!

ecology center summer event series

by Jessica Burleigh, Erica Madero, Eli Michaels, and Elizabeth Ruggieri !

! !!

!

  i  

Table of Contents LETTER OF INTENT (LOI) …………………………………………………………….……ii POTENTIAL FUNDERS ……………………………………………………………….…. ...iv ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………………....……...1 ISSUE STATEMENT & DATA ……………………………………………………………....1 TARGET POPULATION & HEALTH ISSUES ……………………………………...….…...1

Adolescent and Young Adult Health ………………………………………………......1 Health Issue #1: Youth Violence …………………………………………………...….2 Health Issue #2: Diet-Related Illness ………………………………………………......2

Implications & Proposed Benefits …………………………………………………......3 PROPOSED PROGRAM ACTIVITIES ………………………………………………………3

Table 1. Program Activities …………………………………………………………....4 RATIONALE FOR PROPOSED PROGRAM ACTIVITIES ………………………………...4 Intervention Evidence: Diet-Related Illness …………………………………………...4 Intervention Evidence: Youth Violence ….……………………………………………5 Intervention Evidence: Community Art …………………………………………….....5 Theories of Change ……………………………………………………………………6 Community Organizing Theory …………………………………………..…...6 GOALS & OBJECTIVES ……………………………………………………………….....….7 ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY ……………………………………………………..….....8 Table 2: Description of Staffing ……………………………………………….………8 EVALUATION PLAN ……………………………………………………………….…….....9 Table 3: Evaluation Plan ……………………………………………………………...9 Table 4: Measurement Tools ………………………………………………..………..10 BUDGET …………………………………………………………………………………..…10 Budget Justification …………………………………………………………………..10 SUSTIANABILITY PLAN …………………………………………………………………..10 REFERENCES …………………………………………………………………………….…12 APPENDIX A: Target Area Maps ………………………………………………………...…17 APPENDIX B: Social Cognitive Theory ……………………………………………...….….20 APPEXDIX C: ECSES Logic Model …………………………………………………….…..21 APPEXDIX D: Organizational Capacity of Community Partners …………………………...22 APPENDIX E: Ecology Center Organization Chart …………………………………………24 APPENDIX F: Program Implementation Work Plan ………………………………………...25 APPENDIX G: ECSES Budget ………………………………………………………….…...26 APPENDIX H: Evaluation & Sustainability Work Plan ……………………………….…….27

  ii  

Submitting Agency: Ecology Center 2530 San Pablo Ave. Berkeley, CA 94702 May 5, 2016 Founded in 1969, Ecology Center is a nonprofit organization based in Berkeley, California that seeks to build a sustainable, healthy, and just future for the East Bay, California, and beyond. Ecology Center offers services including farmers’ markets, produce stands, curbside recycling, classes, workshops, and youth programming, while working collaboratively with other local community-based organizations (CBOs) to empower healthy communities. Ecology Center will lead the implementation of the proposed program and coordinate the participation of organizational partners including Destiny Arts Center, Healthy Black Families, Inc., Phat Beets Produce, and Youth Spirit Artworks. This collaboration will ensure diverse expertise, perspectives, and backgrounds. Acknowledging the context of a changing neighborhood was crucial to our issue selection and programmatic intervention. The program will serve the South Berkeley/ North Oakland community, which is located within a neighborhood that has been targeted for re-development. This has led to widespread displacement of long-term residents and significant disruption and reconfiguring of the community. Residents remaining in a neighborhood undergoing this process are experiencing the impact of community fragmentation, elevated stress-levels, and a broad range of health concerns. Programs that work to improve the health of adolescents and young adults can have significant population-level benefits, including reducing racial and economic health disparities in future generations. According to the CDC, diet-related illness is a leading cause of death in the United States. Studies indicate that black, Latino, and low-income youth struggle disproportionately with obesity and precursors to chronic illness compared to their white, higher-income counterparts. Additionally, Alameda County has the fourth highest rate of youth homicide in California, with homicide being the leading cause of death for black youth and the second leading cause of death for Latino youth. The proposed program seeks to address diet-related illness and youth violence among low-income, black and Latino young people aged 15-24 living in the South Berkeley/North Oakland neighborhood, and meet three overarching goals: reduce diet-related illness, decrease rates of youth violence, and strengthen community cohesion and connectedness. The ECSES expands on Ecology Center’s existing weekly Tuesday Evening Farmers’ Market in South Berkeley, and includes additional programming and activities designed meet the program’s goals, including: supportive youth employment, provision of healthy food vouchers, outreach from local community-based organizations, and a workshop series. Additionally, once a month, the event will be further augmented by community dinners and participatory, youth-led arts projects. Each of our program activities are informed by conversations with youth and community leaders, intervention evidence, and Community Organizing Theory.

  iii  

Ecology Center has the staffing, experience, and local knowledge of the community necessary to successfully implement this program. In addition, because the ECSES strategically utilizes the existing infrastructure of Ecology Center farmers’ markets to construct a wide-reaching program, total costs are minimized. However, a program of this magnitude requires supplemental funding in order to support each distinct program activity. The ECSES aims to implement a wide variety of program activities in order to improve community health and cohesion. The total cost of the program is estimated at $86,803. After implementing in-kind costs totaling $44,960, we are requesting $41,843 to fund the ECSES. Diet-related illness and youth violence are two of the most pressing issues facing low-income black and Latino young people aged 15-24 in North Oakland/South Berkeley. In addition to addressing a myriad of underlying determinants of these health issues, the ECSES program activities empower and support a diverse, empowered, and resilient community. We thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Jessica Burleigh Erica Madero Eli Michaels Elizabeth Ruggieri

  iv  

POTENTIAL FUNDERS California Wellness Foundation http://www.calwellness.org/grants_program/promoting_healthy_and_safe_neighborhoods.php The California Wellness Foundation’s Advancing Wellness Grants Program is grounded in research on the social determinants of health and includes four areas of funding, one of which is Promoting Healthy and Safe Neighborhoods. This funding focus contains two target areas: Fostering Healthy Environments and Promoting Violence Prevention. Key strategies within Fostering Healthy Environments include increasing healthy food access and promoting nutrition and healthy food education to low-income communities of color. Key strategies within Promoting Violence Prevention include arts programming and violence prevention training for youth and adults. Given that the ECSES program is also situated within a framework of social determinants of health and has goals well aligned with their Grants Program’s target areas, this funder may be an ideal fit. Gellert Foundation http://www.gellertfoundation.org/ The Carl and Berta Gellert Foundation awards grants to non-profit agencies within nine counties in the greater bay area: Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma. Last year, they gave grants totaling $1,833,692 to almost 20 recipients, in amounts ranging from $2,500 to $50,000. The focus of programs and activities awarded in the last grant cycle was very broad and included: food security programs, wellness programs, programs centered on creating safe neighborhood spaces, education and workforce development programs, community centers, and youth programs. The ECSES incorporates many activities already targeted for awards by the Gellert Foundation, and may be a good fit for this funder. Wells Fargo https://www.wellsfargo.com/about/charitable/ca_guidelines.jhtml Wells Fargo’s philanthropic goals and objectives are met through a nation-wide corporate giving program. The California-specific guidelines include funding non-profit projects that “keep our communities strong, diverse and vibrant.” Funding priorities are broad and include programs that revitalize and stabilize communities, programs that provide job training and workforce development, and programs that provide health education. The ECSES falls within the corporate giving program’s funding priorities and may be a good fit for this funder.

  1  

ABSTRACT The Ecology Center Summer Event Series (ECSES) is a summer-long program designed

to address diet-related illness and youth violence among low-income black and Latino young people aged 15-24 living in North Oakland/South Berkeley. Program goals include 1) reducing diet-related illness among low-income black and Latino persons living in North Oakland/South Berkeley, 2) reducing youth violence among low-income black and Latino young people living in North Oakland/South Berkeley, and 3) improving community cohesion in North Oakland/South Berkeley. The ECSES will take place during the summer of 2016 at the weekly South Berkeley Tuesday Evening Farmers’ Market, and will include a range of program activities to serve the target population. Building on a strong tradition of community organizing and food justice, and through the formation of partnerships with other local youth-serving community-based organizations, the Ecology Center Summer Event Series will address underlying determinants of diet-related illness and youth violence, while supporting a diverse and empowered community.

ISSUE STATEMENT AND DATA

The community of North Oakland/South Berkeley is located within an area of Alameda County, CA that realtors have recently re-named "NOBE" (a trendy acronym for North Oakland, Berkeley, and Emeryville) in an effort to rebrand the area for redevelopment and attract new home buyers and renters (see Appendix A, Map 1) (NOBE, 2016). This process has led to widespread displacement of long-term residents and disruption of the original community, disproportionately affecting minorities (Zuk et al., 2015). The changing demographic of this area is illustrated by the striking decrease in the percentage of black homeowners in North Oakland, which dropped from 50% to 25% between 1990 and 2011. Many of these residents were replaced by affluent, white renters and homeowners (Zuk et al., 2015).

Residents who remain in an area undergoing such changes experience the effects of community fragmentation, restrictions on housing and affordable food options, and an increase in various health issues. (Zuk et al., 2015). Focus groups with Ecology Center staff and the youth they serve, as well as semi-structured interviews with the leadership of other local community-based organizations (CBOs) informed the target population identification and issue selection for this intervention (CBDC, 2016).

TARGET POPULATION & HEALTH ISSUES

The target population for this intervention is low-income, black and Latino young people aged 15-24 living in the North Oakland/South Berkeley neighborhood. There are a total of 3,126 young people aged 15-24 living in this area, totaling 12% of the population. Additionally, 36% of the area’s residents identify as black, 6% identify as Latino, and about 19% of the residents are living below the federal poverty line (US Census, 2014) (see Appendix A, Maps 2-5). Issues targeted for intervention are youth violence and diet-related illness. Adolescent & Young Adult Health

Adolescence marks a critical period when lifelong patterns of behavior are formed. Services and interventions provided during this period significantly contribute to the potential for health and wellness later in life (WHO, 2010). The target population for this intervention includes “emerging young adults” up to age 24 because the risks adolescents face persist into young adulthood (FIFCFS, 2014; Neinstein, 2013). Additionally, the cumulative effects of institutionalized racism and systemic socioeconomic inequality during this critical

  2  

developmental period make these groups particularly vulnerable to poorer health outcomes than their more affluent, white counterparts (Sanders-Phillips et al., 2009).

