HomeMy WebLinkAbout05.01.2023 @630 Reg Youth Commission Agenda Packet
! "!
!!
" #$% $&" '
(
! $
1
( ! $
)* ) *! *
#$%" &
' % ! ! (
" %$
' % ! !$$
" )
( ! &
$
( %
$ (*
!$$ "" +""&
)+% *!
,-./$ -011/-2/,/ --3 41.5/-- -$6-
!
"
#$ %&'%&(# )#*))
$ 2*!$
,
- ) ' $
" '''
&$
"
!$' )
$ !" )
. "%
"!
"")
/ "
-0"!"
! "! 12 $
3!!+""&
4! $ "" ' $% % &
"! '
&
/ "
$
" '&
&$
" !
"
53 " %&
$
(
!!$$
"* 4 " ) / "'! "" "
! & "%
3
$ & !
!!$$
'
! '
$
( ! (4
'
!"" !
!
&& !&
-%$
3!!+""&
53 "%&
$
(
78 78
"
2
( ! $
66,0.70
066 66
78.07947:
4,7# 0# , #7#70
;64 ##78,
#,,70 0 8 4.70,48
''&#
"&$
' <55<#
( 9
"
$$! 0! "
"
=.'
#(
9
"
"
"
# 55<0!'7
9
.% &" $$ "" "
>.% &?
$
.
4,7# 0#0.#7#70 ##4 4870 ##4,,77#7#70
.@;08#78,
78 78
"
3
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-348 Agenda Date:5/1/2023
Version:1 Item #:1.
Approval of Minutes from the April 3, 2023, Meeting
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/28/2023Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™4
City of South San Francisco
Youth Commission
Meeting Minutes: Monday, April 3, 2022
City Manager’s Conference Room, City Hall, South San Francisco, CA 94080
6:30 pm
Commission Members:
Present: Ethan Mizzi, Melissa Hua, Aaron Adriano, Sophia Cyris, Nika Mariano,
Nataly Quinteros, Julia Tsuei, Megan Yoshida, Danielle Leong, Sara Vides
Absent: Claudia Miller, Jiancarlo Ray, Daniela Aceves, Jasmine Ho
Staff Members:
Present: Tamiko Huey, Management Analyst II
Maryjo Nuñez, Management Fellow
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Call to Order:
Meeting called to order at 6:39pm.
Agenda Review:
No changes to the agenda.
Approval of Minutes:
Minutes from July 11, 2022, approved.
Public Comments:
There were no public comments.
o Items from Staff
Sweatshirts go to youth cultural arts scholarships
City won an award for Cultures United
Ingrid no longer the secretary
x Motion to approve minutes
o Motion by Commissioner Hua
o Seconded by Commissioner Yoshida
o Minutes approved
5
Friends for Youth
o Mission statement to empower youth with mentorships and community relationships
o Provide every person who needs a mentor with a mentor
o Challenges that youth face
Racism
Immigration
Class
Violence
Homelessness
Bullying
Mental health
o Mental Health
Psychological distress among youth has skyrocketed from the pandemic
In 2021, ER visits for suspected suicide attempts were 51% higher for adolescent
girls
o Wants to bring core 1:1 mentoring program
This program has been around for 40 years
Match 1 youth (8-17 years, living in the bay) to 1 mentor (commit 6 months -
1yr) and meet 2 hours weekly
Free activities like arts & crafts or STEM provided to mentors to do activities
with youth
1:1 outcomes
o 1:1 outcomes
95% had a positive attitude towards school
80% avoided suspension
o Planning on starting Group-School-based mentoring program
Go into the classroom
RWC, East Palo Alto are among the cities already participating
School Based Outcomes
x 100% recommend the program
x 89% express wish to attend college
x Application Process
o Takes about 6-8 weeks
o Fill out Google form; complete application, complete background check, etc.
Commissioner Leong: how do the mentors and mentees match, especially for the younger kids since
they can’t really write essays?
