2023 Minneapolis Local Action Plan

From the Office of Mayor Jacob Frey

Minneapolis is thrilled to advocate for children's rights and is proud to shoulder UNICEF's Child Friendly City Initiative (CFCI). A child-friendly city ensures that the voices, needs and priorities of children are an integral part of public policies, programs and decisions. Thus, a "child-friendly city" is a city that is fit for all. CFCI provides meaningful opportunities for cities to collaborate with child and youth-led social justice initiatives and to amplify existing efforts in realizing children's rights, especially for children and young people of color and other historically marginalized groups.

Originally created in 1996, UNICEF's Child Friendly Cities Initiative uses a child rights-based framework to build a roadmap for establishing safer, more just, equitable, inclusive, and child-responsive cities and communities around the world. The framework consists of two pillars: goals and results to be achieved and strategies for achieving these goals and results.

As of February 14, 2020, the City of Minneapolis has been committed to planning and implementing more meaningful programs and efforts that focus on emergency management and preparedness planning, youth voice and decision-making spaces, community safety, and child rights education and awareness. Our team, led by the health department and the Minneapolis Youth Coordinating Board (YCB), has been working hard these past two years to bring forward an action plan based on feedback from high school age youth and parents with young children. The City of Minneapolis looks forward to becoming one of the first cities in the nation to be designated a child friendly city by UNICEF. These changes will ensure every child in Minneapolis is heard and prioritized in city decision making.

Mayor Jacob Frey
City of Minneapolis

Introduction to Minneapolis CFCI

Child Friendly Cities Initiative

UNICEF USA's Child Friendly Cities Initiative (CFCI) was launched globally in 1996 to protect children's rights in an increasingly urbanized and decentralized world. CFCI supports municipal governments in realizing the rights of children at the local level using the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) as its foundation. UNICEF USA's Child Friendly Cities Initiative (CFCI) represents a community-based commitment to elevating and prioritizing the voices of children in local governance and decision-making.

Convention on the Rights of the Child + CFCI Goal Areas

CFCI is rooted in the 1989 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). The CRC is the most widely supported and comprehensive international human rights treaty. It outlines the full range of civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights to which every human is entitled and recognizes the essential role and importance of parents and families.

Even though the United States is the only country in the world which has not yet ratified the Convention, the Convention remains a powerful tool not only for advocacy and programming but also for guiding our everyday behavior with children. This treaty provides a framework to help governments ensure that children and families have certain rights and protections:

• Children should be free from discrimination.
• Government policies should be based on the best interest of the child.
• Children should survive and develop to their full potential.
• Children's views and perspectives are important.

In 1989, Minneapolis Mayor Don Fraser signed onto the newly minted CRC as an early advocate, setting a tone that the City of Minneapolis values and prioritizes children and youth.

The CFCI Goal Areas reflect the 54 articles of the CRC and provide a framework of action for the Child Friendly Cities Initiative which are (*CRC Articles applies to multiple CFCI Goal Areas):

• Safety and inclusion: Every child and young person is valued, respected and treated fairly within their communities and by local authorities. (CRC Articles: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 16, 17, 19*, 20*, 21*, 23*, 25*, 28*, 29*, 30, 31*, 32*, 33*, 34*, 35*, 36*, 37*, 38, 39*, 40*, 41*)
• Children's participation: Every child and young person has their voice, needs and priorities heard and considered in public laws, policies, budgets, programs and decisions that affect them. (CRC Articles: 7, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 23*, 31*, 32*, 37*, 40*, 41*, 42*)
• Equitable social services: Every child and young person has access to quality essential social services. (CRC Articles: 18, 19*, 20*, 21*, 23*, 24*, 25*, 26, 27*, 28*, 29*, 31*, 32*, 34*, 35*, 36*, 37*, 39*, 40*, 42*)
• Safe living environments: Every child and young person lives in a safe, secure and clean environment. (CRC Articles: 24*, 25*, 27*, 33*, 34)
• Play and leisure: Every child and young person has opportunities to enjoy family life, play and leisure. (CRC Articles: 23*, 31*)

CFCI Strategies

CFCI utilizes two pillars of strategy to achieve goals and results for children and youth:

CFCI Local Action Plan

The CFCI Local Action Plan lays out priorities and strategies for improving the wellbeing of Minneapolis children and young people. It is based upon the results of local government and community assessment data, integrating the voices of Minneapolis young people and parents.

