SOLUTION: Youth Empowerment Strategies (YES!) Project | My Assignment Tutor

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6980641Getting to Social Action: The Youth Empowerment Strategies (YES!) ProjectArticle in Health Promotion Practice · August 2006DOI: 10.1177/1524839906289072 · Source: PubMedCITATIONS119READS2,7085 authors, including:Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:Special Issue of Health Education and Behavior on Collaborating for Equity and Justice View projectResearch for Improved Health View projectMeredith MinklerUniversity of California, Berkeley208 PUBLICATIONS 15,248 CITATIONSSEE PROFILENina WallersteinUniversity of New Mexico147 PUBLICATIONS 12,433 CITATIONSSEE PROFILEAll content following this page was uploaded by Nina Wallerstein on 02 June 2014.The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.http://hpp.sagepub.comHealth Promotion PracticeDOI: 10.1177/1524839906289072Health Promot Pract 2008; 9; 395 originally published online Jun 27, 2006;Nance Wilson, Meredith Minkler, Stefan Dasho, Nina Wallerstein and Anna C. MartinGetting to Social Action: The Youth Empowerment Strategies (YES!) Projecthttp://hpp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/9/4/395The online version of this article can be found at:Published by:http://www.sagepublications.comOn behalf of:Society for Public Health EducationAdditional services and information for Health Promotion Practice can be found at:Email Alerts: http://hpp.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsSubscriptions: http://hpp.sagepub.com/subscriptionsReprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navPermissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navCitations http://hpp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/9/4/395Downloaded from http://hpp.sagepub.com by Carmen J. Head on June 12, 2009Getting to Social Action: The YouthEmpowerment Strategies (YES!) ProjectNance Wilson, PhDMeredith Minkler, DrPHStefan Dasho, MANina Wallerstein, DrPHAnna C. Martin, PhDbehaviors in youth (Futterman, Chabon, & Hoffman, 2000;Sanders-Phillips, 1996; N. Wilson, Battistich, Syme, &Boyce, 2002; N. Wilson, Syme, Boyce, Battistich, &Selvin, 2005).An increasing appreciation of the potential of youth ascritical thinkers and problem solvers has led to a numberof new programs that apply an asset-based approach(Blaine et al., 1997; Tencati, Kole, Feigher, Winkleby, &Altman, 2002; Wallerstein, Sanchez-Merki, & Dow, 2004),using problem posing as a way of engaging youth in collectively working on issues that they themselves identify as topics for school or community-level change(Schensul, LoBianco, & Lombardo, 2004; Wallerstein,2002; Wallerstein, Larson-Bright, Adams, & Rael,2000). Exemplifying this alternative approach, the YouthEmpowerment Strategies (YES!) project was designed topromote problem-solving skills, social action, and civicparticipation among underserved elementary schoolyouth in West Contra Costa County, California (N. Wilsonet al., 2006). The YES! project model is well grounded inearlier empowerment intervention efforts and has partnered with key individuals from these earlier efforts onthe design, training, and implementation of the YES!program. YES! has adapted many elements of the earlierAdolescent Social Action Program (ASAP) inAlbuquerque, New Mexico (Wallerstein et al., 2004).ASAP was a youth-centered empowerment model prevention program implemented in more than 30 middleThis article describes the social action component of theYouth Empowerment Strategies (YES!) project funded bythe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention throughits community-based prevention research (CBPR) initiative. YES! is designed to promote problem-solving skills,social action, and civic participation among underservedelementary and middle school youth. The after-schoolprogram focuses on identifying and building youths’capacities and strengths as a means of ultimatelydecreasing rates of alcohol, tobacco, and other drug useand other risky behaviors. The article discusses the conceptual models of risk and intervention and factors contributing to successful social action work, includinggroup dynamics, intragroup leadership, facilitator skills,and school-community contexts. Attention is focused onhow the nature of the projects themselves played a keyrole in determining the likelihood of experiencing success. Implications and recommendations for other youthfocused empowerment education projects are discussed,including the effective use of Photovoice in such projects.Keywords: social action; empowerment education;Photovoice; youth workCommunity health education and health promotion increasingly reflect strength-based approaches that identify and build on individual and community assets (Goodman et al., 1998; McKnight & Kretzmann,1990) to address high rates of alcohol, tobacco, and otherdrug use; antisocial, violence-related, and other riskyHealth Promotion PracticeOctober 2008 Vol. 9, No. 4, 395-403DOI: 10.1177/1524839906289072©2008 Society for Public Health EducationAuthors’ Note: This research was supported by Grant No.R06/CCR921439-01 from the Centers for Disease Control andPrevention. The opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of the funding agency. Please address correspondence related to this article to Nance Wilson, YouthEmpowerment Strategies (YES!), Center for Research onAdolescent Health and Development, Public Health Institute, 55512th St., 10th