Surko Michael, Pasti Lawrence W, Whitlock Janis, Benson Deborah A
Department of Pediatrics, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY 10128, USA.
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2006 Nov;Suppl:S72-8. doi: 10.1097/00124784-200611001-00014.
This article presents the process used to develop a set of statewide positive youth development (YD) outcome indicators to complement existing adolescent well-being indicators in New York State (NYS). Intended uses included program and community-, county-, and state-level planning; grant writing; evaluation; and outcome monitoring in coordination with national YD-oriented initiatives. A common set of metrics, if adopted, would promote consistency and information sharing across levels and purposes. A workgroup of the NYS Youth Development Team reviewed existing indicators and accepted nominations from NYS stakeholders. Input from Youth Development Team members and national YD experts was used to narrow the list to 91. Forty-one NYS policy makers performed card sorts and ratings of the indicators, and a concept-mapping process, employing hierarchical cluster analysis, identified nine clusters of items. The policy makers, along with 121 NYS program providers and 91 young adults (aged 18-21) rated the indicators from 1 ("not important") to 5 ("very important"). All intergroup correlations of ratings were 0.93 or greater, and therefore responses were analyzed together. The concept map and mean indicator ratings were used to select a short list of 15 indicators. Although respondents were intentionally given a mix of problem-focused, risk-focused, and strength-based items, the highest rated items were almost exclusively strength based.
本文介绍了一套用于制定全州范围的积极青年发展(YD)成果指标的过程,以补充纽约州(NYS)现有的青少年福祉指标。预期用途包括项目以及社区、县和州层面的规划;撰写拨款申请;评估;以及与全国以青年发展为导向的倡议协调进行成果监测。如果采用一套通用的指标,将促进不同层面和目的之间的一致性和信息共享。纽约州青年发展团队的一个工作组审查了现有指标,并接受了纽约州利益相关者的提名。青年发展团队成员和全国青年发展专家的意见被用于将清单缩小到91项。41名纽约州政策制定者对这些指标进行了卡片分类和评级,一个采用层次聚类分析的概念映射过程确定了9个项目集群。政策制定者以及121名纽约州项目提供者和91名年轻人(年龄在18 - 21岁之间)对这些指标从1(“不重要”)到5(“非常重要”)进行了评级。所有组间评级的相关性均为0.93或更高,因此对所有回复进行了综合分析。概念图和指标平均评级被用于选出15项指标的简短清单(入围清单)。尽管受访者被特意提供了一系列以问题为重点、以风险为重点和以优势为基础的项目,但评级最高的项目几乎全是以优势为基础的。