The Challenge 

Africa is one of the most vulnerable continents to the impacts of climate change and is already experiencing symptoms of climate catastrophe such as increased temperatures, extreme weather events, rising sea-levels, and altered rainfall patterns. The impact of climate change on the health of Africans is significant, with some studies suggesting that climate change could cause an additional 100,000 deaths per year by 2030 [1]. Addressing the intersection of climate change and infectious disease in Africa requires urgent action by governments, the private sector, civil society, and international organizations. Further, climate change greatly exacerbates health problems on the continent, including the transmission of infectious diseases.

As climate change intensifies and the planet warms, infectious diseases—many of which are climate sensitive—are provided with the ideal environment to thrive as well as expand across geographies. Changes in temperature, rainfall patterns, and humidity are altering the distribution and behavior of disease vectors such as mosquitoes and ticks, thus increasing the prevalence and transmission of diseases such as malaria, dengue fever, and Lyme disease. As their natural habitats disappear, animal species are being forced to occupy new areas, which enables the potential spread of zoonotic diseases, both animal-to-animal, and animal-to-human—such as Ebola, Lassa fever, and Rift Valley fever.[2].  

Flooding, also more frequent and severe due to climate change, can contaminate drinking water sources, further increasing the risk of waterborne diseases. We will then expect to see a rise in diseases such as cholera, typhoid fever, and hepatitis A through changes in precipitation patterns.

Solutions

It can certainly be discouraging and alarming to consider the possibility and preponderance of such dire outcomes, however, there are several policy, behavioral, resource, and systemic mitigations that can be put in place. Some have already risen to the level of urgent imperatives.

Strengthening surveillance & monitoring systems

Healthcare workers who are trained in disease surveillance, laboratory diagnosis, and outbreak response are crucial to the success of surveillance and monitoring systems. Information and communication technologies such as mobile phone technology, GIS mapping, and social media can also improve the efficacy of these systems.

Effective surveillance and monitoring systems are crucial in addressing the nexus of climate change and infectious disease in Africa. To enhance these systems, a comprehensive approach is required. Early warning systems that utilize real-time data, modeling, and risk assessments are invaluable in detecting the emergence and spread of infectious diseases. Furthermore, integrated disease surveillance and response (IDSR) systems that use standardized case definitions and reporting mechanisms enable the rapid detection of disease outbreaks through the tracking of cases by medical professionals and other stakeholders such as local health officials [3].

Public-private partnerships that bring together governments, the private sector, and international organizations to invest in disease surveillance and response systems are vital to effective disease control. So is improved data sharing across sectors such as agriculture, environment, and health will allow for earlier identification of potential outbreaks.

Furthermore, community participation in surveillance and monitoring systems is vital for strengthening surveillance and monitoring systems. Communities can be upskilled in recognizing and reporting disease outbreaks, and community health workers can collect data on disease trends. By bolstering surveillance and monitoring systems, we can promptly detect and respond to disease outbreaks, mitigating the impact of climate change on infectious disease transmission in Africa.

Ensuring climate resilience in healthcare infrastructure

Ensuring the climate resilience of healthcare infrastructure is imperative. As climate-caused extreme weather events become more frequent, infrastructure planning and strategies must meet the moment to mitigate the risk of infectious disease transmission. Some of the necessary actions include investing in water and sanitation systems able withstand climate change-induced impacts and weather events, construction of climate-resilient housing, and the promotion of renewable energy sources.

Healthcare facilities must be built and/or repaired and upgraded so that they may withstand climate-caused challenges, with updated building codes featuring climate-resilient design such as elevated floors, reinforced walls, and wind-resistant roofs. Backup power systems will ensure that  healthcare facilities can continue to provide essential services during power outages. Addressing this deficit is of urgency given how many healthcare facilities in Africa are underdeveloped, lacking basic amenities such as clean water and sanitation [4]. Not only does this insufficiency makes delivering life-saving care an extreme challenge, it also further exposes patients and healthcare workers to infection and disease transmission.

To respond effectively to the health effects of climate change, healthcare workers must receive new training and updated equipment. This upskilling can range from education on how to diagnose and treat climate-sensitive diseases such as malaria and dengue fever to the management of extreme weather events such as heat waves and floods. Moreover, as we recall from the recent disparities around the COVID pandeminc, healthcare workers must imperatively be supplied with the proper personal protective equipment to safeguard themselves and their patients.

