ACADEMY PUBLIC POLICIES

What are child rights?

Participation as engagement at different levels and in different arenas

Participation takes place in a range of arenas and at different levels, from inclusion in individual decision making, such as in initial child protection conferences and reviews, to involvement in promoting organisational change at local, regional, national and international levels. The levels of participation involved in these arenas vary both in terms of power sharing between children and adults and with regard to the nature and context of the event. In both individual decision making and in organisational change the effectiveness of participation depends both upon the skills of the practitioners supporting them, and also on the culture and organisation of the officiating body. The two are, of course, interdependent.

 Participation as achieving different outcomes

Participation is also aimed at achieving different outcomes, from personal empowerment in individual decision making to organizational change. In these diverse situations, as Sinclair, Wilson and Gibbs (2004) point out, the frequency and nature of the participatory activity will vary widely, as will the children and young people involved. For example, effecting the participation of looked-after children in reviews over a number of years is a very different process from involving children in schools in youth forums, and the outcomes to be achieved will also be different. A positive outcome of children’s engagement in their reviews could be increased self confidence. The outcome of a child’s involvement in a school council could mean that the play space is altered. Unpicking the difference between these participatory transactions and the skills involved is important if we are to understand the dynamics of relationships and organisations that endeavour to promote children’s participation, and to explore what gets in the way.

We use the terms ‘childhood’ and ‘children’ in the way defined by the law - as the period and stage up to age 18, the age of majority. We most commonly talk about ‘children’s’ participation, within which young people are subsumed. However, we are cognisant that there is, as James and James (2004) point out, a danger of using terms such as ‘childhood’, ‘child’, ‘children’, and ‘youth’ as a collective, since each child/young person is unique and his experiences and conditions hugely various. Government legislation and guidance for working with children is written as if  these differences did not exist. They do, and they impact profoundly on practitioners’ skills and capacity to involve children in important decisions that affect them. Hopefully the content of these texts does address these issues and takes into account and reflects individuality. Of course, the question of where the boundary with adulthood should be drawn is a tricky one, particularly when considering children’s competence to take part in decision making. In determining their competence, three factors are key: age, ability and culture. For example, in considering whether or how to involve a child in a child protection conference, age is significant. On the face of it a 16-year-old may present her views clearly and be less disturbed by what she hears than would a 9-year-old because she is ‘more mature’. But this does not take into account her intellectual ability, emotional capacity, family support or background. Neither does it allow for consideration of other abilities, such as mobility or communication – not necessarily linked to age. Nor does it take into account the disadvantages engendered by cultural difference, such as language, gender and custom.

.Participation as taking part

Two of the dictates of social work today are working in partnership and promoting engagement in the process of change through direct work. Involving children in social work interventions is the basis of practice that is effective and empowering - of participatory practice. Indeed, children who have not taken part in the work or felt respected as individuals in their own right are unlikely to engage in the process of change at all. There are both process and outcome goals of empowerment. Braye and Preston-Shoot define empowerment as ‘the process of taking control of one’s own life’, of moving from a position of vulnerability or lacking power toward a position of enhanced power. Individual empowerment is thus about personal development where feelings of self worth, strategies for coping and the idea of choice is instilled. Those processes – and so the outcomes that depend uponthem – can only happen where the children take an active role in their social work.

To illustrate some of the ways in which children can be helped to take part in their social work I give an example of an intervention with young children. I have chosen to describe a group work activity with young children in order to demonstrate that:

• The age of the children does not preclude their capacity to take part or be empowered

• A variety of social work methods – in this case group work with puppets - can be employed to achieve engagement

• Engaging children in a social work intervention can have as its outcome behavioural change which is empowering.

The example here is of work with young children, aged from 4 to 10, taking part in a parenting programme devised by Webster Stratton (Webster Stratton and Hancock 1998). In this programme, group work is undertaken with young children with behavioural problems, alongside the groups where their parents are being taught parenting skills. Part of the task is to engage both groups in the group work process and to sustain that engagement in order to teach them new skills and strategies for managing their relationship and personal problems. For the children, the objectives are to teach them to   manage their feelings, to make friends and to learn social and problem solving skills.

