the contribution of youth

7/28/2019 The Contribution of Youth

1/10

The National Youth Agency

Research Programme

Series

Information and Research

The contribution of youth work to

the Every Child Matters Outcomes

Introduction

Book 1: Introduction

Book 2: Being Healthy

Book 3: Staying Sae

Book 4: Enjoying and Achieving

Book 5: Making a Positive Contribution

Book 6: Economic Wellbeing


2/10

2 The contribution o youth work to the Every Child Matters Outcomes

Introducing the vebrieng papersAround 60 per cent o young people are

estimated to come in contact with theyouth service at some point between the

ages o 11 and 25 (NYA, 2006).

The NYA Research Programme commissioned ve

papers by leading youth work researchers into the

contribution that youth work can make to achieving

each o the ve outcomes outlined in Every Child

Matters. The case studies in these documents

provide examples o the range o ways in which

youth work contributes to the ECM agenda, as set

out in the Outcomes Framework:

Being Healthy

Staying Sae

Enjoying and Achieving

Making a Positive Contribution

Economic Wellbeing

This introduction to the set o ve briengs outlines

some generic issues that relate to the ECM agenda

overall. It sets out the dening eatures and values

o youth work, outlines the varying orms o provision

that youth work can take, and addresses the

implications Every Child Matters has or youth work.

1. What is youthwork?

Values in youth work

Youth work helps young people by oering personal

development, education and lie skills programmes

tailored to individual need, and by providing

social, economic, educational and recreational

opportunities designed to encourage social inclusionand lie-long learning (NYA, 2006). Its contribution

has a strong proessional base. Merton and

colleagues (2004) identied our main distinctive

The contribution of youth work to

the Every Child Matters Outcomeseatures o youth work. It is based on:

voluntary engagement o young people;

young peoples active involvement in dierent

eatures o local youth provision;

use oinormal education as a primary; and

method

aexible and responsive approach toprovision.

The core purpose o youth work is the

personal and social development o young

people through inormal education

According to Merton et al (2004), there is

widespread consensus within the youth work

proession that the core purpose o youth work is

the personal and social development (PSD) o young

people through inormal education. However, the

study suggests that there is lack o clarity outsidethe youth work proession about what youth workers

actually do. This is largely because many youth

workers talk about their work in terms o its values

rather than what it is meant to achieve.

Youth work has a role both in the

development o social capital and within

the social inclusion agenda.

Youth work is more strategic than is sometimes

portrayed. Merton et al (2004) describe youth

work activity as preventative, and point to its role

in relation to social inclusion. The approach is a

holistic one, in addressing the totality o a young

persons experience in social context. Depending

on the individual circumstances o the young

person (including their community and amily

contexts), youth work variously contributes to

their re-integration, diversion and engagement in

preventative activity, protection and enablement,

levels o aspiration and achievement and active

citizenship. Through youth work, young people are

helped to prepare or working lie.

Youth work helps young people maximise theirpotential. Bernard Davies stresses its commitment

to a potentiality rather than a deciency model o

young people. He argues that youth work provides a

The National Youth Agency Research Programme Series


3/10

The contribution o youth work to the Every Child Matters Outcomes 3

security and a acility which arms more critical and

creative responses that can lead to change (Davies,

2005: 16).

The primary medium is non-ormal education.

This is dened by The NYA as a structured

educational intervention in a non-institutional

setting, which is negotiated between the learner

and the acilitator, and which leads to a planned

and reorganised outcome or the learner. The

outcome is not typically certication (though this

is increasing). The EU/Council o Europe (2004)

indicate that youth work has a role in ormal, non-

ormal and inormal learning, ranging rom structured

alternative ormal education (eg or dropouts,

excluded, etc), to non-ormal learning through

youth activities, and inormal learning o sot

skills through daily lie in work, amily and leisure.

The youth work curriculum (Merton and Wylie,

2003) contains elements which contribute to theacquisition o social capital, and the skills needed

or employability. These are not just work-related

skills, but also sot skills, including:

emotional literacy(sel-awareness, sel-

esteem, motivation, sensitivity to others,

handling relationships and diversity); and

creativity and enterprise (eeding and

expressing the imagination, thinking laterally,

recognising and solving problems, calculating

and taking risks)

A undamental element in the youth work value

base is that young people set their own aims and

objectives (Davies, 2005). This means that young

people are listened to and their views respected.

