Enhancing Social Service to At-Risk Children

The Children, Youth & Families Issue Group, part of the University ofRhode Island's Cooperative Extension Service, has provided education outreach and technical assistance to community based social service providers since 1990. In an effort to enhance the effectiveness of the programming which they provide the group initiated a research project designed to illuminate strategies for increasing the effectiveness of community-based service provision. This study uses the theory of developmental contextualism as presented by Dr. Richard Lerner to suggest ways in which service providers can enhance their effectiveness by understanding the particular context of their community. The study focuses on two Rhode Island communities which were identified as being at-risk by Cooperative Extension; these communities are Pawtucket and West Warwick, Rhode Island. Demographic data pertaining to these communities as well as a sample of social services available are considered. An analysis of the service provided in each community is also presented. Recommendations for enhancing community service provision are based on the theory developmental contextualism applied as the development-in-context evaluation (DICE) model by Dr. Richard Lerner.


TABLE OF ILLUSTRATIONS
under what was found to be the three major areas of concern for these communities, poverty, negative peer pressure, and lack of family support . The at-risk populations identified were found to share a combination of the following characteristics: • low income, often single parent, female-headed households • minority, particularly black and Hispanic • having limited English proficiency • being a member of a family which fails to instill a strong sense of values and self worth or to provide positive reinforcement for its children • residing in neighborhoods where a relatively small proportion of the resident majority population send their children to public schools • being members of families and school districts with low aggregate levels of educational attainment and high rates of school drop-out The programmatic mission of the University of Rhode Island Cooperative Extension Children, Youth and Families Issue Group is to provide the following assistance to these, and other, at-risk communities.
• Provide current, research based information, technical assistance and educational programming for children, youth, and families and groups focused on the development of human potential, family well-being and leadership development skills.
• Address youth and family issues by initiating educational outreach programs and networking, to foster cooperation, partnerships, and coalitions. In order to enhance the effectiveness of the " Issue Group" in meeting their goals the work of applied developmental scientists such as Dr, Lerner has been reflected upon. Fostering colearning and community empowerment through the promotion of an ecologically-based program design the following results can be generated .
• The creation of cohesive educational community based outreach program policies that promote the use of participatory and normative (value-based) evaluations of programs at the community level . 5 • The design of a theoretical model for replication to additional outreach community based program development in Rhode Island Communities.
• Future policy development guidelines for R1 Youth & Families that include; collaborative relationships, programs effective in promoting positive youth and family development, increases community participation and diversity, and long term program sustainability through community empowerment .
These positive outcomes could not only improve the effectiveness of Cooperative Extensions ' outreach assistance but may also improve the lives of many children, youth, and family members in Rhode Island ' s most .at-risk communities.

Literature Review
Several social scientists have addressed the need for an ecological or contextual approach to the problems associated with at-risk children and families . This report will be based primarily on the work of three researchers in this field , Richard M. Lerner, Urie Bronfenbrenner,  • Who's voices must be included in the program and evaluation • What are the most salient issues in the minds of the stakeholders • What specific evaluation tools are appropriate for the community The goal of a DICE model is to work collaboratively with the relevant stakeholders to identify and describe the problem, articulate program goals, and identify the questions the community wants answered . The involvement of the community in all stages of program development adds a new asset to the community which can result in sustained community change; • The stakeholders ability to make better informed decisions about their community is enhanced .
• The ability of the stakeholders and local agencies to develop/implement programs will be enhanced .
• The program itself, collectively implemented, is an added asset to the community.
The DICE model features a colearning approach, where the community eventually takes control of their own outcomes. The DICE model also focuses on the relationships that exist between children and the social system they exist in, that is; family members, schools, peers, neighbors, etc. It should be noted, however, that programs can not be designed as one shot "inoculations" to protect and guide the development of children within their systems. Programs must be long term, life-span orientated, convoys of social support, designed to reinforce and further the positive elements of youth programs (Lerner, 1995). Programs designed in this way must factor in the changing nature of children during the study time frame According to Lerner, the goal of any DICE based program should be for the members of the community to eventually take control of the implementation and evaluation functions, formerly conducted by outside researchers. The essence of a truly effective and contextual program is the reownership and empowerment of a community. 1. Positive child and youth development can be promoted by reducing risks and promoting protective factors in a young persons environment.
2. The most effective interventions attempt to influence risk and protective factors at multiple levels including family, peers, school, work, neighborhood, and community.
3. Community assessment will make it possible for interventions to focus on actual risks as opposed to assumed risks .
4 . The more risks a young person faces, the more likely he or she is to experience negative developmental outcomes such as underachievement, school drop-out , substance abuse, and teen pregnancy.
The risk-focused ecological model suggests that comprehensive, community-based efforts are needed to prevent the problems young people face The most effective prevention programs will assess risk factors and protective factors at each level of the child ' s ecology and then target programs to the gaps that exist (Bogenschneider et al;.

