Skip to content

This report was published by the former Department of Families, Community Services
Contents | Downloads

4. Young people

The impact of changes in the social and economic structure of society is highlighted by the fact that many young people face a mismatch between their natural abilities and the task and roles that are available to them. The resultant weakening of the bonds between young people, their families and their communities undermines social cohesion and inhibits the development of social capital (Graycar & Nelson 1999).

As noted in the previous chapter, the early years are critical in laying the foundation for healthy participation in society. In addition, it is widely accepted that if early prevention experience is to have a permanent effect, it must be subsequently reinforced and built on (Bright 1997).

A recurrent theme in the literature is the notion of identified 'risk factors' which are said to increase the likelihood of a range of behaviours, for example, young people offending, substance abuse, and 'protective factors' (which are often the opposites of the risk factors). Risk factors and their corresponding protective factors fall into four categories: community; school; family; and peer/individual. Many prevention strategies have been based around increasing protective factors and decreasing risk factors (Bright 1997; Harachi et al. 1996).

Of particular interest, is the claim that community disorganisation and low neighbourhood attachment are key risk factors with the corresponding protective factor being strengthened communities. In support of this, the success of prevention strategies, including community based-programs and those aimed at strengthening communities rather than remedying individual pathologies, is cited in a range of literature (Bright 1997; Krisberg & Austin 1993; Graycar & Nelson 1999; Pinkney & Ewing 1997, cited in Chamberlain & MacKenzie 1998).

While the value of prevention and early intervention programs is cited throughout the literature, there are two broad caveats to this. The first is that various authors refer to the need for coordinated service delivery and treating the 'whole person' (Krisberg & Austin 1993; Chamberlain & MacKenzie 1998). In some instances, coordination of services is also specifically discussed in terms of it being more cost effective (Krisberg & Austin 1993). Secondly, the profound impact of broad structural changes in society is highlighted. Of particular concern are changes in levels of employment, the economy, technology and family structures which have made it increasingly difficult for some young people to avoid drugs,

crime and under-employment (Bright 1997; Blumstein 1998, as cited in Krisberg & Austin 1993; Graycar & Nelson 1999; Morrison et al. 1997a). This idea is further developed by Pinkney and Ewing (1997,cited in Chamberlain & McKenzie 1998) who argue that the real economic cost to the community does not arise primarily from government expenditure needed to support young people in the absence of family and employment. Rather, it is a consequence of a more fundamental undermining of economic wellbeing, resulting from the reduced productive capacity of the nation as a whole. To this end, the key economic costs of youth homelessness have been identified through focusing on labour market efficiency, health related costs and involvement in the criminal justice system (p.129).

In terms of the cost of a range of poor social outcomes for young people, there are various estimates, both within an Australian and the United States (US) context.

For example, institutionalisation of young people through imprisonment or residential treatment for emotional disorders is enormously expensive. A 1990 US study found that residential placement for treatment of children with emotional disturbances is the most expensive form of treatment, averaging at US$30 000 per year per child. In contrast, the study provided an estimated cost of US$3 474 for a community-based continuum of care intervention (Texas State Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation 1990).

Estimations of costs of juvenile crime in Australia were obtained from a number of different sources. Potas et al. (1989) claim that the direct cost of some major categories of juvenile crime in Australia in 1986-87 was $601.7 million. This includes $150 million for car theft; $90 million for household burglaries; $4 million for vandalism to local government property; $56.5 million for arson and vandalism to non-local government property; $300 million for shop theft; and $1.2 million for violent crime (based on in-patient bed day costs). In addition, it is estimated that $500 million is spent on administering juvenile justice; $350 million on policing; $15 million for legal aid, prosecution and private legal costs; $70 million on detaining offenders in institutions; $12 million on non-custodial sanctions; and $250 million on the private security industry. Therefore the total cost of juvenile crime in Australia is stated to be $1.5 billion per year.

In terms of juvenile incarceration, the annual cost is stated to be between $50 000 and $83 000 per person, not to mention the emotional and financial costs to the community in the course of getting them into prison, nor the likely social security payments after their release (Potas et al. 1989; Graycar & Nelson 1999). In turn, this means that it costs 12 or 13 times more per day to keep a juvenile in an institution than putting them on probation or under community service orders (both equally effective in terms of recidivism rates). It is also costs five to 10 times more to deal with juveniles through the courts than administering cautions (Potas et al. 1989, p. 2).

