This document describes an auditing and self-assessment model used to evaluate the quality of youth work in Finland. The model consists of criteria across five activity forms of youth work. Auditors and youth workers use the criteria to assess activities through peer auditing and self-assessment. The goal is to identify strengths, areas for improvement, and develop high-quality youth programming through self-reflection and feedback. The multi-step auditing process involves observation, assessment, reporting and providing constructive feedback to support continuous learning and growth.

1. Auditing and self-assessment model for youth
work
Meiju Hovi 2013
(Kirsi Autio modified from training material)

2. Assessment model—what is it?
• A tool for assessing the quality of youth work and
developing it
• Centring on learning from one's work and developing
work through the learning
• The assessment criteria exist for five activity forms
1. Open youth evenings (youth centres)
2. Small groups with goals
3. Camping activities
4. Online-based youth work
5. Online game activities

3. Assessment model—what is it?
• The logic of the criteria for the assessment work model comes
from the auditing and assessment model in use in the UK (
www.ofstedt.gov.uk)
• In Finland, the assessment model of youth work emphasises
self-learning in the activities and at the sites and peer auditing
in developing the work instead of external audits
• The assessment model has been developed in collaboration
youth leaders
• The criteria are updated based on the experiences obtained
• Used in various parts of Finland

4. Assessment model—why?
• Youth work requires a qualitative assessment tool
 quantitative indicators are an important but insufficient way of
assessing youth work
• Assessment is needed as the foundation of the development work
• Helps identify the strengths and areas of development of the activities
• Youth workers (and why not the youths!) find the criteria an easy way to
understand what types of components good work is made up of
• With the criteria and levels, a shared meaning and understanding is
created for the content of high-quality activities

5. Assessment model—how does it work?
• Peer auditing
– Youthworkers´colleagues perform the auditing and give feedback on the
evening/audit event in question based on their observations
– The auditing is always done in pairs so that the assessment is always based
on the observations of the same event by at least two people.
– The auditor pairs are formed so that auditors come from different youth
centres or from a neighbouring municipality, for instance. For example, a
regional auditing structure has been developed in south-eastern Finland as
collaboration between several municipalities.
• Self-assessments
– The work community/employee assesses the activities for a specific period
of time, selects the areas of improvement and prepares an action plan for
the development with his/her supervisor

6. Using the criteria of the auditing model in audits
The target of the audit is solely the activity form agreed upon (open youth
work , small groups with goals, camp activities etc.)
– On the one hand, it is important for the auditor to restrict the
target of the audit on the one hand and, on the other,
visualise the big picture in which the activities being audited
belong
• The activities and actions, i.e., what can be seen happening, are
audited
– The goals are not audited
– The employees’ personal skills or tendencies are not
assessed. For example, when assessing criterion 5
(activeness of the interaction), the instructors are not
assessed as individuals; instead, the focus is on how present
they are in the activities of the evening and with the youths.
Each instructor naturally implements their presence through
their personal style, some for example being more talkative
than others.

7. Work community activities Activities of the youths Resources
1. Division of responsibilities of the instructors
2. Utilising the expertise of the instructors
3. Space control
4. Situation management
5. Activeness of the interaction
6. Meeting the youths as individuals
7. Utilising customer feedback in planning the
activities
8. Utilising indicators in planning the activities
9. Knowledge of the area
10. Collaboration and partnership
11. Partnership networks
12. Planning of activities
13. Gender sensitivity
14. Opposing racism
15. Ethnic equality
16. Youth work methods and tools
17. Environmental education
18. Media education
19. Promoting a healthy lifestyle
20. Collaboration with the homes
21. Operating models
22. Rules
23. Safety
24. Interaction between the instructors
25. Internal flow of information and communication
between the instructors
26. Behaviour and speech culture
27. The youths’ learning
28. Scope of involvement
29. Decision-making structure
30. The youths’ participation
in communication
31. Peer activities
32. Division of duties between the
youths, workload
33. Interaction between the youths
34. Instruction resources
35. Utilising the spaces
36. Furnishing of the spaces
37. Activity equipment
38. Computers
39. Cleanliness and general appearance of
the premises
40. Sustainable development—sorting and
recycling
41. Sustainable procurements
42. Energy consumption
43. Information material targeted at the
youth
44. Communicating about the activities
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA: Open youth evenings at youth centres

8. Criteria level descriptions
Each criterion has four assessment levels
• Excellent (4), good (3), satisfactory (2), poor/insufficient (1)
Logic of the criteria and levels
• The level descriptions are explanations of what is required to reach that level
• Some of the levels are normative, such as safety
• Good activities or policies mentioned for a lower level are included in the higher
level but not separately mentioned
• At the excellent level, the actions are common to the entire work community or
pair; an individual employee who works excellently cannot reach the excellent
level
• The cannot assess column
• Used if the observer notices when making the common assessment that the
observations are not sufficient to assess the criteria and the instructors were
not asked about it in more detail
• NOT a so-called 0 level
 If the activities are assessed so that they do not reach level 1, level 1 is still
used and the issue is mentioned in the auditing report in the notes column
or as an area of development

9. Example of a criterion
ASSESSMENT
CRITERION
4 EXCELLENT 3 GOOD 2 SATISFACTORY 1 INSUFFICIENT/POOR
10. Gender
sensitivity
Conscious actions of
the instructors exceed
the traditional borders
of gender roles.
The actions of the
instructors enable all
youths to have
physical and mental
space to work equally
at the centre.
The activities have
been planned so that
they are attractive to
girls and boys.
Gender sensitivity
has not been taken
into account in the
planning and
implementation of the
activities.

