Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Commission

Panel Enquiry into Youth Services

June, 2008

Scrutiny Report No #

Chair’s Foreword

This enquiry was undertaken after members of the former Lifelong Learning, Culture and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Commission expressed concern regarding the impact the Youth Matters Green Paper would have on the provision of existing youth provision in the City. In particular we felt that historically, the move to a curriculum based youth service had led to a significant drop in the number of young people accessing youth services in the City.

We realised that there were a significant number of current and emerging issues at a national level which would impact on the future delivery of youth services, across all sectors, at a local level. For these reasons we have made a number of strategic recommendations which should be taken into consideration as part of any future service reconfiguration and future commissioning of services for young people.

During the course of the enquiry we established that there were a number of areas within the spectrum of both statutory and voluntary youth services which should be addressed. In particular, we found that a number of issues relating to the way the City Council worked with community and voluntary sector organisations in delivering quality, value for money youth activities within the City. We also recognised the need to redress the balance between universal and targeted youth work plus the urgent need to reintroduce outreach and detached youth work within the City.

The Panel received a lot of evidence and considered the options very carefully, placing the views of young people as a priority. It is hoped that the recommendations will help shape all areas of youth provision across the City in years to come.

I would like to thank, the members of the Panel and all those who contributed to the enquiry for all of their hard work. I commend this report to Cabinet for acceptance.

Councillor L. Maxwell Bird Chair of the Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Commission

CONTENTS Page

Summary of Recommendations

1. Introduction 1

2. Aim of the Enquiry 1 3. National Picture 2 4. Local Picture 8 5. Kingston upon Hull City Council Scrutiny Enquiry Into 19 Anti Social Behaviour 6. Evidence From Witnesses 19 7. Voluntary Care Sector Provision 26 8. Mapping of Youth Provision 30 9. Consultation With Children and Young People 30 10. Conclusions 32 11. Recommendations 33

Appendix A Appendix B Appendix D Appendix F Appendix G Appendix H Appendix I

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

The Panels detailed Conclusions and Recommendations are set out in the report, but for ease of reference, the Recommendations are set out here. The recommendations are to be read in conjunction with the conclusions laid out in section 10 of this report

i) A standard programme of support be developed to deliver to voluntary and community sector organisations to ensure that they have appropriate exit strategies in place when managing the discontinuation of time limited funding

ii) The Council, with its partners utilise existing outreach services, such as the community warden’s service more effectively to signpost young people into youth activities in their area

iii) That the re-introduction of outreach and detached youth work be established as an urgent priority and that the Assistant Chief Executive (Children and Young People) produce a detailed action plan demonstrating when this will be implemented

iv) That Assistant Chief Executive (Children and Young People) produces a report to a future meeting of the Children and Young People’s Overview and Scrutiny Commission detailing how youth provision and activities will be included in the BSF programme with particular reference to new builds and in the context of the 14-19 agenda and extended school model

v) The Council utilises HCVYS, as the umbrella organisation for youth services to share information about future funding and joint commissioning opportunities

vi) The Assistant Chief Executive (Children and Young People) a meeting of Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Commission upon completion of the JSNA in order to comment on future plans for the delivery of youth work in the city

vii) The responsibility for ‘championing youth services should sit with the Portfolio Holder for Quality of Life with a reporting overview from the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services and the Portfolio Holder for Lifelong Learning

viii) That in the future provision of youth services consideration should be given to providing informal meeting places rather than a prescribed youth centre model.

ix) In terms of the future delivery of youth activity youth work should be seen as an area ‘in growth’ with a gradual shift from an educational based delivery model to a focus on leisure based provision.

x) The Youth Development Service look at how it could market and promote its services more effectively and imaginatively to include looking at alternative

ways of funding and working with partner organisations xi) The Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Commission seek assurances, as part of it update report into the youth services review that the recommendations from the Environment and Transport Commission Panel Enquiry into Anti-Social Behaviour enquiry have been implemented xii) That the Bransholme Buddies model should be rolled out to other areas of the City where appropriate xiii) That the Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Commission receive regular monitoring information in relation to how the changing focus of youth service delivery is contributing to the Councils wider priorities as well as the Every Child Matters objectives

Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Commission Panel Enquiry into Youth Services Draft Final Report

1. Introduction

1.1 The Panel was established after members of the former Lifelong Learning, Culture and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Commission expressed concern regarding the impact the Youth Matters green paper would have on the provision of youth services locally.

1.2 The Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Commission agreed at its meeting held 17 July 2007 “that the Commission ratify the amendments made to the Terms of Reference for the Panel Enquiry into Youth Services.”

1.3 The Panel comprised Councillors Bird (Chair), Butterworth, Waudby and Welton and Mr J. Gwinnell.

1.4 During the course of the enquiry the Panel received a wide range of evidence from Local Authority representatives, members of the Voluntary and Community sector and through a consultation exercise with young people. A list of witnesses to the Enquiry is attached at Appendix A to this report.

1.5 It was realised part way through the enquiry that there were a significant number of current and emerging issues nationally which would impact on the future delivery of youth services, across all sectors, at a local level. For these reasons the Panel have made its recommendations in the context of a ‘snap shot’ of the way services were provided locally at the time of the review. These strategic recommendations should be taken into consideration as part of any future service reconfiguration and Commissioning of services with a view to improved service delivery.

1.6 The Panel would like to thank all those who contributed to and gave assistance to the enquiry.

2. Aim of the Enquiry

The Panel agreed that the enquiry should result in recommendations being made to Cabinet and the Local Strategic Partnership in relation to how the Local Authority, with its partners could improve youth services in the City with particular reference to extended access, availability and quality of service. To achieve this the Panel agreed that it needed to determine the current extent of provision across all sectors and the challenges and opportunities they face in improving service delivery. A copy of the terms of reference and project plan for the enquiry is attached at Appendix B to this report.

1

3. National Picture

3.1 Every Child Matters

3.1.1In 2005 the Government launched the Every Child Matters: Change for Children agenda. This was a new approach aimed to improve the well-being of Children and Young people from birth to 19.

3.1.2 The Every Child Matters approach was aimed at every child whatever their circumstances to have the support they need to: • Be Healthy • Stay Safe • Enjoy and Achieve • Make a Positive Contribution • Achieve Economic Well-being

3.1.3 This meant that local authorities would be required to work with their partners to develop new ways of sharing information in order to ensure that young people were consulted on issues relevant to them and could contribute to the development and delivery of services.

3.2 Youth Matters

3.2.1 Youth Matters, the youth agenda green paper was published on 18 th July 2005 and formed part of the Governments toolkit to enable it to meet the five key objectives of the Every Child Matters agenda. It set out the Governments vision to transform the lives of every young person through a radical reshaping of provision. The proposals in Youth Matters responded to four main challenges: 1. Empowering Young People: Things to do places to go; Young People as Citizens: Making a Contribution; 2. Supporting Choices: Information, Advice and Guidance, and 3. All Young People Achieving: Reforming Targeted Support.

3.2.2 The overarching aim of Youth Matters was to develop an integrated Youth Support and Opportunities framework to encompass targeted support, remote access, advice and guidance, youth offending, social services, youth work, Connexions, extended schools etc. The green paper also talked about the need “to give all young people the choice of a positive future by helping them to learn ways that motivate and stretch them and enable them to achieve by engaging in positive development activities; make informed choices about their lives and benefit from high quality target support before problems arise.”

3.2.3 The proposals stated that there should be an identifiable focus on young people within children’s trusts and that the provision of services for young people was considered through the new commissioning process and draws on alternative service providers such as the Voluntary and Community sector through Local Area Agreements.

2 3.2.4 In order to cover each facet of the Youth Matters agenda the paper was separated into seven key chapters highlighted below:

(i) Chapter one of the report looked at the issues facing children and young people today. The report recognised that there were numerous examples of good practice nationally in terms of the delivery of services for young people but it also recognised that there were a number of significant areas for development in the following areas: • Services did not always meet the needs of individual young people;

• Organisations providing services and help for young people did not work together as effectively or imaginatively as they should, resulting in poor value for money

• Not enough was being done to prevent young people from drifting into a life of poverty or crime;

• Services were failing to exploit the full potential of the ICT, mobile phones and new technologies, and

• Teenagers and their parents were not having enough say on what was provided locally. (ii) Chapter two of the report discussed the challenges and approaches to reforming youth services nationally. The paper identified four key challenges and six underpinning principles to approaching the reform including:

• How to engage more young people in positive activities and empower them to shape the services they receive;

• How to encourage more young people to volunteer and become involved in their communities;

• How to provide better information, advice and guidance to young people to help them make informed choices about their lives, and

• How to provide better and more personalised intensive support for each young person who has serious problems or gets into trouble. (iii) Chapter three of the report stressed that local authorities, working through children's trusts would have a key role to play in commissioning and providing activities and facilities for young people. To help ensure that activities were of a more consistent quality and met the needs of young people the following changes were proposed:

3

• Legislate and clarify local authorities' duty to secure positive activities for all young people;

• Provide statutory guidance for Local Authorities setting out a new set of national standards for the activities that all young people would benefit from accessing in their free time including, access to two hours per week of sporting activity; two hours per week of other constructive activities in clubs, youth groups or classes; opportunities to contribute to their communities through volunteering; a wide range of other recreational, cultural, sporting and enriching experiences; and a range of safe and enjoyable places in which to spent time, and

• That each local authority, working through children's trust arrangements, should, within existing resources, develop an annual local offer to communicate clearly the national standards to young people and the range of activities available locally. iv) Chapter four of the report discussed how young people could be encouraged to volunteer and become involved in their communities. A new body is to be established to implement the recommendations of the Russell Commission on volunteering and be tasked with achieving a positive change in the level of volunteering by young people. v) Chapter five identified how councils and its partners could better support young people to make decisions about their careers, education, and health and set out some clear proposals in relation to the guidance young people should receive during the ages of 11-19 including:

• At age 11-12 (year 7): an introduction from a variety of people, including other pupils, to what is on offer within secondary school;

• At age 13-14 (year 9): support in considering post-14 choices and a personal session with an adviser if they or their parents need or want it to complement plans for a local 14-19 learning prospectus and

• Throughout the teenage years improved help to think through post-16 options, personal social and health issues and career choices. vi) Chapter six of the report looked at the need to provide a more tailored and intensive support service for young people who had serious problems or got into trouble and ensure that services were accessible and met the overall needs of individual teenagers, rather than as a collective group. vii) Chapter seven of the paper indicated that those local authorities who worked through children's trusts would be given the necessary responsibility, resources, authority and incentives to lead the way towards a more responsive and integrated service for teenagers and their parents. It was felt that a single body responsible and accountable for youth policy and the Every Child Matters outcomes in each area would enable integrated planning and commissioning of the full range of services for teenagers from universal activities through to more specialist and targeted support. This would lead to an integrated youth support service, focused

4 on, and structured around young people's needs and involving a wide range of providers, including voluntary and community organisations. Subject to consultation, and the success of the pilots, it was intended that the reforms proposed in this document would be completed by April 2008. 3.2.5 As part of this process, over 19,000 young people gave their views on the proposals. Young people felt that the proposals were positive overall, however, highlighted the need to ensure access and opportunity for all young people. The results of the consultation helped shape the government’s next steps for the implementation of the youth matters agenda. Consultation results included:

• 68% of young people would like to help decide how local councils spend money on providing activities for young people; • 71% of young people said they would do up to four hours of activities in their spare time if they had the opportunity; • 73% of young people thought that having more places for young people to go would stop some teenagers getting into trouble; • 85% of young people and 83% of adults/organisations supported the proposals for empowering young people to shape local services, and • By April 2008 the Youth Matters framework would place a new duty on local authorities to ensure that young people had access to a wide range of positive activities, through the Youth Opportunity and Youth Development Fund. Funds would put directly into the hands of young people to spend on activities in their local area (a total of £115m over two years).

3.3 Children’s Trusts

3.3.1Children’s trusts will aim to assess the needs of local young people across all communities through mapping existing services from the voluntary, private and public sectors against young people’s needs and through the Children and Young People’s Plan. Children’s Trusts will be integrated, responsive and accessible with effective range of services and provision, underpinned by a local workforce strategy.

3.3.2 Children’s trusts will aim to tackle a range of problems which currently face local agencies such as:

• sharing information between services to identify children and young people with multiple risks; • focussing spending to provide support in a more coherent way between agencies; • harnessing the resources of the Voluntary, Community and Private sectors; • co-ordinating plans, partnerships and strategies across relevant agencies, and • Organising services around the needs of the child rather than the convenience of providers.

3.3.3 Children’s Trusts will also track the progress of young people and their progress against local Not in Education Employment Training (NEET) targets and

5 actions within the Joint Area Review (JAR) and the Children and Young People (C&YP) plan. It was also hoped that the new Connexions structure would play in important part in this role.

3.3.4 The table below shows an example of Children’s Trust model:

3.4 Aiming High for Young People: a ten year strategy for positive activities 3.4.1 In July 2006 the Government launched a policy review of children and young people that focussed on what further steps could be undertaken to improve the life chances of children and young people. Particular emphasis was placed on a more preventative system and aiming to do more to build a child’s resilience and intervening as soon as possible when problems arose. The report argued that positive leisure time activities could build both resilience as well as social and emotional skills in young people using research to analyse the characteristics of successful provision.

3.4.2 The strategy identified three themes for reform: 1) Empowerment – giving young people and communities influence over local services (a key role for local authorities and ward councillors). Youth Opportunity and Youth Capital funds will be extended until at least 2011 with additional resources for projects in the most disadvantaged areas; 2) Access – making services that are both attractive to all young people and effective in reaching out to engage those who may not otherwise access them; youth facilities are to be improved under a £60 million investment programme over the next three years, and 3) Quality – enables more effective co-ordination and commissioning of services from cross the statutory, third and private sectors; and supporting and developing the workforce to employ the very best practice in working with young people.

6 3.5 Building on the Best: Overview of Local Authority Youth Services 2005/2006

3.5.1 Published by OfSTED, the report was based on visits to 33 local authorities which took place during the JAR inspections in September 2005. There were a number of key findings summarised below: • The quality of youth work was improving, with 15 of the 33 youth services inspected judged good or better; • The quality of strategic and operational leadership and management is a key factor in bringing about improvement; • The most successful services meet a broad range of needs and have a clear vision and match their resources effectively to local needs; • Youth services are increasingly taking the lead in involving young people in youth councils, local forums, conferences and other events; • Youth services make particularly strong contributions to the Every Child Matters outcomes on making a positive contribution and being healthy, and • Quality provision depends on having a sufficiency of resources.

