LYIP Project Report

The London Youth
Involvement Project
www.mentoruk.org.uk

2
The London Youth Involvement Project is a demonstration of the
hard work, dedication and commitment to a cause that we are all
passionate about. Over the past three years, we have worked hard as
a team of young people to really discover what the problem is with
young people and drugs and why they’re facing this problem.
As Youth Advisors, we came from different parts of London, but brought
our opinions and passions together to move towards a society that cares
for each other and seeks ways to protect young people from harm.
All the work and effort we put into the project wouldn’t have been possible
without the dedication and commitment of the young people we carried out
research with and the help and guidance of the wonderful Mentor team. They
have helped us to progress in our campaign for better protection for young
people from the harms of drugs and alcohol and taught us many valuable skills.
We have enjoyed begin a part of this project and the opportunities that it
has given us. We want to thank you for taking the time to look at this report
which demonstrates the work we have done and how we have done it.
An Introduction from
the Youth Advisors

3The London Youth Involvement Project
Why Youth Involvement?
The London Youth Involvement Project (LYIP) builds upon a strong legacy of
youth participation within Mentor. Listening to and learning from young people
is central to our work. It is the most effective way to understand what young
people want and need from drug and alcohol prevention. Their views inform
and extend our practice and ensure that our work has the greatest impact.
The LYIP had three key objectives: that young people inform the work of
Mentor; that young people inform the work of policy makers, practitioners
and others working within drug prevention in London; and that young people
themselves gain knowledge and skills which not only inform their work
with us, but which will benefit them for many years to come. Within these
parameters, the young people themselves set the agenda and the goals.
Methodology
We recruited 20 Youth Advisors to drive and deliver the project over
three years. Supported by a project officer, they carried out research with
their peers across London to identify how better to prevent young people
from coming to harm from drugs and alcohol; analysed their findings in
order to draw out recommendations; and disseminated their work via
conferences, seminars, social media and literature. 700 young people
participated in research, and many hundreds more were involved with and
have already benefited from the project, either by having their voice heard
in interviews, as audience members, or through the work of practitioners
and policy-makers affected by the messages delivered by the Advisors.
Findings
The research focused on three areas: drug education in schools; the role of
parents in prevention; and the role of police in prevention. The findings were
both shocking and reassuring. For example, we were shocked to discover that
over a fifth of young Londoners surveyed reported receiving no drug education
at school at all; and that over a quarter of those who had received drug
education had to wait until year 9 (ages 13-14) to do so. We were concerned
by the number of young people who reported feeling unsafe around adults
as a direct result of alcohol and drugs the adults consumed. However, we
Executive Summary

4
also found that young people want excellent drug education at school, that a
majority want to be able to speak meaningfully to their parents about drugs
and alcohol, and that most young people recognise that the police have a
role to play in keeping them safe from harms caused by drugs and alcohol.
In other words, young Londoners want the opportunity to be protected from
harms caused by drug and alcohol: they don’t want us to turn a blind eye.
Recommendations
A number of recommendations emerged from the Youth Advisors’
research. We sought opinions on these from delegates at a large youth
conference organised by the Advisors to mark the end of their project.
Each recommendation received at least 70% backing, and three received
support from over 90% of respondents. These were: that schools should be
required to spend a certain amount of time on drug education; that parents
should have opportunities to improve their knowledge about alcohol and
drugs; and that ways to increase and improve communication between
young people and the police should be identified and put into practice.
Thanks
Mentor is truly indebted to the young people from across London who gave
up their time - whether to participate in our research, take part in focus
groups, or as interviewees for the films we made. We also want to thank our
advisory group who helped make sure we kept on track and opened many
doors. Without the generous support of the City Bridge Trust and the Peter
Cruddas Foundation we would not have been able to undertake the project.
They made a ground-breaking commitment to help give young Londoners
a platform to be heard on the crucial but hidden issue of prevention. Finally,
and most importantly, we pay tribute to the Youth Advisors. Their dedication
and passion has inspired and humbled us and we can’t thank you enough.

6
Contents
1.
p. 7
2.
p. 10p. 12
p. 18
3.
4.
p. 20
5.
p. 24
6.
p. 30
7. 8.
p. 36p. 42
9.
p. 46
10.
Introduction Project Aims
& Objectives
Participation of
Youth Advisors
Recruitment
of Youth
Advisors
Retaining
Youth
Advisors
Activities &
Achievements
Case Study: Youth
Advisors’ Research
Case Study:
Mentor Youth
Conference
Project
Impact
Tools

Mentor
Mentor was born from the passionate conviction that prevention is better
than cure. Treating people for alcohol and drug misuse is vitally important.
But it is even more important to do all we can to protect young people in the
first place. We nurture their knowledge, skills, self-confidence and ambition
to encourage them to enjoy life, achieve and take important social roles.
For the past 14 years, Mentor has identified and promoted the most promising
routes to alcohol and drug protection. We’ve trialled approaches and
asked authoritative, independent evaluators to report on what works, what
doesn’t and where we need to learn more. We’ve been honest in reporting
shortcomings and ardent in promoting programmes that hold promise.
Building on a Legacy of Youth Involvement
From its earliest days, Mentor has championed the right and need for
young people to be involved in the development and delivery of prevention
projects. The LYIP built on years of experience in the field of youth
participation within drug and alcohol prevention. It also benefited from
running alongside other participation projects within the charity, allowing the
sharing of ideas and experiences to keep it fresh, innovative and dynamic.
Youth Involvement in Prevention Policy and Practice Development
In 2006, Mentor delivered a two year youth involvement project across
the UK, consulting with young people about substance misuse prevention
issues and getting them involved in the development of drug policy
and consultation. Those concerned expressly wanted young people to
be able to contribute meaningfully to national drug prevention policy
Introduction
1.
Our Vision: a world that provides opportunities for the
healthy development of children and young people
free from the harm caused by drug misuse.
Our Mission: to prevent drug misuse and promote the
health and wellbeing of children and young people.

8
and practice, and for youth participation to be developed at local and
regional levels. Mentor’s Muslim Youth Involvement Project looked at
the particular barriers to young Muslims’ participation in drug misuse
prevention policy and practice and how these might be overcome.
The LYIP developed the work of these two projects and piloted the first
steps to embedding youth participation in drug prevention policy and
practice in the capital, working with a pioneering group of young people.
Peer Education
Mentor has established a reputation for excellence in developing peer
education projects around prevention. Its Peer Education Alcohol Project
was delivered in Scotland over two years and aimed to change attitudes
to drinking amongst young people at serious risk of alcohol misuse. The
education programme was designed and delivered by a group of peer
educators and led to overwhelming requests from youth workers in
Scotland for support with establishing local peer education projects.
Building on this success, Mentor currently runs a three year project, Breaking
Out, in HM YOI Polmont which incorporates elements of peer education,
alcohol issues and personal development. It aims to reduce the risky
behaviours and harms caused by alcohol misuse amongst young offenders.
Youth Consultation
Mentor’s Alcohol, Offending and Deprivation project explores how far
young people involved with youth offending teams think alcohol may
have played a part in their risk-taking behaviours. Consultation with young
people allows the project to contextualise the raw data collected by
youth offending teams to gain a more accurate understanding of the role
of alcohol in young offenders’ lives and to explore levers for change.
Project Description
The LYIP was a three-year project funded by the City Bridge Trust
and the Peter Cruddas Foundation. It aimed to bring together a
group of young people – ‘Youth Advisors’ – from across London, who
would ensure the inclusion of youth voice in debates and decision-
making around drug and alcohol prevention within the capital.
The Youth Advisors were provided with training and support which
enabled them to identify and research drug prevention issues
and to deliver recommendations based on their findings.