Engagement needs thereore to be on avoluntary

basis. Theexibility and time perspectives

o the service make it possible or young people to

review and revise their earlier choices, allowing them

to re-enter education and training, or example.

Forms o provision

Youth work while given cohesion through

its basis in core values is adaptable to

dierent needs

Youth work provision takes many dierent orms.

It is not aimed purely at 13-19s, but oten caters

or young adults up to 25 years o age. It may be

part o a community-based initiative rather than be

specically youth-based. The case studies in these

documents include examples o both o these.

Current provision ranges between universal or openaccess centre-based provision and that which

targets young people at risk. Youth work provision is

diverse, catering or dierent localities or dierent

types o user. In many cases it involves collaboration

with mainstream services, such as education, or

orms part o the targeted service provision within

government initiatives. It can identiy previously

unseen need, and can ocus on those young people

who are unlikely to be contacted through schools

or schemes the hard-to-reach. This listing (NYA,

2006) shows how youth work while given cohesion

through its basis in core values is adaptable to

dierent needs.

Forms o provision

Buildings-based work youth clubs and

centres operated directly by local authorities

or by voluntary and community organisations.

They range rom well-equipped purpose built

youth centres catering solely or young people

to clubs based in premises shared with other

organisations such as community centres andvillage halls.

Detached work making contact with

young people who cannot, or choose not to,

use youth centres. Detached youth workers

meet young people in their own spaces,

or instance parks, bus shelters, shopping

centres or on the street. Through developing

non-judgmental relationships they work with

individuals and groups to help them address

the needs they identiy and engage with other

relevant agencies.

Outreach work encouraging young people

to make more use o existing provision or to

develop new provision.

Mobiles converted buses or other vehicles

taken to particular localities, oering young

people opportunities to meet together, take

part in structured programmes and gain

access to resources, inormation and advice.

Schools and urther education colleges

in many schools and colleges, youth

workers contribute to ormal education

programmes, particularly relating to PSHE

(personal, social and health education)

and citizenship education. They may oer

lunchtime and ater-school provision open

to all young people, as well as developing

programmes with specic groups o young

people, especially those who are having

diculties at school. Youth workers are

also involved in study support programmes

voluntary learning activity outside normal

lessons.

Youth work involvement in government

programmes or post-16 education and

Book 1 Introduction


4/10


training, such as the Learning Gateway, New

Deal or Connexions.

Inormation, advice and counselling

projects providing a range o services rom

inormation about local acilities to long-term

support or individual or groups o young

people.

Youth orums, councils or other projects

enabling young people to learn about

and engage in democratic processes,

and to ensure that their views inorm the

development o policies and services.

Specialist projects, targeting particular

groups o young people, or instance Asian

young women or young people in or leaving

care.

Specialist projects ocusing on specifc

activities, or instance young volunteer and

youth action projects, motor projects or arts

projects. Cross-community and international

work, in Britain or abroad, which brings

together young people rom dierent cultures

and countries on joint projects, through which

they nd common ground while recognising

and valuing dierences.

Work with vulnerable groups

Street-based or outreach work is particularly

eective in nding the hard-to-reach and mostdisaected young people, who are unlikely to

respond to school or centre-based work (Crimmens

et al., 2004). An evaluation ound that most o

the young people involved with projects were

male, partly because male youth cultures are more

street-based, but also because the increasing policy

emphasis on youth nuisance was beginning to

create a bias towards work with young men. The

study o 564 street-based youth work projects

stressed the importance or eectiveness o a

fexible and open-ended approach, responsive to

individual needs and based on voluntarism.

The duration o a successul intervention may

be dictated by the time it takes or the young

person to gain sucient condence and maturity

rather than an arbitrary chronological cut-o

point set by unding or project goals (Crimmens

et al., 2004b: p 5).

It seems clear that youth work does not provide a

quick x or social problems which may be deep-

seated, or or patterns o behaviour which may be

long-standing. Many o the evaluations o individual

projects or o youth work methods indicate the needor longer time rames, possible only through longer-

term unding and retention o proessional trained

sta.