3.5.2The report made a number of recommendations for local authorities when reviewing its children and young people’s service including:

a) Ensuring that elected members, senior officers and other decision-makers including children’s trusts, understand the educational role of youth work and its potential contribution to young peoples lives; b) Building on the managerial and relevant experience of youth service officers and engage them in key strategic developments, and c) Ensuring that commissioning arrangements for youth work is focused on delivering high quality learning outcomes for young people.

3.5.3 It was noted that although OfSTED reported a gradual upturn in the quality of youth services overall, it highlighted the need for considerable improvement in one in five of those authorities inspected.

3.6 An Evaluation of the Impact of Youth Work in England

3.6.1 The study was carried out by the youth affairs unit at De Montfort University on behalf of the DfES. Its primary purpose was to explain the impact of youth services in England on young people and on local communities. The research involved case studies of local youth work practice and a small scale survey of young people as well as other documentary evidence.

3.6.2 The outcome of the survey reported that youth work had made a considerable difference to young people’s lives including increased confidence, ability to make new friends and learning new skills. Other tangible outcomes included re- engagement with education and reduced incidences of drug use.

3.6.3 In terms of impact, the study showed that positive factors mainly relied on the ability of youth workers to establish a relationship with young people that was distinct from other service providers. Evidence showed that youth workers were closely connected to local communities and that this could often act as a bridge between young peoples, their families and other service providers such as

7 education, health, social services and the police. The study also found that adopting a holistic approach between the statutory, private and voluntary and community sector also enhanced involvement. The study also identified a range of negative impacts including local adverse social conditions, negative attitudes of friends, families and the local community, poor management of youth workers and also that the quality of partnerships between youth services and other agencies like schools and voluntary organisations was highly variable.

3.7 Youth Provision and Crime

3.7.1 In 2005 the BBC reported that the Government had pledged to provide a youth club in every neighbourhood as part of its 10 year strategy to tackle youth delinquency; however research undertaken by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) showed that by simply giving young people a base to meet and socialise can do more harm than good. The IPPR stated that “just hanging out at a club can have a detrimental impact on young people’s lives e.g. making them more likely to smoke, drink and become teenage parents”. However, the research also showed that youth clubs can be improving when delivering structured activities such as sport, art or drama activities take place regularly in a structured setting and develop social and emotional skills which may be lacking at home. Julia Margo of the IPPR said that “every child should be expected to do at least an hour a week of constructive after-school activities”.

3.8 University of London’s Institute of Education

3.8.1 A study conducted by the University of London’s Institute of Education for the Department of Education and Skills tracked a group of people born in 1970 to examine the impact of youth activities overtime. It concluded that giving young people a place to hang out without organised activities, or effective supervision, is damaging. Young people not only need places to go but things to do.

4. Local Picture

4.1 Hull City Council Youth Development Service

4.1.1The Youth Development Service (YDS) was established at the end of August 2006 when the Hull Youth Service and elements of the Sports Development Unit (Learning Support and Youth & Pupil Support) were restructured and integrated. It aimed to “maximise every child and young person’s potential by raising their confidence, creativity and aspirations through developing opportunities that meet their learning needs and give them a voice”. The service is made up of two major strands; area youth and community network and a learning support strand. The YDS also works in partnership with several voluntary and community sector organisations including Preston Road New Deal for the Community, and the Dales Fitness Centre. Services are also provided through specific projects for Secondary Schools, Young people in the ‘looked after’ system and young people who are NEET.

4.1.2 The Youth Development Service developed the following principles which formed the basis of their service delivery plan:

8 § All young people have the right to be heard and their views respected and responded to; § Young people have the right to be actively involved in identifying, developing and influencing their futures; § Young people should be valued for who they are as individuals; § The Service will be responsive to young peoples starting points, changing needs, interests, learning styles and aspirations; § We will provide a high quality professional service which works collaboratively to create outcomes for young people; § The Service will actively promote and celebrate young people’s achievement, and § The Service will work in accordance with the UN Rights of the Child.

4.1.3 Overview of Work Undertaken by the Youth Development Service in line with the Children and Young Peoples Plan and Every Child Matters

In developing the delivery plan the following core objectives have been agreed, in line with the Every Child Matters Outcome and are also linked to the National Services Maternity Framework which aims to promote Health and well-being for all, parenting support, is children and young people family centred, supports transition to adulthood and promotes safeguarding. These outcomes are summarised below:

i. Being Healthy The Youth Development Service contributed to this outcome through the provision of healthy lifestyle opportunities for young people. The Youth Information and Counselling Unit provides counselling services to young people, in order to ensure that young people’s mental health issues were addressed to reduce risk. Demand for the Service was high and one of the challenges for the YDS at the time of the review was to examine ways to integrate youth work provision with the Primary Care Trust (PCT). The Service also contributes to the Teenage Pregnancy Strategy, through drop in sessions and comprehensive training for youth and play workers.

ii. Staying Safe The Youth Development Service provides safe meeting places across the City. In addition more creative and partnership solutions were available, particularly through the Voluntary and Community sector. Youth Support Workers had clear boundaries within their interactions with young people enabling them to engage with activities, workers, and peers safely. The Service provides training to workers on the full spectrum of the Common Assessment Framework (CAF), and is developing a strategy for monitoring entry and exit from youth provision and effective local links were being established with Partners enabling a more proactive approach to responding to need. Consultation with young people and national research highlighted personal safety as an important aspect to young people’s lives. Programmes are offered aimed at contributing to the reduction of anti social behaviour and enhancing community safety, community cohesion, and the social development of young people.

9 iii. Enjoying The Service delivered recreational activities, in all youth centres to raise standards and provide progression and also included an element of play provision, delivered a range of settings with some element of partnership working.

iv. Achieving A number of alternative education programmes were provided for young people, through youth work intervention, skills and support, tackling issues around attendance and re-engagement with School. Young people were also engaged in a wide variety of projects developing personal and social skills, where progression could be evidenced through recorded and accredited outcomes. The Service offers a number of accreditation routes including Duke of Edinburgh’s Award, Open College Network (OCN), and Accredited Scheme Development Achievement Network (ASDAN) and from 2007/08 the Youth Development Service will offer its own local award which meets national criteria as an accredited outcome, and have local currency through ASDAN.

v. Making A Positive Contribution The service contributed to this outcome through a range of activities with young people at the heart of its work. It enabled young people to be involved in the design and delivery of projects, and influenced change locally through a variety of mechanisms. The service also provided volunteering opportunities for young people and worked with young people to access the Youth Opportunity and Youth Capital Funds in partnership with Hull Youth Council in order to support young people as applicants, assessors, and recipients of the funds. Youth and Play Workers support young people in a range of voice and influence opportunities through the Youth Council, Youth Forums, Youth Parliament and Local Democracy Work.

vi. Achieve Economic Well-being The service supports young people who are NEET in partnership with Connexions, through a range of projects. In addition it contributes to the NEET action plan through the secondment of a Youth Development Manager to lead on the ‘Top 700’ initiative and also provides opportunities to young people engaged in this initiative. Information was provided to support young people into education, employment, training and external funding was available for programmes to be run which would enhance young people’s skills and employability.

4.1.4 Youth Centres (Hull City Council Youth Development Service)

The service is responsible for 11 delivery venues providing a range of facilities including open access provision, where any young person can attend the various sessions, as well as targeted provision for young people with a variety of personal and social development needs. There is also a Service Level Agreement (SLA) in place with every secondary school in the City. Services were provided based on the area committee structure as well as delivering services city wide Examples of the facilities are provided in the table below: however a comprehensive list of access provided by the Service is attached at Appendix C to this report:

10

Youth Centre Type of Provision

BUMPS Bransholme Urban Motor Project (BUMPS) is a city wide project based at Noddle Hill Youth Centre. The facilities at BUMPS include a large fleet of karts, training/mechanics workshop, training room, sports hall, and social area (including kitchen). Two Wheel The Two Wheel Centre (TWC) is a city wide project based Centre at Chapman Street. The Two Wheel Centre has a large fleet of motorcycles, training/mechanics workshop, training room and social area (including kitchen).

The motor projects vehicles and environment at both centres are used as informal educational tools of engagement, progression, and achievement. Kingston Youth The Kingston youth centre’s facilities include a sports Centre hall, IT room, drama room, arts room, recording studio, multi gym, social space, kitchen. Astra The Bransholme Astra Youth Centre has social space and a kitchen and also makes use of the Winifred Holtby School Pool (on site) for canoeing and kayaking. Route One The facilities at Route one, Hall road include a drama room, counselling room, sports hall, it room, classrooms, and social space.

4.1.5 Staffing

The Staffing structure within the Youth Development Service is also aligned to the Councils priorities linked to the Every Child Matters agenda. The Youth Development Service staffing (based on staff in post at the time of the review) was: o Operational Managers = 5 FTE o Youth Work Delivery Staff = 70.2 FTE (including Area Development Workers) o Play Work Delivery Staff = 2.5 FTE o Caretakers = 2 FTE o Youth Services Management Team = 5 FTE posts.

Staffing structures were under review in order to relate them more effectively to the wider children and young people service area.

4.1.6 Funding Allocated to the Youth Development Service

The Youth Development Service Budget is set out below: This information relates to the budget for publicly funded (local authority) youth provision and does not identify additional funding sourced through the local authority to deliver partnership, grass roots provision with other statutory and third sector organisations but covers location costs and mass engagement and participation projects.

11

2006/07 CORE GRANT TOTAL BUDGET FUNDED SERVICE FOR YEAR BUDGET BUDGET Employee Costs 2,338,693 590,829 2,929,522 Premises Costs 338,659 9,000 347,659 Supplies & Services 321,040 582,080 903,120 TOTAL EXPENDITURE 2,998,392 1,181,909 4,180,301 ESF Funding -835,000 -835,000 Government Grants -443,091 -443,091 Other Income -170,000 -125,112 -295,112 TOTAL INCOME -170,000 -1,403,203 -1,573,203

NET BUDGET 2,828,392 -221,294 2,607,098

2007/08 CORE GRANT TOTAL BUDGET FUNDED SERVICE FOR YEAR BUDGET BUDGET Employee Costs 2,345,934 614,213 2,960,147 Premises Costs 348,514 9,225 357,739 Supplies & Services 319,265 835,205 1,154,470 TOTAL EXPENDITURE 3,013,713 1,458,643 4,472,356 ESF Funding -835,000 -835,000 Government Grants -459,791 -459,791 Other Income -400,000 -125,112 -525,112 TOTAL INCOME -400,000 -1,419,903 -1,819,903

NET BUDGET 2,613,713 38,740 2,652,453

4.1.7 Key Performance Indicators

The YDS is required to measure its performance against national key performance indicators. Copies of the 2007/08 outturn information for the service key performance indicators is attached at Appendix D to this report

4.2 Hull Youth Council

4.2.1 Hull Youth Council (HYC) is a City-Wide project supporting young people aged 11 – 25. It enables young people to become active citizens through Youth Forums, Action Groups, Student Councils, Consultation, the Coalition of Hull’s Young People and the Hull Young People’s Parliament. The Youth Council state that “we empower young people to put their ideas into action by working together with partners and decision makers who want to help young people make a difference”.

4.2.2 Hull Youth Council is a partnership of the following: • Hull City Council Youth Services • The Warren

12 • The Rights and Participation Project • Hull Children’s Fund • Hull Council for Voluntary Youth Services

4.2.3 In 2006/07 the project’s core budget from the City Council was £120,000. The YDS contributed an additional £70,000 and the City Council (Community Development) also fund Hull Youth Council’s Young People’s Customer Panel at £11,000, totalling £201,000. Workers also support young people to access appropriate funding for activities and campaigns in their local areas.

4.2.4 The project employs the following posts: • Project Co-ordinator • Administrator • Campaigns Development Worker • Forum Development Worker • Four Forum Project Workers (30hrs each) • Publicity Project Worker (30hrs) • Customer Panel Administrator (18.5 hrs)

4.2.5 The attendance at Youth Council activities for April 2005 to March 2006 totalled 6,247 young people and the number of certificates issued by the Youth Council for the period April 2005 to March 2006 is shown below:

Award Number Hull Youth Council Certificates 888 Local Certificate of Achievement – Arts and Culture 48 Local Certificate of Achievement – Challenging and Physical 35 Pursuits Local Certificate of Achievement – Citizenship 250 Local Certificate of Achievement – Health and Personal 96 Education Certificate of Higher Achievement 6 TOTAL 1323

13 4.2.6 Hull Youth Council supports many other forums and projects for young people and a brief description of these are provided in the table below:

Project Aims and Objectiv es Youth Forums There are seven Youth Forums, facilitated by Hull Youth Council, for young people aged 11-25 across the City aligned with the Area structure. Forums are fortnightly at various suitable and accessible venues including Libraries and Community Centres. All Youth Forums are open access and focus on young people’s issues in their local areas e.g. litter, personal safety, youth provision, etc. The Forums plan campaigns relevant to their issues and attend Ward, Neighbourhood Forums and Area Committees when appropriate. The following Forums are also involved in Neighbourhood Management Pilots: o Riverside, (Thornton Street and NASA) o North Carr (North Bransholme) o West, (Derringham) (West) o Wyke, (Sculcoates and Newland) o Park, (Preston Road) The Coalition of A City-wide action group for young people aged 11-25 facilitated by Hull Youth Council and the Warren. Hull’s Young Young people from Youth Forums, other active groups and individuals attend on a monthly basis to focus on People (CHYP) city-wide issues and campaigns. The Hull Youth The Group meets fortnightly to campaign on issues relating to the media or that need a media/creative Council Publicity response. Young people have created a number of mufti-media publications around issues such as bullying Group and stereotyping of young people, racism and issues around fair trade. Hull Young Established in July 2006 the Parliaments have sought to involve a wide range of young people aged 11 – 25 People’s from across the City. Young people are representative of groups such as Youth Forums, Schools and Parliament Student Councils, Training Providers and other children and young people’s groups. Young people set their own agenda and supporting workers facilitate workshops. Decision–makers are able to address young people and negotiate agenda items although, fundamentally, young people will have the overall decision on their agenda. Young People’s HYC facilitate a Customer Panel on behalf of the City Council for young people aged 13 – 19. The panel is for Customer Panel City Council and partner organisations to consult young people on services through questionnaires and focus groups. There were 390 young people on the panel and 6 consultations carried out and collated each year. HYC also carries out regular consultations with young people on issues that affect them. Children and A regular children and young people’s page for children and young people to raise their issues, experiences Young People’s and concerns to others. This wor k was facilitated by Hull Children’s Fund and Hull Youth Council. pages in Hull In

14 Print Children and Hull Youth Council, Hull Children’s Fund, The Warren and the Rights and Participation Project provide Young People opportunities for children and young people from across the City to be involved in recruiting and selecting involved in staff. HYC also instigated the writing of the Council’s Workforce Strategy guide to Involving Young People in Recruitment and Recruitment and Selection. Selection Work Experience The Youth Council offer school, college and extended work experience placements in Administration and Youth Work to young people across the City. Residentials The Youth Council deliver two residentials for young people across the City on Team Building and Effective Campaigning Local Democracy Hull Youth Council works in partnership with the 7 Area Teams to involve Primary and Secondary School Week pupils in activities during Local Democracy Week. Diversity As part of the project’s commitment to challenging oppression facilitates diversity workshops in a range of Workshops settings including schools and youth groups Youth Enterprise A City-Wide pot of money for young people aged 13-25 who need help to set up their own business or run a Bank community enterprise or activity. Free business support is also available through the Youth Enterprise Project.