Methods and Procedures
The first step in the research process was to become familiar with research previously conducted on the subject of participatory normative evaluation models.

CHAPTER TWO DEMOGRAPHICS
Demographic data for each locality must be collected and analyzed before an 12 assessment of community services can begin. This is done so that a clear picture of the two communities can be drawn and a basis for further data collection can be established . " Children grow up, not in isolation, but in ever-widening environments.
Children are influenced first and foremost by their families but also by their peers. their school and work settings, and the community in which they live. Development has no single cause; rather multiple factors working together shape development" (Bogenschneider et al) . Therefore, data on many different areas in the lives of the children and families of Pawtucket and West Warv.ick has been compiled . The acknowledgment of the interrelations within children's development is at the heart of the ecological approach . That is, each area of developing childrens lives affect the other areas of their lives, and the lives of others around them .
This chapter consists of three major sections . The first sectidn contains general demographic information for the communities of Pawtucket and West Warwick, Rhode Island. Information regarding population, family income, educational attainment, etc., will be presented side by side for comparison . The second section contains demographic data specific to the children of Pawtucket and West Warwick .
These data are compared to state-wide child demographics so that the degree of difference or similarity between the two communities can be judged. The final section consists of general conclusions that can be drawn from the information presented in the previous sections.

General Demographics
Pawtucket is a city of 72,644 persons located at the strategic falls of the       The age cohort size of families and parents whom may require social services can be determined through age distribution analysis . Specific data regarding children at risk has been included in the second section of this chapter.
Educational attainment is another important factor to consider when analyzing the demographics of the communities. Pawtucket is a community where in 61 .6% of the population have a high school diploma or higher, and 13 . 1 % have a bachelor's degree or higher.  Educational attainment levels may significantly impact the household and family income levels earned by the population; the median household income in Pawtucket was $26,541 per year in 1990.

