YEP: Interpret Findings with Community

ResourceJul 24, 2025

This phase of the YEP project focused on working with research group members to make meaning of their data and identify recommendations that reflected their experiences. Our goal was to create individual profiles of each of the five grantee organizations’ policy wins as well as a summary report with a finalized framework for authentically engaging young people in the policy process. To achieve this, we needed to interpret the data on both an individual organization level and a broader group level. We held four meetings fully dedicated to making meaning of our data, along with a portion of a fifth meeting. One of these was a meeting with individual grantee organizations, while the other four were full group meetings. In the full group meetings, we included at least one activity for each component of the framework as it related to our research questions. The details of each of these sessions are below.   

Session 1: individual meaning making 

Objectives: 

  • Gather feedback on the themes we found in individual grantee organizations’ data 
  • Be prepared to write the case study for individual grantee organizations’ policy win 

Because youth engagement work is nuanced, and recognizing that our data collection may not have captured a full picture of all this work, we prioritized building a shared understanding of youth roles, the policy process, and related outcomes. It was important to discuss examples of the roles youth played in policy efforts and identify which stages of the policy process their activities aligned with. These individual meetings allowed us to reach an agreement so we could recode some of this data if necessary.  

Downloadable Resources

Session 2: organizational practices codes and local factors discussion 

Objectives: 

  • Make meaning of data related to organizational practices and local factors 
  • Work together to turn our data into something meaningful and actionable  

In this session we focused on data related to organizational practices and local factors that might help or hinder youth engagement in the policy process. The first activity was focused on helping us refine our codebook by reviewing the organizational practices codes and identifying any that could be removed, combined, or revised. This ensured the list of themes remained manageable and meaningful for reporting. Then we had a discussion utilizing interview excerpts from our most coded themes within the local factors.  

Downloadable Resource

Session 3: youth engagement definition and how organizational practices help or hinder youth engagement 

Objectives: 

  • Make meaning of data related to engaging youth and organizational practices 
  • Work together to turn our data into something meaningful and actionable  

In this session, we shared updates we made to our codebook based on the discussion in our previous meeting. Then we spent time on two main activities. The first was to create a definition for authentic youth engagement, using some data for inspiration. The second was to revisit organizational practices and ask research group members to consider how different themes (e.g., adult training, recruitment) might help or hinder youth engagement. We did this by creating a mind map.  

Downloadable Resources

Session 4: major findings identification by research question 

Objectives: 

  • Make meaning of data related to outcomes and recommendations 
  • Work together to turn your data into something meaningful and actionable  

In this session, we had small group discussions about outcomes, particularly community outcomes and organizational outcomes. Then we asked research group members to react to recommendations drawn from interview data. We spent time editing, rewriting, and removing recommendations before we asked research group members to prioritize the recommendations. 

Downloadable Resources

Session 5: turning key findings into conclusions 

Objectives: 

  • Make meaning of data related to outcomes and recommendations 
  • Work together to turn your data into something meaningful and actionable  

In this session, we dedicated half of the time to a final meaning making activity. We asked research group members to review key findings pulled from the data related to youth roles, policy process, and organizational practices. We then worked collaboratively to develop conclusions we could include in the summary report.  

Downloadable Resources

The Youth Engagement in Policy Research Group brought together young leaders and practitioners from across the country: Jamya Clark and Faith Robinson (New Orleans Youth Alliance); Teddy DeLeon-Alvarado, Blandina Flores, and Sam Joo (Para Los Niños); Iziko Calderon and Brisia Gutierrez (Los Angeles Opportunity Youth Collaborative); Nadirra Monrose and Tony Turner (Center for Fair Futures); and Deven Rudy-Johnson, MSW, and Kyra Stoute (Georgia EmpowerMEnt). Child Trends staff included principal investigators Amy McKlindon and Samantha Holquist; researchers Alyssa Scott, Ja’Chelle Ball, Jessica Conway, and Sage Caballero; and senior advisors Karin Malm and Elizabeth Jordan (Child Trends) and Julie Petrokubi (Education Northwest). 

If you have questions about the Authentic Youth Engagement in Policy Project, please contact co-Principal Investigators Amy McKlindon at amcklindon@childtrends.org and Samantha E. Holquist at sholquist@childtrends.org

This study is supported by the Conrad N. Hilton Foundation through its Foster Youth and Opportunity Youth Initiatives.