Crespin: when youth come into program, they have to be recommended by teachers or other adults,
then interview the youth, and then create a youth profile: background, why they want a mentor, etc.
Once they find a match, then share the profiles with the families and the mentor and if all agrees, it
becomes a match
6
Commissioner Leong: can Friends for Youth also help young adults, around college age? This transition
age can be difficult…
Crespin: this is something we could consider; it seems like it would be very impactful
Vice Chair Hua: how do you recruit mentors?
Crespin: The mentors have to be at least 20 years old; will go into the different colleges at career fairs,
etc. but also use social media to spread the word; have mentors in their 50s too… it’s pretty open as
long as they want to help the youth and meet the requirements
Chair Mizzi: are you working with the school district? At all the schools?
Crespin: SSFHS and Parkway Heights Middle School
Commissioner Adriano: the only way to be part of the program is through a referral through a
counselor?
Crespin: well, if a parent wants their kids to be a part, FFY can give the referral form to the parents to
give to the teacher/counselor
Commissioner Adriano: how does homeschooling work?
Crespin: it would probably be similar
Chair Mizzi: After the fall, if FFY could return and present updates, then would be appreciated
Youth Poet in Residence updates
x Chloe Chou is the current YPR
x Youth commission is all invited to the book release
x The party is to announce the next YPR as well!
x Secured funding for next year ($500 for the YPR in 2024 and chapbook published for them too)
x More applications this year than last year
x There will be a more accessible version online
Commissioner Leong: how did you print it out? It would be helpful for folks who didn’t win, to make
their own books
Marty: made all the books
Commissioners Leong and Yoshida willing to help the creation/stitching process
Marty: even though didn’t win, those who applied are still invited to submit poems for their own
chapbooks
Commissioner Leong: this is similar to zines, would love to have something like ZineFest
Commissioner Adriano: so, is this YPR part of the national YPL program?
Marty: not yet, but maybe next year … Also, this year, we did outreach to SSFHS and Baden HS but we
only received applications from ElCo
7
Tamiko: can share this information with the YIG students and the staff liaisons there
Chair Mizzi: can add info on YPR to the YIG boba slides
Chair Mizzi: you should present to the school board
Tamiko: you can ask me, and I can share with them
Marty: Comic Arts Fest is also going on in April, this is a partnership with a lot of libraries in San Mateo
County
Marty: any feedback for next time?
None… but Mizzi thanked Marty for his leadership on this program
Recess
The Youth Commissioner held a recess at 7:15pm returned at 7:22pm.
Promotores Presentation
x Launched for 1 yr
x Byproduct of racial and social equity plan in 2020
x Team of 3 SSF residents
x This is a navigational model: don’t administer these programs in-house
o They don’t give you food; they help you sign up for food
o Advocate on behalf of the client
o Individualized
x Presentation out of date now; today number is 200 clients
x 91% of clients indicate that Spanish is their primary language
x How to meet clients
o Library
o Phones/referrals
o Schools
o Canvassing
x Many of the clients are 40 yrs or older
x Top 3 service requests
o Food
o Health
o Housing
o EBT (have to be documented: get food boxes from Second Harvest)
This is not a sustainable solution though
o Health
Health coverage unit every Friday
Mobile clinic at Miller
x Initial Requests
o Most ask for food, housing, medical, legal aid
x What they ask for is not necessarily what they will get most
8
o i.e.: food
x Client Satisfaction
o Average satisfaction: 9.03/10
o 73% learned about new service
o 53% in great confidence
x Advocacy happens in a bi-directional manner
o Eyes and ears of the community Æ elevate concerns to city staff
o Ex: many residents of district 5 couldn’t pay for boosters or didn’t have a computer so
worked with county to have pop-up clinic
Commissioner Adriano: do they work with EAC closely?
Tamiko: yes, and they will be moving there soon
Vice Chair Hua: you talked about the income, not all of those who need support are not able to get
support, so what happens after that?
Tamiko: there is no limit for income; the only thing is that you have to live in SSF and the income limits
come from the programs that the clients are referred to
Vice Chair Hua: how were the 3 promotores chosen?
