Out-of-school-time (OST) programs, whether they occur after the school day or during the summer, have changed a great deal in the last several years. Program quality has evolved. Demand remains high. And access to programs, particularly for children from low-and middle-income families, continues to be a challenge. A 2025 study by Afterschool Alliance revealed that parents of nearly 30 million children want afterschool programs, yet 22.6 million kids still don’t have access.
A recent update of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s foundational report, Community Programs for Youth Development (also known as “The Blue Book”), points to how programs have evolved in three key ways:
OST programs and activities have become increasingly varied in their settings, programming, and children and youth served.
Culturally-responsive programming is being more widely considered as a key part of high-quality programming.
Public and private funding and support for programs has increased, but so has demand. Greater investment and policy coordination are needed to expand access and continue to improve program quality.
This shift in OST programs presents an opportunity for the field to build on the evidence-based practices and lessons from successful programs already in place. Years of research shows that OST programs can play a key role in the academic and social development of children up to age 12 and youth ages 13-17. In OST programs, young people enter a safe, structured space where they can begin to explore careers, build meaningful relationships with peers and older role models, and develop essential life skills. Moreover, programs often offer academic support, too.
Below, we explore how the field has evolved—and offer ways it can continue to grow—within three core areas: programs, people, and practices.
Programs
Research over the years helps to define what we mean by “high-quality OST programs.” These programs are defined by evidence-based practices and structural elements such as:
- A clear program vision and goals
- Strong relationships between adults and young people
- Continuous quality improvement
- Meaningful engagement of families and young people
Sustainable funding is needed not just to cover basic operations, but to ensure programs can offer high-quality jobs and environments that attract and retain talented staff.
— Jill Richter, senior researcher at the American Institutes for Research (AIR)
“Paying for high-quality programs means investing in these core elements,” says Jill Richter, senior researcher at the American Institutes for Research (AIR). Significant costs for high-quality programs include staff wages and benefits, facilities, materials, and ongoing professional development.
Richter notes the importance of staffing expenses in implementing high-quality programs. “Sustainable funding is needed not just to cover basic operations, but to ensure programs can offer high-quality jobs and environments that attract and retain talented staff,” she says.
People
“Across the country, providers, partners, and advocates increasingly recognize that investing in both youth and the professionals who make these experiences possible is essential to youth success,” says Gina Warner, president and CEO of the National Afterschool Association.
These professionals, known in the field as the Youth Workforce, are core to developing and facilitating high-quality OST programs. A recent AIR report, the first of its kind, on this workforce, revealed the wide range of roles and responsibilities that comprise this group, from leading enrichment activities and mentoring young people to coordinating family engagement and managing program operations. Significantly, 62 percent of survey respondents across all roles said that a sense of purpose was what drove them into the youth fields; their passion and enjoyment working with youth motivated them on their current career paths.
But passion isn’t always enough to sustain a career. Warner points to how the pandemic-era funding for OST illuminated “what’s possible when programs can invest in people.” It also showed how precarious these roles can be. AIR researchers found that a significant number of youth workers experience stress and burnout on the job and that 69 percent indicated that better pay and/or benefits is a needed job improvement. In fact, this was the most common desired change to their job selected by respondents.
According to AIR, a more unified understanding of the common roles and responsibilities across the OST workforce could support the pursuit of federal recognition of an occupational classification for OST workers. In turn, such recognition could help establish wage protections, lead to investments in professional development, and clarity of career pathways.
AIR offers a starting point for this effort in a brief that highlights common roles and responsibilities and how this information can be used to better support youth workers. This brief can help inform an organization’s assessment of current staffing roles and decision making around hiring for new positions. At a broader level it can help build the capacity of the workforce through professional development and convene local, state, and federal government leaders to create and adopt occupational codes.
Professional learning systems and tools that clearly define and validate staff expertise are also gaining importance. One such tool is the National Afterschool Association Professional Credentialing System (NAAPCS), a competency-based framework that allows youth workers to demonstrate mastery of key skills—such as youth development, leadership, or social-emotional learning—through evidence of practice rather than hours of training. These competencies are recognized through micro-credentials, represented by digital badges that can be shared with employers and stacked into broader credentials. By emphasizing demonstrated skills over seat time, NAAPCS offers a flexible pathway for professional growth while supporting high-quality OST programming.
“Strengthening the field means valuing [youth workers’] expertise, investing in leadership development, and ensuring that youth and staff alike have a voice in shaping programs,” says Warner.
Strengthening the field means valuing [youth workers’] expertise, investing in leadership development, and ensuring that youth and staff alike have a voice in shaping programs.
— Gina Warner, president and CEO of the National Afterschool Association
Practices
Beyond the youth workforce, programs are also using evidence-based practices to help students build skills beyond academic outcomes.
“This shift in focus enables a more holistic understanding of the true value of OST programs in helping young people grow into happy, healthy individuals who feel connected with others and a sense of belonging in their community,” says Arielle Lentz, researcher at AIR.
Another new brief from AIR highlights why evidence matters for building and improving OST programs. Implementing practices that have already been proven to work in other programs increases program development efficiency, avoiding the dreaded reinventing-the-wheel. It can also help generate buy-in among stakeholders, including staff, funders, and families, by pointing to areas for further investment and ensuring a collective commitment to programming that works.
Recent evidence shows that cost—both for families to attend the programs and operating costs—continues to be a major concern. In 2009, Wallace developed a report on how much strong OST programs cost to implement and how much that cost can vary. The study included an online cost calculator to help users determine the costs of various OST options, which was updated in 2021. But, as noted, a lot has changed in the OST landscape over the last several years.
Strong demand has emerged in the field for an updated cost study, which is underway, along with an improved cost calculator. This information will help funders, policymakers, and program providers make informed decisions about how to sustain and scale effective, high-quality OST programs now.
“We hope our study will continue to clarify what resources are truly required to deliver these evidence-based practices at scale, helping funders and policymakers understand the real investment needed for quality and access in OST,” says Richter.
As the temporary pandemic relief funds run out, out-of-school-time program providers have their eyes on sustainability. According to Warner, they are focusing on “lasting systems, equitable access, and opportunities that reflect the diversity of the youth and communities they serve.” But they can’t do this work alone. She emphasizes the urgent need for long-term systemic investments in wages, benefits, and career pathways for the youth workforce—and of engaging the voices of those workers in shaping the future of OST.
“By working together and across education, workforce, and philanthropic sectors,” Warner says, “we can create the kind of lasting systems that allow both young people and professionals to thrive.”