10
Project Aims &
Objectives2. Aims
1. Establish a volunteer network of young people
who can communicate their views on:
A. Health and social issues that are relevant to drug
misuse prevention work with young people.
B. The effectiveness and relevance to young people
of current drug prevention work.
C. Mentor’s drug prevention projects, strategies and direction.
2. Deliver a project that establishes a good practice model for
youth participation in the public and third sectors, during which
the young people will lead on every step of the decision-making
process throughout planning, implementation and evaluation.

Objectives
1. Recruit and train 20 young people aged 12-15 across London as
Youth Advisors on prevention and facilitate the development of:
A. Their knowledge of substance misuse and prevention work.
B. Their skills in contributing to policy and planning
in the drug prevention sector.
2. Provide the 20 volunteer Youth Advisors with opportunities through
which they can contribute to effective prevention policy development
and practice in London and can ensure the work of Mentor is informed
and developed in accordance with the views of young people.
3. Facilitate a model whereby local and/or regional drug misuse
prevention professionals, departments, organisations and networks
across London consult the Youth Advisors when developing
and/or commissioning prevention policy and practice.
4. Promote project learning to inform development of youth
participation in drug misuse prevention strategy relevant
to young people, at local and regional levels.
5. Engage and inform diverse young people across London
about substances, substance misuse, prevention policy and
practice, and opportunities for youth participation.

12
Participation of
Youth Advisors3. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 12, states that
children and young people have the right to have their voice heard in
matters which affect them and for their views to be taken seriously. This
principle should guide all adults working with and for children.
At Mentor, we believe it is essential that the voice of young people is considered
and appreciated as prevention services are designed and delivered. Their
views improve the quality of decision making and the implementation of
programmes which are aimed at protecting their peers from harm.
Throughout the LYIP, we found that by allowing Youth Advisors
ownership of their project, they responded with an extraordinary
level of passion and commitment. A core group of Youth Advisors
worked with us for the duration of the project, and cite the extent of
their participation as a key factor in maintaining their interest.
The project was informed by the work of two influential thinkers on
young people’s participation: Roger Hart and Phil Treseder. Each
developed a model of participation which helped us to map and
monitor the type of participation we were aiming for and achieving.
Roger Hart believes that participation is a central tenet of citizenship
rights and responsibilities. His ladder of child participation helped
us map the extent of our Youth Advisors’ participation. It was
especially useful in identifying the dangers of apparent participation
which are in fact ‘Manipulation’, ‘Decoration’ or ‘Tokenism’.

I think it’s a really
hands on project.
Everything we’ve
done so far has been
us planning it and
just a bit of help
from the adults just
to get it done but
it’s really our ideas.
– Youth Advisor
I’ve been in a lot of
projects and ... it’s
more hands on ... with
other adults it’s about
60/40 to the adults
but here it’s about
80/20 to the children
and here they just help
us with the stuff and
we get to do the rest
which is pretty cool.
– Youth Advisor
Hart’s Ladder Model
While the project in its entirety could not
be defined by any one rung, it falls mainly
on rung six of Hart’s ladder: Adult-initiated,
shared decisions with young people (6).
Rung 1: Young people
are manipulated*
are decoration*
are tokenised*
assigned and informed
consulted and informed
Rung 6: Adult-initiated,
shared decisions
with young people
lead & initiate action
Rung 8: Young people &
adults share decision-making
*Note: Hart explains that the bottom
three rungs are non-participation.
Adapted from Hart R. (1992). Children’s
Participation from Tokenism to Citizenship.
Florence: UNICEF Innocent Research Centre

14
Treseder’s Model
Treseder’s model of participation was useful in undercutting the notion of
hierarchies of participation which a ladder can convey. Instead, his model
implies that different types of participation work best for different projects.
This project was ‘adult-initiated’ in that it was conceived by Mentor and
the initial project plan was designed prior to recruiting our Youth Advisors.
However, we were clear that young people’s participation was to be at
the very heart of the project and was the focus of its second aim:
Deliver a project that establishes a good practice model for
youth participation in the public and third sectors, during which
the young people will lead on every step of the decision-making
process throughout planning, implementation and evaluation.
Assigned but informed
Adults decide on the project and young people volunteer for it. The young people understand the
project, they know who decided to involve them and why. Adults respect young people’s views.
Adult-initiated,
shared decisions with
young people
Adults have the initial idea but young
people are involved in every step of the
planning and implementation. Not only are
their views considered, but young people
are also involved in taking decisions.
Consulted and
informed
The project is designed
and run by adults.
Young people have
a full understanding
of the process and
their opinions are
taken seriously.
Young people-initiated, shared
decisions with adults
Young people have the ideas, set up projects
and come to adults for advice, discussion and
support. The adults do not direct, but offer
their expertise for young people to consider.
Young people-
initiated and
directed
Young people have
the initial idea and
decide how the
project is to be
carried out. Adults
are available but do
not take charge.
Approaches to
Participation

Beyond Tokenism
We wanted to avoid a tokenistic approach to participation
at all costs. By tokenism, we mean:
• Using young people’s voices simply to illustrate our own work.
• Encouraging young people to express their views and opinions, but not
seeking ways of actively incorporating them into delivery, planning or policy.
• Using images of young people to give an impression
of participation which is not a reality.
• Implying individual young people are representative
of their peers when this is not the case.
Put simply, tokenism can be seen as a box-ticking exercise. It involves young
people only at a cursory level: at best, this means that their voices and ideas
have no chance of being incorporated; at worst, it is manipulative – using
young people to your own ends in order to add credibility to your work.
Instead, we believe that young people must be supported to form their
own ideas rather than persuaded to our way of thinking, that these
ideas should inform the development and direction of the project and
that young people should be able to see clear evidence of this.
I started Mentor because I wanted to get my voice
heard, but also to help others get theirs heard. I have
had great fun and made loads of new friends and feel
very at home in the group. I feel that my ideas are being
heard and differences are made because of what I say.
– Youth Advisor
Things to think about
Questions to have in mind when deciding whether or not a process has been clearly participatory:
• How has this information/view/piece of work shaped what we are doing?
• If it hasn’t shaped what we are doing, why not?
• Have the young people we work with been informed of how they have or
have not been able to precipitate change/determine project direction/
carry out a particular task/etc and, if not, have they been told why?
• Are they happy with this explanation?

