First Place For Youth
Rating: 4 stars 12 reviews
Issues: Children & Youth, Job Training, Homeless & Housing, Human Services
Location: 519 17TH St Ste 600 Oakland CA 94612 USA
Results: While 65% of California foster youth who “age out” of care become homeless immediately, 92% of former foster youth who go through the First Place program maintain safe and affordable housing. Over the last decade, First Place has had a profound impact on our youth participants. When compared to other transition age foster youth, First Place youth are: * five times less likely to experience homelessness * three times less likely to give birth before the age of 21 * three times less likely to be arrested * six times more likely to be enrolled in college * twice as likely to graduate from high school * twice as likely to be employed
Direct beneficiaries per year: 927 former foster youth
Geographic areas served: San Francisco County, Alameda County, Solano County, Contra Costa County
Filter Reviews by Role
Promote This Nonprofit
5 people found this review helpful
The staff at First Place are highly qualified and dedicated, and the organization is well intentioned. There are some serious problems however, which are masked by misleading and selective outcomes reporting. The often quoted educational outcome for example, which reports the percentage of youth who enroll in an educational program as a marker of success, is vague and misleading. This percentage represents only the percentage of youth who enroll -- as in sign up for a class, usually with strong assistance from a staff member -- at a Community College or vocational program. This percentage does not represent the number of youth who graduate from an educational program, nor the number of youth who even complete the course for which they signed up. Similarly, the percentage of youth who exit to stable housing upon leaving the program, which is touted as another measure of success, is again vague and misleading. Stable housing may include living with a family member, and could in fact be the exact same housing situation a youth was in prior to entering the program. So a youth who was living with a relative enters program, receives a rental subsidy and lives in an apartment for 2 years. Upon exit, that youth returns to live with the same family member. This is certainly better and more stable than homelessness or an unaffordable rental situation, but should not be portrayed as a positive outcome since it represents no actual change.
More inclusive, comprehensive and transparent outcomes would paint a more complete and detailed picture programs, and would help the organization identify and address areas for improvement.
How does this organization compare with others in the same sector?
How much of an impact do you think this organization has?
Will you recommend this organization to others?
When was your last experience with this nonprofit?