Four out of ten crimes carried out by youth mainly theft, robbery and social harm (Munice,2009). Apart from these crime knife crimes are on the high amongst youth and is a topic that is in the media all the time (Golding and McClory (2008) cited in Stephen (2010), p.194). Knife crimes are at it’s highest in disadvantaged areas where there is poverty and a dense population. It is also equally related to gangs (Stephen 2010, p194). A study carried out by Pitts (2007) demonstrated that gangs can be linked to drug markets. Gangs are based in disadvantaged, poor and unstable communities. These communities have a lot of crime and victimization and members of the community do not report anything, therefore the cycle is ongoing. Gangs are protective of the surroundings and it is their comfort zone (Stephen, 2010 p.194). A further study carried out Kinetra et al (2008) suggested that gangs are protective of their area as they lack in programmes and services which engage them in activities to keep them motivated (Stephen, 2010 p.195). Statistics have shown that from 2000 the numbers of youth that have re-offended have dropped by 3.3 percent and from 2008 it had dropped 0.4 percent (Great Britain:Ministry of Justice, 2011). Farrington (1996) found that there are number of factors that can increase the chances of young people to committing crime. These factors include coming from a split family or where there is parents arguing, living in a poor housing conditions and in high risk crime areas, low educational achievements, lack of discipline and control from parents and behavioural disorders. Many of these factors also lead to social exclusion within the community. Other factors that can lead to social exclusion are problems within school, in care, if you come from an ethnic minority and have committed crimes previously (Gray 2007, p.403). Many authors have claimed that early intervention is the best technique to overcome these major risk factors which therefore will lead to the prevention of youth offending (Muncie, 2009).
Community based initiative programmes
The government together with agencies, youth justice board, home office and department of education are working together all the time to find positive methods towards the prevention of crime (Gray, 2007 p.403). There are prevention methods on a national level as well as a local level. Community.programmes has to be integrated to suit everyone’s needs, areas and how people socialize with one another in that community. According to Rock (1988) and Power (1989) states community programmes are built upon on the recognition of the many issues that are involved in deprived areas. These issues include low socio-economic status, increased levels of crime, joblessness, bad health, homelessness and low levels of educational achievement (Jack, 2005 p.294). Jack (2005, p.295) states that governments have to be tactful in creating successful programmes for the betterment of children’s lives and to decrease inequalities. The Labour Government brought in community programmes like Sure Start. In order to support parents and children Sure Start Children’s Centres were opened. This initiative was targeted towards families with children of the age five and under and from deprived areas. These centres provide services like health services for families, childcare options, early learning, parenting support and help to find a job (Schneider, Ramsay and Lowerson, 2006 p.431-432). Hodge (2004) stated that positive outcomes were shown in parenting, children’s health and learning as well as more use of various services (Jack, 2005 p.298). Although Gordon (2000) argues that Sure Start centres did not cover the poorest children which were outside the Sure Start areas (Jack, 2005 p.298). Another initiative developed by the government was the Children’s Fund. According to the Children and Young People’s Unit (2004), the Children’s Fund was a cohesion between three sectors: voluntary, community and legal. These three sectors together with young families and children provided help towards deprivation and creation of social inclusion (Jack, 2005 p.298). Another initiative which was introduced by the Home Office between 2008 and 2009 was the Tackling Knives Action Programme (TKAP). TKAP was to prevent knife crime and that too among the youth. It was to also stop youth carrying sharp objects. To reach these goals there was a number of initiatives within this programme that was carried out. These included anti-knife campaigns, tougher sentences and stop and search (Taylor, 2010 p.187). The government also put in powers like Acceptable Behaviour Contracts (ABC) and Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (ASBO) in order to bring down crime rate. ASBO is an order that is used for unacceptable behaviour that has lead to grief, panic or be a nuisance to someone that do not live with them. It is given to anyone over the age of ten and given by the police, local authority, registered landlords or housing associations (Youth Justice Board, 2011).