16
Examples of participation in practice
Group Agreement/Rules
Establishing group agreements/rules is a well-established example
of good practice in participation. We did this the very beginning
of the project and it had clear benefits. As well as reducing the
likelihood of inappropriate behaviour, further benefits were:
• The group owned the rules – they were not imposed.
• Participants policed the rules themselves.
• They provided a good resource to refer back to when problems arose.
We ensured that the rules were fair and encouraged young people
to think about inclusivity and respect. When a rule was problematic,
we supported the group to explore why this was the case.
Participation in Project Planning
Three overarching themes were identified by the Youth Advisors during
the course of the project as areas they wished to explore in depth with
their peers: drug education in schools; the role of parents in prevention;
and the contribution of drugs and alcohol to young people’s sense of
safety within their communities. There were further areas the group
explored in less depth: the role of the media in stereotyping young
people; the role of government in prevention; and social norms.
The first issue to emerge was the inconsistency in the Youth Advisors’
experiences of drug education in their schools. While there were instances
of young people who had regular, high quality drug education, the majority
reported irregular drug education which they felt was of poor quality.
Allowing them time to explore their own experiences meant the Youth
Advisors were able collectively to identify an area they wished to research
with their peers, ensuring passion and commitment for the work.
We reviewed areas of interest throughout the project.
New topics were identified and incorporated.
From my past experience, drug education has been
very limited, and having seen the negative effects
that bad drug education can have on young people
gave me more of a conviction to change things.
– Youth Advisor

Gathering Information
The Youth Advisors identified how they might gather the views and ideas
of other young Londoners and focused on achieving breadth and depth so
that their research had credibility. Gathering the views of peers also meant
findings were representative of young London, not just of themselves.
Following a session on research methods, facilitated by the project officer
and Mentor’s policy officer, the Youth Advisors decided to conduct surveys,
focus groups and vox pops. They wanted to begin by examining the extent
and content of drug education in London’s schools and decided that a
survey would be the best method for gathering this evidence. A detailed
case study of their participation in research can be found on page 30.
Participation in Interim Seminar and End of Project Conference
The Youth Advisors planned and hosted a seminar to explore
emerging findings and an end of project conference in order
to showcase their final findings and draft recommendations. A
case study of the conference can be found on page 36.
Participation in Evaluation
We wanted to ensure that we gained clear insights into how far the project
was meeting its objectives. We identified three areas which we believed
would benefit from the objectivity and expertise of external evaluation:
participation; policy and practice impact; and impact on Youth Advisors.
We employed an evaluator with a strong background in evaluating
participation projects who was keen from the outset to involve young
people not only by gathering their views, but also by enabling them to
contribute to the evaluation process itself. To this end, Youth Advisors
were involved in determining how best to measure the outcomes
of the project and in gathering the information they identified, for
example, transcribing focus groups and helping to write reports.

18
Recruitment of
Youth Advisors4.
Ensuring Project Appeal
There are myriad opportunities for young people across London. This
wealth of choice, coupled with demands on time from school work and
exams, meant that maximising the LYIP’s appeal was essential.
We knew that many young people were interested in the role played by
drugs and alcohol in their immediate circles and wider communities. We
felt sure that they would recognise how important it is to have young
people’s opinions heard on issues which directly affect them and for
support services, or prevention work, to be informed by them. These two
strands were emphasised in publicity for the project alongside highlighting
the skills and learning which would be offered to young people.
Flyers emphasised the participatory nature of the project. We asked
young people whether they wanted to have their say about drugs
and alcohol and pointed to some of the ways we would enable them
to make their voices heard. Because the project was to be developed
and driven by the Youth Advisors themselves following recruitment,
detailed specification at initial recruitment stage was difficult. Instead, we
emphasised their ownership of the project and its focus on youth voice.
As the project progressed, we incorporated the voices of current
Youth Advisors into publicity to refresh and augment group
membership. See our project Toolkit for an example project flier.

Approaching Organisations & Young People
Recruiting young people to a new project requires a great deal of commitment
and persistence. It needs leg-work and enthusiasm. You may well have
fantastically appealing flyers, be regularly tweeting and blogging on your
organisation’s website, but we found the most effective way of recruiting was
by communicating directly with other organisations working with young people.
We collated a spreadsheet of youth organisations and schools in
London, contacted them via email and requested opportunities to visit
and discuss the project. We got involved in London-wide networks of
youth organisations, for example Participation Works. We spoke face-
to-face with teachers, youth workers, participation workers, etc. This
allowed the project officer to explain in greater detail how young people
could be involved and really generate enthusiasm for the project.
Organisations would either refer young people directly to us, advertise the
opportunity in their own publicity materials or invite us to speak with groups
of young people. Young people who were interested had the opportunity to
meet the project officer, either at Mentor’s office, or at a location convenient
to them to chat informally about the project and its opportunities. Meeting
young people prior to the project’s first Youth Advisor workshop helped
to ensure that they were put at ease and we found a majority of young
people we met with individually attended the first meeting. We also found
that some Youth Advisors introduced their friends to the project so that the
young people’s own networks became important recruitment sources.
Recruitment Packs
Recruitment packs contained information for parents
as well as Youth Advisors. They included:
As soon as I got the email
about this project I had to join
– Youth Advisor
• Introduction to the
project for parents
• Introduction to the project
for young people
• Personal details form
• Data Protection consent form
• Parental consent form
• Image and video consent form
• Written information
consent form

20
Retaining Youth
Advisors5.
We are extremely proud that we retained many of the Youth Advisors who
joined the LYIP at its inception. It is great for a project to bring with it a sense
of continuation and this results partly from maintaining a core group who
identify strongly with its work and enthuse others to become involved.
Participation
Meaningful participation is essential. We were determined that the Youth
Advisors would have ownership of the project – of their project - and
we worked hard to ensure this happened from the outset. We supported
the Youth Advisors to identify which areas of drug prevention they were
particularly interested in, allowing discussion and debate as essential to
the process. The three main areas the Youth Advisors decided to research
were each identified by them. They also devised surveys and focus group
questions, hosted focus groups, planned their seminar and conference,
and took to the streets to speak to the general public about their
opinions. We ensured training and support, but were led by the group.
This helped to ensure that the team were focusing on areas which
were of interest to them, felt a deep sense of responsibility towards the
work, identified closely with Mentor as an organisation and with the
LYIP in particular, and were determined to see the project succeed.

I think my ideas helped to shape the project
because the groups I worked in were very focused
and together we had some brilliant ideas that have
been successful to the shaping of the project.
– Youth Advisor
Contact
Maintaining regular contact was essential if young people were to
continue to feel interested and involved. Our Youth Advisors met together
at weekends, usually monthly. It was difficult to establish more regular
meetings because the Youth Advisors were based across London and
therefore travel was a barrier to meeting during the week after school.
We spoke to our Youth Advisors about how best to keep in touch with them and
followed their advice. Different methods worked best for different individuals.
It was a lesson in listening to young people in order to improve practice.
In between meetings, it was important to ensure the Youth Advisors
were aware of any developments and opportunities arising. We regularly
contacted the team by phone, email, our Facebook group and Twitter.
A minimum of twice-weekly contact was the benchmark. We did not
restrict contact to project-specifics – we also made young people aware of
anything we thought they might find interesting – sharing YouTube clips,
newspaper articles, events being hosted by other organisations, etc.