Young people are highly susceptible to social and environmental factors, such as peer networks, schools, and communities (WHO, 2014). These influences can either promote healthy behaviors that serve as the foundation for a flourishing adulthood, or conversely, can spur unhealthy habits that have lifelong health consequences both on the individual and on the population level (Blum, 2000; Healthy People 2020, 2016; Neinstein, 2013; WHO, 2014). While our target population faces numerous health issues, two of the most salient concerns identified by the community are youth violence and diet-related illness (CBDC, 2016). Health Issue #1: Youth Violence

As neighborhoods undergo community fragmentation, the rate of youth violence increases (CDC, 2013). Youth violence has serious implications for the fabric of communities. The victims and perpetrators of violence are often affected psychologically and socially over the life course, and this impact spreads to their friends and families (WHO, 2015).

California has historically higher rates of violence among youth ages 14-24, compared to other states (Bureau of Justice, 1999). Among the juvenile population, violent felonies and misdemeanor assault and battery arrests comprise 24% of all juvenile arrests in California (OAG, 2014), compared to 19% nationwide (U.S. Dept. of Justice, 2014). Homicide is the leading cause of death for black youth in California and the second leading cause of death for Latino youth (Violence Policy Center, 2015). Alameda County has the fourth highest homicide rate for victims aged 10 to 24 in California. Most of these homicides occur in Oakland, with the highest rates being among 20 to 24 year olds, followed by 15 to 19 year olds (rates of 79.6 homicides per 100,000 and 47.4 per 100,000, respectively) (ACPHD, 2006). Within California, Oakland has the most consistent decline in youth crime compared to other cities, likely attributable to an approach emphasizing prevention and intervention rather than punishment and incarceration (CJCJ, 2006). Youth violence prevention strategies in Oakland include academic and employment programs, leadership development, arts and media training, wellness programs, family and community engagement, and policy advocacy (Youth Alive!, 2016; Oakland Unite, 2016; EOYDC, 2016; Urban Peace Movement, 2016; Youth UpRising, 2016; The Mentoring Center, 2016). However, most programs serve the communities of West and East Oakland. To the authors’ knowledge, only two programs focus on youth violence prevention in North Oakland specifically, none focus solely on South Berkeley, and none focus on the neighborhood comprised of South Berkeley and North Oakland. Health Issue #2: Diet-Related Illness

Residents of North Oakland and South Berkeley face many chronic health issues. Though Berkeley has lower rates of type II diabetes compared to state and national levels, significant health inequities persist. Black residents of Berkeley are 4 times more likely to have diabetes and 14 times more likely to be hospitalized for diabetes-related complications than white residents (City of Berkeley, 2013). In Alameda county, the prevalence of obesity among adults is 29% for black residents and 27% for Latino residents, compared to 21% among white residents. Similar trends are noted with regard to childhood obesity, where obesity prevalence among black and Latino youth is 23% and 26% respectively, compared to 11% among their white peers (City of Berkeley, 2013; ACPHD, 2014). As obesity in childhood and adolescence is often a precursor to serious chronic illness in adulthood, these striking health disparities among youth are a serious issue (Babey et. al, 2012).

  3  

In the U.S., structural barriers lead to inequities in the availability of healthy foods along socioeconomic and racial lines, significantly impacting the distribution of diet-related illness (Bell, 2013; Larson, 2009; Flournoy & Treuhaft, 2005). For example, retailers in low-income communities of color stock lower-quality, less nutritious, and more expensive foods relative to those in higher-income or white communities (Treuhaft & Karpyn, 2010). These disparities in food access are particularly damaging during adolescence, as lifelong eating habits are formed (Healthy People 2020, 2016; Neinstzein, 2013; WHO, 2014).

A diet rich in fruits and vegetables reduces nutrient deficiencies, prevents obesity and chronic illness, and enhances lifelong health (WHO, 2004). However, in Alameda County, only 25% of adolescents consume 5 or more servings of fruits and vegetables per day, as recommended by the World Health Organization (ACPHD, 2014; WHO, 2004). Latino, black, and low-income youth are 20-50% less likely to meet this recommendation compared to their white, Asian, and higher-income counterparts (ACPHD, 2014).

To address these issues, Ecology Center supports three thriving farmers’ markets in North Oakland and South Berkeley, as well as a farmers’ market Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) program (Ecology Center, 2016). In addition, Ecology Center, Phat Beets Produce, and the Agriculture and Land-Based Training Association (ALBA) participate in Market Match, a healthy food incentive program that matches federal nutrition assistance benefits at farmers’ markets (Ecology Center, 2016; Phat Beets Produce, 2016; ALBA, 2016).

Despite the success of these initiatives, they are often underutilized by the community. Data gathered through focus groups with Ecology Center staff, as well as with youth from the target population, suggest farmers’ markets often do not feel welcoming or relevant to low-income young people of color because members of their communities are underrepresented among attendees (CBDC, 2016). In order for farmers’ markets to effectively impact the health of low-income youth of color, the markets must be attractive to and accessible for this population. Implications and Proposed Benefits

While the effects of neighborhood change are felt by entire communities, low income, black and Latino young people represent a particularly vulnerable population due to the combined effects of a complex developmental period and intersecting systems of oppression (CBDC, 2016; Sanders-Phillips et al., 2009). Diet-related illness and youth violence are two of the most pressing threats to the health of our target population. As such, the proposed program plan seeks to 1) reduce diet-related illness among low-income black and Latino persons living in North Oakland/South Berkeley 2) reduce youth violence among low-income black and Latino young people living in North Oakland/South Berkeley, 3) improve community cohesion in North Oakland/South Berkeley.

PROPOSED PROGRAM ACTIVITIES

The Ecology Center Summer Event Series (ECSES) will address the aforementioned goals. ECSES is a weekly, summer-long program that builds upon existing Tuesday evening farmers’ markets in South Berkeley to incorporate community-building activities and a range of resources and to serve the target population (table 1). The Berkeley Farmers’ Markets are well-established and well-attended, and as such, the South Berkeley Tuesday Evening Farmers’ Market will serve as the venue for the ECSES. Each week, the market will be bolstered with infrastructure to support increased programming. Once a month, the event will take the form of a summer evening block party, which will include additional activities. The target population will be encouraged to participate through targeted community outreach.

  4  

Table 1. Program Activities

Note: See Appendix F for Full Program Implementation Work Plan.

RATIONALE FOR PROPOSED PROGRAM ACTIVITIES Intervention Evidence: Diet-Related Illness

To reduce incidence of diet-related illness, interventions must target not only individuals, but also community-level determinants of health (NCI, 2005; Treuhaft & Karpyn, 2010). As such, ECSES addresses four major barriers to accessing healthy food: physical, economic, educational, and cultural (SPUR, 2015; Samuel, 2014; Cho, 2014).

Increasing access to farmers’ markets is a community obesity prevention strategy supported by a 2009 CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (Khan et al., 2009). In 2010, Kaiser Permanente implemented a survey measuring the influence of their farmers’ markets on health behaviors of attendees. Findings showed that 70% of farmers’ market patrons report consuming an increased quantity and variety of fruits and vegetables, as a result of shopping at the market. (Cromp et.al., 2011-2012). Selection of farmers’ markets as the ECSES venue will increase the availability of healthy foods to break down physical barriers to food access in North Oakland/South Berkeley.

Expanding economic assistance enables increased purchase of healthy foods among low-income residents (SPUR, 2015; CDC, 2011). The Michigan Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program (MFMN) distributed farmers’ markets coupons totaling $20 among a low-income population. The coupons directly impacted fruit and vegetable consumption among those who received coupons compared to those who did not, demonstrating that low-income populations may be more likely to increase fruit and vegetable consumption when economic assistance is provided (Anderson et al., 2001). Distributing food vouchers to youth employees at ECSES alongside continued operation of the Market Match program will counter economic barriers to the access of healthy foods.

Activity Frequency Description Youth Employment Weekly Ecology Center will hire 12 new youth positions to staff the ECSES throughout the summer.

Youth employees will assist with event advertising, program implementation, and data collection. Food Vouchers Weekly Ecology Center will distribute $10 in food vouchers to be used at the program’s farmers’ market to

each youth employee at each weekly event. CBO Tabling/Info Sessions Weekly Local youth-serving community based organizations (CBOs) will provide information on available

community resources. Skills-Based Workshops Bi-Weekly Ecology Center staff, Destiny Arts Staff, and other community partners TBD will offer skills-

based workshops to address both violence prevention and nutrition. The violence prevention workshops will provide youth and community members with the necessary skills to prevent and de-escalate potentially violent situations. The nutrition workshops will provide youth and community members with skills to help them purchase and prepare healthier foods.

Cultural & Political Workshops Bi-Weekly Phat Beets Produce Staff, Healthy Black Families Representatives, and other community partners (TBD) will offer cultural and political workshops. Topics covered may include: the way in which the health profiles of black and Latino communities are shaped by social determinants of health, the cultural and political history of South Berkeley and North Oakland, avenues for policy change, and cultural humility.

Community Dinners Monthly Ecology Center Staff will offer a community dinner featuring fresh, organic ingredients sourced from local farms. During each dinner, a community leader (TBD) will facilitate a dialogue around neighborhood issues, or other cultural & political topics.

Youth-Led Community Art Monthly Youth Spirit Artworks will facilitate an ongoing youth-led community art project to any interested youth attendees. The final product will be displayed in the community.