In relation to homelessness in Australia, the number of homeless young people and associated costs are cited in a range of literature.

The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) (AIHW 1999) provides a range of data, particularly in relation to the Supported Accommodation Assistance Program (SAAP). SAAP provides a range of services to people who are homeless or at imminent risk of becoming homeless. The enormous impact of youth homelessness is highlighted by the fact that, for both men and women, the greatest proportion of recipients of SAAP services is for 15-19 year olds (this includes only those who themselves are SAAP clients). In 1997-98, 15-19 year olds represented 20.7 per cent (or 19 376) of the total number of clients and 20.9 per cent (or 34 130) of the total number of support periods. In 1997-98, the total funding for SAAP services was $224 million (AIHW 1999).

Indigenous Australians are also identified as being particularly vulnerable to homelessness. This is stated to be a result of: displacement associated with European settlement and subsequent policies of segregation and assimilation; and with difficulties in accessing housing due to low incomes, discrimination and in some instances, lack of housing stock (AIHW 1999, p. 296). The over-representation of Indigenous people in SAAP services is highlighted by the fact that in 1997-98, Indigenous Australians received 13 per cent of support periods and yet only two per cent of the general population identified as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander in the 1996 census (AIHW 1999, p. 316).

Dixon (1993) has estimated the cost of homelessness in Australia to be $7 400 per year per person. This includes the cost of unemployment benefits and the associated loss of tax revenue, based on the assumption that homeless people are unemployed. While it is acknowledged that some people are homeless as a result of unemployment, addressing homelessness remains a viable strategy for increasing the employability of young homeless people. In addition, it is argued that homelessness has significant non-economic costs because of the loss of people's potential to contribute to communities and the broader community (Dixon 1993).

Again, within an Australian context, Pinkney and Ewing (1997) argue that the total cost attributable to homelessness in 1994 was $574 million. This includes $132 million in costs associated with ill health and involvement in the criminal justice system, and $442 million in foregone education and long-term unemployment. They argue that a national early intervention strategy would cost $100 million per year which would result in a net benefit of $474 million and would break even at a success rate of 21 per cent. Therefore, even if only one quarter of homeless students could be helped, the economic benefit would outweigh the cost (Pinkney & Ewing 1997, quoted in Chamberlain & MacKenzie 1998, p. 129).

Despite the availability of some information regarding costs, there is clearly a need for better costing and reporting on juvenile crime (Potas et al. 1989).

The prevention and early intervention programs cited in the literature relate to a range of issues including crime prevention, mental health, unemployment, homelessness and education. For the purposes of this report, the programs have been divided into four categories: crime prevention, school-based programs, unemployment and youth leadership. The following provides a summary both of programs that contain detailed cost-benefit analysis and of those that report information of a more general qualitative nature only (including those, such as the scouts, that do not address negative social indicators explicitly).

back to top

4.1 Crime prevention

Research indicates that community-based programs are both effective in reducing recidivism rates and are considerably less expensive than total confinement in traditional correctional services (Krisberg 1992, cited in Krisberg & Austin 1993). In addition, it is generally accepted that early entry in the criminal justice system is a significant factor in the creation of criminal careers and that attention should therefore be focused on prevention and early intervention approaches (Blagg 1992; Graycar & Nelson 1999).

While the authors were unable to obtain program information relating to prevention strategies specifically targeted at Indigenous people, there is significant evidence of over-representation of Indigenous young people in the criminal justice system and the need for programs that involve and/or are controlled by Indigenous communities (Blagg 1992; Crime Research Centre 1995; Aboriginal Justice Council 1998). It is recommended that further information be obtained in relation to Indigenous-specific programs.

Massachusetts Department of Youth Services

Krisberg and Austin (1993) report on the success of the Department of Youth Services' crime prevention strategy in Massachusetts, US. The strategy incorporates a range of community- based programs including group homes; forestry programs; day treatment programs; outreach and tracking programs; and foster care.

