Review of Voluntary Sector Organisations
(Community Learning and Development)
Follow-up review of the
Scottish Youth Parliament
8 January 2008
Contents
Page
The review
1. Progress the governance changes in line with charities legislation
2. Develop improved links and Service Level Agreements with all
32 local authorities including the development of an effective support
workers’ network
3. Develop a training pack for local authority support workers that
clearly outlines the aims of the SYP and the role of MSYPs
4. Implement the schools engagement strategy
5. Progress the Project Scotland application in partnership with
YouthLink Scotland
6. Capitalise and share good practice across its membership and with
partner youth organisations in engaging with the wider youth
constituency
1
1
2
2
3
3
3
What is the SYP’s capacity to improve?
4
Conclusion
4
How can you contact us?
5
HM Inspectorate of Education
Follow-up to the review of the Scottish Youth Parliament
The review
HM Inspectorate of Education (HMIE) and Audit Scotland published a report on the follow-up to the
review of the Scottish Youth Parliament (SYP) in February 2007. The report of the original review
of SYP was produced in March 2004.
HM Inspectors of Education made a further follow-up visit on 9 and 10 October 2007 to evaluate
progress. The main points for action section of the previous follow-up report contained
six recommendations.
In the period since the original review, there have been a number of significant changes to the SYP.
Revised governance changes were adopted in March 2007. Member of Scottish Youth Parliament
(MSYP) elections in June 2007 resulted in an increase in the number of elected MSYPs. A new
board of directors was elected at the AGM in June 2007. A work plan agreed with Scottish
Government committed the SYP to focusing their efforts and their funding from Government on
delivering the key priority areas identified in the Scottish Government’s strategy for youth work,
Moving Forward: a strategy for improving young people’s chances through youth work.
The recommendations only are produced below in bold type followed by the HM Inspectors’
assessment of progress. Inspectors used the same four point scale of evaluations as in the original
review.
1.
Progress the governance changes in line with charities legislation
The proposed changes and revised memorandum and articles of association were approved by the
Office for the Scottish Charities Regulator (OSCR) in January 2007. The revised governance
structure was approved by the SYP at a general meeting in March 2007 with the previous
unincorporated non-charitable association successfully wound up. A recently elected board of
14 directors replaced the previous board of four. Through a series of small group meetings, and a
question and answer paper, SYP had ensured all members were clear on the impact of the
governance changes. All new directors had undertaken training in the roles and responsibilities of
being a director, governance, finance, and child protection. New directors had an increased
understanding of the organisation’s aims and were better equipped for their governance role.
The general manager was identified as having lead responsibility for financial management. All staff
had completed training in finance. The terms of reference for a finance and audit committee had
been approved. One lawyer with a specialism in employment law had been successfully recruited.
SYP were in the process of recruiting another lawyer and an accountant. An effective performance
reporting system had been fully implemented. All staff had individual work and learning and
development plans linked to the organisational work plan. These were reviewed in regular support
and supervision meetings. A recently introduced impact assessment framework was supporting the
organisation to better understand the impact it was making.
This was very good progress.
1
2.
Develop improved links and Service Level Agreements with all 32 local
authorities including the development of an effective support workers’ network
SYP had made very good progress on its local authority engagement strategy. Meetings had been
held with 21 authorities. SYP had made good use of networks such as the Society of Local Authority
Chief Executives and Senior Managers (SOLACE) and Community Learning and Development
Managers Scotland (CLDMS) to engage with the most relevant local authority contacts. In response
to a suggestion from local authorities, service level agreements had been renamed partnership
agreements. Partnership agreements had been successfully signed with five local authorities and
there were others in development. As a result local authorities were clearer in terms of roles and
responsibilities and more responsive in their support.