22
Maintaining Project’s Appeal
Ensure Youth Advisors Understand Project Direction Throughout
Our Youth Advisors were involved in project planning at the start of the project.
They helped to develop a timeline which included project outcomes and
outputs. This meant they were able to understand the direction of the project
and how each activity fed into and led towards the project’s completion. It
made their work feel relevant and avoided any sense that direction was lacking.
Avoid ‘Dead Time’
It could have been easy for the project to lose its appeal at specific
points, particularly when waiting for surveys to come back or for focus
group transcriptions to be completed ready for analysis. Instead of
becoming ‘dead time’ these periods were transformed into opportunities
to explore areas of interest, extending the main research.
For example, while awaiting survey results, young people carried out a series
of vox pops with members of the public in London, asking their opinions
on social norms and finding out who they felt was responsible for keeping
young people safe from the harms caused by drugs and alcohol. This piece
of work directly informed subsequent focus group research following an
overwhelming public response which suggested that parents were viewed
as key in protecting their children from the harms caused by drugs and
alcohol. The videos were used to illustrate the work of the Youth Advisors
and to inform subsequent presentations. Youth Advisors were given the
opportunity to edit their films and to post them on Mentor’s YouTube page.
Since joining Mentor UK, I feel that I have
developed as a person. I was always very shy
and kept to myself rather than participating in
discussions actively. Joining made me flourish
out of my shell and now I have no inhibitions
when it comes to voicing my opinion.
– Youth Advisor

Identify and Support Passions and Interests
This meant not only supporting young people to identify which areas of drug
prevention they were particularly interested in and wanted to research with their
peers – although, of course, this was incredibly important in ensuring project
appeal. It also meant encouraging the Youth Advisors to use their talents and
skills and to develop new ones in order, for example, to present their findings.
Filming, editing and photography are examples of this. A further
example is work with Headliners, a charity which supports young
people to develop journalism skills. Our Youth Advisors spent a day
with Headliners developing a newspaper front page to showcase their
survey findings. It was subsequently used as a key piece of publicity
for the project and as a means of disseminating research.
Fun
Having a good time was central to our project. The Youth Advisors
worked hard, but we wanted to ensure that they were also given the
chance to have fun. It showed that their hard work was appreciated,
gave them the opportunity to bond as a group and meant that the LYIP
was considered not only a space for hard work but also enjoyment.
We took Youth Advisors away on residentials, went out for meals,
had a trip to the theatre, took a boat trip, and went to an outdoor
activity centre. We also kept our meetings structured but informal.

24
Activities and
Achievements6.
Meetings
The Youth Advisors met approximately every month although there were times
when this was not possible – for example, during exam periods and summer
holidays when many of the Youth Advisors went away. Meetings had different
focuses as the project developed and they typically combined an element of
training with practical activities. See our project Toolkit for activity ideas.
Presentations
Delivering their thoughts and ideas, as well as those of their peers from
across London, meant that the Youth Advisors needed to develop strong
presentation skills. Their research gave them excellent knowledge of their
subject matter which underpinned confident, accurate presentations.
They were supported around key aspects of presenting, including:
• Structuring clear, influential presentations
• Using IT to produce eye catching presentations
• Involving your audience
• Speaking clearly and projecting
• Working together to create presentations
• Anticipating questions from the audience
The Youth Advisors used their skills to deliver their research findings
and other aspects of their work in a variety of settings, for example:
• Youth councils to introduce focus group research
• The LYIP interim seminar for policy makers and practitioners
• Mentor seminar on drug education for 50 policy
makers, teachers and youth workers
• Mentor’s Youth Conference to over 100 young
people, policy makers and practitioners
• European Youth Alcohol Policy Forum in Slovenia to young people,
policy makers and prevention experts from across Europe
• London Drug and Alcohol Policy Forum
• Girl Guiding UK to peer educators

Feedback on their presenting tells its own story about
just how accomplished our Youth Advisors were.
It was a great way for me to really voice the
opinions of young people in London and it
was a brilliant opportunity for me to really
gain confidence through public speaking
Very informative and I look forward
to any future presentations
– Conference Delegate
Very well presented. I felt the young
people did an excellent job answering
some very difficult subject matter
Very informative and well delivered

26
European Alcohol Youth Policy
Network Conference
Two Youth Advisors headed to Slovenia in order to participate
in the first European Youth Alcohol Policy Forum. They were
the youngest delegates, yet made a fantastic impression.
Michelle Healy, Youth Advisor tells us all about her trip
to Slovenia and what she learnt from it.
On 8th November 2012 Amy, Simon and I arrived at Luton Airport ready
to depart for Slovenia. I don’t know about Amy but I definitely felt slightly
apprehensive about being one of the youngest people at the conference as well
as being a completely new country where I did not know the language. There
was also obviously a sense of excitement at the opportunity to meet other
people who were also working in the field of alcohol (and often drug) policy, the
chance to learn new things and skills and the opportunity to visit a new country.
When we arrived at the hotel, we were all pleased to note that the
surroundings were even more beautiful than promised as it seemed to
be “from a fairytale”. We took a night time stroll around the notoriously
beautiful Lake Bled, chatting to friendly locals and in general taking in the
beautiful surroundings which would be home for the next five days.
The next morning was the official start of the conference and we kicked
off with introductions and ice breakers which made it clear that my
apprehensions about any language barriers were completely ridiculous given
the brilliant levels of English spoken by all the attendants. Their spoken
English certainly put my attempts at French to shame. It also made it easier
to communicate thereby increasing the effectiveness of the conference as
our ideas could be shared seemingly effortlessly as they certainly seemed
comfortable expressing and understanding complex ideas in English.
The next day we started our workshops, I carried out the workshop into
“research”. We started off by briefly analysing the reasons for accurate and
good research. We concluded that without sound research it is impossible
to draw accurate conclusions, thereby making any suggestions you have
for policy makers invalid meaning that, in this instance, we will never
see the changes in alcohol policy that we hope for. I particularly enjoyed
this as I find research very interesting given my interest in science.
Throughout our time in our conferences we all learned a lot. I learned
effective methods of research and analysis as well as the best ways to
present this so that we can present our findings in the best light to bring
about a better alcohol policy with reference to the conference. We also