The Local Action Plan Process consists of four main components:

• Conduct Situational Analysis | Compile local government data regarding children and young people. Distribute surveys to target community groups. Analyze and visualize government and community data.
• Develop Local Plan of Action | Host in-person huddles with target community groups to examine data and propose solutions. Prioritize issues and solutions into a written Local Action Plan.
• Implement CFCI Strategies | Implement CFCI Local Action Plan strategies and activities over one year.
• Monitor and Evaluate Progress | Measure success of CFCI Local Action Plan strategies and activities.

Our Vision, Mission, Guiding Principles for a Child-Friendly Minneapolis

Minneapolis' vision, mission and guiding principles for a Child-Friendly Minneapolis began with a focused conversation facilitated by the Minneapolis Youth Congress in November 2020 with our local Executive Committee. A small work group turned this conversation into the following guidance:

VISION: CFCI Minneapolis' vision is a future where all children and youth in Minneapolis feel safe and heard, are provided opportunities to participate and lead, find agency, and thrive.

MISSION: CFCI Minneapolis' mission is to lead the state and the country by creating equitable and just spaces for children, youth, and families to share power and mobilize collective action to champion local cultures, development, education, health, and safety through a global children and youth rights lens.

GUIDING PRINCIPLES: Guided by a spirit of hope, we continually strive to uphold the rights of children and youth in innovative and relevant ways by embracing:

• Youth Leadership. Our city's children and youth are sought out and encouraged to lead in peer to peer and intergenerational decision-making. (Article 12)
• Inclusion and Collaboration. Our city's children and youth feel heard and feel free to share their thoughts with their own voices and through their lived experiences. (Article 13)
• Safe and courageous spaces. Our city's children and youth are safe at home, in school and in their communities. (Article 19)
• Accessibility. Our city will be intentional about making sure that all programs and services are accessible to all children and youth. (Articles 2 and 23)
• Accountability. Our city is accountable to the rights of children and youth and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and children, youth and adults are accountable to one another. (Articles 42 and 43)

Child-Friendly Minneapolis Team

In May 2019, a trio of Minneapolis-based child rights advocates participated in UNICEF USA's conference in Jacksonville, Florida focused on bringing the Child Friendly City Initiative to the United States.

On February 14, 2020, Mayor Jacob Frey signed the Memorandum of Understanding with UNICEF USA to become a CFCI Candidate City. On August 12, 2020, International Youth Day (an annual observance to celebrate young peoples' voices, actions and meaningful, equitable engagement) UNICEF USA launched the Child Friendly Cities Initiative in the United States.

An Executive Committee of Minneapolis City staff and community child rights advocates was formed, along with three sub-committees: Child Rights Education, Emergency Management and Planning, and Engagement. The CFCI Team over the past 3 years has engaged over 300 Minneapolis youth and adults. We are grateful for all the youth and parents who participated in the community assessments, and to our passionate CFCI champions sustaining this body of work!

Situation Analysis Results

Child Equity Profile

Total children population	85,422 — children make up 20% of Minneapolis (total residents: 425,336)
Gender	50.3% male, 49.8% female
Age	33% under 5; 67% ages 5–18
Race of children	35% White, 33% Black, 17% Hispanic, 7.5% multiple race, 4.9% Asian/Pacific Islander, 1% American Indian/Alaska Native, 0.7% other race
Citizenship (children under 18)	94% citizen (80,243), 3% naturalized citizen (2,624), 3% not citizen (2,555)
At or under 200% poverty line	54% Black, 21% Hispanic, 9% White, 7% multiple race, 6% Asian/Pacific Islander, 2% American Indian/Alaska Native, 1% other race (200% poverty line = $55,500/yr for a family of 4 in 2022)
2014–16 infant mortality rate by race of mother	26% American Indian/Alaska Native, 18% Black, 16% multiple races, 13% Asian/Pacific Islander, 12% other/unknown, 8% Hispanic/Latina, 7% White (infant mortality is the death of a Minneapolis infant born alive under age 1)
Parks	98% of Minneapolis residents live within 6 blocks of a park (source: Trust For Public Land)

We are reporting our children's demographics based on Census data collection. We recognize that children have wonderful variety in who they are and how they identify themselves. Our community is committed to valuing them holistically and using language that reflects their whole selves. Data sources: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates (2016–2020) IPUMS USA, University of Minnesota; Minnesota Department of Health, Birth Cohort Infant Mortality; Trust For Public Land.