Floor, Oakland, CA 94607: e-mail: nwilson@phi.org395Downloaded from http://hpp.sagepub.com by Carmen J. Head on June 12, 2009and high schools in vulnerable neighborhoods. The goalsof ASAP were to reduce morbidity and mortality, encourage youth to make healthier choices, and use empowerment education, including facilitator-led critical dialogueabout youths’ experiences, to actively engage youth insocial and political action in their schools and neighborhoods (Wallerstein et al., 2004). ASAP, in short, modeledthe strengths-based empowerment approach that is central to the YES! program.The YES! program has also incorporated thePhotovoice method, defined as “a process by whichpeople can identify, represent and enhance their community though a specific photographic technique”(Wang, 2003, p. 179; Wang & Burris, 1994). In the YES!project, youth use their own photographs as the starting point (trigger) for personal writing and facilitatorled in-depth discussions, leading to social action.Formation and implementation of an action plan is acentral part of the Photovoice method, which has beenused effectively with diverse groups (Strack & Magill,2004; Wang, 2003; Wang & Pies, 2004).Following a brief description of the community contextin which the YES! program operates, we provide anoverview of the program and describe the conceptual riskand intervention models on which the project is based.We then explore the factors that influence the ability ofyouth groups to identify common themes and developand implement social action projects to address their concerns. Implications and recommendations for other youthempowerment and social action–oriented programs arediscussed, with special attention to the challenges posedby such approaches with preteen and teen populations.> COMMUNITY CONTEXTThe urban youth in the YES! project’s densely populated school district are faced with high rates ofpoverty, substance abuse, homicide, teen births, and highschool dropout rates and live in neighborhoods whosehigh unemployment rates (American Factfinder, 2000;Community Health Assessment Planning and EvaluationUnit, 2003) may contribute to feelings of lack of control,hopelessness, alienation, powerlessness, depression, anda decreased sense of purpose in life (DuRant, Cadenhead,Pendergast, Slaven, & Linder, 1994; Link & Phelan, 2000;Mirowsky, Ross, & Reynolds, 2000; Sanders-Phillips, 1996;Wallerstein, 1992; N. Wilson et al., 2005). Such feelingsare often grounded in the harsh realities of life in lowincome neighborhoods. However, they may also reflectwhat Lerner (1991) called “surplus powerlessness”—the degree to which feelings of hopelessness and inability to bring about change exceed the actual degree ofpowerlessness inherent in the situation. In contrast tothese troubling facts of life are positive factors, such asmulti-ethnic neighborhoods rich in cultural and civicorganizations, and a tradition of organizing and community building around environmental health hazardsand other problems (Community Health AssessmentPlanning and Evaluation Unit, 2003; El-Askari et al.,1998; Minkler, 2000).> INTERVENTION: THE YES! PROGRAMThe YES! project is a 3-year after-school programand research project based on the principles of individual and community empowerment (Wallerstein, 1992;Zimmerman, 2000) and community-based participatory research (Castelloe, Watson, & White, 2002; Israel,Schulz, Parker, & Becker, 1998). Empowerment educationincorporates in its approach components of positiveyouth development, as stated by various interventionistsand researchers. In collaboration with others, Catalano,Berglund, Ryan, Lonczak, and Hawkins (2004) definedpositive youth development programs as approaches thatseek to address one or more of 15 objectives. Included inpositive youth development are: opportunities to buildcompetence (skills and resources for developing healthyoptions, developmentally appropriate skill-buildingactivities), confidence (opportunities for making decisions, positive self-identity), connection (primary orsecondary support, bonding with others, relationshipswith caring adults and peers), character (a sense of396 HEALTH PROMOTION PRACTICE / October 2008The AuthorsNance Wilson, PhD, coinvestigator and program director,Youth Empowerment Strategies (YES!), Center for Researchon Adolescent Health and Development, Public HealthInstitute, in Oakland, California.Meredith Minkler, DrPH, YES! project collaborator/consultant; professor, University of California, School ofPublic Health, Division of Community Health and HumanDevelopment, in Berkeley, California.Stefan Dasho, MA, program evaluator, Youth EmpowermentStrategies (YES!), Center for Research on Adolescent Healthand Development, Public Health Institute, in Oakland,California.Nina Wallerstein, DrPH, YES! project coinvestigator, professor, Masters in Public Health Program, University ofNew Mexico, in Albuquerque, New Mexico.Anna C. Martin, PhD, Youth Empowerment Strategies (YES!),Center for Research on Adolescent Health and Development, Public Health Institute, in Oakland, California.Downloaded from http://hpp.sagepub.com by Carmen J. Head on June 12, 2009responsibility for self and for others), caring (a sense ofbelonging), and contribution to the community (participation in meaningful community work). Empowermenteducation adds the participatory strategy of youth identifying their issues, and planning and engaging in socialaction to change underlying conditions that cause distress and ill health. Link