carried out research of our own within the conference which although it
had invalid results (as we had a biased sample group as well as too few
participants) taught us a lot about research. However the lessons learned
at the conference will no doubt prove useful in any research I carry out.
In the evenings we had a variety of things to do including watching a local
band at the youth centre and take part in an international evening to showcase
our country’s best assets with a gesture, a clue and any local cuisine we had
to offer. These things kept in mind that overall it was a youth conference while
also giving us an opportunity to network and make connections as well as
friends to help us in our campaign for a better alcohol policy across Europe.
The culmination of the trip was the chance to present our findings
in the Slovenian Parliament which both Amy and I got to do. I
represented the data collected by our group along with the statistical
analysis and our (limited) conclusions. This was followed by a free
day in Ljubljana so that we could spend time with the friends we
made and experience more of Slovenia’s picturesque sights.
I thoroughly enjoyed my time and would like to thank the
London Youth Involvement Project and Alcohol Policy Youth
Network for the opportunity and my knowledge gained.
Residential
The emphasis for the residential was team work. We deliberately
avoided ‘leadership’, instead emphasising that high performing
teams are bigger than the sum of their parts.
Activities included a range of team games and exercises, coupled
with guided and focused work on how to present information
at the interim seminar which followed the residential.
We applied informal education principles, delivered within the
context of stretch and challenge and managed risk. This enabled
us to further embed strong working relationships as a group.

28
Interim Seminar
In February 2012, our Youth Advisors hosted an interim seminar to
professionals and policy-makers in order to showcase the findings from
their drug education survey and to launch their draft recommendations.
The seminar also gave the Youth Advisors a clear mid-term goal,
developed their confidence and skills around presenting and gave
them their first experience of getting feedback on their work.
The Youth Advisors were integral to the planning of the seminar, including
identifying delegates they wished to invite, topics to be discussed,
interactive opportunities and presentations. They delivered the seminar
to great acclaim from delegates and were enthused to pursue further
research. See our project Toolkit for the interim seminar report.
Filming
The Youth Advisors were really keen to use film throughout
the project to carry out and disseminate research.
They headed to Camden Market and London’s South Bank with
video cameras to ask the public their thoughts on the following:
• Do more young people drink alcohol/use drugs than did 10 years ago?
• Who is responsible for keeping young people safe
from harm caused by drugs and alcohol?
• How can parents help to keep their children safe
from harms caused by drugs and alcohol?
They edited the vox pops into short films on parenting and incorporated them
into a further film they shot to explain the work of the LYIP. The Youth Advisors
also filmed at the Youth Conference to capture the views of delegates.
Their films can be accessed at Mentor’s YouTube
channel: www.youtube.com/user/MentorUK
The young people involved were extremely
professional and I was very impressed
by their knowledge and enthusiasm.
– Seminar Delegate

Health and Safety when Filming
It is essential that the health and safety of young people is, as far as possible,
assured when they are carrying out research with the public. This was a
particular priority when the group were carrying out vox pops interviews
with members of the public in Camden Market and on the South Bank.
The young people were very keen to carry out this activity and it was
therefore important to facilitate it. A risk assessment is essential and should
include details of the potential risks and strategies to minimise them.
The greatest concerns were that Youth Advisors might get lost or leave
the activity without letting workers know or that they might decide not to
carry out the activity. We put a number of strategies in place to minimise
these risks, for example, establishing ground rules prior to filming, ensuring
the project officer remained in one place throughout filming and that each
vox pops team had a fully charged phone with them. It is worth noting
that our Youth Advisors were all over 14 and had been working with us
for six months when this activity was carried out. This meant that we felt
confident that they would be able to carry out the vox pops with only
minimal supervision from the project officer. If the Youth Advisors had been
younger, were less well known to us, or we had reason to believe that they
were likely to get lost/leave the activity venue, we would have ensured
staff accompanied the Youth Advisors as they carried out the interviews.
You can find an adaptable risk assessment template in the project Toolkit.
Representing Mentor
The Youth Advisors represented Mentor both at LYIP and Mentor
seminars, speaking powerfully of their own experiences and their
research findings. These seminars gave the Youth Advisors an
opportunity to deliver their findings and recommendations to influential
audiences and to increase their experience of presenting.
Participatory Evaluation Process
All of Mentor’s programmes and projects are evaluated in order for us
to build on good practice and to identify what does and does not work.
The LYIP recruited an external evaluator experienced in involving young
people in project evaluations. This helped us to ensure that young people
were able to speak openly about the project to an objective third-party.
Making evaluation a participatory element of the project meant that young
people were integral to all aspects, including identifying areas of success
and improvement. It also enabled them to build a further set of skills.

30
Case Study 1: Youth
Advisors’ Research7.
Research was central to the LYIP. It was a means
to elicit opinions from significant numbers of
young people from across the city and to draw
out recommendations for drug and alcohol
prevention. The research was carried out by the
Youth Advisors once they had identified subject
areas they wished to explore in greater depth.
1. The first area was drug education in
London’s schools. The subject came up at a
workshop to generate research ideas. The Youth
Advisors began by identifying where they had
experienced interventions which might be
identified as preventative. Drug education was
a clear front-runner, although the extent to
which Youth Advisors personally experienced
it as meaningful or useful proved limited.
What emerged from the group was a picture of
drug and alcohol education within the capital
which varied in terms of its extent and content.
While one Youth Advisor spoke of a well-rounded
and regular drug education, the rest reported
less favourable experiences. They included:
• Irregular drug education –
sometimes once a year or less.
• Delivery by non-specialist teachers.
• Age inappropriate education and
lack of progressive teaching.
• Scant focus on lifeskills (for example, exploring
how to remove yourself from risky situations).
The group felt strongly that this was an area they
wished to explore further. They wanted to discover
whether their own experiences of limited drug
education were typical. They considered two
different research methods: surveys and focus
groups. Because this was a scoping exercise, they
decided that a survey would be the best way to
reach as many young people as possible and to
give them the data they needed to ascertain the
frequency, content and delivery of drug education.
The next step was to design the survey. The Youth
Advisors workshopped their questions. They
aimed to make the survey easy to complete so
decided to keep it as short as possible without
losing essential information, and to make most
questions multiple choice. They included a couple
of questions which allowed respondents to
expand on their answers. With the Youth Advisors’
permission, the project officer took the survey
to the project’s advisory group for scrutiny. Any
suggested changes were passed by the Youth
Advisors before they were incorporated.
The survey was made available online as well
as in hard copy to maximise take up and the
Youth Advisors allowed a three-month window
for completion. We used Survey Monkey to
generate the online survey, linking to it via Twitter,
Mentor’s website and in email correspondence
to potential participating organisations.
Many organisations chose to complete the
surveys via hard copy, for example schools and
youth groups. It proved easier to do the work
in a single session – pens being more readily
available than computers in many instances.
In the interests of ensuring the process was
as straightforward as possible, the project
Research

officer always offered to support with survey
completion and to collect completed surveys
to save on postage costs for organisations.
The surveys were sent to secondary schools
and a variety of organisations working with
young people, for example youth centres, local
authority youth services, and youth organisations.
The Youth Advisors also took the surveys to
their own networks. It required a great deal of
persistence to ensure a decent return of surveys.
After three months, almost 600 surveys were
returned. The Youth Advisors felt satisfied
that this was a significant enough number
to draw conclusions from survey analysis.
Mentor’s policy officer supported the Youth
Advisors to analyse the research and complete
a report on the findings. The group came
together to discuss what they found especially
interesting/ thought provoking and to determine
a series of draft recommendations. Shockingly,
a fifth of young people reported receiving
no drug education at secondary schools and,
of those who did, a third reported receiving
drug education once a year or less. You can
find details of the research findings and
recommendations in the project Toolkit.
The process of determining, designing and
analysing their research allowed the Youth
Advisors to speak with a great deal of confidence
about what they had found and what they would
like to see change. They were able to talk not
just from their own experiences, but also from
those of their peers from across London.
The findings were disseminated via our
website, in a newspaper format sent to
potential interested parties and made available
at a variety of Mentor events, at the Youth
Advisor’s interim seminar on their work and
at the project’s final youth conference.
I am 16 years of age. Colouring pictures
of smiley-face ecstasy tablets will not
make me less inclined to take it.
– Youth Advisor

