Executive Summary of Findings
2021/22 Academic Year
Growth Project description
In an initial report section entitled The Growth Project (go to tab on the main page) a brief description of the history of Young Social Innovators as an organisation is followed by a more detailed discussion of the historical evolution of the Growth Project from its inception in Cork City to its present coverage of all local authority areas in the ROI. The broad goals of the Growth Project are to expand the reach of Social Innovation Education to 50% of all second-level schools and to embed and deepen the approach within participating sites through support, networking, and related activities.
What transpired across Ireland relative to the Growth Project is not exclusively attributable to the work of the local leaders since YSI has both a historical and ongoing presence. Therefore, in addition to tracing the key events and circumstances within the project as it has evolved, this section lists some of the organisational accomplishments that have occurred during this timeframe and the impact the project has had on YSI as an organisation. The section concludes with a table showing the array of local leader assignments during 2021/22.
For this follow-up progress assessment of the Growth Project, two evaluation approaches have been selected: brief case studies of local leader activities and quantitative portrayals of key outcome data. These build on data and processes explored during the 2020/21 school year[1] as they have played out with the expansion of local leader coverage to all local authority areas (cities and counties) in Ireland
[1] 2020/21 Evaluation Report: https://reacheval.com/ysi-growth-project-report-main (PW: Solution.131518)
Growth Project Process Data (Case Vignettes)
Case vignettes of local leader Growth Project activities can be found in the next major section of the report (go to Local Leader Case Vignettestab on the main page). This section provides “thick description” of local leader activities within priority process domains deemed essential to their role. These include: (1) activation, (2) amplification, (3) integration, and (4) networking.
Activation in this context implies local leader activities that engage participants (young people and Guides) to more fully clarify and plan what they intend to accomplish, operationalise and sequence project activities, overcome obstacles, and instill greater energy and enthusiasm to propel projects forward. Amplification refers to local leader activities that emphasise ensuring the perspectives, concerns, and leadership of young people are supported, valued, and at the center of project formulation and implementation. For youth-led social innovation to have authentic meaning, the “voice” of young people must inform and guide decision-making such that young people perceive they played a substantial role in bringing about change. Integration indicates that local leaders encourage the full participation and engagement of young people in each step of the process, including activities that occur outside of the classroom, such as making a presentation or advocating for change. When local leaders assist young people and educators to find resources, link to key people or community organisations, collaborate across settings, or build internal capacity, their work can be construed under the broad category of Networking. Each of these functions is illustrative of added value associated with the role of the local leader. This aspect of their work demonstrates how their efforts can deepen, extend, and sustain the work of YSI across the country.
The vignettes are presented in narrative form using edited video material. In effect, these are “stories” told from the perspective of each of the local leaders (with a synopsis by the evaluator). Each provides an exemplar of a unique strategy that a local leader has deployed to achieve growth goals. For each of these examples, the local leader describes the activity, its school and community context, the process through which they engaged with Guides or young people, the specifics of what they did to help make the activity successful, what worked and what did not, what impact was experienced, and what was learned.
Several themes emerge from these illustrations. The first is the centrality of building and sustaining relationships with people in schools and communities as a prerequisite to serving in a facilitative capacity (this is the essence of the role). Relationship-building takes time and concerted effort. Second year local leaders appear to develop and capitalize on more advanced opportunities by virtue of knowing the “landscape” and having more fully developed relationships with Guides, administrators, and community members. This is not to discount the fact that even when local leaders are relatively new to YSI, opportunities emerge for relationship-building that can lead to creative collaborations, and there are numerous examples of these in the video material. Opportunities emerge in different ways and at different points in the relational process. Local leaders show evidence of being sensitive to these “moments” and capitalising on them.
It is also apparent that each local leader has a different style, background, and skill set, and each region has very different characteristics, history, and needs. The approaches taken by local leaders vary considerably, but notably the “stories” demonstrate that careful listening to young people, educators, and community members can result in a wide range of positive outcomes. This illustrates that timing, relevance, and goodness-of-fit are all important predictors of success. But it also seems to be the case that readiness for change (sometimes due to failure and frustration) and serendipity can play a role in the emergence of opportunity.
