Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 8:12 pm
Time: 8:12 pm
Results for at-risk juveniles
2 results foundAuthor: The Nucleus Group Title: Evaluation of the Ramp Mentoring Program: Final Report Summary: Ramp is a personal development and mentoring program specifically designed to meet the needs of high-risk young people aged 13 to 17 years in residential care in the Eastern Metropolitan Region (EMR) of Melbourne. It was established by Whitelion Inc and the Reach Foundation and funded as a pilot project by the Office for Children, Department of Human Services (DHS) from February 2005. In June 2007, DHS contracted the Nucleus Consulting Group to undertake an evaluation of Ramp. The main purpose of the evaluation was to identify and assess the effectiveness and efficiency of Ramp in regard to outcomes and impact and to determine whether the broader program objectives were being met. The evaluation was informed by quantitative and qualitative data from program management, young people participating in the program, Ramp staff, mentors, residential care staff and DHS protective workers. There were a number of limitations to the evaluation including the low response rates of residential care staff and DHS protective workers, which is in part a reflection of high staff turnover and caseloads. Obtaining interviews with young people participating in Ramp also proved challenging and reflected the complexity of working with this group. Ramp participants had high and complex needs - of the 64 young people who participated in some way with the Ramp program over 80% were or have been considered to be at high risk by DHS. Just under half were considered to be abusing alcohol, drugs or other substances, and over a third had Youth Justice involvement. Nearly one quarter of participants had been in care for six years or more. Ramp is unlike other mentoring programs in Victoria as it incorporates additional features - lead mentors to visit residential care units and engage young people, workshops, camps and other activities. These features provide an integrated approach and are essential strategies in conducting an effective program for young people in this target group. The evaluation also found that the Ramp model incorporated features of effective mentoring programs as shown in relevant research. The Ramp strategies have the added benefit of providing young people with a range of positive role models as well as multiple layers of support (from other young people, some of whom are outside the residential care system, Ramp staff, the Reach Crew, other adults, and mentors should they choose to be matched). Not all participants want a mentor, at least not initially, and Ramp provides a way for these young people to also participate and achieve some positive change as well. Ramp is more expensive than some other mentoring programs due to the inclusion of lead mentors and workshops, a camp and associated activities in the service model. However, it is these elements that facilitate the engagement of high-risk young people and that contribute to sustained, beneficial mentoring relationships. Communication between Ramp and DHS protective workers was found to be poor and action is recommended to remedy this situation. Relationships between Ramp and residential care staff were variable due often to high turnover of staff. Where there was a positive relationship, residential care staff worked in a highly complementary way with Ramp, promoting the program to residents and supporting achievements. Good communication between all parties is essential for working effectively with young people. Ramp activities were generally well attended with most of those interviewed believing they were fun and provided a safe and inclusive environment where they could meet new people and make friends. The evaluation demonstrated that Ramp provided a diverse range of activities for young people, particularly those with mentors. Comments from young people participating in Ramp indicated that Ramp provided a stimulating and inspiring experience. A number of factors have been identified that encouraged engagement with Ramp. Matches are carefully considered and given time to develop, including an initial trial and ongoing assessment to ensure both parties are committed. Most matches continue for the mandated 12 months and many go even longer. Young people are mostly very positive about the relationship with their mentor. Mentors spend time with their mentee weekly or fortnightly in a wide range of activities, are very dedicated and work hard at their relationship. Based on length of relationship, observed and reported impact, and general satisfaction amongst both mentors and mentees, the great majority of Ramp matches were found to have been successful. Ramp exceeded targets established in its 2006/07 DHS Funding and Service Agreement. Ramp staff, mentors, residential care workers and the young people themselves all indicated that participants seemed to be more self-aware and had better self– esteem and confidence as a result of participation in the program. Comments from mentors and participants demonstrated that participants also had improved interpersonal and communication skills. Participants were better placed to take responsibility for and control their future than they were prior to entering the program. Many had new, more positive social connections and some were actively working towards more positive life goals. However, for many, given their complex backgrounds, these gains must be regarded as early (but significant) steps in a long journey. A number of the young people involved in Ramp reported to have achieved some important changes in their lives; most believed these changes were a result of participating in Ramp. The Ramp service model embodies a number of significant strengths and this evaluation has demonstrated many positive effects and substantial promise, including the possibility that it will produce long-term savings and benefits to the community through successful intervention in the lives of high risk, difficult to engage young people. In summary the Ramp model appears to have had a positive impact on most of the young people who engaged with the program. The unique elements of the program, such as the ‘lead mentors’, workshops and camps are deserving of further investigation by DHS in the development of mentoring service models. Details: Balwyn, VIC, AUS: The Nucleus Group, 2008. 60p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 27, 2013 at: http://www.whitelion.asn.au/files/Ramp_Final_Report.pdf Year: 2008 Country: Australia URL: http://www.whitelion.asn.au/files/Ramp_Final_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 127728 Keywords: At-Risk JuvenilesDelinquency PreventionJuvenile Offenders (Australia)Mentoring |
Author: Treskon, Louisa Title: What Works for Disconnected Young People: A Scan of the Evidence Summary: This paper was commissioned by the Youth Transition Funders Group in 2015. The purpose was to conduct a scan of the current state of the evidence regarding what works in helping disconnected young people, defined as the population of young people ages 16 to 24 who are not connected to work or school. To prepare the paper, MDRC conducted a literature review of relevant policies and programs. The literature reviewed included writing on impact, quasi-experimental, and implementation studies. MDRC also conducted reviews of numerous websites to learn about current policy trends and evaluations in process. To supplement what was learned from written materials, MDRC interviewed a number of practitioners in the field, including representatives from foundations, coalitions, and research organizations. The main findings of this scan are: -Policies affecting disconnected young people span a range of systems, including public schools; adult basic and secondary education; and the juvenile justice, foster care, and mental health systems. As a result services, funding, and research are often uncoordinated and fragmented, though collective impact or system-level approaches are attempting to combat these challenges. -Though program impacts may be modest or short-lived, successful programs share some common features. These include: opportunities for paid work and the use of financial incentives; strong links among education, training, and the job market; the use of youth development approaches; comprehensive support services; and support after programs end. -Programs share some common implementation challenges, including: outreach and enrollment practices that may limit the populations they serve; difficulties keeping young people engaged in a program long enough to benefit from it; staff turnover; and difficulties addressing young people's barriers to participation, particularly their lack of transportation and child care. -The field's understanding of what works in serving disconnected young people could advance significantly in the coming years, as more than a dozen evaluations of programs are currently under way, including evaluations of collective impact approaches. There are gaps in the existing services available: There are not enough programs for young people who are not motivated to reconnect to education or the job market on their own, nor for young people who have weak basic skills, especially those who have aged out of the public school system. The areas where there are gaps in services also tend to be areas where there is little evidence regarding what works. Details: New York: MDRC, 2016. 57p. Source: Internet Resource: MDRC Working Paper: Accessed February 25, 2016 at: http://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/What_works_for-disconnected_young_people_WP.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/What_works_for-disconnected_young_people_WP.pdf Shelf Number: 137973 Keywords: At-Risk JuvenilesAt-Risk YouthDelinquency PreventionDisadvantaged Youth |