Tamiko: this is a grassroots model; the reason why this program works is bc you are hiring from the
community; screened on being able to work with canvassing, etc.; this is not a benefitted position and
they only work up to 25 hours. We did interviews 2 weeks ago.
Vice Chair Hua: so, would you like to keep 3 until 2040?
Tamiko: we would love to expand to 4 people by the next fiscal year
Commissioner Cyris: what does summer internships entail? What are the requirements?
Tamiko: in the past, we had college-level interns and they did data analysis; ask interns to backtrack the
data and create graphs and manage the cases; we would love to have more interns! We are getting
more interns through YSIP and you can join as long as you are bi-lingual in any other language
Tamiko: we barely get any youth; so, how can the Promotores help the youth?
Commissioner Adriano: mental health is important; if the Promotores could become counselors that
would be nice
Tamiko: so, like connections to star vista?
Commissioner Adriano: even just finding a job is something folks need
Tamiko: what do the youth need?
Commissioner Quinteros: budgeting, like financial literacy
Vice Chair Hua: yes finances, like paying for college; didn’t even know about Promotores until now
9
Commissioner Marino: building credit is something she needed help with; so how to build credit without
supportive parents is something we could do
Tamiko: even if you need something like needing help with credit, let her know. She can present on how
to build credit.
Debriefs on Boards and Commissions
Vice Chair Hua: couldn’t find the meeting link nor the recording
Chair Mizzi: attended a planning commission meeting… he said it was fine; doesn’t really remember
what they were talking about
Commissioner Adriano: on the LGBT commission, passed resolution to change standard from “he” to
“they”
Youth in Government Day Discussion
x Ad hoc committee gave feedback to Maryjo
x 11 applicants for this year
x Leong: Mr. Gassaway didn’t even show the video in the classrooms; could one last push
x Leong: it would be better to have city staff in person come
x Mizzi: he pushed it really hard for my class though…
x Yoshida: [email protected] and [email protected] (El Camino teachers)
The Youth Commissioners expressed their interest in having bananas in fraps.
Items from Commissioners
Chair Mizzi announced that the new city manager is Sharon Ranals. So, the City is now looking for
Assistant City Manager
Chair Mizzi: can the commission write a letter of thanks for Ingrid’s service and give her a pin?
If the Commission could give Ingrid a gift from the Commission’s budget that would be helpful.
Chair Mizzi and other commissioners were not able to receive texts for this meeting. Tamiko Huey thinks
it might be because of issues with T-Mobile.
Chair Mizzi was at the last school board meeting and mentioned that they are working on Measure T.
Commissioners would like a tour of the LPR.
Commissioner Adriano would like to hear general updates for this item.
Chair Mizzi announced that he will be moving to Toronto.
Commissioner Yoshida announced she is going to the University of Portland.
Commissioner Hua announced she is going to either UC Berkeley or UCLA.
Commissioner Adriano announced they are studying abroad in Japan.
10
Adjournment
Meeting adjourned on April 3, 2023 at 8:08pm.
11
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-384 Agenda Date:5/1/2023
Version:1 Item #:2.
Presentation on Commercial Reach Codes,(Christina Fernandez, Deputy City Manager)
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Youth Commission hear the presentation to learn more about commercial
reach codes and climate action and offer a youth perspective regarding this topic.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
In 2021, there was a residential reach code ordinance. A Reach Code is a voluntary code that “reaches” beyond
baseline requirements, and the Statewide Energy Code is updated every three years. Next code (2022) came
into effect 1/1/23.
CONCLUSION
Since the Youth Commission is interested in sustainability, it is recommended that they learn about reach codes
and offer their input.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/28/2023Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™12
Commercial Reach Codes
SSF Youth Commission
DATE:May 1, 2023
1 13
Climate Action Initiatives
1.October 2022: Council passed an
update to the Climate Action
Plan (CAP).
2.CAP sets bold targets and
strategies for reducing GHG
emissions while increasing
resilience.