Community Assessments Summary

Methodology

Community Assessments were conducted in two parts:

1. A digital survey consisting of about 60 questions housed in SurveyMonkey. Questions were categorized by the 5 CFCI goals and a section on demographics. Nearly all questions were affirmative statements with the following multiple-choice responses: Mostly True, Sometimes True, Rarely True, or Not Sure, while the remaining questions were either open-response or demographics.
2. Three In-Person Reflection Huddles with 59 young people and parents with young children took place after the online surveys were completed and summarized.

Digital surveys were drawn from a convenience sample of high school students surveyed on iPads over the lunch hour during the fall 2021 school semester. While digital surveys from parents with young children were also drawn from a convenience sample of emails sent to school and community early childhood center users and fall 2021 as well. The surveys were mostly identical, with some questions being unique to the respective target group. Survey results were translated onto a 1-10 point scale with 1 being rarely agree and 10 being mostly agree. Each group was desegrated by gender, sexuality, race, and neighborhood.

In-person reflection huddles took place in March and June 2022. Due to our two target groups with separate surveys, it was decided to have a huddle specifically for youth and 2 huddles for parents. The youth huddle consisted of young people in the Minneapolis Youth Congress and the Minneapolis Public School CityWide Student Leadership Board. The parents huddles were conducted at two separate child care centers: LaCreche located on the northside and Joyce Preschool located on the southside. Food was provided and participants were offered a $50 gift card. Huddles were modeled after a "What, So What, Now What" approach where participants were presented with the digital survey results. They were asked to objectively describe the data, then make meaning of the data via a series of reflections questions, and then develop potential recommendations or solutions.

The CFCI Intergenerational Committee reviewed and analyzed the survey results along with the transcriptions of the huddles to determine the top 4 priorities in this Local Action Plan.

Target Groups

The CFCI Executive Committee intentionally selected two target groups for the community assessments:

• Minneapolis High School Age Young People (ages 10-18)
• Minneapolis Parents with Young Children (under the age of 5)

For both groups, African American/Black respondents were the largest share (roughly 40–45%), followed by White, Latino/a/x, East African, Asian or Pacific Islander, a race/ethnicity not listed, Native, and Middle Eastern/North African respondents.

Target Groups by Location

Additionally, the CFCI Executive Committee prioritized the following geographical areas in Minneapolis:

• Northside
• Phillips
• Powderhorn
• Cedar-Riverside

These neighborhoods have the highest concentration of children and young people, people of color and immigrant families, and are historically under resourced.

Findings

Responses from our two target groups showed their level of agreement on the five CFCI goals; a higher score corresponds with higher level of agreement with the given survey item. Specifically, they indicate that both groups rated topics related to children's participation lowest and rated topics on relationships and necessities highest. There were notable differences between how different demographic groups responded to these topics.

CFCI goal area	Survey items (approximate average agreement)
Play and Leisure	accessible play spaces and opportunities, safe in public spaces, safe movement (all around 6.5–7) safe high quality play (about 7.5)
Safe Living Environments	clean community (about 6.5) climate change awareness and strategies, garbage/recycling, access to nature (about 7.5) emergency plan and resources (about 7 — Priority 1) access to nutritious food (about 8)
Equitable Social Services	education and career counseling (about 7) internet access (about 8.5) access to and satisfaction with health services/care (about 7.5)
Children's Participation	understand how to and opportunity to participate/voice (about 5.5 — Priority 2) happy with government actions (about 6) aware of rights and political issues (about 6 — Priority 4) participation in community (about 6)
Safety and Inclusion	safe and respected regarding race, religion, ability (about 7.5) peer support (about 6.5) adult and community support (about 7) community diversity (about 7.5) safe and respected regarding disabilities (about 6.5) safe at school (about 7.5) safe and respected regarding gender/sexuality (about 6.5) safe overall (about 6.5)

Priority 3 (community safety) was drawn from the safety items in Play and Leisure.

