2.2 Community Partner Interview Analysis - Youth

Organizations

The Social Planning Council interviewed key community organisations in Cambridge and North Dumfries that serve the youth population in order to gauge the inclusively of organisations and the community proper. Here is a list of the youth organisations interviewed and the services that they provide:

OrganizationService
Argus Residence for Young PeopleProvides emergency and transitional shelter to youth 15-24, counseling, career services.
City of Cambridge Community Services Dept. (Youth and Sport)Liaison between various youth councils/groups. Works to engage youth.
YMCA Immigrant servicesTo promote well being and inclusion of refugee and immigrant populations.
YMCA Youth CentreSetting up a new free Youth Centre at the YMCA.
John Howard SocietyWorks with youth for career planning and crime prevention.
Big Brother Big SistersProvides friendship and mentoring for young boys and girls.
Community Support Services of Ayr and North DumfriesWorking to engage youth in a rural setting.

There were three sections in the interview; questions regarding the interviewee organization, questions regarding the community on the whole and questions about the youth they serve.

Organizational Perspective

The various roles that the interviewees held in the organisations ranged from Executive Director, to Program Manager, to Recreation Coordinator. Also, these interviews probed issues such as barriers to participation, community perceptions, opportunities for change, etc.

Participants interviewed felt that social and economic inclusion was very relevant to their organisation. All the interviewees felt that inclusion was something that their organisations strive for when creating programs for the youth population. Many of the organisations felt that inclusion was the overriding idea or philosophy of their organisation, showing just how important and relevant the term was to them. An excellent example of this relevance is shown in one organisations mandate. The entire vision of the organisation is to integrate and include rather than assimilate. This shows that the relevance of the term inclusion is truly at the forefront of most organisations serving youth.

Although all the organisations work hard to include and integrate they all stated some barriers that some people might have when looking to participate in their organization and/or the community. The one common barrier that every organisation stated was transportation. This seems to be a very important barrier youth must overcome in order to participate. Some of the interviewees stated that no matter how well an event was planned, kids could not come unless there was transportation provided. Youth do not have their own transportation so if a parent is busy, then they cannot participate. Many do not know how to use the transit system, even if they can afford to use it. This is an even greater issue for rural youth. Most services for youth are run in the city of Cambridge; therefore youth from North Dumfries need a car to get to the services because there is no connection to the Grand River Transit System. This lack of transportation is a serious barrier that all youth and more importantly, youth service providers need to look at.

Another common barrier is lack of knowledge among youth about programs catered to their population. Many organisations felt that they provided many quality services but youth simply did not know about the, eliciting the common response “There is nothing to do in Cambridge” from youth they encountered. This barrier stems from a lack of funding organisations have to go towards quality marketing plans to inform and attract youth to their programs. Some of the organisations try very hard to stretch their resources and find creative ways to market, always asking youth if the marketing is working, but they find the lack of dollars a true problem when it comes to marketing.

Another interesting barrier is community perception. One organisation in particular stated that the community’s false perception that their services are for marginalized or criminal youth acts as a barrier for some youth to use their services. “Mainstream” youth sometimes feel that they are not welcome or are “scared” to use the programming. This is a major problem because these services are provided for all youth, even the “mainstream” youth.

Other barriers stated in the interviews were:

  1. Language
  2. Gender
  3. Religion
  4. Culture

Despite these barriers the organisations work hard to overcome them, and this is shown in some of the successes and strategies that they have taken to work through such barriers. All the organizations have some policy towards fees. Most provide services for free, which totally eliminates the barrier of income that is such an issue for youth, especially for marginalized youth. If an organization charges for service, it is done on a sliding scale or subsidies are readily available. No organization that we interviewed will withhold services or programming based on income.

Also some organizations subsidize travel, especially the rural organizations. This could mean gas money or money for a bus ticket. Also organizations are always looking at inexpensive, creative marketing strategies. They all have an excellent rapport with their clients and constantly ask them about what resonates with the youth population. These relationships are a sign of the success these organizations have at reaching out to youth and making them feel welcome. And for all of the organizations that is the key, making the youth feel welcome.