Here a 7-year-old boy describes his learning from the puppet, Tiny Turtle, and the technique he learned to manage his anger: ‘Stop – go into your shell [Tiny Turtle, the puppet’s shell] and do three deep breaths…going along, feeling angry – then, stop, go into your shell and take three deep breaths – feels better when he comes out of his shell…I did that when they were being nasty to me at school. And, yea, I will use it at other times – when I’m an adult. When I get into my car instead of smashing windows you go and ask them to move the car, don’t you.’ (Bell and Fisher 2004)

His participation in the work of anger management resulted in an important learning process which should enable him to better manage destructive emotions in the present, with all the positive knock-on and longer-term effects that skill could have for him in terms of his capacity to participate in wider issues and in later life.  

Other studies, such as the evaluation of Sure Start by Williams and Churchill (2006) have also identified practices which encourage empowerment in young children, such as self help and mutual support. The effects on the confidence and learned skills of children, even young children, are clear from these studies, and the knock-on benefits in terms of the rights agenda will be explored in more detail later. However, the picture is not all rosy. There are a number of difficulties in seeking the views of children on personal matters. A recent review on the literature on children’s participation and focus group interviews conducted with children by Participation Works (Davey 2010) found that in the most personal decisions that affect them children’s views are often not sought. This study covers individual health care, private law proceedings, child protection investigations, the immigration and asylum-seeking process and school exclusion as being areas where children’s views are often not sought, and where, if they do appear, they often have little impact.

Turning to taking part in organisational change, participation has become a key target for organisations in both the voluntary and statutory sectors. Investing in Children (see Cairns and Brannen 2005) provides a good example of an organisation that has had some success in engaging children and young people from a range of backgrounds and in promoting their opportunities to contribute to political debate in County Durham. It is a multi-agency partnership, begun a decade ago, that has successfully completed a number of projects to improve public services. The ‘730+’ was one project run by children with diabetes who wanted to improve their treatment. They interviewed hospital staff, organised focus groups and produced a report which resulted in better facilities at the local hospital and greater understanding of their needs.

However, while some specific projects in this initiative achieved success, others, such as better access to community resources, did not impact upon the political agenda. Williamson (2003) conducted an evaluation of Investing in Children and concluded that many of the changes ‘require a change in attitudes or in mind sets’, and that the developments would be difficult to sustain over long periods of time. Sustaining the enthusiasm and commitment of young people in organisational change is a challenge, especially where the results are unclear to them. In Danso et al.’s study (2003), where children within the care system had been given the opportunity to express their views, they felt that they were not taken into account. Danso suggests there is ‘consultation fatigue’, and reports ‘What’s the point?’ responses from children when asked if they want to take part in yet another consultation exercise. A particular problem was that the deadlines for completing projects and tasks were too tight, resulting in disillusionment all round. Lightfoot and Sloper (2003) also found that disillusionment sets in quickly if the ideas of the young people are not implemented, or they feel that their ideas are fed back to adults rather than to them (a process common with children with disabilities) and they sense the process was tokenistic. Linked to this is that they needed evidence that any participatory processes they had been involved in had some positive outcomes. While anecdotal evidence is relatively easy to come by, rigorous evaluations were not often demonstrated. So, while taking part is an essential starting point for children’s participation, and the values, skills and commitment of adults to engagement are similar whatever the arena, openness, honesty and clear feedback about results and outcomes is necessary to ensure the children do not end up thinking their voices were sought but not heard, and that the process was tokenistic.

We ask for our Rights (Children's Rights to Education and Health) (Video)

Children’s Rights

Participation at different levels

 Levels of active engagement can helpfully be seen in terms of the degrees of power sharing between adults and children. The earliest conceptualization of these aspects of power was delineated by Arnstein in 1969. In describing planning processes in the United States, she constructed a ladder of participation which delineated three levels of power sharing, from degrees of tokenism to degrees of citizen power.

Level 1 - Manipulation and tokenism: On the lowest rungs were manipulation and tokenism – both non-participant, the aim being to cure or educate the participants. The response of young people in the UK to Anti-Social Behavior Orders (ASBOs) provides a good example of how a policy intended to gain young people’s engagement in change, to ‘cure’ their bad behavior, has been experienced as tokenistic, and has been unsuccessful in achieving either their co-operation or a change in their behavior.