CFCI goal area	Survey items (approximate average agreement)
Play and Leisure	safe public places (about 4.5 — Priority 3) safe community movement and transport (about 5) accessible play resources (about 4.5) access to safe places to play (about 6.5)
Safe Living Environments	emergency plan and resources (about 5.5 — Priority 1) air quality (about 7) access to safe water (about 8.5) affordable home (about 8)
Equitable Social Services	access to community resources (about 8.5) internet access (about 8.5) parent-child interaction (about 9) know how/where to get support for child (about 6.5) access to enough healthy food (about 7.5) access to affordable and trustworthy child care (about 6.5) access to and satisfaction with health services/care (about 7.5)
Children's Participation	happy with government actions (about 5) understand how to and opportunity to participate/voice (about 3.5 — Priority 2) knowledge of government resources (about 5.5) aware of rights and political issues (about 5.5 — Priority 4) participation in community (about 6.5)
Safety and Inclusion	adult and community support (about 7) safe and respected regarding race, religion, ability (about 6.5) community diversity (about 6.5) safe and respected regarding disabilities (about 5.5) safe and respected regarding gender/sexuality (about 5) safe at daycare (about 8) safe overall (about 5.5)

Local Action Plan Priority Areas

• Priority 1: Emergency Management + Preparedness Planning — Minneapolis Emergency Preparedness and Operations plans ensure/include the needs of children, young people, and their caregivers.
• Priority 2: Youth Voice in Decision Making Spaces — Young people are involved in planning and/or decision making for their communities.
• Priority 3: Community Safety — Gather and amplify community safety experiences and solutions from young people and parents with young children to decision-makers.
• Priority 4: Child Rights Education + Awareness — Develop and implement strategies, involving young people and adults alike, to raise awareness of child rights across Minneapolis.

Priority 1: Emergency Management + Preparedness Planning

CFCI Goal Area 4 states that every child and young person lives in a safe, secure, and clean environment. This goal area includes the following CRC articles:

• Article 6: Every child has the right to life. Governments must do all they can to make sure that children survive and develop to their full potential.
• Article 24: Every child has the right to the best possible health outcomes. Governments must provide quality health care, clean water, nutritious food, and clean environments to ensure children are healthy.
• Article 27: Every child has the right to a standard of living that is good enough to meet their physical, social, and mental needs. Governments must help families that cannot afford to provide this.

The results of the community assessment surveys revealed that family emergency planning is a relatively low priority for Parents with Young Children and High School Age Youth.

Share	Survey finding
23.18%	of youth survey respondents know about the emergency plan
27.35%	of parents survey respondents are not sure about the emergency plan
36%	of parents survey respondents know about the emergency plan

During the youth huddle, young people recommended that emergency preparedness information and workshops for families would be useful.

Emergency management and preparedness planning was identified as a priority due to the impact of three compounding incidents in Minneapolis that disproportionately impacted children, youth and families. The Drake Fire in December of 2019, the COVID 19 pandemic, and the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police and the resulting racial reckoning. A review of previous disaster after-action reports showed that while these reports showed thoughtful review of the emergencies, there was little to no discussion of children, youth or caregiver specific needs. A review of the current literature on child-responsive emergency preparedness, response and recovery led to the following recommendations for the City of Minneapolis:

• The needs of children, youth and their caregivers must be centered and specifically planned for in the event of emergencies and include the needs of children with disabilities and other vulnerable groups.
• Child-responsive emergency planning should include outreach and education to families on how to prepare for disasters.
• Children, youth and their caregivers must have access to quality, accurate and understandable information during and following an emergency or disaster.
• Child-responsive emergency plan must address recovery efforts and be responsive to ongoing needs of children, youth and their caregivers, particularly around mental health.
• Schools, government, and communities should work together on child-responsive preparedness, response and recovery efforts.
• Child-responsive emergency planning must be inclusive of marginalized communities and responsive to their needs to reduce disproportionate impact.