  5  

Cooking Matters, a course offered to low-income residents of the Bay Area, teaches skills-based nutrition education resulting in 71% of adults consuming more vegetables and 66% of teens consuming more fruit following program completion (Cooking Matters, 2013). Workshops detailing healthy shopping, cooking, and eating at ECSES will adapt principles of Cooking Matters to address the educational barrier to food access. Intervention Evidence: Youth Violence

The CDC recommends a multi-level, comprehensive approach to address the underlying causes of youth violence (David-Ferdon & Simon, 2014). Evidence-based strategies include: building skills to choose nonviolent behaviors; fostering relationships between youth and caregivers, other youth, and adults in the community; creating a safe physical environment; increasing social cohesion in the community; changing social norms surrounding violence; and stabilizing communities by increasing economic opportunities (David-Ferdon & Simon, 2014).

ECSES incorporates several evidence-based violence reduction approaches. First, we will increase economic security by providing employment opportunities for youth. A summer jobs program in Chicago, IL targeting youth in high-violence schools led to a 43% reduction in crime over the course of 16 months (Heller, 2014). Similarly, ECSES provides employment to youth from underprivileged backgrounds as one piece of a violence intervention strategy. Second, skills-based workshops will include training on nonviolent problem-solving strategies, addressing social norms surrounding violence. Safe Streets is a program designed for adolescents in Baltimore, MD with a focus on teaching nonviolent conflict mediation skills (Webster et al., 2012). The Safe Streets program was associated with reductions in homicides by up to 56% and reductions in overall shootings by up to 44%. The program also changed social norms regarding violence, with participants being less likely to support the use of guns to settle disputes than non-participants. Lastly, Youth Empowerment Solutions (YES) is a program designed for adolescents in Flint, MI that incorporates conflict resolution training into its broader curriculum on leadership and community-building (Reischl et al., 2007). Within two years of the program’s implementation, the number of violent crimes against people under the age of 25 decreased by 50% in the target area. ECSES will incorporate evidence-based interventions on multiple levels to address youth violence. Intervention Evidence: Community Art

Due to the community as unit of analysis, dynamic study populations, lack of baseline data, and broad social outcomes, quantitative intervention evidence for arts-based community programming is uncommon (McQueen-Thomson and Ziguras, 2002). For this reason, the benefits of community art are primarily documented qualitatively through participant observation, interviews, and focus groups (Franzen et al., 2009; Kinloch, 2007; Lowe, 2000; Madyaningrum & Sonn, 2010; Reischl et al., 2011; YES, 2016; Zimmerman, et al., 2011). Through field visits, focus groups, questionnaires, and participation data, Lowe (2000) studied the outcomes of involvement in a community art project in Colorado. The project enabled relationship-building between neighborhood residents, increased solidarity, provided social support, offered a space for communicating common concerns, and facilitated individual and collective identity formation (Lowe, 2000). A similar project in Australia was analyzed using interviews and thematic qualitative analysis. Findings suggest participation in the project supported cross-cultural empathy between historically divided groups within a shared geographic space (Madyaningrum & Sonn, 2010). Lastly, a youth-led public mural project in Harlem, NY was studied through participant observation. Authors found that by creating a space for young

  6  

people to communicate their lived experiences of gentrification with adult allies, this project fostered youth agency and empowerment (Kinloch, 2007).

Supported by the preceding three case-studies, and bolstered by community organizing theory (detailed below), the ECSES will collaborate with Youth Spirit Artworks to facilitate an ongoing youth-led community mural. This project will bring young residents of the community together to support the formation of collective identity and solidarity, facilitate cross-cultural conversations, and empower young people to communicate with adult allies in creative ways. Theories of Change

While activities to achieve goals 1 and 2 are primarily supported through rigorous intervention evidence (as well as social cognitive theory, outlined in Appendix B), activities supporting goal 3 draw heavily on Community Organizing Theory (COT). Community Organizing Theory:

Community organizing is the process through which individuals and groups in communities identify shared issues, mobilize resources, and take collective action (NCI, 2005). Essential elements in this process include empowerment, community capacity, relevance, issue selection, participation, and critical consciousness (NCI, 2005). Empowerment is the “manifestation of social power at individual, organizational, and community levels” (Speer & Hughey, 1995. Perkins & Zimmerman, 1995) and is created through social action processes that increase confidence and community capacity (NCI, 2005). Community capacity is built upon the attributes of a community that augment its ability to identify and solve social problems (NCI, 2005). Relevance is established through agenda creation based on “felt needs, shared power, and awareness of resources” (NCI, 2005). Issue selection identifies specific and realistic tasks to target agenda items (NCI, 2005). Participation by community members in social action processes, agenda creation, and issue selection bolsters leadership abilities and problem-solving capacity (NCI, 2005). Critical consciousness is the “awareness of social, political, and economic forces that contribute to social problems” (NCI, 2005), and can be both a product of empowering action and a contributor to empowerment, relevance and effective issue selection. The elements of Community Organizing Theory overlap to support our program activities.

Through focus groups and semi-structured interviews, the problem identification phase involved participation from members of the target population and from staff members of the CBOs committed to serving them (CBDC, 2016). Focus groups and interviews also helped establish relevance, aided in the issue selection process, and ultimately led to including interventions that have been shown to contribute to empowerment, community capacity, and critical consciousness, detailed below (CBDC, 2016). Supportive employment will enhance the skills and confidence of youth employees, contributing to both empowerment and community capacity. Skills-based workshops will increase individual capacity for health-improving action. By providing youth with knowledge and tools to situate their own lived experiences in the context of institutionalized oppression, cultural and political workshops will contribute to youth empowerment while raising critical consciousness. Additionally, the focus on community organizing skills and cultural humility will increase community capacity for meaningful civic engagement and political advocacy. They will also contribute to relevance by enhancing a sense of shared needs and power and by building on knowledge of local resources.

Safe spaces for dialogue will be established in the context of community dinners, arts programming, and through interaction with CBOs at the ECSES. This dialogue will promote the sharing of information and ideas (participation), help establish a common community vision

  7  

(relevance), and lead to increased potential for future collaborations (empowerment and community capacity). Arts programming will be participatory in nature, with all interested members of the community invited to partake in a collaborative art project. This will aid in developing community cohesion and connectedness, and will thus further contribute to empowerment and community capacity (Lowe, 2000). In addition, by participating in a youth-led community art project, young attendees will have the opportunity for involvement in issue selection, deepen their understanding of selected issues through discussion (critical consciousness), and communicate their ideas with adult allies through creative expression. Ultimately, the use of community organizing theory and its constructs to inform activities offered will bolster the effectiveness of the ECSES to achieve the goals of decreasing diet-related illness, reducing youth violence, and strengthening community cohesion and connectedness in South Berkeley/North Oakland.

GOALS & OBJECTIVES Goals:

Goal 1: To decrease diet-related illness among low-income, black and Latino residents of North Oakland/South Berkeley.

Goal 2: To reduce violence among low-income, African American and Latino young people aged 15-24 living in the North Oakland/South Berkeley area. Goal 3: To strengthen community cohesion and connectedness in North Oakland/South Berkeley. Process Objectives: P1: Youth employment: By September 1, 2016, Ecology Center will provide supportive employment opportunities for 12 members of the target population to staff the weekly Ecology Center Summer Event Series. P2: Healthy food vouchers: At each weekly event, Ecology Center staff will distribute $10 food vouchers to all youth employees for the purchase of produce sold at the event. P3: CBO tabling & information sessions: At weekly each event, 2-3 local youth-serving CBOs will provide information on available community resources to at least 120 members of the target population over the course of the series. P4: Skills-based workshops: By September 1, 2016, Ecology Center staff and community partners will offer 6 bi-weekly skills-based workshops to at least 80 community-members, including at least 50 members of the target population. P5: Cultural & political workshops: By September 1, 2016, community partners will offer bi-weekly 6 cultural and political workshops to at least 80 community-members, including at least 50 members of the target population. P6: Community dinners: By September 1, 2016, Ecology Center will host 3 monthly community dinners with facilitated dialogue components featuring locally sourced, healthy foods for at least 100 total attendees, including at least 60 members of the target population. P7: Youth-led arts programming: By September 1, 2016, local community arts-based organizations will offer 3 monthly youth-led arts programming sessions for at least 40 members of the target population attending the ECSES.

Short-Term Outcomes: O1: Increased economic security: By October 1, 2016, at least 80% of young people involved in the employment program will have increased economic security. O2: Youth purchase healthier food: Throughout their period of employment with the ECSES, at least 80% of youth employees will increase their purchase of healthier foods. O3: Increased knowledge: By September 15, 2016, at least 80% of members of the target population who attended at least one skills-based workshop will have increased knowledge about nutrition or violence prevention. O4: Increased skills: By September 15, 2016, at least 80% of the members of the target population who attended at least one skills-based workshop will have increased nutrition or violence prevention skills. O5: Increased community resource utilization: By October 1, 2016, at least 50% of the members of the target population who attended at least one CBO tabling and information session will have increased utilization of resources in the community. O6: Nutrition-based self-efficacy: By September 15, 2016, at least 60% of the members of the target population who attended at least one nutrition skills-based workshop increased self-efficacy to make healthy dietary choices. O7: Violence-prevention self-efficacy: By September 15, 2016, at least 60% of the members of the target population who attended at least one violence-prevention skills-based workshop will have increased self-efficacy to de-escalate conflict and prevent violence. O8: Increased cross-cultural empathy & understanding: By September 15, 2016, at least 60% of the members of the target population who attended at least one youth-led community arts programming session, community dinner, and/or skills-based workshop will have increased cross-cultural empathy and understanding. Long-Term Outcomes: O9: Improved diet: By October 1, 2016, at least 30% of the members of the target population who attended one or more ECSES events will have healthier dietary practices.

O10: Increased empowerment: By October 1, 2016, at least 30% of the members of the target population who attended one or more ECSES events will be

  8  

empowered to make positive changes in their communities and lives.

O11: Safe space for community dialogue and social connection: By September 1, 2016, at least 70% of the members of the target population who attended one or more ECSES events will feel that the farmers’ market is a safe space for community dialogue and social connection. O12: Increased critical consciousness: By October 1, 2016, at least 40% of the members of the target population who attended one or more ECSES events will have increased critical consciousness about social issues faced by the community.