Under the program, the young offender is assigned to a case manager who develops a treatment plan based on clinical and educational evaluations as well as family history and the severity of the current offence. As a condition of release from a residential program, the case manager arranges participation by the offender in community services, such as drug and alcohol treatment or counseling.

The small size of the program has been identified as a critical success factor—no residential program houses more than 30 young people and supervision case loads are kept very small.

Two significant evaluations have occurred—the first by a Harvard Research Team, reported on in 1982, and the second by the National Council on Crime and Delinquency (NCCD), reported on in 1988. While the Harvard evaluation offers some insights, it is the NCCD evaluation that provides a more detailed analysis of the program outcomes.

The NCCD study tracked the criminal involvement of 819 young people for 36 months. The first indicator of recidivism used was the number of young people who continued to violate the law during the 12 months after returning to community living. It is noted that this is a very conservative measure of success or failure as it is based on the notion of 'absolute cure'/ abstention. Having said that, of all the young people, 51 per cent were re-arraigned within 12 months of their return to community living compared with a figure of 66 per cent of young people released from the old training schools. It is argued that this decrease in recidivism cannot be attributed to the department handling less serious offenders or that the police were less likely to arrest juvenile offenders.

Through comparisons with other states, albeit with methodological constraints, the recidivism rates were equivalent to, and in some cases lower than, youth recidivism rates in other states. In another comparison the recidivism rate, after being statistically re-weighted, was 62 per cent compared to 70 per cent for the Californian Youth Authority data. From a 12-month follow-up study, it was found that for both those admitted for a violent crime and chronic offenders, the number of arraignments dropped by half after involvement in the community-based program. In addition, the young people showed a tendency to commit less serious crimes. This is highlighted by the fact that while 60 per cent of pre community-based program charges were for violent crimes, in successive follow-up periods only one third of their offences were crimes against people. Based on statistical analysis, it was argued that the decline in offending could be attributed in part, but not wholly to a 'regression to the mean' (based on the notion that a predictable slowdown occurs immediately after the frequent and serious offence episode) and through maturation (offenders engage in less crime as they grow older).

Of the 810 youth committed annually to the Department of Youth Services, approximately 15 per cent are initially placed in a locked treatment program. Generally, offenders are transferred to less secure residential or non-residential programs after a very short time (that is, four weeks), compared to traditional juvenile corrections programs that result in longer placements in secure confinement and often re-incarceration following parole violations.

A variety of states in the US report spending US$100-125 per day to hold a young people in a traditional training school (Allen-Hagen 1991, cited in Krisberg & Austin 1993). Massachusetts offers a range of community-based programs for young offenders, including secure treatment programs at US$170 per day; staff-secure placements at US$127 per day; community-based group care averaging $95 per day; day treatment programs at US$50 per day and non-residential outreach and tracking services costing US$23 per day. The increase in cost of secure units is because of the small size of the programs and extensive investment in educational and clinical services. The average annual cost per young person for the community-based programs is US$23 000 compared to US$35 000-45 000 per young person per year spent by many states. As well, it is estimated that to incarcerate young people in a training school in Massachusetts would cost an additional $16.8 million in operating funds. This estimate assumes that all committed young people were placed in a secure program for 360 days (which was typical of many states in 1988) and that the state would have to triple its number of secure beds.

Job Corps

The evidence that job training is successful in reducing recidivism and in generating other social benefits comes primarily from the US-based Job Corps program (Potas et al. 1990). Job Corps provides a comprehensive set of skills and services to disadvantaged unemployed young people, and includes vocational, education and health care with a 6-12 month residential placement (Long, Mallar & Thornton 1981, cited in Potas et al. 1990).

A cost-benefit analysis has been completed which details budgetary (governmental) impacts and other social impacts. Based on this analysis, the cost per entrant in 1997 dollars is said to be US$5 070, with the net value per entrant at US$2 271. This equates to a benefit-cost ratio of 1:45—that is, for every $1 invested in the Job Corps program there is a return of $1.45.As the analysis did not include a number of benefits that were hard to quantify, it is further argued that this is likely to be an underestimate (Long, Mallar & Thornton 1981, cited in Potas et al. 1990).