The number of MSYPs elected had increased at the recent elections. Seven local authorities had
representation where previously there had been none. There had been a significant increase in
participation by young people in SYP elections. In the North Lanarkshire on-line election
7,955 young people voted. Local authorities without MSYPs were also engaging positively with
SYP. Despite not having MSYPs, Stirling had agreed to host the 2008 AGM and East Lothian had
signed a partnership agreement. SYP was at an early stage of developing increased engagement with
the voluntary youth sector using a Scottish Council of Voluntary Organisations (SCVO) database of
youth organisations to identify and follow up possible new members. To date, 22 voluntary youth
organisations had been identified and contacted with further work planned. A partnership agreement
had been signed with LGBT Youth Scotland.
A support workers’ network had been established and four meetings held to date. The meetings
which tied in with sittings of SYP provided a good networking opportunity for support staff. The
relationship between the support workers and SYP had improved as had the credibility of SYP.
Support workers had successfully influenced SYP with regard to target setting with clearer and more
realistic expectations being set. SYP was seen as approachable by support staff responding quickly
to requests for information. This enabled support workers to be more effective locally. However
SYP needed to finalise and implement the terms of reference for the support network to ensure more
cohesive support was in place.
This was very good progress.
3.
Develop a training pack for local authority support workers that clearly outlines
the aims of the SYP and the role of MSYPs
The proposal to develop a hard copy training pack for support workers had altered from being hard
copy to an online resource located on a dedicated section for support workers on the SYP website.
SYP had developed and issued a range of useful support documents such as The good practice MSYP
election guidelines and What is meant by support for MSYPs? The election guidelines had proven a
useful practical resource in assisting local authority staff in running SYP elections. Local authority
support staff were clear on the aims of the SYP and the role of MSYPs. The regular SYP update
bulletin e-mailed weekly to identified support staff, interested parties and MSYPs was valued and
informative and gave good geographic coverage to over 250 recipients. However the SYP website
was currently being redeveloped and the support worker online resource section was still to be
created.
This was good progress.
2
4.
Implement the schools engagement strategy
Between November 2006 and March 2007 SYP delivered 18 effective Speakeasy events in
17 secondary schools, across 11 local authority areas. In addition, Renfrewshire MSYPs delivered a
session on youth democracy in Scotland to 120 pupils from all 11 mainstream high schools in the
authority. SYP had been pro-active in meeting with key staff at Learning and Teaching Scotland, the
Scottish Government and had participated in the Association of Directors of Education Scotland
(ADES) conference in December 2006. This had assisted SYP to effectively identify clear links
between their core activities, Curriculum for Excellence and other important national initiatives in
education. The organisation’s work plan included clear commitments to implement the schools
engagement strategy (SES) during 2007-8. Progress reviews highlighted the areas that still required
action or improvement. The SYP was at an advanced stage in negotiating and planning the
implementation of a pilot school champions project, designed to strengthen links between student
councils and local MSYPs.
A peer interview activity introduced at the most recent sitting of the parliament had proven highly
effective in generating information on local contact with schools. Seventy-five MSYPs reported
contact with over 250 schools. The nature of this contact ranged from early correspondence and
negotiation to attending school councils and effectively contributing to events. SYP had plans to
repeat this activity at future parliament sittings and to use this data to inform the development and
support of work with schools. SYP had written pro-actively to all headteachers in Scotland,
providing information about the organisation and inviting future contact and engagement. This
remained at an early stage of development. SYP had successfully reached agreement with Project
Scotland for a full-time volunteer placement to support the implementation of the SES. However,
delays in appointing this volunteer had limited SYPs capacity to deliver all elements of the SES
within planned timescales.
Overall this was good progress.
5.
Progress the Project Scotland application in partnership with YouthLink
Scotland
In light of the emphasis on the SES the original intention to progress the application in partnership
with YouthLink Scotland was dropped. SYP had reached agreement with Project Scotland in
July 2007 for the appointment of a full-time volunteer, with a clear remit to take forward key aspects
of its SES. Staff had developed a clear job outline and person specification for this voluntary
position. SYP was at an advanced stage in recruitment.