Level 2 – Informing, consulting and placation: At the second level, informing, consulting and placation are seen as legitimate steps. Providing information, for example in relation to how an assessment will be carried out, is an essential beginning to engaging young people in the social work process from assessment to review.

And information and feedback about what has happened are key aspects of motivation and engagement. Children’s participation at all levels depends upon the information that is made available to them at the outset, as well as whether their views are taken into account as an outcome. Consultation is also a key part of gaining the views of children, for example about their wishes in cases of parental contact. However, those processes can also involve degrees of tokenism. If a child is consulted but her views not taken into account the process is tokenistic and can result in a loss of trust between the practitioner and the child. Placation, also, can be tokenistic – for example, where selected ‘worthies’ are voted onto committees, or where, in individual work, children are assured that ‘everything will be all right’, when this cannot be guaranteed.

Level 3 – Partnership to citizen control: Finally the last three rungs of Arnstein’s ladder comprise degrees of citizen power which include partnership. Partnership comprises a redistribution of power – from delegated power through to citizen control. The redistribution of power is central to the process. Participation without redistribution of power is an empty and frustrating process for the powerless. It allows the power holders to claim that all sides were considered but makes it possible for only some of these sides to benefit.

Arnstein did not, of course, have children and young people at the centre of her conceptualization of power sharing. As we have already indicated, there are particular issues relating to adults’ ability to share power with children, and vice versa, which have more recently become central to the consideration of children’s participation. However, despite the fact that other writers have subsequently modified or adapted Arnstein’s ladder to reflect a process rather than a hierarchical view, all models do contain essentially the same components and are applicable to children and young people.

In considering social workers working in partnership with families in child protection Thoburn reduced the levels of partnership to three: information provision, consultation and active participation. At this time, following the publication of The Challenge of Partnership in Child Protection which outlined 15 principles for working in partnership with children and families, research commonly focused on unpicking social work practice to analyze what, within the client–worker relationship, promoted the empowerment of clients. Bell analyzed the transactions between professionals and 83 families involved in initial child protection conferences; Marsh and Fisher explored the relationship between social workers and service users in Bradford. While the detail of the analysis focused on social work practice – for example, the need for explicit consent and the use of negotiated agreement between client and worker – the conclusions of Marsh and Fisher were broader based in turning the focus from social workers’ practice skills onto organizational issues, in particular culture.

Users can play a key role in informing the development of policy and practice…but that belief in the value of partnership contrasts with the low recognition of users’ views. Staff may resist change towards participation, openness and information because they ‘do this already’.

Interest in refining conceptualizations of participation and partnership continued. Hart’s  ‘ladder of participation’ also comprises eight rungs, each rung describing different aspects of power sharing from nonparticipation – manipulation and tokenism – to degrees of participation.

The bottom three rungs continue to comprise manipulation, decoration (for example, where children wear T-shirts promoting a cause), and tokenism, where children’s views are heard but not acted upon (for example in some court proceedings). The remaining five rungs all include some genuine participation, up to the top rung where children initiate processes and share decisions with adults. These are situations where ‘children initiate their own project’ and where ‘they should be allowed to direct and manage the project.

Hart’s ladder is thus very similar to Arnstein’s although the discourse – reflecting the increasing concerns about children’s rights and children’s disempowerment – involves children as well as adults. Again, the structure is hierarchical and based on power, although Hart differs somewhat in where he draws the line between non-participation and degrees of participation. On Hart’s ladder the lowest three rungs are all non-participant.

Following this, the validity of the hierarchical concept of the ladder or pyramid, with the objective of striving for the top rung, was further questioned. In New Zealand Treseder developed a circular model to demonstrate how children and young people can be involved to varying degrees in project decision making. This model recognizes that in certain areas, such as schools and councils, children’s involvement will never result in children and young people completely controlling the decision that is made although they have contributed to it.

Treseder’s circular model takes into account the wide range of activities in which children are participating and the context in which decisions are made. His definition continues to be used. Participation Works base their review of children’s participation in home, family and school on an adaptation of his definition: ‘Participation is a process where someone influences decisions about their lives and this leads to change.’