and Phelan (1995, 2000) suggested that merely addressing the symptoms of problemswithout changing the fundamental underlying cause ofproblems may explain the persistent relationshipbetween socioeconomic status and disease outcomes.They noted that individuals use available resources tocope with potential risk and create strategies to deal withrisk and maximize opportunities. Mirowsky et al. (2000)pointed out that people with fewer resources have areduced capacity to overcome more difficult and serioushardships in their lives. These resources, and levels ofneighborhood poverty, are directly related to levels ofhealth, sense of well-being, and sense of control overone’s life. The importance of the role of power and control in the lives of children also has been discussed, withPrilleltensky, Nelson, and Peirson (2001) noting that themajor focus is on affective and cognitive dimensions ofpowerlessness, rather than on social and political dimensions of power. These investigators define power andcontrol as having opportunities to (a) access materialsand resources that satisfy basic human needs, (b) exerciseparticipation and self-determination, and (c) experiencecompetence and self-efficacy.The goal of the YES! program is to help vulnerablechildren have healthy, fulfilling lives and a sense ofhope for the future. We hypothesized that children’sactive involvement in participatory approaches tosocial action will help them develop a stronger futureorientation, while helping to create a sense of cohesion,efficacy, and perceived influence over their world. Wefurther hypothesized that having a sense of future willpromote healthy behaviors and increase children’sawareness of some behaviors as healthy or as risky(evaluation of these data are forthcoming).> CONCEPTUAL RISK ANDINTERVENTION MODELSThe YES! conceptual risk model states that individuals living in distressed neighborhoods have higherlevels of exposure to environmental and social disorder(N. Wilson et al., 2006). According to the model, thisincreased exposure leads to negative changes in beliefsand attitudes, which in turn result in decreased healthpromoting behaviors. In young adolescents, violence; useof alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs; early school leaving;antisocial behaviors; unwanted pregnancy; and depressionare problematic, in terms of youth development, and asmarkers for later health outcomes (see Figure 1).The YES! intervention model (Figure 2) posits thatparticipation in YES! groups has a positive influenceon beliefs (e.g., future orientation and efficacy at thepersonal and group levels) and teaches a repertoire ofbehaviors (e.g., collaboration skills) that, in turn, positively influence proximal outcomes, such as willingness to use conflict resolution skills, and groupcollaborative decision making, in the pursuit of meaningful community participation, ultimately resultingin increased health and wellness outcomes (N. Wilsonet al., 2006). Although these models are presented aslinear, they are interactive.We now describe the application of empowermenteducation as a strategy for early adolescents to generatehealth-related social action.> PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATIONParticipantsIn the fall of 2003, participants were recruited in fiveelementary schools with underserved minority populations. Because we contend that exposure to social andenvironmental disorder in the community places thesechildren at risk, we recruited through presentations toall fifth-grade classrooms. All volunteers from whomwe received caregiver consent and student assent wereassigned to same gender groups of 6 to 10 students.Together with a small number of continuing sixthgraders from the pilot year, there were 122 participantsin 13 groups.FacilitatorsCritical to the success of the YES! project was the careful selection and training of high school and college-agedgroup facilitators, which has been discussed elsewhere(N. Wilson et al., 2006). Pairs of facilitators worked witheach group. Apart from providing instruction in the curriculum, facilitators guided the groups in their decisionmaking and project development. Facilitators receivedtraining in the goals of empowerment education, facilitating critical dialogue, community-organizing strategies,group management, multicultural understanding, familiarization with health issues in the community, and childdevelopment.Curriculum and Preliminary ActivitiesDetailed weekly curriculum guides charted the sessionagendas up to the point where groups developed theirsocial action projects. The YES! curriculum (Dasho &Wilson et al. / YOUTH EMPOWERMENT STRATEGIES 397Downloaded from http://hpp.sagepub.com by Carmen J. Head on June 12, 2009398 HEALTH PROMOTION PRACTICE / October 2008 DistressedNeighborhoodEnvironmentsCognitive &AttitudinalFactorsProximalOutcomesDistressedLivesLiving in impoverishedneighborhoods increasesexposure of residents to:Physical and/or environmentaldisorder:-refineries/toxic waste sites-boarded-up or abandoned-vacant lotsSocial and/or behavioral disorder:-violence-harassment-ATOD use(Skogan, 1990; Wilson, 1996)Hopelessness, alienation,powerlessness(Sanders-Phillips,1996)Powerlessness(Wallerstein,1992)Depression, hopelessness,decreased purpose in life(DuRant, Cadenhead,Pendergast, Slaven, &Linder, 1994)Decreased health-promotingbehaviorsSusceptibility to ill healthViolenceViolenceSchool ProblemsATOD UseAccidentsEarly PregnancyHIV, STDsEarly School LeavingAntisocial