Section Ill. Demogra(!hics of Children.
Due to the nature of the programming provided by the Children, Youth & Families Issue Group, demographics specific to children must be analyzed . The Census defines children as all persons under the age of 18. Table 8  Pawtucket has a higher percentage of minority children than the state at 16.2%, while West Warwick has a much lower percentage of 34%. COUNT Factbook, p. 14). Table 9 displays the number of children living in poverty in each community, as well as the number of children under the age of six in the city who are living in poverty. West Warwick ' s birth-to-teen rate was 26 .2, which was less than the state-wide rate (see Table 11) Receiving a High School diploma may be one of the most vital factors in the development of a child. Children who receive a quality education are more likely to grow into capable, self-sufficient adults who contribute to their communities" (1996 These data show that Pawtucket has a much higher percentage students with LE.P .
than West Warwick, and a graduation rate 20 percentage points lower than that of the state.
One factor that may influence the graduation rate for these communities is the number of children enrolled in the Head Start program. "Head Start is a comprehensive early-childhood development program for low-income preschool children (primarily ages three to five) and their families . Head Start program components include education, parent involvement, social services, health and nutrition, and mental health services. These services help low-income children acquire the readiness skills they need in order to enter the public school system on an "equal F coting" with more economically advantaged children" ( 1996 Rhode Island KIDS COUNT Factbook, p.60). Table 13 indicates the percentage of eligible children The combined benefits of these programs for a three person family in this state is $822 per month . "Income support programs such as AFDC and Food Stamps have a significant impact on the ability of poor families to provide food, shelter, and clothing for their children. While AFDC and Food Stamp benefits do not prevent a famil y from falling below the poverty line, they provide a minimal subsistence for poor families" (1996 Rhode Island KIDS COUNT Factbook, p. 18).
The supplemental food program known as WIC (Women, Infants, and Children) is another source of assistance for the children and families of these communities. The program serves pregnant, postpartum, and breast feeding women, as well as women with children under the age of fi ve. " the General Accounting Office has estimated that for every dollar spent in the WIC program, $3 .30 is saved in federal , state, and local government program benefits for the new child ' s first eighteen years" (Schneider 1995, p. 56).   than West Warwick (7%) and the state as a whole (8 .5%) . Consequently, Pawtucket also has the highest percentage of minority children of the three populations.
Minorities make-up 16% of Pawtucket's child population (4% higher than the state), where as West Warwick has a minority child population percentage of only 3 A% This is significant because maiiy risk behaviors have been found to be more pronounced among minority populations (Lerner, 1995)  These data indicate a need for social services in both communities. Although West Warwick seems to be less at-risk than Pawtucket the community is still one of the states ten most at-risk localities. The next chapter outlines the theoretical framework on which the recommendations of this study are based; this is the theory of  (Lerner, 1995) This chapter outlines the concept of developmental contextualism and presents the key elements of the DICE model.

Developmental Contextualism
Developmental contextualism stresses that bi-directional relations exist among the multiple levels of organization involved in human life, e.g , biology, psychology, social groups, and culture (Bronfenbrenner, 1977) The changes that occur in these relations over time constitute the behavior and development of individuals.
Developmental contextualism views these relationships as dynamically interactive, i.e , they are reciprocally influential over the course of human development. Within this perspective, the context for development is not seen as merely as a simple stimulus environment, but rather as an ecological environment (Lerner, 1995). Therefore, children have come to be understood as active producers of their own development.

2S
"These contributions primarily occur through the reciprocal relations individuals have with other significant people in their contexts: for example, children with family members, caregivers, teachers, and peers" (Lerner 1995, p. 17) Parents and their children have significant reciprocal effects on each others development. Children stimulate different reactions in their parents, and these reaction provide the basis of feedback to the children (Schneirla, 1957) However, these relationships do not exist in isolation, both the child and the parent have other social roles which influence their development and in turn influence the development of one another. " The sorts of relationships in these other social networks in which children and parent engage when outside of their roles of child or parent, respectively, can be expected to influence the parent-child relationship" (Bronfenbrenner, 1977) The core idea in developmental contextualism is that the individual and his or her context can not be separated, both are fused together throughout the lifespan. Research designed to address the issues faced by children, youth, and families must recognize the complexity of these relationships in order to be effective Failure to do so may result in inadequate research and application. " That is, research inattentive to the complexity of per~on context relations will be deficient in that either it will fail to appreciate the substantive nature of individual, familial , or relationship variation, and/or it will mistakenly construe variation around some (potentially significant inapplicable) mean level as, at best, error variance, that is, differences that are at random and nonmeaningful" (Lerner 1995, p.32). This situation may result in programming which is insufficient to meet the needs of the persons it has been designed to serve.