Investing in innovative research and development

It is essential to invest incrementally in the development and deployment of new technologies that can enhance healthcare delivery amid climate change. For example, remote diagnosis and treatment of climate-sensitive diseases can help to decrease the need for patients to travel long distances to receive healthcare. Digital health platforms also enable disease surveillance and response, allowing healthcare workers to promptly detect and respond to disease outbreaks [5]. Such investments can also help identify novel strategies for preventing and controlling infectious diseases.

Some innovations we need to see include research on the influence of climate change on disease transmission, the creation of new vaccines and drugs, and the evaluation of innovative prevention and control measures.Collaborations between the public and private sectors are also imperative in order to leverage resources and expertise in developing and implementing climate-resilient, innovative solutions that can address the health impacts of climate change.

Promoting behavior change to mitigate challenges

Education and awareness campaigns will encourage behavior change focusing on the risks of climate change and infectious disease. In the face of climate change and an increasingly interconnected world, it is imperative that individuals take proactive measures to reduce their risks. Such efforts can include handwashing, safe food preparation and storage practices, and other hygiene measures. Community engagement is critical in promoting behavior change, ranging from identifying local health needs to developing and implementing culturally appropriate health programs. Community health workers play an important role in delivering health education and promoting behavior change within their communities.

Traditional healers and community leaders also serve as resources for their communities, and their knowledge must be incorporated into future resilience design. Behavioral change can be incenvtiveed at the individual level, such as through rewards for households that adopt sustainable practices. Incentives can also be depoloyed at the community level, such as in encouraging widespread adoption of climate-resilient ag (drought-resistant crops, drought-sensitive irrigation, etc.). At the civic, regional, or national level, regulations and policies come into play in promoting systemic behavior change. Examples include clean energy requirements, or safe hygiene practices in healthcare facilities. Policies could also encourage sustainable farming practices, such as crop rotation and conservation agriculture.

Addressing immediate implications of climate change

Efforts to build climate resilience to reduce Africa’s vulnerability should also provide communities with basic amenities to weather the impacts of climate change. Amenities such as access to water and sanitation, electricity for productive use, clean cooking and climate-smart agricultural systems, and food preservation methods enable sustainable rural landscapes. Governments should encourage investment into standard primary health care centers to respond proactively to emerging infections through a “ONE Health [6]” approach.

Conclusion

The impact of climate change on the transmission of infectious diseases has been significant, leading to health, economic, and security implications. A comprehensive and multidisciplinary approach involving all stakeholders—governments, the private sector, civil society, and international organizations alike—is necessary to address this challenge. Actionable solutions including strengthening surveillance and monitoring systems, ensuring climate resilience in healthcare infrastructure, investing in innovative research and development, promoting behavior change to mitigate challenges, and addressing immediate implications of climate change. By taking urgent action, we can improve the health and well-being of people on the continent, reduce the burden of infectious diseases, and promote sustainable development.

The intersection of climate change and infectious disease is a global challenge, and solutions developed for Africa can be applied to other regions of the world facing similar challenges. There is an urgent need for increased investment in addressing this challenge in other parts of the world. This investment will improve the health and well-being of people in Africa, as well as contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, especially Goal number 3: Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all.

Additionally, the intersection of climate change and infectious disease represents one dimension of the interconnected impacts of climate change on all domains of life and society (e.g., agriculture, food systems, overall health, etc.). Solutions addressing this nexus should maintain perspective on the intersectional influences of climate change.

Dr. Chidiebere E.X. Ikejemba is the Director of Climate & Environment at Camber Collective. His body of work focuses on climate equity and justice, building resilient climate-smart development programs, strengthening political will for urgent climate change action and many other levers of activation. His theory of impact operates across both the upstream and downstream of a systems chain. that encompasses, just transition, agriculture & food security, migration, economic & rural development, climate education, waste management (circularity), healthcare, corruption and democracy, energy access, gender inclusion, carbon neutrality and other dimensions. The circularity of Camber’s approach and theory of influence is, we believe, the most congruous path to balancing economic reality and humanitarianism.  

Notes

¹ UNECA, “Climate Change and Health in Africa: Issues and Options,” United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, 2011.

² E. S. Brondizio, J. Settele, S. Díaz and H. T. Ngo, “IPBES (2019): Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services,” https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3831673, Bonn, 2019.

³ Kang G et al., “Improved surveillance of infectious diseases in resource-poor settings: The value of analytical epidemiology,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, vol. 20, no. 10, pp. 1728-1735, 2014.