Priority 1 Theory of Change

Priority 1 Goal: Minneapolis emergency plans ensure and include the needs of children, youth and their caregivers. Three connected elements:

• Information — providing access to accurate and understandable info throughout an emergency or disaster
• Support — delivering responsive resources to children and caregivers throughout emergency or disasters
• Inclusion — creating a process for children and caregivers to add input into emergency plans and after-actions reports

Priority 1 Action Plan

Priority 2: Youth Voice in Decision Making Spaces

CFCI Goal Area 2 states that every child and young person has their voice, needs, and priorities heard and taken into account in public laws, policies, budgets, programs, and decisions that affect them. This goal area reflects numerous articles in the CRC including:

• Article 12: Every child has the right to have a say in all matters affecting them and to have their opinions and suggestions taken seriously by the government, school boards, parents, and civil society.
• Article 13: Every child must be free to say what they think and to seek and receive all kinds of information, as long as it is within the law.
• Article 15: Every child has the right to meet with other children and to join organizations, as long as this does not stop other people from enjoying their rights.

The Children's Participation results from the Community Assessments with high-school age youth scored the lowest of any CFCI Goal Area. The following statements within the Children's Participation section were ranked the lowest:

Share	Survey finding
40.14%	of survey respondents know how to give their opinion on city planning (e.g. bike routes, bus lines) and services (e.g. public safety) for young people in the city
42.75%	of survey respondents are aware of the children's rights or the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)
29.05%	of survey respondents don't have meaningful opportunities to voice ideas and concerns about decisions that affect them

During a huddle discussion, young people discussed that the City lacks structured and intentional opportunities for them to have a seat at decision-making tables and have a voice in decisions that affect their well-being and that of their communities. They recommended that the City should create more opportunities for young people to share their opinions and feedback.

Minneapolis has 54 boards, commissions, and advisory committees, which are groups that advise the Mayor and City Council on specific policy areas. The process of recruitment, application, and selection of new members looks different for each board. The City of Minneapolis website notes that they seek out candidates from "diverse backgrounds, life experiences, and perspectives;" however the process for applying and serving is not easily assessable (City of Minneapolis. (2020). Boards, commissions and advisory committees. City of Minneapolis. https://lims.minneapolismn.gov/boards?page=2). Youth participation on Minneapolis City Boards, Commissions, and Advisory Committees is limited.

According to the 2018 Appointed Boards and Commissions Diversity Survey Report conducted by the Minneapolis's Neighborhood and Community Relations Department, only about 2% of board members were in the 18-24 age group, despite that 18-24-year-olds represent about 14% of Minneapolis's population. In addition, the report also notes that "the applicant pool shows that applicants ages 18-24 are applying at a percentage rate of 7%, [but] only 2% of those applicants are getting seated on a board or commission." Less than half of applicants in this age group are being seated on a board, which may indicate a bias towards this group. The survey does not collect data for participation of high school youth under the age of 18, so it is likely that participation for this age group is minimal or nonexistent. Although there is no specific statute prohibiting the participation of youth under 18 on boards, commissions, or advisory committees, the lack of inclusion of this group in the data indicates that participation of high school-age youth has not been a priority for the City (Minneapolis Neighborhood and Community Relations Department. (2019). 2018 appointed boards and commissions diversity survey report. https://lims.minneapolismn.gov/Download/RCA/8218/Final_2018ABCDiversitySurveyReport.pdf).

Priority 2's goal is that young people (ages 15-24) are involved in planning or decision making for their communities. The City and the Minneapolis Youth Coordinating Board (YCB) will develop a Youth on Boards program where young people are trained, paid and supported to serve as voting members of City Boards and Commissions. Current adult Board members will also receive training and support to welcome and share power with young people.

Priority 2 Theory of Change

Three connected elements:

• Accessibility — creating pathways to youth leadership
• Support — providing money, transportation, training, and support
• Shared Power — ensuring adults and youth authentically share power

Priority 2 Action Plan

Priority 3: Community Safety

Goal area one of the CFCI framework states that every child and young person is to be valued, respected, and treated equally within their communities and schools, as well as by local governments, parents, and fellow young people. This goal area includes the following CRC articles:

• Article 6: Every child has the right to life. Governments must do all they can to make sure that children survive and develop to their full potential.
• Article 19: Every child has the right to be properly cared for and protected from violence, abuse, and neglect by their parents or anyone else who looks after them.
• Article 27: Every child has the right to a standard of living that is good enough to meet their physical, social, and mental needs. Governments must help families that cannot afford to provide this.
• Article 31: Every child has the right to relax, play, and to join in a wide range of leisure activities.

