Sector united in desire for youth work institute, but split on role

The vast majority of the youth sector appears to support the creation of an Institute for Youth Work, giving a boost to what has long been a contentious concept.

But one year into the two-year government-funded exercise, the sector appears split on precisely what an institute’s function should be and exactly who it should represent.

A National Youth Agency consultation, carried out on behalf of the government-appointed Catalyst consortium, found that 92 per cent of respondents believed the development of an institute for the sector would be a "positive thing".

But responses on what exactly it should do were less unanimous, with 40 per cent stating that provision of a "licence to practise" should be a function, and 49 per cent interested in the possibility of it holding a register of youth workers.

Further consideration will now be given to governance, function, services and who could become a member.

The consultation process itself has come in for criticism from the In Defence of Youth Work campaign, which warns that discussions around the creation of an institute risk being framed in line with government policy, namely promoting links with business, the creation of mutuals and the use of social finance.

"Catalyst has been very clear about its agenda and has stated its wish to introduce social markets right into the heart of youth work and youth services, and that is the government’s agenda," says Tony Taylor, founder of In Defence of Youth Work.

While "cautiously welcoming" the concept of an institute, he is calling for a "more open" process and is also concerned that certain sections of the sector are not being given the opportunity to contribute their views.

"I don’t think the different areas of youth work are being sufficiently involved at the moment," he says. "Will an institute be flexible enough to recognise different types of youth work or will it narrow it down [to a general title]?"

The extent to which young people’s issues are being prioritised is also a sticking point. Janet Batsleer, chair of the Professional Association of Lecturers in Youth and Community Work, says too little time is being spent seeking out the voices of young people.

"It has to be an advocacy body and speak for young people at a time they really need it," she says. "Localism and fragmentation of services mean a voice is needed all the more nationally." This must involve tracking spending cuts and monitoring services on offer, she argues: "We need a body that can get all the evidence."

Others believe the functions of a new institute could easily be provided by existing organisations. Garath Symonds, assistant director for young people at Surrey County Council, says the Confederation of Heads of Young People’s Services and the National Youth Agency could provide a strong voice for young people, while the Joint Negotiating Committee could oversee the introduction of a licence to practice.

Meanwhile, concerns over the sluggish pace of discussions on the budding institute remain. Kevin Ford, an independent member of the consortium’s support and challenge group for an institute of youth work, warns that progress has been too slow.

He says an "early adopter launch" could test the concept of an institute with between 100 and 500 members within eight months. "Further consultation isn’t required," Ford says.

"The consultation has been running for 25 years [in various forms]. What has been missing is a real leadership to try it and see what the issues and details are."

INSTITUTE FOR YOUTH WORK

The Catalyst consortium is exploring the potential for creating an institute for youth work. This work is being led by the National Youth Agency.

An initial consultation ran last year to identify whether the idea is supported by the sector – 92 per cent of respondents said an institute for youth work would "be positive".

Phase two of the project will establish details on structure and governance, membership levels, terms and fees, functions, services and the sustainability of an institute as an independent organisation.