Benefits reported include:

There are a number of similar programs in Australia æ for example Special Youth Employment Training Program, Education Program for Unemployed Youth, the Wage Pause Program, the Good Neighbour Program (Victoria) and the Community Employment Program. However, there is no systematic evaluation of these programs.

Croydon Good Neighbourhood Program

Vernon and McKillop (1989) report on this Victorian State Government initiative where money was made available for projects that aimed to both assist the identified offenders, but also had a broader prevention focus.

A total of 15 councils across the Victoria were each given a $10 000 seeding grant to initiate a Good Neighbourhood Committee. In addition, up to $40 000 could be accessed via submission and a further $20 000 obtained on the basis of the government matching money raised by the community, dollar-for-dollar. Croydon was one of the first to take up the invitation and received $10 000 seeding money and an additional $40 000 grant.

The Croydon Neighbourhood Committee of 20 people included academics, professionals, retired people, youth workers, police and students. The following initiatives were developed:

The cost for the various programs varies enormously and no quantitative evaluation has been completed. However, all programs have led to the development of extensive involvement with other parts of the community and an awareness of all participants of each other's activities. Examples of cooperation cited include:

While the literature cites the increased networks and partnerships that were formed as a result of involvement in the program, no quantitative evaluation was reported.

Family Ties Program

Bilchik (1995) reports on the Family Ties Program which originally began in New York in 1989 as an alternative to incarceration for young people aged 7 to 16. The program is underwritten by the City of New York with the state providing match funding on a three to one basis.

The program consists of intensive home-based services and an assessment of family, community and educational needs of the young person. The program aims to modify individual behaviour, but it also works to strengthen families as a key aspect of crime prevention.

Approximately nine out of 10 juveniles who participated in the program during 1991 and 1992 remained uninvolved with the juvenile justice system six months later with no significant difference in the results of a follow up after 12 months. Findings indicate that for every $1 spent on the program there was a $7 saving to the public by averting juvenile placements in detention centers. This has been equated to a total saving of over $335 388 during a six-week period, based on an average of 32 participants per group (Bilchik, 1995). The literature did not provide information about whether the program had been repeated and if so, with what effect. Therefore, it is not possible to extrapolate the savings over a 12-month period.

Pathways to Prevention—developmental and early intervention approaches to crime in Australia

The Pathways to Prevention report is the result of research undertaken by the Developmental Crime Prevention Consortium in 1997 that included:

A number of the programs have been evaluated and refer to a range of outcomes related to building stronger communities. Time did not permit the authors to obtain detailed information on the programs but several may be worth following up, specifically:

back to top

4.2 School-based programs

The link between education and a range of social outcomes has been explored in a range of literature, both from the point of view of the impact of school on the wellbeing of young people and the impact of the wellbeing of young people on their school performance (Bright 1997; Graham & Bowling 1995; Texas State Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation 1990).

Referring to the 'school effect' where students of the same ability achieve different academic grades in different school settings, Bright (1997) argues that the school itself has a considerable impact on young people. This is reinforced by Potas et al. (1989) who state that 'instructionally effective' schools are also effective in reducing the potential for individuals to engage in delinquency. In addition, the impact of truancy, bullying, school exclusion and underachievement have been linked to social indicators such as levels of offending. For example, a study found that truants are three times more likely to offend than those who had not truanted. It also found that excluded children are much more likely to admit to offending and other anti-social behaviour (Graham & Bowling 1995, cited in Bright 1997). Equally, a student's school performance will be adversely affected by substance abuse or mental health problems (the Texas State Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation 1990).

It is no surprise, therefore, that schools have increasingly become the focus of prevention and early intervention programs in areas like mental health, school exclusion, truancy, bullying, under-achievement and parent involvement.

Student Assistance Program

The 1990 Texas State Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation report highlighted the Student Assistance Program which includes a comprehensive range of services provided in a school setting to students at high risk of emotional disturbance. Service delivery options are either coordinated and/or provided by staff within the school, by professional external agencies, or a combination of both. In the combination model, services have a broader base which incorporates campus-wide programs such as healthy living, parenting skills and student leadership. It is noted that communication and networking are facilitated in such an approach.