A further observation is that there seem to be critical moments when things get “stuck” in the life of projects. When local leaders have open and accessible relationships with their constituents, they can play a role to help “unstick” things. This is illustrated in several of the stories they tell. Providing reassurance and support, coupled with some creativity and permission to try different ideas, is effective when deployed. This is especially the case when organisational hurdles (e.g., bureaucracy) is an obstacle to moving forward. A related theme that emerges in several of the stories is that local leaders can be helpful in identifying resources that students and Guides might not be aware of and help them to procure what they need to do their work.
Local leaders often work directly with young people. This implies that they have achieved “entry” into the site to the extent that they have been able to build trust with young people, engage productively, amplify their voice, and activate them toward change. Connecting with and activating young people is at the heart of youth-led social innovation, and local leaders can serve as models for educators and community members.
The role of the local leader in facilitating, supporting, and linking projects is complex. They need to be able to move from external consultant and resource person to collaborator, organizer, emotional supporter as circumstance and need arises. This requires flexibility and capacity to tolerate ambiguity, knowing when to actively intervene and also when to step back. There is no one “right” way to engage with people in the role of local leader, but in the end the intent is to empower others to be effective.
Growth Project Outcome Data
Academic year 2021/22 was the first that the entire country was served by local leaders. In 2020/21, there were fewer local leaders, their coverage areas were delimited, and regions were not strictly defined in relation to local authority areas (see prior evaluation report). Therefore, direct comparison of application/retention/recruitment/withdrawal rates of target areas in the prior year is neither feasible nor appropriate.
It was therefore determined that the present report should highlight the developmental status of each bounded city/county area in the ROI (geographically defined by local authority areas) as of 2021/22. In the report section entitled Growth Project Outcome Data, city/county developmental progress in recruitment, retention, participation, and withdrawal rates for 2021/22 are shown in map form. These maps correspond to the city/county areas that each local leader has responsibility for.
Within that section of the report, links are also provided to a table showing the array of youth-led social innovation projects by local leader and area, and a list of all 2021/22 projects by project name, topic, level and city/county is provided. In addition, contextual information in the form of links to Children and Young People’s Services Committee (CYPSC) descriptive and demographic reports for each city/county (local authority) is provided.
A summary table that aggregates data from the area maps Is provided below. It provides a national perspective on what transpired in 2021/22 and enables indicators relevant to assessing growth. The table shows that 208 institutions (sites) completed applications to participate, which is similar to participation levels in the past three years. Since this is the first year that the Growth Project has achieved national coverage, this number may serve as one baseline for judging future growth as the project “recovers” from the effects of the Pandemic.
An indicator (and predictor) of growth is likely to be the capacity to retain sites year-upon-year. As can be seen in the table, in many locales retention rates are quite high, especially in areas where YSI has a historical presence. Recruitment and support strategies designed to enhance rates of retention are central to the ongoing effort at promoting growth and engagement.
A corollary to rate of retention is the capacity to add new sites, as defined by whether the 2021/22 participant had been involved with YSI in either the past year or in the preceding three years. The New site statistic is perhaps most sensitive to the combined recruitment efforts of local leaders and YSI more generally. Here it can be seen that 72 sites were new to YSI in relation to the 2020/21 and, when viewed over a three-year period, 43 of the 2021-22 sites were new to YSI. These are substantive indicators of effective growth that is not likely attributable to the natural variation in participation that may occur from year to year. They are a strong indicator of successful recruitment.
It can further be seen that during this past year twenty institutions dropped out (9.5% of participants). A potential indicator of effectiveness for the Growth Project may be ensuring that sites complete the work that they propose upon application. Local leaders can play a vital role helping participants overcome obstacles to completion, thereby reducing the overall withdrawal rate.
The final column of the table shows what is, in effect, the current level of site participation (market penetration) within each area. It is clear from these percentages that opportunities for growth are distributed across the country. Notably, several areas approach or equal the 50% target, but especially in more remote areas or areas where YSI has not had a historical presence, there is considerable work to be done. Again, these area numbers can serve as a baseline from which to judge future growth.
Finally, below is a descriptive summary of broad national outcomes over the three years of the Growth Project across all sites in the ROI. Note that 2021/22 was the first year local leaders covered the entire country. Over the three-year period of the Growth Project, 22,441 students took part in projects, and of these 4,566 of these were from schools new to YSI.
[2] Due to the impact of COVID, most totals decreased in 20/21 as schools shut down but have increased in 21/22 back to 2019/20 participation levels. Note also the recent positive increase in 2021-22 junior cycle students and workshops