⁴ Nguh BL et al., “Assessing the healthcare delivery system: A cross-sectional survey of healthcare managers and administrators in Cameroon,” Journal of Hospital Administration and Management, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1-11, 2017.

⁵ Mwapasa V et al., “The role of mobile health technologies in the fight against infectious diseases in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review,” Journal of Medical Internet Research, vol. 20, no. 8, p. e10756, 2018.

⁶ ‘One Health’ is an integrated, unifying approach to balance and optimize the health of people, animals, and the environment. The approach mobilizes multiple sectors, disciplines, and communities at varying levels of society to work together. This way, new and better ideas are developed that address root causes and create long-term, sustainable solutions. One Health involves the public health, veterinary, public health, and environmental sectors. The One Health approach is particularly relevant for food and water safety, nutrition, the control of zoonoses (diseases that can spread between animals and humans, such as flu, rabies, and Rift Valley fever), pollution management, and combatting antimicrobial resistance (the emergence of microbes that are resistant to antibiotic therapy).

The post Climate Change and Infectious Disease in Africa appeared first on Camber Collective.

Once the child turns 18, they can use the funds for eligible wealth-building purposes (such as continued education, homeownership, or establishing a business), provided they meet certain basic requirements. Baby bonds target support to children from low-wealth households by using income or other wealth-proxies (e.g., Medicaid) as eligibility criteria for account establishment or as a determining factor in the size of government contributions.  

In the US, wealth is acutely concentrated among a small subset of households (many of whom have benefitted from inter-generational wealth transfers), while many others struggle to get by. In 2019, the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) found that the wealthiest decile holds over three quarters of total household wealth, while the bottom half of the distribution holds just one percent of the wealth (see Figure 1). Not only do families at the bottom of the distribution hold little wealth, but over 13 million actually have negative wealth (i.e., debts exceed assets).[i]

Confronting the Racial Wealth Divide

In addition to wealth inequality, a persisting racial and ethnic wealth divide characterizes wealth distribution. For example, in the US, the median Black family ($23K) held just 13% of the wealth compared to their White peers ($184K), and the typical Hispanic family ($38K) held around 20% (see Figure 2). While not all races and ethnicities are represented in wealth data sources (e.g., SCF), income poverty and other wealth-related metrics show that Native Americans and many communities within the Asian American and Pacific Islander category are also excluded from wealth.[ii]

Baby Bonds Legislation

The racial and ethnic wealth divide is primarily the result of historic and continuing systemic inequities that affect people of color in the United States (e.g., land theft from indigenous tribes, enslavement of Black people, the G.I. Bill, redlining and housing discrimination, etc.). Baby bonds policies could, using a race-neutral approach, begin to correct some of those inequities that underlie the racial and ethnic wealth divide. Gaining access to one’s baby bond account at age 18 could mimic the advantage of intergenerational wealth transfers that wealthier, typically, white) families, and propagate inequalities through generations. By providing young adults with money specifically for wealth-building purposes, baby bonds can help interrupt the status quo and create opportunities for BIPOC*, lower-income, and other disadvantaged communities to seed wealth for themselves and for future generations.

While economists William Darity Jr. and Darrick Hamilton first proposed baby bonds as a way to close the racial wealth divide in 2010,[iii] it wasn’t until eight years later that the first federal legislation was put forward. Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) proposed the American Opportunity Accounts Act, in which every child’s account would be seeded with a $1,000 deposit upon birth, with tiered annual contributions dependent on family income.[iv] As a result, children from the poorest households would have an estimated balance of $46,000 at their 18^th birthday, while peers from the wealthiest households would receive under $2,000.

While Booker’s initial proposal did not advance, he, along with Massachusetts Representative Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), reintroduced the American Opportunity Accounts Act in 2021 with broader support from co-sponsors.[iv]

In addition to federal legislation, several states have proposed—and even passed—local baby bonds policies.