While the literature did not provide details of program costs or quantitative evaluative details, a number of findings are worth noting. For example, in New Jersey a sample of approximately 10 per cent of the 2 000 student participants indicated that absenteeism has decreased significantly. In Phoenix, 61 per cent of surveyed participants reported either a decrease or cessation of chemical abuse and the majority reported gains in areas such as coping with problems, expressing feelings of self-worth, peer relations and family relations. In Oregon, there was a decrease in alcohol and other drug-related violations æ from 27 in 1986-87 to 12 in 1987-88 (Texas State Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation, 1990).

The Youth Support Coordinator Initiative

The Youth Support Coordinator Initiative was recently implemented by the Queensland Department of Families, Youth and Community Care as an early intervention response to student homelessness and early school leaving. The initiative aims to:

A budget of $1.9 million was allocated over three years, which enabled thirteen community organisations to employ Youth Support Coordinators. All projects were targeted at areas with a high incidence of youth homelessness and school suspensions and exclusions, across metropolitan and regional areas with one program set up to specifically target Aboriginal young people.

Kippax (1999) reports that there were an estimated 350 homeless students in any one week in the 35 target schools, with between 3 250 and 4 600 students at risk of homelessness at any one time (1 300 to 1 950 of which were considered seriously at risk). In addition, there were likely to be between 200 and 800 under-age school leavers and an estimated 2 000 aged between 12 and 14 who are at risk of leaving school early.

An evaluation has been completed which included:

Results indicate that the program has been highly effective with interview and principal survey results indicating a 78 per cent and 65 per cent success rate respectively in terms of assisting young people who are at risk of early school leaving. In addition, interview responses and principal surveys indicated an 82 per cent and 55 per cent success rate respectively in relation to assisting young people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. Unfortunately, the full evaluation report was not available, so few if any conclusions can be drawn from this information. However, taken at face value these results are impressive and it would be worthwhile obtaining further details in further research.

As well as providing direct assistance to individuals and their families, it also works at a whole-of-schools' and community development level. This is evidenced through the community networks and links formed including local businesses becoming involved in employment and vocational options and through the provision of materials; and school staff, students and families building up their own relationships with community agencies.

Critical success factors identified include:

It is also worth noting that there has been considerable work undertaken in relation to youth homelessness within Australia, but unfortunately program details and evaluations were not able to be obtained.

A significant initiative that is worth highlighting is the Prime Ministerial Youth Homelessness Task Force that was established in 1996. In all 26 pilot programs which targeted homeless young people and people at risk of homelessness and their families were conducted across all states and territories and in both metropolitan and rural areas.

A comprehensive evaluation was completed including:

The specific cost-benefits of these programs were not available at the time of writing.

Peer group activities

Very little information was available in relation to this initiative and the source reference was unable to be obtained. However, it has been included on the basis that it is cost neutral and appears to have impacted significantly on the rate of vandalism.

A comprehensive school in Tyneside, UK, allocated existing Local Management of Schools' school improvement funds (£200 000) to a committee of students who were responsible for managing planning improvements in the school. During the three years following the introduction of the scheme, school vandalism reduced by 75 per cent. (The Observer 9 February 1992, cited in Bright 1997).

Dalston youth project

Reported on in Bright (1997), this is an education and mentoring project in Hackney, London for 15 to 18 year olds who are offenders, have been excluded from school or are persistent truants. The program includes:

Arrest rates for the 25 young people involved in the project reduced from between 50 and 70 per cent and 16 young people re-enrolled in college or training course. While details could not be obtained in relation to the cost-benefit analysis, Webb (1996, cited in Bright 1997) states that the estimated number of crimes prevented amounted to a greater value than the cost of the project.

back to top

4.3 Unemployment

While unemployment programs are obviously an area of great significance, only two community-based programs with any kind of evaluation were identified.

Work Force Youth Unemployment Prevention program

This program, which is based in Massachusetts and operated by the Cambridge Housing Authority and a non-for-profit corporation called Pathways Institute, has been reported on in Lassen (1995).

The program includes:

Parent involvement is cited as an important element of the program, taking on the roles of part- time coordinators of the homework centres and chaperones on college tours and field trips.

The program relies on the collaboration of a number of government and non-government agencies to deliver the services offered, including the local school; the Department of Human Services; outdoor adventure clubs; private foundations; juvenile probation; youth workers; and public and private ventures.

