TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluating youth justice in the UK.

AU - Paylor, Ian

AU - Simmill-Binning, Cheryl

N1 - 50% contribution RAE_import_type : Journal article RAE_uoa_type : Social Work and Social Policy & Administration

PY - 2004/9

Y1 - 2004/9

N2 - In the UK, following the Crime and Disorder Act of 1998, the Youth Justice Board (YJB) funded over 450 separate crime prevention schemes. The YJB in approving these various schemes stressed the importance of monitoring and evaluation. Local evaluators were appointed whose role was to report back to the funding agency and the national evaluators. We were commissioned to undertake the local evaluation of four separate schemes. This article attempts an overview of the evaluation process and identifies five crucial areas that raise questions about whether the Youth Offending Teams are the ‘unqualified success’ and such a fine example of ‘joined-up government’ that the Youth Justice Board claims (YJB, 2001). In this article, we examine the setting up process (and offer a case study of one particular scheme), issues of inter-agency work and the links between schemes and local communities; procedures and protocols and on what evidence policy was being based; the relationship between the national and local evaluators (and other stakeholders); and finally, the feasibility of achieving the scheme’s ambitions given the duration of the funding and the resources available.

AB - In the UK, following the Crime and Disorder Act of 1998, the Youth Justice Board (YJB) funded over 450 separate crime prevention schemes. The YJB in approving these various schemes stressed the importance of monitoring and evaluation. Local evaluators were appointed whose role was to report back to the funding agency and the national evaluators. We were commissioned to undertake the local evaluation of four separate schemes. This article attempts an overview of the evaluation process and identifies five crucial areas that raise questions about whether the Youth Offending Teams are the ‘unqualified success’ and such a fine example of ‘joined-up government’ that the Youth Justice Board claims (YJB, 2001). In this article, we examine the setting up process (and offer a case study of one particular scheme), issues of inter-agency work and the links between schemes and local communities; procedures and protocols and on what evidence policy was being based; the relationship between the national and local evaluators (and other stakeholders); and finally, the feasibility of achieving the scheme’s ambitions given the duration of the funding and the resources available.

U2 - 10.1177/109821400402500305

DO - 10.1177/109821400402500305

M3 - Journal article

VL - 25

SP - 335

EP - 349

JO - American Journal of Evaluation

JF - American Journal of Evaluation

SN - 1557-0878

IS - 3

ER -