Keeping promises

Six months into Worcester Promise, an unprecedented

campaign to help Worcester youth, the organizers assess their success.

by Kristen Lombardi

For the Promise to truly work, members must sense the urgency behind what they're trying to accomplish.

Saturday, May 16, 1998. A brilliant sun radiated above clear skies, the kind of agreeable day made for kids. And a youthful spirit was exactly what hundreds of young people brought to the city's first Youth Summit at the Worcester Centrum Centre. Teenagers commanded the stage, modeling street clothes, dancing, acting out skits. Attendees hailed the summit as "one great party" for the city's youngsters.

But the Youth Summit was billed as more than a celebration; it was the start of a highly ambitious, comprehensive initiative meant to "improve the well-being of children and youth by increasing their access to five fundamental resources." Amid the summit's fanfare, "action plans" were unveiled describing a two-year, community agenda based, in general, on national and state youth campaigns.

Enthusiasm at the summit bodes well for the agenda; indeed, an impressive crowd of 700 teens, youth workers, city officials, and corporate leaders attended the event. Six months later, those behind what's now known as Worcester Promise have managed to assemble a rare, citywide collaboration around youth issues here -- and progress has been achieved; institutions, as well as individuals, have stepped forward.

Still, the project appears precarious. Although concrete action, understandably, is slim so far, some Promise members hint at a nebulous future, one possibly resulting in revamped goals. Others respond to accountability questions with outright irritation. Even once-hopeful youth workers are finding the Promise aggravating enough to quit -- proving, it seems, just how unstable broad-based collaborations are.

Considering the effort's inherent value -- namely, bettering the quality of youngsters' lives -- it behooves Worcester Promise leaders to recognize today as critical -- not only to fulfill their goals but, ultimately, to help turn around the city's poor reputation regarding youth.

WHEN IT COMES TO YOUTH-RELATED matters, Worcester city leaders can hardly boast a stellar reputation. Youth advocates have long questioned leaders' commitment, criticizing them for the lack of a comprehensive youth-services plan, and for failing to fund structured after-school and summer programs. Critics, invariably, point to the troubles at Worcester Youth Center, particularly the arrests of three center employees during a police raid in 1997, as proof of the city's inability to address issues facing youths.

So it's not surprising youth advocates have embraced a community initiative focusing on kids, which is what Worcester Promise promotes. The Promise presents a chance for youth workers, businesspeople, city employees, and, most important, youths to discuss problems and work toward giving young people essential resources in the form of health care, education, after-school activities, adult role models, and community service.

As Worcester Promise committee member Sarah Lange-Kennedy, director of resource development at Oak Hill Community Development Corporation, explains, "The Promise isn't the same cacophony of complaints but rather a common vision for change."

The concept's rooted in the much-touted national and state movements known, respectively, as America's Promise and Massachusetts Promise. At the ceremonious President's Summit for America's Future in Philadelphia last year, General Colin Powell himself urged communities across the country to come together to assure kids have "resources available to them to lead healthy and productive lives." He identified five fundamentals the nation must concentrate on: "mentor, protect, nurture, teach, and serve." Powell's message was soon echoed by officials like Governor Paul Cellucci in Massachusetts, which became the first state to match the initiative in October 1997.

For Worcester youth advocates, the goals put forth by both national and state efforts appear relevant, even imperative to help solve the city's youth-related problems, such as crime, unemployment, and a dearth of social outlets. But many doubt the larger campaigns can make a difference locally. "A top-down, packaged approach from Washington would never be sustained here," says Stephen Coan, the Alliance for Education's director and Worcester Promise committee member. Such aspiring projects need grassroots leadership, he adds, people who understand the community, and who will likely stay committed.

With this in mind, youth workers, business leaders, city employees, and teens initiated Worcester Promise this year -- coordinating the summit to kick off the Promise's two-year agenda. The plans outline specific objectives to be implemented by year 2000: raise today's group of 740 adult mentors (coaches, tutors, role models) to 1490; create 25 new programs or "safe places" for kids; ensure health insurance for youths up to age 18; boost preschool-literacy and school-to-career opportunities; increase the number of kids working in community service by 10 percent.

