download - Deutsches Jugendinstitut e.V.

More documents

Recommendations

Info

the adjustment of existing processes and thereby subsequently to changes in social welfare contexts. Duration of strategy/programme implementation The implementation of programmes for improvements in the living conditions for disadvantaged children and young persons in various countries has a differing historical tradition. The first country to implement this type of programme was Ireland which initiated the programme Youthreach in 1988 to integrate young persons without school leaving qualifications into the world of employment. There are plans to continue this programme up to 2013 and it is embedded in the national strategy for the social inclusion of children. The Children’s Fund in Great Britain has existed since 2000 and will be continued in its present form up to the year 2008; thereafter it will be transformed into a Children’s Trust. Measures within the framework of the strategy Children’s Act however date back to 1989. In France, programmes targeting socially disadvantaged neighbourhoods and various problem contexts concerning children and young persons have existed since 1996. In 2003, the laws concerning the reorientation of urban politics were passed; within this framework, the National Observation Authority now collects and evaluates a variety of indicators within the areas of employment, health and education. In Germany, the first national programmes for urban planning were initiated in 1998 and the programme “Development and opportunities for young people in disadvantaged neighbourhoods” was set up in 2000 and expired in 2006. Individual elements of this programme platform are however being continued; for example, the programme “Local Capital for Social Purposes” will also be supported within the framework of the next ESF support period 2007-2013. The context programme oriented to urban planning “City Districts with special Development Needs – the Socially Integrative City” will definitely continue to be funded up to 2009. Portugal began in 2001 with just a few social disadvantaged areas and subsequently built up its programme ’Escolhas’ to cover a current figure of 120 locations. The extension of this programme up to 2009 is certain. All examples display support on a long-term basis. At this point, it is not yet possible to determine on the basis of the available information which duration of programmes proves to be the most effective, but it is already clear that developments in these neighbourhoods cannot be achieved within a period of less than five years. It can certainly be confirmed that longer periods of support are necessary if sustainable effects are to be achieved and not a mere flash in the pan. Examples such as Ireland however also show that cooperation with other departments is necessary: for example, the number of early school leavers without school leaving qualifications will not decrease without a change in the Irish school system, and it is ultimately a permanent task for the state to re-integrate those who fail to achieve the school leaving certificate. A preventative approach would be more favourable which would directly target the improvement of conditions in educational establishments. 113
The various functions of programmes and strategies must also be considered from the aspect of their duration. The German programme E&C primarily unites model projects and programmes under a single umbrella: in view of the country’s federal structure, this has a purely motivational function and necessitates per se a shorter duration. Programmes such as LOS achieve a certain long-term structure due to their tangible success and support possibilities through the ESF. Youthreach in Ireland was conceived on a long-term basis in order to counter deficits in the national education system. Role of reporting and evaluation The topic of reporting an evaluation is closely connected with the individual countries’ management practices. In Great Britain, where the allocation of financial resources has to adhere to specific criteria, these criteria must be measurable, i.e. evaluation and reporting is indispensable. The evaluation of the outcome of a variety of fields of action is a central element in the overall programme. Evaluation is performed partially on the basis of scientifically collected data and partially on data and reports from local authorities. In Ireland, the programme was scientifically evaluated right from the start. This is a formative evaluation in which results are incorporated into the process and result in programme changes (improvements). Through this evaluation process, the programme management has the opportunity of reacting to a variety of developments in different fields and can develop stricter parameters to reduce imbalances. A mixture of external and internal evaluation raises the acceptance of projects on the part of the members of staff involved. In France, the process is slightly