3.Two main approaches to reduce
emissions in buildings:
electrification and improving
energy efficiency.
4. Adopted first all-electric reach
code and EV reach code for
residential construction in
2021.
5. Joined Peninsula Clean Energy
(PCE) to give the community
cleaner energy and renewable
source options.
6. Committed to reducing
greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions, protecting
community resources, and
resiliency.
2
14
Background
•Statewide Energy Code updated every three years.
Next code (2022) will be in effect 1/1/23.
•Reach Code is a voluntary code that “reaches”
beyond baseline requirements.
•Residential Reach Codes Ordinance – May 2021
15
Energy Reach Code Pathways
EElectric-Preferred
Energy Code Ordinance
•Requires buildings
to perform at a
higher level when
natural gas is
installed to any
end-use.
All-Electric
Energy Code Ordinance
•Requires specific
end-uses to
install electric
appliances, with
exceptions.
Natural Gas Ban
Municipal Code Ordinance
•Natural Gas
Prohibitions are
more aggressive
than the all-
electric and
electric-preferred
model reach
codes.
16
9th Circuit Court of Appeals
Ruling on Berkeley’s Gas Ban
5
•Berkley’s Gas Ban is a Health and Safety Code
amendment prohibiting gas piping to new
buildings.
•April 17th: U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued
ruling revoking Berkeley’s Gas Ban.
•Ruling states that the ban conflicts with federal
laws on energy efficiency and is preempted,
unless specific requirements are met.
17
Policy Development
Background
6 18
Policy Development
Background
1. 2022 Statewide Code
requires Solar PV,
Battery, and expanded
EV infrastructure.
2. Reach Code is a
voluntary code that
“reaches” beyond
baseline requirements
3. Proposed commercial
reach code impacts
new construction only.
4. Since 2021, per the
direction of Council,
staff has conducted
stakeholder outreach
targeted towards the
biotech, life sciences,
development, and
local business owner
community.
719
Effective
30-Days
After
Second
Reading
Policy Development & Outreach Timeline
January 27, 2021
Study session on potential
reach code pathways and
EV reach codes for 2019
code cycle.
November 2, 2021
Study session to update
council on outreach
conducted to inform
nonresidential new
construction reach code
policy2021 2023
June 9, 2021
2019 residential reach code
adopted by council,
direction to conduct
additional nonresidential
outreach.
October 26, 2022
January – Fall 2022
Additional outreach and
surveys released to large
developers and local
business owners on
potential reach code
policies.
March 16, 2023
Planning commission
meeting to receive
feedback on proposed
policy and limited
exemptions.
Study session to update council
on additional outreach and get
direction on reach code pathway
for nonres and 2022 EV reach
code policy.
Ongoing Stakeholder Engagement & Outreach
20
Stakeholder Engagement
9
Biotechnology/Life
Sciences Town Hall
Business
Community Town
Hall
1:1 Stakeholder
Outreach
Gas Dependence
Survey
Promotores survey
from local business
owners
Commercial Reach
Code Survey
Planning
Commission
21
Common Feedback
Developers
1. Phase in requirements or
include a grace period for
entitled projects.
2. Include specific exemptions for
commercial cooking, labs,
industrial.
3. Concern over power outages
and reliability of electric grid.
4. Lead time is critical due to
PG&E requests to bring power
to a new area taking up to two
years.
Local Business Owners
1. Majority of existing businesses
rely on natural gas for ovens,
stovetops, water heaters.
2. Hesitation to transition due to
unfamiliarity with electric
technology.
3. Increased EV requirements may
increase parking demand.
4. Concerns about increasing
panel capacity to meet EV
requirements.
5. Willingness to transition if City
provides incentives or rebates
and C/E.