An interesting dimension here is the association of participation with the ‘successful’ outcomes of influence and change, since this implies that, if change does not happen the process has not been participatory. Certainly, as will become clear when we look at the research on children’s experiences, the relationship between process and outcome is not straightforward. Children can feel they have participated, as they do in some of the family group conferences even if the outcome is not what they hoped for. The outcome the child is endeavoring to achieve may be different from the outcome the parent or social worker is aiming toward. So, although the outcome in terms of the decision made will be determined differently in terms of ‘success’ by the actors involved, the process can be empowering for the children because they have felt included. It is now more generally accepted that different levels of involvement and different mechanisms will be appropriate for different tasks and will also depend upon the outcomes to be achieved. Shier adapts the ladder to enable practitioners to determine which of five levels of participation is best, from listening through to sharing power. He also advocates organizations to think in terms of ‘openings, opportunities and obligations’.

Williams further develops the process view by stressing that the process is not a hierarchy where the ‘aim’ is to reach the top of the ladder. Kirby’s model is also circular, nonhierarchical and process based  Certainly, this shift in the conceptualization of process, from Arnstein’s steps on the ladder to Treseder, Kirby and Williams’ notions of circularity, does allow us to see children’s participation in both individual decision making and in organizational issues as progressive and nuanced. While some engagements may be experienced by a child as tokenistic, others may be fruitful, depending upon a wide range of factors. For example, the Participation Works survey of organizations and participation workers suggests that the age of the children was critical to their engagement. Secondary-school-aged children were more likely to be involved in decision making than primary-school-aged children. For example, children at Park View secondary school in Tottenham elect their own year representatives to take their views to the youth forum where decisions about catering, safety in school and saving for charities is discussed. From a girl in Year 8: ‘I’d like to make the school a happier and safer place and make sure everyone has a say.’

From Children's Rights to Children's Realities (Video)

COUNCIL OF EUROPE - Building a Europe for and with children - Discover children's rights!

Participation in different arenas

Clearly, the outcomes to be achieved by children and young people’s participation vary according to the arena in which the participation is happening. Theoreticians differ in their definitions of arena. Sinclair and Franklin separate private (within the family or between individuals) and public (service) arenas, but make a further distinction between decisions relating to an individual, and those relating to a group.

Kirby delineate participation as taking place in three areas:

• Where individual decisions are being taken about children’s own lives

• Where services for or used by children are being delivered locally

• Where national policies are being developed or evaluated.

Wright reduces this to two by collapsing the latter two together into ‘collective involvement in matters that affect them’, be they local or national services or policies.

A further way of defining arenas has been suggested by Moss, who conceives public provisions as ‘children’s spaces’. Spaces can be social, such as relationships, cultural, such as values and rights, and discursive, such as dialogue or deliberation. One of the key points illustrated by the research studies, is the importance of the ‘social space’ of relationship in facilitating children’s participation in decision making. Time and again, and in a variety of situations, such as in assessments and in leaving care, it is the children’s

relationship with their social worker that enables them to engage and take part. At an organisational level also, for example in school councils, the culture and dialogue of the interaction also contribute to the child having a voice which is heard suggest that the concept of children’s spaces alters ways of thinking about the relationship between professional and service users, so that both groups contain expertise and knowledge while the professionals are the facilitators. As we know from serious case reviews the information children can provide to professionals can be essential to safe decision making. Again, the idea of process and inclusion is central to this conceptualization of arenas and relationships, while the acknowledgment that all stakeholders bring expertise highlights a positive feature: that child also hold power although it may be expressed and experienced as different from adults.

These concepts convey different emphases in thinking about the connections between context, process and arena. Whatever the discourse, there is agreement that the participatory activities in which children and young people are involved occupy different spaces – and range from service planning and service development to situations where children may be involved as subjects in their own right Participation as achieving different outcomes.

Turning to the outcomes to be achieved in these varied arenas, there is some common ground that relates to process. Children’s engagement in both individual decision-making arenas and in organizational change, for example, shares features such as taking part and being committed.

From another pupil at Park View School: ‘School is not just about what my school and teachers can do for me, it’s also about what I can do for my school.’ (Bell 2011)

The capacity to present views clearly and to be heard is also important to achieve change, irrespective of the arena or the purpose of the enterprise. However, there are also differences in the intended outcomes.