Local Council
Jack (2005, p.299) suggests many of these programmes and services help to bring together the community which then means social cohesion. Therefore social exclusion will reduce over time. Bottoms and Wiles (1997) states that it its true that where people reside and how they communicate with one another in that area plays an important role towards crime rates (Jack 2005, p.299). Apart from government funded initiatives there have been many small programmes as well. One of these programmes is the Youth Inclusion Programme (YIP) developed in 2002. This programme was aimed at young people that were more likely to cause crime in deprived areas and concentrated on issues like pressure from friends, use of drugs and just youth with nothing to do. This was done through the use of learning, music, sports and workshops (Jack, 2005 p.301). According to the Youth Justice Board (YJB) (2003) crime rate had fallen due to this initiative (Jack, 2005 p.301). Another programme that has helped to reduce crime is Communities that Care (CtC). CtC was initially created in USA. The key aims of this were to stop low educational outcomes, misuse of drugs and young pregnancy. This initiative requires the input from the local community as well as skilled workers. This team will assess current services provided and build upon that (France and Crow, 2001 p.1-2). The final initiative is the Safer Schools Partnerships (SSPs). The YJB, Department of Education and Skills and the Association of Chief Police Officers created this initiative. The aim of this programme is to solve conflicts, behavioural issues and crime-related issues in and around schools (Burgess, 2006 p.24). Programmes like this work together with schools, police, youth offending teams (YOTs), health services and local authorities towards an early intervention. Therefore it is very successful as it is a joint partnership and creates a sense of positiveness (Burgess, 2006 p.25). A successful partnership is the youth offender panel (YOP), which has one person from YOT and two voluntary people from the community. This ensures that members of the local community will have an involvement in youth crime. A contract will be set up between them and the youth and it is based around the concept of restorative justice. This has helped to ease the process of the youth offender to integrate back into the community easily (Sharpe, 2001 p.26-27). Even though there are programmes set up on a national level, local councils play a key role in the service they provide for youth. Local council services are easily accessible by local communities (Twelvetrees, 2008). This brings in one model of community education ‘decentralization’ where by the services or programmes are near to where people live therefore it is more likely for people to participate. In the London borough of Redbridge, there are many services that support young people like the Youth Service, Detached Team and Youth Bus, Youth Centres and Clubs, Redbridge Youth Parliament and information on drug and alcohol use (Redbridge Youth, 2011).
Restorative Justice
Restorative justice is a process in which both the victim and the offender come together in order to mend the crime or conflict that have occurred. It can be used formally or informally. Formally it is used with victim and offenders and informally it is used on daily places like at work and schools. It is an opportunity for the offenders in someway to repair the damage caused to the victims by apologising and answering the questions of the victims. It enables to create a positive forward thinking (Restorative Justice Council, 2010). This process is not only to make amends between all parties but it is there for the youth offenders to be accountable for their mistake (Gray 2005, p.941). In the UK, the Thames Valley Police carried out a three-year study to change cautioning practices towards the direction of restorative justice (Hoyle et al, 2002 p.1). Similar schemes have been set up in Australia and New Zealand and the Thames Valley Police followed these schemes (Walklate 1998, p.217). Hoyle et al (2002, p.43) states that the restorative meetings were somewhat successful as it had given many of the offenders an opportunity to recognize what they had done is wrong. Eighty percent of the victims and offenders had felt they had solved the problem and realised these meetings were great way forward (Hoyle, Young and Hill, 2002 p.43). According Hoyle, Young and Hill (2002, p.68) restorative justice helps offenders understand their problems better and therefore obtaining help towards rectifying these problems like housing and finance. There have been some criticisms to restorative justice. A study carried out by Miers et al (2001) showed that victims felt that the offenders were not being punished enough, by apologising is an easy way out (Hoyle, Young and Hill, 2002 p.61). ). Restorative justice still needs more implementing to prove that is a successful way forward for the victim, offender and in the legal system (Hoyle, Young and Hill, 2002 p.67). The use of restorative justice creates healthy relationships. The Safer Schools Partnerships use the process of restorative justice to solve problems like bullying, anti-social behaviour, conflicts, non-attendance of school and social exclusion (Burgess 2006, p.25).
Voluntary Organisations
There are many voluntary organisations that contribute to help youth of disadvantaged backgrounds to move forward positively and to give them a sense of direction instead of making mistakes.
The YMCA provides work on youth and crime. YMCA’s main aim in youth and crime is early intervention towards the prevention of youth crime. Many of the YMCA’s in the UK provide many programmes that distract youth away from committing a crime. They give the opportunity not only to learn about social issues but also allow them to voice their opinions. The YMCA work jointly with Youth Offenders Institutions. YMCA helps youth to gain confidence, self esteem and ensure they have a sense of belonging (Baker, 2003 p.34). The YMCA covers activities in several key areas which intervene early towards the prevention of crime like:
‘…….parenting and family; crime and safety; skills and education; money and work; citizenship and personal development; housing and homelessness;…….’ (Baker, 2003 p.34).
An example of YMCA’s work is a project called Access All Areas. This project is a stepping stone towards the youth voicing their opinions within politics mainly about issues on crime and issues around crime. The youth were given the relevant training and skills to carry out this project. It had given the youth offenders to talk about their own crime related stories and what had helped them come out of crime. Another project which created was YSPEAK?. Again it was the involvement of youth in politics at a local level and an international level. (Baker, 2003 p.34). Projects like these give youth a sense of citizenship and civic responsibility. It also gives them community involvement.
