Because neither researchers nor policymakers pay sufficient attention to program management, youth programs remain largely paraprofessional, ad hoc enterprises, given, of necessity, to improvisation rather than stability and maturity. More often than not, local programs fail to reflect current knowledge of effective practices, and well-designed programs are undermined by faulty implementation. If researchers paid more attention to program management, much more could be learned about why programs succeed or fail. Youth programs are usually described in terms of the target groups served, the sponsoring entity, or the type of primary service delivered. While these descriptions are necessary and useful, they do not evoke the inner workings of the programs.
Most youth programs are, first and foremost, service organizations.
They are labor-intensive and require financing, marketing, staffing, and management control. Their services are delivered by counselors, job developers, instructors, and case managers. The differences between successful and unsuccessful programs can be quickly traced to the variable capacity of the programs to deliver their services. If these differences are ignored, evaluators, policymakers, and funders are in danger of ascribing success or failure to the wrong set of factors. Researchers have not entirely overlooked management issues, but they are typically subordinated to evaluative overall program effects.