2. The implicationso ECM or youthwork

Towards an integrated YouthSupport Service

There have been concerns or some time

surrounding delivery o services or young people.

Youth work was ound to oer a crucial but uneven

service (according to Osted inspections), while

Connexions ailed to take account o local needs

and related services. The Youth Matters Green

Paper (2005) indicated the need or services to be

integrated at local level in order to lead to the ECM

outcomes. The unevenness in coverage and quality

can oten be related to stang and management

problems and/or unding arrangements (Merton etal., 2004).

ECM areas or action

ECM species areas or action to ensure integration

o services with clearly dened responsibility. These

have major implications or the ways in which

voluntary and statutory youth services are unded,

organised and delivered.

ECM areas or action

Working with amilies

Early intervention and eective protection

Accountability and integration

Workorce reorm

Funding

a) Working with amilies

Supporting parents and carers is one o the ECM

areas or action. The Parenting Fund is set up to

support parents, balanced with Parenting Orders

to emphasise their parental responsibility or their

childrens behaviour (though not or their nancial

responsibility). It was the main argument o the

earlier section o this paper that or economic

wellbeing o young people to be addressed,

attention must now be given to the relationships

between young people and their parents or carers.

This is largely because o the extension o the period

o economically dependent youth and the diculties

associated with accessing parental support.

Research has shown ease o communication with

parents to be a major actor in reducing risk o

teenage pregnancy. Increased homelessness amongyoung people has been ound to be because an

increasing number o parents are unwilling to provide

housing or them (Bynner et al, 2004). Preventive



5/10


work with young people is likely to be ar more

eective i the parent-child relationship is addressed.

Merton et al ound that amilies, as well as

riends and communities, could have a negative

infuence on the eectiveness o youth work. This

is particularly going to be the case where the

aspirations o young people, their parents, service

providers and policy makers do not coincide (see

Brieng 3 on the sources o young peoples belies).

Youth work is currently orientated to the ECM

economic wellbeing outcomes in terms o young

people rather than their amilies. Youth Matters

(DES, 2005) reers to the prospect o a step

change in the extent to which proessionals who

support young people engage with their parents.

Merton et al (2004) point out that youth workers

can act as a bridge between young people and

their amilies. There are examples in the papers oprojects which work with young people and their

amilies. St Basils in Birmingham (see the paper

on Economic Wellbeing) has undertaken work

with amilies, including mediation between young

people and their parents, or some time, as part

o its work in preventing homelessness. ASTRA in

Gloucestershire, which works with young runaways,

recruited a amily worker. It is perhaps obvious

that the amily context is important in cases o

homelessness or running away; perhaps it is less so

in cases where a young person has dropped out o

education, training or employment. Nevertheless,parents may hold the key to successul re-

integration, not least in cases where they are

expected to provide a home and nancial support.

There may be resistance in the youth work

proession to diverting attention away rom young

people to work with their amilies. Many young

people do however experience problems in their

amily relationships. Youth workers would not want to

jeopardise their relationships with the young people

they work with, and their skills may not extend to

working in a amily setting. Partnership working with

other proessionals may provide a means o working

with amilies.

Parents may hold the key to successul

re-integration, not least in cases where

they are expected to provide a home and

fnancial support.

b) Early intervention and eectiveprotection

There is a need or common assessment, trackingprocedures, and monitoring i services are to be

made more level nationally, and the main criticism o

existing youth work services addressed. Inormation

must be pooled between agencies i needs are

to be identied and acted upon early, and i gaps

and overlaps in services are not to be allowed to

develop. The intention is to make sure that children

and young people do not all through holes in the

saety net because o acts o omission on the part o

service providers.

The need or inormation sharing is obvious in

child abuse cases. It may be less so in the

case o disaected young people where the same

procedures can be interpreted as control rather

than protection. The ethos that lies behind agency

inormation-sharing and common assessment

ramework may be seen by youth workers to breach

the condentiality principle on which their work is

based. Youth workers may need some convincing

that inormation sharing is in young peoples

interests.