15 4.2.7 How Hull Youth Council contributes to improving outcomes for children and young people:

The main impact of the Youth Council’s work was to enable young people to meet others with common issues and who want to do something to change their local environments and services. By engaging with HYC Young people were able to develop personal and social skills as well as skills in communication, team building, political awareness, assertiveness and active citizenship. Young people participating also gained a greater awareness of the issues they face and how to make recommendations and campaign to change them.

Young people also learned how to influence change through direct meetings with decision makers and, through involvement in recruitment and selection, work experience and youth enterprise, young people gained vital employability skills. As young people became recognised for their positive contribution, they also learnt about their rights and responsibilities and ways of increasing their value and positive contribution to the City.

4.3 Additional Plans, Policies, Strategies and Projects Contributing to the Delivery of Services to Children and Young Peoples in the City

4.3.1 The Hull Coalition and Youth Networks The Coalition consists of people (paid and unpaid) from the statutory, community and voluntary sectors who work with children and young people in Hull. The Coalition organises through seven Youth Networks, geographically based across the City areas plus a core group linking the networks and providing space for city-wide workers. The networks and the core group were open to all who work with children and young people and meet monthly. The main aims of the coalition were: i) To link people together so that better use could be made of information, resources and initiatives regarding children and young people; ii) To develop & support, with Hull Youth Council & others, genuine initiatives so that young people could get involved in their city as active, democratic citizens, and iii) To raise concerns & campaign about the serious issues that affect the lives of young people as well as those that affect the work they could do. Such work included working with lobbying those who hold political power and resources, locally & nationally.

4.3.2 Hull Children’s Fund

Hull Children’s Fund is a Government initiative targeting 5-13 year olds and has been in operation since 2001. Both locally and nationally, the Children’s Fund has been acclaimed for the work that it has done around developing preventative services, partnership working and the participation of children and young people as well as contributing to the delivery of youth provision and play.

It was envisaged that this funding stream would cease on 31st March 2008, however in summer 2007 the Council was informed that Children’s Fund would continue for a further 3 years. The amount awarded to Hull was £1,243,432 per year which maintained the Fund at its present level of funding

In Hull the work has focused on children aged 5-13 years across in six target wards:

16 • Orchard Park and Greenwood • Bransholme East • Bransholme West • Marfleet • Myton • St Andrews

It has also supported city wide groups of children and young people-ethnic minority children, asylum seekers, children with a disability and looked after children. In terms of Youth Provision Hull Children’s Fund has supported numerous play and youth projects across the City including: • Kids Play provision • St Michael’s youth project • Hull and East Yorkshire Ability • Parks Department • Scrapstore • Goodwin • Riverside play project • Thorpes Community Association • Bransholme Summer Play grant scheme • Marfleet summer play scheme • PRNDC Youth Inclusion project • Afro-Caribbean Youth Diversion Project

4.3.3 Youth Enterprise Partnership

The Hull Youth Enterprise Partnership (YEP) is an informal public, private and community partnership network set up to influence major partners in supporting Hull's enterprising young people by taking a proactive and supporting role within the Local Strategic Partnership (ONE HULL).Its Mission is to “strive to secure a positive and sustainable future for the City and its young people”.

The primary purpose of the YEP was to support and encourage young people aged 8-25 to become more enterprising, enabling them to develop their enterprising ideas and skills thereby making a contribution to the City's target of creating 1,200 new businesses. The Partnership enabled young people to overcome economic and social barriers that denied them the opportunity of economic inclusion, progression and choice as well as enabling them to become more employable. The main source of funding was Neighbourhood Renewal Funding (£100,000) which provided continued support to develop Youth Enterprise Activity as well as donations from partners of up to £10,000 in order to support National Enterprise Week. Hull Training also supports the programme through a budget of £30,000 which linked to the work of the Employability project.

4.3.4 Hull 14 – 19 Strategy and Partnership

The development of a 14-19 strategy was of critical importance to the economic and social regeneration of the City through the improvement of collaborative working between schools, colleges and businesses in order to raise the educational attainment and reduce the level of NEETs.

17 The Partnership targeted 14-19 year olds and the key priority was attainment and progression and to achieve excellence for all learners. The strategy aimed to provide access to a wide range of continuously developing provision and curriculum that reflected the needs and aspirations of learners, the community and the local economy and to provide clear progression pathways to further, higher education and employment. The strategy aimed to give young people the opportunity to gain diplomas, new GCSE’s and young apprenticeships and opportunities for personal development. It involved all young people regardless of special needs, ability, race, colour, sexual orientation or religion and aimed to have a percentage of teenage mothers, young offenders and looked after children in education or training and, for post-16, also in employment.

The YDS has an important role in the reduction of NEETs in the city and had met LSC targets for reducing the number of young people in the city (100 young people).

4.3.5 Youth Arts and Music

The Arts Council has supported youth arts in the Yorkshire region since 1992 when youth arts forums were established as a means of developing youth culture in the region and gave young people decision making powers. The forums received funding applications from young people for self-initiated projects. Grant aid from Yorkshire and Humber Arts (YHA) was dependant on local authority financial input and at least 50% of the forums total base budget was put towards the employment of professional arts expertise.

The Council’s City Arts Development Service, supported, encouraged and developed creative people and organisations to improve cultural opportunities for all. In terms of the provision of youth arts activities the service ran a major programme of events and learning in partnership with the youth development service to ensure a variety of arts opportunities for young people in Hull was offered.

The creation of a Youth Arts entitlement meant that every young person aged 13- 19 years in Hull had the right to access quality arts provision in their city. This was based on three key principals Accessibility, Diversity and Excellence. The entitlement aimed to ensure that young people could access all cultural activities as a participant, as an artist or as an audience member/visitor/customer.

4.3.6 Youth Music Action Zone

The Youth Music Action Zone (YMAZ) worked across the region covering all ages from early years through to young people. The City Arts Unit was a partner in Music4U, a regional music organisation, funded by YMAZ with the National Lottery, delivering music projects to disadvantaged young people. For a £5,000 annual contribution from the City Arts Unit Live Music Fund the City received a minimum investment of £25,000 into music projects in return. Some of these projects included:

Project Outcome Access Rock Assisting young people in their musical development across the spectrum..

18 Creative Voice A summer holiday project which culminated in a live performance in queens gardens and contributing to part of the criteria for the Arts Award accreditation Astra Youth Centre Young People with severe disabilities learnt Brazilian percussion Kingston Youth worked in partnership with the YOT to deliver DJ-ing Centre workshops Hull City Arts Mad A long term project run twice weekly at Kingston About Music Wesleyan Methodist Church. project

Statistics showed that from 1 April 2007 to date there had been 1375 people participating across the region in YMAZ activities this included 297 participants categorised as ‘at risk’ including young offenders, exclusions and with disabilities. There were only 16 participants whose ethnicity was not White British. The participants involved in the projects were over 13 (282 aged 13-15 and 138 aged 16-18). In terms of impact 66 young people were signposted onto other activities and 7 young people achieved some form of accreditation.

5. Kingston upon Hull City Council Scrutiny Enquiry into Anti Social Behaviour

5.1 In 2006 the Council’s Environment and Transport Overview and Scrutiny Commission published a report into how the City Council and its partner organisations could become more effective in tackling incidents of Anti-social Behaviour (ASB) and the causes of Anti-social Behaviour.

5.2 As part of their review the Panel gathered evidence in relation to the role of youth inclusion and engagement programmes and made a number of recommendations as to how these initiatives could tackle ASB issues. The relevant section of this report is attached at Appendix E to this report.

6. Evidence from Witnesses

During the course of the enquiry members of the Panel received evidence from a range of people involved in the provision of youth services across the statutory and voluntary and community sectors. Evidence was received through the production of briefing papers submitted to the Panel and through personal attendance at scheduled meetings.

6.1.1 Evidence from the Assistant Head of Service (Health and Well-being), Hull City Council

6.1.1 In terms of funding arrangements the Youth Services Manager reported that the YDS had had a standstill budget for the last 10 years. The service had a £2.4 million budget which, in terms of comparison to other local authorities was falling short, an example of this was that the service had not had outreach in the City for a number of years. The European Social Fund also ceased in March 2008 which included funding for NEET's and social inclusion/cohesion for vulnerable 16-19 year olds in the city.

19 6.1.2 The number of Council run youth services had dropped in favour of a multi- agency partnership approach to service provision and the curriculum development framework which impacted negatively on the number of young people who accessed youth clubs. At the time of the review, there were 6,151 young people aged 13-19 registered and known to the service, a further 1000 11- 13 yr olds and 302 19-25yr olds, providing an overall contact of over 7000 young people. In addition the service has recorded 7573 ‘anonymous’ contacts, a possible 14,573 young people contacting the service. The DfES set a 2006 target of 25% yearly contact rate of the 13-19 yr population, Hull had increased year on year from a baseline of 21% in 2003/04, 23% in 2004/05, 27% in 2005/06, 20% in 2006/07) due to restructuring of the service and up to 27% in 2007/08) in conjunction with partner organisations.

6.1.3Staff were feeling unsettled about the reorganisation of services with some choosing to leave the Service, taking valuable experience and skills with them. There were also issues around capacity to meet the needs of young people and the demands placed upon the service such as responding to CAF requirements, Top 700 Initiative, work with NEETS, local area requirements etc. meaning that the service was unable to build capacity with other organisations without affecting front line delivery.

6.1.4 As part of the wider Hull City Council re engineering process, Lifelong Learning were attempting to redress the balance of universal and targeted youth work. This was through the creation of an ‘extended services’ model, where all identifiable youth work and work with young people could be better coordinated to respond to the range of targeted provision (often externally funded) and achieve a greater economy of scale and, therefore, efficiency savings. This was coupled with the emerging Neighbourhood Management model for service delivery and also meant that there would not be a discrete youth service in the traditional sense of service delivery.

6.1.5 The role of the voluntary sector would increasingly be required to provide the additional capacity and value to enable the ‘funded’ sector to meet national targets, especially where open access type provision was concerned and in response to the Youth Matters green paper. This suggested that the pendulum could swing away from targeted provision in terms of the requirement local authorities have in ensuring young people have places to go and things to do.

6.1.6 The Youth Services Manager felt that there were still a number of challenges and opportunities facing the Youth Development service including:

• Securing resources to establish and sustaining a designated detached youth work team to work with those young people that were hard to reach and potentially disengaged from a range of service providers; • Securing recognition and a dedicated budget for young people to be involved in the design and delivery, and performance management arrangements of the service; • Securing future funding to sustain the externally funded youth work provision, providing targeted youth support for young people with identified needs; • Building capacity through working with voluntary and community organisations in a climate of diminished resources, funding pressures;

20 • Linkages with other voice and influence and community involvement initiatives need to be more effective to ensure added value and avoid duplication; • Building in additional investment into the core funding allowance in order to build capacity within the service in line with additional demands placed on the service; • The difference between consultation and active involvement needed clarity as services and agencies often relied solely on consultation which was co- ordinated centrally through the Hull Children’s Fund. It was felt there was a need to use existing consultation more effectively to reduce duplication and the negative effect this had on children and young people; • The experience of HYC and partners suggested that children and young people often had the same issues as other residents but in a different priority order and requiring different solutions. There was some real scope in building alliances between young and older people on common issues. The potential for this has been identified through Youth Forums, Area Committees, Neighbourhood forums and in the Neighbourhood Management pilots.

6.1.2 Evidence from the City Arts Officer and Youth Arts Development Co- ordinator, Hull City Council

6.2.1 The City Arts Unit had included the post of Youth Arts Coordinator since 2001. The post was created to maximise the opportunities for young people arising from the arts in the City as previously there had been little or no coordination between arts providers and youth services or young people. The arrangement had greatly enhanced the ability of both services to address each others priorities and maximise impact.

6.2.3 The City Arts Unit has had a standstill budget since 1996 and therefore, been limited in the amount of funding it could make available specifically for youth arts activity (£5,000 per annum available from core budget). The Youth Development Service did not make budget provision for Youth Arts above sustaining the staff in post.

6.2.4 The Panel were informed that there was disparity between the reported positive effects of arts based interventions and the demand from young people for them as well as the lack of consistent, sustained investment from the core budget. Most of the projects undertaken made use of very short term project based funding and relied on ‘one off’ applications.

6.2.5 Increasingly young people were asking for a more sustained approach to such activity so that they could more fully develop and explore new found skills and interests. One way of answering these demands was the development of more educational provision for creative and performing arts and the significant increase in the range and quality of provision in these fields at Hull College, Wyke College and Wilberforce College.

6.2.6 There was also concern that whilst provision within the education sector had developed to respond to the growth in interest from young people there had been no corresponding growth in opportunities for young people in the City wishing to pursue an interest in the arts outside of educational establishments. Talented young people were increasingly forced to leave the City to pursue career

21 development in the creative and performing arts giving rise to skills shortages when it came to the availability of locally based talented arts practitioners.

6.1.3 Evidence from the Assistant Head of Service (Commissioning and Contract) and Hull Children’s Fund, Hull City Council

6.3.1 At the time of the review, Hull Children’s Fund was in the process of recommissioning its services for next three years and had identified play and youth provision as one of its priority areas . In addition, it was exploring the possibility of providing approximately £15,000 to each of the 7 Areas for holiday play provision, providing additionality to the Big Lottery funding which the City had for play.