32
2. The Youth Advisors also carried out focus
group research. They wanted to hear from fellow
young Londoners about the role they believe
parents play in drug prevention and the role of the
police in preventing harm from drugs and alcohol.
During the project the Youth Advisors took to
the streets to interview the public about who
should be responsible for keeping young people
safe from harms caused by drugs and alcohol.
Overwhelmingly, respondents said that parents
had particular responsibility for drug and alcohol
prevention. Armed with this feedback, the
group decided that they wanted to hear more
on this from peers and that focus groups were
the best way to do this. You can see the Youth
Advisors’ films at Mentor’s Youtube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/MentorUK
The group devised five questions during a
brainstorming session followed by group
discussion and debate. They were advised to
try to make the questions open, with scope for
follow up ‘what’, ‘how’, and ‘why’ questions.
• Do parents have a role in providing
education to their children?
• Do you think parents have enough
knowledge to provide drug and
alcohol advice to their children?
• How and when should parents talk to
their children about drugs and alcohol?
• Do you think that children are more
or less likely to use drugs or alcohol if
their parents set clear boundaries?
• Do you think parents’ views on drugs
and alcohol are likely to affect the
choices their children make?
They spent time practising conducting focus
groups, learning how to keep discussions
focused, how to encourage participants to
expand on their answers, and how to ensure
focus group participants felt comfortable. The
focus groups were to be recorded on dictaphones
and then transcribed, with all participants
kept anonymous. Before conducting any focus
groups, the Youth Advisors gave clear details
as to how the findings would be used and
assured participants that this was voluntary
and that they could withdraw at any point.
We contacted a range of youth organisations.
Youth councils were the most receptive. Four
participated, involving over 70 young people aged
12-18 from inner and outer London boroughs.
After the focus groups were completed, the
project officer transcribed the discussions and
a session was held with the Youth Advisors
to identify emerging themes. The transcripts
were grouped under the question headings
with quotations from the transcripts numbered
in order to make them simpler for the Youth
Advisors to navigate. They worked in small
groups, highlighting repeated words, phrases and
views. They then came together to discuss what
they felt were the key themes emerging and to
select the quotes which best highlighted them.
The Youth Advisors identified four key messages:
• Young people believed strongly that
their parents did have a role to play in
providing drug and alcohol education.
• There are barriers which prevent them
from doing so, for example, lack of
knowledge, or cultural beliefs.
• When and how parents talk to
their children is important.
• Appropriate boundary setting by parents
was an important protective factor.
It was then time to determine what their
draft recommendations were. The team
again worked in small groups before coming
together to share their thoughts and to make
final decisions. They were to present their

draft recommendations at an end-of-project
conference to gain feedback before finalising
them. The recommendations were strongly
endorsed at the conference where they received
backing from more than 70% of delegates.
This suggests both that the recommendations
were in line with mainstream thinking from
sector experts and that the Youth Advisors
were powerful advocates for their messages.
Recommendations
• Parents must play a part in educating their
children about drugs and alcohol.
• Parents should have opportunities to improve
their knowledge about alcohol and drugs.
• Parents should ensure conversations
are recurrent, relaxed and open.
• Conversations should begin before
children are teenagers.
• Children are less likely to rebel and more likely to
talk openly to parents who adopt an authoritative
as opposed to authoritarian style of parenting.

34
The Youth Advisors also decided to look into
the area of policing and prevention. Group
discussions led to a sense that there was a lack
of trust between young people and the police.
They also looked at some work other young
people had done. The Advisors decided that they
would be interested in exploring the following
areas: availability of drugs and alcohol; sense
of safety on the streets; and the relationship
between young people and the police.
Following the same format as the parenting
focus group development sessions, they
devised five questions to ask their peers:
• Do you think alcohol and/or drugs can
contribute to young people feeling
unsafe on the streets? How?
• Can the police help to make
young people feel safer?
• Is it easy to get hold of alcohol?
What should the police do?
• Is it easy to get hold of drugs?
What should the police do?
• How can the police help to build trust
between themselves and young people?
Focus groups were held with three youth councils,
with over 40 young people aged 12-18 taking part.
The Youth Advisors drew out four main themes:
• The presence of drugs and alcohol on the
streets make young people feel vulnerable.
• It is relatively easy for young people to access
drugs and very easy for them to access alcohol.
• Young Londoners believe the police have
a role to play in making them feel safe and
reducing availability of drugs and alcohol.
• Young Londoners perceive a tension
between the police and young people.
• They made three draft recommendations.
Once again, these recommendations
received over 70 % backing when launched
at the Youth Advisors’ conference.

Recommendations
• Police and trading standards should liaise more closely to enforce ID policies around alcohol sales.
• There should be a more visible police presence in areas and at times where
there is a high number of drinkers, drug users and drug dealers.
• Ways to increase and improve communication between young people
and the police should be identified and put into practice.

36
Case Study 2: Mentor
Youth Conference8.
The culmination of the LYIP was a conference
hosted by the Youth Advisors in February 2013.
The aim of the conference was to showcase their
work and to get support for the recommendations
which emerged from the three areas of research
carried out by the team: drug education in
London’s secondary schools; the role of parents in
prevention; and the role of police in prevention.
The conference was held during half term so that
all the Youth Advisors were available to take part.
This did make it more difficult to attract young
people because we were unable to invite school
groups. However, the Youth Advisors – especially
those at critical points in their school careers –
felt it was important that they didn’t miss school.
They also thought that the people they especially
wanted to influence – for example policy makers,
the police, practitioners, etc, would be available.
The Youth Advisors were given the chance
to explore conference scenarios and as an
ambitious group, they had a wealth of ideas.

