laurier University and coordinator of the graduate program in community psychology. He has published numerous articles and book chapters on the topics of program evaluation, community-based prevention programs, and youth activism, and he coordinated a special section of the Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health on the Better Beginnings' research. Mark is

348 Contributors

currently a researcher with Health Canada's Centre for Excellence on Youth Engagement. He has been a member of the Better Beginnings' Research Coordination Unit and site liaison to the Highfield Community Enrichment Project since its inception in 1990. Karen Hayward is a graduate of the MA program in community psychology at Wilfrid Laurier University. She was a research staff member with the Centre for Social Welfare Studies at WLU, and is currently an independent social research consultant. Karen has conducted evaluations of and completed several reports on programs for children and families, including intensive family preservation services and selfhelp/mutual aid organizations. Karen was co-site researcher for the Highfield Community Enrichment Project and has continued to work on the Better Beginnings' qualitative research. Ray Peters is professor emeritus of psychology at Queen's University. Ray has been the Research Director of Better Beginnings, Better Futures since its inception in 1990. He was a visiting scientist with the Oregon Social Learning Center in 1979-80 and with the Mental Health Division of the World Health Organization in Geneva, Switzerland, in 1986-87. Since 1982 he has served on the executive committee of the Banff International Conference on Behavioural Science. His primary research interests are in the areas of promotion, prevention, and early intervention in child and family development.

Author Index

Abbott, R.D., 220, 230, 258 Adams, P., 175 Adelman, H.S., 172,174 Aiken, M, 172,175,176,186 Albee, G.W., 5,8, 303,304 Alcalde, J., 192 Alvesson, M., 280 Amio, J., 43, 46, 47, 72,115,278,281, 302

Angus, D.E.,311 Apfel, N.H., 108 Armstead, T., 246 Armstrong, K.L., 97,175,177 Arnold, R., 311 Arnstein, S.R., 192, 285 Austin, M.J., 176,177,189, 289 Badgley, R.F., 269 Baker, W., 92,150,156 Baldwin, L.M., 238 Barbour, N., 172,176,177,187, 288 Barlow, J., 87 Barlow, M., 15,17, 304 Barrera, M., 61 Barton, A., 136 Barton, P., 90 Bartunek, J.M., 57, 58,101

Battistich, V, 220,230,257 Bauman, L.J., 61 Beatrice, D.R, 175,176 Beatty, M., 172,175,189,190,289,290 Beauvais, C., 301 Becker, W.C., 108 Beiser, M., 136 Belksy, J., 6 Bennett, E.M., 10, 77 Bernstein, L.S., 77, 78,83, 99,239,277 Berquist, W., 150,156 Berry, J.W., 97 Betters-Read, B.L., 57, 58 Bickman, L., 58,283 Bidgood, B., 203 Birman, D., 43,139 Bishop, D.S., 238 Black, K.B., 77 Blackmer, E., 192 Blakely, C.H., 61 Blank M.J., 172,174 Block, P., 150,156 Bloom, B.L., 5 Bloomberg, L., 176,177,187,190,290 Blum, A., 57 Bond, M.A., 150,170 Bouchard, C., 14,284, 301

350 Author Index Boutilier, M.A., 13,269, 300, 301 Boyle, M.H., 17, 216,221,222,230 Bronfenbrenner, U., 6,12, 78 Brook-Gunn, J., 92 Brooks, J., 176,187,190 Brophy, K., 311 Brown, B.B., 123,124,142 Browne, G., 14,137 Bruce, P.C., 319 Bruner, C, 172,175,176,186 Buckner, J.C., 29 Bumbarger, B., 11,110,247, 258 Burke, E., 192 Burke, S.O., 311 Burrell, B., 97 Byles, J.A., 176 Byrne, C., 14,137 Cadell, S., 133,193,302 Cadman, D.T., 17 Cadzow, S.P., 97 Cameron, G., 103,133,134,193,302 Cameron, K., 57 Campbell, B., 304 Campbell, C., 13,15,17,269 Caplan, G., 9 Castro, KG., 61 Catalano, R.R, 110,220,230,247,258 Cauce, A.M., 116 Chackerian, R., 174 Chamberland, C., 7,11-12,12,14,15, 16,60,304-5 Chamberlin, R., 92,277 Charette, A., 232 Charlebois, P., 284 Chavis, D., 192 Chen, H., 58,283 Cherniss, C., 59, 60, 73,101,189 Church, K., 144 Cimring, B.R., 47, 75