6.3.2 In terms of gaps in service provision and areas for improvement, Hull Children’s Fund had clearly helped in the provision of services for play and youth provision for children and young people aged 5-13, however, this services area needed to be funded further.

6.3.3 The Government’s recent consultation on Staying Safe (July-October 2007) playing on the streets and open areas and how it was crucial not only to their physical development, but also emotional and social development. Locally it was felt there was a need to look at how this could be encouraged in a safe environment as tension existed between children and young people being able to play and engage in activities outside and the perceived or sometimes actual involvement in anti social behaviour. Consultations held with members of local communities regularly stated that there were not enough activities for young people to be involved in and there was a need to look at how more positive images of children and young people could be promoted.

6.3.4 Further work was also required to look at how more targeted support could be provided to vulnerable groups in accessing play and youth provision for example ethnic minority children, children with a disability, looked after children, young carers.

6.3.5 Finally it was felt there was a need to look at how information for children, young people and families was provided. It was hoped that a new children and young people’s website to be launched in March 2008 would assist with this and provide a hub for information.

6.1.4 Evidence from the Employment Strategy Manager (Youth Enterprise Partnership), Hull City Council

6.4.1 The Employment Strategy Manager reported that the Youth Enterprise Partnership (YEP) was looking to ensure that young people in the looked after system and those with a disability were made aware of the self-employment opportunities available to them, and that the needs of BME groups/refugees were addressed.

6.4.2 He felt that there were a number of challenges and opportunities for development of skills of young people in the City within the remit of the YES and the LSP these included:

22 • the need to explore how the City Council and its partners can support the jobs and prosperity theme board and the Children and Young People’s Board of ONE HULL in relation to youth enterprise issues; • the need to develop and embed enterprise programmes in primary and secondary schools helping to build on current capacity of Young Enterprise and the Employment and Business Link Organisation (EBLO) in Hull and replacing capacity that could be reduced due to possible reduction in LSC funding, and • the potential for the development of local access points linked to mainstream services in order to reach out to young people were they go and linking to the Customer Service Centres.

6.5. The Panel wanted to gather evidence from Youth work practitioners at an operational level in order to ascertain some of the challenges in the front line delivery of youth services across the statutory and voluntary and community sector.

6.5.1 Evidence from Area Manger (Positive Contribution), Area Youth and Community Development Co-ordinator and Operational Manager BUMPS, Hull City Council

6.5.2 In terms of attendance the Panel were informed that the level of attendance at session’s facilitated through the YDS varied as some sessions could have 2 young people and one staff member in the context of targeted youth support for the most vulnerable but others have over 60 young people at any one time in a centre, formal setting. These differences were due to the differences in the level of work required for example on a one to one basis when delivering on the CAF process and the Top 700 project compared with drop in evening sessions.

6.5.3 In terms of service delivery they reported there was a real contrast in the types of services and programmes provided for example in area based youth work they would take young people off the streets and give them something to do in the evening and during the day work was more specialised targeted work. It was felt that the service was trying to meet too many different markets.

6.5.4 The Panel were informed that there used to be 46 traditional youth clubs run through the local authority and there were now only 6. The quality of sites had declined as had staffing numbers. The casual pool has also ceased due to funding pressures. At the time of the review there were 3 ½ full time staff in each of the 7 areas. It was felt that they now provide a better provision in terms of management information systems, statistics, Ofsted inspections, evidence progression of young people, positive outcomes, for example. However it was for fewer numbers of young people.

6.5.5 In terms of partnership working they worked with a range of organisations such as the Warren, community wardens but it was acknowledged that it had taken a long time to build relationships and joint capacity. North Carr were felt to be good at encouraging parent volunteers and that this varies from area to area. There were a number of areas within the service which were oversubscribed such as BUMPS. Staff felt there were a number of gaps within the service, coverage and providing enough choice, a detached work team was lacking. .

23 6.5.6 It was felt that the endless restructuring was damaging to the work force and they had not seen any improvements from this. They felt that there was so much time managing change that they were unable to do their job however were willing to adapt to change and changing agendas but on the promise that things would improve.

6.6 Evidence from Youth worker Preston Road New Deal for Communities (PRNDC)

6.6.1 The representative from Preston Road New Deal for Communities (PRNDC) informed the Panel that the project had started in 2000 and since then had spread into the East of the City, the project had originally worked with the ‘Top 50’ (the 50 most at risk young people on the estate). The project works extensively in partnership with statutory and voluntary sector providers such as Andrew Marvell Youth Centre, Longhill Link-Up Trust and Kingston Wesley Church. They also work with Hull Kingston Rovers to re-engage young people back to school and over 100 young people (aged 11-17). In July 2007 a purpose built youth centre was built and opened every week night and would soon be open on weekends. The centre has its own youth management team who plan youth centre activities. They also provide outreach and a drop in youth centre and provide family support, outreach and citywide events and the staff work across the Preston road area.

6.6.2 The witness reported that working relationships had been structured naturally and others formalised. The Panel were informed that NDC employed 8 staff plus sessional workers and 7 staff were employed by HCC, all of these staff cover the Park and East area but NDC funding is soon to run out, 2 staff from NDC will be leaving in the near future. The Preston Road Youth Project and its partnerships will soon be known as United Youth Transforms, the organisations will share a good standard of working, share resources, look at current programme provided and will be a partnership of people that work with young people in the east of the city.

6.6.3 The witness stated that outreach work was not consistent enough or happened enough across the city. In terms of funding the Panel were informed that the majority of funding for PRNDC was sourced from the City Council. The funding was for youth delivery but the majority covered staffing costs which had meant reductions the activities budget. There were plans to involve the young people in fund raising activities and outreach workers had identified resources available and accessed these, for example the use of multi use games areas (MUGA).

6.6.4 It was felt that partnership working was an important facet in the reduction of Anti-Social Behaviour although there were still a number of ‘service refusers’ that smoke, drink alcohol etc that could not be accommodated.

6.6.5 In terms of the balance between education and leisure activities the witness felt that there should be a balance, as accreditation could be valuable if relevant and meaningful. There was a logic to gaining new skills as often the rest of their life was chaotic and youth workers would help them to complete forms, cook, budget often teaching them new skills informally without the young person realising, sometimes a certificate or accreditation through the youth service would be the only recognition a young person received.

24

6.6.6 The national youth work targets for accreditation was 20% and the funding PRNDC received meant that they must achieve set targets they had received £257k total funding from the council. The witness was unsure as to how much funding was accrued by the voluntary organisations but they were looking at putting together a joint bid. It was also hoped that the extended schools model would have provision for youth centres within it.

6.6.7 The witness felt that physical provision was important and sharing venues was not always a good idea even if cost effective, youth shelters if built in the right place would be a good idea as young people wanted safe, light and bright areas and not being put at the ‘back of a field’. It was felt that what was needed was the right people with willingness to do the work through sharing information in a partnership approach and that PRNDC was successful because of the strength of its partnership working.

6.7 Evidence from the Portfolio Holders for Children’s Services and Quality of Life

6.7.1 The Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services felt that the biggest and worst thing that had happened to youth services was making youth services outcome based and this was reflected by the take up of the accreditation schemes and demonstrated the lack of flexibility. It was felt that there needed to be a commissioned service led by young people and by devolving budgets for youth services down to the area teams would allow young people to start commissioning the services that they wanted. She also felt that the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme would be a good opportunity to improve provision but this was a long way down the line.

6.7.2 The Panel were informed that there was no city wide youth policy as every area of the city was different and if it was too structured there would be no flexibility. The Council does have a enjoy outcome policy steering group which looked at strategic issues relating the delivery of youth services across the city it was also reported that there had been no issues relating to the provision of youth services identified during the Joint Area Review (JAR) inspection.

6.7.3 The Portfolio Holder for Quality of Life also gave evidence to the Panel on issues in relation to youth service provision. The Panel felt that there was some confusion in relation to whose portfolio responsibility for youth provision as it fell between two portfolios.

6.7.4 He reported that in terms of the plans for the migration of services £3.1m of resources would be devolved to areas to deliver services such as youth provision at a targeted local level although the budgets would be retained centrally. The Panel felt that there would be some problems with this as there were a number of city wide projects such as the two wheel centre which would have to be managed centrally.

25 7. Voluntary and Community Sector Provision

7.1 During the Enquiry the Panel were keen to gather information around the extent of provision provided through the Voluntary and Community Sector as there appeared to be no comprehensive picture of the level of youth work undertaken across the city.

7.2 The Panel received evidence regarding a number of Voluntary and Community sector organisations including:

Rhema Youth Works

• Rhema Youth Works targets 13-19 year olds, and works with, and builds positive relationships with young people, to increase their self-esteem and self worth by enabling them to identify choices that would improve their life and support them in seeing those life choices realised. It aims to see young people reconnected with relevant training and eventually work opportunities.

• Rhema works in the Wyke area of the City with the Wyke Area Team, Wyke NEET’s and the Wyke Sub-Group They receive funding from the Big Lottery, Connexions Humber, Youth Capital Fund and Wyke Area Team although receive no direct City Council funding.

• It provides supported learning programmes for young people in Years 10 & 11 and are referred from Endeavour, Kelvin, St Mary’s & Pickering schools who pay £40 per day per pupil with additional costs covered by external funding. Attendance at Rhema is included within the young person’s school attendance and in some cases young people’s attendance has risen from 30% to 85%. Rhema was also featured as part of the OfSTED inspection at Kelvin Hall school.

The Warren

• The Warren is a city wide voluntary organisation with Hull City Council providing its main funding.

• The Warren targets 10–25 year olds which caters for the socially excluded, those who live in poverty and have chaotic lifestyles, they offer a counselling section and is a non-member organisation who aim to empower young people to take control of their lives and works on building relationships. They also help with English and Maths and National tests in English and Maths as well as accredited courses. Over 150 young people attended the Youth Parliament which is developing a real model for youth partnership.

• The Warren had been seeking funding to secure the Warren once NRF funding ceased. They had been successful in receiving funding from a London stockbroker of £25,000 in 2007. The Warren had also made a bid to the PCT to deliver a health eating programme and had already received funding of £161,000 to spend on a sexual health and teenage pregnancy project. 26

Road ‘Yoof’ Project

• The Project was set up in 1999 by local residents and covers Newington and Saint Andrews ward. The project covered 3 strands; alternative learning, outreach and youth work training to volunteers and young people.

• The project worked closely with Endeavour and Pickering schools. Delivering alternative learning projects running from 9.00am to 3.00pm both part and full time referred by schools due to behavioural and attendance issues or being vulnerable.

• Outreach work was undertaken during school lunchtimes at Pickering school. Two youth workers were employed through Gateway and another through Comic Relief funding for outreach. Funding also comes from Children In Need and they received £435k from the Big Lottery which enabled staff to be funded for the next few years. The service does a lot of partnership work and has an excellent relationship with the Riverside Area Team.

St Michaels Youth Project

• The project had been running since 1989 to support the children of North Hull and Orchard Park Estate. Their remit was 0 -25 but the main focus was on 5 -19, they are a registered charity and all funding was external; through the Big Lottery, Connexions Humber & Children In Need with no funding provided from the City Council.

• The project offers a number of activities, which included a healthy lifestyle worker covering eating, sexual health, sports and dance, a part time esteem worker and also a transition worker who worked with all primary schools particularly year 6 & 7 pupils from Sir Henry Cooper school. Parents attend any sessions that are held for those young people who appear to be disengaging with school.

• The centre provides cooking, sports and arts activities and during the school summer holidays they provide 5 weeks of activities on site, trips and a residential. The project has attendance of 300 young people per week which includes attendance to activities at lunchtime in schools.

• The project is involved in the Northern Area Youth Network, Children’s Play Partnership and the project has representation on LSP Board. In terms of partnership working it was felt there were good relationships with individual people but strategically was not there yet.

Bransholme Buddies

• The project started in 2004 by members and has had 6000 children and young people using the service. In 2005 these figures dropped to 4700 due to a reduction in funding. This year the project received NRF funding of £123k and 5908 children had accessed the buddies up to the end of July 2007. They work with 8-12 years olds and 12-21 year olds and some of the 27 hard to reach children and young people in the area. They also encourage the elderly to access the facility and talk to the young people to break down barriers and gain respect mutual respect.

• The project costs £120k per year to run and there is no cost to the young person. The cost is £9.80 per child and the unit can take a maximum of between 25-30 children.

• The Bransholme Buddies work in partnership with the Youth Service, Sure Start and the Area Team. The Police have stated that when the Buddies are out nuisance calls were down by 29%. The scheme has tried to get into the primary schools but nobody was willing to pay at that time.

Hull Council for Voluntary Youth Services

• Hull Council for Voluntary Youth Organisations (HCVYS) is the umbrella body for the voluntary youth sector in Hull and works “to support the voluntary youth sector and to create an environment in which voluntary youth organisations can flourish.”

• At the time of the review HCVYS were representing 70 members across the city including girl guides, sea cadets, boy’s brigade, scouts and informal groups. The service works with young people aged 0-25, but primarily with young people aged 11-25. In the past they had represented up to 200 members.

• Based on HCVYS research it was felt that as a rough average there are possibly 35,000 young people in the City involved in youth group activity.

• The Panel were informed that there was no picture of the extent of youth provision delivered across the city and this would be a key piece to be undertaken in order more effectively sign post young people to services. HCVYS had submitted an unsuccessful bid for £30,000 to the Children’s Fund to undertake this piece of work. HCVYS used to have a Service Level Agreement with Hull City Council until the basis for funding changed. Single Regeneration Fund and the European Renewal Fund were also coming to an end.

• HCVYS stated that the service struggled to gain access to schools and there was also concern that there were a number of schools using youth services that had not registered with the organisation.

• The witnesses from HCVYS had identified a number of challenges and opportunities for the delivery of youth services in the future including:

Accessibility to premises and buildings which were often in poor state of repair; Addressing the issues of some schools charging and not charging; The number of ‘fragile’ organisations in terms of funding arrangements Transport issues in terms of accessing services Young people not engaging with services in the evening, 28 Targeting of resources onto young people with ‘problems’ and less opportunities The need for a open access voluntary hub to target and provide support for those who were NEET or subject to a ASBO

Longhill Link Up Trust

• The trust is based at St Margaret’s Church which provides a range of community led services including a community centre, café and youth club. The youth work team at St Margaret’s makes contact with young people in the area (especially if they are perceived to be at odds with local residents), to raise aspirations and to help them to achieve what they want in life. Over 2006-2007 the youth workers have engaged in specific work with Wansbeck road Children’s home and Longhill Ward community association. Over the year the team have delivered two residential programmes, a spirituality project and an environmental project which involved locating and clearing rubbish on the estate. The projects outreach provision across the estate and has seen some groups of young people move from hanging around on street corners to finding fulltime employment and further education.