The ethos o rapid response multi-disciplinary teams

is also quite contrary to that o street-based youth

work, where relationships are long-term (ideally)

and based on trust (Crimmens et al, 2004). On the

other hand, youth work has a clear and existing role

in identication o need, especially among hard-to-

reach groups (Davies, 2005).

c) Accountability and integration

Clear mechanisms or governance are needed ichildrens and young peoples services are to be

integrated through local partnerships. ECM puts

orward a structure or local services comprising

a Director o Childrens Services, with local

saeguarding childrens boards, and an integrated

inspection ramework (led by Osted). A Childrens

Commissioner or England was established in 2005.

The transorming youth work management

programme (TYWMP) was designed to help youth

work managers who were having to cope with

increasing demands, in part because o increasing

awareness o the value o youth work. Tylers (2004)

evaluation o TYWMP ound indications that working

in partnerships involved more strategic thinking and

operational management on the part o youth work

managers, more scrutiny and review o practice,

and also, perhaps more surprisingly, increasingly

involvement o young people in service development.

Under the ECM arrangements, Connexions is to

be transerred to Local Authority responsibility, to

allow the service to be more responsive to local

need. Youth work has played a central role in

the development and delivery o Connexions, orexample, ensuring that Connexions reaches young

people who are disaected or at risk. There is also

crossover between Connexions and youth work

Book 1 Introduction


6/10


many youth workers have taken on (with training)

the Personal Adviser role, while many Connexions

Services locate PAs within local youth services.

Merton et al (2004, p. 13) comment that there is

variation in the quality o partnerships between local

youth service and Connexions, but where they are

close and condent, youth work is adding value.

Youth workers already work with other agencies (as

several o the illustrative Case Studies in this Brieng

show). There are partnerships involving housing,

youth oending teams and police, leisure and health

services (especially those working on the Teenage

Pregnancy Strategy and Drugs and Alcohol Advisory

Teams) (NYA, 2006). Partnerships with social

services in supporting care leavers were, according

to Merton et al (2004) the least developed.

At their best, local multi-agency partnerships are an

eective way o coordinating services and lling gaps

between services. Problems can however occur, asseveral evaluations have shown. One o the main

areas o concern is the dierence in proessional

ethos and culture between partners. Partnerships

will thereore vary according to which organisation

takes the lead, and this leads to continued national

unevenness o services, and inconsistent data

sharing, tracking, record-keeping and evaluation.

The challenge is to nd coordinating mechanisms

and common strategies (Bynner et al, 2004).

Youth workers, by working in partnership with non-

youth work proessionals, may be able to to developmore preventive work by widening the ocus out rom

the individual and working with communities and

amilies, without losing sight o their primary concern

with young people themselves.

d) Workorce reorm

The devolution o Connexions unding and

the development o an integrated youth

support service both have implications or

the workorce. Local partners will need to

build on the skills o todays proessionals,

clariying their roles and developing their

skills to meet new challenges. (Youth

Matters, 2005: 63).

ECM proposes a ramework or workorce reorm. This

includes mechanisms or improving skills, through

training and standards, leadership development

programme; and improved mechanisms or joint inter-

proessional working, such as common core training

through a Sector Skills Council (SSC), and breaking

down barriers to joint working.

What does this mean or youth work? In all, there

are around 3,000 ull-time and 21,000 part-time

youth workers employed by local authority youth

services in England, and an estimated hal a

million volunteers. The service is staed by people

with dierent levels o attachment to it and its

proessional values, thereore.

A misft between the aims o the service

to work through long-term relationships

o mutual trust and the reality o its

stafng situation.

Levels o training also vary widely. Crimmens et

als (2004) study o street-based work ound that

stang could aect the quality o the service.

Projects were staed 75 per cent by volunteers

or part-time sessional sta, though they could

be working with high-risk young people. High

sta turnover made training dicult. There was,

thereore, a mist between the aims o the

service, to work through long-term relationships

o mutual trust, and the reality o its stangsituation. Evaluation o Connexions and mentoring

projects similarly show the importance o well-

trained proessional sta (see Bynner et al,

2004). Merton et al. (2004) ound that lack o

management support o youth workers and lack o

clear proessional development structures adversely

aected the eectiveness o youth work.

e) Funding

The establishment o Childrens Trusts ascommissioning bodies is intended to allow services

to be organised around local needs, and projects

commissioned specically to ll identied gaps.