The total funding for 1994 was $383 252 which serves 100-125 young people per year. Evaluations indicate that:

Constraints and challenges to the program included:

Durham North Carolina (NC)—guidance and employment

This was a community-based preventative program in 1993, which targeted 260 African- American young men (Ringwalt et al. 1996). It combined the provision of mentoring with a six-week summer employment experience and a three-month entrepreneurial experience and was evaluated by the participants. A subsidiary element to the program was that community violence was a factor in unemployment facing these young men. The program was intended to assess risk and to promote protective factors in the actions of the participants. Findings showed that the young men were both the perpetrators of and the victims of violence. Conflict resolution and anger management were indicated as aspects for developing protective factors in work with young men in this situation.

As a whole, the project findings identified three key factors in the success of guidance and employment training. These factors are:

back to top

4.4 Youth leadership

Young people are frequently characterised in professional and research literature as the recipients of programs or services that are led by adults. However, this may be a consequence of a needs or risks' focus as opposed to one that emphasises the development of leadership and resilience of young people themselves (Morrison et al. 1997b). For example, one survey found that young people themselves are often engaged in defining their own solutions to improve their own communities even when these efforts may not have a formal outlet (Starr 1998). The following examples represent two different approaches to the development of youth leadership in community building and show that when given appropriate support and facilitation young people have enormous potential to play a central role in strengthening communities.

The scout movement: service and leadership

In recent years, the scout movement has received a number of criticisms in youth studies, from a variety of directions. Because of its origins in Edwardian England and subsequent history, the movement has been seen as promoting a particular view of people and society that is exclusionary because it is derived from white, male, middle-class and able-bodied norms (for example æ Salzman 1992; Stevens 1995; Pryke 1998).

The modern scout movement has responded to such perceptions through the development of a series of initiatives that seek to promote relevant leadership skills among young participants and, at the same time, to support parents and other adults in the community that are associated with the young people. A series of 'parent's guides' published by the Scout Association address issues such as drug misuse, youth suicide, child abuse, youth sexuality, employment concerns and so on (Scout Association of Australia 1993-1999). The movement is also attempting to deal with issues of cultural and ethnic bias in its operations and publicity (Victoria Scout Association 1989).

However, the emphasis of the movement is less on youth problems and very much more focused on active work in the development of leadership and potential among young people as contributors to their communities (Scout Association of Australia, 1999). The movement promotes volunteering on the part of young people and also among the adults who provide the direction for local groups and who help to run associations at regional, national and international levels (Raskoff 1994). Raskoff also notes that although the scout movement is segregated on a gender basis, this may work to the advantage of young women and girls who are able to develop strong positive models of women's leadership that go beyond dominant stereotypes. Pryke (1998) also notes that the historical ethos of the scout movement includes a positive regard for the environment alongside individual autonomy within a strong sense of community.

No cost benefit information about the scout movement is available.

Young people as community builders

Finn and Checkoway (1998) report a pilot project studying six community-based youth programs in different parts of the US. These programs brought together young people as active participants in problem solving, program planning and providing services in their communities. The underlying principle in the sampling for this review was that the programs should involve young people as 'thoughtful, active citizens in a living democracy' and so as 'active participants in the process of personal, organizational, and community change' (p. 335). The six programs described in Finn and Checkoway's review were evaluated in terms of four factors (1998, p. 337):

Two hundred initiatives that matched these criteria were identified across the US. From these they selected six case studies æ The City, Minneapolis; Youth as Resources, Indianapolis; Youth Action Program, East Harlem [New York]; Latin American Youth Center, Washington DC; 21st Century Youth Leadership Network, Selma [Alabama]; Southwest Organizing Project, Albuquerque. The authors show that these projects exemplify ways in which the talents and commitment of young people themselves can be facilitated and supported to make a significant contribution to community building. Demonstrable outcomes included both positive and negative measures. The former are illustrated by young people exercising leadership in housing regeneration and community clean-up campaigns; outreach to seniors; skills development and employment projects; peace and cultural awareness projects; environmental action; community arts; and active campaigns on a variety of community issues. Each program has its own blend of specific action projects, in which the young people are actively involved to define their own community's goals. Negative outcome measures include declining truancy and school drop outs; reduced crime and vandalism; less community violence; and reductions of expressed discrimination and of negative perceptions of their communities.