A major risk factor to committing to crime is social exclusion. Not feeling a part of something, feeling left out can lead to unwanted damage. Racism is a form of social exclusion, especially for the black boys. This leads to low self esteem and lack of confidence (Cantle, 2008). Many charities have been created to help these underachieving black boys to better themselves in many ways and change the thought of failure. Dr Tony Sewell stated that institutional racism is not the reason behind the underachievement of the black boys. It is down to bad parenting, not having discipline or the need to achieve and of course, peer pressure (Operation Black Vote, 2010). According to Dr Tony Sewell, the science subjects need to involve more practical lessons to enable boys to be kept motivated with their learning and to express themselves. As schools aren’t doing this boys feel aggravated, therefore leading to the involvement in gangs and even committing crime (Sewell, 2008). Dr Tony Sewell is an education consultant and the director of the ‘Generating Genius’. Generating Genius is a project that started in 2005, it is a project to help talented students of diverse and from disadvantaged backgrounds to develop their science knowledge. The programme is aimed at eleven to twelve year olds and it is run over five years through the summer schools, internships and mentoring (Generating Genius, 2011). The aim of starting this programme at a young age is the process of early intervention. At this age the students would have been less exposed to the surrounding negativity which means they are still ambitious. Generating Genius is a programme for the talented, in return it will help to make them leaders and role models for the future generation, therefore closing the gap of underachievement in the under privileged (Kinson, 2008). Black boys lack role models, therefore another important aim of this programme is to have exposure to black role models and the best way this was thought to be achieved is to spend a part of this programme in Jamaica. Sewell has thought this is all to create positivity in the young boys (Taylor, 2006). Many schools, local education authorities, top universities and top companies are very much backing Generating Genius (Generating Genius, 2011). Another similar programme is called ‘The From Boyhood to Manhood Foundation (FBMF)’. The FBMF started in Southwark, London in 1996 and the directors of this programme are Decima Francis and Uanu Seshmi. The aims of this programme is to help young boys whom are excluded from school mainly between the ages of 11 to 19 from causing crime and gives them a chance of life betterment. The programme helps to stop young boys from being on the streets and getting involved in gangs and street crime. The FBMF works with local authorities and other services in order to promote education and self-development of the boys. The programme has been successfully running, the boys that participated on the programme feel it has given them a sense of direction, improves their behaviour and given them a responsibility towards the community (The From Boyhood To Manhood Foundation1, 2011). It clearly seen that many of these voluntary projects and organisations play a key role in preventing youth re-offending. Most of them reflect on the models of community education.
Social Identity Theory
When one thinks of community the key point that comes across is the members of that community. They will have a shared vision which makes them integrated. The language of community is important towards various groups within the community. An example of this is used by the Black and Ethnic Minorities to display them (Crow and Allan, 1994). Cantle (2008) defines social identity theory as:
‘…………we have a natural tendency to place ourselves in one group and to socially categorise people in relation to that group, often on the basis of an immediate judgement. We then favour members of our own group, at the expense of members of other groups.’ (Cantle, 2008 p.115).
Tajfel and Turner (1986) distinguished the difference between personal and social identity. They identified social identity it linked to the group one is associated with and members of the group want to create a positive social identity which gives more self-esteem (Brown, 2000 p.746-747). The theory is based on two factors; permeability and security. Permeability means even though there is a permeable membership of the group, if a member thinks they can be of success within society then they will move away from the group and see themselves as separate person. Security is if one thinks that their current situation unavoidable then the process of adaptation fits in (Brown, 2000 p.748). Multiculturalism creates a separation between groups and integration has to be something that bring everyone together without any boundaries. Therefore diversity has to be accepted and assimilation has to be eliminated (Phillips 2005, p.4)
Conclusion
Overall a combination of the various models of community education will help to prevent youth crime. This essay has discussed about community, community work and community education. It has also looked at areas on youth re-offending and the initiatives and programmes that are available for the prevention behind youth crime. The essay has discussed about restorative justice and voluntary organisations as well as the social identity theory.
WORD COUNT: 3728
References:
Baker, J. (2003) ‘Prevention, intervention and representation: the YMCA’s work on youth and crime’ , Criminal Justice Matters, 54, pp.34-35 Swets Wise [Online]. Available at: (Accessed: 29 March 2011)
Brown, R. (2000) ‘Social Identity Theory: past achievements, current problems and future challenges’ , European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, pp. 745-778 EBSCO [Online]. Available at: (Accessed: 6 April 2011).