different. Here, a series of relevant indicators are collected by the National Observation Authority and an annual report prepared which formulates the nature of the problems and serves as the basis for the development of measures and programmes on a national level. The evaluation of the programmes presented is still at a development stage. In Germany, the programme “Development and opportunities for young people in disadvantaged neighbourhoods” is being accompanied on a scientific basis, but due to its platform character will not be evaluated in the strict sense of the word. Individual programme elements were however externally evaluated and results contrasted with other comparable measures. Spatial orientation of strategies/programmes In the last twenty years, the problems of disadvantaged children and young persons have intensified. It became clear that it was not only the individual and family-related situations which influenced the development chances of these children and young persons, but that their living environment was increasingly becoming an additional discrimination factor (cf. Burgers et al. 2003 , Reutlinger et al. 2007). This situation provoked different reactions within the various European countries. In the countries presented here – Great Britain, Ireland, France, Portugal and Germany – strategies were developed with a highly concrete approach to these disadvantaged neighbourhoods. 114
Page 2 and 3:
EU Congress “Children and Young P
Page 4:
Table of Contents Introduction ....
Page 7 and 8:
state concepts produce different na
Page 9 and 10:
highlighted the importance of small
Page 11 and 12:
Programme EU Congress “Children a
Page 13 and 14:
WG 4: Cross-departmental strategies
Page 15 and 16:
Working Group 1: Education Presenta
Page 17 and 18:
promoted, respecting the voice of y
Page 19 and 20:
cooperation with each other. Unfort
Page 21 and 22:
coordination of skills, are aimed a
Page 23 and 24:
Question for Discussion − How to
Page 25 and 26:
22 3. The encouragement and strengt
Page 27 and 28:
The other major obstacle for youngs
Page 29 and 30:
History The project was based on a
Page 31 and 32:
The innovative outcome of the proje
Page 33 and 34:
There are four broad reasons why we
Page 35 and 36:
In youth work and adult education o
Page 37 and 38:
For those who remain on Youthreach
Page 39 and 40:
Working Group 3: Multicultural Livi
Page 41 and 42:
Good results are achieved in locali
Page 43 and 44:
education with her friends. The sup
Page 45 and 46:
Presentation Lithuania Tadas Leonč
Page 47 and 48:
Key policy programmes concerning na
Page 49 and 50:
Presentation Europarat Kathrin Grot
Page 51 and 52:
− Participation Symposium 25th -
Page 53 and 54:
Report working group 3: Multicultur
Page 55 and 56:
Working Group 4: Cross-departmental
Page 57 and 58:
Example of local implementation - N
Page 59 and 60:
Presentation France Philippe Choffe
Page 61 and 62:
These facts demand ambitious measur
Page 63 and 64:
25 boarding school projects were se
Page 65 and 66: Presentation United Kingdom Kate Mo
Page 67 and 68: Evaluator’s Perspective In conclu
Page 69 and 70: national observation authority. Bri
Page 71 and 72: Working group 5: Local strategies f
Page 73 and 74: projects for young people. The LOS
Page 75 and 76: targeted a total of 332,004 persons
Page 77 and 78: employment, these young persons are
Page 79 and 80: the granting of a subsidy to enable
Page 81 and 82: S (Strengths)• Effective approach
Page 83 and 84: Two further Adele Lavoro projects r
Page 85 and 86: Implementation in London In London,
Page 87 and 88: Report for working group 5: Local s
Page 89 and 90: Prof. Salvador Parrado, Governance
Page 91 and 92: What is governance? • reflects a
Page 93 and 94: Prof. Rainer Kilb, Fachhochschule M
Page 95 and 96: anomic developments and, secondly,
Page 97 and 98: Three factors have a particularly p
Page 99 and 100: • individual encouragement of tal
Page 101 and 102: Literature • Principle of transve
Page 103 and 104: These developments need relatively
Page 105 and 106: that was struck in 2005 on matters
Page 107 and 108: conventional aspirations in illegal
Page 109 and 110: premises practical concepts have pr
Page 111 and 112: Dr. Susann Burchardt, Dr. Heike Fö
Page 113 and 114: It is self-evident that the first g
Page 115: spanning the fields of education, h
Page 119 and 120: Lithuania is by its own account ori
Page 121 and 122: It must however be mentioned that t
Page 123 and 124: 120 2. National action strategies a
Page 125 and 126: Literature professional standards s
Page 127 and 128: Carmona Maria Instituto de Apoio à
Page 129 and 130: Knudsen John Vinter Youth Guidance
Page 131 and 132: Rombach Jürgen Stadt Eschweiler De
Page 133 and 134: Speakers Surname First name Organis
Page 135 and 136: Project fair Ausstellergruppe Surna
Page 137 and 138: Frankreich Douat Rémi L'atelier Jo
show all

download - Deutsches Jugendinstitut e.V.

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?