1022
Takeaways for Ordinance
11
• Provide a runway or a long enough implementation
periodProvide
• Apply to only new construction Apply
• Take into consideration unique industry make up
including life sciences and commercial kitchen needs Take
• Consider back-up power for public health and safety
in the event of outages
Public Health &
Safety
• Consider technical infeasibility & discretion of
building officials Consider
23
Proposed Commercial
Reach Code Requirements
12 24
Commercial Construction Impacted
All-Electric Building
1. New Nonresidential
Construction
EV Charging Infrastructure
1. New Nonresidential Office
Building
2. All Other New
Nonresidential Buildings
1325
All-Electric New Construction
1. Newly constructed nonresidential buildings shall be
designed and constructed as all-electric buildings.
2. Limited exceptions for new nonresidential projects.
1426
Proposed All-Electric Exemptions
1. Specialized equipment for Industrial processes,
laboratories, and medical uses.
2. Commercial Food Heat-Processing Equipment.
3. Back-up power for Critical Facilities necessary to protect
public health or safety in the event of an electric grid
outage.
4. Nonresidential building projects that receive valid
entitlements within six months of the effective date of
the ordinance.
5. If there is not an all-electric prescriptive pathway and the
building is unable to achieve the Energy Code’s
performance compliance pathway.
15
27
EV Infrastructure: Terminology
Speed Readiness Number
Level 1
3-4 miles per
charging hour
Level 2
10-20 miles per
charging hour
Level 3
150+ miles per charging hour
EV Capable
EV Charging Station
Percent of
Parking Spaces
EV Ready
Source: Bay Area Reach Codes Initiative
1628
New Nonresidential Construction:
EV Charging Infrastructure
17
2022 CALGreen
Mandatory Requirements
•5% Level 2 EVCS
•15% Level 2 EV Capable
Proposed
Reach Code
Mandatory
Requirements: Offices
Mandatory
Requirements: All Other
•20% Level 2 EVCS
•30% Level 2 EV
Capable
•10% Level 2 EVCS
•10% Level 2 EV Capable
AUTOMATIC LOAD MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (ALMS) ENCOURAGED
29
EV Charging Exemptions for
Nonresidential
18
1. A determination of infeasibility by local enforcing agency.
2. Parking spaces accessible only by automated mechanical
car parking systems.
3. Nonresidential projects with valid entitlements within six
months of the effective date of the proposed ordinance
are subject to CALGreen Mandatory requirements.
30
Next Steps
•Feedback received today will be consolidated and
included in the staff report for City Council.
•Staff plans to return to Council for first reading of
the proposed reach code policy before the end of
2023.
1931
Thank you!
Any additional questions or comments can be sent to:
Christina Fernandez, Deputy City Manager | Chief Sustainability Officer
Email:[email protected]
20 32
Supplemental Slides
21 33
22
Property Category Property Type Port Type Port Incentive Applicable Cap
Existing
Multi-Unit Dwelling
L1 outlet or L2 outlet $2,000 No cap
L2 EVSE port $5,500 75% of costs, up to $90k
Main panel upgrade $5,000 Up to $5,000 per property
Affordable Housing Multi-Unit
Dwelling
L1 outlet or L2 outlet $2,500 No cap
L2 EVSE port $5,500 Up to 100% of project cost, max $90k
per property
Main panel upgrade $5,000 Up to $5k per property
Employee Parking L1 or L2 outlet $2,000 No cap
L2 EVSE port $5,000 75% of cost, max $90k
All publicly accessible non-residential
locations
L1 or L2 outlet $2000 No cap
L2 EVSE port $5,000 75% of cost
Any Make Ready circuit $2,000 Up to $20k per property
New
Market Rate
Multi-Unit Dwelling
(Above Code)
L1 outlet or L2 outlet $1,000 No cap
L2 EVSE port $2,000 Up to $40,000
Affordable Housing Multi-Unit
Dwelling
L1 outlet or L2 outlet $1,500 No cap
L2 EVSE port $2,500 Up to $100,000
Public Agency
L1 or L2 outlet $1,000 No cap
L2 EVSE port $2,000 Up to $250k per property
Source: Peninsula Clean Energy Incentives
EV Charging Incentives
34
Each scenario is 0.3 –
0.5% of construction cost
