‘Freedom for Young People’ –
Evaluation and Session Plans
Simon Kerss, Programme Manager (19/06/2007).
1
‘Freedom for Young People’ – Evaluation and Session Plans
Introduction
‘Freedom for Young People,’ derived from Pat Craven’s ‘Freedom
Programme,’ was delivered in Cambridge City from January 31st to
March 28th 2007 (from 1830 – 2030hrs) by a multi-agency team
consisting of professionals from Connexions, Cambridgeshire Youth
Service and Manor Community College, Cambridge, working under the
umbrella organisation of Cambridgeshire’s Office of Children and Young
Peoples Services (OCYPS).
The 8 week programme was aimed at girls aged 14-24, and was
designed to provide therapeutic learning for those affected by domestic
abuse issues, or those seeking to avoid such issues in future
relationships.
This evaluation will outline the issues raised in the delivery of ‘Freedom
for Young People,’ give context to the programme content and show
learning outcomes from the attendees. Relevant issues will be explored
under the following headings:












Funding and Costs
Organisation and Planning
Staffing
Venue
Referrals
Transport
Risk Assessment
Food
Materials
Awards
Attendees’ Evaluations
Conclusion
The reader will also find detailed programme notes for each session
attached as appendices (Appendix A).
Funding and Costs
South Cambridgeshire District Council’s Crime and Disorder Reduction
Partnership and Cambridge City’s Community Safety Partnership very
kindly provided joint funding for ‘Freedom for Young People.’ The
award was originally designed to provide both a victim and perpetrator
programme for young people. However, issues with the Home Office
definition of domestic abuse (stating that perpetrators are adults aged
18 years and above) meant that neither local courts nor Cambridgeshire
2
Youth Offending Service could order young perpetrators to attend. For
this reason, it was decided to concentrate on young female victims and
to allocate the underspend to other preventative programmes. Funding
was controlled through the Sawston and Linton OCYPS Locality team
budget, with invoices being administrated by OCYPS delivery support
staff.
As referrals were expected from across Cambridge City and South
Cambridgeshire, high transport costs were expected. To try and
alleviate this expense, a venue on the northern fringe of Cambridge was
chosen to host the programme. The venue had previously been used
for other youth activities and had childcare provision, a cafeteria and
other useful amenities attached. However, despite having attendees
‘double up’ and travel into the venue in taxis together, the final bill for
transport ran to over £2000. Due to the rural nature of the catchment
area and the age of the programme’s attendees, it is difficult to
conceive of ways of reducing this cost (a minibus picking up attendees
would prove too time consuming, and public transport, especially across
South Cambridgeshire, too infrequent). Attendees’ making their own
way to the programme was deemed unrealistic and risky.
Staff costs for three facilitators working out-of-hours were also
considerable. However, unless future programmes are to be hosted
during school/normal working hours or facilitated by volunteers/staff
seconded from their day jobs, it is unlikely that savings can be made on
facilitator remuneration. During this programme, the two primary
facilitators were paid overtime of 8 hours per week (4 hours delivery
and 4 hours planning/administration). Our school support worker was
paid for 4 hours per week to cover her time at programme sessions.
Other costs included venue hire (£15 per week, including use of TV and
video recorder), course materials (art resources, photocopying, etc.)
and food. Art resources totalled around £40, whilst food for each twohour session cost around £100 each week (13 attendees plus 3
facilitators). Money could conceivably have been saved on the food bill,
but this would have been at the expense of time and convenience, and
would have added expenditure onto facilitator costs.
Organisation and Planning
A considerable re-write of Pat Craven’s ‘Freedom Programme’ was
needed to make the sessions appropriate for young people. More youth
work-type activities were required to maintain interest and the difficult
theories within the programme needed expanding upon. The core of
the programme did, however, remain the same, with the figure of the
‘Dominator’ (and his counterpart ‘Mr Right’) remaining central to our
work. Each session was, therefore, re-written with Pat’s original aims
and objectives in place – only the methods of delivery and content of
each session were changed to suit. Additionally, the duration of each
3
session was lengthened to two hours, whilst the overall programme
length was shortened from 12 to 8 weeks. The overall session titles
were as follows:








Session One – The Dominator
Session Two – The Dominator (Part 2)
Session Three – The Liar, the Bully and King of the Castle
Session Four – The Liar (Part 2), the Headworker and the
Persuader
Session Five – The Jailer and the Sexual Controller
Session Six – The Badfather
Session Seven – The Effects on Children (Parts 1 and 2)
Session Eight – Warning Signs and Plenary
(See Appendix A).
Planning for taxis, food, risk assessments, referrals processes, etc., was
all undertaken prior to the commencement of the programme on
31/01/07, and took approximately 25 hours.
It was also determined at the planning stage that attendees should be
accredited for their work on the programme and be able to achieve a
qualification as a result. The ASDAN ‘Citizenship in Action’ award was
subsequently chosen as the appropriate qualification to run alongside
the programme.
Staffing
The programme’s lead facilitator (Paula Mayes, Youth Service Locality
Coordinator) was chosen to provide much needed experience of group
work in a youth work setting and to ensure that the lead facilitator was
female (as per Pat Craven’s wishes). Marie Fella (Student Support
Worker seconded from Social Care, Manor Community College,
Cambridge) was asked to co-facilitate and to support the cohort of
school-age girls from Manor. Simon Kerss (Outreach Adviser,
Connexions, Cambridgeshire Office of Children and Young Peoples
Services) retained the role of programme coordinator and also
facilitated where appropriate. Both Paula and Simon were trained
‘Freedom Programme’ facilitators. The range of professional experience
was deemed vital in the overall success of the programme.
Venue
The venue chosen for this programme was the Meadows Youth and
Community Centre, Kings Hedges, Cambridge. Situated on the
northern fringe of Cambridge City, the venue had the necessary
conveniences and facilities. The venue was also staffed at all times and
entry was via a secure reception area. Childcare provision was on-site
4
(though not used) and the centre was accessible to all. Hire costs were
low and food could be provided when necessary.
In retrospect, the room used was somewhat Spartan and not of the kind
usually associated with youth-work provision, though this issue was not
mentioned in any of the attendees’ evaluations. The actual room layout
used for the programme was to have the chairs arranged in a circle to
start, then to re-arrange the set-up when appropriate to the session
plan.
There were issues with attendees impacting on other centre users as
they entered and left the premises (and took comfort breaks), though
these were quickly overcome after meetings with the centre
management and staff.
Referrals
Referrals to the programme were opened out to all relevant
professionals (though Social Care and the Youth Offending Service were
particularly targeted) or through self-referral. In planning, it was
decided that the age of group attendees should be co-terminus with
that of Cambridgeshire Connexions and the Youth Service (13-19, or up
to 25 if there are additional needs), and that the maximum group size
should be 15 (to allow a facilitator to attendee ration of 3:1).
No referral paperwork was involved initially, though all prospective
attendees were to be risk-assessed prior to their commencing with
‘Freedom for Young People.’ Invitations to refer were made by letter,
email, telephone calls and meetings with relevant service providers. An
example of the information sent out to prospective referring
professionals is attached in the appendices (see Appendix B).
On commencement, two girls self-referred from the local community,
five came from Cambridge’s Youth Foyer (supported accommodation)
and a further six self-referred from Manor Community College,
Cambridge. Three attendees came directly from South Cambridgeshire,
two from East Cambridgeshire (they had been re-located from
Cambridge on foster placements) and the remainder from Cambridge
City.
Transport
Taxi provision was originally on account through a company that the
Connexions partnership had historically used. However, following
allegations from two ‘Freedom’ attendees that certain drivers had made
inappropriate conversation with them, provision was changed to a firm
that was used by Cambridgeshire Education to bring school-age pupils
into various providers. This firm were able to offer specially trained
drivers who had been given prior notification of the issues surrounding
5
the programme. Subsequently, drivers were asked not to engage in
anything other than general conversation with attendees. Had this
been the case from the outset, many hours of work around the
allegations (which were passed onto senior management in
Cambridgeshire County Council) could have been avoided.
Risk Assessments
As previously stated, all attendees were individually risk assessed
(orally) prior to commencement to ascertain their suitability and risk
status. None were currently in abusive relationships, and those that
had suffered historical abuse were now in safe positions. As per
‘Freedom Programme’ requirements, each session began with a review
of risk and a reminder of confidentiality protocols.
The programme as a whole was risk assessed using a Cambridgeshire
Youth Service document, which has been attached as an appendix (see
Appendix C).
Food
Food was provided to replace the evening meal that would be missed
through attendance. Initially it was provided by the Meadows Centre,
though attendees were given other choices (such as pizza, Subway
sandwiches, etc.) as the programme progressed. Healthy and
vegetarian options were always made available.
Materials
‘Freedom Programme’ booklets (‘Living with the Dominator’) were
ordered directly from Pat Craven at £4 per issue. Other resources, used
for art projects (pens, paints, paper, glue, glitter), were bought directly
from a local provider. ICT hardware, such as laptops, projectors and
DVDs were sourced from within OCYPS. ASDAN workbooks were
bought from the ASDAN website, www.asdan.org.uk.
Awards
As stated, the ASDAN ‘Citizenship in Action’ award was chosen as the
appropriate accreditation for ‘Freedom for Young People.’ The
requirements of this award meant that attendees had to produce a
portfolio of work (taking not less than 30 hours) around the issue of
domestic abuse, and to use their portfolios to help other young people.
In this instance, attendees chose to exhibit their work at Manor
Community College and Cambridge Youth Foyer.
The quality of work varied according to ability, but most attendees could
show that they had indeed completed 30 hours of study (which included
watching relevant TV programmes, searching the Internet, visiting other
6
service providers, producing art work, etc.) through recording their
efforts on a pro-forma, designed for this purpose. Meetings outside of
the programme were necessary to administrate this award, with
approximately three additional hours being spent in group-work with
attendees.
At programme’s end, 11 of the 13 who eventually completed ‘Freedom
for Young People’ gained their ASDAN awards. Two others were
awarded Youth Service certificates of achievement in recognition of
their work. All had letters of commendation attached to their ASDAN
certificates and further letters of commendation were sent to Manor’s
Head Teacher and Foyer’s management. A celebratory meal was also
arranged to celebrate achievement. Examples of attendees’ portfolios
can be found in the appendices (see Appendix D).
Attendees’ Evaluations
The following statements regarding the programme have been drawn
from written evaluations completed by attendees during the final
session. Other feedback on individual sessions can be found at the end
of each session plan (see appendices):
Question 1. How do you feel the programme went?
1. I feel that this programme went really well because we learned
how to tell good boys from bad boys. We also got to do many
different activities as well.
2. I thought it went better than I thought it would.
3. I think that the programme went well because everyone
participated and we worked together as one group instead of a lot
of little groups.
4. I think the programme went well. I enjoyed it the people in the
group made me feel welcome.
5. I enjoyed meeting people and learning the signs.
6. The programme for me went smoothly. There was a session
where I felt uneasy due to the fact that some group members
were not getting on with each other. Overall, I felt this course was
a good place for me to start with my career.
7. I think it went really well as it was put together really good. Also
we had a lot of information that I didn’t know. What made it
better was who was running it, Paula. Maria and Simon made it
really funny and we must give credit to Simon for putting up with
all us young women for 7-8 weeks.
8. I feel that the programme went well and felt that I was good to
learn and fun.
9. It went well I have really enjoyed this course.
10.I feel the programme went very well and it was really good.
7
11.I feel that this went really well because it helped me realise how
to spot things like the early signs of domestic violence and help me
in case I come across someone. I will then know that not to get
involved with that sort of person.
12.It went really well and I thought it was good.
Question 2. What did you learn?
1. How to notice the D.V, what is D.V and also know some of the
warning signs.
2. I learnt out of this freedom program, how to spot early signs are
how domestic violence affects different people in different ways
even children.
3. I have learnt a lot about how men treat men and the other way
round and how you know what to look out for in men.
4. I have learnt how to control myself if I get into a relationship. I
will know how to get help and I can help others that are in a
violent relationship.
5. In the programme I learnt a lot about D/V and I have learnt all
about the bully, bad father etc. now I think I know how to read a
man.
6. I have learnt how to choose a man more carefully. Also how to
socialise with other young women in the area.
7. I have learnt a lot about violence against women and children.
The insight into the dominators tactics and his behaviour will help
me through out my life. I feel that I can now tell and find out if I
ever meet a violent man before anything happens.
8. That not all men are like the dominator and how to spot the signs.
Now I can date different kinds of guys that aren’t dominators.
9. I learnt that my ex was the dominator. I know how to get away
from a violent man.
10.That all men are not like the dominator and what the signs would
be if you meet the dominator. Also that there is a lot of people in a
situation of domestic violence.
11.I learnt more about how men are towards women.
12. I learned that at the beginning of a domestic relationship the
men could seem really nice and normal like any other bloke so you
don’t really know what you get yourself into.
Question 3. What could we have done differently?
1. The thing that I think we could have done differently is we could
have had more practical examples such as acting or movies.
2. Longer time to discuss more ideas and to concentrate more on
the friend as well as the dominator.
3. Longer sessions and more weeks so that we could learn more.
4. I think we need more group time so we could discuss more ideas
and produce a more detailed portfolio.
8
5. I think that after evaluating every form of dominator we should
have made a point of also discussing Mr right. This is because I
began to feel uneasy half way through the course and thought
every man is the same (even though I believed that before). The
duration of the course could be longer.
6. I think that we could have a longer time frame so we can learn
more and socialise more.
7. I don’t think there is anything we could have done differently.
8. More time and a longer course so we could learn a lot more.
9. We could have not had any arguments and all got on well
together and kept things that are not to do with the course
outside. More time to learn more.
10.If we had a change to do this group again. I reckon that having
longer weeks to do this programme would have been better because
we could learn so much more.
Question 4. Would you recommend the programme to a friend?
1. Yes I would because it would help other people to notice D.V.
2. If I had the chance to tell all my friends about this program I
would, as me having been through the domestic violence I
wouldn’t want anyone friends or family, or anyone to go through
this because no one really deserves to be emotionally abused or
smacked around, no one at all!
3. Yes I would because my friends could be going through the same
things as me or they might want to learn about Domestic Violence
towards women or men.
4. Yes I would so they could learn more about this course and how
they could help others.
5. I think the programme would be ideal to recommend to a friend
and family so it could help them to notice the dominator as well.
6. I would tell a friend about the programme as I think that all
women should have the basic knowledge of what a Mr Wrong is.
7. I would definitely recommend this course to some of my friends.
It does give a great amount of insight into Domestic Violence. It
will also help many vast amounts of women avoid Domestic
Violence.
8. Yes because it has helped me understand things that I would of
missed if I hadn’t of attended the course programme.
9. Yes I will recommend it because it has helped me learn about
domestic violence.
10.Yes because even if you don’t suffer by domestic violence it is
very interesting and also you will know the signs of Domestic
Violence if someone you know is in the situation or if you meet the
dominator.
11.Yes I would recommend this my friends because then they can
learn about the dominators.
9
12. I would recommend this programme to my friends who are in
abusive relationship because they could learn how to protect
themselves and how to tell nice guys apart from the mean guys.
Conclusions
It is the facilitators’ opinion that this first ‘Freedom for Young People’
proved a great success. Attendee evaluations indicate a high degree of
learning whilst on the programme, and also show that ‘Freedom’ was as
enjoyable as it was educational and therapeutic.
We were surprised to learn that the attendees would have preferred a
longer course, as it was initially felt that 8 sessions of 2 hours apiece
(out of school time) would be enough. However, we can assume that
attendees’ enjoyment of the programme contributed to their wish for
more time. In future, and if resources allow, a rolling programme
would help put ‘Freedom’ into context and would allow young women
access to the elements they had missed. It would also facilitate ‘word
of mouth’ referrals and provide peer support opportunities.
We also feel that future referral procedures need additional work to
ensure that referrals adhere to the original target group. However, as
the ‘Freedom Programme’ was initially designed to be preventative, as
well as therapeutic, this issue need not be pressed to the detriment of
those young ladies who may need help avoiding abuse.
The multi-agency delivery of the programme supported the aims and
objectives of ‘Freedom’ and also ensured that ongoing support was
available to those attendees with complex issues. Also of benefit were
the previously established relationships between facilitators and
attendees. This happenstance facilitated access to the group by some
of the younger and less confident members and led to greater group
cohesion.
Having a project manager to coordinate week-by-week and follow up on
outstanding issues proved invaluable, as did having a substantial
budget. The well-resourced programme (including transport and an
evening meal) made attendees feel valued and created a good learning
environment. In addition, accreditation of the programme added value
for attendees. Their portfolios have subsequently been used to raise
awareness of domestic abuse issues within appropriate environments.
Pat Craven’s ‘Freedom Programme’ has, in our opinion, provided an
excellent starting point for this kind of work with young people, and
without her training and guidance this project would not have
happened. However, the facilitators felt that having to work through all
of the specific elements did, at times, feel rather restrictive. We feel
that there is more room for varied delivery methods and the
opportunity to ‘go with the flow.’ In future, other resources could be
10
tailored to facilitate group learning in a more youth-friendly
environment.
Finally, great thanks are due to the 13 young women who made this
first ‘Freedom for Young People’ such a success. Without their humour,
openness, honesty and participation, the programme could have
become a sombre, depressing and humourless affair. With them,
‘Freedom for Young People’ enriched the practice of its facilitators and
proved that young people can overcome domestic abuse issues and go
on to live happy and fulfilling lives.
Simon Kerss (Programme Coordinator), 19th June 2007.
11
Appendix A: Session One – Eight Notes
Session One: The Dominator
Objectives:



To begin the process of working together and setting boundaries
for the programme.
To reduce the women’s sense of isolation by beginning the
process of imparting information about he reality of domestic
abuse.
To begin to debunk myths surrounding domestic violence.
Outcomes:




Participants will have identified the extent of domestic abuse.
Participants will have identified some of the tactics used by
abusive people to control others
Participants will have identified the characteristics of a nonabusive male
Participants will have understood the nature and demands of the
programme.
Process:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Welcomes.
Health and Safety warnings/confidentiality.
Facilitator’s introduction/History of programme.
Attendee’s introductions/group rules.
Questions.
Quiz.
Non-abusive males.
Handouts/resources.
Conclusion/evaluation.
1.Welcomes:
PM and SK to facilitate welcomes. SK to ensure IT/flip charts in place
and that each attendee is comfortable with group/venue (10 minutes).
2.Health and Safety Warnings/confidentiality:
12
SK to make sure that attendees are aware of Health and Safety in
building and issues around confidentiality. SK to ensure that relevant
attendees have an ‘excuse’ ready for attending and have an escape
strategy in place (10 minutes).
3.Facilitator’s Introductions/history of programme:
Both PM and SK to explain roles and context of sessions, including
ASDAN award (10 minutes).
4.Attendee’s Introductions/group rules:
PM to facilitate group introductions and SK to log agreed rules on
flipchart (10 minutes).
5.Questions:
PM and SK to field any questions arising (15 minutes).
6.Quiz:
SK to facilitate PowerPoint quiz based on local issues/statistics (10
minutes).
7.Non-abusive males:
PM to facilitate short group work to encourage attendees to think about
one ‘role model’ non-abusive male from their pasts, and to reflect on
what made these ‘role models’ so memorable (15 minutes).
Break for 20 minutes.
8.Handouts/resources:
SK to signpost info and resources (5 minutes).
9.Conclusion/evaluation:
13
PM to finish session on positive and to seek feedback (15 minutes).
Total time, 2 hours.
Facilitator’s notes from session:
Overview:
Six girls aged 15 – 23 attended the first Freedom session (seven more
were unable to attend, but have agreed to attend the next session). Of
these six, four were NEET and living in supported accommodation, one
was in full-time education and one was working part-time. All had
experienced abuse either at home or from a partner. All stated that
they were currently not in an abusive relationship.
The initial session required significant amendments to the original
schedule and content, though the stated outcomes were still met by its
end. Much more time was required with introductions than was
previously expected. It is thought that this use of time will decrease in
subsequent weeks.
The group bonded quickly and established their own rules (the use of
‘time-outs,’ no bullying, respecting one another, etc.), having first
discussed their backgrounds and feelings about the use of language
(words such as fuck, slut, etc. were only to be used in the context of
describing their experiences). All were willing to talk and one attendee
especially seemed to have undertaken research on DV prior to joining
the programme.
Feedback and evaluation was positive and attendees all agreed to
return for the next session.
1. Welcomes:
As stated, this took slightly longer than anticipated, but all attendees
were happy to introduce themselves and talk a little about their current
circumstances.
2. Health and Safety Warnings/confidentiality:
Facilitators assessed individual risk and advised attendees on Child
Protection requirements regarding disclosures. Group was encouraged
14
to either talk in general terms (examples were provided by the
facilitators), or to make specific disclosures outside of the group.
3. Facilitator’s Introductions/history of programme:
Facilitators explained their role and relationship with DV issues.
Freedom Programme explained and changes to this programme (to
better fit with the needs of young people) noted.
4. Attendee’s Introductions/group rules:
Each attendee gave their name, current circumstances, a brief
biography and were encouraged to state what they knew about the
programme and what they hoped to get from it (two stated that they
were very interested in gaining the ASDAN qualification, four that they
hoped to better understand why men abuse women). The group
developed their own rules, as follows:











Maintain confidentiality
Respect peoples’ views
Participate
Be able to call ‘time outs’
Agree when breaks should be
No drugs/alcohol
No aggressive language towards others
Listen when others are talking
No interrupting
Mobiles on silent
No bullying.
These rules were logged on a flipchart and will be visible during all
subsequent sessions.
5. Questions:
Very few questions were logged at this time.
6. Quiz:
The following quiz was displayed onscreen:
What percentage of violent crime is Domestic Abuse-related in
Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire? 20 – 25% of all violent police
recorded crime in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire is Domestic
Abuse related
Approximately how many Domestic Abuse incidents are reported to the
police in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire each year?
Cambridgeshire Constabulary deal with approximately 2000 DA
incidents each year (that’s nearly 5 every day)
15
What percentage of homeless applications to City Council and SCDC are
caused by DA? Between 15 and 25% of all homeless applications come
about because of DA
How much money does Cambridgeshire spend on DA issues per year?
Cambridgeshire PCTs £17+ million, Cambridgeshire Constabulary £8+
million, Cambridgeshire Court and CPS £2.5+ million, Cambridgeshire
Prisons £1.9+ million and Cambridgeshire Social Services £1.5+ million
How many murders caused by DA are there in the UK every year? 129
Interestingly, the attendees hugely over-estimated the answers to all
the questions except the final question on costs, which was thought to
be £1 million pounds per year. These answers were explored and it was
though that personal experience of DV issues was responsible for the
outcomes.
7. Non-abusive males:
Rather than introduce the Dominator immediately, it was decided to
first concentrate on the non-abusive male and to have attendees
develop a ‘role-model’ from their pasts to enable them to reinforce their
beliefs that non-abusive males do exist. The handouts from the
Freedom Programme were not introduced; instead each attendee gave
one characteristic of their role model, which corresponded with the
Freedom materials.
Break:
A buffet was provided for the group. It was agreed that in future weeks
the group may decide what food they would like and that this will be
ordered in. Each attendee was approached during break to ensure that
the facilitators had relevant personal details and emergency numbers.
8. Handouts/resources:
These were available on a table near the door, and attendees were
encouraged to access them as necessary. Information on housing,
training, benefits, sexual health and other issues was made available,
as well as DV resources.
9. Conclusion/evaluation:
The group was encouraged to feedback, and this feedback was
particularly positive. One attendee texted a facilitator after the session
to thank the facilitators and advise that, ‘I had a great time and it
wasn’t so scary after all.’
16
It was also agreed between the facilitators that session two would start
an half-hour early to allow those who missed session one to ‘catch up’
on missed context and introductions. It was also agreed that ASDAN
moderation would take place outside of the group sessions and that a
facilitator would arrange additional sessions with the attendees to
complete this work.
Session Two: The Dominator Part 2
Objectives:



To enable women to identify characteristics of the Dominator.
To enable women in discussion to understand the tactics of
intimidation, why it is used and its affects.
To enable women in discussion to begin to identify how a nonabusive person might behave.
Outcomes:




Participants will have
role models.
Participants will have
Participants will have
Participants will have
non-abusive person.
strengthened their understanding of male
identified excuses for men’s abuse.
identified characteristics of the Dominator.
identified some more characteristics of a
Process:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Welcomes.
Health and Safety warnings/planning.
Introduction to session.
Re-visit the Role Model.
Why do men abuse women?
The Dominator and his characteristics.
Conclusion.
1.Welcomes:
As previously (5 minutes).
17
2.Health and Safety warnings/planning:
As previously (5 minutes).
3.Introduction to session:
FM to introduce concepts and SK to ensure that previous week’s work is
on display around room (5 minutes).
4.Re-visit the Role Model:
PM to remind attendees of the Role Model and his characteristics and to
ask each attendee to re-state what they find most attractive about their
role model. SK to distribute Freedom Programme resource ‘not an
angel we see’ (20 minutes).
5.Why do men abuse women?
PM to facilitate small groups to examine reasons men may give for
abusing women. SK to scribe. (20 minutes).
6.The Dominator and his characteristics:
PM to introduce the Dominator (SK to distribute Freedom Programme
resource ‘the Dominator’) and to facilitate small groups to examine the
Dominator and his characteristics. Groups to provide two additional
characteristics of the dominator. SK to scribe (30 minutes). To continue
after break…
Break for 20 minutes.
Continued…
Groups to feedback additional characteristics. SK to scribe (10
minutes).
7.Conclusion:
Plenary of session and SK to introduce local safety initiatives, such as
Sanctuary and Refuge (5 minutes).
18
Total time, 2 hours.
Facilitator’s notes from session:
Overview:
Thirteen girls aged 15 – 23 attended the second Freedom session. Of
these thirteen, five were NEET and living in supported education, one in
employment and seven were in full-time education.
The session was badly hampered by the late arrival of two taxis,
resulting in a half-hour delayed start. To support several of the schoolaged girls, a student support worker from their secondary school was
asked to attend. This worker proved very helpful and was instrumental
in making the girls feel more comfortable.
Once again, the group bonded quickly and were amenable to being split
into smaller, mixed groups. The group rules were reiterated and agreed
upon.
Feedback and evaluation was positive once again.
1. Welcomes:
Again, this took longer than expected – due to the very late arrival of
two taxis.
2. Health and safety warnings/confidentiality:
Illustrated and agreed upon as per session one.
3. Introduction to session:
Programme as described last session.
4. Re-visit the Role Model:
As the session involved new attendees, it was necessary to re-establish
a positive image of men (the ‘Role Model’). Each attendee was asked to
contribute one male role model from their past and to identify the
characteristics of this individual. Two of the shyer attendees declined to
participate in this exercise.
5. Why do men abuse women?
19
This group session threw up a number (20) of pertinent observations
from the attendees such as:









Men don’t know how to express themselves
Control freakery
Alcohol/drug use
Personal problems
No respect for women
Learnt behaviour
Revenge
Poor support networks
Abuse is ‘normal’
The attendees were encouraged to see these reasons as excuses, rather
than causality.
Break:
A buffet was provided for the group. A ‘straw poll’ was taken to
ascertain what the attendees would like in future sessions. It was
agreed that subsequent sessions would feature different foods, such as
pizza, subs, Chinese, salads, etc.
6. The Dominator and his characteristics:
The group noted that many of the reasons they had identified in the
previous exercise were present in the Dominator. The Freedom
Programme resource was therefore deemed to be very useful. This
exercise was cut short (because of late start) and will be re-visited next
time.
7. Conclusion:
Feedback was very encouraging, with attendees advising that they had:





Learnt to speak in a group
Learnt how to listen effectively
Overcome shyness
Made new friends
Learnt how to socialise
Folders to were distributed to all attendees in order that their
programme resources/notes could be kept together. All were advised
that the facilitators could keep these folders if attendees didn’t feel
comfortable taking them home (only one attendee took this option).
In addition to the second session, the first ASDAN session (to complete
the fist parts of the project book and the action plan) was held away
from the main group (two days earlier). This session took thirty
20
minutes and went very well. The attendees from supported housing will
use their portfolios to produce a display at their housing provider for
other residents.
It was agreed that a school ASDAN session would be held for those in
education and that one further session would be facilitated to include
the two attendees who live in a rural area. These sessions will take
place following the half-term break.
Session Three: The Liar, The Bully and King of the Castle
Objectives:



To enable women in discussion to understand why abusive men
lie about their behaviour, in what way and with what effects.
To enable women in discussion to understand the tactics of
intimidation, why it is used and its effects.
To enable women in discussion to understand more of the specific
characteristics of a non-abusive person.
Outcomes:




Participants will have identified
abusive behaviour.
Participants will have identified
and using, intimidatory tactics.
Participants will have identified
subservient.
Participants will have identified
abusive person.
the role played by dishonesty in
experiences of being subject to,
experiences of being treated as
more characteristics of a non-
Process:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Welcomes.
Health and Safety warnings/planning.
Introduction to session.
Revisit the Dominator/Role model.
Why do abusive men lie about their behaviour/What lies do they
tell?
How do these lies affect victims?
The King of the Castle and his beliefs.
The Bully and his beliefs.
Conclusion.
21
1. Welcomes:
As previously (5 minutes).
2. Health and Safety warnings/planning:
As previously (5 minutes).
3. Introduction to the session:
As previously (5 minutes).
4. Re-visit the Dominator/Role model:
As previously. Two characteristics of the Dominator from each attendee
(5 minutes).
5. Why do abusive men lie about their behaviour/what lies do they tell?
PM to facilitate group session with attendees split into two groups. First
group to look at why abusive men lie, second to examine what lies are
told. PM and SK to scribe (15 minutes).
6. How do these lies affect victims?
Again in two groups, PM to facilitate discussion. SK to scribe (15
minutes).
Attendees will break for 25 minutes.
7. The King of the Castle and his beliefs:
PM to facilitate group work to establish the King of the Castle’s beliefs
and characteristics. SK to scribe (15 minutes).
8. The Bully and his beliefs:
PM to facilitate group work to establish the Bully’s beliefs and
characteristics. SK to scribe (15 minutes).
22
9. Conclusion:
As previously (5 minutes).
Total time, 2 hours.
Facilitator’s notes from session:
Overview:
Thirteen girls aged 15 – 23 attended the second Freedom session. Of
these thirteen, five were NEET and living in supported education, one in
employment and seven were in full-time education.
The session was again hampered by issues with taxis (resulting in a
change to the taxi account). Pizzas were ordered on request to replace
the buffet, but these turned up 40 minutes late – causing last minute
changes to the schedule.
Once again, the group bonded quickly and were amenable to being split
into smaller, mixed groups. The group rules were reiterated and agreed
upon. The school support worker (Marie Fella) attended and again was
very helpful in facilitating.
Feedback and evaluation was positive once again.
1. Welcomes:
Again, this took longer than expected – due to the very late arrival of
two taxis.
2. Health and safety warnings/confidentiality:
Illustrated and agreed upon as per session two.
3. Introduction to session:
Programme as described.
4. Revisit the Dominator and the Role Model:
Each attendee was asked to provide a characteristic of each.
23
5. Why do abusive men lie about their behaviour/What lies do they tell?
Group discussion, which was scribed and reflected upon.
6. How do these lies affect victims:
Group discussion, which was scribed and reflected upon.
7. The King of the Castle and his beliefs:
Group discussion, which was scribed and reflected upon.
8. The Bully and his beliefs:
Group discussion, which was scribed and reflected upon.
9. Conclusion:
Feedback was very encouraging, with attendees advising that:



We’ve all started to mix well and be comfortable;
Abusive men appear caring on the outside, but we know they are
different on the inside;
The only way I won’t come to the group is if someone dies!
Marie Fella (school support worker) was asked to stay with the group to
help with facilitating and advised that her time will be paid for.
Session Four: The Liar, The Headworker and The Persuader
Objectives:




To enable women in discussion to understand the tactic of
emotional abuse, why it is used and its effects.
To enable women in discussion to identify the tactics of coercion,
the beliefs which underpin it, which of these are shared by women
and its effects.
To enable women in discussion to further understand the tactics
of the liar.
To enable women in discussion to understand more of the specific
characteristics of a non-abusive person.
Outcomes:
24





Participants will have identified experiences of being subject to,
and using emotional abuse.
Participants will have identified where their own beliefs coincide
with behaviour designed to eliminate self-confidence.
Participants will have identified the beliefs which support abuser’s
persuasive behaviour.
Participants will have identified the use of lying as a coercion tool.
Participants will have identified more characteristics of a nonabusive person.
Process:
1.Welcomes.
2.Health and Safety warnings/planning.
3.Introduction to session.
4.Revisit the Dominator and Role model (and Bully).
5.How does the Liar use tactics to control his partner?
6.How does the Headworker use emotional abuse to control his
partner and how does the Persuader use women to persuade us not
to leave, drop charges, etc?
7.What does the Headworker and Persuader believe about women
and how do we share his beliefs?
8.How does the Headworker, Persuader and Liar make us feel?
9. Conclusion.
1. Welcomes:
As previously (5 minutes).
2. Health and Safety warnings/planning:
As previously (5 minutes).
3. Introduction to the session:
As previously (5 minutes).
4. Re-visit the Dominator/Role model (and Bully):
As previously. Two characteristics of the Dominator from each attendee
and finish off work around the Bully (10 minutes).
5. How does the Liar use his tactics to control his partner?
25
PM to facilitate group work (10 minutes).
6. How does the Headworker use emotional abuse to control his partner
and how does the Persuader use women to persuade us not to leave,
drop charges, etc?
PM to facilitate group session with attendees discussing how and why
abusive men try to control their partners (10 minutes).
7. What does the Headworker and Persuader believe about women and
how do we share his beliefs?
Again in two groups, PM to facilitate discussion. SK to scribe (15
minutes).
Attendees will break for 25 minutes.
8. Excuses for violence:
SK to facilitate group activity to encourage attendees to reflect on the
question ‘is violence ever acceptable?’ (25 minutes).
9. Conclusion:
As previously (5 minutes).
Total time, 2 hours.
Facilitator’s notes from session:
Overview:
Fourteen girls aged 15 – 23 attended the second Freedom session (one
girl brought a guest). Of these fourteen, six were NEET and living in
supported education, one in employment and seven were in full-time
education.
Once again, the group bonded quickly and were amenable to being split
into smaller, mixed groups. The group rules were reiterated and agreed
upon. The school support worker (Marie Fella) attended and again was
very helpful in facilitating.
26
Unfortunately, personal issues outside of the group affected this
session, with several of the attendees in disagreement with one
another. Five attendees left the group prematurely – which was
challenged by SK. The remaining members strongly supported the
group continuing, and turned what could have been a very negative
experience into a positive one. SK agreed to contact each attendee
individually outside of the group to ascertain whether or not they would
continue to abide by the agreed rules.
Feedback and evaluation was generally positive.
1. Welcomes:
All taxis arrived on time. This was due to a change in the company
providing transport.
2. Health and safety warnings/confidentiality:
Illustrated and agreed upon as per session three. Special emphasis was
made on the rules regarding respect and bullying as several issues had
been raised by attendees regarding conduct outside of the group.
3. Introduction to session:
Programme as described.
4. Revisit the Dominator and the Role Model (and Bully):
Each attendee was asked to provide a characteristic of each and issues
from last session were revisited (regarding the Bully).
5. How does the Liar use his tactics to control his partner?
The group responded well to this element and were forthcoming with
many examples.
6. How does the Headworker use emotional abuse to control his partner
and how does the Persuader use women to persuade us not to leave,
drop charges, etc?
The group responded well to this element and were forthcoming with
many examples.
7. What does the Headworker and Persuader believe about women and
how do we share his beliefs?
The group responded well to this element and were forthcoming with
many examples.
27
8. Excuses for violence:
Facilitated quiz wherein attendees were asked to ‘run around’ and move
to a designated part of the room to answer quiz questions (areas
marked agree, disagree and don’t know). Attendees were then asked
to explain their answers. As with other research and studies on young
peoples’ perceptions of violence, some attendees sought to justify
violence as a means to an end. This was challenged by SK and other
examples of violence (such as the war in Iraq) were used to provide
context.
9. Conclusion:
Feedback was very encouraging, with attendees advising that:



It’s great we can laugh, even when the subject is bad;
This is the only time of the week when I can say my opinions are
heard;
It’s like coming to see my friends.
PM, SK and MF met after the group to decide on a course of action
following the upheavals. It was decided to warn the relevant attendees
regarding their conduct and to reinforce the agreed rules with all
attendees.
SK contacted all attendees following this session to apologise for the
disharmony and to ensure that the issues did not unduly affect
membership. Two members were warned about future conduct, and
one was excluded (with an option to return if she could make
apologies).
SK also met the Foyer and school groups outside of the session to
address ASDAN issues. It was agreed that the Foyer display could be
shown in the Foyer’s lobby on completion and that the school would
provide space for their attendees to display their work. The school also
agreed to have their attendees’ work put forward to the AQA’s Record of
Achievement files.
Session Five: The Jailer and the Sexual Controller
Objectives:

To enable women in discussion to understand the tactic of
isolation, why it is used and what effect it has on women.
28


To enable women in discussion to understand the tactics of sexual
abuse, why it is used and its effects.
To enable women in discussion to continue to identify how a nonabusive person behaves.
Outcomes:




Participants will have identified experiences of being subject to,
behaviour that reduces sources of support.
Participants will have identified experiences of being subject to
sexually abusive behaviour.
Participants will have identified where their own beliefs coincide
with those of the Sexual Controller.
Participants will have identified more characteristics of a nonabusive person.
Process:
1.Welcomes.
2.Health and Safety warnings/planning.
3.Introduction to session and ice breaker.
4.What tactics does the Jailer use to cut women off from others?
5.What does he believe about men and women and where do these
beliefs come from?
6.How does the Jailer affect women?
7.What tactics does the Sexual Controller use to achieve his
objectives (and what are these objectives?)?
8.What does he believe about men and women and where do these
beliefs come from?
9.Conclusion.
1. Welcomes:
As previously (5 minutes).
2. Health and Safety warnings/planning:
As previously (5 minutes).
3. Introduction to the session and ice breaker:
As previously, but with additional ice breaker (10 minutes).
4. What tactics does the Jailer use to cut women off from others?
29
PM to facilitate two groups feeding back the tactics of the Jailer.
Attendee from each group to scribe (15 minutes).
5. What does he believe about men and women and where do these
beliefs come from?
Again in two groups, PM to facilitate discussion on the Jailer’s beliefs.
Attendees from each group to scribe (15 minutes).
6. How does the Jailer affect women?
Groups to brainstorm on the question and provide examples. Attendee
to scribe (15 minutes).
7. What tactics does the Sexual Controller use to achieve his objectives
(and what are these objectives)?
PM and SK to facilitate group discussion with examples from the media
and from attendee’s own experiences (15 minutes).
Break for 20 minutes
8. What does he believe about men and women and where do these
beliefs come from?
PM and SK to facilitate group discussion with examples from the media
and from attendee’s own experiences (20 minutes).
9. Conclusion:
As with previous weeks, attendees reminded of Role Model and his
characteristics and feedback from session sought by SK (10 minutes).
Total time, 1 hour 55 minutes.
Facilitator’s notes from session:
Overview:
Eleven girls aged 15 – 23 attended the fifth Freedom session (one was
unavailable and one voluntarily left the group). Of these eleven, five
were NEET and living in supported education, one was in employment
and five were in full-time education.
30
Once again, the group bonded quickly and were amenable to being split
into smaller, mixed groups. The group rules were reiterated and agreed
upon. The school support worker (Marie Fella) attended and again was
very helpful in facilitating.
None of the previous session’s tensions arose and this week’s group
dynamic worked very well. Pat Craven’s ‘Living with the Dominator – A
Book About the Freedom Programme’ was disseminated and very well
received. Attendees were asked to read the book before the next
session, as many were referring to it (to the exclusion of creating their
own ideas) during the session.
Once again, feedback was positive.
1. Welcomes:
All taxis arrived on time. This was due to a change in the company
providing transport.
2. Health and safety warnings/confidentiality:
Illustrated and agreed upon as per session four. Again, special
emphasis was made on the rules regarding respect and bullying as
several issues had been raised by attendees regarding conduct outside
of the group.
3. Introduction to session and ice breaker:
Programme as described. PM facilitated ‘the sun shines on…’ ice
breaker.
4. What tactics does the Jailer use to cut women off from others?
Each attendee was asked to provide a characteristic of each and issues
from last session were revisited.
5. What does he believe about men and women and where do these
beliefs come from?
The group responded well to this element and were forthcoming with
many examples.
6. How does the Jailer affect women?
The group responded well to this element and were forthcoming with
many examples.
7. What tactics does the Sexual Controller use to achieve his objectives
(and what are these objectives)?
31
The group responded well to this element and were forthcoming with
many examples.
8. What does he believe about men and women and where do these
beliefs come from?
The group responded well to this element and were forthcoming with
many examples.
9. Conclusion:
Feedback was very encouraging, with attendees advising that:



Everyone just sits down, listens and then takes part;
Everyone has really got involved;
The session was very calm – which was nice.
All facilitators felt that the group had really bonded and progressed well,
and that the methodology of Freedom Programme was becoming
second nature to them.
Session Six: The Badfather
Objectives:



To enable women in discussion to understand tactics of using
children to control the behaviour of women.
To enable women to identify the beliefs they share with the
Badfather.
To enable women in discussion to continue to identify how a nonabusive person behaves.
Outcomes:



Participants will have identified experiences of being subject to,
and using, manipulative behaviour.
Participants will have identified where their own beliefs coincide
with manipulative tactics.
Participants will have identified more characteristics of a nonabusive person.
Process:
32
1.Welcomes.
2.Health and Safety warnings/planning.
3.Introduction to session.
4.What tactics does the Badfather use?
5.What does he believe about men and women and where do these
beliefs come from?
6.Which of these beliefs do we share?
7.Art project.
8.Conclusion.
1. Welcomes:
As previously (5 minutes).
2. Health and Safety warnings/planning:
As previously (5 minutes).
3. Introduction to the session:
As previously (5 minutes).
4. What tactics does the Badfather use?
PM to facilitate two groups feeding back the tactics of the Badfather.
Attendee from each group to scribe (15 minutes).
5. What does he believe about men and women and where do these
beliefs come from?
Again in two groups, PM to facilitate discussion on the Badfather’s
beliefs. Attendees from each group to scribe (15 minutes).
6. Which of these beliefs do we share?
Groups to brainstorm on the question and provide examples. Attendee
to scribe (15 minutes).
Break for 20 minutes.
7. Art project.
33
PM and SK to facilitate individual art projects to allow attendees to
express their feelings about the Dominator, his characteristics and the
effect that he has on them through a variety of media (40 minutes)
8. Conclusion.
As with previous weeks, attendees reminded of Role Model and his
characteristics and feedback from session sought by SK (10 minutes).
Total time, 2 hours 5 minutes.
Facilitator’s notes from session:
Overview:
Eleven girls aged 15 – 23 attended the sixth Freedom session. Of these
eleven, five were NEET and living in supported education, one was in
employment and five were in full-time education.
Once again, the group bonded quickly and were amenable to being split
into smaller, mixed groups. The group rules were reiterated and agreed
upon. The school support worker (Marie Fella) attended and again was
very helpful in facilitating.
The art project proved to be very popular and provoked a range of
emotions from attendees. ASDAN project books were distributed and
arrangements made for follow-up meetings during the next week.
1. Welcomes:
All taxis arrived on time.
2. Health and safety warnings/confidentiality:
Illustrated and agreed upon as per session five. Break length was reiterated and agreed upon.
3. Introduction to session:
Programme as described, but with additional art project.
4. What tactics does the Badfather use?
34
Each attendee was asked to provide a characteristic and tactic of the
Badfather. All attendees found this exercise to be very easy as they
had now built a working knowledge of the Dominator.
5. What does he believe about men and women and where do these
beliefs come from?
The group responded well to this element and were forthcoming with
many examples.
6. Which of these beliefs do we share?
The group responded well to this element and were forthcoming with
many examples.
7. Art Project:
Attendees were advised that this work could either be used as part of
their ASDAN displays or kept personally if they did not feel comfortable
sharing their work with others. A range of art and crafts resources were
used, and all attendees produced art to reflect their feelings about the
Programme and the issues therein. Several of the girls reacted quite
emotionally to this element, but all said that they had enjoyed the
experience. For all facilitators, this type of project was deemed to be
more in keeping with the needs and wants of young people in a youth
work environment.
9. Conclusion:
Feedback was very encouraging, with attendees advising that:


The session was brilliant;
Art was fun and really helped us express our feelings.
All facilitators felt that the group had really bonded and progressed well,
and that the methodology of Freedom Programme was becoming
second nature to them. The art project was something that could be
taken forward to other Freedom-type projects in the future.
Session Seven: The Effects on Children (Parts 1 and 2)
Objectives:
35




To enable women in discussion to understand how children are
affected by domestic abuse.
To enable women in discussion to understand how children of
different ages can be affected by domestic abuse.
To enable women in discussion to understand how children’s lives
can be improved by the absence of domestic violence.
To enable women in discussion to continue to identify how a nonabusive parent behaves.
Outcomes:



Participants will have identified in detail how children are affected
by domestic abuse.
Participants will have identified that the absence of an abuser will
improve children’s lives.
Participants will have identified characteristics of a non-abusive
parent.
Process:
1.Welcomes.
2.Health and Safety warnings/planning.
3.Introduction to session.
4.What do children need?
5.How does the experience of domestic abuse affect children of
different ages?
6.Sketch.
7.How can things improve?
8. Conclusion.
1. Welcomes:
As previously (5 minutes).
2. Health and Safety warnings/planning:
As previously (5 minutes).
3. Introduction to the session:
As previously (5 minutes).
4. What do children need?
36
PM to facilitate two groups feeding back the needs of children.
Attendee from each group to scribe (15 minutes).
5. How does the experience of domestic abuse affect children of
different ages?
Again in two groups, PM to facilitate discussion on needs/age. SK to
facilitate PowerPoint presentation illustrating this with testimony from a
range of children and their mothers. Attendees from each group to
scribe (20 minutes).
Break for 25 minutes.
6. Sketch
Attendees to deliver a short sketch, acting out an abusive situation.
They will then be asked to repeat the sketch, with the other attendees
asking the actors to ‘freeze’ and explain their emotions (30 minutes).
7. How can things improve?
Groups to brainstorm on the question and provide examples. Group to
concentrate on the positive parent and his/her relationship with his/her
child. Attendee to scribe (10 minutes).
8. Conclusion.
As with previous weeks, attendees reminded of Role Model and his
characteristics and feedback from session sought by SK (5 minutes).
Total time, 2 hours.
Facilitator’s notes from session:
Overview:
Twelve girls aged 15 – 23 attended the seventh Freedom session. Of
these twelve, five were NEET and living in supported education, one
was in employment and six were in full-time education.
Once again, the group bonded quickly and were amenable to being split
into smaller, mixed groups. The group rules were reiterated and agreed
37
upon. The school support worker (Marie Fella) attended and again was
very helpful in facilitating.
The ‘sketch’ exercise proved to be the highlight of the session, with
three girls acting out an abusive scenario.
Once again, feedback was positive.
1. Welcomes:
All taxis arrived on time.
2. Health and safety warnings/confidentiality:
Illustrated and agreed upon as per session six. Break length was reiterated and agreed upon.
3. Introduction to session:
Programme as described, but with additional acting exercise.
4. What do children need?
Attendees were asked to brainstorm and come up with the protective
factors needed if children and young people are to thrive.
5. How does the experience of domestic abuse affect children of
different ages?
SK facilitated a PowerPoint presentation with testimony from a range of
victims of domestic abuse. Attendees were asked to reflect on the
effects of abuse on the victims, especially with regards to their age and
developmental needs. All attendees provided excellent feedback to the
exercise.
6. Sketch
Three school-age attendees were asked prior to the session to develop
a short sketch to deliver to the remainder of the group. They acted out
a scene whereby an abusive male, his partner and child returned home
following a shopping trip. Once indoors, the abusive male began to use
various characteristics of the Dominator to intimidate (and eventually
rape) his partner, whilst we learned that the child had also been
sexually abused by the male.
The girls repeated the scene, with other attendees asking them to
‘freeze’ at various points and explain how they are feeling (in
character). All attendees were then asked to reflect on previous
38
learning regarding effects of victims and characteristics of the
Dominator.
Everyone thoroughly enjoyed this exercise, and requested that it be
repeated during the next session.
7.How can things improve?
Attendees were asked to reflect on previous learning and suggest ways
in which life could be improved for victims if an abusive male were to
leave the family environment. All responded well to this exercise and
provided many examples.
8. Conclusion:
Feedback was very encouraging, with attendees advising that:




I have learnt how children can be treated by the Dominator;
I think that children can become messed up;
I see how there can be long term effects on children;
It’s amazing how quickly kids have to grow up [when an abusive
male is present in the relationship].
The sketch exercise was the highlight of this session, and one which
should be repeated in subsequent programmes. It may also be used in
other settings, such as DV training events or school assemblies.
Session Eight: Warning Signs & Plenary
Objectives:




To enable women to know what resources are available to women
who are being abused
Recognise the early warning signs of being abused
Recognise how they have changed as a result of the programme
Recognise a wide range of non-abusive behaviour.
Outcomes:

Participants will have the ability to recognise the early stages of
the process of abuse
39


Participants will demonstrate through written evaluation how they
have changed/what they have learnt as a result of the Freedom
Programme
Participants will have identified a wide range of attributes
possessed by non-abusive males.
Process:
1.Welcomes.
2.Health and Safety warnings/planning.
3.Introduction to session.
4.Review of the Dominator and his characteristics.
5.‘Sleeping with the Enemy.’
6.Plenary (including non-abusive characteristics).
7.Evaluations.
8. Conclusion.
1. Welcomes:
As previously (5 minutes).
2. Health and Safety warnings/planning:
As previously (5 minutes).
3. Introduction to the session:
As previously (5 minutes).
4. Review of the Dominator and his characteristics:
PM and SK to facilitate group discussion on how we now perceive the
Dominator on completion of the Freedom Programme. (15 minutes).
5. Sleeping with the Enemy:
Group to watch the movie for first 15 minutes and pausing same to
identify abusive characteristics of the lead male character (20 minutes).
Break for 25 minutes.
6. Plenary (and characteristics of the non-abusive male):
40
PM and SK to facilitate a group plenary and help attendees celebrate
the characteristics of a non-abusive male (30 minutes).
7. Evaluation:
Attendees to complete a written evaluation on their learning and
experiences of the Freedom Programme (10 minutes).
8. Conclusion:
PM and SK to celebrate group achievements (5 minutes).
Total time, 2 hours.
Facilitator’s notes from session:
Overview:
Twelve girls aged 15 – 23 attended the final Freedom session. Of these
twelve, five were NEET and living in supported education, one was in
employment and six were in full-time education.
The group were sad to that the programme was ending, but were
looking forward to completing their ASDAN qualifications.
The movie proved to be the highlight of the session, with all attendees
identifying abusive characteristics of the lead male character.
Once again, feedback was positive and the formal evaluations showed a
substantial degree of learning by all attendees. These evaluations have
been attached in a separate document.
The deadline for ASDAN folders was extended to allow attendees more
time to develop their portfolios (as several were studying for GCSEs),
and it was agreed that all attendees and facilitators would go out for
dinner on completion to celebrate learning.
41
Appendix B: Pre-programme information for professionals
Freedom For Young People: Professionals’ Briefing
Introduction:
Freedom For Young People (F4YP) is based on Pat Craven’s wellestablished Freedom Programme – a cognitive therapy course
providing women with an understanding of the Duluth model of power
and control in abusive relationships. The Freedom Programme has
been re-designed with the special needs of young people in mind, but
its original aims and objectives (to provide [women with] an opportunity
to develop ways of thinking and behaving to protect themselves, their
children and others from harm) remain central to Freedom For Young
People.
FA4Y will be delivered by two fully trained Freedom Programme
facilitators - Paula Mayes, a Locality Youth Work Co-coordinator Level 5,
and Simon Kerss, a qualified Connexions Outreach Personal Adviser,
who is also Chair of the Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire Domestic
Violence Taskgroup. Both have a wealth of experience in individual and
group work settings and have worked with victims of domestic abuse
for many years.
F4YP is funded by the City and South Cambridgeshire Community
Safety Partnerships, and is delivered in partnership with
Cambridgeshire’s Office of Children and Young People’s Services
(OCYPS), Cambridgeshire Youth Service, the Cambridge and South
Cambridgeshire Domestic Violence Taskgroup and the Meadows Youth
and Community Centre, Kings Hedges.
Aim:

To provide an opportunity for young women (aged 14- 20) to
develop ways of thinking and behaving to protect themselves,
their children and others from harm and to provide them with the
knowledge they need to achieve this.
Objectives:

To increase young women’s ability to take control of their lives.