Implications for Programming
Fostering the attributes of positive youth development can not be successfully done by a single person, family, or institution . All segments of the community must collaborate in the raising of America's youth (Lerner, 1995). The changing characteristics of the American family, (i e., divorce, working parents) lend further support to this theory. Families need support from other sectors of their communities to both promote positive development of youth, and to prevent the actualization of risk factors facing today's families Community based programs can make several potential contributions to positive youth development. According to the Carnegie Corporation of New York ( 1992) these contributions can include; • Providing opportunities for youth to engage in positive social relationships with peers and adults.
• Teaching youth important life skills such as goals setting, teamwork, problem solving, and communication.
• Offering youth opportunities to make contributions to their communities.
• Providing youth with a sense of being part of a positive group experience.
• Facilitating a sense of seff-competence among youth Unfortunatley, many community based programs are underfunded, under staffed, have low staff morale, and lack specific training . Furthermore, many of their services are aimed at only one of the interrelated set of problems confronting youth, rather than the co-occurance of problems and risk behaviors (Carnegie Corp ., 1992).
Several researchers have reviewed the results of evaluations of youth programs aimed at addressing the risk factors facing America's youth, these researchers include Dtyfoos ( 1990), Schorr ( 1988), Little ( 1993 ), and Hamburg ( 1992). Each of the researchers have indicated the following social institutions as being vital to adolescent development and successful prevention programs: family, peer groups, workplace, and school. Other components of successful programs include programming which is sensitive to the individual needs of the clientele. This requires non-bureaucratic. userfri endly service provision (Schorr, 1988) This focus on individual attention coincides with a key element of development in contextualism which is active client participation. Furthermore, focus on the individual allows a programs to have a preventive orientation. " Through a focus on the individual and his or her distinctive needs, a program may be able to strengthen and empower the person for long-term, healthy development" (Little, 1993).
In the vein of developmental contex1ualism, , and Hamburg (1992) have indicated that programs should not promote the separate focus on mental health, public health, social service, and educational issues. " Rather, pr<?grams and policies should promote an integrated, case management approach to services" (Dtyfoos, 1990). Little ( 1993) supports this assertion and adds that the vast majority of youth-serving programs reach only very small numbers of youth. However, programs which grow in scale (i e., number of youth served) do so through integrative partnering (Little, 1993) .
In order to address these issues in the application and evaluation of programs a participatory -normative approach could be taken. A value-based, normative approach to evaluation which engages the community, and especially the youth and famil y program participants in the design, implementation, and analysis of the evaluation, empowers the community and enhances the efficacy of the program (Weiss and Greene, 1992). According to Weiss and Greene (1992) a participatory and normative approach to evaluation; • Builds 011 the values and meaning system of the youth, families, and other stakeholder groups in the commu11ity • Engages this commu11ity coalitio11 as active participants (partners) i11 the evaluation • Enhances the capacity of the community partners to themselves identify, organize. and use their assets to conduct planned actions to attain goals they value.
This participatory-normative approach to evaluation serves to counteract the often uninformed, and disempowering nature characteristic of many evaluations of youth and family serving programs (Lerner, 1995). The approach enfranchises commun;ty stakeholders as full partners in programming decisions. " Simply, a participatorynormative approach to evaluation is a value-added component to an intervention that, through the collaborative conduct of the evaluation, the capacity of the community stakeholders to better direct their own future development in enhanced" (Lerner 1995 , p.83) .

The Development-in-Contextualism Evaluation (DICE) Model
The DICE Model builds on the idea of promoting social development and change through the use of a participatory-normative evaluation. The model is based upon the following maxims; • Think holistically or contextually, make no distinctions between the program and the context in which it occurs • Include as many voices or stakeholders as possible, especially those from different points of the life-~pan

• Focus on the actions involved informing effective programs
• Realize that reality is complex and socially constructed

• Build evaluation into the day to day function of every program.
To implement these ideas programs must be built from the "inside out", that is to focus on solutions within the community. Rather than focusing on the needs and deficiencies of a community, programs should begin with a clear commitment to discovering a communities capacities and assets (Lerner, 1995). Programs which focus on their clients problems and the value of the " service" provided for them can cause people to view themselves as people with special needs dependent on outside assistance. Island . The sampling of service providers was based in part on a directOfy of senJices prepared by Cooperative Extensions' Individuals, Youth and F amities Issue Group in 1992. A discrepancy analysis was conducted based on the information regarding the function and clientele of the agencies sampled . Data was also gathered through personal and telephone interviews with the service providers themselves .