• The Trust expressed a number of views to the Panel including “Over 40 years I have seen the statutory Youth Service flourish and decline, a decline which led to a massive increase in the number of youth workers employed by voluntary organisations and churches. Due to this great increase in the number of youth workers employed by voluntary organisations and their ability to work together, the City Council will need to commit itself to working with them as partners. Past funding sources have come to an end and no clear information has been available with regard to the future. For many voluntary organisations their funding streams are coming to an end in March and the danger is that many youth workers will be made redundant. The core of experience, stability and expertise could easily then be lost”.

• Funding needs not only to take into account particular pieces of work but to maintain organisations that are capable of carrying them out. Some voluntary organisations have had a good track record and their history gives much on which they can draw. Although increasingly the nature of volunteering has changed and more paid staff are involved, yet the spirit of volunteering is still alive and the balance, of having paid staff working alongside volunteers is maintained, despite the inherent difficulties. Ensuring that these bases for operations are not lost is rather like keeping an aircraft carrier so that it can act as a base from which separate initiatives, whatever their nature, can be ‘launched’. Youth Work 'aircraft carriers' are needed and with the reduced nature of the statutory Youth Service over the past decade, this role has been increasingly taken by voluntary organisations so their continued presence is essential. From my perspective, the funding process now seems to threaten the survival of this body of experience with decisions being made by a large number of intermediary bodies and, perhaps, too late in the day to ensure experienced staff can be retained.

29 • In considering the future of the Youth Service in Hull the Council should: a) clearly acknowledge the increasing role played by voluntary organisations in maintaining a service to youth over the past decade and commit themselves to working with them in a genuine partnership;

b) clarify the future of the youth service so that long term policies and plans can be put in place; this will involve long term funding arrangements, long term as well as short term programmes and longer term contracts for youth workers;

c) in the immediate future, to take steps to ensure that the Council and partner organisations sharing this responsibility, clarify and deliver funding so that what has been achieved is not lost.

8. Mapping of Youth Provision

8.1 As a result of evidence from HCVYS the Panel felt that there was a need to ascertain the level of youth provision across all sectors within the city. The Panel conducted a mapping exercise across the city of all statutory and voluntary youth provision in the city

8.2 The results of the mapping exercise was too large to include in the report however the Panel felt that the exercise had been difficult to complete and were still not satisfied that there was now a comprehensive picture of provision.

8.3 A copy of the mapping exercise will be submitted to the Head of Health and Well-being, Kingston upon Hull City Council in order to assist them with the mapping of youth provision comprehensively across the city

8.4 An overview of statutory and voluntary and community youth provision available on a ward by ward basis is attached at appendix F to this report

9. Consultation with Children and Young People

9.1 The Panel wanted to gather the views of young people as to the perceptions of youth services both in terms of those who already accessed youth provision and those who didn’t. The Panel enlisted the expertise of Hull Youth Council to undertaken a consultation exercise around these issues. A copy of the Questionnaire is attached at Appendix G to this report.

9.2 The following information outlines the results of the consultation carried out by Hull Youth Council with young people at the request of Scrutiny Panel during the period of November and December 2007. The aim was to find out what young people from across the city thought of current youth provision, both from the statutory and voluntary sector. This was not aimed at individual projects but the whole range of projects young people could access, and was to include current users as well as those not currently engaged to find out what did or did not attract them to provision in the city.

9.3 The targeted age range was 13-19 as this is the core age range for the Youth Development Service. However as Hull Youth Council works with young people

30 from 11-25 and this varies within the voluntary sector, young people outside the target age have been included.

9.4 The questionnaire was designed in two parts to involve all young people -not just those currently involved in youth provision. Hull Youth Council worked with partners from both the statutory and voluntary youth sector as well as schools and through detached sessions to engage young people. Questionnaires were completed anonymously with appropriate support given where necessary.

9.5 In total 399 questionnaires were completed from young people across the city. 235 were from young people currently using youth projects in the city and 164 from those not. A full copy of the information collated by the Youth Council is attached at Appendix H to this report.

9.6 235 young people currently involved with youth projects across the city responded to this question. 4 major themes emerged:

1) Activities : 112 young people identified different activities which encouraged them to use youth projects. Some of these responses were general, 2) Something to do /Somewhere to go: For 106 young people youth projects were seen as somewhere they could go without having to have a specific reason 3) To socialise: For over 80 young people youth centres and projects were a place to meet others: 4) Support/atmosphere: Others highlighted the support they could get from the project:

9.7 46 young people did not identify any changes they wanted to see. Of those who did the majority focussed on two themes:

1) Equipment and activities: Over 170 young people identified activities or equipment which they though would improve their projects. Again this ranged from the more general responses: 2) General improvements to provision: The other main theme that was identified in the section was around the main fabric of the projects and centres

9.8 There was a large number of young people surveyed who did not access formal youth related activities (164). In response to this question 3 major themes emerged:

1) Activities: 146 young people identified different activities to attract others. Again the more general, 2) Information: Over 80 young people identified means of publicising youth provision as a way of getting more young people involved. 3) Access/support/other : Others identified ways of changing structures within projects to encourage different people

9.9 When asked what would change their minds about going to a youth club 32 young people felt that nothing would make them join in youth provision. From others the same themes emerged as with the group who did use youth provision.

31 28 identified different methods of publicising what’s going on in their area. Some young people would be more likely to get involved if they knew they had support either from friends or workers.

10. Conclusions

10.1 The Panel made a number of observations and conclusions in relation to the report however noted the planned reconfiguration of the service and related budgets and will monitor and commented on the outcomes of the impending Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA) and the recommendations of the Targets Support/Youth Matters Strategy Group:

10.2 Hull Children’s Fund has clearly made a considerable contribution to the provision of play and youth activities and particularly in helping develop services for children aged 8-13 years, where there is currently a gap in service provision;

10.3 The Panel recognised the invaluable work being undertaken by the voluntary and community sector in delivering youth work at a local grass-roots level. They were concerned that the voluntary and community sector organisations who delivered youth provision did not appear to be aware of the reasons behind funding being withdrawn in respect of the new commissioning arrangements and the end of national ERDF funding etc. The Panel also felt that these issues had not been communicated to front line staff. It was agreed that there were numerous benefits of local people working within their local community as they were more likely to recognise specific need and undertake the necessary work;

10.4 The Panel felt that information around accessing funding opportunities could be better accessed and were concerned as there was evidence that youth work undertaken with the voluntary and community sector was very effective;

10.5 The Panel felt that the voluntary and community sector model for the training and development of youth workers was to be commended and acknowledged that this often led to volunteers gaining paid employment. They were also concerned about the lack of opportunities in respect of funding and accessing training opportunities to train as a youth worker and there was a risk of losing a valuable skill base of workers within the City. There appeared to be no stability with the service area in terms of job security and it is critical that the youth services training group is sustained

10.6 The Panel felt that the model for providing localised community youth work funded between the local authority and the voluntary and community sector was positive and this was evidenced by the work undertaken in the Preston Road area of the City. It was felt that this model of youth work had a positive impact on other services and problems in the area such as anti-social behaviour, housing etc. Members felt this approach promoted community cohesion and that it was important to create a synergy between the statutory and voluntary sector providers;

10.7 It was hoped that the migration of services to local level would mean more targeted support as well as the reintroduction of outreach and detached youth work which members felt was much needed in the City and the importance of this being articulated across city wide strategies;

32

10.8 Members agreed that there was a need for schools to have a responsibility for supporting and facilitating youth activities in the community through the BSF and extended schools programme.

10.9 The Panel felt that it was vital that youth work was delivered in the context of consistency, building positive relationships, good organisation and had the element of security for the young people accessing services. The Panel also felt that youth services needed to be delivered with a view to demonstrating added value and built on its success stories to secure a concrete base for service delivery in generations of young people come;

10.10 The Panel felt that there was some confusion in relation to whose portfolio responsibility for youth provision fell into. It was noted that youth services currently fell between two portfolios. It was also felt that there should be a single portfolio holder who actively ‘championed’ the importance of youth work in the City

10.11 The Panel felt that there was a urgent need to identify funding to deliver outreach and detached youth work provision across the city

10.12 The Panel felt that youth work ‘per se’ had played a huge role in contributing the delivery of an effective 14-19 strategy in respect of supporting young people’s aspirations and progression in offering a range of informal learning environments delivering functional skills programmes, identifying rights and responsibilities and reducing the level of NEETs

10.13 The Panel felt that the local authority should continue to develop youth arts provision in the city and this should be developed through a youth arts strategy as part of the wider cultural strategy for the City which is appropriately funded and linked to existing models of good practice

10.14 That the Bransholme Buddies projects is a good initiative and could be replicated across other areas of the City

10.15 The Panel supports and endorses the recommendations made by the Environment and Transport Commission Panel Enquiry into Anti-Social Behaviour

11. Recommendations

11.1 The Panel recommended that:

i) A standard programme of support be developed to deliver to voluntary and community sector organisations to ensure that they have appropriate exit strategies in place when managing the discontinuation of time limited funding

ii) The Council, with its partners utilise existing outreach services, such as the community warden’s service more effectively to signpost young people into youth activities in their area

33 iii) That the re-introduction of outreach and detached youth work be established as an urgent priority and that the Assistant Chief Executive (Children and Young People) produce a detailed action plan demonstrating when this will be implemented iv) That Assistant Chief Executive (Children and Young People) produces a report to a future meeting of the Children and Young People’s Overview and Scrutiny Commission detailing how youth provision and activities will be included in the BSF programme with particular reference to new builds and in the context of the 14-19 agenda and extended school model v) The Council utilises HCVYS, as the umbrella organisation for youth services to share information about future funding and joint commissioning opportunities vi) The Assistant Chief Executive (Children and Young People) a meeting of Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Commission upon completion of the JSNA in order to comment on future plans for the delivery of youth work in the city vii) The responsibility for ‘championing youth services should sit with the Portfolio Holder for Quality of Life with a reporting overview from the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services and the Portfolio Holder for Lifelong Learning viii) That in the future provision of youth services consideration should be given to providing informal meeting places rather than a prescribed youth centre model. ix) In terms of the future delivery of youth activity youth work should be seen as an area ‘in growth’ with a gradual shift from an educational based delivery model to a focus on leisure based provision. x) The Youth Development Service look at how it could market and promote its services more effectively and imaginatively to include looking at alternative ways of funding and working with partner organisations xi) The Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Commission seek assurances, as part of it update report into the youth services review that the recommendations from the Environment and Transport Commission Panel Enquiry into Anti-Social Behaviour have been implemented xii) That the Bransholme Buddies model should be rolled out to other areas of the City where appropriate xiii) That the Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Commission receive regular monitoring information in relation to how the changing focus of youth service delivery is contributing to the Councils wider priorities as well as the Every Child Matters objectives

34

Appendix 1

Attendance at Hearings

Miss. Lynne Bird Acting Principal Legal Officer Hull City Council

Mr. Barrie May Head of Workforce Strategy Hull City Council

Ms. Angela Dunn Head of Community Care Services Hull City Council

Mr. Roger Grey Locality Manager Hull City Council

Mr. Martin Fox Head of Corporate Finance Hull City Council

Councillor Ken Branson Former Leader of Hull City Council Hull City Council

Mr. Ken Foote Assistant Chief Executive Hull City Council

Mr. David Gibson Assistant Chief Executive Hull City Council

Councillor Mary Glew Former Portfolio Holder for Health Hull City Council

Councillor Phil Webster Former Portfolio Holder for Finance Hull City Council

Councillor Carl Minns Leader of the Council Hull City Council

Mr. Michael Hudson Director of Corporate Resources Hull City Council

Councillor Stephen Baker Portfolio Holder for Health Hull City Council

Ms. Tracy Mayerhoff Senior Learning Disability Manager Hull City Council

Appendix A List of Witnesses to the Enquiry

Councillor Mrs C. Randall Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services – Kingston upon Hull City Council

Councillor Mr. K. Neal Portfolio Holder for Quality of Life – Kingston upon Hull City Council

Mr G. McManus Assistant Head of Service (Health and Well-being) – Kingston upon Hull City Council

Ms M. Priest Assistant Head of Service (Commissioning and Contract) - Kingston upon Hull City Council

Mr S. Green Rhema Youth Works

Ms A Richards St Michaels Youth Project

Mr C. Cracknell Employment Strategy Manager - Kingston upon Hull City Council

Ms P. Dumble

Mr. N. Coulthup Assistant Head of Service (Positive Youth Development and youth Justice) - Kingston upon Hull City Council

Mr K. Russell The Warren

Ms S. Hatfield Preston Road New Deal for Communities

Mr R. Drayton Bransholem Buddies

Ms K. Kelleher Area Youth & Community Development Officer – Kingston upon Hull City Council

Ms L. Woolmington Area Manager (Positive Contribution) - Kingston upon Hull City Council

Ms J. Jones Operational Manger (BUMPS) - Kingston upon Hull City Council

Mr P. Harrison Longhill Link-up Trust

Mr P. Holloway City Arts Officer – Kingston upon Hull City Council

Ms J. Robinson Hessle Road ‘Yoof’ Network

Ms M. Garland Hull Council for Voluntary Youth Services

Mr S. Rock Hull Council for Voluntary Youth Services

Mr P. Pearce Hull Council for Voluntary Youth Services

Appendix B Terms of Reference and Project Plan

Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Commission Panel Enquiry into the Youth Service

Terms of Reference

1. Aim

1.1 The aim of the enquiry is to make recommendations to Cabinet in relation to how the authority can improve Youth Services in the city with particular reference to extended access, availability and quality of service provision.

2. Background to the Enquiry

2.1 The Chair of the former Lifelong Learning, Culture and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Commission received a request from the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services to look at the issues of Youth Service provision in Hull.

2.2 After receiving two briefing notes from the Principal Youth Officer on issues relating to Youth Service provision nationally, local provision and participant take up, Members recommended to undertake an enquiry into the provision of Youth Services in Hull.