Despite its larger connections, Worcester Promise has carved an identity and the result, members say, is a unique, even unprecedented collaboration. Promise leaders, for one, have made concerted attempts to reach teens. Members have hosted "listening sessions" at neighborhood centers like Henry Lee Willis and Great Brook Valley in hopes of engaging kids. And teens played the major role at the May event, not just by entertaining but by offering ideas.

Promise leaders, in addition, have branched beyond the non-profit world, linking agencies to corporations, churches, city departments, drawing on a host of people who see different aspects of the issues. Thus, acknowledging that concerns like teen pregnancy and youth violence are complicated -- instead of seeing kids as the problem. Billy Ayala, coordinator for Worcester Collaborative for Teen Health and Promise member, says, "A great dynamic is happening. People from various sectors are becoming aware of the real issues."

They're also recognizing that to solve such complex concerns, they must contribute. Although city government will always be responsible for making policies and funding services, members say, agencies and corporations can support public-sector functions by contributing money and volunteers. Lange-Kennedy explains, "It's clear that government hasn't solved the problems, and this is where the power of the Promise [lies]. Broad collaboratives lead to more creative solutions."

The fact that Worcester's actually accomplished a far-reaching partnership is a feat, members say. What Promise leaders have done, in essence, is mobilize agencies beyond self-interest for the sake of youth. Even Massachusetts Promise director Martha Morkan considers the extent of Worcester Promise "amazing," adding that, "To have these groups recognize that this is about kids is a big deal."

Worcester, in fact, boasts one of the largest "promises," as they're called. Even though 15 communities have taken on similar efforts, Morkan says, Worcester, along with Springfield, has become a front-runner - partly because it's adopted the "lofty" national and state program, and partly because it's tried to be so inclusive.

Ultimately, she adds, Worcester Promise could lead to partnerships "that institutionalize change."

WORCESTER PROMISE participants know the value of forging connections -- so much so the term "new partnerships" is basic to their agenda. But members have pledged more than cooperation; they've vowed to enhance existing youth services.

Jean Strock, vice-president of community service and volunteer development at United Way of Central Massachusetts and a Promise member, says, "Fundamental to [this] is that we expand on what's strong; we didn't want to wipe the slate clean and start anew."

Now six months into the campaign, Promise members are taking initial steps by reviewing plans, setting timelines, pinpointing what can be done outright. Since teens have suggested that they don't know of the city's services, members say, the Promise can "close gaps," in part, by informing kids. The Worcester Promise committee -- a group of 30 that coordinates task forces and oversees progress -- is determining how to spread the word by hiring a marketing firm. They may launch a Web page listing youth activities, for instance, or install kiosks at area malls.

Meanwhile, task forces are collecting information for a sweeping "inventory" of youth services -- which, perhaps, is more germane to fulfilling goals. Members say the endeavor, albeit sizable and tedious, will better reveal disparities like underserved neighborhoods. For some task forces, the inventory is considered critical. Take the "protect" group, which is charged with devising 25 additional programs that offer kids safe places, such as evening church-based activities. The task force must invent age-appropriate programs, says protect's chair, Lange-Kennedy; to do this, she adds, "We need to know what's out there and what isn't." Likewise, in attempts to double the number of adult mentors, the "mentor" group's compiling a published guide -- partly to get a "clear picture" of services, and partly to use for recruitment.

Not all task forces are in the midst of surveys, though. Take the "nurture" group, which is trying to enroll youngsters in health care. Since the state augmented public health-insurance coverage last year, members say, there's no reason why each Worcester kid can't be covered. "We're lucky because the pieces are in place," says Frances Anthes, the Family Health Center's director and nurture cochair. Unlike other task forces, the group doesn't have to find resources; it just needs to "get out the word." Nurture members have yet to decide promotional strategies -- strategies, they say, will be discussed at a December meeting of health-care providers, school nurses, and day-care directors.