BehaviorsDepressionSuicideCyclic Involvement withWelfare and/or CriminalJustice Systems EmpowermentProcessCognitive &AttitudinalFactorsProximalEmpowermentOutcomesHealth &WellnessOutcomesParticipation in YES!Groups:Photovoice, dialoguereflection-action, andother PAR approachesNeighborhood SocialAction ProjectCommunity Social ActionProjectFuture OrientationSocial CohesionMeasures of Personaland Group EfficacyPerceived InfluenceUse of collaborativedecision makingUse of conflictresolution skillsIncreased involvementin designing andimplementing positiveproject effortsIncreased efficacy andpolitical participationIncreased:-Awareness of riskybehaviors-Health-promotingbehaviorsReduced:ATOD useAccidentsAntisocial behaviorsViolenceDepressionSchool Social ActionProjectFIGURE 1 Conceptual Risk ModelNOTE: ATOD = alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs.FIGURE 2 Intervention ModelNOTE: PAR = participatory action research; ATOD = alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs.Downloaded from http://hpp.sagepub.com by Carmen J. Head on June 12, 2009Wilson, 2003) was designed to cover four domains:team building, photography, empowerment educationbased activities, and the steps involved in developing agroup-identified social action project. Group formationand photography were emphasized during the first 6 to7 weeks. Activities included team building to create asense of group cohesion and identity, basic instructionon how a camera works, and concepts of photographiccomposition.The core of the empowerment education activitieswas the use of Photovoice leading to group critical dialogue to generate a social action project. In Photovoice,participants represent their world with photographsthat they then analyze to surface their meaning. Theformat for reflecting on the photographs is to respondin writing (a “freewrite”) to the following questions(which are referred to by the acronym SHOWeD): Whatdo we See in this picture? What’s really Happening?How does this relate to Our lives? Why does it exist?What can we Do about it? (Shaffer, 1983). To preparefor this intellectual work, the groups first did preliminary activities to learn to take documentary picturesand to write about images. The groups described theirschool environment by drawing a large map of theirschool, on which they posted the photos of qualitiesor characteristics of their school (e.g., clean or dirty, scaryor peaceful, friendly or unfriendly, etc.). Student groupsbrainstormed for places in their school that they feltrepresented the qualities. We also prepared participants for writing or “freewrites” by asking them to create storyboards, using a sequential series of stickdrawings while working from a picture they had takenof their family, to imagine past and future eventscausally related to the picture and to describe theirconcerns and hopes about these imagined pictures. Thepurpose of the freewrites was to pose questions thatsupported deeper level thinking of cause and effect.The Photovoice assignment involved taking picturesof assets and/or issues at the school that either promoted (assets) or prevented (issues) health, safety, orhappiness at the school. Facilitators assisted studentswho appeared to have difficulty in understanding theassignment or who had difficulty actually writing.After doing and presenting their freewrites individually, group members engaged in facilitated discussionabout the effects of the assets and issues at the school.In these discussions, or “critical dialogues,” facilitatorsstrove to elicit deeper thinking from the group, oftenemploying the questions from SHOWeD. The intent ofcritical dialogue is for the group to consider why theseindividual experiences are public concerns, and toclarify their underlying root causes. Through these discussions, the group was to explore the social contextand the “causality” involved in conditions to frame thepurpose of social action.Each group ranked the importance of issues andassets they had identified according to the followingcriteria: Which idea might make the biggest differenceat the school? Which idea might have a chance to succeed? What are the reasons this project would or wouldnot be a good idea? Which idea would you want and beable to work on? After voting to determine the highpriority topics, the groups considered the goal of potential projects to address these topics. The facilitatorsprovided additional criteria to consider: Is the projectworthwhile? Is it winnable? Does it exclude other kidsin the school? Can we finish it? Can we afford it? Thegroups researched these questions and then, in a subsequent session, chose a topic by consensus or by voting.Facilitators introduced examples of community-organizing strategies such as using presentations or media forawareness campaigns, petition drives to influence policy, and organizing volunteer community action. Thegroups posted comments about potential project ideason flip chart pages placed around the room to get allgroup members’ input, discussed these responses, andthen determined the specific method for the project.Each group presented its project to school personnelfor support and approval.