Finally, in the longer running programs, former participants have provided mentoring and support for the succeeding generation, benefiting the community through the development of capacity, leadership, knowledge and skills, as well as providing gains for both the young person and the mentor in personal development. Using older teenagers as mentors for younger adolescents has been shown in other programs to benefit both for the younger person and also the older teenager (or young adult) in recognising and valuing their own leadership potential (Hamann 1999).

No costing information is provided in this review, but the demonstrable benefits of these programs are clearly shown.

back to top

4.5 Young people—conclusions

There is overwhelming evidence that for many community-based programs directed at the early prevention of social disadvantage through unemployment or homelessness and/or anti-social behaviours in young people, economic and social benefits are delivered way in excess of the costs of the programs. There are several key factors that contribute to effective programs.

First, it is important that programs address the whole-of-community.' Society-wide social and economic forces which impact upon young people make it difficult for some of them to avoid the risk factors which lead to unemployment or homelessness or to destructive or anti-social behaviours. Whole-of-person and whole-of-community approaches that coordinate appropriate service delivery are more likely to address these society-wide factors through building resilience and protective barriers.

Second, the school environment appears to be important. Instructionally-effective schools appear to be effective in also reducing young people's destructive and anti-social behaviours, as well as increasing their chances of achieving the educational and social skills necessary to enter employment and to avoid marginalisation. In terms of the school environment, communication and effectiveness is facilitated through a coordinated approach that involves both school staff and professional external agencies. However, effectiveness is also facilitated when the level of community involvement is high, such that there are effective partnerships between the school and members of the local community — business people, churches, sporting and social organisations, and so on, together with a capacity for working with families. A management structure outside the school's management system assists in achieving these factors. As in programs directed at children, active parent involvement is a key factor for success in programs directed at youth. For Indigenous young people, the active involvement in and control of programs by Indigenous communities is also a key factor in effectiveness.

In the area of crime prevention, early intervention is crucial in minimising future involvement as an offender in the criminal justice system. The more that young people become involved in the criminal justice system, the more likely it is that they will continue to offend. The cost of both the prosecution of crime and incarceration are enormous, and far in excess of the cost of effective prevention and early intervention programs. Small-size programs (with small case loads) appear to be more effective than larger-scale programs, and programs which include job training appear to reduce recidivism, as well as reducing substance abuse and other destructive behaviour. Such programs also tend to engender a preference for work over welfare.

Finally, the practice of mentoring appears to play a crucial role in many of the programs that have been identified. Through mentoring, young people, either individually or in groups, often develop their potential for community participation and leadership because of the encouragement, guidance and support they experience. Mentors may be only just a little older than the young person receiving the mentoring or they may be seniors. (Chapter 5 addresses intergenerational issues and develops this theme.) What is important is that partnerships and networks operate in this way to share ideas, skills and to stimulate and strengthen community capacity in all age groups.

Table 3: Summary of youth programs reviewed
Program/ Project Title Program/ Project Description1 Target Community/ Group2 Funding sources Project Costs3 Outcomes4 Evaluation5 Contact Details

Massachusetts Department of Youth Services

An ongoing program resulting out of juvenile corrections reforms in Massachusetts, USA in the 1970s that resulted in the traditional training schools being shut down and replaced by a range of community-based programs. The program has been extended to other areas in the USA.

7-17 year olds

Average of US$23 000 per young person, per year.

Social indicators: reduced crime.

Two quantitative evaluations reported.

N/A

Job Corps

A USA job training program that aims to reduce recidivism.

Unemployed youth selected from an at risk population with regards to juvenile delinquency.

Not known from the literature cited.

Social indicators: reduced welfare dependency, reduced crime, reduced alcohol/ drug use.

Quantitative, cost benefit ratio of 1.45 that is, for every $1 invested, there is a return of $1.45.

N/A

Croydon Good neighbour-hood Program

An initiative of the Victorian State Government, Australia. The program aims to assist individual offenders and to help prevent young people from getting into a position where they might offend.

Youth.

A mix of state government and community funding. The state government provides $10 000 seeding funds, up to $40 000 program funds and an additional $20 000 that can be accessed on a dollar for dollar basis with money raised by the community.