Cleverly, S., 13,300,301 Coburn, D., 15, 304 Cochran, M., 92 Cohen, J., 216,320 Cohn, L., 103 Cole, R., 92 Comer, J.P., 115,133,192,257 Connolly, A.J., 222 Cordray, D.S., 26 Coren, E., 87 Cowen, E.L., 7,9,10, 58,59 Crim, B., 123,124,142 Cross, D., 103 Crusto, C., 16,58,118 Cummins, J., 223 Cunningham, C.E., 221,222,230 Curtis, L., 160,291 Curtis, S.E., 59, 73 Cutrona, C.E., 236 Danish, S.J., 137 Darlington, R., 11,237 Davidson, W.S., 61 Davino, K., 16 Davis, M.S., 133,233 Day, L.E., 220,230,258 Deber, R.B., 172,175,189,190,289, 290 Depiano, L., 133,192 Derksen, B., 124,133 Dewar, R., 172,175,176,186 Dewey, John, 273 Dion, R., 136 DiTomaso, N, 172,175,176,186. Domitrovich, C., 11,12,110,247,258 Dryfoos, 121 Dubas, J.S., 60 Duffy, C., 192 Duku, E., 221, 222, 230 Dunn, L.M., 221

Author Index 351 Durlak, J.A., 8,11,60,61,66,103, 111, 224 Eckenrode,}., 92 Efron, C, 108 Eichler, M., 306 Eisen, A., 13, 269, 301 Elias, M.J., 47, 60, 75,110, 111, 118, 120 Elliott, S.N., 217 Ellison, C., 172,176,177,187,190,288 Enman, M., 192 Epp,J., 17,303 Epstein, N.B., 238 Evans, P.M., 304 Everingham, S.S., 239 Farrington, D.P., 136 Fawcett, S.B., 193, 269 Febbraro, A., 14,15, 304, 305 Fielding,J., 39 Fielding, N., 39 Finnegan, D., 177, 288 Fleming, J.E., 216 Florin, P., 133,192 Fogg, L., 97 Foster-Fishman P.G., 59,73 ,161,166, 170 Fox, T., 246 Francis, M., 133,192 Francisco, V.T., 193 Fraser, J.A., 97 Fredericks, L., 11,110, 111, 121, 258 Frumkin, M., 174 Fullan, M., 101 Fuller, W.H., 319 Futterman, R., 103 Gafni, A., 14,137 Gager, P.J., 60

Galano, ]., 60 Cans, S.P., 172,174,175 Garbarino, J., 6 Geller, S.R., 60 Gerstein, R., 108 Giamartino, G., 193 Gibaud-Walston, J., 235 Gilling, D., 136 Goldston, S.E., 9 Goodson, B.D., 77, 78,83,99,239,277 Goodwin, J., 192 Gotowiec, A., 136 Gottschalk, R.G., 61 Graczyk, P.A., 111 Gray, B., 176,189 Greenberg, M.T., 11,12, 60,110, 111, 116,121,247,258 Greenley, J.R., 176,177,189,288 Greenwood, P.W., 239 Gresham, P.M., 217 Griffin, K., 278,279 Griffin Cohen, M., 304 Gross, D., 97 Gruber, J., 73,117 Gullotta, T.P., 137 Gustavsen, B., 150,156 Hage, J., 172,175,176,186 Hagebak, B.R., 175,176 Haggerty, K., 87 Haldane, S., 14,137 Handy, C., 150,156,170 Harbert, A.S., 177, 288 Hassett, S., 176,177,189,289 Hastings, J.E.F., 172,176, 289 Hawkins, J.D., 110, 220,230,247,258 Hayday, B., 17,18 Hayward, K., 285 Head, J., 90, Heale, J., 221,222,230

352 Author Index Heller, K., 40,43 Henderson, C.R., 92,277 Herzog, A., 87 Hickman, R.D., 319 Hidroglou, M.A., 319 Hightower, A.D., 57, 58,59,61, 73 Hodge, M., 160, 291 Hodgson, S., 192,193 Hornung, M., 96 Horton, G.T., 172,174,175 Hoube, J., 239 Hughey, J., 14,142 Hundert, J., 221, 222,230 Hung, H., 172,176,289 Hunt, D.R., 60 Hyman, I., 136 Imershein, A.W., 174 Ireys, H.T., 61 Iscoe, I., 192 Jacobs, F.H., 77 Janzen, R., 280 Jastak, S., 222 Jenson, J., 301 Jodoin, E., 172,176,289 Johnson, D.B., 58,59, 61, 73 Johnson, D.L., 13 Johnston, C, 235 Jones, B., 57,124,143,147,148,172, 191 Jones, M.B., 137 Jovchelovitch, S., 13,269,301 Juras, J., 59, 73 Kagan, S.L., 77,172 Karoly, L.A., 239 Karweit, N.L., 108,223 Kaye, G., 193 Kellerman, M., 77,78, 79

