Counting and Surveying Homeless Youth DC Alliance of Youth Advocates Washington, D.C. Overview Having an accurate count of homeless youth helps a community to understand the scope of the problem and to design solutions. The District of Columbia Alliance of Youth Advocates (DCAYA) is leading the effort to deepen understanding about the prevalence and needs of homeless youth in Washington, DC. In partnership with the District of Columbia Interagency Council on Homelessness (DCICH), the Trachtenberg School of Public Policy at George Washington University (GWU), public and nonprofit agencies, and a host of volunteers, DCAYA conducted a count and survey of homeless youth over a two-week period in multiple locations from nearly 500 homeless and at-risk youth. The findings listed in DCAYA s final report reflect the responses of 330 youth who met the criteria for completing the survey. This data will be used to educate the public and key stakeholders about youth homelessness and to shape both policy and program interventions in the District of Columbia. History DCAYA is the citywide coalition that works to ensure policies, programs and practices within the District of Columbia are in place to help youth transition into adulthood. The vision of DCAYA is a community where no youth is considered at-risk and where all youth are respected as valued members of society. DCAYA was formed in 2004 by agencies serving youth to address the lack of developmental opportunities and safe spaces for young people when they were out of school in Washington, D.C. Approximately 20 community organizations, along with youth and concerned residents, joined together to form DCAYA to advocate for youth. Today DCAYA is a nonprofit membership organization with over 100 members.
Why the Study of Homeless and Unstably Housed Youth? There is no accurate picture of the size and specific characteristic and needs of homeless youth in Washington, DC (nor across much of the U.S.). As a result, there are gaps in knowledge about the local causal factors leading to homelessness for youth, the services youth access and find useful, and the service gaps in the community. This gap in knowledge inhibits the development of policies and programs that can be implemented to effectively prevent and end homelessness for youth. Increased information will allow the District of Columbia, and other local communities that conduct youth specific counts and surveys to more accurately assess the scale of the problem and allow improved targeting of services and interventions. Targeted youth-specific counts and surveys provide an opportunity for communities to improve street outreach efforts to get youth to safe places; to know how to better reunify youth with their families when they come to a drop-in center in need of help because they have run away from home; and to better prepare youth living in transitional living programs for self-sufficiency by accessing education, employment, and stable housing. Moreover, homeless youth are at increased risk of commercial sexual exploitation, better information will also help to address this problem. Developing Key Partnerships DCAYA initially reached out to DCICH to propose a two-week study to count homeless youth in Washington, DC. The partnership eventually expanded to include 60 local agencies, community centers, schools, shelters and drop-in centers. Each of the partnering agencies also agreed to serve as data collection points. McKinney-Vento school liaisons were also made aware of the survey and helped to identify youth to participate in the study. DCAYA made a concerted effort to attract a research partner to help with the development of the survey instrument, data collection, and analysis. DCAYA staff developed an abstract proposal and contacted faculty in the city s universities who might be interested in supporting the study which proved useful in building support. Dr. Young of the Trachtenberg School agreed to provide support, and connected DCAYA to two university professors overseeing the final capstone projects of graduate students at Trachtenberg. He facilitated a partnership between a group of interested students and DCAYA. The graduate students helped inform the design of the survey instrument, completed data input, and conducted initial data analysis. The study design and instruments were submitted and approved by the University s Institutional Review Board (IRB) process. The IRB process ensures that the research method is sound, that the study will protect the rights of the individuals being surveyed and that their privacy will be honored. The partnership with the University resulted in significant cost savings and support from
graduate students which allowed for a more comprehensive study than would otherwise have been possible with the available resources. Study Design To inform the development of the study, DCAYA surveyed the methods and tools used by other communities that have counted homeless youth, including Amherst H. Wilder Foundation s research study of homeless youth in Minnesota, and studies conducted in Baltimore, MD and New Haven, CT. Due to concerns that a one day point-in-time count would fail to capture many youth experiencing homelessness, the group decided to capture data over a two week period. Data were collected in numerous locations from unaccompanied homeless youth and young mothers residing on the streets or in shelter, as well as those who were couchsurfing or unstably doubled up. DCAYA also included youth residing in out-of-home care, including those in group-living or transitional housing programs, to capture youth at risk of homelessness. Using the survey instrument designed with the Trachtenberg School, the following information was collected: Demographic information; Causal factors leading to homelessness; Services utilized and perceived barriers to services; Unmet service needs; Barriers to stability; Prior residence (where youth lived and with whom); Prior involvement with systems such as juvenile justice and foster care; Health history (including mental health and substance abuse histories); Employment status, work skills, and employment history; Educational background and goals service utilized; and Social support network.