There were differences between our two target groups regarding their perceptions on safety in Minneapolis. The following statements within the Safety and Inclusion and Play and Leisure sections were ranked the lowest by High School Age Young People:

Share	Survey finding
18.81%	of survey respondents feel safe in their community
13.51%	of survey respondents feel valued by peers in their community
29.06%	of survey respondents are not sure if girls, trans and nonbinary people are safe in their community
22.04%	of survey respondents are not sure if LGBTQR are treated with respect in their community

The following statements within the Safety and Inclusion and Play and Leisure sections were ranked the lowest by Parents with Young Children:

Share	Survey finding
40%	of survey respondents indicate that family and children are rarely safe in their community
48%	of survey respondents are not sure if girls, boys and nonbinary children are treated equally in their community
52%	of survey respondents feel safe from traffic when walking in their community
52%	of survey respondents feel safe in their community

During the huddles with both High School Age Young People and Parents with Young Children, concerns and perceptions about safety got the most airtime out of the five goal areas. Safety was a greater concern for Parents with Young Children. One's level of safety depended on, in part, that individual's identities. Those who identified as Latinx, or LGBTQ+ rated their perception of safety lower than their white and/or straight peers. Specific concerns ranged from bullying, to safety and accessibility at local parks, to increased housing and rent prices, to sharing outdoor space with unhoused people, to safety on public transportation, and stress surrounding barriers to immigration. While several solutions were proposed, it varied by community and experience. On a positive note, a strong majority of High School Age Young People rated that they felt safe at school, and a stronger majority of Parents with Young Children rated that their daycares were safe places.

All people deserve safety in their homes, workplaces, parks, and other community spaces—safety not only from violence, but from the economic, social, and environmental conditions that fuel violence in the first place. Within the United States, however, access to physical safety—just like access to clean air, economic mobility, and high-quality schools—is shaped by where someone lives, with many of our most unsafe places reflecting decades of systemic disinvestment.

Based on many quality-of-life measures, Minnesota is often cited as one of the best places to live in the US. However, those measures belie significant racial disparities. In Minnesota, People of Color face significantly worse outcomes in many areas. They are twice as likely to live in poverty, less likely to graduate from high school, and less likely to own their own homes. They are more likely to experience unemployment and incarceration. They also face worse health outcomes, including higher rates of mortality and chronic disease. As the state's largest city, Minneapolis has a role in driving those racial disparities. Minneapolis has grown increasingly segregated, and that segregation perpetuates significant inequities in many of the measures described above. Compared to the rest of the state, Minneapolis also experiences higher levels of violent crime. Within Minneapolis, the burden of violence becomes even more disproportionate based on geography, race, and age.

That burden heavily impacts young people. In 2019, homicide accounted for 39% of deaths among youth age 15 to 25 in Minneapolis. In 2020, there were 1,715 incidents of violence where the victim was ages 10-24. Youth gunshot injuries increased from 97 in 2018 to 225 in 2020. In 2020, there were 352 incidents of domestic violence in households with youth under 18. Minnesota Student Survey (MSS) data illustrates the impact of that violence. The 2019 MSS included a Mental Wellbeing assessment which determined that 22% of participating Minneapolis Public School students scored less than 4 out of 10 on a mental wellbeing composite. The survey also showed that 11% of responding female 9th graders reported having experienced verbal abuse from their partners, 11% of 9th graders reported experiencing sexual coercion from their partners, and about 14% of 9th graders scored 4 or higher in ACEs.

Violence in its multiple forms has lasting impacts on individuals, relationships, and entire communities. This is particularly true when violence impacts young lives. It also presents an opportunity to critically consider the intersections between racial inequity and violence. Following the tragic murder of George Floyd in 2020, events in Minneapolis were a catalyst for demonstrations for racial justice around the world. Mr. Floyd's murder and the events that followed have led to a reimagining of what community safety looks like in Minneapolis.

Minneapolis is on the precipice of reimagined systems of community safety and young people's voices should be centered and prioritized.