In the case of individual decision-making arenas the outcome to be achieved is a personal one, often involving key decisions about where the child can live, who he or she can have contact with…and so on. The family group and the child are the most affected by the decision. In the case of organizational change, on the other hand, the objectives are to bring about change outside of self, that is, with the organization or policy. The process of participation will therefore also include some different aspects, such as consulting others in the group and presenting views effectively to a number of audiences. This girl from Park View School, representing Year 9, puts this succinctly: ‘Even though this is a leadership role, I don’t want to be seen as a leader. I would like to be seen as a representative.’ (Bell 2011)

And in the arenas of local services and national policies the mechanisms, skills, tasks and opportunities for being involved also differ. The Who Cares? Trust, for example, has resources, contacts and experience of meeting with ministers at national level which are not available to local groups involved in community initiatives – and their purposes may differ.

Despite the different goals of the participatory practice and the arena in which it takes place, there is evidence that positive outcomes are achieved by children’s participation, both in personal and in organizational domains. Although children’s estimation of the services they receive varies, a consistent finding is that they do value involvement in decisions which concern them, and that they are therefore more likely to maintain engagement which underpins change. All social workers and social work programmes, with all ages of children and young people, should therefore provide evidence that they engage children and their careers in the change process. Positive involvement and engagement underpin participatory practice, irrespective of the arena in which it takes place.

In relation to personal empowerment, the benefits for children of participation at both individual and organizational levels include learning new skills, such as presentation and negotiation, as well as increased self confidence and a stronger sense of self worth. This can happen at an individual level, in meetings and reviews, for example, as well as at an organizational level, in forums, councils, etc. The research carried out by Participation Works (Davey 2010) showed that children developed confidence and public speaking skills as a result of being a member of a school councilor youth forum. They had opportunities ‘to negotiate and think through problems from different angles and to use their own initiative’. Mostly these decisions were around what food they wanted rather than deciding how school budgets should be spent.

There is evidence that enhanced self esteem and greater self confidence are built upon children’s experiences that their views are valued. Research studies demonstrate that, where children are engaged in the therapeutic social work process, the objectives, for example, to teach new skills and strategies, are achieved. In some cases practitioners work specifically with a child to teach them how to manage their anger, as described previously in the account of the Webster Stratton children’s groups earlier in this chapter. In others the development of new skills can result from the self worth experienced as a result of the positive relationship and care devoted by the practitioner who can become the child’s ‘secondary attachment’ describes the importance of the role practitioners can play as a secondary attachment figure in child protection investigations.

However, before outlining some specific outcomes of personal skill development as a result of participatory practice, a note of caution. From the child’s perspective an outcome could be that they feel better, have a positive attitude, feel respected, and so on. Difficult to measure! From the agency’s perspective a positive outcome could be that more children have attended reviews or child protection conferences whereas, in fact, representation by other means might have been the child`s preference and more effective.

In practice, the young person may have experienced their review as a waste of time and boring or the young person may find that the school policy on bullying does not reflect the views she carefully presented in the school council – the process therefore may feel tokenistic and not worth the time and effort. Similarly, the child’s contribution to a social work record could be monitored, but would not necessarily provide evidence that the child had felt included, nor would it portray the quality of that transaction, nor of its effect on future events. This could really only be rated by the child and by longitudinal research.

 Human Rights Watch - Children`s Rights

What Are Children`s Rights?

Children`s Rights

Positive outcomes: personal

Partnership and negotiation skills

Strategies learned in participatory practice provide excellent models of the transaction for the children involved. For example, in working toward partnership in the social work relationship, children are required to give their explicit consent to the involvement, where the contract of the engagement is negotiated and what it comprises. This can give a level of influence and an element of choice about the provision offered which can help young service users to understand their own wants and needs, as well as to learn and practise some of the processes of negotiating and prioritising. For example, a written contract, signed by the child, may include an agreement about times of meeting, what will be discussed and what it is hoped to achieve. Where social workers have worked toward such a contract, or helped children to include it in their records, it is far more likely that they will engage and co-operate. And these skills will stand them in good stead in future transactions, be they personal or business.