Note: See Appendix C for Logic Model.

ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY Founded in 1969, Ecology Center is a nonprofit organization based in Berkeley,

California that seeks to “build a sustainable, healthy, and just future for the East Bay, California, and beyond” (Ecology Center, 2016). Ecology Center offers services including farmers’ markets, produce stands, curbside recycling, workshops, and youth programming, and also collaborates with other CBOs to empower healthy communities. Ecology Center operates on an annual budget of over $6 million, with 26 full-time and 13 part-time employees. Ecology Center will lead the implementation of the ECSES and coordinate the participation of organizational partners. They are well-funded, well-known, and well-respected among the community, and as such are properly situated to successfully lead this project. Ecology Center staff includes both a Food and Farming team and a Youth Development team. These teams are comprised of a diverse group of staff members with a shared commitment to food justice, youth development, and community health (see table 2). In addition, program infrastructure is set in place in the form of the Tuesday Evening Berkeley Farmers’ Market. Rather than building this program from the ground up, Ecology Center possesses the sizeable advantage of a working from a strong, previously existing foundation.

Partnerships with local CBOs, including Destiny Arts Center, Healthy Black Families, Inc., Phat Beets Produce, and Youth Spirit Artworks will bolster Ecology Center’s capacity to deliver proposed activities (see Appendix D for more information about community partners).

Table 2: Description of Staffing

Martin Bourque – Executive Director Martin holds an M.A. in Latin American Studies and Environmental Policy from UC Berkeley and a B.A. in Evolution, Ecology, and Behavior from UC San Diego. Primary responsibilities at Ecology Center include overseeing the organization’s administration, programs, and strategic plan. He will devote 4% full-time equivalency (FTE) to implementing the ECSES and overseeing arrangements with community partners. Jacinda Abcarian - Development Director Jacinda holds an M.S.W. with a concentration in Management of Human Services and Community and Social Systems from the University of Michigan, and a B.A. in Sociology from UC Berkeley. She leads fundraising efforts at Ecology Center. Jacinda will devote approximately 10% of her time to writing grants, coordinating with funders, and performing program evaluation for the ECSES. Martin Johnson - Farmers’ Market Program Manager Martin holds both an M.S. and B.S. in Range Management from UC Berkeley. At Ecology Center, he brings a passion for connecting communities with fresh, local produce and manages all three Farmers’ Markets in Berkeley. He will devote approximately 10% of his time to coordinating planning meetings, training staff for the ECSES, and overseeing the ECSES program implementation. Carle Brinkman - Farmers’ Market Access & Equity Program Manager Carle holds a B.F.A in Art and a B.A. in Women’s and Gender Studies from the University of Oregon. At Ecology Center, she leads the organization’s statewide initiatives to make fresh, local foods accessible to communities through farmers’ markets. She will devote approximately 4% of her time to ensuring the ECSES goals are aligned with the organization’s food equity values. Amanda Gordon - Lead Market Manager & Special Event Coordinator Amanda has been in charge of staffing weekly Farmers’ Markets in Berkeley since 2013. She tracks accounting and maintains relationships with vendors, and brings a passion for local food and sustainability to her work at Ecology Center. She will devote approximately 20% of her time to official ECSES planning tasks, including supply rental and coordinating the activities of contractors. Dante Kaleo Alnas-Benson, Griselda Serratos, & Heather Walton - Youth Program Assistants Dante (10% FTE) has been with Ecology Center since 2011 and is responsible for training teens to support the Farm Fresh Choice stands. Griselda (5% FTE) joined Ecology Center in 2014 is in charge of training new Youth Environmental Academy Interns. Heather (5% FTE) has been with Ecology Center since 2015 and is passionate about educating youth interns on environmental issues. The Youth Program Assistants will execute tasks related to ECSES, such as setting up for summer block parties and assisting with the training of YouthWorks employees.

  9  

Jacquse Wyatt, Nerine Ortiz Pon, & Galen Folk - Youth Interns Jacquse (5% FTE) joined Ecology Center in 2015 and primarily distributes Market Match incentives to low-income patrons at the downtown Berkeley Farmers’ Market. Nerine (5% FTE) has been with Ecology Center since 2014 and is primarily responsible for updating social media accounts. Galen (5% FTE) joined Ecology Center in 2015 as an intern, assisting with outreach at events and supporting the Farm Fresh Choice stand. The Youth Program Interns will assist with community outreach for the ECSES events. YouthWorks Employees 12 newly hired YouthWorks employees will assist with community outreach and collecting evaluation data for the ECSES.

The above Ecology Center staff, YouthWorks employees, and community partners will

coordinate to plan and execute ECSES events. The ECSES will be primarily coordinated by Martin Johnson (Farmers’ Market Program Manager), who will communicate regularly with all involved parties and report directly to Martin Bourque (Executive Director). Ecology Center’s organizational chart (see Appendix E) details the reporting lines of personnel. For the four weeks preceding the ECSES and throughout its implementation, weekly staff meetings will be extended by 30 minutes to discuss ECSES. Representatives from each community partner will be invited to attend relevant parts of staff meetings.

EVALUATION PLAN Table 3: Evaluation Plan

Process Questions Corresponding Process Objectives

PQ1: Were skills-based workshops and cultural & political workshops implemented as planned (content, # of sessions, # of attendees, & demographics of attendees)? If not, how and why did implementation differ?

P4: Skills-based workshops

P5: Cultural & political workshops PQ2: Was arts-based programming implemented as planned (content & number of sessions, # of attendees, & demographics of attendees)? If not, how and why did implementation differ? P7: Youth-led arts programming

PQ3: Were community dinners carried out as planned (# of dinners and facilitated dialogue components, # of attendees, & demographics of attendees)? If not, how and why did implementation differ? P6: Community dinners

PQ4: Were community members satisfied with ECSES programming? If not, what could be done to increase satisfaction? Which components did participants enjoy? Which components did participants not enjoy?

Outcome Questions Corresponding Outcome Objectives OQ1: Did community members feel that ECSES activities were culturally relevant and provided a safe space for community dialogue? If not, how could the ECSES be improved upon to provide a safe space for community dialogue?

O11: Safe space for community dialogue & bonding

OQ2: Did the workshops increase participant knowledge/ understanding/ skills/ comfort level with the topics covered?

O6: Nutrition-based self-efficacy

O7: Violence prevention self-efficacy

The ECSES is a novel program in the early stages of planning and implementation. These evaluation questions will measure the degree to which program components are carried

out as planned (fidelity) and are reaching the target population (dose and reach), assess participant satisfaction, and assess whether key short-term outcome objectives are being met. Since there is no comparison group available, this evaluation will be non-experimental and include components of both implementation and outcome evaluation. Measurement tools (table 4) will include pre- and post-tests, questionnaires, and focus groups. Many aspects will be participatory, driven largely by community members, Ecology Center staff, youth interns, and community partners. This will build knowledge, skills, and relationships among all contributors while strengthening partnerships and program sustainability.

  10  

Table 4: Measurement Tools

Results of the evaluation will be disseminated formally among all stakeholders, as well as

informally among the community of North Oakland/South Berkeley, through newsletters, social media, etc. Since the ECSES will be an annually recurring program, results of this evaluation will be used to identify potential areas of program improvement in order to secure further funding and to ensure an impactful Summer 2017 ECSES.

BUDGET

[See Appendix G for Line-Item Budget] Budget Justification Listed below are the major budgetary expenses for Ecology Center: Personnel: 56% of the personnel budget will be in the form of in-kind contributions from Ecology Center. The majority of the requested personnel funding is to support the community partners, contractors, and youth employees, as they are all an integral part of the ECSES. Operating Costs: The Farmers’ Market venue is the largest single operating cost, which is an in-kind contribution from Ecology Center. Other notable costs include the event supplies, such as food for community dinners, sound systems for the concerts, and amplified noise permits. Indirect Costs: Indirect costs, such as additional supplies and unforeseen expenses, are anticipated to comprise 15% of the budget.

SUSTAINABILITY PLAN

The ECSES will build on existing relationships between Ecology Center and Youth Spirit ArtWorks, Destiny Arts, Healthy Black Families, and Phat Beets Produce (see Appendix D), and will provide the first opportunity for all organizations to collaborate on a specific program. Given that these organizations serve the South Berkeley/North Oakland community and have aligned goals around increasing the health and wellbeing of its residents, this collaboration can be expanded upon by establishing a more formal coalition. This will support the ongoing implementation of ECSES, its overarching goals, and the common vision of all member organizations for a safe, healthy, and equitable community.

Measurement Tool Description Corresponding

Evaluation Question

Document Review

Workshops, arts programming, community dinners, and all other ECSES programming will produce careful records of program sessions, collected by workshop/arts program facilitators and youth employees at each ECSES event for the duration of the series. Program sign-in sheets will provide data on the number of attendees at each session, as well as the age, race/ethnicity, and zip code of each attendee.

PQ1, PQ2, & PQ3

Pre/post Tests

Participatory pre/post testing methods will be used to measure participant knowledge/perception of knowledge both before and after workshop sessions to determine the effects of each workshop on attendees. Data will be collected by workshop/arts programming facilitators and youth employees at every event.

OQ2

Program Evaluation Questionnaires

Questionnaires will be administered to all workshop/arts programming participants following each session in order to address participant satisfaction with the session and ask for feedback regarding session topics and implementation. Questionnaires will be administered by workshop/arts program facilitators and youth employees directly following each session.

PQ4

Focus Groups (3 Focus Groups of 8 people)

Focus groups with ECSES attendees, including youth, will open dialogue surrounding ECSES programming likes and dislikes, cultural relevancy of program activities, whether or not the ECSES provided a safe space for community dialogue, and any changes to improve upon ECSES programming. Data will be collected by Ecology Center staff and youth employees following the conclusion of the 2016 ECSES.