• Connecticut: In July 2021, Connecticut paved the way by enacting the CT Baby Bonds legislature.[vii] CT Baby Bonds will automatically enroll babies born under HUSKY (the state’s Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program) starting in July of 2023. Upon birth, the state will deposit as much as $3,200 into the CT Baby Bonds Trust, to be invested and managed by the Office of the Treasurer. In order to access funds, beneficiaries must be 18-30 years old, complete a financial literacy course, and currently reside in the state. When those conditions are met, young adults can then make a claim to request funds for one of the designated eligible purposes: higher education, homeownership in the state, investment in a business in the state, or retirement savings. See the full legislation here (Sec. 104-110).
• District of Columbia: The DC Council approved the Child Wealth Building Act by a unanimous vote in October 2021.[viii] The Child Trust Fund Program established by the act will automatically enroll babies whose birth is covered by DC Medicaid and that are born to households with income 300% or less of the federal poverty line and enrolled in DC Medicaid.[ix] Accounts for eligible babies will be seeded with an initial $500 deposit and grown with annual contributions of up to $1,000, dependent on family income. If the previously eligible child’s household becomes ineligible at any point before their 18^th birthday, annual contributions will cease but the existing balance will still be available for later distribution. At 18 years of age, beneficiaries of the Child Trust Fund Program residing in the district can receive distributions to be used for the following purposes: education, ownership or investment in a DC business, ownership of a DC property, or retirement investment. See the full legislation here.

Beyond Connecticut and DC, baby bonds legislation has been discussed in California[1], Delaware[2], Iowa[3], Louisiana[4], Maryland[5], Massachusetts[6], Nevada[7], New Jersey[8], New York[9], Washington[10], and Wisconsin[11].

Washington Future Fund: Camber’s Work in Baby Bonds Policy

In 2022, the Washington Office of the State Treasurer (OST) contracted Camber Collective, with partner Prosperity Now, to conduct a wealth inequity study. The Washington Future Fund Study Committee—made up of elected officials, community representatives with lived experience, and members of economic empowerment organizations—would then leverage the wealth inequity study, along with their other work, to make recommendations to the state legislature regarding baby bonds policy in Washington. To present a comprehensive understanding of wealth inequities in Washington, we utilized quantitative analysis of household- and individual-level data, qualitative analysis of interviews with low- and middle-income Washington residents, and secondary research of exiting literature throughout the study.

Our research identified racial/ethnic and geographic wealth divides in the state, informed by stories from individuals experiencing challenges in building wealth. The final report (excerpts included in OST’s report to legislature contextualizes wealth disparities with exploration of why wealth matters, summary of how inequities are created and perpetuated, and discussion of the implications of wealth inequities on households and the state economy. The insights surfaced through the research study, complemented by Prosperity Now’s expertise in baby bond policy, resulted in a series of evidence-driven policy recommendations for the state legislature’s consideration in the 2023 session. This work, along with the research study report, was highlighted recently in the Seattle Times.

[i] Can ‘Baby Bonds’ Eliminate the Racial Wealth Gap in Putative Post-Racial America? – Darrick Hamilton, William Darity, 2010 (sagepub.com

[ii] An exclusive look at Cory Booker’s plan to fight wealth inequality: give poor kids money – Vox

[iii] Booker reintroduces ‘baby bonds’ bill to give all newborns a $1K savings account – POLITICO

[iv][Can ‘Baby Bonds’ Eliminate the Racial Wealth Gap in Putative Post-Racial America? – Darrick Hamilton, William Darity, 2010 (sagepub.com)

[v] An exclusive look at Cory Booker’s plan to fight wealth inequality: give poor kids money – Vox

[vi] Booker reintroduces ‘baby bonds’ bill to give all newborns a $1K savings account – POLITICO

[vii] CT Baby Bonds

[ix] DC Council unanimously ‘baby bonds’ bill – WTOP News [1] Chapter 6D. Building Child Wealth. | D.C. Law Library (dccouncil.gov)

[1] California approved budget for the Hope, Opportunity, Perseverance, and Empowerment for Children Trust Account Fund, which will target low-income children who lost a primary caregiver to COVID-19 and foster children

[2] Legislation introduced in 2022

[3] Legislation introduced in 2021; note that this policy would have created opt-in accounts for all babies in the state, regardless of wealth

[4] Resolution passed in 2022 to commission study on baby bonds to be delivered for 2023 session

[5] Proposed by governor-elect

[6] Task Force conducted study in 2022

[7] Treasurer requested legislature to draft a bill for baby bonds

[8] Legislation re-introduced in 2022; note that, in 2020, Governor Murphy called on lawmakers to implement baby bonds, though budget was finalized without the necessary allocation

[9] Legislation introduced in 2021 (multiple versions)

[10] Legislation introduced in 2022; study committee established to provide recommendations for 2023 session

[11] Legislation introduced in 2021

Rebecca Drachman is an analyst at Camber Collective. Her work at Camber thus far has included several projects in the Shared Prosperity sector, including with a direct services nonprofit, large family foundation, and, most recently, state government. Before coming to Camber, Rebecca studied Psychology and Neuroscience and conducted neuro-imaging research at Yale University. She is passionate about leveraging quantitative and qualitative research approaches to solve pressing problems and elevate marginalized voices.

