de St Croix, Tania and Doherty, Louise
(2024).
Rethinking Impact, Evaluation and Accountability in Youth Work, 2018-2021.
[Data Collection]. Colchester, Essex:
UK Data Service.
10.5255/UKDA-SN-855316
This research investigated the policy and practice of evaluation and accountability in youth work. It collaborated with young people, youth workers, managers, funders and policy makers/influencers, to understand the effects of impact measurement, and develop approaches to evaluation that are congruent with youth work practice.
This three-year research project involved 143 participants in 87 qualitative interviews and focus groups, including flexible and creative approaches to interviewing (e.g. photovoice, peer interviewing, music elicitation). The researchers also engaged in extensive participant observation in eight open youth work settings around England (youth clubs, detached / street-based youth work, and youth work aimed at specific groups e.g. trans young people, girls, boys). The study aims to find out how the youth impact agenda is implemented in practice, and how impact processes are experienced and perceived by young people and youth workers. Interviews include the perspectives of policy makers and influencers in the UK and USA, to explore how and why 'youth impact' has become so important at this time.
Data description (abstract)
The data collection included 87 qualitative interviews / focus groups (semi-structured and/or flexible / conversational / creative) with 143 people: 58 young people who engage in youth work, 59 youth workers and managers, and 26 policy makers, influencers and informants. The data focuses primarily on the value of youth work and its evaluation. The young people, youth workers and managers were from eight open youth work settings around England, selected to represent the diversity of open youth work (youth clubs in purpose built centres and shared spaces; detached / street based youth work; and open youth work with specific groups: trans young people, girls, and boys). The policy makers, influencers and informants were mostly from England. One was from Scotland and five from the USA; these perspectives were sought for comparative and international learning purposes.
In addition, the researchers engaged in 73 sessions of participant observation. 63 of these were in the eight youth work settings mentioned above. The remaining ten were policy-related events.
The fieldnotes and a small number of interview / focus group transcripts are not included in the shared dataset, either for ethical reasons (e.g. if it was not feasible to anonymise them or to redact sensitive data), or because participants opted out of data sharing.
Data creators: |
|
Sponsors: |
ESRC
|
Grant reference: |
ES/R004773/1
|
Topic classification: |
Social welfare policy and systems Education
|
Keywords: |
YOUTH WORK, EVALUATION, YOUTH CLUBS, POLICY MAKING
|
Project title: |
Re-thinking impact, evaluation and accountability in youth work
|
Grant holders: |
Tania De St Croix
|
Project dates: |
From | To |
---|
1 April 2018 | 6 December 2021 |
|
Date published: |
21 Dec 2021 16:58
|
Last modified: |
22 Apr 2024 12:50
|
Collection period: |
Date from: | Date to: |
---|
1 June 2018 | 14 September 2021 |
|
Geographical area: |
England |
Country: |
England, United Kingdom, United States |
Data collection method: |
The study took a qualitative approach based on 87 interviews and focus groups with 143 young people, youth workers and policy influencers in England (16 of whom took part in two or more interviews or focus groups), alongside 73 sessions of participant observation.
The research took place in four phases. Phase 1 involved interviews with 13 policy makers and influencers and participant observation in 10 policy-related events in 2018.
Phase 2 took place in eight open youth work settings, purposively selected to encompass a diversity of youth work approaches, locations, and organisation types. This involved an average of four visits to each of eight youth work settings in the first half of 2019, and included participating in youth work sessions, debriefs and team meetings, alongside interviews with managers and administrators, and focus groups with youth workers and young people. This phase included 14 interviews and 14 focus groups with 87 participants.
Phase three took place from December 2019 to October 2020, focusing in depth on two of the Phase 2 organisations. This enabled us to build a deeper contextualised understanding of evaluation and monitoring in these contrasting settings over time. Our longer engagement in these settings enabled greater trust, fluidity, collaboration and creativity. Data collection included a recorded tour of a youth club; sharing and discussion of photographs and songs; and a ‘paper chatterbox’ with questions selected by young people. This research phase was impacted by the Covid 19 pandemic and some participant observation, interviews and focus groups took place online. This phase included 28 interviews / focus groups with 40 participants.
Phase 4 involved 15 online semi-structured interviews with ten policy makers and influencers from the England context, and five expert informants from the USA context. |
Observation unit: |
Individual, Organization |
Kind of data: |
Text |
Type of data: |
Qualitative and mixed methods data |
Resource language: |
English |
|
Data sourcing, processing and preparation: |
The fieldnotes and a small number of interview / focus group transcripts are not included in the shared dataset, either because it was not feasible to anonymise them, or because participants opted out of data sharing. Some of the policy maker, influencer and informant data in Phases 1 and 4 is not anonymised, as some of these participants opted to speak on the record in their own names. Some of this data has been partially anonymised (name redacted, organisation named). The young people, youth worker and manager data from the eight youth organisations is all anonymised - names of individuals and organisations have been changed and only approximate locations are provided. In the methodology and overview document we have included an ethics section to emphasise that re-use of data should take into account that these interviews and focus groups are semi-structured and often conversational in nature. Users should ensure they are using the data ethically - e.g. avoiding taking quotations out of context. Users who recognise or guess an anonymised participant's identity should maintain confidentiality and ensure they do not contact that participant or give away the participant's identity, including by implication. (This is unlikely but is possible e.g. with some of the policy informants, who may be guessed through context, or if someone from one of the participating organisations guesses the identity of someone else from that organisation).
|
Rights owners: |
|
Contact: |
|
Notes on access: |
The Data Collection is available for download to users registered with the UK Data Service.
|
Publisher: |
UK Data Service
|
Last modified: |
22 Apr 2024 12:50
|
|
Available Files
Data
Documentation
Read me
Edit item (login required)
|
Edit Item |