Kelly, J.G., 25,40,294 Kelly, R., 285,294 Keys, C.B., 101,150,161,166,170 Kiely, M.C., 24 Kilbane, T.L., 87 Kilburn, M.R., 239 Kirschner, E., 103 Kirst, M.W., 174-6,186 Kitzman, H., 92 Kjolseth, R., 33 Klein, D.C., 9 Kleiner, A., 149,156,158,169 Kluger, M., 150,156 Knight, J., 89 Koppich, J.E., 174-6,186 Korfmacher, J., 92 Kress, J.S., 47, 75 Kretzmann, J.P., 148,191,283 Kumpfer, K.L., 16,58,118,247 Kyle, I., 78 Labonte, R., 13,14,269,300,301 Lalonde, M., 16 Lamb, H.R., 10 Landesman Ramey, S., 11 Landy, S., 231 Langmeyer, D., 101 Laurendeau, M.-C, 11-12,14,15,16, 17,304-5 Laverack.G., 14, 269 Lavoie, R, 87 Layzer, J.I., 77, 78,83,99,239 Lazar, I., 11,277 Lee, B., 47,48 Lehnhoff, N., 90 Levin, H.M., 38 Lewis, R.K., 193 Lincoln, Y.S., 150,170 Links, P.S., 17 Lipsey, M.W., 26,320

Author Index 353 Lord, J., 144,150,158,278,279,293 Lynch, K.B., 60 M'Timkulu, D., 57, 58, 61 Mac Allan, L., 175 MacGillivary, H., 13, 46,133,149, 187,190, 289, 302 Mackin, J.R., 59, 73 MacLeod, J., 11,13, 92,108,121, 221, 276 Maioni, T.L., 96 Malone, P.J., 57, 58, 59, 61, 73 Martin, P., 174 Martinez, C.R., 61 Mash, E.J., 235 Masse, L.C., 247 Matjasko, J.L., 111 Maton, K.I., 149,156,170,193 Maughan, B., 100 Mayer, J.P., 61 Mayfield, M.I., 77, 78, 89, 90 Maynard, A.G., 174 McClure, L., 133,192 McDonald, J., 221, 222, 230 McDonald, L., 247 Mclntosh, P., 139 McKenzie, A., 43 McKenzie-Mohr, S., 285 McKnight, J., 148,191, 274, 283 McNeely, J., 191 Melaville, A.I., 172,174 Meyer, L.A., 108 Molgaard, V., 247 Moos, R.H., 100 Morrissey, E., 16 Morrissey-Kane, E., 16,58,118 Mortimore, P., 100 Mukherjee, A., 139 Narayan, V, 175

Nation, M., 16,58,118 Nault, M., 77 Nelson, G., 10,11,12,13,14,16,17, 18,46,47,57,58, 72, 92,101,108, 115,121,124,133,149,150,158, 187,190,192,221,276,278-282, 285, 289,293, 302-3 Nelson, K., 175 Newborough, J.R., 273 Nichols, L., 24 Nickels, P., 46,47, 72,115,278, 281, 302 Normand, C.L., 284 O'Brien, M.U., 11,110, 111, 121, 258 O'Donnell, J., 220,230,258 O'LooneyJ., 175,176,186 O'Neill, P., 192 Ochocka, J., 150,158, 278-80,293 Offord, D.R., 17,137,216 Ogborne, A., 59, 283 Olds, D.L., 12, 62,92,277 Ouston, J., 100 Oxley, D., 101 Pagani, L., 247 Paine-Andrews, A., 193 Pancer, S.M., 18,57,133,134,192, 193, 281, 282, 285 Pandiani, J.A., 174 Papineau, D., 24 Parker, I., 280 Patton, M.Q., 32, 33, 37,283 Peirson, L., 7,10,11-12,14,15,47,59, 60, 73,101,133,189,193,302-5 Perkins, D.D., 14,123,124,142 Peters, J., 11-12,15,305 Peters, R. DeV., 9,11-12,15,305,311, 318, 319