Assumes $392/ft2 to build per:
Turner and Townsend, 2021
% of dwellings
with access 100%40-60%100%
$-
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
2019 Reach Code 2022 CALGreen 2022 Reach Code
- with L1 Ready
2022 Reach Code
- with low power L2
EV Infrastructure Cost for 100-Dwelling Multifamily Building
L2 EV Capable
L1 Ready
Low Power L2
Ready
L2 EVCS + Load
Management
L2 EVCS
$170k
$146
k
$194
k
$227
k
100%Affordable Housing new
construction is eligible for
PCE incentivesHigh Power
Option
Low Power
Option
100% access is cost comparable
23 35
National & Statewide Context
1. EO 14008: President Biden called for “government-wide approach to
climate change”
2. Inflation Reduction Act: Federal rebates and tax credits for decarbonization
efforts
3. EO B-30-15: Gov. Brown issued to reduce emissions 40% below 1990 levels
by 2030
4. EO B-55-18: Gov. Brown set statewide goal for carbon neutrality by 2045
5. EO N-79-20: Gov. Newsom required 100% in-state sales of new passenger
cars/trucks to be zero-emission by 2035
6. CA Climate Commitment: Gov. Newsom signed climate legislation and plan
to invest $54 billion to fight climate change
7. SIP Strategy: CARB voted to ban sale of new gas furnaces + water heaters
by 2030
8. BAAQMD: Passed zero-emission appliance standard starting in 2027.
9. CPUC Decision 19-01-011: CPUC voted to eliminate subsidies that
incentivize gas lines to new buildings starting July 1, 2023 2436
2022 California Energy Code:
Highlights
New Residential
•Heat pumps = prescriptive baseline
•Residential: space heating or water
heating
•Performance credit for all-electric
design
•Pre-wiring required for gas appliances
•Higher ventilation rate for gas stoves
•Energy storage systems (ESS) ready
New Nonresidential
•Heat pumps = prescriptive baseline
•Nonresidential: water and/or space
heating for most building types
•Performance credit for all-electric design
•Solar PV prescriptive
•Requirements based on building type
•Battery Storage system prescriptive
•Requirements based on building type
2537
Ordinance Pathways: New
Construction
Efficiency Electric-
Preferred
Electric Only Electric Only Electric Only
Plus
Efficiency
Electric Only Natural Gas
Moratorium
Mechanism Energy Code Energy Code CALGreen Jurisdictional
authority
Jurisdictional
authority or
CALGreen plus
Energy Code
Requires All new
construction
exceeds
minimum
energy code
Only mixed
fuel buildings
exceed
minimum
energy code
All new
construction is
electric only
No new gas
infrastructure
(Hookups or
Piping)
All new
construction is
electric only
AND exceeds
minimum
Consideration
s
Simplicity,
preserves
choice,
specific
measures
Preserves
choice, lower
GHG savings
Must be
renewed
Longest lasting Biggest impact,
must be
renewed
2638
Equipment
Space Heating Water Heating Cooking Clothes Drying
Source: BayAreaReachCodes.Org
2739
City of South San Francisco
Legislation Text
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File #:23-355 Agenda Date:5/1/2023
Version:1 Item #:3.
Presentation on Sister to Sister SMC 2023 Recap and Evaluation.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Youth Commission listen to the presentation to learn more about the Sister-to
-Sister Leadership Conference from March 14, 2023, and provide their insight accordingly.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
On March 14, 2023, the first Sister to Sister Leadership Conference in San Mateo County was hosted by SMC
Asian American Recovery Services Prevention programs at the South San Francisco Municipal Building from
11:30am to 4:00 pm providing six workshop sessions, a plenary keynote, socializing and unity activities. A total
of 130 individuals participated in the event, representing 66 youth and 64 adults (based on registration
information collected).
CONCLUSION
It is recommended that the Youth Commission listen to the presentation and use the information they learned
from Asian American Recovery Services to further offer their feedback/a youth perspective on the conference.