Community Service Providers: Pawtucket Blackstone Valley Community Action Program
This non-profit, community based agency provides social and health services for community residents and senior citizens, including counseling and work experience. Spanish, Portuguese, and French is spoken. The programs are available to clientele from the Pawtucket area, no fees are charged . Street Address: 129 School Street Pawtucket, RI . 02860 401-723-4520

Community Counseling Center
This community center provides counseling for substance abuse, sexual and physical abuse, and for ACOA (Adult Children of Alcoholics) The agency provides crises intervention facilities, outreach programs for children to prevent abuse and neglect.
The agency also provides alternative educational programs for behaviorally and

Discrepancy Analysis
In order to gain a comprehensive understanding of the various services The subjective nature of these data must be stressed before analyzing this graph. Risk factors such as low self esteem and negative peer pressure are often indirectly addressed by various programs. In other words, an agency's goal may not be to increase self esteem but that may occur as an outcome of their actions Therefore, many programs/agencies included in the data have been given credit for addressing risk factors that they may not have explicitly attempted to counter-act. This situation may be responsible for the fact that most number of agencies address low self esteem according to the data. A large number of agencies also address drug abuse, negative peer pressure, and lack of family support. It should be emphasized that these are often overlapping risk factors (as are many risk factors) . Health problems are the focus of half of the agencies and programs sampled in Pawtucket . The category of risk factors labeled health problems includes mental and behavioral problems, medical ailments, and substance addiction treatment. There are also many programs and agencies in Pawtucket that address literacy and educational problems, which are often one and the same problem. The growing Hispanic population of Pawtucket (see Chapter Two) warrants the provision of these services, aimost half the agencies studied offer some sort of literacy assistance. Domestic violence and unemployment are addressed equally by the agencies considered in Pawtucket . Four of the ten agencies had programs for either victims of domestic violence, or unemployed persons. There are two risk factors that do not appear to be directly controlled for according to the data, these are sexually transmitted diseases (S .T.D ' s) and street crime. Although many of the agencies offer some form of health services, none of the ten studied directly treat sexually transmitted diseases. Only two of the ten agencies or programs address street crime directly. This only means that there mission statement or stated goals do not include these items, they may indirectly control for these risk factors .
Like Pawtucket, the sample data show that majority of the services available to the people of West Warwick address the problems of low self esteem, negative peer pressure, and lack of family support. The subjective nature of these categories partially explains the dominance of these risk factors in community services .
However, programs geared toward the problems of children at-risk often address these vital areas .
Exhibit 3  This statement may indicate that unemployment counseling and skills training could be enhanced in these communities in order to further assist at-risk families

Sun,ey Findings
The following data are the results of telephone interviews conducted with the service providers sampled in Pawtucket and West Warwick. Qualitative data gathered during the survey process has illuminated facts that would not have been identified through the use of the community asset matrix alone. The surveys were designed to gather several different pieces of data ranging from descriptive to quantitative in nature. This information was useful in reinforcing the data gathered for the previous sections.
The nature of the opening questions regarded the name, location, and function of the service provider, as well as which groups they were attempting to serve. In many of these cases this information was already known, however it is often useful to hear this information from the agency first hand . Table 18 displays the data regarding which group or groups the agency being surveyed was attempting to serve. Both communities focus much of their social service provision on minorities.
However, West Warwick also has a significant amount of service provision directed toward children. These data have been graphically presented for comparison in Exhibits 4 and 5. Parents, teenagers, and children were the second most served groups according to the survey. Homeless, jobless, and drop-outs were the three most undeserved groups in both communities.
The function of the agencies sampled have been tabulated in a similar manner It should be noted that there is some overlap in agency function , i.e., most agencies have many functions and they often overlap with other agencies. The three most common functions of the agencies in both communities was counseling, drug and alcohol add iction treatment , and health service provision In Pawtucket there is also a significant amount of agencies which provide emergency shelter and skills training which are not provided at the same level in West Warwick Exhibits 6 and 7 graphically illustrate the data for Pawtucket and West Warwick