354 Author Index Peterson, K.A., 58,283 Peterson, N.A., 246 Petrunka, K., 311 Phanindis, J., 176,187,190 Piotrkowksi, C.S., 92 Poland, B.D., 269 Potasznik, H., 10 Potts, R.G., 118 Powell, B., 17,57,58,148 Powers, J., 92 Prestby, J.E., 133,192 Price, C, 77, 78, 83,99,239 Price, R.H., 40,43 Prilleltensky, I., 10,13,14,17,46-7, 59,60,72-3,101,115,133,149,156, 170,187,189,190,278,281, 289, 302-4 Pruett, M.K., 60 Pugh, G., 284,301 Putnam, R., 14,301 Quinn, R.E., 57 Racine, Y., 216 Racino, J.A., 149 Radloff, L.S., 237 Rae-Grant, N.I., 7,17,18, 66, 74 Ragab, I., 57 Rajkumar, E., 269 Ramey, C.T., 11,222 Rappaport, J., 192 Redmond, C., 87 Regan, E.M., 77 Reinhardt, J., 103 Reinharz, S., 40,43,57,148,150,156, 158,169 Resnicow, K., 103 Resnik, H., 11,110, 111, 121, 258 Rich, R., 133,192 Richards, S., 47,48

Richter, K.P., 193, Riger, S., 40,43, 57,148,150,158 Rivas, R., 246 Roberts, C., 149,156,158,169 Roberts, J., 14,137 Roberts, J.D.T., 172,176,289 Roitman, D.B., 61 Rondeau, K.V., 172,175,189,190, 289,290 Rose, W., 284, 301 Ross, C., 149,156,158,169 Rossman, G.B., 39 Rossmo, K., 176,187,190 Roth, G., 149,156,158,169 Rotheram-Boms, M.J., 174 Rothman, J., 124 Rothschild-Whitt, J., 148,150,158 Roussos, S.T., 269 Rub, S., 90 Rubin, K.H., 96 Runkel, P.J., 101 Rush, B., 59,283 Russell, C.C., 18, 74,191,236 Russell, D.W., 191,236 Rutman, L., 58,59, 283 Rutter, M., 7,100 Rydell, C.P., 239 Salem, D.A., 149,156,170,193 Sambrook, A., 97 Sanders, M., 239 Sanford, M., 216 Sarason, S.B., 40, 58,59, 73,100,102, 189 Sayger, T.V., 247 Schaps, E., 220,230,257 Schmitt, N., 61 Schmuck, R.A., 101 Schorr, L., 13 , 62, 301 Schultz, J. A., 193

Author Index 355 Schwartz, D., 116 Schweinhart, L.J., 277 Scriven, M., 31 Sechrest, L., 39 Seidel, J.V., 33 Seitz, V., 108 Senge, P., 149,150,156,158,169,170, 293 Sexton, D., 97 Seybolt, D., 16, 58,118 Seymour, E., 33 Shamdasani, P.N., 34 Shelley, A., 77 Shin, C, 87 Sidani, S., 39 Silberman, P., 123,124,142 Silva, J., 57,124,143,147,148,172, 191 Simon, J.L., 319 Skoldberg, K., 280 Slavin, R.E., 108, 223 Smith, B., 149,156,158,169 Snow, John (and Broad Street Pump), 5 Solomon, D., 220, 230, 257 Solomon, J., 220, 230, 257 Speer, P.W., 14,142, 246 Spoth, R., 87 Spreitzer, G.M., 161,166 St.Pierre, R.G., 277 Statistics Canada Stein, R.E., 61 Stewart, D.W., 34 Stewart, M., 87 Stewart-Brown, S., 87 Stiegelbauer, S., 101 Strange, B., 77 Straus, M.A., 237 Strayhorn, J.M., 235 Swain, M., 223

Szatmari, P., 17, 216

Tam, K.K., 231 Tatelbaum, R., 92,277 Taylor, B., 176,187,190 Teleen, S., 87 Thompson, B., 97 Tobias, S.E., 110 Tobin, S., 269 Tonry, M., 136 Toulmin, S., 150,156 Trawick-Smith, J., 96 Tremblay, R.E., 247 Trickett, E.J., 43, 73,117,139 Tropman, J.E., 124 Tucker, L.R., 318 Tyler, N., 177, 288 Utting, D., 284, 301 Van Alst, D., 246 Vander-Schie, R.A., 176,177,288 Vitaro, R, 247, 284 Vu, N., 136 Wagenfield, M.O., 176,177 Wandersman, A., 16,40,43,58,118, 133,192,193, 235 Ward, T., 87 Washnis, G.J., 133,136,192 Wasik, B.L., 108,223 Watson, M., 220, 230 Watt, S., 14,137,139 Watts, R., 43 Weidman, C.S., 235 Weikart, D.P., 277 Weininger, O., 96 Weiss, C.H., 24 Weiss, H.B., 77 Weiss, J.A., 174-6,186