Youth Advisors’ Initial Input
Content
• Begin with something thought-provoking
• Film to showcase the LYIP and its work
over the past two and a half years
• Guest speaker(s) to highlight
importance of LYIP work
• Include a quiz
• Small break-out groups
• Workshops
• Question and answer session
• Film/presentation showing recommendations
Structure
• Large group > break out groups > large group
• Three hours
• Groups to be led by Youth Advisors
• Possibility of experts hosting workshops
with Youth Advisor support
• Different areas to be assigned to
different topic on rotation?
• Or – one room with Youth Advisors
split between groups?
Marketing
• Tell focus groups
• Twitter
• Facebook
• Friends
• Schools and groups who completed surveys
• Incentives? Perhaps a voucher prize on offer
We were limited in terms of budget and therefore
venue. This put constraints on break-out sessions
and workshops. Time was also an issue. We had a
total of four hours, including lunch and tea break.
The Youth Advisors felt that this needn’t constrain
audience participation which they believed was
key to engaging and maintaining interest.
The conference programme was finalised
by the Youth Advisors and incorporated
into the conference agenda.
Agenda
13.30 Arrival and registration. A light
lunch, tea and coffee will be provided
14.00 Opening speech from Sim
Scavazza, Chair of Mentor’s Board
14.05 Film: The London Youth
Involvement Project
14.10 Youth Advisors Present:
Drug and Alcohol Education
Parents and Prevention
15.10 BREAK
Safety, Availability and the Police
16.00 Question Time
16.50 Closing Speech: Youth Advisors and Paul
Tuohy, Mentor’s Chief Executive
17.00 Finish
The Youth Advisors were all thoughtful,
dedicated and ridiculously confident
and articulate in expressing their views.

38
Presentations
Three presentations designed, scripted
and delivered by the Youth Advisors
formed the backbone of the conference.
They focused on the three main areas of
the research: drug education, parents and
prevention, and policing and prevention.
It was essential that the Youth Advisors were
absolutely confident of their material before
being put into a position where they not only
had to present, but also to field questions from
the audience. We put in place measures to
equip them with knowledge and confidence.
1. Participation
By conducting their own research with
peers into topics they felt passionate
about, the Youth Advisors were able to
deliver their points with confidence and
credibility. Their participation in planning
the conference and determining their roles
also helped them to feel confident and
comfortable in what they were doing.
2. Support in designing presentations
The Youth Advisors determined the groups
they were going to present in and the
structure and content of their presentations.
They were developed in Mentor’s office with
access to computers, rehearsal space and
staff. There was also support with scripting
the presentations – scripts proved to be really
important for some of the Advisors who felt
less confident ad-libbing their delivery.
3. Rehearsal
Youth Advisors rehearsed in their
presentation groups, in front of the rest
of the team, to Mentor staff and, finally, in
the conference space. Rehearsal helped
Youth Advisors enormously to deliver
confident, fluent presentations.
Interaction
1. Threaded through each presentation was
a segment which required the audience
to answer questions around the Advisors’
recommendations. Each audience member
had colour-coded Post-It notes on which
to write their responses: orange for drug
education; blue for policing; green for parents.
The Youth Advisors collected then collated
them onto a large, quartered outline of
London. At the end of the conference, the
four sections were joined, symbolising how
delegates’ and Youth Advisors’ work would
help to inform best practice for the city.
2. Conference presentations were also interactive.
For example, delegates were asked whether
they thought young people were more
likely to drink now than 10 years ago. The
Youth Advisors surprised the room with the
information that, in fact, young people are less
likely to drink now, highlighting the need for
drug education to deliver accurate information
about young people’s use of alcohol and drugs.
All presentations had time for Q+A at the end.
3. The final session of the afternoon was
Question Time. The panel included a head
teacher, a parent, a policemen, Youth
Advisors and a representative from the
London Drug and Alcohol Policy Forum.
4. Delegates were encouraged to network at
the start of the conference and during the
break, facilitated by the Youth Advisors.
5. The Youth Advisors carried out vox pops
with delegates at the start, middle and end
of the conference to establish expectations,
experiences and opinions of the conference.

Master(s) of Ceremony
Two Youth Advisors were enlisted as Masters
of Ceremony. This allowed the group total
ownership of the conference - presenting,
welcoming delegates, introducing each section
and ensuring the conference kept to time.
Delegates
We wanted to have a wide variety of delegates
to ensure the Youth Advisors’ research and
recommendations received as much publicity
and influence as possible. The Youth Advisors
asked the project officer to encourage Mentor’s
own contacts to attend, including those involved
in decision-making, the police, schools, alcohol
and drug treatment and advisory bodies,
academics, researchers and youth organisations.
The Advisors designed an invitation which was
emailed and we also created an Eventbrite
invitation. Details of the event were tweeted
regularly and follow up emails sent.
Roles and Responsibilities
A list of roles and responsibilities was drawn up
for the Youth Advisors to look at so they could
identify individually what role they wanted to do.
This allowed the Youth Advisors to see exactly
what their roles entailed and to understand what
they would be taking on. The Advisors were
then given individual sheets with their specific
roles/responsibilities to use as a guide in the
lead up to and on the day of the conference.
Roles and responsibilities were also set
out for Mentor staff who were tasked
with helping to ensure the conference ran
smoothly and in supporting the Youth
Advisors around different aspects of it.
Conference Packs
Delegates’ packs contained a welcome letter from
the Youth Advisors, an agenda, reports on their
research findings, Post-it notes and a pen for
presentation activities, and an evaluation form.
Evaluation Forms
The evaluation forms were not only to gain
feedback on the conference itself but also
to establish how far delegates agreed with
the Youth Advisors’ draft recommendations
because we wanted to ascertain levels
of support before confirming them.
A copy of the evaluation form can
be found in the project Toolkit
The presentation
style and quality
of spontaneous
responses to hard
questions were
very good and
show the maturity
and hard work of
the young people.
Fantastic and very
inspiring. Some
very impressive
and competent
young people.

40
Outcomes
The conference resulted in a number of further
opportunities for the Youth Advisors. They were
invited to present to the Girl Guides as part of
the Department of Health’s youth marketing
strategy, giving them an opportunity to share
their experience and expertise around drug and
alcohol prevention and youth participation.
The Advisors were also invited to present the
project’s work and findings to the London Drug
and Alcohol Policy Forum, a strategic body which
seeks to improve local authority responses to drug
problems by raising awareness and promoting
best practice. We also met with Diana Johnson,
MP, a Labour front bench Member of Parliament,
with a keen interest in PSHE and drug education.
The conference was also attended by a
representative from Evans Woolfe Media, a
production company which has developed alcohol
education programmes for BBC Learning. This
team is now liaising with Mentor on developing
films to support drug education in schools.
We met with the Guides to
give them a presentation
on drugs and alcohol.
Their new initiative is for
the older Guides to teach
the younger ones about
sex, drugs and alcohol and
what they wanted to know
was how to go about it.
Using our research from
the past two years, we put
together a presentation
with guidelines on how to
go about talking to young
people about drugs and
alcohol. It was about 20
minutes long. I think the
presentation went well
because the Guides had
lots of questions and that’s
usually a good sign.
- Youth Advisor