Feelings of self-worth and better behaviour Where young people have been engaged constructively in their social work or in consulting on policy issues, this also carries with it benefits which will further their capacity to participate in wider issues. Developing confidence and feelings of self-worth can enable them to deal with personal and family problems more constructively. Next texts will describe children’s experiences of child protection investigations. This quote from a 9-year-old boy illustrates how the gain in his self-confidence meant his behaviour substantially improved: ‘Since the ICPC things have got better because I’ve been going out and coming in at proper times and going to bed when I’m told. I’m fine now - my confidence has improved…speak better, sleep better…

at school, things are better because I used to fight nearly every day - but at this school I’m good.’ Such positive experiences can also empower children to become involved in issues outside the family, such as in community initiatives or school councils.

Voice and choice

Starkey introduces the notion of voice - that is, having a say in service provision - as a way of enabling young service users to be aware of choices, to exercise choice and to have the opportunity to voice dissatisfaction. This quote is from a 15-year-old girl who had been using drugs, and was talking about how her participation in a family group conference really helped her, as reported in next texts: ‘…I had the choice whether I wanted to go [to the drug scheme] or not and all the family around me decided whether it was a good idea and whether it was good for me. I think it was me that made the decisions really. So that’s good because I’ve never been able to do that before, I’ve just had social workers just making decisions for me, you know, without even consulting me, so that was really brilliant, because you get to decide yourself.’

It also provides a good example of what Lister conceptualises as ‘agency’ as it describes the process of acquiring the confidence to act in a purposeful, autonomous way, and to positively experience being taken seriously.

Identity and self-esteem

Having an awareness of agency contributes to identity and self-esteem and is, in turn, influenced by them. So, it is important that professional practices enable opportunities for the agency to be effected. Such processes provide important learning which can then be extended to the wider arena. Looked-after children who have good experience of assessments, conferences and reviews are well placed to transfer their learning to organisational issues.

The involvement of looked-after young people in the Who Cares? Trust can be seen as a product of their positive experience of and skills gained in a social work intervention. In 2009, the trust ran a project called Building Futures, where young people took part in an intensive three-day course to build confidence and prepare for the workplace before embarking on a fortnight’s placement. The overall aim of the project was to provide care leavers with work experience opportunities, which would enable them to gain valuable skills and experience to enhance their employment opportunities.

Better decisions

Participation can lead to more accurate, relevant decisions which are better informed and therefore more likely to be implemented. The importance of listening to what the child has to say in situations of child protection or domestic violence can not be over-stressed, as child abuse inquiries have many times brought home. And better decision making in agencies can also be a result of listening to children’s experiences of service delivery.

Positive outcomes: service delivery, policy and training Enhanced skills

In working toward organisational or policy change and in youth forums and councils, young people have developed skills of communication and presentation - verbally, in writing reports and in their use of technology. For example, in talking to a group of trainee social workers about her experience in care, Marie produced a brilliant PowerPoint presentation, some small group exercises for the trainees to work on and a role play exercise. Such experience and skills will stand her in good stead in an employment capacity.

Better services

At an organisational level, the benefits are that services become more responsive to the needs of children and young people, and more accessible and efficient as they are providing a more effective service. The study described in next texts illustrates a number of ways in which the local authority took on board the views of the children. For example,

the complaints procedure for young people was revised following consultation with a group of young people who had complained. As a result, the complaints officer was upgraded to the senior management group and a hotline to the assistant director was set up. This ensured that complaints were taken beyond the individual level and that the feedback was also given to the Area Child Protection Committee and to team managers. Clear time scales and the use of advocates from a voluntary agency ensured that the young person knew what had happened as a result of their complaints.

Contributions to other organisations, such as charities and research

The value of listening to the views of children has been demonstrated by the National Youth Agency, which maintains a database on participation. Their report (2008) says that 80 per cent of statutory and voluntary sector organisations currently involve young people in decision-making. Many children’s charities include an advisory group of young people.

And it is now considered good research practice to have a steering and/or consultation group led by or involving young people. An example of this is described later, where a young people’s group worked together with the researcher to identify what research questions about the Integrated Children’s System might engage the young service users as well as the most opportune environment for carrying out the research.

Input to resources and training

Young people, especially those who are looked after, are increasingly being involved in information distribution and advertising, and in training. Participation Works is a UK organisation set up to provide ‘online access to the world of children and young people’s participation’, including access to information and resources on, for example, rights and governance. Young people aged 16-19 are approved as trainers, and help to run workshops on Hear by Right (HBR), a tool designed to enable organisations to map and develop the extent of young people’s participation in their organisation.