356 Author Index Weissberg, R.P., 11,12, 61,110, 111, 116,118,120,121,258 Weissbourd, B., 77 Wekerle, G.R., 304 Wells, A.M., 11 Westheimer, M., 92 Westhues, A., 11,12,13,57,108,221, 276, 281 Westland, C, 89 Wholey, J.S., 58,283 Wilkinson, G.S., 222 Wilkinson, S., 280 Williams, E., 77, 79

Willms, J.D., 14 Wilson, B.L., 39 Wilson, D.B., 320 Worgess, B.L., 176,177,288

Yin, R.K., 32 Youngkin, E.Q., 233 Zeitz, G., 172,175,176,186 Zigler, E., 77 Zimmerman, M.A., 192 Zins, J.E., 10, 60,110, 111, 121,258 Zusman, J., 11

Subject Index

Abecedarian Project, 222 Academic/language development: development of concept, 109; implementation, 109-10; intended outcomes, 110; participation; relevant literature, 108-9 Administrative structures 156-8 Advocacy, 168 African-centred education, 118 After School program (see Before and After School program) Alternative settings, 148,156 Anti-racism. See Ethnocultural programs and activities; Multicultural relations/work Atmosphere, organizations, 149, 155-6,170 Baseline comparison group, 311-12 Before and After School program, 66, 128,131,137-8 Benjamin E. Mays Institute, 118 Better Beginnings, Better Futures: economic analysis, 21, 38; goals of, 21; history of development, 18-20; limitations of research, 39; outcome research, 21-2, 28-30; policy

research, 31; project development research, 21, 22, 30-2; Research Coordination Unit, 20; research designs 25-7; research measures and sources of information, 27-8; resident participation, 23-4; site reports, 35-8; time periods for data collection, 30 Block Booster Project, 193 Breakfast program, 65,104,107. See also Health and nutrition program Broad Street Pump, 5 Building Rainbows report, 37 Canada, 16-17 Canadian Association of Toy Libraries and Resource Centres, 84 Canadian Family Wellness Project, 304-5 Chicago Parent-Child Center and Expansion Program, 239 Child and family enrichment workers. See Family visitors; Home visits Child development, 6 Classroom social skills intervention,

358 Subject Index 105,110-15; development of concept, 111-12; impacts, 113; implementation, 112-15; intended outcomes, 115; participation, 115; relevant literature, 110-11 Committees, 73,157. See also Community Action Committee; Community Development Committee; Fun and Recreation Committee; In-school Committee; NIMH Committee on Prevention Research; Personnel Committee; Research Committee; Steering Committee Communication, 69,128,183-5, 250-1,254,256,294-5 Community Action Committee, 134-5 Community-based approaches, 13, 31 Community-based organizations, 147 Community-based prevention programs, 273-4, 300-1; compared to community development, 301-2. See also Prevention programs and interventions; Lessons learned Community capacity, 13,148, 301 Community development, 13,57,58, 63,65-6,123-4,301-2; and ecological perspective, 6; and prevention, 6; cognitive development, 11,12; committee, 65,125,127; coordina-

tor,: 72,126-8,136,205; social-emo-

tional development, 12,110-11 Community development, areas of focus, Highfield: ethnocultural programs and activities, 132,13940; language and prevocational skills, 131,135-6; neighbourhood safety, 131,136-7,309; resident

participation/leadership, 130,131, 133-5; social and recreational programs, 131,137-9,309 Community development, Highfield, 123^2; budget, 125; development of concept, 125-6; impacts, 269; implementation, 126-30; intended outcomes, 130; overview, 124-30 Community Development Committee, 65,125,127 Community empowerment, 13-14, 301 Community interventions, 13-14 Community ownership, 59 Community-school and ethnocultural relations, 106,118-19; development of concept, 118-19; implementation, 119; intended outcomes, 119; participation, 119; relevant literature, 118 Conflicts of interest, 159-60 Cost-benefit analysis, 38 Cost-effectiveness analysis, 38 Costs, prevention programs, 277-8 Crime prevention. See Neighbourhood safety Data analysis strategies, 318-20 Data collection strategies, 317-18 Decision-making, 154-5,158-60,280; conflicts of interest, 159-60; how decisions are made, 158 Domestic violence. See Marital violence Ecoles maternettes, 11 Ecological perspective, 6,14 Economic analysis. See Research Educational assistants, 70, 72,309.

