Last month in the 4-H Update column, I talked about how out of school time affects youth outcomes. We know that youth development programs can make a difference in social, psychological, and educational outcomes. We also know that youth programs can also harm if they are poor quality programs. What we do matters, if we do it well.

So what are we learning about quality programs? Recent research has shown evidence linking quality with positive impact. There is also research that has found negative consequences of poor quality programs. Dr. Deborah Lowe Vandell studied quality programs over two years at elementary and middle schools. Important characteristics of promising programs include access to and sustained participation, programs must be of high quality with appropriate supervision and structure, well prepared staff and intentional programming, the programs must be done in partnership with families, schools, and other community organizations, and a heavy focus on academics does not work as well as a broader enrichment and engagement approach. What else are we learning about quality? It is measurable, it is meaningful, it is malleable (we can improve it) and it is a better place to focus our programs than on outcomes alone.

The big question that all youth programs need to answer is: How do we get quality programs or how do we make sure our programs are quality driven? How does 4-H youth development measure quality in their programs? We use a tool called the Youth Program Quality Assessment (YPQA) tool. The tool measures quality at the point of service or where young people and adults work together. There are four sections on the YQPA tool for measuring quality programs. The first one is having a safe environment (meetings/activities offer a safe environment for all participants). In the first section the questions include; are healthy food and drinks being served, are meetings held in a safe environment, are meetings free of bullies and teasing?

The second tool to look at is having a supportive environment (session flow is planned, presented, and paced for youth). Some of the questions to ask from this tool are; do the meetings start and end on time, do leaders have materials and supplies ready to begin activities, Are there enough materials and supplies for each participant, and are activities clearly explained?

The third tool to help look at quality is Interaction (youth have opportunities to develop a sense of belonging). Questions to ask here are: Do youth have structured opportunities to get to know each other, do meetings include structured opportunities to recognize achievements, work, etc., of at least some of the youth, do youth exhibit inclusive relationships with all members in the meeting or club?

The Fourth and last tool to look at quality programs is Engagement (youth have opportunities to set goals and make plans). In this section, questions include; do youth have multiple opportunities to make plans for projects and activities, do youth have the opportunity to decide roles, order or activities, roles or materials or how to give results?

This is just one tool used for measuring quality in a youth program that we have just started using in 4-H Youth Development. There are many things that affect the impact of youth development as shown in this math equation: Impact=PxExQxPI where P=Participation E=Engagement, Q=quality and PI =potential impact. It is important to remember in any youth organization that more programs aren’t necessarily better, but to look instead at the quality of those programs being offered.

For more information of research on Quality Youth Development Programs, connect to http://www.extension.umn.edu/YouthWorkINstitute/quality-research.html.

Megan Thorson is a 4-H program coordinator for Freeborn County.