46
Developmental contextualism stresses that diversity and context should be the focus of both research and outreach efforts . To that end intensive, individualized attention should be given to the participants of community based programs (Lerner, 1995) Enhanced client participation may help service providers to realize th e specific motivations, interests, aspirations, and needs of their clientele. Furthermore. client involvement in the evaluation and decision making process empowers individuals to take control over programs which are in place in their communities. Such empowerment can serve to enhance the sustainability and the effectiveness of programming As mentioned in chapter four only four of the thirteen community agencies surveyed utilize some form of client input mechanism . These agencies are as follows; Community Counseling Center, Inc , Providence Head Start, Barton Street Community Center, and Kent County Mental Health. It is there for recommended that the remaining community agencies be encouraged to engage their clientele in some form of feedback/input process. The Children, Youth & Families Issue Group may be able to provide suggestions for various methods possible to gain input from community program participants.
The data analyzed in chapter four also suggests that many of the community programs sampled focus on the remediation and/or treatment of risk behaviors rather than focusing on positive youth development. By taking this approach programs may be acting as little more than "Band-Aids" to problems which have developed at earlier stages of their clients ' development. To remedy this situations Little ( 1993) suggests that programs could shift their efforts to enhancing the following characteristics in their young clientele; • Competence: Developing practical skills to sustain and improve the quality if their lives such as, literacy, employability, vocational/academic skills ...
• Connecuon: Pi emoting the development of caring human relationships through mentoring, peer tutoring, community service ...
• Character: Promoting the values that give meaning and direction to the lives of children and adolescents. E.g., honesty, equity, courage, pride, and hope .
• Confidence: Providing experiences that lead to hope and self-esteem .
Examples of agencies which focus on these characteristics in Pawtucket and West Warwick are the Cunningham School Child Opportunity Zone (COZ), Channel One, and Projecto Esparanza. These programs and agencies develop practical skills and positive values at various stages during the life-cycle of their clientele. These programs are not simply designed to counsel individuals on risk behaviors which has already become problematic. However, it should be stressed that the agencies which do provide such counseling are also extremely important to these communities. They should, in my opinion, be used as a second line of defense against risk behaviors, the first line being early intervention programs.

Promote the Integration of Services
The separate focus on mental health, social service, drug counseling, educational issues, etc., may detrimental to the effectiveness the various community services. It has been suggested by researchers such as Hamburg ( 1992), and Schorr (1988) that an integrated, case management approach to services may be a more effective strategy. The partnering of service providers can solve the problem of one client or family being " served" by several disconnected agencies and programs (Little, 1993) This approach may also utilize the already scarce funding for these services more efficiently Another reason for the integration of services is the interrelatedness of high-risk behaviors. " As noted by , I 0% of all 10-17 year-olds in America engage in behaviors associated with all four major categories of high-risk behaviors, i.e., drug and alcohol abuse, unsafe sex, school failure, and delinquency and crime" (Lerner 1995, p78) . Therefore, a package of services may be needed within each community experiencing high-risk behavioral problems. Kent County Mental Health is an example of an agency surveyed which provides many services throughout the community. The agency is responsible for several health service programs as well as day care programs in the Echo Valley and Elm Street public housing projects However, these services are not integrated into one program, they are instead fragmented throughout several programs. The matrix (Exhibit I) presented in chapter four also illustrates the duplication of services in Pawtucket and West Warwick. For example, seven agencies between the two communities provide drug and alcohol abuse counseling. Three of these programs are located in Pawtucket and four are located in West Warwick. It may be possible to integrate some of these programs with programs designed to address other, related risk behaviors. A program designed to enhance youths ' self esteem and resistance to negative peer pressure could be combined with one of the four drug and alcohol counseling programs in West Warwick. This type of inter-risk factor integration could strengthen the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of service provision in these communities.
Public schools may also oe key institutions w~ich need to be integrated into the fabric of community service provision. Presently, schools are failing to provide for the complex health, social, and cognitive needs of youth (Lerner, 1995) This failure, according to Dryfoos ( 1994) and Lerner ( 1994) is derived in part from three interrelated problems; • first , schools are not adequately addressing the high-risk behaviors engaged in by today ' s youth • second, the increasing prevalence of poverty is both diminishing the resources available to schools and adding to the stress of the students and parents, • finally, schools are not integrated into the community in regards to other youth serving programs and institutions. 50 It should be noted that public schools were never intended to offer these kinds of social services and have not failed in fulfilling their task of educating youth. The concept of full-service schools represents the integration of these services with public schools.
" Such schools involve, then, in a fully integrated manner (a) community-wide, multiagency collaborations, (b) involving a full range of social services (e.g., health centers, vocational guidance and career development programs, and counseling services), which are (c) embedded within schools but are administered by the collaborating nonschool agencies; and use (d) citizen input and volunteerism" (Lerner 1995, p. 95) .
The Child Opportunity Zone (COZ) concept, currently being applied at the Cunningham Elementary School in Pawtucket, may be a step toward this type of integrated service provision .. The COZ offers programs ranging from day care to adult education to the residents of the Woodlawn neighborhood in Pawtucket. Although, the services offered are not as diverse as those found in full-service schools it is an attempt at integrated service provision.