When asked what could be used to better understand youth and what tools can be used to make organizations more inclusive, one theme ran throughout, relationships. Every participant felt that the best way to understand youth and therefore include them in the community was to build a relationship with individual youth. By talking and more importantly, listening to what the youth population had to say, organizations could then truly understand what the youth wanted and truly include them in decision-making and programs. It is the best and least expensive method for including youth. However it was noted that many adults do not have the patience and/or knowledge to understand how to approach youth at all.

This is where the idea of some sort of workshop or tool book for including youth in committee structure might come into play. Also, a workshop that teaches youth how to be a part of a committee seemed like a common theme. Other ideas included:

No interviewee was currently using a tool with regards to inclusion or had awareness of a project working on inclusion.

Community Perspective

In this section of the interview participants were asked to reflect on if and how exclusion and isolation were factors for youth and whether or not this isolation was different between rural and urban youth. Also a probe was done into what the community does well and does not do well for the youth population.

Every interviewee felt that isolation and exclusion were highly relevant issues for youth today. Given the fact that our society places the most value on economic productivity, the youth population is being undervalued and excluded by the “mainstream” of society because they have very low productivity. This means youth rarely have a say in public forums and are overlooked. Couple this with the already common issues that teens are going through such as puberty, identity shaping, social acceptance, and the increasingly harsh consumer society we live in, isolation can become a huge factor in a youth’s life.

Also, it was noted that the increasing use of electronic media has cut off many youth from actual face-to-face human relationships. So much so that they feel uncomfortable talking to other people, especially adults. True relationship building has been compromised because of dependence on electronic media.

The differences between rural and urban youth seemed to solely revolve around issues of transportation. These issues have been talked about previously. Other than transportation, participants felt that the isolation factor was the same for all youth whether living in rural or urban settings.

Some of the key organisations that the interviewees felt could help make the community more inclusive for youth are:

All the interviewees felt that the community provided ample services for youth and that they were more or less accessible. Also they all felt that the co-operation and networking between various community organizations was something that was a plus for the youth population. One participant noted that they shared calendars between organisations to make sure that there was no programming overlap in the community.

Other various things the community does well:

There was no one overriding theme among participants on what the city was not doing well, only various suggestions.

One strategy that a few interviewees felt could work to make youth more included in the community was letting youth design their programming. With the facilitation of the organisation, the youth get to make the decision on what type of programming they want and the details of individual programming. This requires patience and understanding on the part of the organisation because as noted, youth like to move at their own pace. However, if done properly it works well to make the youth feel welcome and in turn have larger turnouts at programs/events. Also, it was mentioned that mentoring is an excellent strategy to break down barriers for youth.

Youth Perspective

When asked what they felt youth wanted different in the community the overriding theme was activities. The biggest complaint is that there is nothing to do in Cambridge and North Dumfries. Youth want a place to hang out; the most requested type of hang out is a permanent Skate Board park. Every participant offered a skateboard park as a solution.

Also, among most of interviewees an over riding theme was that youth just want to be listened to and respected. This one point probably does the most for youth inclusion. If they feel listened to and respected by the community than they are more likely to include themselves in that community.

Community perception was also something that participants felt youth wanted to be changed. Many youth feel discriminated against solely because of their age. They feel that the community believes that all youth are “punks” and cannot be trusted. This can be seen in many corner stores where most instate a rule allowing no more than three youth in the store at a time. However, many interviewees felt that youth could make changes to this perception. Every participant noted that youth must stand up for their rights and be more visible in the community. This is a key point for youth to understand. The community on the whole wants youth participation (although sometimes they are not very good at expressing it) so all it takes is for youth to stand up and say, “I think this needs to change, how can I do that?”

It was also felt among some interviewees that a good strategy for youth is to take on small projects and do them very well. The promotion of those successes would be the best way to gain trust in the “mainstream” community.