3. Objective of Enquiry

3.1 The following are the suggested objectives for the enquiry:

• Identify the current level of youth service provision in the city • Clarify the current level of expenditure for council youth services including ad- hoc projects • Ascertain the views of users of youth services in terms of areas for improvement • Ascertain the views of young people not accessing youth services in terms of making recommendations for improved take up • Establish the level of engagement of Looked After Children in accessing youth services • Review process of agreeing exit strategies for specific target projects • Critically evaluate the future plans for the service.

4. Strategy for the Enquiry – Background Research

4.1 Summary Reports

4.2 The Panel will be presented with summary reports containing:

• Details of the Government’s Green Paper – ‘Youth Matters’

• Details of other national policies/legislation relating to the provision of Youth Services • Service Profile • Details of existing and future models for providing Youth Services locally • Latest OfSTED inspection reports relating to Hull Youth Service • Details of existing research carried out locally, regionally and nationally into Youth Services • Relevant local Plans, Policies and Procedures • Budgetary Information • Summary reports resulting from consultation with Youth Workers and relevant support workers. • Summary reports resulting from consultation with Young People.

5. Evidence Gathering

5.1 A series of public hearings will be arranged to present members of the Panel with evidence written, verbal or in alternative formats.

5.2 Potential Witnesses to the Enquiry:

• Portfolio Holder for Primary and Secondary Education • Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services • Corporate Director for Children and Young People Services • Head of Health and Well-being • Head of Safeguarding and Development • Principal Lifelong Learning Youth Standards and Achievement Officer • Youth Engagement Service Manager • Young People Support Service • Hull Youth Council • Young People • Community Policing Teams • Anti-social Behaviour Unit • Community Wardens • Connexions • Head Teachers • Youth Workers, Outreach and Support workers • Voluntary Sector Youth Services Providers (Hull Council for Voluntary Youth Service) • Results of the scrutiny enquiry into Anti-Social Behaviour

6. How?

6.1 The enquiry will comprise Members and be facilitated by the Director of Finance. The suggested timetable for the enquiry is:

• Meeting 1 - to agree Chair etc., Terms of Reference, Information requests • Provision of information, review and digestion – 4 weeks • Meeting 2 – discussion on background documentation, identify interviewees and questions and agree consultation strategy

• Arrange evidence gathering sessions and start consultation process – 2 weeks • Meetings 3 and 4 – interviews to take place – 3 weeks • Review of outcome of interviews – 1 week • Meeting 4 – to discuss conclusions and summarise findings • Consultation period ends • Meeting 5 – review out come of consultation process - 1 week • Chair, and Scrutiny Officer co-ordinate drafting of the report summarising findings - 3 weeks • Meeting 6 – report to Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee.

6.2 From the above it is suggested the enquiry will take 14 weeks to complete, provided information is available on time and all meetings can be scheduled. With slippage the review should be completed no later than 17 weeks after the Terms of Reference are completed.

7. Conclusions

7.1 Members of the Panel will meet to discuss their conclusions and make recommendations.

7.2 Following approval by the Commission, the final report will be submitted to Cabinet for consideration by November 2007

Appendix D

YOUTH DEVELOPMENT SERVICE & PARTNERS CONTACT OUTTURN INFORMATION 2007/08 CONTACTS AREA <13 13 TO 19 >19 TOTAL Citywide City Arts 75 370 7 452 Citywide Provision 1 93 36 130 Usually delivered from Kingston Youth Centre Two Wheel (*Learning Support & 70 568 14 652 Open Access) Voluntary/Community Sector – via 286 1533 83 1902 Youth Opportunity/Youth Capital Funds Duke of Edinburgh Award Scheme 26 49 4 79 (work outside YDS) Economic Wellbeing Projects 18 413 15 446 Hull Youth Council 277 643 37 957 No Limits 5 80 0 85 Youth Information & Counselling 2 32 18 52 Unit Youth Offending Team (Youth 0 79 1 80 Worker) Play Work 452 44 0 496 North Carr Bumps (*Learning Support & Open 64 484 28 576 Access) North Carr (Including Dales) 280 591 8 879 Mainly delivered from Astra East East 116 514 10 640 Andrew Marvell – Learning Support 47 181 3 231 Only Park Park 443 1176 42 1661 Taboo Youth Initiative 30 224 2 256 Also used by other areas Riverside Riverside 136 753 31 920 West West 66 406 1 473 Wyke Wyke 152 231 2 385 Northern Northern 190 492 33 715

*Learning Support Projects via Service Level Agreements with Secondary Schools/Special Schools/ PRU in the City

Appendix F

Extract from Kingston upon Hull City Council Environment and Transport Overview and Scrutiny Commission Panel Enquiry into Anti-Social Behaviour

8.7 Youth Inclusion Programmes and Youth Inclusion Support Panels

8.7.1 Youth Inclusion Programmes (YIPs) are youth crime reduction initiatives and are funded through the Youth Justice Board with matched funding from local agencies. Within each YIP 50 young people aged between 13-16 years are identified as being engaged in crime or identified as being the most at risk of offending, truancy or social exclusion. At the time of the enquiry a scheme was running on the Preston Road Estate. YIPs had the following targets:

• To ensure that at least 75% of the target group of 50 receive at least 5 hours of appropriate interventions per week.

• To reduce arrest rates among the group by 70% compared to the 12 months prior to the engagement.

• To ensure the 90% of those in the engaged target group are in suitable full time education or employment.

8.7.2 The Home Affairs Select Committee into ASB noted that an independent evaluation into YIPs suggested they had been a great success. It found that arrest rates for the 50 young people considered most at risk of crime in each programme had been reduced by 65% and that of those who had offended before joining the programme, 73% were arrested for fewer offences after engaging in a YIP.

8.7.3 Youth Inclusion Support Panels (YISP) are multi-agency planning groups that seek to prevent offending and ASB by offering voluntary support services to children aged 8-13 and their families who are at risk of becoming involved in ASB and crime.

8.7.4 The Select Committee report into ASB stated, “We welcome the introduction of targeted diversionary and support schemes such as Youth Inclusion Programmes and Youth Inclusion Support Panels. All the indications are that these schemes are extremely successful and cost-effective in terms of their impact upon ASB.”

8.7.5 At the onset of the enquiry the Manager of the Youth Offending Team stated, “It is important that any YISP type approach is built around the common assessment framework so that it is genuinely inclusive

and multi-agency.” Later in the enquiry, he informed the Panel that the YJB had approved the implementation of a YISP approach based around the CAF. He felt this would ensure that prevention and ASB work would be mainstreamed and delivered city-wide as the CAF was rolled out.

8.7.6 The Panel learnt that no NRF or Safer Stronger Communities Funding was specifically allocated to prevention activity.

8.8 Conclusion

8.8.1 The Panel felt all opportunities to expand Youth Inclusion Programmes and Youth Inclusion Support Programmes should be rigorously explored. With that in mind, the proposals to integrate a YISP type approach within the CAF were fully supported. It was felt the Youth Offending Team’s continued commitment to pursuing this course of action and that of the Citysafe Partnership should be highlighted and explained through the ASB Strategy and Action Plan. The Panel also felt that the possibilities for accessing current funding streams should be explored further if preventative measures prove themselves to be effective and efficient.

8.9 Recommendations

8.9.1 That the Youth Offending Team in partnership with the LSP continue to explore all available opportunities in relation to Youth Inclusion Programmes and Youth Inclusion Support Panels for the City;

8.9.2 That the Citysafe and the Children and Young People’s Strategic Partnership’s commitment and approach to Youth Inclusion Support Panels and Youth Inclusion Programmes is clearly defined within the ASB Strategy and Action Plan.

8.9.3 That the success and value for money offered by preventative schemes is closely monitored and if evidence clearly supports their continuation or expansion then all possible funding streams are explored and considered.

8.10 Youth Engagement / Diversionary Activities / Universal and Targeted Provision

8.10.1 The Panel heard evidence from the Principal Youth Officer about the level of Youth Provision the service provided across the City. He commented that in meeting targets set by OfSTED the service had had to perform a balancing act to a certain extent, between targeted and universal provision. He explained that OfSTED placed a strong emphasis on accreditation and targeting ‘hard to reach’ groups. The service was expected to record young people’s outcomes through a performance management framework.

8.10.2 He felt, however, there could be some confusion and problems associated with the traditional definition of ‘universal youth provision’. Traditional youth services were struggling to be all things to all people but were recognised as a significant contributor to the ASB agenda. For example, since the inception of a motor cycle club between HCC and New Deal for Communities (NDC) youth motor crime had decreased by 30% on the Preston Road Estate. He suggested children’s needs had become much more sophisticated over the last 10 years and stated that we needed to consider how we were going to take the service to young people at a neighbourhood level. The Youth Service was having to compete with new private leisure facilities. He felt the extended services model and the development of the Youth Engagement Service would underpin this localised, targeted approach but ultimately it was a matter of collective responsibility. If the Youth Service could not provide a particular service then they would actively seek to develop partnerships, signpost young people towards alternative provision or commission agencies to bridge gaps. He felt the most significant shift would be the Youth Engagement Service, which would be developed alongside the neighbourhood management model.

8.10.3 The Principal Youth Officer suggested outreach work was of benefit if it was responsive rather than reactive. There were plans to develop a ‘rapid response type unit’ but it would be very limited in terms of its resources. The Principal Youth Officer told the Panel that the number of outreach workers attached to the service had still to be confirmed. National evidence suggested outreach work can be effective in engaging ‘hard to reach’ groups but relationships had to be given time to develop and this was not always easy given the temporary nature of the funding regimes.

8.10.4 When the Panel asked the Principal Youth Officer what he would spend additional funding on he highlighted the following areas:

• Mobile provision • Wider outreach programmes • A virtual youth centre

8.10.5 Ms Honor Rhodes, Director of Family and Community Care, Family Welfare Association, in her evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee suggested, “Young people are anxious for useful, interesting things to do and when we look around at a lot of Youth Centres interesting activities are not there for these young people.” Representatives from the Bransholme Buddies questioned the effectiveness of traditional fixed site youth centres and where they sat in the modern world. The Principal Youth Officer suggested Hull City Council had perhaps not been as radical as it might have been in terms of its youth centre approach. He felt there had been a serious lack of capital expenditure for these facilities and there had

been difficulties in raising (at planning stage) the need to consider youth facilities, for example, on the Kingswood Estate.

8.10.6 The Panel noted that the Draft Community Strategy highlighted the important role structured activities would play in tackling ASB. It stated, ‘We will substantially reduce incidents of anti-social behaviour and develop a range of alternative activities focused on sport, leisure and culture.” Delivery mechanisms were not discussed.

8.10.7 Many of the organisations giving evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee (Crime and Society Foundation, Howard League for Penal Reform, JUSTICE, Liberty, and NCH) felt more emphasis should be given to prevention.

8.10.8 The Panel heard evidence from the Bransholme Buddies, just one of many voluntary groups that ran youth programmes within the City. Using a converted bus they targeted different areas of the Bransholme Estate. They ran activities children wanted (which they determine through a consultation exercise) and offered support and development opportunities wherever possible. Sessions took place in the evening and during the school holidays. Mr Drayton and Councillor Harrison highlighted some of the successes they felt the project was delivering and the problems they had experienced in securing funding on an annual basis

8.10.9 The Manager of the YOT felt there were good examples of partnership working in respect of tackling ASB amongst young people but these were not replicated consistently city-wide or rooted in a coherent city-wide strategy. He suggested that work needed to be done with children in a protective environment which required a whole package of measures. Also he felt there were gaps in provision for the 13 to 18 age group and the lack of consistency was a worry as was the lack of alternatives.

8.10.10 The Youth Matters Green Paper highlights four key challenges:

• How to engage more young children in positive activities and empower them to shape the services they receive.

• How to encourage more young people to volunteer and become involved in their communities.

• How to provide better information, advice and guidance to young people to help them make informed choices about their lives.

• How to provide better and more personalised intensive support for each young person who has serious problems or gets into trouble.

8.10.11 Amongst other things, the Paper proposes the introduction of opportunity cards for youngsters which could be used to access a range of local provision and could be topped up by parents, local authorities or Government. The cards would be withdrawn if the individual was involved in ASB or criminal behaviour. The Green Paper also proposes to place a duty on local authorities to provide positive activities for young people; promise to reinvigorate youth work; invest in a network of local youth sports development managers, and place youngsters at the heart of the decision making and evaluation process.

8.10.12 The last Crime and Disorder Survey reported that nearly 50% of people felt ‘groups of young people’ were either a very big or fairly big problem within their area. Also, when asked what they considered to be the biggest social problem in their area, 37% of people felt it was a lack of facilities for young children; this was the top ranked answer.

8.11 Conclusions

8.11.1 The Panel was concerned about the demands placed on the Youth Service by OfSTED. Whilst it welcomed the fact that children were offered the opportunity to pursue accredited courses, it did not feel this should form the cornerstone of service delivery or be the measure that determines the success or failure of youth provision. The Panel felt there was a danger that the basics such as fun, friendship and just relieving general boredom may be overlooked. It may be that the restraints placed on the Youth Service, by OfSTED, meant it could no longer deliver a universal service, however, this should not stop the City as a whole from delivering that provision. The Panel was also wary of the emphasis placed on targeted provision. If this trend continued there was a real danger that a layer of universal provision might be ‘stripped out’ which would merely exacerbate the need for targeted provision. The Panel felt, therefore, that it was imperative to qualify what was meant by universal provision, the importance placed on it by the Council and City and what safeguards, if any, were needed to ensure its continuity. An assessment was quickly needed on the impact that the proposals contained within the Youth Matters Green Paper might have on the Youth Service and the Council as a whole.

8.11.2 The Panel did not underestimate the challenge of creating a modern, responsive, flexible Youth Service and acknowledged the OfSTED framework requirements, but believed the Youth Service’s ability to respond to need within the partnership structure was paramount. This included their ability to address causes and incidents of ASB. In order to achieve this, the Panel felt two key areas needed to be addressed, input at strategic level and links with Community Safety Tasking Groups. The Panel proposed that these issues were addressed through the ASB Strategy and Action Plan and included

provision for the Principal Youth Officer to sit on the Intelligence and Tasking Sub-group.

8.12 Recommendations

8.12.1 That Hull City Council defines what is meant by ‘universal youth provision’, if current provision meets that definition and, if not, what needs to be done to make sure it does, now and in the future.

8.12.2 That the Youth Service is actively involved in developing the ASB Strategy and Action Plan and that it clearly outlines its role, where it will sit and how it will be represented within the partnership structure.