Marc Allen is a Director at Camber Collective and heads the firm’s Shared Prosperity portfolio. Drawing on his toolkit as a strategist and former policy attorney, Marc leads teams working to strengthen and reimagine our economic and democratic systems. His experience spans strategy and investment design, human-centered research/insights, and coalition-building services for philanthropies, government agencies, multilateral institutions, nonprofits, and socially-invested corporations. More broadly, Marc guides the effectiveness of executive teams in mission-driven organizations, helping to advance their theories of impact, program design, business models, and cultures of belonging.

The post How Baby Bonds Can Address Wealth Inequality appeared first on Camber Collective.

Opportunity youth (OY)—defined as individuals aged 16-24 who are neither in school nor in work—have become a focus of the national conversation on economic mobility for young people. 2020 Census data from the American Community Survey estimates that, of the 38 million 16-24-year-olds across the US, almost 5 million are OY.[1] This equates to more than 1 in every 8 youths nationwide being out of both school and work during a period of life that is critical for acquiring the skills and opportunities required for lifelong upward mobility.

Longstanding and systemic racial inequities in high-quality education access, employment opportunities, household stability, and justice system exposure mean that disconnection from work and school disproportionately affects BIPOC youth. Compared to non-Black youth, Black youth are 1.6 times more likely to be OY. [2] Similarly, both Native and Pacific Islander youth are 1.3 times more likely to be OY, and Hispanic youth are 1.1 times more likely to be OY, while white youth are 1.4 times less likely to be OY. Due to the heterogeneity of Asian Americans, inequities in youth connection to work and/or school are not visible on a group-level; however, youth identifying as Bangladeshi, Burmese, and Cambodian are more likely to be OY than the national average, highlighting the importance of disaggregating racial and ethnic categories.[3] On top of race and ethnicity, youth who report limited English skills[4] are 1.9 times more likely to be OY, while male youth and those residing in rural areas also face increased risk of disconnection.[5]

The issues faced by OY, and the implications of youth disconnection, are far-reaching and pertinent to diverse funders and service providers across the social sector. This is because OY aren’t just distinct from their in-school / in-work counterparts in terms of their educational and employment status; they are also typically experiencing other cross-cutting risk factors. For example, many OY are also navigating early parenthood, lack of health insurance, limited educational attainment—e.g., lack of secondary degree—, disability, and exposure to the penal and/or foster care systems.[6] Reconnecting OY to opportunities for advancement, as well as preventatively serving at-risk youth, is of critical importance to many different entities in the social sector with intersecting missions. As a result, community-based organizations, philanthropies, government initiatives and policymakers, national coalitions, and think-tanks across the country seek to help OY succeed in school and work to, ultimately, open the door to opportunity for all young people.

What do Opportunity Youth need to succeed?

In analyzing the landscape of organizations supporting opportunity youth nationwide, and in partnering with some of these organizations as strategic advisors, we have identified 4 sequential categories of needs that must be met in order for OY to experience upward economic mobility and thrive within the workforce:[7]

1. Basic needs and personal wellbeing: housing, food, physical and mental health care, trusted adults, childcare
2. Personal effectiveness and workplace competencies: interpersonal skills, job search and resume experience, basic computer and analytical thinking skills, dependability and professional
3. Vocational skills and industry competencies: stackable credentials, vocational training, industry-specific skills, on-the-job experience in industry
4. High-wage occupational requirements and management competencies: highly specialized capabilities, advanced degrees and credentials, networking and connections, access to highly upwardly mobile careers

Each step on this ladder provides the necessary foundation to enable the development of subsequent skills and competencies. For example, before a young adult can focus on showing up to work shifts on time and communicating effectively with a supervisor, it is important that they have a safe place to live and access to critical healthcare services. Similarly, refining vocational skills depends upon underlying interpersonal and workplace competencies that enable effective communication, learning, and working. Finally, industry-recognized credentials are often pre-requisites for OY to progress along upward career trajectories, as most do not have traditional 4-year degrees. This framework of needs required for upward economic mobility for OY acknowledges the barriers that these youth face and the importance of continuously establishing a strong foundation at each level to best position youth for success.