PQ4 & OQ1

  11  

Coalitions expand available resources and leverage them more effectively (Butterfoss and Kegler, 2012). Strong coalitions are comprised of members that bring diverse expertise, perspectives, and backgrounds to the planning process (Butterfoss and Kegler, 2012) – as reflected by the five potential coalition members represented in this plan. Supporting ECSES and other potential projects through a coalition will also ensure continuity of both staffing and knowledge, since these will be diffused across several organizations. Furthermore, a coalition will expand available funding opportunities, as each organization will bring areas of specialization and pre-existing relationships with funders, and an established coalition may be eligible for funding sources that are unavailable to single organizations. Other ways to contribute to program sustainability include: 1) keeping detailed documentation of the implementation of the program plan, which will strengthen institutional memory and ensure minimal loss of knowledge with staff turnover, 2) conducting program evaluation and publicizing positive outcomes, which will result in broader support of the program and increase the likelihood of funding renewal or replacement, and 3) expanding on existing funding of the Farmers’ Market by increasing the number and type of vendors present in order to support the ongoing implementation of the ECSES (see Appendix H for more details).

  12  

REFERENCES: Anderson, J., Bybee, D., Brown, R., McLean, D., Garcia, R., Breer, M., & Schillo, B. 5 a day

fruit and vegetable intervention increases consumption in a low income population. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 101(2); 195-202.

Agriculture and Land-Based Training Association (ALBA). (2016). Programs. Retrieved from

http://www.albafarmers.org/programs.html Alameda County Public Health Department (ACPHD). (2006) Alameda County Health Status

Report 2006. Alameda County Public Health Department. Retrieved from: http://www.acphd.org/media/52956/achsr2006.pdf

Alameda County Public Health Department (ACPHD). (2014). Alameda County Health Data

Profile 2014: Community Health Status Assessment for Public Health Accreditation. Alameda County Health Data Profile 2014. Retreived from: http://www.acphd.org/media/395851/acphd_cha.pdf

Babey, S., Wolstein, J., Diamant, A., Bloom, A., & Goldstein, H. (2012). Overweight and obesity among children by California cities - 2010. UCLA Center for Health Policy Research and California Center for Public Health Advocacy.

Bell, J., Mora, G., Hagan, E., Rubin, V., & Karpyn, A. (2013). Access to healthy food and why it matters: A review of the research. PolicyLink & The Food Trust.

Blum, R. W., Beuhring, T., Shew, M. L., Bearinger, L. H., Sieving, R. E., & Resnick, M. D. (2000). The effects of race/ethnicity, income, and family structure on adolescent risk behaviors. American Journal of Public Health, 90(12), 1879.

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (1999): State data: Homicide victimization and offending rates of juveniles and young adults. Retrieved from: http://www.bjs.gov/content/dtdata.cfm#State

Butterfoss, F. & Kegler, M. (2012) A Coalition Model for Community Action. Community organizing and community building for health and welfare. Rutgers University Press. Edited by Minkler, M.

California Department of Social Services (CDSS). (2007). CalFresh program. Retrieved from http://www.calfresh.ca.gov/

Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice (CJCJ). (2006) California Youth Crime Declines: The Untold Story. Retrieved from: http://www.prisonpolicy.org/scans/cjcj/CAYouthCrimeSept06.pdf

Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice (CJCJ). (2012) California Youth Crime Plunges to All-Time Low. Retrieved from: http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/CA_Youth_Crime_2011.pdf

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2011). Strategies to prevent Obesity and Other Chronic Diseases: The CDC Guide to Strategies to Increase the Consumption of Fruits and Vegetables. Atlanta: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2011.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2013). Health Effects of Gentrification. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/healthyplaces/healthtopics/gentrification.htm

Cho, K. (2014). Impact of providing healthy food access and nutrition education through food hubs. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 46(4), s104.

City of Berkeley Public Health Division (2013). 2013 Health Status Summary Report. City of Berkeley. Retrieved from:

  13  

http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/uploadedFiles/Health_Human_Services/Level_3_-_Public_Health/BerkeleyHealthSummary_online_FINAL.pdf

Community-Based Data Collection (CBDC) (2016). J. Abcarian, personal communication, January 28th, 2016; Ecology Center Staff, focus group, February 24, 2016; Ecology Center Youth, focus group, February 25, 2016; V. Alexander, personal communication, March 10th, 2016; S. Hindman, personal communication, March 10th, 2016; M. Cadji, personal communication, March 3rd, 2016; I. McCasey & J. Tang, personal communication, March 3rd, 2016.

Cooking Matters. (2013). Annual Review. Retrieved from http://cookingmatters.org/ Cromp, D., Cheadle, A., Solomon, L., Maring, P., Wong, E., & Reed, K. (2011-2012). Kaiser

Permanente Farmers’ Market Program: Description, impact, and lessons learned. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 2(2); 29-36.

David-Ferdon C., Simon T.R. (2014). Preventing youth violence: Opportunities for action. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

East Oakland Youth Development Center (EOYDC). (2016) Program Info. Retrieved from: http://eoydc.org/

Ecology Center. (2016). Retrieved from http://ecologycenter.org/about/ Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics (FIFCFS). (2014). America’s Young

Adults: Special Issue. Institute of Education Sciences: National Center for Education Statistics, 1-86. Retrieved from: http://www.childstats.gov/pdf/ac2014/YA_14.pdf

Flournoy, R., & Treuhaft, S. (2005). Healthy foods, healthy communities: Improving access and opportunities through food retailing. PolicyLink.

Franzen, S., Morrel-Samuels, S., Reischl, T., & Zimmerman, M. (2009). Using process evaluation to strengthen intergenerational partnerships in the Youth Empowerment Solutions program. Journal of Intervention and Prevention in the Community, 37(4), 289-301.

Glanz K., Rimer B.K. (1995). Theory at a glance: A guide to health promotion practice. Bethesda MD: National Cancer Institute. 2nd edition 2005. NIH Publ. 05-3896.

Healthy People 2020. (2016). Adolescent Health: Online Overview. Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Retrieved from: http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topics-objectives/topic/Adolescent-Health

Heller, S. (2014). Summer jobs reduce violence among disadvantaged youth. Science, 346(6214), 1219–23.

Khan, L., Sobush, K., Keener, D., Goodman, K., Lowry, A., Kakietek, J., & Zaro, S. (2009).

Recommended community strategies and measurements to prevent obesity in the United States (COCOMO) Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5807a1.htm.

Kinloch, V. (2007). Youth representations of community, art, and struggle in Harlem. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education: 116 (Winter 2007).

Larson, N., Story, M., & Nelson, M. (2009). Neighborhood environments: Disparities in access to healthy foods in the U.S. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 36(1).

Lee, V., Mikkelsen, L., Srikantharajah, J., & Cohen, J. (2008). Promising strategies for creating healthy eating and activity environments. Healthy Eating Active Living Convergence

Partnership.

  14  

Link, B.G., & Phelan, J. (1995). Social Conditions as Fundamental Causes of Disease. Journal of Health & Social Behavior 35 (Extra Issue): 80-94.

Lowe, S.S. (2000). Creating community: Art for community development. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 29(3); 357-386.

Madyaningrum, M.E. & Sonn, C. (2010). Exploring the meaning of participation in a community art project: A case study on the Seeming project. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 21; 358-370.

Mckenzie, J. F., Neifer, B. L., & Smeltzer, J. L. (2005). Theories and models commonly used for health promotion intervention. Planning, Implementing, and Evaluating Health Promotion Programs; 162-204.

McQueen-Thomson, D. & Ziguras C. (2002). Promoting Mental Health & Wellbeing through Community & Cultural Development: A Review of Literature focussing on Community Arts Practice. The Globalism Institute for the study of of Transnationalism, Nationalism & Cultural Diversity. Pp: 1-46.

National Cancer Institute (NCI). (2005). Theory at a glance: A guide for health promotion practice. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services & National Institute of Health.

Neinstein, L.S., (2013). New adolescents: An analysis of health conditions, behaviors, risks, and access to services in the United States compared to California, among adolescents (12–17), emerging young adults (18–25) and young adults (26–34). University of Southern California, 1-80. Retrieved from: (http://www.usc.edu/student-affairs/Health_Center/thenewadolescents/doc/TheNewAdolescents_Final_Locked.pdf

NOBE (North Oakland, Berkeley, Emeryville). (2016). Retrieved from http://www.nobeneighborhood.com/Home.html.

North Oakland Restorative Justice Alliance. (2016). Program Info. Retrieved from: http://www.phatbeetsproduce.org/north-oakland-restorative-justice-alliance/

Oakland Unite. (2016). Program Info. Retrieved from: http://oaklandunite.org/ Office of Attorney General (OAG). (2014) Report on Juvenile Justice in California. California

Department of Justice. Retrieved from:https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/cjsc/publications/misc/jj14/preface.pdf?

Perkins, D. D., & Zimmerman, M. A. (1995). Empowerment theory, research, and application. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23(5), 569-579.

Phat Beets Produce. (2016). Farmers markets: Double your EBT/SNAP. Retrieved from http://www.phatbeetsproduce.org/farmers-markets/double-ebtmarket-match/

Phillips, D., Flores, L., & Henderson, J. (2014). Development without displacement: Resisting gentrification in the Bay Area. Causa Justa. Retrieved from http://cjjc.org/images/development-without-displacement.pdf

Project for Public Spaces (PPS). (2013). Farmers’ markets as a strategy to improve access to healthy food for low-income families and communities. Retrieved from https://www.policylink.org/find-resources/library/farmers-markethttps://www.policylink.org/find-resources/library/farmers-market

Reischl, T. M., Zimmerman, M. A., Morrel-Samuels, S., Franzen, S. P., Faulk, M., Eisman, A. B., & Roberts, E. (2011). Youth Empowerment Solutions for Violence Prevention. Adolescent Medicine: State of the Art Reviews (22); 581-600.

Resnick, M.D., Bearman, P.S., Blum, R.W., Bauman, K.E., Harris, K.M., Jones,J., & Ireland, M. (1997). Protecting adolescents from harm: findings from the National Longitudinal Study on Adolescent Health. Jama, 278(10), 823-832.