As task forces plod along, Promise leaders keep gathering what they call "commitments" -- or, more aptly, the money and manpower needed to achieve their goals. They've collected an impressive list, considering the initiative's fairly new. Non-profit agencies have stepped forward. Take the Boy Scouts of America, which contributed to the mentor goal by offering 400 new mentors for teenage boys. Or the YMCA of Greater Worcester, now developing a Lincoln Village after-school program that is certain to aid the protect plan. United Way has also set up a 1-800 hotline to link volunteers to agencies, thereby assisting the serve plan.

Much like non-profits, city officials have assured that they'll improve ongoing efforts relating to the Promise, such as the public schools' school-to-career programs, as well as an expansion of city services; they just added 500 jobs to youth summer-employment programs, and increased the community-schools fiscal 1999 budget by $13,000. Recently, the city received $300,000 from the state to create a pilot program for the protect plan.

Perhaps the most noticeable support so far has come from corporations and foundations. Indeed, BankBoston's donated $300,000 to youth services to bolster the protect plan, and another $18,500 to Worcester State College for its Career Beginnings program, a school-to-career effort targeting at-risk teenagers. Fleet Bank's established a tutoring center as part of the teach plan. And Greater Worcester Community Foundation's earmarked $10,000 for additional mentors, as well as another $40,000 to health-care agencies to help the nurture plan.

The commitments are encouraging, for sure -- a testament to the community's willingness to accept this challenge. Yet when Worcester Promise members talk about the initiative's future, it becomes apparent that such broad-based collaborations are tenuous, at best.

One thing remaining unclear is the role each segment of the community will play in advancing the plans -- and how ready Promise leaders are to ask for heightened involvement. This is especially true when it comes to the city administration, which everyone, including city officials, agrees is crucial for success. Right now, the Promise taps into an array of city services, gets occasional planning assistance from Mayor Raymond Mariano's office, and has a few city officials on its committee.

"We have the number twos in city government at the table, which shows we're making appropriate connections," says Richard Myers, BankBoston's vice-president of corporate and community affairs, who chairs the Promise committee.

Even so, the city isn't as involved with each task force as it could be -- or as some would like, anyway. Members concede they haven't been "clear" with city leaders, but they detect ways in which the city can step up its commitment, particularly with funds and policies. Yet if some members hope to solicit certain support from the city, others seem hesitant to do so, claiming Promise and city leaders are beginning to discuss a "shared vision."

Then, there's the matter of defined objectives. Promise members are optimistic the plans will be fully implemented by year 2000, considering task forces are still meeting. But there are cautious types who note that the task forces drafted the plans quickly and, in hindsight, goals may be too ambitious, too unrealistic.

"The truth is we may not achieve [them]," Strock admits. "We are stretching ourselves, which is the point of setting goals. It remains to be seen whether we can carry them through."

Finally, while members are well aware of the public promises they made to young people, (They did, after all, declare the summit THE START OF SOMETHING BIGGER.) there's a seeming reluctance to discuss accountability. The Worcester Promise committee is charged with making sure task forces, which mainly consist of volunteers, carry out plans. To aid oversight, the United Way even assigned staff people like Strock to the group. But in reality, members say, the committee is more a clearinghouse; as one agency director points out, "Broad collaboration is important, but the realistic effectiveness of oversight is another issue."

Perhaps this explains why some members bristle at the mere suggestion that the committee holds people responsible: "This wasn't a contract we signed," insists James Caradonio, Worcester Public Schools deputy superintendent and a committee member. "There isn't anything saying that by year 2000, you have to meet these goals."

Maybe so. But for youth workers like Sean Harris of Worcester Community Action Council, this kind of attitude is what leads him to doubt the Promise, especially since Worcester's already hosted fanfare events, then declined to follow up. "This could be another dog-and-pony show," he says. "People think they're doing a good job because they meet all the time, but I want to see something tangible."