51
"Promoting positive individual and social development and change through the incorporation of participatory evaluation into program design and implementation is precisely what is considered within a developmental contextual view of evaluation" (Lerner 1995 , p.84) There are three interrelated characteristics which participatorynormative programs share. First, the process of building programs is asset based.
" The programs should start with what is in the community-the capacities of the residents and of the programs, agencies, and other institutions based in the area-not with what is absent" Lerner 1995 , p.87). Second, the agenda' s of the various programs are based on the values, and problem solving capacities of the local residents, associations, and institutions. A qualitative understanding of the particular meaning system of each community should be held by the researcher so that the programs can be guided in the direction desired by the clients. Finally, positive relationships between local residents, local associations, local institutions are promoted so that a collaborative, caring communities can be created (Lerner, 1995).
The DICE model is an approach for evaluating ways in which programs can be enhanced by focusing on the particuiar conicxt of the communities in which they are applied. The model focuses on the stakeholders' perspectives of the regarding the direction programming should take in their community The importance of co-learning between members of the community and outreach programmers is vital to the DICE model process. An organization such as Cooperative Extension can assist community agencies by providing expertise in the area of evaluation methodology, screening, and assessment. However, Extension faculty must learn from community members about what development in their particular community context means . According to Lerner, "They must network with community members to learn (a) who are the people whose voices must be included as part of the program and its evaluation, and thus (b) the issues that the community wants to have addresses and that are seen as the most salient. Finally, faculty must learn what specific evaluation tools are necessary and appropriate to deploy or to develop in the community" (Lerner 1995, p.88) .
The goal of DICE programs then, are for outreach professionals to work collaboratively with the relevant stakeholders to identify and describe problems which exist in the community, articulate program goals, and determine the kinds of questions the stakeholders want to have answered . The strongest and most appropriate evaluation design for each community can then be formulated (Lerner, 1995).
Data collection and analysis must be multifaceted given the vast array of issues and methods that may be used in each community. A key goal of any development-incontext evaluation (DICE) is to obtain interpretation of the day-to-day realities of the people, programs, and contexts involved in the program. " The participants themselves are the experts of the meaning of development in their community context ; they are the source of the important interpretations of the data" (Lerner 1995, p. 89) . Through collaborating with the community in the interpretation of the data evaluators and stakeholders can determine whether the program is appropriate for the needs of the community. If so, the stakeholders will be able to make judgments about the features of the program that should be maintained, revised, or eliminated . If not , the stakeholders will be able to better clarify to the evaluators what sort of information they need to make such judgments. In either case the ability of the stakeholders to make better informed decisions regarding community programming will be enhanced (Lerner, 1995) The increased capacity of the community stakeholders resulting from this collaborative evaluation can eventually result in enhance program sustainability. 53 " The capacity of youth, families, and other community stakeholders to enact and sustain desired programs will likely be furthered significantly as a consequence of (a) the community ' s enhanced abilities in program design, implementation, and evaluation; (b) community members ' increased knowledge of themselves, gained through the data that they themselves helped to collect and analyze; and (c) the community ' s increased experiences with successful decision making, that is, with what is a constant part of the process of participatory evaluation procedures such as those involved in the DICE model" (Lerner 1995 , p.90-91).
The following points summarize what evaluators following the DICE model must do • " Work with the community members to identify the problems or issues to which the program will be directed • Engage the members of the community in (a) the planning of the evaluation; (b) decisions about the nature of the information sought about the program; (c) the collection of relevant data; and ( d) the interpretation of the information derived from the evaluation • Collaborate with the community in the use of the information derived from the evaluation, for example, in the execution of any "mid-course" corrections deemed necessary to enhance program effectiveness and/or in the identification of any changes that have resulted in the nature of the problem that led to the initiation of the program" (Lerner 199 5,p. 91) .
The evaluation is predicated on attention to the diversity which exists within a specific community, to the specific goals, values, and meaning systems that are present in the community and shape local programs. Recognition of the importance of such diversity is critical to the design of effective prevention programs (Lerner, 1995)