  15  

Samuel, L., Ethan, D., Basch, C., & Samuel, B. (2014). The need for nutrition education among parents purchasing toddler foods in New York City supermarket circulars. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 46(4), s105.

Sanders-Phillips, K., Settles-Reaves, B., Walker, D., & Brownlow, J. (2009). Social inequality and racial discrimination: Risk factors for health disparities in children of color. Pediatrics, 124(Supplement 3), S176-S186.

San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Association (SPUR). (2015). Healthy food within reach: Helping Bay Area residents find, afford, and choose health food. http://www.spur.org/publications/spur-report/2015-02-05/healthy-food-within-reach

Speer, P. W., & Hughey, J. (1995). Community organizing: An ecological route to empowerment and power. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23(5), 729-748.

Story, M., Neumark-Sztainer, D., & French, S. (2002). Individual and environmental influences on adolescent eating behaviors. Supplement to the journal of The American Dietetic Association, 102(3).

The Mentoring Center. (2016). Program info. Retrieved from: http://mentor.org/ Treuhaft, S. & Karpyn, A. (2010). The grocery gap: Who has access to food and why it matters.

PolicyLink & The Food Trust. University of Michigan Injury Center. (2016). Youth empowerment solutions (YES). Retrieved

03/01/16. http://www.injurycenter.umich.edu/programs/youth-empowerment-solutions-yes

Urban Peace Movement. (2016). Program info. Retrieved from: http://www.urbanpeacemovement.org/

US Census Bureau. (2010). 2010 State & county quickfacts. Retrieved

from: census.gov/quickfacts US Census Bureau. (2014). Poverty status in the past 12 months: 2010-2014, American

Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. Retrieved from: http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=CF US Department of Justice. (2014). Statistical briefing book. Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention. Retrieved from: http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/JAR.asp Violence Policy Center. (2015) Lost youth: A county-by-county analysis of 2013 California

homicide victims ages 10 to 24. Retrieved from: http://www.vpc.org/studies/cayouth2015.pdf

Webster D., Whitehill J.M., Vernick J., and Parker E. (2012). Evaluation of Baltimore’s Safe Streets program: Effects on attitudes, participants’ experiences, and gun violence. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Center for the Prevention of Youth Violence.

World Health Organization (WHO). (2002). World Report on Violence and Health. Retrieved from: http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/violence/world_report/en/

World Health Organization (WHO). (2003). Diet, nutrition, and the prevention of chronic diseases. WHO Technical Report Series, Geneva.

World Health Organization (WHO). (2004). “5-a-day” symposium to encourage fruit and vegetable consumption in Asia-Pacific. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/notes/2004/np17/en/

World Health Organization (WHO). (2005). Nutrition in adolescence – issues and challenges for the health sector. WHO Discussion Papers on Adolescence.

  16  

World Health Organization (WHO). (2010). Strengthening the health sector response to adolescent health and development. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/maternal_child_adolescent/documents/cah_adh_flyer_2010/en/

World Health Organization (WHO). (2014). Health for the world’s adolescents: A second chance in the second decade: Executive summary. Retrieved from: www.who.int/adolescent/second-decade

World Health Organization (WHO). (2015). Youth Violence Fact Sheet. Retrieved from: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs356/en/

World Health Organization (WHO). (2016). Maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health: Adolescent development. World Health Organization Adolescent Development, 1-2. Retrieved from: http://www.who.int/maternal_child_adolescent/topics/adolescence/dev/en/

Youth Alive! (2016). Program info. Retrieved from: http://www.youthalive.org/about-us/ Youth Empowerment Systems (YES) (2016). Retrieved 03/01/16.

http://yes.sph.umich.eduhttp://yes.sph.umich.edu/ Youth UpRising. (2016). Program info. Retrieved from: http://www.youthuprising.org/ Zimmerman, M., Stewart, S., Morrel-Samuels, S., Franzen S., Thomas, M., & Reischl, T. (2011).

Youth empowerment solutions for peaceful communities: Combining theory and practice in a community-level violence prevention curriculum. Health Promotion Practice, 12(3):425-39.

Zuk, M., Chapple, K., Crispell, M., Montojo, N., & Maurer, S. (2015). Urban displacement project: Executive summary. University of California: Berkeley. Retrieved from http://www.urbandisplacement.org/sites/default/files/images/urban_displacement_project_-_executive_summary.pdf

  17  

APPENDIX A: Target Area Maps Map 1. North-Oakland/Berkeley/Emeryville “NOBE” neighborhood boundaries (NOBE, 2016).

Note: Demographic data specifically on the NOBE neighborhood cannot be easily obtained as NOBE spans two cities—Berkeley and Oakland—each with their own public health departments and separate reporting protocol. Presenting the most current and accurate demographics for this specific target area required we build our own dataset. To do so, we downloaded relevant demographic data for Alameda County from the 2014 ACS 5-year estimates (US Census, 2014) and used ArcMap 10 to create a boundary file representing the NOBE region (informed by the NOBE Real Estate website (2016) and by correspondence with our community partner, Jacinda Abcarian (2016) (Map 1). By joining the census data to our NOBE shapefile, we were able to determine the exact numbers and percentages of young people, black and Latino individuals, and people living under the federal poverty line in this region (maps 2-5).

  18  

 Map 2.“NOBE” Neighborhood Block Groups by Percent Impoverished

Generated in ArcMap 10 using ACS 2014 5-year estimates Map 3.“NOBE” Neighborhood Block Groups by Percent Aged 15-24

Generated in ArcMap 10 using ACS 2014 5-year estimates

  19  

Map 4. “NOBE” Neighborhood Block Groups by Percent Black

Generated in ArcMap 10 using ACS 2014 5-year estimates Map 5. “NOBE” Neighborhood Block Groups by Percent Latino

Generated in ArcMap 10 using ACS 2014 5-year estimates

  20  

APPENDIX B: Social Cognitive Theory Social cognitive theory (SCT) encompasses six constructs to describe personal,

behavioral, and environmental factors that impact the likelihood of behavior change (NCI, 2005). Reciprocal determinism refers to the cyclical nature of the relationship between an individual, their behavior, and their environment. Behavioral capability acknowledges that behavior change necessitates both knowledge and skills. Expectations are anticipated outcomes of a behavior. Self-efficacy refers to confidence in one’s ability to change their behavior and to overcome barriers. Observational learning states that behavior change is a result of observing the actions and consequences of other individuals’ behavior. The final construct, reinforcement, is a response to behavior that either increases or decreases the likelihood of repeating that behavior.

To address diet-related illness, we will intervene on each level of reciprocal determinism: on the personal level by distributing food vouchers to youth employees; on the behavioral level by promoting healthy eating habits through educational and skills-based workshops; and on the environmental level by increasing access to healthy foods in the community. Behavioral capability will be addressed through skills-based workshops that promote healthy shopping, cooking, and eating. Community leaders modeling outcomes of healthy eating and cooking behaviors in skills-based workshops will form expectations of the positive effects of healthy diets among workshop attendees. We will promote self-efficacy by approaching healthy eating behaviors and food access through avenues allowing participants to independently adopt healthy habits when they feel confident, able, and willing to do so. Observational learning will occur when participants connect to and engage with role models who promote healthy cooking and eating habits. Role models will include community leaders who teach skill-based workshops on health-promoting topics such as gardening and cooking, as well as representatives from CBOs that advocate for healthy eating and food justice. Reinforcement will be provided through voluntary rewards and incentives for healthy eating behaviors in the form of Market Match, a healthy food incentive program in the state of California, and in the distribution of healthy food vouchers.

Similar to our intervention strategy for decreasing diet-related illness, our strategy for youth violence reduction addresses each level of reciprocal determinism. On the personal level, we will attempt to change individual attitudes regarding violent behavior. On the behavioral level, we will provide youth with the necessary skills to defuse violent situations. On the environmental level, we will provide alternative paths to financial security, while also cultivating a safe and supportive space for young people. We will address behavioral capacity by offering skills-based workshops to teach non-violent problem-solving strategies, such as anger management and conflict resolution tactics. We will address expectations with skills-based workshops that include role-playing scenarios in which potentially violent situations are de-escalated using the nonviolent strategies being taught. Regarding self-efficacy, we will provide employment opportunities to youth in the community to promote economic security, thereby reducing the likelihood of youth becoming involved in violence through gangs. For observational learning, we will provide youth with opportunities to form valuable, trust-based relationships with role models at their place of work. For reinforcement, we will incentivize positive behavior by offering job promotions and increased responsibility as rewards for displaying model behavior.

  21  

APPENDIX C: ECSES Logic Model

Pro

cess Ob

jectives (Activities)

Red

uctio

n in

you

th

violen

ce (G2)

Decreased

diet-related

illn

ess (G1)

Strength

ened

com

mu

nity

coh

esion

and

co

nn

ectedn

ess (G3)

You

th h

ave imp

roved

diets (O

9)

You

th are em

po

wered

to m

ake p

ositive ch

anges in

com

mu

nities

and

lives (O10)

You

th h

ave increased

eco

no

mic secu

rity (O1)

You

th feel th

at the farm

er’s m

arket is a safe space fo

r co

mm

un

ity dialo

gue an

d so

cial co

nn

ection

(O11)

CB

Os tab

le and

pro

vide

info

rmatio

n (P3)

EC staff an

d C

Ps offer co

mm

un

ity d

inn

ers with

a facilitated d

ialogu

e co

mp

on

ent (P6)

EC creates yo

uth

emp

loym

ent

op

po

rtun

ities (P1)

EC p

rovid

es health

y foo

d

vou

chers fo

r you

th em

plo

yees (P2)

EC staff an

d co

mm

un

ity partn

ers o

ffer skills-based

wo

rksho

ps to

yo

uth

and

com

mu

nity-m

emb

ers (P4)

CPs o

ffer you

th-led

arts p

rogram

min

g (P7)

CPs o

ffer cultu

ral and

po

litical w

orksh

op

s to yo

uth

and

co

mm

un

ity-mem

bers (P5)