Burgess, J. (2006) ‘Safer Schools Partnerships’ , Criminal Justice Matters, 63 (1), pp. 24-39 Swets Wise [Online]. Available at: (Accessed: 16 May 2011)
Cantle, T. (2008) Community Cohesion : A New Framework For Race And Diversity. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan
Crow, G. and Allan, G. (1994) Community Life: An Introduction to local social relations. Hertfordshire: Harvester Wheatsheaf
Defining Community Education (2008) Available at: (Accessed: 20 April 2011).
Dodds, A. (2009) ‘Families ‘At Risk’ and the Family Nurse Partnership: The Intrusion of Risk into Social Exclusion Policy’, Journal of Social Policy, 38 (3), pp. 499-514 Cambridge Journals [Online]. Available at: (Accessed: 10 May 2011).
Farrington, D. (1996) Understanding and Preventing Youth Crime. [Online]. Available at: (Accessed: 17 May 2011).
France, A. and Crow, I. (2001) CTC-The story so far-an interim evaluation of Communities that Care. [Online]. Available at: (Accessed: 8 April 2011)
Generating Genius (2011) Available at: (Accessed: 10 May 2011).
Gray, P. (2005) ‘The Politics of Risk and Young Offenders’ Experiences of Social Exclusion and Restorative Justice’ , British Journal of Criminology, 45 (6), pp.938-957 Oxford Journals [Online]. Available at: (Accessed: 31 March 2011).
Gray, P. (2007) ‘Youth Justice, Social Exclusion and the Demise of Social Justice’ , The Howard Journal, 46 (4), pp.401-416 Swets Wise [Online]. Available at: http://www.swetswise.com (Accessed: 10 May 2011).
Great Britain. Ministry of Justice (2011) Youth Justice Statistics 2009/10 England and Wales (annual) [Online]. Available at: (Accessed: 20 April 2011).
Hoyle, C., Young, R. and Hill, R. (2002) Proceed with caution:
An evaluation of the Thames Valley Police initiative in restorative cautioning. [Online]. Available at: (Accessed: 9 May 2011).
Jack, G. (2005) ‘Assessing the impact of community programmes working with children and families in disadvantaged areas’ , Children and Family Social Work, 10, pp.293-304 EBSCO [Online]. Available at: (Accessed: 17 May 2011).
Kinson, S. (2008) BBC-London-People-London People:Dr Tony Sewell. Available at: (Accessed: 12 May 2011).
Muncie, J. (2009) Youth and Crime. 3rd edn. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Operations Black Vote (2010) Sewell: Blame Black boys for underachievement. Available at: (Accessed: 10 May 2011).
Phillips, T. (2005) ‘Sleepwalking.pdf’. Available at: (Accessed: 12 May 2011).
Popple, K. (1995) Analysing Community Work: It’s Theory and Practice. Berkshire: Open University Press
Redbridge Youth (2011) Available at: (Accessed: 18 May 2011).
Schneider, J., Ramsay, A. and Lowerson, S.A. (2006) ‘Sure Start graduates: predictors of attainment on starting school’ , Child: Care, Health & Development, 32 (4), pp.431-440 Swets Wise [Online]. Available at: (Accessed: 10 May 2011).
Sewell, T. (2008) Tony Sewell: Racism is not the problem in schools-guardian. Available at: (Accessed: 13 May 2011).
Sharpe, K. (2001) ‘Community Matters: making a difference to tackling youth crime’ , Criminal Justice Matters, 45, pp. 26-27 Swets Wise [Online], Available at: (Accessed: 29 April 2011).
Stephen, D.E. (2009) ‘Time to stop twisting the knife: a critical commentary on the rights and wrongs of criminal justice responses to problem youth in the UK’, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 31 (2), pp.193-206 Swets Wise [Online]. Available at: (Accessed: 17 May 2011).
Taylor, E. (2010) ‘Tackling Knives Action Programme: Key findings’ , Probation Journal, 57 (2), pp.187-188 Swets Wise [Online]. Available at: (Accessed: 17 May 2011).
Taylor, K. (2006) BBC News-Education-Scheme aims to ‘grow’ black boys. Available at: (Accessed: 12 May 2011).
Tett, L. (2010) Community Education, Learning and Development. 3rd edn. Edinburgh: Dunedin Academic Press Ltd.
The From Boyhood To Manhood Foundation1 (2011) Available at: (Accessed: 10 May 2011).
Twelvetrees, A. (2008) Community Work. 4th edn. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan
What Is Restorative Justice/ Restorative Justice Council (2011) Available at: (Accessed: 8 May 2011).
Youth Justice Board – ASBO and ABC (2011) Available at: (Accessed: 12 April 2011).