Subject Index 359 See also Academic/language development Effect size, 216 Employment rates. See Income and employment rates Empowerment, 14,17, 305-6; empowering organizations, 149 Ethnocultural programs and activities, 132,139-40. (See also Multicultural relations/work); activities, 140; intended outcomes, 140; participation, 140; relevant literature, 139-40 Ethnograph (The), 33 Executive Team, 24, 33, 70,154,157 Exploitation, 305-6 Family Assessment Device, 238 Family Matters program, 92 Family/parent interventions. See Prevention programs and interventions Family Resource Centre/drop-in, 64, 78, 79-87, 309; development of concept, 83-4; implementation, 84-6; intended outcomes, 86; participation, 86-7; relevant literature, 79-83; special events/outings, 85 Family support, 63, 64, 79-99; budget, 79; conceptual basis, 78; definition, 77; effectiveness, 78; services and programs, 77; values and philosophy, 77 Family Support Committee, 67 Family visitors, 64, 72, 94. See also Home visits FAST program, 247 Feminization of poverty, 14-15,305-6 Field notes, 33 Follow Through projects, 108

Freedom of Information Act, 93 Full-service schools, 121 Fun and Recognition Committee, 66, 135,287 Government involvement, 68 Head Start, 11 Health and nutrition program, 64, 103,104,107; development of concept, 103,107; implementation, 107; intended outcomes, 107; relevant literature, 103 Health promotion, 10,17 Helping Children Adjust Project, 221, 222 High Scope/Perry Preschool Project, 239 Highfield community: before Better Beginnings, 40-5; formal and informal resources, 43-5; geography and physical environment, 40-1; income and employment rates, 41-2; multicultural nature, 43 Highfield Junior School, 24,43, 4950,101-2; prevention programs at, 102-22 Highfield program model, 62-6; community development, 63, 656; family support, 63,64; in-school, 63,64-5; intended long-term outcomes, 63; intended short-term outcomes, 63 Home Instruction Program for Preschool Children (HIPPY), 92 Home visitation programs, 12 Home visits (Highfield), 81,92-5; development of concept, 92-3; implementation, 93; intended out-

360 Subject Index comes, 94-5; participation, 95; relevant research, 92 Houston Parent-Child Development Center, 12,239 Impacts on children, 215-30; cognitive functioning and academic achievement, 222; emotional and behavioural problems, 216-17; 216-17 from child's perspective, 225-7; health, 224-5; nutrition, 223^; parents' views, 227-8,228-30; social skills, 217-18, 219,220; staff and teachers' views, 228 Impacts on community, 258-70; child protection cases, 260-1; ethnic relations, 263-4,265 (see also Multicultural relations/work); involvement in, 259,262,264; leadership, 260, 264,265-6; parents' views, 258-64; partnerships and coalitions, 266-8; researchers' views, 265-8; safety/crime, 259-60, 261, 263, 264; satisfaction with, 259; staff and service provider views, 264-5; use of resources, 258-9 Impacts on parents and families, 231-47; appreciation for diversity, 243-4; tioning, 238, 239; interactions with teachers/service providers, 241-2; knowledge of community, 243; life stress, 237, 239,241; marital satisfaction, 2367,239; marital violence, 237-8,239; parent health, 232^, 239; parental depression, 237,239; parenting behaviour, 234-5,239,243; selfconfidence/self-esteem, 240; skills, 242-3, 266; social support, 236-7, 240-1

Impacts on school, 248-58; parents' views, 251-4; researchers' views, 256-7; school climate, 248-50, 251-2; special education services, 252-3; staff and service providers' views, 254-6; teachers' views, 248-51 Implementation, 73^1 Income and employment rates, Ontario and Canada, 42,305,306 In-school Committee, 69, 111 In-school coordinator, 65 In-school programs. See Schoolbased programs Inter-organizational work. See Service integration Investing in Children, 301 Lalonde report, 16-17 Language and prevocational skills, 131,135-6; activities, 136; intended outcomes, 136; relevant literature, 135-6 Learning organization, 149 Lessons learned, prevention programs, 275-99; community human resources, 276-8; comprehensive and long-term, 275; developing prevention programs, 281^4; focused and intensive, 275-6; participatory community research, 278-81; partnerships with residents, 284-7; partnerships with service providers, 287-90; project management and organization, 290-5; sustainability, 295-9 Letter of agreement, 167-9 Life cycle of organizations, 57; implementation, 60-1; maintenance, 612; planning and preparation, 58-60