8.12.3 That the Principal Youth Officer has a place on the Intelligence and Tasking Sub-group.

Appendix G

Example of Questionnaire to Young People

YOUR VIEWS ON YOUTH CENTRES/YOUNG PEOPLE’S PROJECTS IN HULL

Hull Youth Council have been asked by Hull City Council (Scrutiny Panel) to find out young people’s opinions on youth services/projects in the city. We would be really grateful if you could spend some time answering the following questions.

1 Do you currently use youth centres/young people’s projects within the city? YES / NO

If YES please go to question 2 If No please go to question 5

2 Why to you use it? What’s good about it?

______3 Is there anything else that you think would make it better?

______

4 There are a lot of young people who don’t attend youth projects. What do you think could be done to encourage more young people to take part?

______5 If you answered NO to question 1. Why don’t you use youth centres/young people’s projects?

______

6 What would make you change your mind and start using young people’s projects/centres?

______

7 How do you find out what’s going on for young people in the city?

______

______

______

______

8 Is there anything else you would like to say about youth centres/young people’s projects in the city? ______

______

______

______

THANK YOU FOR TAKING PART

If you would like to find out more about what happens to this please contact:

Hull Youth Council, Kingston Youth Centre, 48A Beverley Road, Hull HU3 1YE Telephone: (01482) 585297 Email: [email protected]

Appendix H

Youth Provision in Hull. A consultation by Hull Youth Council on behalf of Scrutiny Panel December 2007

The following outlines the results of the consultation carried out by Hull Youth Council with young people at the request of Scrutiny Panel during the period of November and December 2007. The aim was to find out what young people from across the city thought of current youth provision, both from the statutory and voluntary sector. This was not aimed at individual projects but the whole range of projects young people could access, and was to include current users as well as those not currently engaged to find out what did or did not attract them to provision in the city.

The targeted age range was 13-19 as this is the core age range for the Youth Development Service. However as Hull Youth Council works with young people from 11-25 and this varies within the voluntary sector, young people outside the target age have been included.

The questionnaire was designed in two parts to involve all young people -not just those currently involved in youth provision. Hull Youth Council worked with partners from both the statutory and voluntary youth sector as well as schools and through detached sessions to engage young people. Questionnaires were completed anonymously with appropriate support given where necessary.

In total 399 questionnaires were completed from young people across the city. 235 were from young people currently using youth projects in the city and 164 from those not.

Male Female White British Other* Not Specified

210 189 351 25 23

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

6 32 71 92 64 75 38 9 4 3 2 0 1 1 1 0

* Black British x 8, Muslim x 1, Asian x 8, Afghan x 4, African x 4

The attached document provides detail of all the responses received including individual comments. This briefing highlights the major themes which emerged from the consultation but acknowledges the importance of all those individual responses from young people.

Responses to questions 2-8 Question 2. Why do you use it? What’s good about it?

235 young people currently involved with youth projects across the city responded to this question. 4 major themes emerged:

• Activities : 112 young people identified different activities which encouraged them to use youth projects. Some of these responses were general, for example: Activities/facilities (20), To do new things (16), Others more specific, for example: Motorbikes/Quad bikes (21), Computers (15), Trips (13), Group discussions (9) Sports (rugby/football) (7), Pool (6), Volunteering/Duke of Edinburgh/Get involved in community (5) Arts/music (2)

• Something to do /Somewhere to go: For 106 young people youth projects were seen as somewhere they could go without having to have a specific reason: Something to do/somewhere to go (29) It keeps me out of trouble (22) It keeps me off the streets (14) Because it’s warm (13) Gets me out the house (13) Because it’s somewhere to go when I get bored (5) Because I get bored (4) Because there’s nothing else to do on a night (4) Because I want to (2)

• To socialise: For over 80 young people youth centres and projects were a place to meet others: To meet my friends/socialise (56) Meet new people (20) Somewhere to sit and chill out (4)) Discuss opinions (3)

• Support/atmosphere: Others highlighted the support they could get from the project: It’s fun/good (52) Staff are good/nice/listen to us (15) It’s safe (2) We can get around easily in our wheelchairs (2)

To boost my confidence and it’s good cos you can talk to anyone about your problems You get treated fairly and workers don’t look down on you They made you have fun but understood the point

Question 3. Is there anything else you think would make it better?

46 young people did not identify any changes they wanted to see. Of those who did the majority focussed on two themes:

• Equipment and activities: Over 170 young people identified activities or equipment which they though would improve their projects. Again this ranged from the more general responses: More activities /things to do (31) Better /more equipment (5) to the more specific which included? More trips/ residentials (23) More computers/computer games (23) New/better pool tables (14) Better/more sports equipment (13) More bike time (10) Music/karaoke/DJ decks/more song time (5)

A more extensive list is identified in the attached document.

• General improvements to provision: The other main theme that was identified in the section was around the main fabric of the projects and centres Should be open more days /nights a week/later hours (25) I would like it to be refurbished/redecorated (9) Refreshments/wider range of refreshments (6) More workers (5) Carry projects on for longer (3) Having building just for teenagers (2) More girls stuff (2)

There was a mixed response to age range: Older age range (2) Raise leaving age The age I would like it to be is 10-19 Under 10’ should be allowed

Question 4. There are a lot of people who don’t attend youth projects. What activities /other things could be done to encourage more young people to take part?

3 major themes emerged to this question:

• Activities: 146 young people identified different activities to attract others. Again the more general,

More facilities/activities (29) More trips/residentials (25) plus the more specific including Sports (14) - football (7), rugby (4) Discos/parties (5) Music sessions (4)

• Information: Over 80 young people identified means of publicising youth provision as a way of getting more young people involved. More advertisements (35) Posters (13) Leaflets/Flyers (11) Tell people what they have to offer (10) Internet (6) Letters (4) People should come into school and talk about it (4)

• Access/support/other : Others identified ways of changing structures within projects to encourage different people More youth centres in all areas (accessible) (11) Extra support -someone to take you along the first time you go (6) Make it cheaper /free (4) Ask them what they would like to do (3) Club open more often (3) Separate activities for boys and girls (3) Separate trips for older and younger kids –not just together

Question 5.Why don’t you use youth centres/young people’s projects?

164 young people took part in the consultation that do not use youth provision in the city and gave the following reasons why:

• It’s boring : Over 50 gave this response. Because it’s boring/there isn’t much to do there (37) Because I don’t like them (10) There’s nothing I like to do (2) Because people who go there say it isn’t good Babyish and boring You can’t drink

• Doing other things: For 37 young people choosing not to use youth projects in the city was because they had other things to do. Don’t have the time/too busy/do other things (29) I prefer to hang around with my mates (5) Because I go to other clubs (3)

• Information on provision: 29 young people did not get involved as they did not have adequate information on what was going on. I don’t hear/know about them (19) Don’t know where they are/what they do (7) I don’t know where they are and how much they are (2)

• Access/support : As well as physical access, None around my area/near my house (17) Because I can’t get to them and I don’t know where they are (2) I’m not allowed to go out much/have to stay in after school (2) Too dark when I come home,

young people also identified other areas of support which stopped them accessing youth provision. My friends don’t go (7) Because they don’t have anything for my age group (6)-aged 13 (1), aged 15 (4), aged 16 (1) They are full of chavs (2) I am nervous about who might be there and if they are friendly or not Because I have a son and it’s hard to just get up and go

• Can’t be bothered/not interested: Finally 26 young people were not interested in getting involved.

Question 6.What would make you change your mind and start using young people’s projects/centres?

In this group 32 young people felt that nothing would make them join in youth provision. From others the same themes emerged as with the group who did use youth provision.

• Activities: Over 80 young people identified activities, including: If there were fun/interesting/better things to do (18) More activities (17) Football training (11) Rugby (5) Games consoles/DS tournaments/computers (3) If they did more sports (3) Dancing/Drama/Singing (3) Trips (3)

• Information: 28 identified different methods of publicising what’s going on including: Better advertised/more publicity (14) Knowing where they are/what is available (10) If I knew there was one in my area and if I knew it was good (3) The days and times they are open

• Support/access: Some young people would be more likely to get involved if they knew they had support either from friends or workers, If my friends went/knowing people who go there (16) If there was a youth centre near me (6) If I was supported in attending the first couple of times If I had a lift there/was picked up from home (2) If a friend told me about it

Or that projects were closer/more attractive If there was a youth centre near me (7) If there were more youth centres so didn’t have to travel so far (6) If they looked better (3)

Question 7. How do you find out what’s going on for young people in the city?

The full list is detailed in attached document. The following were the most common responses, From friends/family (105) Youth workers/youth Centre (61) Posters (60) Leaflets/flyers (57) Newspaper/newsletter (48) Internet/email (47) Schools/teachers (41) I don’t Know /I don’t find out (40) Letters (22)

Question 8.Is there anything else you would like to say about youth centres/young people’s projects in the city

This question has produced some similar responses for example, There should be more Youth Centres (18) They are good/very good (12) Open more/more things to do (6) They need to advertise better (6) However this question has produced a range of personal responses from young people and it is more difficult to present them as themes without losing their individuality. Please refer to attached document for more detail.

Your views on youth centre/young people’s projects in Hull

1 Do you currently use youth centres/ young people’s projects within the city? Yes 235 No 164

2 Why do you use it? What’s good about it?

• To meet my friends/socialise x 56 • It’s fun/good x 52 • Something to do/somewhere to go x 29

• It keeps me out of trouble x 22 • We get to go on the motorbikes/quads x 21 • Meet new people x 20 • Activities/facilities/ a good place to go and lots of activities x 20 • Learn new skills/do new things x 16 • Staff are good/nice/listen to us x 15 • To use computers x 15 • It keeps me off the streets x 14 • Because it’s warm x 13 • Gets me out of the house x 13 • Because I can go on trips x 13 • Sports (football, rugby) x 7 • Social Inclusion Project – pool, go-karts, workshop – enjoy group discussion x 6 • To play pool x 6 • Because it is somewhere to go when you are bored x 5 • Because I get bored x 4 • Because there is nothing else to do on a night x 4 • Somewhere to sit/chill out x 4 • Discuss opinions x 3 • Something to do after school x 3 • Because it’s free x 3 • School send me x 3. • Wyke Youth Forum x 2 • For fun and games x 2 • Because I want to x 2 • My parents work x 2 • It’s safe x 2 • To volunteer x 2 • We can get around the centre easily in our wheelchairs x 2 • A variety of things to do x 2 • To keep fit/healthy x 2 • I use the Warren, especially for meetings such as CHYP. The Warren is good as you get treated fairly and the workers don’t look down on you, they are just your friends. • Used to go to St Michaels youth centre, it was superb because they made you have fun but understand the point • It’s good because anyone can turn up • Help make things better in our community • Get involved in more activities and help people and the environment • Arts course at Kingston Youth Centre – it’s good for artistic stuff and the arts award • I use it to boost my confidence and it’s good because you can talk to anyone about your problems. • Stuff to do for older kids • Because it feels like we own the place and we have a good time • To join in with music stuff • To get help with homework

• To watch TV • I do Duke of Edinburgh’s Award • Because it’s at the bottom of my street.

3 Is there anything else that you think would make it better?

• No x 46 • More activities/things to do x 31 • It should be open more days/nights a week/later x 25 • More trips/ residentials x 23 • New/better pool table x 14 • Better/more sports equipment x 13 • More computer games /more computers x 23 • More riding time x 10 • I would like it to be refurbished/redecorated x 9 • Bigger track x 6 • Better/more equipment x 5 • TV x 4 • Trampolines x 4 • More money to buy better things/do more activities x 4 • Carry projects on for longer x 3 • Refreshments/wider range of refreshments available x6 • Dance x 3. • More staff x 3 • Football x 2. • Disco Night/Night Club x 2 • Don’t know x 2 • Take part in good activities x 2 • Older age groups x 2 • Mixed groups – more girls stuff x 2 • Having buildings just for teenagers x 2 • More drama lessons to make us feel confident x 2 • DJ decks x 2 • Skipping ropes x 2 • More workers so we could do more things x 2 • Music x 2 • Swimming pool x 2. • Change some of the posters. • To make it better • It’s a bit boring • Nothing I like it the way it is, it wouldn’t be Costello if there was a change • Get more games and have the karaoke on all night • Get more activities and do more songs • More books, more laptops, more people working there • The age I would like it to be is 10 to 19 • Less work • Better (faster) bikes

• More team games • Better lighting on football surface outside x 2 (Route One + Taboo) • Hair braiding • Under-10’s should be allowed • Pinball • Bowling • Art Room • Raise the leaving age • Snooker table • Workshops on sex, drugs etc • If more people came to it. • Table Tennis. • Youth Cafe. • Internet access at every club. • Outdoor activities. • No TV. • Exercise/healthy food. • Snooker. • Pool • Poker • Jacuzzi.

4 There are a lot of people who don’t attend youth projects. What activities/other things could be done to encourage more young people to take part? • More advertisements x 35 • More facilities/activities x 29 • More trips/residentials x 25 • Sports x 14 • Posters x 13 • More youth centres in all areas (more accessible) x 11 • Leaflets/flyers x 11 • Tell people what they have to offer/opportunities x 10 • Nothing they do enough already x 9 • I don’t know x 7 • Football x 7 • Internet/email x 6 • Extra support – someone to take you along (the first time you go) x 6 • Discos/Parties x 5 • Fun days/events around the City x 5 • Letters x 4 • Make it cheaper/free x 4 • People should come into school and talk about it x 4 • Music sessions x 4 • Separate activities for girls and boys x 4 • Computer sessions x 4. • Rugby training x 4

• Ask them what they would like to do x 3 • Club open more often x 3 • Give prizes x 3 • Redecorate the centre and make it more cosy (Newland Youth Centre) x 3 • Ice Skating x 3. • Cookery sessions x 3 • Games consoles/ playstations x 3 • Videos/Films x 2. • Motor biking clubs x 2 • Taster sessions/demonstration x 2 • No work x 2 • Arts and crafts x 2 • Drama x 2 • Boxing x 2. • Trampolining x 2 • A mix of dance, music and serious things • Graffiti • Dance • Shooting targets • More game sites which are not banned • More projects and things that people are interested in • More people come in the summer because we do games outside in the hot sun • Help them with the games • There is colouring in singing and playing pool and snooker • Festivals and charity events • Make it more interesting • Being able to use leisure facilities such as sports halls/swimming baths • Youth meetings so they can say what they want in their area, like we did for the dance project • Separate trips for older and younger kids – not just together • TV/Video Games • Sex education • Practical things • Catering for young people’s needs • Bowling • Swimming • Pottery • Youth Cafe on winter nights. • Darts • Make tuck shop cheaper. • Make it cheaper to get in the Youth Club. • Hairdressing.