Eective youth work needs a secure unding base,

to underpin sta development as well as youth work

practice. Short-term, unstable and variable unding

leads to dierential capacity to deliver and is one

o the reasons or the geographic unevenness o

the service. It is inimical to the idea o long-term

and sustained contact with young people (Merton

et al, 2004). More systematic unding o street-

based work may oer good value or money and

measurable results (JRF, 2004; Merton et al,2004).

Funders may, however, be single-issue orientated

and want short-term results (Crimmens et al, 2004).

Examples like the SIGNPOST Case study and the

evaluation o mentoring schemes or care leavers

(in Enjoying and Achieving) show the importance o

long-term core unding or the long-term involvement

o young people and greater chance o positive

outcomes.

Service management

ECM Outcomes Framework sets out ways the



7/10


directorate will judge on service management,

including leadership and value or money. The

criteria include the ollowing (this is not an

exhaustive list):

ECM Service management judgment criteria

Ambition

Local services share objectives and targets

Comprehensive analysis o needs take into

account the views o parents, carers, children

and young people

Needs are mapped against provision and

gaps

Prioritisation

Priorities are clear and robust, and shared

between partner agencies, parents, carers,

children and young people

Delivery achieves value or money Preventive services

Eective inter-agency processes or planning

and reviewing provision

Accessible venues

Capacity

Accountability and decision-making through

CYPP and Childrens Trust

Ecient use o capacity fexibility in

services, use o local providers, pooled

budgets i needed, workorce planning and

action to recruit, train and retain sta. Eective identication, recording and

communication o individual need through

single recording system

Perormance management

View o children and young people listened to

Regular and collective review o service

perormance

Services regularly monitored, evaluated

and reviewed, and ndings used to improve

services

Contributions o dierent services integrated

where development needs are identied, or

new services commissioned

The emphasis on ensuring value or money, through

evaluation and monitoring o needs and service

provision, has major implications or the ways in

which youth work is conceived and organised. The

emphasis on shared vision is also challenging, since

it will mean compromise and fexibility.

Measuring eectiveness

How should the eectiveness o youth work be

measured? According to Davies (2005: 21)

the course o its practice is decided by human

interactions which are always fuid, continuously

shiting and which, thereore, can oer no guarantee

o reaching certain and nal endpoints. On the

other hand, Merton and colleagues (2004) ound

that local youth services in England were adapting

to policy developments, and there were tangible

outcomes, such as re-engaging with education or

reducing drug use.

The link between scope or evaluation and unding

is likely to get closer, and it will become increasingly

important to nd appropriate means o evaluating

youth provision, i the service is not to become

skewed towards the achievement o hard outcomes.

Services need to be eective and seen to be

eective ie value or money.

The DES discussion document Transorming Youth

Work(2001) listed qualitative criteria or good youth

work, and The NYA have added a th:

Criteria or good youth work that young

people would want to use (rom DES, 2001;

and NYA, 2006)

Oers quality support to young people which

helps them achieve and progress.

Enables young people to have their voice

heard and infuence decision making at

various levels.

Provides a diversity o personal and social

development opportunities. Promotes intervention and prevention to

address individual, institutional and policy

causes o disaection and exclusion.

Is well planned, ocusing on achieving

outcomes that meet young peoples needs

and priorities.

It is clear that most o these criteria o quality do

not lend themselves to development into

measurable targets o eectiveness. There is a

problem about evaluating the eectiveness o any

provision or young people. Being in a period o

transition where much in their lives is changing,

including their social relationships and their

economic situations, young people are subject to

many changing infuences. There is no easy way

o determining whether desistance rom crime or

drugs, or increased sel-esteem, is due to youth

work or other actors. Monitoring o eectiveness

would require procedures such as randomised

control trials (RCT), and these would require clear

and standardised measurements o the aims and

target outcomes o the intervention, and start and

endpoints or the user (all o which ECM Outcomes

Framework aims to provide). Evaluations have amuch broader remit and examine processes and

problems o implementation and delivery as well as

outcomes (Bynner et al, 2004).