Subject Index 361 Lion's Quest Skills for Growing, 65, 111-15, 248-50. See also Classroom social skills intervention Longitudinal comparison group, 314-15 Longitudinal focal group, 312-14 Lutherwood Children's Mental Health Centre, 58 Management style/approach, 149, 150,155-6,170; after the demonstration phase, 153-5; decisionmaking, 154-5,158-60; during demonstration phase, 150-1; flexible roles, 151; informal, 152-3; leadership style, 151; multiple skills, 292-4; non-bureaucratic, 150-1; participatory, 290-2, 2945; staff ing/super vision 160-1, 165-7 Marital satisfaction, 236-7 Marital violence, 237 Methodology, 311-20 Montreal Prevention Experiment, 247 Multi-component interventions/ programs, 12-13 Multicultural Caravan, 119 Multicultural relations/work, 106, 118-19, 243-4, 263-1, 265; celebrations, 140. See also Ethnocultural programs and activities National Longitudinal Study for Children and Youth (NLSCY), 224 Neighbourhood safety, 131,136-7; relevant literature, 136-7; activities, 137; intended outcomes, 137 Neoliberal policies, 15, 304

NIMH Committee on Prevention Research, 9 Nutrition program. See Health and nutrition program One (1), 2, 3 GO!, 301 Ontario, 17-20 Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, 17,18,19 Organizational atmosphere, 149, 152-3,170 Organizational development, 57, 156 Organizational review, 72,153—4 Organizational structure, 148,150-1 Organizational theory, 149 Ottawa Charter, 17

Pacific Institute for Community Organization, 246 Parent participation. See Resident participation and leadership Parent relief, 81,97-8; development of concept, 98; implementation, 98; intended outcomes, 98; relevant literature, 97 Parent training programs, 12. See also Parents group Parental depression, 237 Parenting Sense of Competence Scale, 235 Parents group, 80, 87-9 (see also Resident participation and leadership); development of concept, 87-8; implementation, 88; intended outcomes, 88-9; participation, 89; relevant literature, 87; special events, 88 Participatory approach, 18, 24,46, 150, 281-2,282

362 Subject Index Participatory community research. See Research; Lessons learned Partnerships, 281-2,282; approach, 46-8; creating, 72-4; pooling knowledge and strengths, 75-6; time and process, 281-2,287-8; vision and values, 74-5,288-9; with residents, 284-7 Permanent funding, 72 Personnel Committee, 67 Perspectives, traditional versus new, 273^ Peter F. Drucker Foundation for Nonprofit Management, 149 Planning days, 70,157-8 Playgroups, 81,96-7; development of concept, 96; implementation, 96-7; intended outcomes, 97; participation, 97; relevant literature, 96 Policy research, 31 Poverty, 14-15, 304 Prenatal/Early Infancy Project, 12 Preschool computer and literacy programs, 82,98-9 Preschool interventions/programs, 11-12,82 Prevention: and public health, 5-6; effectiveness of, 10-11; history 5-6, 9; primary, 9; scope, 6; secondary, 9; selective, 9; terms/language used, 6,9-10; tertiary, 9; types/ levels, 9; universal, 9 Prevention Clearinghouse, 18 Prevention Congresses, 17 Prevention programs and interventions: Better Beginnings, Better Futures, 18-20; champions, 297-8; community ownership, 298-9,300; costs, 277; family/parent, 12; fund-

ing, 295-6; in Canada, 16-20; lessons learned, 275-99; multicomponent, 12-13; preschool/ school, 11-12; principles, 16,283^, 296,302; social intervention, 14-15; sustainability, 295-9; theory or evidence-driven, 300; time, 282 Principal's involvement. See School (Highfield) and school personnel involvement Professional development, teachers, 120-1; development of concept, 120; implementation, 120; intended outcomes, 120; participation, 120-1; relevant literature, 120 Program development: community development approach, 58; development in schools, 57-8,59; implementation, 60-1, 73-4; maintenance, 61-2; participatory process, 73; partnership approach, 468; planning and preparation, 5860; program fidelity and adaptation, 60-1; researcher-driven approach, 46; timelines, 59-60 Program development stages: implementing program model and ongoing planning, 69-71; maintenance, 72; planning program model, 66-72 Program fidelity and adaptation, 60-1 Program logical model, 59,282-3 Project Care, 239 Project independence. See Sponsor organization Proposal development (Highfield), 45-54 Protective factors, 6, 7-8,303