I felt as though the young people did an excellent
job answering some very difficult questions
The presentation style and quality of
spontaneous responses to hard questions
were very good and show the maturity
and hard work of the young people
A real eye-opener about
drug and alcohol issues
among young people

42
Project Reach
Impact on Youth Advisors
A key objective of the project was to benefit the individual Youth
Advisors by developing their skills and knowledge which would
support them both within their work for Mentor and beyond.
Knowledge
We wanted not only to improve the Youth Advisors’ knowledge about drugs,
alcohol and prevention, but also their understanding of how they might be
able to stimulate change within the field. It was, for example, important that
they were aware that only very few young people use drugs or regularly
drink alcohol. This knowledge is preventative in itself, dispelling the myth that
‘everyone else is doing it.’ However, we also wanted them to know who should
hear their messages, who might be agents of change. This meant, for example,
ensuring that they had some understanding of the process of commissioning
prevention work and of the role of policy makers in leading on change.
By supporting the Youth Advisors to carry out their own research, we also
enabled them to develop their knowledge about their peers’ views and
experiences and therefore an understanding of what needs to be done in
order to ensure better prevention from harms caused by drugs and alcohol.
Number of Youth Advisors involved in the Project: 20
Number of Young Londoners involved in research: Over 700
Number of followers on Twitter: 1900
Project Impact
9.
I’ve enjoyed the project so much;
it’s really given me a chance
to increase my knowledge
about drugs and alcohol.
– Youth Advisor

Skills
It was also essential that the Youth Advisors believed they had developed
new skills as a result of their participation in the LYIP. We wanted them to
develop both soft skills, for example teamwork and confidence, and hard skills,
for example project planning, research skills and delivering presentations.
Their skills development allowed them not only to identify,
carry out and analyse research, but also to ensure its effective
dissemination. Confident presentation delivery, accompanied by
a sophisticated use of IT became a hallmark of the LYIP.
We wanted to accredit the Youth Advisors’ work and used the AQA Unit
Awards (which offer an extremely flexible approach to accreditation) in
order to ensure that parts of their work gained official recognition.
Project Influence
Measuring the impact of a project in terms of how influential it has been is
not straightforward. The LYIP wanted to influence drug prevention policy
and practice in London by bringing young people’s voices to the centre
of debate. There are three key areas where the impact of the LYIP has
been felt: firstly, in Mentor itself; secondly, in bringing the Youth Advisors’
recommendations to key parties across London; and thirdly in highlighting
the ongoing need for youth participation in drug and alcohol prevention.
I found it surprising that parents
aren’t able to communicate with their
children about drugs and alcohol
and I think that’s really important.
– Youth Advisor
An interesting thing I found out
was how people felt intimidated by
big groups of police, even though
they’re there to make us feel safe.
– Youth Advisor

44
Within Mentor
Mentor has developed as an organisation as a direct result of the project.
By putting youth voice at the heart of the charity, we enhance our practice
and ensure development in line with young people’s views. The Youth
Advisors’ research findings have been embedded in our work and used
to develop new programmes as well as to inform our responses to policy
makers. Youth Advisors’ comments on their individual experience of drug
education have been used by Mentor to illustrate our response to the
Department of Education’s PSHE Review, the Government Alcohol and
Drug Strategy and reprised in Parliamentary debates and reports.
Beyond Mentor
We can also say with certainty that the Youth Advisors’ research findings
and recommendations have been heard by a wide range of policy makers,
practitioners and young people themselves. To find out how likely it
would be to secure changes in policy and practice, we asked attendees
at the project conference if they supported the Youth Advisors’ draft
recommendations. We also wanted the Youth Advisors to be able to
identify where they might focus campaigning efforts. To their - and
our - delight, all the recommendations received over 70% endorsement
and three received agreement from over 90% of the audience.
• Schools should be required to spend a certain amount of
time on drug education and cover specific topics.
• Parents should have opportunities to improve their
knowledge about drugs and alcohol.
• Ways to increase and improve communication between young
people and the police should be identified and put into practice.
These three recommendations were highlighted in subsequent
conversations with influential bodies and have helped
determine the next steps for the project and Mentor.
The LYIP Youth Advisors have been the heartbeat
of Mentor. They give the academic evidence a voice
that sings. They are frank, direct and passionate
and we need to listen to them. It’s a sign of their
influence that Mentor has developed an entirely
new body of work during this project.
Paul Tuohy, Chief Executive

Sustaining Momentum
After such a successful project which proved just how vital youth
participation is in terms of learning and development in the area of drug
and alcohol prevention, we are working to embed youth voice across
the capital. We aspire to see youth voice at the heart of strategic bodies
which influence drug and alcohol prevention policy for young people.
Our experience of successfully delivering a truly representative
youth participation project gives us expertise which we
are eager to share with other organisations.
It is our firm conviction that unless young people’s voices are central to the
debate around drug and alcohol prevention, the most effective interventions will
be lost. Only by putting young people’s involvement at the heart of policy can
we provide effective and intelligent protection from alcohol and drug harms.

46
Tools
10.A Toolkit for the project can be found on our website: www.mentoruk.org.uk
It contains the following:
• Project information, sign up, and consent forms
• Ideas for warm up activities
• Examples of workshop sessions
• Example project flier
• Risk assessment form
• Conference evaluation form
• Research ethics
• Interim seminar report
• Research findings and recommendations

Our Youth Advisors, without whom none
of this would have been possible
Stephen Baker, Elijah Emmanuel, Eleanor Ferrand-Brooke, Amy Garrad, Kyron
Greenwood, Ciaran Healy, Michelle Healy, Raisa Hyman, Zeinab Ibrahim-
Hashi, Chante Joseph, Elijah McBean, Ezekiel McBean, Ja’Deane Morgan,
Anthony Mosey, Laura-May Nardella, Treasure Oyelade, Anda Podaru
With many thanks to our Advisory Group
Rachel Cass (IARS), Addicus Cort (London Councils), Sue Inwood
(Metropolitan Police), Peter Nash (South West London and St
George’s Mental Health Trust), Rebecca Palmer (GLA), Tom Smith
(Alcohol Concern), Matthew Upton (The Campaign Company)
And finally, a big thank you to our evaluator, Sarah Parry
Thanks

For prevention to be effective, we must listen to and learn from
young people. Youth involvement is central to Mentor’s philosophy
and practice and is embedded in our work. We involve young people
in different ways, for example in focus groups, policy work and
through our pioneering peer education to young offenders.
About Mentor
Mentor is the UK’s leading charity dedicated to protecting young
people from drug and alcohol harms. We review research from around
the world, test promising approaches and work to translate best policy
and practice into evidence based national and local services.
Contact Mentor
Mentor
1st floor, 67–69 Cowcross Street
London, EC1M 6PU
+44 20 7553 9920
admin@mentoruk.org
www.mentoruk.org.uk
www.twitter.com/mentortweets
Charity no. 1112339, SC041210
Registered company no. 5609241 (England & Wales)

LYIP Project Report

More Related Content

Similar to LYIP Project Report

LYIP Project Report