5 If you answered NO to question 1. Why don’t you use youth centres/ young people’s projects? • Because it’s boring/there isn’t much to do there x 37 • Don’t have the time/too busy/do other things x 29

• Can’t be bothered/not interested x 26 • I don’t hear/know about them x 19 • None around my area/near my house x 17 • Because I don’t like them x 10 • My friends don’t go x 7 • Don’t know were they are/what they do x 7 • Because they don’t have anything for my age group x 6 (1 x Age 13, 4 x Age 15, 1 x Age 16). • I don’t know x 5 • I prefer to hang around with my mates x 5. • Because I go to other clubs x 3 • Because I can’t get them and I don’t know where they are and don’t know how much they are x 2 • They are full of chavs x 2. • There is nothing I like to do x 2. • I’m not allowed to go out much/have to stay in after school x 2. • Because we don’t have anything that involves the youth centre • Because I have a son and it’s hard to just get up and go. • Because I’m nervous about who might be there and if they are friendly or not. • Never thought about it. • Because people who go there say it isn’t good. • Because I think Youth Centres are dull, boring and babyish. I think they’re stupid. • Too dark when I come home. • You can’t drink in the centres.

6 What would make you change your mind and start using young people’s projects/centres? • Nothing x 32 • If there were fun/interesting/better things to do x 18 • More activities x 17 • Better advertised/more publicity x 14 • Football training x 11. • Knowing where they are/what is available x 10. • If my friends went x 11 • If there was a youth centre near me x 6 • If there were more youth centres so they didn’t have to travel as far x 6 • Knowing people who go there/if my friends went x 5 • Don’t know x 5 • Rugby x 5. • If they looked better x 3. • If I had more time x 3 • If I knew there was one in my area and if I knew it was good x 3 • If they were less boring x 3 • If I had more time x 3 • If they did more sports x 3. • Trips x 3.

• Need good stuff to do x 2 • If we did something good x 2 • If I was supported in attending the first couple of times x 2 • Games consoles x 2. • Dancing x 2 • Poker Club x 2. • Rock climbing x 2 • More activities for teenagers • More activities in the West Hull area • To work with other people • If a friend told me about it • If my teachers gave me less homework • If it was free, if they had a lot of cool stuff like consoles, football, ping pong table and a snooker table • Probably if I had a lift in a car to get there or any other transport /if I was picked up from home x 2 • Have them straight after school • If you went to play in DS tournaments • Make it more lively for us • More topics that interest me – under variety of project topics • If there was somewhere to chill, have a drink and a chat. Also have more than about 6 projects which are mostly the same. Get people’s ideas in hand and see what people like the most. • More outdoor activities. • If they had taster days. • If they had dance classes. • Drama • Singing • Computers • The days and times they are open. • Fishing trips. • If they contributed to my education/hobbies. • Refreshments. • If I was picked up from home

7 How do you find out what’s going on for young people in the city? • From friends/family x 105 • Youth Workers/Youth Centre x 61 • Posters x 60 • Leaflets/flyers x 57 • Newspaper/Newsletter x 48 • Internet/email x 47 • School/teachers x 41 • I don’t know/find out x 40 • Letters x 22 • Television x 14 • Radio x 13 • Ask people/look around x 12

• News x 12 • From other clubs/groups x 11 • Adverts x 9 • From Youth Council/Forum x 6 • Adverts on buses x 4 • Community Centre x 4 • Library x 4 • Notices x 3 • Booklets (summer holidays) x 2 • Telephone x 2 • There is an awful lot of things for them • Festivals/local events • Police • Most of the time I see it in Hull in Print but by the time I get it the things are almost finished.

8 Is there anything else you would like to say about youth centres/young people’s projects in the city? • There should be more Youth Centres/Projects in Hull x 18 • They are good /very good x12 • Open more / More things to do x 6 • They need to advertise better x 6 • Enjoy the Social Inclusion Project, don’t really use youth centres in free time x 6 • Keeps young people off streets They keep you off the streets and out of trouble x 6 • Need more centres in City Centre/Beverley Road area x 6. • Boring x 5. • There should be mini buses to take people to and from clubs x 3 • They keep you off the streets and out of trouble x 3 • More sports activities to keep people fit x 2 • Get more games x 2 • They are all good and I would like you to keep them open x 2 • There should be a lot more clubs for young people with disabilities x 2 • Better Youth Centres with modern equipment like computers, internet and a place to chill out x 2 • I wish they had better/more things to do x 2. • Make them more fun/better x 2. • If they started to do fun stuff such as sports/rock climbing then we would start to go to them x 2 • Thank you • Fantastic • You need to know people to go there • There’s too much safety so we’re not allowed to go to the beach • In my mind there isn’t a lot • That you should go around the other youth clubs • Not enough youth centres and aren’t open regular enough

• They’re good because they inform you about different things also we go on visits and meet new people • This one is the best • More local • There should be a youth centre near my house and area (Ings). There should also be more advertising like in the paper and leaflets sent to your door • I think that they are a good idea for children who need help or enjoy these kind of things • Get more songs to sing • More people have fun when something is going on • They could be made more accessible • It’s good because its not boring • Don’t know about them • Youth Club is the best club in the world because they listen • Activities are good in Hull but we need more for all the young people in all areas • Show off what we have been doing to others so they can see how good it is • Get more young people to attend • Projects I have done at Thoresby have been fun and all new – more places like Thoresby Youth Project • I think Newland Youth Centre is interesting and a great and safe place to meet my friends • I think they’re a good idea and more projects like this should be done for youths to keep them out of trouble • People complain we’re on the streets • There should be more trampolines in centres • There should be more clubs nearer to where people live • I would like them to stay the same • Youth Centres are useful for unwinding with friends • I think there is enough provision for all young people • Why are the centres being closed and workers sacked? • There are too many short-term projects • I think most of all there should be courses on how to cook and be healthy for all ages. Exercise programmes and crafts because I’m very good at making things and helping people. • I think the Youth Centres are great – they keep kids off the streets and they get to learn things and make new friends at the same time. • I think there should be more sporting activities and more youth centres for older teens, with less chavs. • You need to advertise yourself a bit more – do talks at school because many people haven’t got a clue about all the activities that are going on. • I wish there were more Youth Centres and things to do after school. • From what I’ve heard they do a good job. • If they had more things for my age (16) more teens would turn up. • Keep up the good work. • There should be one on every estate.

• I would like to train as a Youth Worker. • It’s somewhere safe to go on winter nights. • They are sometimes exciting, but a lot of the time they are boring. • Some people don’t like them because they are babyish. • Please arrange more activities for young people – we need to have fun.

Are you: Male 210 Female 189

Age 10 6 11 32 12 71 13 92 14 64 15 75 16 38 17 9 18 4 19 3 20 2 22 1 23 1 24 1

Ethnicity White British 351 Black British 8 Muslim 1 Asian 8 Afghan 4 African 4

Not answered 23

Appendix I

Overview of Statutory and Voluntary and Community Sector Youth provision Mapping Exercise – Ward by Ward

Avenues Ward (West Area) Venue Location Type Thoresby Street Youth Centre Thoresby Street Council Youth Facility Avenues Library Chanterlands Avenue Council Service Delivering Youth Activity Pearson Park Princes Avenue Council Service Delivering Youth Activity

Beverley Ward (Northern Area) Venue Location Type Mark Two St Johns Church Clough Road Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) 872 Air Training Corps Halifax Barracks, Beverley Road Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Army Cadets Humberside Signals, Halifax Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Barracks, Beverly High Road

Boothferry Ward (West Area) Venue Location Type 5th Hull Boys Brigade Derringham Bank Methodist Church, Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Willerby Road Army Cadets Calvert Lane Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal Anlaby Park Library The Greenway, Anlaby High Road Council Service Delivering Youth Activity Fred Moore Library Derringham Bank, Wold Road Council Service Delivering Youth Activity

Bransholme East Ward (Northcarr Area) Venue Location Type BUMPS Motor Project Noddle Hill Way Council Youth Facility (city wide focus) Bransholme Sports Enterprise Snowden Way Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal)

Bransholme West Ward (Northcarr Area) Venue Location Type Astra Youth Centre Midmere Avenue Council Youth Facility Bransholme Library Goodhart Road Council Service Delivering Youth Activity

Derringham Ward (West Area) Venue Location Type Ainthorpe Youth Centre Ainthorpe Grove, Willerby Road Council Youth Facility Hull Girls Brigade Priory Baptist Chirch, Hotham Road Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) South Settingdyke Youth Centre Hull Education Centre Council Youth Facility

Drypool Ward (Riverside Area) Venue Location Type Drypool Project Humberside Police Unit Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) East Hull Pools Holderness Road Council Service Delivering Youth Activity Holderness Road CSC Holderness Road Council Service Delivering Youth Activity Two Wheel Centre Chapman Street Council Youth Facility (city wide focus)

Holderness Ward (Park Area) Venue Location Type 152 Air Squadron Air Training Corps Cadet Centre, Holderness Road Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) East Park Holderness Road Council Service Delivering Youth Activity Woodford Leisure Centre Holderness Road Council Service Delivering Youth Activity Hull Boys Brigade East Hull United Reformed Church, Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Clifford Avenue Hull Boys Brigade East Park Baptist Church, East Park Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Ave Hull Boys Brigade Holderness Road Methodist Church Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) 17 Hull Boys Brigade Kingston Wesley Methodist Church, Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Holderness High Road Max Life Youth Project Kingston Wesley Methodist Churc Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) 882 Holderness Road Taboo Youth Iniitative 261 Holderness Road Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal)

Ings Ward (East Area) Venue Location Type Maybury Youth Centre Maybury Road Council Youth Facility Ings library and CSC Savoy Road Council Service Delivering Youth Activity Ings Resource Centre Savoy Road Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) Coo Gar Martial Arts Malet Lambert School Gym, James Council Service Delivering Youth Activity Reckitt Ave

Kings Park Ward (Northcarr Area) Venue Location Type Hull Boys Brigade St Andrews Church of England, Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Grabdale, Sutton Park

Longhill Ward (East Area) Venue Location Type Andrew Marvell Youth Centre Barham Road, Bilton Grange Council Youth Facility Longhill Link Up Trust St Margarets Church, Shannon Road Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal)

Myton Ward (Riverside Area)

Venue Location Type Kingston Youth Centre 48a Beverley Road, Hull Council Youth Facility Youth Counselling Unit Kingston Youth Centre, 48a Beverley Council Youth Facility (city wide focus) Road Axiomatic New Life Chritian Centre, Bridlington Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) Avenue Lable of Love Good News Centre, Wright Street Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) Sea Cadet Corps 118 Argyle St Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Hull Boys Club Roper Street Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Hull YPI George Strret Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Youth Arts Development Service Hull Central Library, Albion Street Council Service Delivering Youth Activity Hull Play Service c/o 48a Kingston Youth Centre, Council Youth Facility (city wide focus) Beverley Road Hull Youth Council c/o 48a Kingston Youth Centre, Council Youth Facility (city wide focus) Beverley Road Hull Central Library Albion Street Council Service Delivering Youth Activity Rights and Participation Project Queens Dock Avenue Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) The Warren Queens Dock Avenue Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) Spring Bank Community Association Spring Bank Community Centre, West Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) Parade, Spring Bank

Newington Ward (Riverside Area) Venue Location Type Army Cadets Wenlock Barracks Anlaby Road Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Lonsdale Community Centre Lonsdale St, Anlaby Road Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) Army Cadets Middlesex Detachment, Middlesex Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Barracks, Calvert Lane West Hull Community Sports Group Francis Askew School, North Road Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) Albert Avenue Baths Albert Avenue Council Service Delivering Youth Activity Positive Futures and Positive Futures East Stand, KC Stadium Council Youth Facility (city wide focus) Plus Youth Directions East Stand, KC Stadium Council Youth Facility (city wide focus) No Limits East Stand, KC Stadium Council Youth Facility (city wide focus) Stadium Library Learning Zone, KC Stadium Council Service Delivering Youth Activity Duke of Edinburgh Award Scheme East Stand, KC Stadium Council Service Delivering Youth Activity (city wide focus)

Newland Ward (Wyke Area) Venue Location Type Newland Youth Centre Reynoldson St Council Youth Facility Endeavour Sports Centre Station Drive, Temple Street Council Service Delivering Youth Activity Hull Girls Brigade Trinity Methodist Church, Cottingham Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Road Beverley Road Baths Beverley Road Council Service Delivering Youth Activity Rhema Youth Works 306-308 Newland Avenue Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal)

Orchard Park and Greenwood ward (Northern Area) Venue Location Type DOC Chill Out Hull DOC, Homethorpe, Orchard Park Estate Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) Rights and Independence Social Club Suite 4, the Paviliion, Hall Road Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) Hull Boys Brigade Clowes Methodist, Greenwood Avenue Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Greenwood Avenue Library Greenwood Avenue Council Service Delivering Youth Activity St Michaels Youth Project St Michaels Church, Orchard Park Estate Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) Voices in Play 80-82 Dibsdane, Orchard Park Estate Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal)

Southcoates East Ward (East Area) Venue Location Type Preston Road NDC Preston Road Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Marfleet Library Preston Road Council Service Delivering Youth Activity

Southcoates West Ward (Park Area) Venue Location Type Army Cadets East Hull Detachment, Eat Hull Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Barracks, Holderness Road

St Andrews Ward (Riverside Area) Venue Location Type Hull Girls Brigade Selby Street Methodist Church, Selby Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Street Ability Counts Football Club 50 The Boulevard Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) Western Library Boulevard, Hessle Road Council Service Delivering Youth Activity Scrap Store Dairycoates Ave Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) Hessle Road Network Hull Play Resource Centre, Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) Dairycoates Avenue

Sutton Ward (East Area) Venue Lo cation Type Army Cadets Sutton Detachment, Mona House, Sutton Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Army Cadets Bransholme Detachment, Mona House, Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (formal) Sutton Dorchester Community Sports Initiative Tenderton Close, Bransholme Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) Ennerdale Leisure Centre Sutton Road Bridge Council Service Delivering Youth Activity

University ward (Northern Area) Venue Location Type Route One Young Peoples Resource Hall Road Voluntary Sector Youth Activity (Informal) Centre