Subject Index 363

Reading and Parents (RAP), 90 Recreational programs. See Social/ recreational programs Relationships: project staff and school, 69, 71, 73,128,183-5,2501,254-6,256-7; parents and school staff/teachers, 73,115-18,121, 241-2,252, 253-4, 256-7; project and government, 73,179; school and community/ethnocultural relations, 106,118-19; project and sponsor agency, 167-9 Research: designs, 26,27, 32,215-16; economic analysis, 21,22, 38; outcome research, 21, 21-2; participatory community research, 278-81; policy research, 31; project development research, 21, 22, 30-2; qualitative, 22,23,32, 33-5, 281; quantitative, 22, 23; triangulation, 39 Research at Highfield: communitybased prevention process, 25; data analysis, 318-20; data collection, 317-18; limitations of, 39; measures used, 27-8, 216,217,221-2, 223-4,232,233,235, 236, 237, 238, 258; organizational structure, 23; outcomes assessed, 28-30; quantitative research design, 215-16, 311-15; research committee, 24-5, 134; resident participation, 23-5; sample sizes, 217,232,252,313-14; site reports, 35-8 Research Committee, 24,25,134 Research Coordination Unit (RCU), 20, 23, 24, 25,35, 36 Researcher-driven approach, 46 Resident participation and leader-

ship, 23^, 33,34,35, 51,52, 67, 70, 73, 75,83^; activities, 134-5,194, 200; as staff, 162-4, 286-7; barriers to, 133,199,200,201-2, 210-11, 287; changes over years, 195-8; creating partnerships with, 284-7; early in project, 193-5; impacts, 200,206-10,242-4,262-3; on project 206-8; negative impacts, 208-10; 211,244; in advocacy, 1978,207, 242-3; in research process, 278-9; in school/classrooms, 105, 115-18,197; in service integration, 174-5,188-9; intended outcomes, 135; model of, 200; motivation, 198-9; multicultural involvement, 195,203,205; on committees, 157, 188-9,193,194,196,203, 204,208; outcomes, 133-4; relevant literature, 130,133-4,191-3; strategies, 133,202-6 Risk factors, 6, 7-8,8-9,17,303 School (Highfield) and school personnel involvement: in community development or advocacy, 168; in planning/development, 71, 73,157,158,182,183-5; in programs 98-9,182,183-5, 276; lack of, 68, 69; professional development 106,120-1; relationship to parents, 71, 73; relationship to project staff, 69, 71,183-5,188, 189; teacher release time, 69,189, 289 School-based programs, 100-22; budget, 102; characteristics, 121; school reform, 100-1 School board. See School (Highfield) and school personnel involve-

364 Subject Index ment; Sponsor organization School Development Program. See Yale-New Haven School Development Program School interventions, 11-12 Seattle Social Development Project, 247, 258 Service collaboration. See Service integration Service coordination. See Service integration Services-in-kind, 38,277-8 Service integration (see also Serviceprovider involvement, 19); approaches, 172-3; directed, 172, 173; facilitating factors, 176-7; government guidance, 179-80; mediated, 172,173,180; obstacles and barriers, 175-6; rationale, 173-4; resident participation in, 174-5; struggles with, 179-80,186-7; voluntary, 172,173,180 Service provider involvement, 19, 48-50, 68, 71,138,157; agency commitment, 180-1,289-90; facilitating factors, 182,189-90,287-90; in proposal development, 177-8; initial vision, 178; model of, 182; obstacles/barriers, 181-3,186-9; organizations involved, 181-3; partnerships, 178-80,185-6; roles of, 178-83; successes/accomplishments, 183-9,190 Site reports, 35-8,36-7 Social capital, 14,301 Social change, 303 Social cohesion, 14,301 Social events/outings, 131,138 Social interventions, 14-15 Social justice, 302-5

Social/recreational programs, 131, 137-9; activities, 137-8; intended outcomes, 139; participation, 139; relevant literature, 137 Social skills intervention/program. See Classroom social skills intervention Social support, 236-7 Socio-demographic profile or characteristics, 315,316-17 Socio-economic inequalities, 14-15, 304 Sponsor organization, 153,167-9, 168-9,309 Staff: experience of, 164-5; hiring/ firing, 68-9, 74,93,158,162; management/supervision, 151-2,1601,165-7; meetings, 157; morale, 153,154; positions, 161-2; residents as, 162^1 Steering Committee, 45,49,51,52, 53, 70, 111, 157. See also Executive Team Stories of Our Lives, 119 Storytelling and drama, 112 Strengthening Families Program, 247 Stress, life, 237 Sub-committees. See Committees Success for All program, 108,223 Summer enrichment programs, 65 Sustainability, 295-9 Systems, perspective, 148; interaction,, 148 Teachers' involvement. See School (Highfield) and school personnel involvement Toy lending library, 80,89-92; development of concept, 90; implementation, 90-1; intended outcomes,

Subject Index 365 91; participation, 91-2; relevant literature 89-90 Translators / translation services, 117 Unemployment. See Income and employment rates Vision and values, 74-5,148-9, 169-70

Volunteerism. See Resident participation and leadership Wellness. See also Health promotion, 58-9, 302-5 World Health Organization, 17 Yale-New Haven School Development Program, 115-16,118,257