To increase young women’s perception of the importance of, and
ability to, make positive use of social and educational provisions
to achieve the five key performance indicators of the Every Child
42
Matters agenda (Be Healthy, Stay Safe, Enjoy and Achieve,
Make A Positive Contribution and Achieve Economic WellBeing).

To recognise the beliefs held by abusive men.

To recognise the impact of the life experience on their own
attitudes and beliefs.

To increase their ability to recognise what steps they need to take
to protect their children.
Inputs:
This is a 8 x 120 minutes evening group programme (with a half hour
break for supper), delivered to a maximum of 20 young women by two
trained facilitators. The sessions will be held at the Meadows Youth and
Community Centre, Kings Hedges, beginning Wednesday 31st January
at 1830hrs, and continuing every Wednesday evening (with a one week
break for half-term) until 28th March 2007.
An evening buffet will be provided, as will free travel to/from the
Meadows by taxi from across South Cambridgeshire and Cambridge
City. Appropriate childcare costs will be met, but unfortunately, there
will be no on-site provision for babies/young children, and attendees
will have to make their own arrangements for the duration of the
course.
Attendees will also have the option of having their input to F4YP
accredited through the ASDAN CITIZENSHIP IN ACTION
COMMUNITY AWARD, which will require them to undertake an
additional 24 hours independent work towards producing a portfolio
which will be used to help support other young women affected by
domestic abuse.
Outputs:

Completion of all sessions.

Completion of ASDAN award, where appropriate.
Outcomes:

Demonstration of impact of learning through post-programme
evaluation.
43

Production of ASDAN accredited portfolio, where appropriate.
Process:
Group sessions, which include active participation in structured
discussions and work involving value awareness, problem solving,
perspective training, social skills training (assertiveness) understanding
and developing self. Much of this process will follow established
Freedom Programme planning, with further input from Break the
Silence – End the Violence, a resource pack for work with young
people on issues of domestic abuse and child protection.
ASDAN accredited work will be moderated and explained session by
session by the group facilitators.
Target Group:
Young women aged 14 – 20 who feel that they would benefit from
learning how they are affected by their gender position within society.
This includes those who wish to acquire the knowledge and skills to
protect themselves from future abusers.
Referrals:
Informal enquiries/referrals can be made to Simon Kerss at OCYPS,
Pioneer House, Vision Park, Histon, Cambs. CB24 9NL, (01223)
712500/07733261637, or on simon.kerss@connexionscp.co.uk. Simon
will contact each referral prior to the start of the programme to
ascertain transport/childcare needs and to ensure all necessary safety
precautions are in place prior to commencing F4YP.
44
Appendix C: Risk Assessment
Freedom Programme for Young People – RISK ASSESSMENT
Youth Development
Activity
Freedom
Programme for
Young People,
group therapy
sessions held at
the Meadows
Community
Centre, 1
Catherine Street,
Cambridge, each
Wednesday 1830
– 2030hrs
between 31/1
and 28/3/07
Hazard
identified (The
potential to
cause harm)
Behaviour of
young people
Current control measures
(do they meet the hazard?)
Hazard severity
rating. Ask
“What if?”
Likelihood
Risk
rating
Action required with clear
priorities
Who will do it
and monitor?
Date of
completion
Adequate & appropriate
staffing
3
1
3
Staff to discuss issues with
young people
Programme
facilitators
Throughout
programme
Programme
facilitators
On-going
Programme
facilitators
When
necessary
Rules and boundaries
agreed with group at the
start
Young People will be asked to
leave if behaviour
detrimental/risk to rest of group
Individual risk assessments
done on any YPs who are of
concern
Behaviour
/safety of
young people
in taxis
Rules/boundaries agreed at
the start. Taxi drivers to be
CRB checked. Will use
County contract for taxis
3
1
3
Staff to discuss the issues with
young people.
Young people made aware of the
consequences of their actions.
Complaints to be passed to taxi
firm and Senior management at
OCYPS.
Make sure young people are
aware that they should sit in
the back
Ensure that young people
wear seat –belts at all times
and stay seated
If staffing allows, carry out a
search.
Parents and police informed if
necessary.
Call emergency contact
Meet in a safe place with
two staff present at all times
Call taxi firm if appropriate,
then emergency number
given by attendees
Young people
get lost/go
Facilitators, young people
and emergency
contacts/referring agencies
are aware of how young
people are getting to and
3
2
6
Phone young people to see if
there are any problems
Phone taxi company/bus
45
missing or
don’t arrive at
meeting place
from meeting point
company to find out if there are
any problems.
Ask yps to let us know if
they can’t make it on time
Inform emergency contact &
leave message at young
person’s home
Brief all facilitators on risk
assessment and ground
rules for YPs, and action to
be taken
If no-one there and still have no
contact with young person.
Phone the police.
YPs aware of facilitator’s
identities and roles
regarding CP issues
Disclosure of
Abuse
Child protection policy
followed
3
1
3
Child protection procedure
followed
Remind yps of policy and log
any disclosures for follow up
with line manager the following
day
Logging concern forms
available in file with lead
facilitator
Programme
facilitators
When
necessary
All facilitators aware of child
protection policy. All
facilitators CRB checked.
Two staff with young people
at all times
Meet in safe place with
two staff present with young
people at all times
Health and
Safety of
young people
and staff
Facilitators to complete oral
risk assessment with each
YPs on first session.
Emergency number to be
logged
3
2
6
Call emergency
numbers/referring agency or
emergency services if needed
and let line managers know
ASAP
Programme
facilitators
When
necessary
Incident forms/accident
forms available – facilitators
aware of location
First aid kit available in
Meadows
46
YPs to stay in agreed venue
at all times unless
permission given to leave
YPs to let facilitators know
whereabouts at all times
Facilitators to carry mobiles
at all times
No alcohol or drugs to be
consumed by
Yp’s/facilitators
All rules and consequences
agreed by the group at start
of project
Staff trained on policies and
procedures
Staff to follow CCC code of
conduct
Follow fire procedure for venue
Take register of all attendees
Evacuate building
Check all yp’s present
All facilitators and YPs aware
of fire exits and evacuation
procedure for the building
Facilitators to be aware of
the number of YPs in the
group at all times (those for
whom they are responsible
for)
Fire
Programme
facilitators
4
1
4
Move other young people from
danger
Attempt diplomacy
Contact police if necessary
Young person sent home
Entire group leave venue if
necessary.
Call emergency contact and
parent if necessary
Adequate staffing
Agree ground rules with
group at start of project
Trained facilitators
Staff to agree consistent
approach.
Conflict between
young people
Two worker with yps at all
times
Make sure all young people
Follow up any incident with
individual contact with yps to
ensure cooperation
3
1
3
On-going
Programme
facilitators
When
necessary
47
want to be there and are
aware that participation is
voluntary.
Find out what happened
Contact emergency contact if
necessary depending on the
type on incident. Advise centre
management and referring
agency
Two youth workers with
young people at all times.
Facilitators clearly
identifiable
Young people made aware
of the dangers of talking to
strangers and of disturbing
other centre users
General public
around in the
venue
Programme
facilitators
2
1
2
On the day
All incidents and accidents should be reported to the line manager and reports should be written.
Signed by implementing officer ………………………………………………………………..
Date ……………………………………
48
49
Appendix D: ASDAN Portfolios
51
52
53
54
55
56
57