Ecolo

gy Cen

ter Sum

mer Even

t Series (ECSES) at So

uth

Berk

eley Farmers’ M

arket

Long-Term O

utcomes

You

th h

ave increased

self-efficacy to

make h

ealthy

dietary ch

oices (O

6)

You

th h

ave increased

critical co

nscio

usn

ess abo

ut so

cial issues

faced b

y the co

mm

un

ity (O12)

You

th p

urch

ase health

ier fo

od

(O2)

You

th h

ave increased

self-efficacy to

de-escalate

con

flict and

preven

t vio

lence (O

7)

Sho

rt-Term O

utco

mes

Imp

act

You

th h

ave increased

u

tilization

of reso

urces in

th

e com

mu

nity (O

5)

You

th h

ave increased

kn

ow

ledge ab

ou

t nu

trition

or

violen

ce-preven

tion

. (O3)

You

th h

ave increased

nu

trition

o

r violen

ce-preven

tion

skills. (O

4)

You

th h

ave increased

cross-

cultu

ral emp

athy an

d

un

derstan

din

g (O8)

Key

EC: Eco

logy C

enter

CB

O: C

om

mu

nity-B

ased O

rganizatio

nC

P: C

om

mu

nity Partn

er (partn

ers may in

clud

e You

th

Spirit A

rtwo

rks, Destin

y Arts, Ph

at Beets, an

d H

ealthy

Black Fam

ilies). Yo

uth

: Mem

bers o

f the target p

op

ulatio

n (lo

w-in

com

e A

frican A

merican

and

Latino

you

ng p

eop

le aged 15-24

living in

No

rth O

akland

/Sou

th B

erkeley.

  22  

APPENDIX D: Organizational Capacity of Community Partners Destiny Arts Center Interviewed: Indi McCasey, On-Site Programs Director; Joy Tang, Grants Manager

For over two decades, Destiny Arts Center (DAC), a community-based nonprofit organization located in North Oakland, has been working a their mission to “end isolation, prejudice and violence in the lives of young people.” Together with their 12-person staff and numerous community partners, DAC addresses this mission through: movement-based workshops; skills training to youth in the performing and martial arts; violence prevention; outreach, adult mentorship; supporting youth’s development creativity, and artistic expression; and by providing mediums for youth to communicate messages of peace. Destiny Arts’ vision is for young people to “respond rather than react to situations; teach and practice love rather than violence; honor people from different backgrounds and experiences equally; and be connected to and participants in the life of their communities.” As leaders in youth violence prevention through movement-based empowerment programs, DEC is an ideal community partner for the ECSES, offering movement classes and nonviolent workshops at the event series. Healthy Black Families, Inc. Interviewed: Vicki Alexander, Executive Director

Healthy Black Families, Inc (HBF)., founded in 2013, is a nonprofit organization with a vision “to bring about health equality for black babies and full health equity for all black children and families.” Working toward this vision, HBF provides education, engagement, capacity-building, advocacy, and empowerment among the black community. HBF acknowledges that health equity will not be attained until racism is eliminated, and examines health disparities in tandem with the social determinants of health. The HBF Board of Directors encompasses experienced and knowledgeable community leaders who will play an integral role in delivering cultural and political workshops and forums at the ECSES. HBF will be instrumental to facilitating crucial community dialogue surrounding racism, poverty, and other social determinants that produce the health disparities impacting the lives of residents in North Oakland and South Berkeley. Phat Beets Produce Interviewed: Max Cadji, Executive Director

Phat Beets Produce was founded in 2007 as a food justice collective with the goal of “closing the gap between small farmers’ of color that lack market outlets and urban communities that lack access to healthy, affordable, culturally appropriate food.” The collective now supports two certified, clinic-based farmer’s markets, one youth-led school farm stand and community nutrition hub, and a youth market garden in partnership with a local hospital obesity prevention program, provides periodic workshops, and offers a Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) box subscription. Phat Beets has active community partnerships with the Agriculture and Land-Based Training Association (ALBA), People’s Grocery, Oakland Based Urban Gardens (OBUGS), St Martin De Porress Elementary, Health Hearts Clinic at Children’s Hospital Oakland, Arlington medical Center, The Dover St Neighborhood Group, and Oakland Local. Phat Beets is also a part of the North Oakland Restorative Justice Council and the Economic Development Without Displacement Coalition. The participation of Phat Beets in the ECSES will provide a critical social justice framework through which to design and deliver activities. Youth Spirit Artworks: Interviewed: Sally Hindman, Executive Director

  23  

Founded in 2007, Youth Spirit Artworks (YSA) is an art jobs training program located in Berkeley, California, which serves homeless and low-income young people, ages 16-25 in the San Francisco Bay Area. YSA employs a 12-person staff, 8 of whom are youth aged 16-25 from the community. YSA accomplishes their mission to “use art jobs and jobs training to empower and transform the lives of youth, giving young people the skills, experience, and self-confidence needed to meet their full potential” through a fine art program, a community art program, and an art entrepreneurship program. YSA’s involvement in ECSES through a community art program will instrumental in building community capacity, cohesion, and trust. As many of YSA’s projects are facilitated by youth leaders, this partnership will provide positive role-modeling and mentorship for young community-members.

  24  

APPENDIX E: Ecology Center Organizational Chart

Prepared by Ecology Center.

ADVISORY)BOARD)

BOARD)OF)DIRECTORS)

EXECUTIVE)DIR)Martin)Bourque)

FOOD)&)FARM

ING)

PRGM)DIR)

Ben)Feldman)

FARM)FRESH

)CHOICE)

PRGM)COORD)

Dante)AlnasDBenson)

FM)ACCESS)&

)EQUITY)PRGM

)MNGR)

Carle)Brinkman)

FM)ACCESS)&

)EQUITY)COORD)

Jeannette)Lim)

LEAD)MRKT)M

NGR)&

)SPECIAL)EVEN

T)COORD)

Amanda)Gordon)

FM)PROGRAM

)MNGR))

Martin)Johnson)

ASST)FM)MANAGER)

Paul)Stone)

FM)ASSISTAN

T)David)Jaberi)

YOUTH)

DEVELOPMENT)

PRGM)MNGR)

To)Be)Hired)

YOUTH)PROGRAM

)ASSITAN

T)Griselda)Serratos)

YOUTH)PROGRAM

)ASSISTAN

T)Jacquse)W

yatt)

DEPUTY)DIRECTOR)Deborah)Beyea)

SENIOR)

ACCOUNTAN

T)Greg)M

organ)

ACCOUNTIN

G)ASSOC)Susan)M

iller)

ADMIN)SVCS)M

NGR)

Jackie)Yep) DEVELOPMENT)DIR)

Jacinda)Abcarian)

ED)&)EN

GAGEMENT)

PRGM)DIR)

Amy)Kiser)

ED)&)EN

GAGEMENT)

PRGM)MNGR)

Carrie)Bennett)

ED)&)EN

GAGEMNT)

PRGM)COORD)

Jeannie)Pham)

ED)&)EN

GAGEMENT)

PRGM)ASSOC)

James)H

osley)

ADMIN)ASSOCIATE)

Tatille)Jackson)

STORE)MANAGER)

Alison)Moreno)

STORE)ASSOCIATE)Russ)H

arvey)

COMMUN

ICATIONS)

COORD)Leah)Fessenden)

IT)COORDINATOR)

Lan)Minds)Consulting)

RECYCLING)PRGM

)DIRECTOR)Daniel)M

aher)

CUSTOMER)SVC)

REPRESENTATIVE)

Ignacio)Zulueta)

CURBSIDE)DRIVERS)(11))

Salvador)Avalos)Hahns)Cook)

Ryan))Evans)Ben))M

ah)Miguel)N

avarro)Encarnacion))Rivera)Reyes)Sandoval)

Jose)Soto)Jorge))Lopexz)Caloca)Jonathan)Valencia)Wenqi))Zhang)

)

)))

)))ORGANIZATION

AL)CHART)

  25  

APPENDIX F: Program Implementation Work Plan

2016%ECOLO

GY%CENTER%SU

MMER%EVEN

T%SERIES%WORKPLAN

TaskStaff%Responsible

5/105/17

5/245/31

6/76/14

6/216/28

7/57/12

7/197/26

8/28/9

8/168/23

8/30General

Coordinate*w/*Y

outhWorks*to

*create*12*positio

ns*fo

r*youth*employees*to

*staff*E

CSES

Youth&Program&Assista

nts

Communica

te*with

*partn

er*o

rganiza

tions*a

bout*ca

pacity

*for*in

volvement*in

*ECSES

Jacin

da&A.&&

&Martin

&B.&

Apply*fo

r*amplifie

d*so

und*perm

it*with

*City

*of*B

erkeley*to

*cover*a

ll*12*ECSES*events

Amanda&Gordon

Plan*site

Doperatio

ns*a

nd*venue*layout;*g

enerate*venue*m

ap

Amanda&Gordon

Promotion

Desig

n*&*prin

t*poste

rs*&*flie

rs*to*promote*ECSES*

Youth&Interns

Submit*a

dvertise

ment*to

*local*newspapers*&

*radio*sta

tions,*sh

are*co

ntent*o

n*Facebook

Youth&Interns

Targeted*outre

ach,*in

cluding*distrib

utin

g*event*p

oste

rs*&*flie

rsYouth&W

orks&E

mployees

Generate*event*sig

nage*fo

r*all*E

CSES*activ

ities*a

nd*zo

nes

Youth&Program&Assista

nts

Hiring.&.Training.

