Youth Today: Affordable, Accessible, Appropriate

By Karen Pittman, April 1999

Reduced Crime. Averted pregnancies. Improved grades. Reassured parents. Engaged youth. That’s five good reasons to support after-school programming for children and youth. We do not need more research to document what every parent knows: Our youth need caring people to talk to, safe places to go, healthy possibilities to explore. To the extent that we aggressively provide them with these basic supports, we increase the chances that youth stay on the paths that we lay out for them. To the extent that we leave these things to chance, or put the full burden for arranging and paying for these supports on parents, we increase the chances that youth problems will increase and youth preparation will suffer.

Young people will find people to talk to, places to go, possibilities to explore. When for the sake of efficiency or economy we close schools, neglect recreational facilities, under-staff libraries, under-fund community organizations and undervalue the importance of youth employment and service opportunities, we reduce the positive options available to families. Too often the result is that families, in order to protect their children, force them to stay home.

Baltimore-based Advocates for Children and Youth has a response to address this problem. It has forged an effort this year to draft two pieces of legislation: The Maryland After-School Opportunity Fund (HB 6 and SB 632) and the Income Tax for Dependent Care and After-School Opportunity Expenses (HB 7 and SB 631).

The Opportunity Fund, slated for $10 million in FY2001, is just that — a fund accessible by any current or potential provider. It will be administered by the Department of Human Resources through an advisory board that is authorized to review and recommend program standards, request proposals and grant award criteria. It requires a comprehensive plan that ensures that the effort strengthens existing programs and addresses critical issues such as transportation, information, facilities location and quality that are often the reasons why parents don’t use services. It brings focused, collaborative attention and monitoring to an issue that is touted as the solution to the problems of parents, police, teachers, youth workers and child care providers.

The Income Tax Credit is equally well crafted. Under the current federal tax credit program, low-income families who do not pay taxes cannot seek refunds. And for tax-paying families, support is available only for children under 13, leaving parents on their own to provide after-school opportunities through the critical high school years. Under the proposed state legislation, thousands of working parents will receive a state tax credit of 20 percent of their expenses for childcare and after-school care. Those already receiving the federal tax credit will see their refunds doubled. Those receiving no federal credits will get help for the first time. The operative word here is tax credit — a dollar for dollar reimbursement rather than a tax deduction, which is what Maryland currently provides families.

This may sound like complex legalese. But the bottom line is that parents get more support and service providers get more funding. This type of legislation is long overdue in Maryland and around the country. It addresses the key problems of affordability and access directly.

It is cruel to put families in the position of deciding which of their children get after-school care because they can’t afford to provide it to all. And it is irresponsible to let the infrastructure for community-based after-school supports become so tattered that even when programs are affordable they are unattractive, particularly to the middle and high school students who are so often the object of our concerns. This programming will not be a magic bullet that raises test scores, reduces crime and averts pregnancies. But a sustainable after-school system, operating at scale, held accountable to basic practice principles of youth development, can ensure that young people have the kinds of places to go, people to talk to and possibilities to explore what we and they want.

_______________
Pittman, K. (1999, April). "Affordable, Accessible, Appropriate." Washington, DC: The Forum for Youth Investment. A version of this article appears in Youth Today.

Karen Pittman is executive director of the Forum for Youth Investment.