This was good progress.
6.
Capitalise and share good practice across its membership and with partner
youth organisations in engaging with the wider youth constituency
SYP had taken a number of steps to improve its effectiveness in sharing and disseminating practice.
It had introduced a weekly e-mail update for MSYPs that provided details of events, activities and
opportunities. This had good coverage and had improved the flow of information and contributed to
more effective communication. A member of the moment session recently introduced to sittings of
the parliament offered a useful vehicle for sharing practice. The peer interview process introduced at
the August 2006 sitting of the parliament had generated useful information in relation to the local
3
work of MSYPs and had potential to contribute to effective practice sharing and information flow.
SYP had provided training to young people involved in the Roars not Whispers project. This helped
develop and spread good practice in facilitating young people’s engagement with issues of concern.
MSYPs had contributed to a range of external conferences, events and activities in the past year.
SYP was also represented on a number of key national committees dealing with youth issues and
youth policy and was committed to encouraging and supporting this kind of involvement in the
future. The work plan contained a clear commitment to support practice development in other youth
engaging agencies. Requests for SYP inputs were assessed against SYP’s core objectives before
commitments were given. Work undertaken with the Royal National Institute for the Blind (RNIB)
and Lloyds TSB had been well received. However this work was largely reactive and there was
scope for SYP to be more pro-active in targeting their input and support. The member of the moment
and peer interview developments remained at an early stage and it was too early to evaluate their
effectiveness and impact. SYP’s efforts to develop support networks for local authority and
voluntary sector staff were progressing but had yet to achieve their full potential as vehicles for
practice sharing and dissemination.
This was good progress.
What is the SYP’s capacity to improve?
The SYP had considerably improved since the review of 2006 and now has the capacity to continue
to improve. The organisation now has in place a revised governance structure, operational structures
and clear work plan to support its delivery. However, whilst links to local authorities and voluntary
organisations have improved, there was still room to improve the effectiveness of the support
workers network and availability of support resources. The deployment of the Project Scotland
worker would assist SYP in taking forward the schools engagement strategy. Whilst the terms and
reference for the finance and audit committee had been agreed, SYP needed to recruit the remaining
professional advisors. Overall there was now a high capacity for future development.
Conclusion
The SYP had taken effective action to implement the recommendations of the follow-up report of
February 2007. The organisation had made very good progress on two action points, and good
progress on four action points. In light of the progress made HMIE will not make any further visits
in connection with the original review of SYP.
Stewart Maxwell
HM Inspector
8 January 2008
4
How can you contact us?
HMIE Feedback and Complaints Procedure
Should you wish to comment on any aspect of community learning and development voluntary
organisation reviews you should write in the first instance to Annette Bruton, HMCI, at
HM Inspectorate of Education, Denholm House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way,
Livingston EH54 6GA.
If you have a concern about this report, you should write in the first instance to our Complaints
Manager, HMIE Business Management and Communications Team, Second Floor, Denholm
House, Almondvale Business Park, Almondvale Way, Livingston, EH54 6GA. You can also
e-mail HMIEComplaints@hmie.gsi.gov.uk. A copy of our complaints procedure is available
from this office, by telephoning 01506 600200 or from our website at www.hmie.gov.uk.
If you are not satisfied with the action we have taken at the end of our complaints procedure, you
can raise your complaint with the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO). The SPSO is
fully independent and has powers to investigate complaints about Government departments and
agencies. You should write to the SPSO, Freepost EH641, Edinburgh EH3 0BR. You can also
telephone 0800 377 7330 (fax 0800 377 7331) or e-mail: ask@spso.org.uk. More information
about the Ombudsman’s office can be obtained from the website: www.spso.org.uk.
Crown Copyright 2008
HM Inspectorate of Education
This report may be reproduced in whole or in part, except for commercial purposes or in connection
with a prospectus or advertisement, provided that the source and date thereof are stated.
5