Stronger communities' indicators: knowledge and skills, networks and partnerships in communities, local solutions to local problems.

Specific evaluations not referred to in the literature.

N/A

Family Ties program

A crime prevention program based in New York, USA that began as a pilot in Brooklyn in 1989 and was expanded to the Bronx and Manhattan in 1991. The program provides an alternative to incarceration for youth.

7-16 year olds.

Not known from the literature cited.

Social indicators: reduced crime.

Quantitative evaluation indicates that for every $1 spent on the program, $7 savings to the public by averting juvenile placements in detention centres.

Blanca Martinez, Director, Nuestro Centro, 1735 Ewing Street, Dallas, TX 75226 (214) 948-8336.

Student Assistance program

A US-based program run in various states that aims to improve mental health services for children, remove obstacles to children's learning and improve the quality of students'lives.

Elementary and secondary school students.

Not known from the literature cited.

Social indicators: decreased absenteeism; decreased substance use; gains in peer relations and family relations.

Quantitative.

N/A

The Youth Support Coordinator Initiative

An early intervention response to student homelessness and early school leaving implemented in schools in Queensland, Australia.

Students in Queensland schools located in urban and regional areas with high incidence of youth homelessness and school suspensions and exclusions.

$1.9 million over three years which enabled 13 community organisations to employ a Youth Support Coordinator.

Stronger communities' indicators: networks and partnerships in communities.

Quantitative and qualitative.

Rod Kippax, Office of Youth Affairs, Qld. Department of Families, Youth and Community Care.

Peer group activities

Based in Tyneside, UK. It is difficult to know what all the stated aims of the program are due to lack of information. However, reduced vandalism and crime are mentioned.

Comprehensive school.

Allocation of existing funds which are managed by students (£200 000).

Social indicators: reduced vandalism.

Quantitative.

N/A

Dalston youth project

An education and mentoring project in Hackney, London.

15 to 18 year olds.

Not known from the literature cited.

Social indicators: reduced crime; increased enrollments in college or training courses.

Quantitative.

N/A

Work Force Youth Unemployment Prevention program

Commenced in 1984 in Massachusetts, US.

Youth—primarily 13 to 16 year olds comprising African Americans (40%), Hispanic (18%), other ethnic groups (16%) and white (16%).

Approximately 63 per cent of funding is received from federal, state and local government and a third from corporate foundation grants. The total funding for 1994 was US$383 252 which serves 100 to 125 young people per year.

Social indicators: reduced unemployment.

Stronger communities indicators: networks and partnerships.

A quantitative evaluation was completed in 1988.

N/A

Durham NC—youth guidance and employment

Community-based prevention program, combining mentoring, employment and entrepreneurial training. Durham NC, US.

African-American young men, aged 16to 21.

Not known from the literature cited.

Social indicators: reduced crime; reduced welfare dependency; reduced unemployment.

Stronger communities' indicators: knowledge and skills; local solutions to local problems; community capacity to use best practice.

Qualitative in literature cited.

N/A

Scout movement

An international network of youth organisations, intended to promote personal development.

Youthæprimarily aged 10 to 20.

Not known from literature cited.

Social indicators: increased social capital.

Stronger communities' indicators: knowledge and skills including volunteering; networks and partnerships in communities; leadership in communities.

Qualitative in literature cited.

Scout Association of Australia, Canberra ACT.

Young people as community builders

Review of 200 programs in the US, with six described in detail. Most programs involve partnership between community, business, government and young people.

Youth, aged 10 to 21 (some local variation according to program)

Not known from literature cited.

All social indicators and stronger communities' indicators were evidenced in this review (exact distribution varies according to specific program).

Qualitative in literature cited.

Prof. Barry Checkoway, School of Social Work, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

1. Description of project aima and location. Pilot, one-off, or on-going. Project length.

2. By geographic location/region and/or community of interest.

3. Name of funding program/s or funding sources, total project costs (direct and indirect).

4. General effectiveness/outcomes as well as social indicators and stronger communities indicators.

5. Quantitative and/or qualitative evaluation. Availability of cost-benefit data

Return to top

5. Seniors and intergenerational programs

3. Early childhood and families