> SOCIAL ACTION PROJECTSThe groups came up with four distinct types ofsocial action projects: (a) awareness campaigns aboutconditions at school, for example, poster campaignsconcerning potential teacher layoffs, a school vote tohave the school district fix a shack on campus that wasgraffiti- and bullet-hole laden (three groups); (b) schoolbehavior campaigns, for example, skits on subjectssuch as why rumors cause fights, good and bad ways toget attention, the importance of talking to adults aboutwhat is bothering you (five groups); (c) clean-up projects, for example, painting bathrooms to remove graffiti, cleaning up litter on a playground (two groups);and (d) projects to improve school spirit, for example,school spirit t-shirts and a yearbook (two groups).Finally, one group was unable to move beyond creatingan exhibition of its issue and asset photographs.Even though some groups used similar methods fortheir social action project (i.e., skit presentations orpetition drives) the depth of the projects varied tremendously. The degree of success group members experienced with their projects was determined by theinteraction of a variety of factors, including groupdynamics and task readiness, leadership within thegroups, and situational conditions in the schools (e.g.,Wilson et al. / YOUTH EMPOWERMENT STRATEGIES 399Downloaded from http://hpp.sagepub.com by Carmen J. Head on June 12, 2009project support by key school personnel). It is beyondthe scope of this article to address how this constellation of factors played differentially in each group.Instead we focus in some detail on the question of howto determine the success of the projects and factors thatinhibited success. An important part of the YES!program was that the groups establish their own criterion for measuring success of their projects.As discussed previously, the intent of the curriculum was to have the groups come up with consensuallydetermined measures of success for their social actionprojects. We found that most groups did not conduct athorough evaluation of their project because they finished at the end of the school year. Consequently, themost salient criterion from the youth perspective wastwofold: “Was the project completed?” and “Did wetry?” For example, rather than conducting a survey tosee if their presentations affected attitudes in theschool, groups relied on their own feelings about howthe presentation went (e.g., “They liked it,” or “Theylaughed at us ’cause we messed up.”) The group that created the yearbook did not like its appearance becausethey could not afford “quality” materials, yet theyvastly outdistributed the “t-shirt” group who, in contrast, thought they were successful because they likedtheir design. However, many groups were able to pointto measures of success such as the number of peoplewho signed a petition or volunteered to help at a cleanup event. Group members typically analyzed their ownsuccess solely in terms of their level of effort (e.g., “Weworked hard.”) rather than by examining the ways inwhich their action plan was or was not effective.Whatever the groups’ intentions and level of effort, appropriateness, ambitiousness, and opportunity, it is alsovaluable to consider the project within the social andenvironmental climate that placed constraints on thegroup social action projects.AppropriatenessA foundational idea of empowerment education isthat participants need to collectively identify the rootcause of an issue to design an appropriate strategy forpractical action. Thus, the first constraint was theappropriateness of the project given the problem. Thecurriculum emphasized the centrality of critical dialogue for identifying the “problems behind the problem” or the underlying causes of the groups’ issues.Facilitators varied, however, in their success at prolonging these discussions. For example, when groupmembers became excited about a project, they oftenresisted discussing more abstract concerns about whetherthe project addressed symptoms or root causes. Althoughcharting criteria was a good tool to help dissuade groupsfrom undertaking something too costly or impractical,there was no way to reinvestigate their “causal model”when the social action projects were consensually chosen.Facilitators did exert some preemptive control whenproject suggestions seemed inappropriate. Because allprojects needed support of school principals or theirrepresentatives, the projects also needed to be appropriate for the school institution.AmbitiousnessThe second constraint on a project’s potential for success was the ambitiousness of the project. Several groupshad unrealistic ideas about what could be accomplishedin the time available for their social action projects.Typically groups were not ready to begin their projectsuntil there were just 4 weeks remaining in the schoolyear. Because schools closed for the summer and cofacilitators were unavailable during that time, there wasno possibility of extending projects into July.Aside from the limitations of time, some groups misjudged the “degree of difficulty” of projects they proposed. Intermediate success goals were determined sothat the group members could feel successful if they metsome, but not all, of their goals. Working to avoid quixoticefforts, facilitators used dialogue to help the groups todecide on projects that would not encounter strong resistance within the school community. For example,although complaints about school food were rampant,groups were able to see that this could not be addressedlate in the school year. Nonetheless, the groups’ enthusiasm for their topics often led to scheduling additionalgroup meetings, having facilitators take the lead on workthat would have been done more slowly by groupmembers (e.g., editing skit scripts), or to cutting down theoriginal scope of the project. On the