Even once-enthusiastic youth advocates -- in particular, those who work directly with kids -- are starting to grumble about the pace -- or, in their eyes, the lack of it. And they're discouraged that the Promise committee has chosen to focus on what they call "superficial" tactics like mall kiosks, rather than push for things bound to make differences for inner-city kids, such as getting more public schools to stay open at night. A growing number of youth workers are so frustrated, they're dropping out. As one Plumley Village Health Center outreach worker, who asked not to be named, says, "Worcester Promise is supposed to be a community project, but all the community workers are leaving the table."

Another outreach worker, also requesting anonymity, notes the unexpected departure of T&G publisher Bruce Bennett, who used to chair the Promise committee, then surmises, "Watching people like Bennett step down makes you feel something is wrong. . . . If high-profile people are dropping out, why shouldn't you?"

PROMISE LEADERS are frank about the downside of expansive collaborations. There's little question that joint projects can become unwieldy, even ineffective, they say; and those made up almost entirely of volunteers are at a greater risk of falling apart. "With a loose coalition, there is always the threat of losing control," Lange-Kennedy says.

But if grassroots workers are disgruntled now, it may just be a matter of time before young people themselves lose faith -- and such an outcome, leaders agree, would be anything but success.

This is exactly why some advocates suggest that the Promise concentrate on getting the city's high-profile leaders on board immediately. The city's support for youth has long concerned advocates, they say; and so if Mariano or City Manager Thomas Hoover were to serve on the Promise committee, it would lend visibility to the campaign and, more important, prove to the public that the city's a vested player.

Besides, as Ayala says, the planning table is where city leaders belong because they alone have "the power to change policies."

Even though a precedent exists, with the Massachusetts Promise advisory board, where influential politicians like Cellucci, John Kerry, and Edward Kennedy sit, Worcester city leaders aren't likely to copy it. In officials' eyes, the city's embraced the Promise since it began -- by assigning employees to its committee, and by making good on pledges. "The city's involvement is substantial," says Stephen Willand, director of the Office of Employment and Training (OET) and a Promise member.

For the first time ever, officials add, Hoover's made "improved services for youth" one of four administration priorities. In submitting his fiscal 1999 goals to city council last month, he outlined seven strategies for bettering youth services. For example, the OET will give another 300 jobs to kids in summer-employment programs -- if it receives enough federal funds. Parks and Recreation will keep implementing its existing programs. And police officers will teach DARE to all third and fifth-graders, as well as "law-related education" to all juniors and seniors.

For officials, Hoover's youth agenda complements the Worcester Promise and, most significant, shows that the city's ready to intensify its commitment to young people. "The agenda sends a clear message that Hoover takes youth seriously, that he wants his performance to be measured," says Paul Lacava, an employee with the Office of Planning and Community Development and a Promise member.

Similarly, Mariano describes himself as an "active" Promise supporter, ticking off his contributions. Promise leaders asked him to speak at the summit; he did. They've asked to meet with him on occasion; he has. If he isn't officially on the Promise committee now, Mariano says, it's because he's not been invited. "I would serve in any capacity they ask of me."

But, Mariano concludes, the Promise is meant to be a community collaboration so, "The mayor shouldn't lead the effort."

There are, of course, practical ways to keep the Promise not only together but effectively managed -- namely, coordination. Right now, the Promise organizes its various efforts through United Way staff, yet while these six employees are well-intentioned, they have to handle Promise responsibilities on top of professional workloads. To better monitor implementation, Promise leaders might consider hiring a full-time director, which is the case for both the state and Springfield.

In the end, Promise leaders may need to acknowledge apparent indications that organization is slipping; because, beyond the mass of individuals working on plans, the city's youngsters continue to confront grave problems. Like visible signs of escalating violence on Main Street. And Worcester's persistently high teen-pregnancy rates. And incessant gripes from inner-city kids that they have "nothing to do."

For the Promise to truly work, members must sense the urgency behind what they're trying to accomplish. As advocates like Ayala note, the Promise offers potential for real change -- change that might reverse the city's poor reputation on youth.

"We can do this if we stay together," he says but warns, "If we start to look like we're defeated. . . Hello!"