Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
YOUTH POLICY BRIEF #01 NOVEMBER 2012: The effectiveness of youth centres (IPPF)

YOUTH POLICY BRIEF #01 NOVEMBER 2012: The effectiveness of youth centres (IPPF)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 13|Likes:
Published by HayZara Madagascar
This policy brief provides a summary and key recommendations following a joint research project of the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) on the effectiveness of youth centres.

The increasing prominence of adolescents in sexual and reproductive health (SRH) programming is positive, but it is important to identify which policies and programmes are most effective in promoting adolescent health. Youth centres have been popular for many years, and despite two earlier literature reviews which did not identify youth centres as a cost-effective approach to promote the use of SRH services (clinical or non-clinical) by young people
This policy brief provides a summary and key recommendations following a joint research project of the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) on the effectiveness of youth centres.

The increasing prominence of adolescents in sexual and reproductive health (SRH) programming is positive, but it is important to identify which policies and programmes are most effective in promoting adolescent health. Youth centres have been popular for many years, and despite two earlier literature reviews which did not identify youth centres as a cost-effective approach to promote the use of SRH services (clinical or non-clinical) by young people

More info:

Published by: HayZara Madagascar on Dec 19, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

11/18/2014

pdf

text

original

 
This policy brief provides a summary and key recommendations following a joint research project of the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) on the effectiveness of youth centres. The increasing prominence of adolescents in sexual and reproductive health (SRH) programming is positive, but it is important to identify which policies and programmes are most effective in promoting adolescent health. Youth centres have been popular for many years, and despite two earlier literature reviews which did not identify youth centres as a cost-effective approach to promote the use of SRH services (clinical or non-clinical) by young people
1
 they have continued to be used. This is the first time that there has been a rigorous systematic review of the literature on the effectiveness of youth centres
2
, and this policy brief summarizes lessons learnt from the systematic review, combined with key findings from three recent case studies of IPPF youth centres in different world regions
3
. Advocates have proposed that youth centres can offer a safe, non-threatening, youth-friendly environment for provision of SRH services, and can allow services such as contraception to be presented in a way that is both attractive to young people, and acceptable to the community. However, there has been growing concern about the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of youth centres in relation to these objectives, and calls for more rigorous research.
The effectiveness of youth centres
YOUTH POLICY BRIEF
 #
01
 NOVEMBER 2012
 
Overall, youth centres do not appear to be a cost-effective way to increase the use of SRH services by young people, and a relatively expensive approach to increasing their empowerment.A youth-friendly meeting space can be a vital hub for a strong youth outreach programme involving youth volunteers. This does not have to be a specific youth-only building or room, but does need to be a safe place for young volunteers to meet. Youth volunteers should be trained to be able to link young people to local, youth-friendly health facilities.
KEY POINTS
BACKGROUND
Youth centres are a valuable space for training youth volunteers
   I   P   P   F   /   G   r   a   e   m   e   R   o    b   e   r   t   s   o   n   /   N   e   p   a    l   I   P   P   F   /   N   a   n   c   y   D   u   r   r   e    l    l   M   c   K   e   n   n   a   /   S   w   a   z    i    l   a   n    d   /   2   0   1   1
 
A
youth centre
is a physical room that is youth-friendly and where young people can access information and services such as SRH advice, life-skills and recreational activities. They may include clinical services on-site.
IPPF Springboard Guide, 2006
Sexual and reproductive health services
 provided by youth centres can include a broad range of clinical and non-clinical services: family planning counselling and provision including condom distribution; voluntary counselling and testing (VCT) for HIV; general counselling; and treatment of sexually transmitted infections (STIs).
Empowerment
 is a multi-dimensional term that can include a variety of different concepts at both an individual and collective level. It is about participation in decision making, but also includes processes that lead people to perceive themselves as able to, and entitled to, make decisions. This study looked at a broad range of outcomes for measuring empowerment.
KEY TERMSTHE EFFECTIVENESS OF YOUTH CENTRES IN LOW AND MIDDLE-INCOME COUNTRIES FOR PROMOTING THE UTILIZATION OF SRH SERVICES AND YOUTH EMPOWERMENT
A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
A systematic review of previous studies on the effectiveness of youth centres was undertaken by LSHTM. In total, 11 databases and key organizations’ websites were searched, including, amongst others, IPPF, UNFPA, UNICEF, Pathfinder and the Population Council. A total of 3,769 articles were screened against inclusion criteria designed to identify studies that had evaluated youth centres in low and middle-income countries and that had measured young people’s use of SRH services (whether clinical or non-clinical) and/or empowerment outcomes. 22 studies reporting on 18 youth centre programmes were included in the formal literature review.
4
 
KEY FINDINGS
 
Most youth centres are mainly used by boys and young men, many of whom are older than the target age group.
 