underachieving endof “ambitiousness” was the group that only produced anexhibit of its assets and issues photographs.OpportunityThe third constraint on success was the opportunitythat occurred within the school community context.Several social action projects benefited from situationalconditions. For example, one group had conflicts deciding on the content of their skit and was not ready to present it until the last day of school. The principal gavethem the opportunity to present at the final assembly.Because the facilitators were not part of the schoolstaff, they had a limited understanding of potential opportunities or resources available within the school. AlthoughYES! program staff often were in a better position to400 HEALTH PROMOTION PRACTICE / October 2008Downloaded from http://hpp.sagepub.com by Carmen J. Head on June 12, 2009find out about school-based resources, ideally, groupmembers would have the experience of researching theresource possibilities. The school spirit t-shirt projectbecame feasible because a school staff member hadaccess to a silkscreen studio. A group’s bathroom painting project did not require a planned fund-raisingactivity because a janitor was able to quickly supplyfree paint. On the other hand, some groups werethwarted when they were not allowed access to schoolresources or use in-school time to meet. Finally, onegroup, which was enthusiastic about its plan to cleanup a creek behind the school that had been used as adumping ground, was thwarted by numerous obstacles,including the requirement that U.S. $1 million of insurance be purchased in advance of the clean up. Althoughthis group was able to considerably narrow its project(creating a rap song about the need for and performingit as part of their informational efforts at a school fair),this more limited effort did not generate the level ofexcitement of their original proposal.> DISCUSSION: IMPLICATIONSFOR PRACTICEThe experiences of the first cohort of the YES! projectwith the social action component of this program suggest a number of challenges and recommendations thatmay be useful for health educators and others interestedin adapting and applying this model in work with preadolescent youth. The key to empowerment interventionsis that group dialogue and reflection leads to action. Thisproject has grappled with finding the appropriate scopeof that social action for early adolescents. AlthoughWang and Burris (1994) maintained that the Photovoicemethod should result in change at the policy level, others have noted that children have limited social capitalto initiate such change (Strack & Magill, 2004) and thatcommunity service would be a desirable outlet. By limiting the boundaries of the community to the school,YES! afforded its participants an appropriately familiararena and ready allies (school staff and other youth).Time was a significant constraint for the ambitiousness of the social action projects and for the YES!program itself. In particular, youth programs will discover that scarce time forces a compromise in the timeallocated to photography, Photovoice freewrites, critical dialogue, and conducting the social action projects.Photography is an incentive for participation and avehicle for Photovoice. Participants wanted to spendmore time taking pictures, and facilitators reported nothaving enough time to engage participants in criticaldialogue about pictures or to assist reluctant writers inexpressing their ideas in freewrites.Because critical reflection on actions taken is an integral part of empowerment work (Freire, 1973), time alsois needed during the social action phase to enable thisreflection, dialogue, and resultant learning to take place.One reason performing skits was so popular was that thisis a way to physically realize the group members’ socialanalyses. Programs may want to have facilitators withsome experience in drama who can successfully coachthese performances. Taking a cue from the ASAP(Wallerstein et al., 2004), however, skit performance andsimilar activities should also always be followed by dialogue with the audience so that the skit itself is used as atrigger for a meaningful discussion of the issues andassets portrayed and how the problem might best beunderstood and addressed. Our experience suggests thatwith this age group, and when the project has beendecided on, 4 months (90 minutes × 16 weeks) would bea good period of time to develop and evaluate a meaningful social action project.The degree of empowerment group members experience may depend on the level of effort, which is somewhat determined by the group members, and the successof that effort, which may be heavily influenced by external factors. Therefore, it is essential for the projects tohave multiple markers of success. Many groups did nothave the opportunity to assess the impact of their workbecause, for example, they did not receive a response totheir letters, or had not considered how to find out ifthe intended message of their skit had been understoodby their audience and had no more meetings in whichto consider how to do this before the semester ended.Based on this experience, the YES! project is nowbuilding a self-evaluation component into the socialaction planning process, and continuing to expand andmodify the YES! curriculum to promote more richlydeveloped social action projects.An additional consideration in planning youthempowerment work is that, in an after-school context,program activities cannot be exclusively “school-like.”Children this age demand a balance of play and physical activity to go along with discussion, writing, andgroupwork. Building in time for parties, games, andother non-work-like activity is critical to participantretention and overall program success in meeting theneeds of youth participants and achieving programgoals (N. Wilson et al., 2006).In summary, according to the YES! intervention model,each of the planned activities and group processes, (e.g.,team building, social skill development, Photovoice, critical dialogue, democratic decision making, and participating in social action, reflection, and self-evaluation),contribute to individual and group efficacy. A programshould not develop a scope and sequence of activities toWilson et al. / YOUTH EMPOWERMENT STRATEGIES 401Downloaded from http://hpp.sagepub.com by Carmen J. Head on June 12, 2009address these objectives separately but ideally, addressthem synergistically, embedded in the course of authenticaction. For example, isolated team-building activities areless potent than teamwork in a meaningful project.The YES! program provided the facilitators with aweekly curriculum up to the point of a group’s selectionof their social action project. It was essential that the facilitators have a clear understanding that they were to be the“headlight,” or keeper of the vision, of the program if agroup was stuck. Facilitators and program staff shouldcontinually discuss how to handle situations that mighthave an impact on empowerment. For example, whoshould make a decision, the group or the facilitator? Thatdepends on several factors, such as the effect on thegroup’s sense of efficacy and control, the relative importance of the decision, and the amount of time available tothe group to gain the understanding or resources to makethe decision. This uncertainty makes the facilitator’s rolechallenging and exciting. Ultimately, a participatoryaction project with early adolescents cannot be containedin the casing of a curriculum but must be guided and nurtured as it grows.> CONCLUSIONSThe YES! project offers a theoretically driven intervention, grounded in principles of empowerment andparticipatory research, and places a special emphasis oncritical thinking and moving into action. Our experience with social action projects revealed much thatmay be useful to others interested in designing youthempowerment programs. First, youth workers shoulddesign programs to engage participants in social actionearly in the group’s formation and allow sufficient time forcompleting and evaluating its project. Second, programplans must address the time constraints that limit thedepth of the intervention, namely the duration andnumber of available sessions and the need to balanceproject-related work with recreational activities. Third,YES! was designed originally to involve participants for3 years. However, any multiyear youth program willalso face participant attrition, which alters the constitution of the groups and creates other challenges. Fourth,facilitators need to help youth look for the “problemsbehind the problem” and to move beyond their initialopinions to explore social context. Fifth, programs willbe faced with time pressures and other constraintsunderscoring the need to monitor and address theappropriateness, ambitiousness, and opportunities ofthe projects as they are being proposed. Project staffshould be prepared to help clear the path for socialaction projects to improve their likelihood of success.Despite the challenges presented, the YES! program’sstrategies hold potential for refining programs that seekto involve preadolescent youth in identifying, designing, and conducting social action projects in the contextof community-based prevention research.REFERENCESAmerican FactFinder. (2000). Profile of selected economic characteristics, Richmond City, California. Retrieved June 30, 2003,from http:www.factfinder.census.gov.Blaine, T. M., Forster, J. L., Hennrikus, D., O’Neil, S., Wolfson, M.,& Pham, H. (1997). Creating tobacco control policy at the locallevel: Implementation of a direct action approach. HealthEducation & Behavior, 24(5), 640-651.Castelloe, P., Watson, W., & White, C. (2002). Participatory change:An integrative approach to community practice. Journal ofCommunity Practice, 10(4), 7-31.Catalano, R. F., Berglund, M. L., Ryan, J. A. M., Lonczak, H. S., &Hawkins, J. D. (2004). Positive youth development in the UnitedStates: Research findings on evaluations of positive youth development programs. Annals of the American Academy, 591, 98-124.Community Health Assessment Planning and Evaluation Unit,C. C. C., Health Services Department. (2003). Analysis of stateof California death statistical master file. Martinez, CA: ContraCosta County Health Services Department.Dasho, S., & Wilson, N. (2003). Youth Empowerment Strategiescurriculum guide. Youth Empowerment Strategies project.Unpublished manuscript.DuRant, R. H., Cadenhead, C., Pendergast, R. A., Slaven, G., &Linder, C. W. (1994). Factors associated with the use of violenceamong urban Black adolescents. American Journal of PublicHealth, 84, 612-617.El-Askari, G., Freestone, J., Irizarry, C., Kraut, K. L., Mashiyama,S. T., Morgan, M. A., et al. (1998). The Healthy NeighborhoodsProject: A local health department’s role in catalyzing communitydevelopment. Health Education & Behavior, 25(2), 146-159.Freire, P. (1973). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Seabury Press.Futterman, D., Chabon, B., & Hoffman, N. D. (2000). HIV and AIDSin adolescents. Pediatric Clinics of North America, 47(1), 171-188.Goodman, R. M., Speers, M. A., McLeroy, K., Fawcett, S., Kegler,M., Parker, E., et al. (1998). Identifying and defining the dimensions of community capacity to provide a basis for measurement.Health Education & Behavior, 25(3), 258-278.Israel, B. A., Schulz, A. J., Parker, E. A., & Becker, A. B. (1998).Review of community-based research: Assessing partnershipapproaches to improve public health. Annual Review of PublicHealth, 19, 173-202.Lerner, M. (1991). Surplus powerlessness: The psychodynamics ofeveryday life and the psychology of individual and social transformation. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.Link, B. G., & Phelan, J. C. (1995). Social conditions as fundamental causes of disease. Journal of Health and Social Behavior,(extra edition), 80-94.Link, B. G., & Phelan, J. C. (2000). Evaluating the fundamentalcause explanation for social disparities in health. In C. E. Bird,P. Conrad, & A. M. Fremont (Eds.), Handbook of medical sociology(5th ed., pp. 33-46). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.402 HEALTH PROMOTION PRACTICE / October 2008Downloaded from http://hpp.sagepub.com by Carmen J. Head on June 12, 2009McKnight, J., & Kretzmann, J. (1990). Mapping community capacity. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University, Center for UrbanAffairs and Policy Research.Minkler, M. (2000). Participatory action research and healthycommunities. Public Health Reports, 115(1 & 2), 191-197.Mirowsky, J., Ross, C. E., & Reynolds, J. (2000). Links betweensocial status and health. In C. E. Bird, P. Conrad, & A. M. Fremont(Eds.), Handbook of medical sociology (5th ed., pp. 47-67). UpperSaddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Prilleltensky, I., Nelson, G., & Peirson, L. (2001). The role ofpower and control in children’s lives: An ecological analysisof pathways toward wellness, resilience and problems. Journal ofCommunity and Applied Social Psychology, 11, 143-158.Sanders-Phillips, K. (1996). The ecology of urban violence: Its relationship to health promotion behaviors in Black and Latino communities. American Journal of Health Promotion, 10, 308-317.Schensul, S. L., LoBianco, L., & Lombardo, C. (2004). Youth participatory research (youth-PAR) in public schools: Opportunities andchallenges in an inner-city high school. Practicing Anthropology,26(2). Available at http://www.sfaa.net/pa/pa26-2.htmlShaffer, R. (1983). Beyond the dispensary. Nairobi, Kenya: Amref.Skogan, W. G. (1990). Disorder and decline: Crime and the spiralof decay in American neighborhoods. Berkeley: University ofCalifornia Press.Strack, R., & Magill, C. (2004). Engaging youth through Photovoice.Health Promotion Practice, 5(1), 49-58.Tencati, E., Kole, S. L., Feigher, E., Winkleby, M., & Altman, D. G.(2002). Teens as advocates for substance use prevention: Strategiesfor implementation. Health Promotion Practice, 3(1), 18-29.Wallerstein, N. (1992). Powerlessness, empowerment, and health:Implications for health promotion programs. American Journal ofHealth Promotion, 6, 197-205.Wallerstein, N. (2002). Empowerment to reduce health disparities. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 30(Supp 59), 72-77.Wallerstein, N., Larson-Bright, M., Adams, A. R., & Rael, R. M.(2000, November 14). Youth Link: A youth policy leadershipprogram in New Mexico. Paper presented at the American PublicHealth Association, Boston.Wallerstein, N., Sanchez-Merki, V., & Dow, L. (2004). Freirian praxisin health education and community organizing: A case study ofan adolescent prevention program. In M. Minkler (Ed.), Community organizing and community building for health (2nd ed.,pp. 218-236). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Wang, C. C. (2003). Using Photovoice as a participatory assessment and issue selection tool: A case study with the homeless inAnn Arbor. In M. Minkler & N. Wallerstein (Eds.), Communitybased participatory research for health (pp. 179-186). SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.Wang, C. C., & Burris, M. (1994). Empowerment through photonovella: Portraits of participation. Health Education Quarterly,21, 171-186.Wang, C. C., & Pies, C. A. (2004). Family, maternal, and childhealth through Photovoice. Maternal and Child Health Journal,8(2), 95-102.Wilson, N., Battistich, V., Syme, S. L., & Boyce, W. T. (2002). Doeselementary school alcohol, tobacco and marijuana use increasemiddle school risk? Journal of Adolescent Health, 30(6), 442-447.Wilson, N., Minkler, M., Dasho, S., Carrillo, R., Wallerstein, N., &Garcia, D. (2006). Training students as partners in community basedparticipatory prevention research: The Youth EmpowermentStrategies (YES!) project. Journal of Community Practice, 14(1/2),199-216.Wilson, N., Syme, S. L., Boyce, W. T., Battistich, V., & Selvin, S.(2005). Adolescent alcohol, tobacco and other drug use: Theinfluence of neighborhood disorder and hope. American Journalof Health Promotion, 20(1), 11-19.Wilson, W. J. (1996). When work disappears: The world of the newurban poor. New York: Knopf.Zimmerman, M. A. (2000). Empowerment theory: psychological,organizational and community levels of analysis. In J. Rappaport& E. Seidman (Eds.), Handbook of community psychology(pp. 43-63). New York: Academic/Plenum.Wilson et al. / YOUTH EMPOWERMENT STRATEGIES 403Downloaded from http://hpp.sagepub.com by Carmen J. Head on June 12, 2009View publication stats