Hear by Right comprises a set of standards for the active involvement of children and young people. The National Youth Agency (NYA) based the standards on the ‘Seven S’ framework, which forms a practical evidence-based model of how to achieve change in organisations and is thought to promote a shared dialogue between service providers and their users. The framework comprises:

• Shared values

• Strategies

• Structures

• Systems

• Staff

• Skills and knowledge

• Style of leadership.

The NYA have a brief to work with Children’s Trusts to embed Hear by Right, and many organisations, such as West Kent Housing and Cheshire Youth Groups, are using the tools created to improve their services. Young people are also involved in the delivery of training courses such as Ready Steady Change, a course introducing agencies to tools and materials to increase young people’s effective participation in decision making; and to the consultancy package, Building a Culture of Participation. Investing in Children, described earlier, also has a programme of staff development training which it delivers to partners and organisations. The training is delivered by two adults and two young people, its overall purpose being to create a greater understanding of the issues faced by children and young people in society. LILAC is an organisation, initiated by A National Voice (an organisation run by young people in care and care leavers), that recruits and trains young people in care to inspect local authority children’s services. The inspections are based on standards that the young people themselves have set, and the evaluation of pilot projects that they have carried out has demonstrated that they are able to open up and share truths with experienced inspectors (see www.fostering.net).

Influence on national and international policies

At national level, different groups of young people have taken on responsibility for influencing political decision-making and debate. The Children’s Rights Alliance, for example, seeks to promote the rights of children and young people and is proactive in encouraging young people to participate in their projects. The Alliance has appointed young people as full trustees on its Board of Management, and have recently taken part in England’s ‘Get ready for Geneva’ project, which campaigns for children’s rights in England to be respected and better protected. They are also involved in the international debate. Through the Geneva project, they form part of the United Nations’ reporting process for the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Also at an international level, the Who Cares? Trust is involved with the rights of young people in Zimbabwe.

Evaluating outcomes

However, although we can list a number of positive outcomes of children’s participation in organisational arenas, researchers do continue to evidence that, even when structures to promote participation have been put in place and models developed, there are continuing problems in evaluating outcomes. Wade (2003) suggest that there are two main questions organisations need to ask themselves: is there evidence that children and young people have been actively listened to, and is there evidence of change as a result?

There is evidence that local authorities do not formally evaluate the impact of their initiatives. Oldfield and Fowler found the limited use of monitoring and formal evaluation procedures in both the voluntary and statutory sectors. Franklin and Sloper also found that participation was fragile and often rested on a few individuals within an organisation. Where key staff had a wider remit this aspect was not always prioritised. There was a need for dedicated funding, not always available now nor in the longer term. And while there are requirements on local authorities and the courts to progress children’s participation, there are no formal mechanisms in place for evaluating outcomes.

In relation to children with disabilities, Franklin and Sloper found that more than half of the social service departments they researched could not indicate change resulting from the involvement of young people. Where change had occurred it referred to changes in the activities offered, rather than at a decision-making level.

Kirby et al. suggest four reasons why organisations fail to evidence outcomes:

• They lack confidence, being at an early stage in the process.

• They focus on monitoring rather than on outcomes (so they describe what they’ve done rather than what has changed).

• They have difficulty in evidencing possible outcomes, such as increased self-esteem.

• They find it difficult to attribute the change to the young people’s participation.

However, the problem does seem more endemic than Kirby thought.

The 2010 report by Participation Works identifies the same three key barriers to involving children.

The first was the low number of organisations who were proactively measuring the impact…the second and third…concerned the need for better promotion of the benefits…and…the need for better senior management commitment to children’s participation.

Overall, then, it seems outputs, rather than outcomes, are being evidenced. The Social Care Institute for Excellence’s review of service user participation also found little evidence of achieved outcomes. The worry is that the uncertainty about how to involve children in ways that bring about active change, including managing organisational change, is continuing. Some of these issues are explored in detail in next texts which report on a study in one local authority of the structures in place to collect and respond to children’s views.

This text has explored what participation means, discussed evolving definitions of the use of the term and looked at the outcomes that can be achieved in the different arenas in which children’s participation takes place. There are a number of ways in which children’s views can be elicited and represented, and these will be discussed in the next texts.