Youth centres are usually used by a relatively small number of young people who live close to the centres.
 
Young men and boys primarily come to use the recreational services, not the SRH services.
 
More young women use the SRH services, but uptake is often low.
The impact of youth centres on empowerment outcomes were more difficult to assess because there were so many different ways that studies looked at this outcome.
There was some evidence of positive changes in empowerment. However, the evidence for this was not strong.
 
Common barriers to uptake of youth centre services included:
 
»
Distance to the youth centre, often linked with restrictions on young people’s time, particularly for girls
 
»
The significant role of parents as gatekeepers, either allowing or forbidding attendance
 
»
Stigma attached to attending the youth centre because of its association with a family planning organization.
Most youth centres had a peer education outreach component, which was seen as a key aspect of their work. However, the contribution of the peer educator role was rarely evaluated.
 
Limited cost data were available, and where available showed that providing clinical services through youth centres was expensive per client.
Most youth centres are used by young people who live locally
   I   P   P   F   /   N   a   n   c   y   D   u   r   r   e    l    l   M   c   K   e   n   n   a   /   S   w   a   z    i    l   a   n    d   /   2   0   1   1
 
CASE STUDIES 
Different models of IPPF youth centres were visited in Nepal, Swaziland and Peru. Mixed qualitative and quantitative research methods were employed: in-depth interviews with staff, youth volunteers and youth centre users; focus group discussions and participatory workshops with youth volunteers; a review of project documentation and clinic data; and observation of youth centres.
WE FOUND:
 
Commonly, there were a small number of repeat users using the youth centres
 
The youth centres were mainly used by young people living very close to the centre, and often primarily by the same group of in-school young people on their way home from school
 
Those who attended the youth centres for recreational facilities were mainly males (>20 years), and often young men rather than adolescents (10–19 years)
 
In terms of empowerment, the youth centres were a valuable space for training youth volunteers if centrally located and both physically and socially accessible to both girls and boys
The youth centres offered opportunities for young people’s participation within centre management committees, youth boards, and working groups. These opportunities were generally only taken by a relatively small core group of active youth volunteers or youth action members
5
 
Sustainability can often be a challenge given that the cost and maintenance of equipment for ‘modern’ and ‘exciting’ resources can be very hard to sustain, e.g. a cyber cafe or sports equipment.
WHO WAS USING THE CLINICAL SRH FACILITIES ON-SITE?WE FOUND:
 
Uptake was usually low; an exception was a specialist youth clinic adjacent to a youth centre in Peru, close to the university
 
It was mainly females older than 20 years who used SRH services in all sites, and mainly for maternity and child health services
 
They were often used by volunteers for uncontroversial services like blood pressure and weight measurement rather than for SRH services
Encouraging the participation of young people in the activities of the youth centre was sometimes in conflict with being able to provide confidentiality and privacy for young clients.
THE WAY FORWARD: A NEW GENERATION OF YOUTH WORK
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FIELD PROGRAMME STAFF
 
Evaluate whether there is a need for a specific ‘youth centre building’ or whether it might be more efficient and cost-effective to have a multi-purpose training or meeting room in a venue that is easily accessible and suitable, as identified by the local youth volunteers.
Use a youth-friendly meeting space as a vital hub for a strong youth outreach programme involving youth volunteers.
High quality dynamic staff, who have time allocated for their youth coordinator role, are essential for any youth programme that aims to mobilize young people.
FPAN YOUTH CENTRES IN NEPAL
The youth centres of the Family Planning Association of Nepal (FPAN) are closely integrated into a broader ‘youth forum’ structure. There is usually one youth forum per FPAN district office, made up of representatives of different youth ‘sector’ groups and drawn from different villages across the district, with a mandatory gender balance of elected young people who represent different sectors: the college and school sector, youth clubs (such as sports clubs), children’s clubs and women’s groups. FPAN supports two models of youth centres; youth information centres (YICs) and multi-purpose resource centres (MPRCs). The YICs do not offer clinical services directly, but most of them are located very close to an FPAN clinic. One of the more effective MPRCs visited had a large, well-organised network of youth volunteers, mainly young students, with good representation from across the district. These volunteers attended the youth centre for regular meetings and training sessions, and also volunteered at the clinic as ‘youth counsellors’.
FPAN youth centre, Nepal

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->