Hire

*head*ch

ef*fo

r*community

*dinners*(1

)Martin

&Johnson

Hire

*line*co

oks*fo

r*community

*dinners*(2

)Head&Chef

Onboard*Youth*W

orks*E

mployees*(1

2)

Youth&Program&Assista

nts

Contra

ct*workshop*facilita

tors*(6

*for*sk

illsDbased*&*6*fo

r*cultu

ral/p

olitica

l)Jacin

da&Abcaria

n

Contra

ct*youthDle

d*co

mmunity

*art*p

roject*co

ordinator*(1

)*Youth&Program&Assista

nts

Contra

ct*local*m

usicia

n(s)/b

and(s)*to

*perfo

rm*at*m

onthly*su

mmer*e

vening*block*partie

s*Youth&Interns

Train*existin

g*sta

ff*on*program*im

plementatio

n*

Martin

&Johnson

Procurement

Rent*su

pplies*fo

r*community

*dinners/C

BO*ta

bling/w

orkshops/m

usic*(se

e*budget*fo

r*details)

Amanda&Gordon

Purch

ase*su

pplies*fo

r*community

*dinners/sig

nage/decoratio

ns/a

rt*(see*budget*fo

r*details)

Amanda&Gordon

Plan*m

enu*&*generate*sh

opping*list*fo

r*community

*dinners

Head&Chef

Communica

te*with

*farm

ers*re

:*food*fo

r*community

*dinners;*p

urch

ase*ingredients

Martin

&Johnson

Site.Operations

Communica

te*onDsite

*logistics*to

*all*co

ntra

ctors*

Amanda&Gordon

Set*u

p*&*ta

ke*down*Famer's*M

arket,*in

cluding*infra

structu

re*to

*support*a

dditio

nal*activ

ities

Youth&W

orks&E

mployees

Bolste

r*usual*w

aste

*management*e

fforts*to

*support*in

creased*atte

ndance*

Youth&W

orks&E

mployees

Youth.Employm

ent.ProgramDistrib

ute*$10*fo

od*vouchers*to

*youth*employees

Youth&Program&Assista

nts

Brie

f*youth*before*sh

ift,*supervise

*durin

g*sh

ift,*debrie

f*afte

r*shift*

Youth&Program&Assista

nts

CBO.Tabling.&

.Info.SessionsDisp

lay*and*explain*co

mmunity

*resource

s*to*event*a

ttendees

CBO&Representative

s

Workshops

Facilita

te*sk

illsDbased*workshop

Workshop&Facilita

tor

Facilita

te*cu

ltural*&

*politica

l*workshops

Workshop&Facilita

tor

YouthBLed.Arts.Programming

Recru

it*youth*atte

ndees*to

*particip

ate*in*art*p

roject

ArtHb

ased&CBO&partn

er

Facilita

te*youthDle

d*co

mmunity

*art*p

roject*

ArtHb

ased&CBO&partn

er

Community.Dinners.

Cook*dinner

Head&ch

ef,&lin

e&co

oks

Serve*dinner

Youth&W

orks&E

mployees

Facilita

te*co

mmunity

*dialogue*durin

g*dinner

Local&Community&Le

ader

Live.Music.

Perfo

rm*at*m

onthly*su

mmer*e

vening*block*partie

sBand(s)/M

usicia

n(s)

PROGRAM

'IMPLEM

ENTATIO

N'W

ORKPLAN

'KEY:

Pre$implem

entation-tasks

Weekly-ECSES-tasks

Monthly-sum

mer-evening-block-party-additional-tasks

Ongoing'task,"com

pleted"by"column"date

One:tim

e'task,"completed"on"colum

n"date

EVALUATIO

N'&'SU

STAINABILITY'W

ORKPLAN

'KEY:'

Pre$Implem

entation-tasks

Weekly-ECSES-tasks

Monthly-sum

mer-evening-block-party-additional-tasks

Evaluation-&-sustainability-tasks

Ongoing'task,"com

pleted"by"column"date

One:tim

e'task,"completed"on"colum

n"date

  26  

APPENDIX G: ECSES Budget I. PE

RSO

NN

EL

Full-time E

quivalenceH

ourly Rate

Total Hours*

Total Cost

In Kind Value

Am

ount Requested

A. Salaries and W

ages - Ecology C

enter*M

artin Bourque, Executive D

irector 4%

$6026

$1,560$1,560

$0Jacinda A

bacarian, Developm

ent Director

10%$48

64$3,072

$3,072$0

Martin Johnson, Farm

ers' Market Program

Coordinator

10%$34

64$2,176

$2,176$0

Carle B

rinkman, Farm

ers' Market Equity Program

Manager

4%$36

26$936

$936$0

Am

anda Gordon, Special Event C

oordinator20%

$36128

$4,608$4,608

$0D

ante Kaleo A

lnas-Benson, Youth Program

Assistant10%

$14.5064

$928.00$928.00

$0G

riselda Serratos, Youth Program Assistant

5%$14.50

32$464.00

$464.00$0

Heather W

alton, Youth Program Assistant

5%$14.50

32$464.00

$464.00$0

Youth Interns (x3)5%

$1096

$960$960

$0Subtotal Salaries and W

ages$15,168

$15,168$0

B. Fringe B

enefits25%

of salariesSubtotal Fringe Benefits

$3,792$3,792

$0C

. Consultant and C

ontract ServicesA

ctivityH

ourly Rate

Total Hours*

Total Cost

In Kind Value

Am

ount Requested

Head C

hef C

omm

unity Dinners

$2010

$200$200

Line Cooks

Com

munity D

inners$12

20$240

$240YouthW

orks Employees

Youth Employm

ent Program$10

864$8,640

$8,640Youth Spirit A

rtworks**

Youth-Led Com

munity-A

rt Project$50

25$1,250

$1,250D

estiny Arts**

Skills-Based W

orkshops$50

25$1,250

$1,250Phat B

eets** C

ultural & Political W

orkshops$50

25$1,250

$1,250H

ealthy Black Fam

ilies**C

ultural & Political W

orkshops$50

25$1,250

$1,250Local m

usician(s)/band(s)Live M

usic$150

6$900

$900Subtotal C

ontract Services$14,980

$0$14,980

Subtotal Personnel$33,940

$18,960$14,980

II. OPE

RAT

ING

CO

STS

# of Items

Price per item# of Tim

es Needed

Total Cost

In Kind Value

Am

ount Requested

A. Farm

ers' Market Infastructure

$2,00012

$24,000$24,000

$0B

. Supplies to Rent

Banquet tables &

chairs for comm

unity dinners6 tables/60 chairs

$803

$240$240

Event tent for comm

unity dinner (20’x30’)1

$3303

$990$990

Grills for com

munity dinners

3$145

3$1,305

$1,305Tables &

chairs for CB

O tabling

6 tables/12 chairs$12

12$144

$144Sound system

1

$25012

$3,000$3,000

Stage for workshops &

live music perform

ances 1

$5003

$1,500$1,500

C. Supplies to Purchase

Food for comm

unity dinners $500

3$1,500

$1,500B

anquet serving dishes for comm

unity dinners 10

$53

$150$150

Com

postable serveware for com

munity dinners

$753

$225$225

Art m

aterials $700

$700D

ecorations for summ

er evening block parties$300

$300D

. Other C

ostsPrint Ecology C

enter comm

unity resource information

$153

$45$45

Promotional m

aterials and event signage$300

$300A

dvertisement - local new

spaper and radio stations$100

3$300

$300A

dditional waste m

anagement

$1503

$450$450

Am

plified noise permits

$22612

$2,712$2,712

Incentives for evaluation focus groups8

$103

$240$240

Youth food vouchers12

$1012

$1,440$1,440

Evaluation$2,000

$2,000$0

Subtotal Operating C

osts$41,541

$26,000$15,541

Subtotal Direct C

osts $75,481

$44,960$30,521

III. IND

IRE

CT C

OST

SIndirect C

osts15%

of Direct C

osts$11,322

$11,322SU

MM

AR

YTotal

In Kind Value

Am

ount Requested

I. Subtotal Direct

$75,481$44,960

$30,521II. Subtotal Indirect

$11,322$0

$11,322TO

TAL PR

OJE

CT C

OST

$86,803$44,960

$41,843

  27  

APPENDIX H: Evaluation & Sustainability Workplan

PROGRAM

'IMPLEM

ENTATIO

N'W

ORKPLAN

'KEY:

Pre$implem

entation-tasks

Weekly-ECSES-tasks

Monthly-sum

mer-evening-block-party-additional-tasks

Ongoing'task,"com

pleted"by"column"date

One:tim

e'task,"completed"on"colum

n"date

EVALUATIO

N'&'SU

STAINABILITY'W

ORKPLAN

'KEY:'

Pre$Implem

entation-tasks

Weekly-ECSES-tasks

Monthly-sum

mer-evening-block-party-additional-tasks

Evaluation-&-sustainability-tasks

Ongoing'task,"com

pleted"by"column"date

One:tim

e'task,"completed"on"colum

n"date

2016%ECSES%SUSTAIN

ABILITY%AND%EVALU

ATION%W

ORKPLAN

TaskStaff%Responsible

5/175/31

6/146/28

7/127/26

8/98/30

9/139/27

10/1110/25

11/811/22

EvaluationCreate&evaluation&plan

Jacinda'AbcarianCreate&pre.&and&post.tests

Jacinda'AbcarianCreate&program

&evaluation&questionnairesActivity'Facilitators'&

'YouthWorks'Em

ployeesCollect&data:&docum

ent&reviewActivity'Facilitators'&

'YouthWorks'Em

ployees

Collect&data:&pre.&and&post.testsActivity'Facilitators'&

'YouthWorks'Em

ployeesCollect&data:&program

&evaluation&questionnairesActivity'Facilitators'&

'YouthWorks'Em

ployeesRecruit&focus&group&participants

Youth'Interns'&'YouthW

orks'Employees

Collect&data:&focus&groupsYouth'Interns'&

'YouthWorks'Em

ployeesAnalyze&data

Jacinda'AbcarianCom

pile&and&review&findings

Jacinda'AbcarianDevelop&key&findings&report

Jacinda'AbcarianDevelop&final&report

Jacinda'AbcarianDistribute&key&findings&to&com

munity

Youth'Program'Assistants'&

'Youth'InternsDistribute&final&report&to&stakeholders&&

&fundersJacinda'Abcarian'&

'Martin'Bourque

SustainabilityBuild&Coalition&

All'Community'Partner'Staff

Maintain&detailed&docum

entation&of&implem

entationAll'program

'staff,'managed'by'M

artin'JohnsonExplore&additional&funding&opportunities

Jacinda'Abcarian