Further Integrate Cooperative Extension into the Communities
Collaborative evaluation can be more effective when university outreach, such as that provided through Cooperative Extension, is incorporated into the development of community-based social service programs. " Developmental contextualism stresses that the problems facing the youth of America require an integrated set of activities by the members of our nation' s research and extension communities" (Lerner 1995 , p. 11 1) It has been observed by researchers such as Schorr ( 198 8) and  that many effective youth programs have not been sustained because members of the community lack the capacity to maintain the programs once the outside programming/assistance has been withdrawn (Lerner, 1995) The expertise of Cooperative Extension in regards to " best practices" observed for various programs can be used to help community service providers to design the most appropriate and sustainable program possible. In other words, the experience gained by Cooperative Extension in interfacing with various communities can be used to inform service providers as to what has and has not worked "This information may allow public policy-makers, community organizers, researchers, and others to better use their money and time developing or replicating successful programs" (Lerner 1995, p.113  This approach to knowledge application underscores the need for a sustained commitment to a campus-community partnership (Lerner, 1995). Further integration between local universities and colleges and the community' s in which they reside has the potential to simultaneously enhance both effectiveness of social service provision and the public perception of institutions of higher learning.

Conclusions
Pawtucket and West Warwick, Rhode Island are dynamic communities with different values, assets, programming needs, and service providers. However, though these communities have their own very different contexts they can both benefit from the same type of collaborate evaluation practices outlined throughout this report Enhanced client participation in may help service providers to realize the specific motivations, interests, and values of their clientele. Client involvement in the evaluation and decision making process can empower individuals to take control over programs which are in place in their communities. Such empowerment can serve to enhance the sustainability and the effectiveness of social service programs in any Rhode Island Community.
The separate focus on individual risk behaviors and problems may detrimental to the effectiveness the various community services. An integrated, case management approach to services may be a more effective strategy for preventing the development of risk behaviors in Rhode Island youths . The collaboration of service providers may not only be more effective but more cost efficient.
The use of the development-in-context (DICE) model for evaluating ways in which programs can focus on the particular context of the communities in which they are applied should be considered by local service providers. The model focuses on the stakeholders' perspectives of the regarding the direction programming should take in their com111unity The importance of co-learning between member:; oi the community and outreach programmers is vital to the DICE model process. Collaborative evaluation can be more effective when university outreach, such as that provided through Cooperative Extension, is incorporated into the development of communitybased social service programs.
The Children, Youth & Families Issue Group may be the most appropriate conduit for suggesting the use of the strategies recommended by this report to local service providers in Rhode Island communities. The programmatic mission of the Children, Youth and Families Issu~ Group includes the following goals; • Provide current, research based information, technical assistance and educational programming for children, youth, and families and groups focused on the development of human potential, family well-being and leadership development skills.
• Address youth and family issues by initiating educational outreach programs and networking, to foster cooperation, partnerships, and coalitions. The dissemination of the strategies suggested in this report to local service providers in Rhode Island by the "Issue Group" is consistent with the groups stated mission .
The theories presented in this report are applicable to any at-risk community Service providers and outreach professionals must respect the particular contexts of the communities in which they work. As Dr., Lerner has stated; The participants themselves are the experts of the meaning of development in their community context; they are the source of the important interpretations of the data (Lerner 1995 , p . 89)