How can Opportunity Youth be best supported to climb the ladder?

When considering how to support OY along the path to upward economic mobility, it is helpful to return to this 4-step ladder. Given this wide range of needs—from emergency housing to advanced technical training—it is implausible and counter-productive for most organizations or programs to advance youth up every step of the ladder. Instead, it is more efficient and effective to develop a complementary ecosystem of organizations, each providing services to youth targeted at 1 or 2 steps of the economic ladder.

An MDRC analysis of different youth employment programs proposes two arguments in favor of this conceptualization of programs providing youth with support along different steps of the ladder.[8] First, they point to the relative brevity of most programs: “a 6- or even 12-month program is not enough to remove barriers to employment and education that have been years in the making.” By adopting distinct niches, programs can together provide youth longer-term support by “handing-off” youth along the scaffold as they move up the ladder, without implementing impractically long individual program durations. This approach also breaks down large and overwhelming hurdles for youth (e.g., challenges that may take over 5 years to fully address) into more approachable programs, thus lowering the risk of youth attrition.

The second argument put forth is that “any given program can only do so much.” It is unreasonable to expect that a given program could possess sufficiently broad and deep capabilities to specialize in serving youth at each step of the way. This is not to say that one organization could not offer a wide range of services—and in practice, many do—but rather that the guiding organizational objective should focus on just one or two steps on the ladder. Further, organizations targeting two steps of the ladder should ensure that their scope of services addresses two consecutive steps and does not omit an integral intermediate step. This approach allows programs and staff to become experts in the skills and knowledge required to deliver targeted and comprehensive support for youth at a given point on their progressive journey of economic mobility.

Through a landscape analysis of various programs involved in workforce development for OY and at-risk youth, we found most programs can be categorized as one of four archetypes, according to the step of the ladder that they prioritize for youth:

This framework for thinking about programs serving OY highlights the importance of each step, and thus each type of program. Work on either extreme of the ladder may more naturally provide the most visible or flashy impact stories (e.g., Stabilizers’ critical intervention during crisis or Accelerators’ immediate outcomes demonstrating high-paying jobs); however, the intermediate Grounder and Trainer roles are crucial in bridging the gap and bringing youth along from Stabilizer to, ultimately, Accelerator programs. By grounding services in the needs of OY, connecting specialized and focused programs in a broader ecosystem of scaffolded support, and valuing each step of the ladder to economic mobility, we can open doors of opportunity to OY for deep and sustained impact. For locally focused philanthropies and government entities, in particular, it pays to ensure that local investment is strategically planned so as to span the full spectrum of Stabilizer, Grounder, Trainer, and Accelerator service-providers, rather than picking a single OY-serving organization and expecting that organization to offer a full suite of services.

Not only are organizations playing each role—Stabilizer, Grounder, Trainer, and Accelerator—necessary in order to best serve OY; direct service organizations will also be most effective and efficient with their resources when they intentionally focus on 1-2 of these steps in the mobility ladder. Our advisory work has allowed us to test and confirm, first-hand, the reductions in cost per youth served that can be achieved over a multi-year period by strategically shifting to a more focused approach. Through refining a program’s objective, organizations will bring about both internal and external improvements, ultimately enabling greater impact for the youth they serve. Internally, prioritizing youth outcomes along 1-2 skill steps will streamline operations for codified and scalable program delivery; allow for greater specialization and deeper expertise; focus impact metrics and evaluation on most relevant youth outcomes; and guide staff and internal decisions. Externally, articulating organizational objectives in terms of the 4 archetypes creates a more cohesive story to obtain funding; incentivizes strong and intentional partnerships with other service providers; and clearly conveys the organization’s role in the broader ecosystem. These benefits will strengthen direct service providers individually, as well as the collective scaffolded support that they provide to OY.

[1] Analysis of 2020 ACS 1-year data

[2] Analysis of 2020 ACS 1-year data by dichotomous race/ethnicity variables

[3] Analysis of 2020 ACS 1-year data

[4] As compared to those who speak only English or who speak English well or very well

[5] Comparing those outside of a metropolitan area to those within

[6] Measure of America, A Decade Undone

[7] Inspired by and adapted from U.S. Department of Labor Employment & Training Administration’s tiered competency model (Competency Model Clearinghouse – Building Blocks Model (careeronestop.org))

[8] MDRC, Helping Young People Move Up

The post A Ladder to Economic Mobility for Opportunity Youth appeared first on Camber Collective.