(October 2008) Division Criteria | States | | 1. Organizations that have been established a minimum of 10 years, have multiple paid staff, non-profit tax status, rely on diverse funding streams, have a well established board of directors who are not all service providers, provide training, technical assistance, and resources, extensive advocacy activities with policymakers, and have long range plans. | Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, District of Columbia, Georgia, South Carolina, and Colorado | | 2. Organizations that are non-profit, with 1-2 staff, small boards, limited programs, may be in capacity building or re-building phase of organizational development. | Alabama, Iowa, California
| 3. Organizations that are non-profit, have no full-time paid staff, have limited financial resources and/or funding of a short term nature. May have had part time staff at times either donated by another agency or through a grant. The focus of the organization is primarily to raise awareness and do some training or an annual conference. Advocacy activities are non-existent or very limited. May or may not have been in existence 10 or more years.
| Kentucky, Nebraska, New York, Oregon, Indiana | 4. In this division, efforts at creating a state organization on adolescent pregnancy prevention are built on state task forces or coalitions whose primary focus is on teenage parents. Groups are non-profit and many have been in existence for years with volunteer or staff leadership. May also have some prevention activities.
| California, Texas | 5. States which have or had prevention task forces or committees that are created almost solely by state government agencies, generally a Department of Health, Human Services, Education, or a University. This structure often does not include diverse, non-provider leaders and often exists at the pleasure of the governor, state legislature or University and may not have sustained longevity. Some are no longer functioning.
| Alaska, Delaware, Idaho, Kansas, Nevada, New Jersey, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Virginia, Tennessee, Michigan, West Virginia, Louisiana, Maryland, Wyoming, Wisconsin, Missouri | 6. Emerging efforts to establish a new state organization are occurring. May have or are considering non-profit status or recently filed for it. Volunteer leadership, limited or no funding and activities.
| Rhode Island, Michigan, Texas, Oregon, Missouri | 7. States which have had an organization in the past, but do not appear to have a functioning organization in place now.
| Connecticut, Utah, Arizona | 8. States which have no separate organization at this time, but there may be other issue groups that serve the state and include adolescent pregnancy prevention as a secondary issue or one of many risk issues. Groups may be public or private and their commitment to teenage pregnancy may be tenuous and may not involve a continual program.
| Hawaii, New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine, Washington | 9. No formal state body can be currently identified.
| Ohio, South Dakota, Florida, Arkansas, Montana, Mississippi | 10. States that have state funded grant programs for local community based prevention programs.
| North Carolina, South Carolina, Iowa, California, Massachusetts, Oregon, New York, Colorado, Indiana | 11. States that have state funded grant programs for local programs to support teen parents or reduce repeat pregnancies.
| North Carolina, Illinois, California, Massachusetts, Iowa, Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio | 12. States that allocate funds for School Based Health Centers.
| Massachusetts, Oregon, North Carolina, Michigan, Minnesota | 13. States which have rejected Title V abstinence until marriage only funds. (12/07)
| California, Maine, Arizona, Ohio, Wisconsin, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Montana, New Jersey, Wyoming, Virginia, Minnesota, Rhode Island, New Mexico, Iowa,Colorado | 14. States in CDC Promoting Science Based Approaches to Teen Pregnancy Prevention Project
| North Carolina, South Carolina, Colorado, Hawaii, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Massachusetts, Washington |
This chart looks at formal organized bodies responsible for creating, implementing, and/or monitoring and evaluating teen pregnancy prevention efforts in a state.
State organizations regardless of their structure may use any of the following titles:
Campaign Association Task Force Steering Committee
Council Organization Committee Action Group
Coalition Caucus Network
*Almost all states have a person or office identified within state government that is defined as the responsible party for adolescent pregnancy prevention in the state. This may be a designated person or the state adolescent health coordinator may be the designate.
Source: Barbara Huberman, Advocates for Youth, July 2008. Not Published.
|