City of South San Francisco Printed on 4/28/2023Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™40
SISTER TO SISTER1ST ANNUAL SAN MATEO COUNTYLEADERSHIP CONFERENCE
REPORT
41
11 Student pick up from schools
1130-12 Check-in & Lunch
12-1215 Welcome (In Council Chambers)
1215-1225 Words from Mayor Flor & Chialin
1225-1 Keynote - Janelle Knudson & Nani Wilson
105-155 Workshop 1a Workshop 1b Workshop 1c
155-215 Socializing Time + Affirmation Wall/People Bingo
220-310 Workshop 2a Workshop 2b Workshop 2c
310-330 Unity Activity (Lex Saelua & Annie Seuseu)
330-345 Surveys, Snacks, & Incentives
345-4 Closing
OVERVIEW March 14, 2023
South San Francisco Municipal Building
11:30am to 4:00 pm
Six workshop sessions, a keynote, socializing and unity activities
130 individuals participated in the event - 66 youth and 64 adults
42
January 13th, 2023: Initial outreach to community partners
January 25th, 2023: Outreach to SSFUSD public middle and high schools via email
referral by Dr. Shawnterra Moore (SSFUSD Superintendent); Parkside Middle
School in San Bruno received outreach materials
February through March: In person outreach at schools (SSFHS, ECHS, WMS, ALMS)
Support from Flor, Chialin, Moore, Genen, Kais, SSF, Community partnerships
Conduct event outreach at the beginning of the year or during fall semester.
Recommendations for improvements include:
MARKETING &
OUTREACH
43
PARTICIPATION
the majority of participants attend South San Francisco Unified School District.
Followed by San Bruno Park Elementary School District, Samoan Community
Development Center in San Francisco, and one participant from Bayside Academy
in San Mateo.
80.3% of the participants attend middle school while 18.7% attend high school
44
PARTICIPATION
40% identify as Asian followed by 38.3% identify as Native
Hawaiian or Pacific Islander. 16.7% identify as two or more
ethnicities (i.e.Asian, Latino/Hispanic or White,
Latino/Hispanic), 3.3% identify as Latino/Hispanic, and 1.7%
identify as White.
Recommendations for improvement include:
Disaggregate AANHPI demographic data further to truly
reflect the populations we serve.
45
SATISFACTION & KNOWLEDGE
Participants were asked to rate their satisfaction
for the following areas of the conference on a
scale 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (Very Satisfied)
73% described the conference as great and 27% described it as good.
67% benefited “a lot” from this conference and 33% benefited “some.”
82% would attend next year’s conference.
84% of respondents stated this conference would help a friend or
schoolmate.
Of the 66 youth participants 64 (97%) completed the summary evaluation.
46
“I learned that a lot of people face the same things as me.”
“I learned that everyone has their own story & that you can always achieve your goals if you put your
mind to it.”
“The importance of standing up + confidence.”
Participants were asked "What did you learn from this conference?
The majority of responses revolved around three themes: self empowerment, healthy relationship
indicators, and mental health self-care. (N=52)
Specific takeaways shared include:
SATISFACTION & KNOWLEDGE
Participants were asked "What did you like most about this conference?"
Most consistent responses included Asian representation, the activities, workshops, keynote speaker,
and overall experience. (N=53) Topics addressed included healthy relationships, female
empowerment, sharing personal experiences, mental health, and resiliency.
Participant feedback:
“The community! I feel so represented.”
“I liked hearing the mayor talk because it was uplifting. I also liked Lexi & Annie's activity because it was
empowering.”
“I like the keynote speaker, Janelle, when she spoke about her experience”
47
FUTURE NEEDS
There's nothing to improve, it was so fun!
Better food and more variety.
More interactive activities and workshops.
Better audio/PA system.
Event start time to be earlier or during lunch time to avoid class disruption
(leaving in the middle of class).
Participants were asked to share any improvements they would like to see at this
conference. 52 respondents shared feedback listed below.
Top responses from participants include:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
48