Volunteer Recruitment and Training Recruitment The planned data collection strategy required a large number of volunteers to cover the multiple data collection points over the two week period. To recruit volunteers, DCAYA posted ads and notices on various websites, used email listservs to recruit volunteers, and reached out to graduate students in psychology and social work departments at various colleges and universities in the city. Though 50 volunteers were desired, about 30 volunteers ultimately helped with the effort. Training The DCAYA staff, GWU students, and young people experiencing homelessness trained the volunteers on data collection. The training included information about survey protocol, maintaining confidentiality, and honoring the right of youth to refuse to participate in the study. Volunteers were also provided information about available services including brochures about local programs where youth could receive assistance. Homeless youth helped develop the training curriculum for volunteers and participated in each training session. They helped the volunteers understand the best ways to engage homeless youth and the challenges the volunteers might encounter when conducting street outreach or administering the survey. The youth involved in training were also helpful in identifying locations where homeless youth could be found and best times to engage in data collection. Volunteers were also informed about the role of an outreach coordinator who was assigned to be on hand during data collection. The outreach coordinator was available to help volunteers manage difficult situations, including those in which confidentiality might need to be broken to respond to behavior that had the potential to put youth or others in danger. Planning and Conducting Data Collection Data was collected about youth accessing services from 60 partner organizations throughout the District of Columbia including community centers, shelters, schools, drop-in centers, and social service agencies. Youth over 12 years old and under the age of 25 were included in the study. Leading homeless youth providers in Washington, DC, including Sasha Bruce Youth Work, Latin American Youth Center, and Covenant House Washington, led the effort to engage those youth on the street who did not utilize services on a regular basis, if at all. These organizations provided expertise on street outreach and were also aware of
where youth on the street could be found. Police departments also offered information about where youth congregate. During the two-week period, data collection was conducted through street outreach on 10 afternoons and evenings. DCAYA sought central community locations that would remain open from 6 p.m. 12 a.m. on a few nights during the two-week period to provide a space for volunteers and outreach workers to sit with youth found outside social service programs to complete the survey. Data was also collected from youth in recreation centers, metro stations, bus stations, and 24-hour laundromats. Youth participating in the study were asked to help recruit their peers in similar situations to participate in the study. This snowball sampling method is often used in research studies for populations that are hard to identify. Data Analysis and Reporting Graduate students and faculty at the Trachtenberg School will analyze the data which will provide a wealth of information to educate local programs and policymakers. Over half of the youth surveyed were experiencing literal homelessness, residing in shelters, streets, or in other settings unfit for human habitation. A large number of youth surveyed were at risk of homelessness including youth who had been placed in group homes and residential facilities by the District of Columbia child welfare and juvenile justice agencies. DCAYA will use the data to educate policymakers, program providers and, other key stakeholders about the prevalence and needs of homeless and at-risk youth in the community. DCAYA intends to use reports generated from the study to forward policy and program improvement recommendations that are data driven. Lessons Learned The primary lesson learned was the importance of partnerships. DCAYA found that partnering with government agencies was crucial to facilitate data collection from youth residing in city-run group homes and transitional living programs. Early partnership with city agencies also helped build their support and interest in utilizing data to inform their own practices. A strong relationship with local area providers willing to provide input on the survey and help identify youth and collect data was also critical. The partnership with the Trachtenberg School, and their in-kind assistance, greatly offset the cost of doing the study. Input from faculty and graduate students that informed the study design and questionnaire, and their assistance in analyzing the findings, will also enhance the quality and reach of the study.
Communicating with the police was also important. They were informed about the study and did not interfere with youth who were congregating on the streets on the nights street outreach was conducted. Additional lessons learned include: Significant time is needed to plan. DCAYA recommends taking up to 10 months to prepare for and implement a count and/or survey of this size (the survey included over 30 questions). It is helpful to pre-test the questions. Have youth, youth providers, and researchers review the survey instrument to be sure that the right questions are asked and asked in the best possible manner so that youth understand the questions clearly. Start recruiting participating agency and community partners early in the process. First, compile a list of ideal partners about 6-7 months before the first day of the survey. Secondly, begin actively recruiting ideal partners 5-6 months before the first day of the survey. This will allow time to build a strong community-wide effort and develop consensus on the purpose and needs for the count. Proactively market the survey to youth to make them aware of the reason for the study and increase the likelihood that youth will participate. Youth are engaged in social media, they access services, and have a strong network of peers who share information. If active marketing is not accomplished, then extending the window for data collection may be necessary. Recruiting enough volunteers to conduct street outreach is paramount in being able to reach as many youth throughout an area as possible. Having 30 volunteers as opposed to 50 made it difficult to cover all areas of the city and to identify youth on the streets. For more information contact: Maggie Riden Senior Policy Analyst DC Alliance of Youth Advocates P: 202.587.0616 maggie@dc-aya.org