10. Auditing process
• (Selecting and informing the sites to be audited)
• Preparing for the audit (peer auditors have
undergone auditing training)
• Auditing situation and the auditor’s role
• Assessment
• Auditing report
• Feedback meeting

11. Preparing for the audit
• Contact the site to be audited and agree on practical measures
– Times of the audit and feedback meeting
• Getting to know the youth facility’s website
• Reviewing the criteria
• Division of duties with the audit pair
– Both will make observations but the criteria that must be asked about can
be divided
– Agree what topics to discuss with the youths, what division of work
• Division of work in writing the audit report

12. Auditor’s role
• Inspects issues professionally and ethically
• Bases the observations on criteria
• Remembers that the assessment is confidential
• In the audit situation, is sensitive to what he/she listens, sees
and observes, and asks questions if needed
• Does not compare the activity being audited with that of his/her
own site  is open to new issues and views
• Can and wants to work interactively
• Works as the “critical friend” in the feedback event
– Does not give instructions or advice or order areas of development
– Is appropriate and fair
– Can give constructive, honest and encouraging feedback
– Believes in openness

13. The audit
• Observation = listening, watching, feeling the atmosphere,
“expresses curiosity”
• Presenting questions
 to the instructors
 to the youths
• Writing down observations to the criteria set or audit form
• The criteria guide the observation and presenting of questions
• Duration 1.5-2h
• Check with the auditing pair/group during the audit:
• what criteria need more information, what has been discussed
with the youths and instructors
• Write down observations during the audit  the report
will be written faster and you remember the justifications for the assessment
better

14. Assessment
• The assessment is done in stages. First, as individual
work, an assessment of the evening using the criteria set and
level descriptions.
– At this stage, you can use half points, i.e., note that something is between
good and satisfactory
• preparing the shared assessment with the work pair/audit
group
– Come up with a shared view and assessment
– If everyone agrees on the assessment, no discussion is needed, but the
justifications of the assessment should be stated, particularly for the
criteria where the level is satisfactory or insufficient/poor
– The cannot assess column is used if the observations and discussions did
not provide sufficient information for the audit  note in the additional
information column
– Select the strengths and areas of development and justify them

15. Auditing report
• The task of the report is to document the audit and benefit the work community,
instructors and organisation, helping them develop the audited activity
• Write as soon after the auditing as possible—agree on who writes the final form
of the report
• A successful auditing report is clear and highlights a suitable number of central
strengths and development areas: 1–3 of both
– a strong list of strengths may cause “inflation”
– a long list of criteria that need development may make it more difficult to
choose the areas that will be developed and decrease the desire to develop
the work
• Not everyone who uses the report may have been present in the audit and/or
the feedback meeting  make the text as descriptive as possible so that a
person who was not present gets an idea of the content and a feeling of the
evening and the assessment of the auditors
• The strengths and areas of development are written as whole
sentences. Also their justifications.

16. Areas of development
• The areas of development should preferably be selected directly from
the criteria
• When describing the areas of development, you can use the
expression “on the one hand… on the other…”as follows:
– “A structure has been created for the involvement activities (centre meetings) but the
instructor still dominates the related activities. As an area of development, we see the
better use of the existing structures, “blowing life” into the structures. The instructors’
work attitude conveyed an interest in listening to the youths, so the premise for the
involvement activities is excellent.”
• Do not use expressions such as “must,” “has to be,” “is
necessary” or other imperatives, as the auditor’s role is not to rule on
what criteria should be developed or how
• You should not, however, be shy about giving critical and constructive
feedback, as the work community/instructor usually is aware of the
areas that need development. The way in which the matters are
expressed is extremely important.

17. Recording strengths
• The strengths are usually found in the criteria that have been marked
excellent or good
• A strength can be a thought, practice, policy or idea that contains the
aspects of more than one criterion, e.g.,
– “The premises are really clean, good and efficiently used. The community
exudes a warm spirit and the mutual interaction works in all directions.”
• A criterion that as a whole is not yet excellent or good can also be
listed as a strength, if there are related issues for which you want to
give encouraging feedback, e.g.,
– “Although the collaboration with the networks does not appear to work
particularly well, the instructors’ active style, persistence and search for
creative solutions for activating networks is worth noting.”
• In the strengths, you can describe the observed atmosphere, e.g.,
– “The atmosphere at the centre was genial and safe during the evening.”

18. Feedback meeting
• The audit report is sent in advance to the audited work community and its supervisor
• The feedback meeting is arranged shortly after the audit so that the justifications for the
assessment are still fresh in everyone’s memory. The auditors participate in the meeting,
along with the entire work community and the supervisor.
• The duration of the meeting is approximately 1h; one of the auditors is the chairperson
• Idea of the audit—the colleagues provide their “observations for use by the work
community” to support the development of the work
• Not all criteria need to be reviewed but auditors must be able to justify the level of the
assessments made if necessary
– the work community can rectify misunderstandingsthe criterion assessment level
can be changed, if justified
• The selected strengths and areas of development are discussed
• The feedback is given with respect to the criteria
• The feedback targets actions and issues, not people
• The feedback is a shared assessment of the audit pair/group of the activities
– in the feedback meeting, it is not fair to say, for example, “Well, in my opinion your
activity was very well planned but…”
• During the feedback meeting, avoid discussing youth work in general and concentrate on
the content of the audit

19. On utilising the assessment model
Auditing and self-assessment model for youth work is one tool:
1. Make the work visible
• Describing the activities and, consequently, youth work helps
justify the significance and impact of youth work
1. Outline and focus the discussion on the content of the work;
create a mutual understanding and an agreement on the
significance of high-quality activities
2. Provide orientation to new workers
3. Plan work content and select areas of focus
4. Develop assessment expertise and skills for providing
feedback
5. Learn from the work of colleagues
• Good ideas and practices (and learning from the not-so-good
ones...)