Book 1 Introduction


8/10

The contribution o youth work to the Every Child Matters Outcomes

Qualitative and broader evaluation o

the youth work process in context may

be more appropriate than monitoring

its eectiveness against baselines and

targets.

Tensions and challenges

The question is whether the open, fexible,

voluntaristic and exploratory approach o youth

work can be maintained within the current policy

agenda. Davies (2005) is concerned that youth

work is attractive to policy makers mainly because it

acilitates the voice/consult agenda and because o

its ability to make contact with hard-to-reach young

people. He suggests that there is less concern to

preserve the integrity o the means by which these

are achieved.

Merton et al (2004) also alert us to the dangers

o compromising the basic values underlying youth

work. They suggest that youth work is currently

acing our main strategic issues.

Key issues or youth work (Merton et al,

2004)

The balance between universal or open

access and targeted work

Processes or identiying need and directing

resources Relationship between youth work and schools

Retaining the voluntary engagement o young

people

Balancing universalism with open access

and targeted work.

The term progressive universalism has been

used to describe a system where there is

support or all but more support or those who

most need it (HM Treasury & DES, 2005). What

is the desirable balance between universal and

targeted provision? The ever-increasing ocus

on targeting services and provisions runs the

risk o ailing many young people who are less

visibly in need. It will be important or unders to

recognise that universal and open provision is

both needed and eective.

Processes or identiying need and

directing resources.

Broadly speaking, ECM represents a shit in

policy emphasis rom treatment o problems

to their prevention. On the other hand, the

increasing ocus on anti-oending policiesruns the risk o removing resources away rom

preventive work. Youth work is well placed to

identiy needs at local level, especially in relation

to disaected young people who do not come

into contact with other agencies (Davies, 2005).

It is also able to help young people express their

views on what is needed and how provision

should be shaped.

Relationship between youth work and

schools.

The EC White Paper (2001) called or greater

complementarity between youth work and ormal

education and training. Should there be better

links between mainstream and out-o-school/

special education provision, to avoid the dangers

o parallel agendas (Bynner et al, 2004). How

will the increasing recognition o vocational

courses impact on the relationship between

youth work and schools? How desirable is the

increased emphasis on accreditation as a means

o purchasing services? Is there a risk that

inormal and non-ormal education will becomeormalised and less attractive to some young

people?

Retaining the voluntary engagement o

young people.

The voluntary nature o youth work participation

is seen as critical to its success, but is this

one o the rst values o youth work to become

compromised? The policy shit towards

responsibilities rather than rights is refected

in increasing emphasis on the conditionality

o benets, contracts between young peopleand service providers, etc. Can the basic youth

work principle o voluntarism (rather than its

antithesis, coercion) be maintained in the ace

o this policy agenda? Interestingly, Merton

et al (2004) ound that elements o coercion

could be accommodated in youth work: youth

workers could still work out plans and agendas

with young people and convert having to into

wanting to, through negotiation. But what

happens to the relationship between young

people and youth workers when rights (such

as to participate or express a view) become

responsibilities?



9/10


10/10

The National Youth Agency

works in partnership with young people and with

organisations and services to ensure better outcomes

or young people. It is an independent, development

organisation located between government and unding

bodies on the one hand and service providers and their

users on the other.

We strive to ensure that the work o services and

organisations is:

relevant to the lives o young people;

responsive to policy;

eective and o a high standard;

ecient and provides good value; and successul in securing the best outcomes or young people.

Our fve strategic aims are:

Participation: promoting young peoples infuence, voice

and place in society.

Proessional practice: improving youth work practice,

programmes and other services or young people.

Policy development: infuencing and shaping the youthpolicy o central and local government and the policies o

those who plan, commission and provide services or young

people.

Partnership: creating, supporting and developing

partnerships between organisations to improve services and

outcomes or young people.

Perormance: striving or excellence in The Agencys

internal workings.

Published by

Eastgate House, 1923 Humberstone Road, Leicester LE5 3GJ.Tel: 0116 242 7350. Fax: 0116 242 7444.

Website: www.nya.org.uk E-mail: [email protected]

the contribution of youth

Documents