Selecting statewide youth development outcome indicators.

This article presents the process used to develop a set of statewide positive youth development (YD) outcome indicators to complement existing adolescent well-being indicators in New York State (NYS). Intended uses included program and community-, county-, and state-level planning; grant writing; evaluation; and outcome monitoring in coordination with national YD-oriented initiatives. A common set of metrics, if adopted, would promote consistency and information sharing across levels and purposes. A workgroup of the NYS Youth Development Team reviewed existing indicators and accepted nominations from NYS stakeholders. Input from Youth Development Team members and national YD experts was used to narrow the list to 91. Forty-one NYS policy makers performed card sorts and ratings of the indicators, and a concept-mapping process, employing hierarchical cluster analysis, identified nine clusters of items. The policy makers, along with 121 NYS program providers and 91 young adults (aged 18-21) rated the indicators from 1 ("not important") to 5 ("very important"). All intergroup correlations of ratings were 0.93 or greater, and therefore responses were analyzed together. The concept map and mean indicator ratings were used to select a short list of 15 indicators. Although respondents were intentionally given a mix of problem-focused, risk-focused, and strength-based items, the highest rated items were almost exclusively strength based.

Intention to notify sexual partners about potential HIV exposure among New York city STD clinics' clients.

BACKGROUND: Partner notification legislation has recently been implemented in New York State. GOAL: The goal of the study was to assess willingness of individuals seeking HIV testing to (1) give counselors contact information about partners, if infected, and (2) contact partners on their own. STUDY DESIGN: Before implementation of the legislation, 1372 individuals seeking HIV testing at New York City Department of Health STD clinics completed a brief, anonymous survey. RESULTS: More than 90% of heterosexually active individuals and more than 80% of men who have sex with men (MSM) could contact sex partners with whom they had had unprotected vaginal/anal sex. Were they to test HIV-positive, almost all respondents would have been willing to notify sex partners personally; 90% of heterosexually active individuals and 80% of MSM also expressed willingness to provide contact information to providers. Respondents preferred to be notified by a sex partner rather than by a provider. Patient-referred clients reported being more comfortable with the referral than provider-referred clients. CONCLUSIONS: Voluntary partner notification performed by the index case-with notification by the provider should the former fail to occur-is recommended.