Priority 3's goal is to gather and amplify community safety experiences and solutions from young people and parents with young children to decision-makers.

Priority 3 Theory of Change

Three connected elements:

• Engagement — involving community throughout to ensure concerns and aspirations are understood and amplified
• Advocacy — advocating community informed safety recommendations
• Shared Power — utilizing youth-adult partnerships to conduct community engagement

Priority 3 Action Plan

Priority 4: Child Rights Learning + Engagement

Article 42 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child states that governments should make the principles and provisions of the CRC widely known, by appropriate and active means, to adults and young people alike. Article 42 aligns with the following CFCI Goals:

• Safety and inclusion: Every child and young person is valued, respected, and treated fairly within their communities and by local authorities.
• Children's participation: Every child and young person has their voice, needs and priorities heard and considered in public laws, policies, budgets, programs, and decisions that affect them.
• Equitable social services: Every child and young person has access to quality essential social services.

As mentioned in Priority 2, the Children's Participation results from the Community Assessments with high-school age youth scored the lowest of any CFCI Goal Area:

Share	Survey finding
40.14%	of children survey respondents know how to give their opinion on city planning
42.75%	of survey respondents are aware of the children's rights or the Convention on the Rights of the Children (CRC)
29.05%	of survey respondents have meaningful opportunities to participate in the communities' decision making processes

Additionally, Children's Participation results with Parents with Young Children assessments also indicated lower levels of awareness:

Share	Survey finding
68%	of survey respondents were not aware of children's rights convention on the rights of the child
68%	of survey respondents were not sure there is a place to voice their opinion
76%	of survey respondents reported not to be involved in decision-making for my community

Minneapolis and Minnesota have a long and deep history of research, practice, and advocacy in healthy youth development including University of Minnesota's Dr. Gisela Konopka's 1973 groundbreaking "Fundamental Requirements for Healthy Development of Adolescent Youth" that became the cornerstone of the positive youth development framework and field. While much of this work predated the creation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, local early childhood and youth development fields, and educators have yet to incorporate a child rights lens into their work.

Priority 4's goal is to develop and implement strategies, involving young people and adults alike, to raise awareness of child rights across Minneapolis. Priority 4 recognizes the role that health care professionals, educators, and young people have in promoting child rights. The Child Rights Learning sub-committee proposes to take the following strategies to spread the awareness and use of the CRC in Minneapolis:

• Distribute free books about child rights to children and their families through Minneapolis hospitals and clinics in partnership with Reach Out and Read.
• Develop a child rights training program and intergenerational training corps, and make training available across Minneapolis in formal and informal settings.
• Advance the inclusion of child rights in Minnesota's social studies K-12 standards.
• Document the history and development of child rights and youth development initiatives in Minnesota and make public.

Priority 4 Theory of Change

Three connected elements:

• Information — providing accessible and actionable information about child rights
• Advocacy — advocating for the inclusion of child rights in education standards
• Intergenerational — creating opportunities for youth and adults to learn, educate, and promote child rights together

Priority 4 Action Plan

Closing

Monitoring, Evaluation & Learning

Staff from the Executive Committee developed a monitoring and evaluation plan based on indicators from each priority's action plans. Progress on priorities will be monitored at monthly committee meetings, resulting in a final report to UNICEF USA after one year of implementation.

Acknowledgements

The Minneapolis CFCI Local Action Plan is built on the shoulders of many people, projects, strategies, policies, and entities with the shared goal of ensuring that our children and young people are safe and thrive. We acknowledge and have gratitude for the following:

For More Information

• UNICEF USA CFCI Initiative: https://www.unicefusa.org/about-unicef-usa/community-alliance-child-rights/child-friendly-cities
• Convention on the Rights of the Child: https://www.unicef.org/child-rights-convention
• City of Minneapolis CFCI: https://www2.minneapolismn.gov/government/programs-initiatives/child-friendly-city/

Accessibility

• For reasonable accommodations or alternative formats please call 311 at 612-673-3000.
• People who are deaf or hard of hearing can use a relay service please call 311 at 612-673-3000.
• TTY users can call 612-263-6850
• Para asistencia 612-673-2700
• Yog xav tau kev pab, hu 612-673-2800
• Hadii aad Caawimaad u baahantahay 612-673-3500