KIDS AT THE DOOR REVISITED Russell House Publishing Ltd By Bob Holman

In 1976,Bob Holman left a university post to initiate a community project sponsored, by the Children's Society, in his house on the Southdown council estate. Bath. He was soon joined by Dave Wiles, a former delinquent who had spent all his life on the estate, and by Jane Sellars. After five years, residents money for the project's own centre, although callers still came to the house. After 11 years. Bob left to initiate another project in Glasgow. A Community Association was elected to continue the Southdown Project.

During 1998-99,Bob Holman re-visited 51(35 men and 16 women) of the former youngsters who had been most closely associated with the project. A reunion was also held The study attempted to find out:

• what the former youngsters thought about the project and its staff
• what they considered they had gained from it
• what had happened to them as adults
• what effects the project had on them both as youngsters and as adults.

Few welfare workers maintain contact with youngsters who attended their projects. By interviewing 51 of them. now in their mid thirties, Bob Holman produces a unique assessment of the impact of a community project on their lives

The Results

1. At Risk Factors

The study established that few of the 51 had started life with many advantages.49% had been brought up in lone parent families or with step-parents 43% described their childhood as unhappy Nearly all were in low-incomed families, with 24% of their fathers(where the father was present) being unemployed 49% were in large families. 57% experienced school difficulties such as truancy and suspensions. Even as young teenagers,39% were in trouble with the police while 22% were in families visited by statutory social workers.

Previous research shows that the above factors are linked with future educational failure, unemployment, crime, and unstable relationships, An 'at risk' table showed that:

39% were at high risk(4-5 factors)
22% at moderate risk(2-3 factors)
29% at low risk(0-1 factors)

2.The Outcomes

How did they turn out as adults'?

Nearly all are in two-parent relationships with only 8% in step-parent situations and 6% as tone parents.

10% had known periods of substantial unemployment. By contrast.90% had not.

14% had been in serious trouble with the police. It must be added that this trouble tended to occur in early adulthood and before they settled with partners At the time of interview, none had had recent prison sentences.

8% had been heavy drinkers. None had a hard drugs problem.

6% had had problems of severe debt

On a satisfactory/unsatisfactory life scale, the 51 were rated as follows.

2% as very unsatisfactory

12% as unsatisfactory

86% as satisfactory

Nearly all the adults spoke positively about the Southdown Project and many attributed their present position to its influence.

Noticeably, the adults turned out far better than the 'at risk' table had suggested. Few of the adults were in high paid jobs or detached houses. But most were in steady employment(or were at home with children),in comfortable if modest accommodation, were in stable relationships with partners and their own children, and were steady members of the community interestingly. 41% of those interviewed had participated in some form of youth work, usually as volunteers but in several instances as paid workers.

Case Examples

One chapter of the book is devoted to seven of the adults telling their own story

1 Jack

Jack came from a poor family, suffered from partial deafness and tended to be introverted. He was so backward at reading and writing that, when he was at secondary school, his mother approached the project for help. Bob's wife, Annette, gave him regular tuition. Today he is the manager of a large supermarket. He says, "We used to go down to Bob's house at lunch-times and so I got used to going there. Then I went in the evenings to play swingball My mum was worried about my schooling and had a chat with Annette She agreed to see me a couple of nights a week. l felt embarrassed at first but it made me a lot better-so thanks Annette. The biggest problem in my life was reading and writing. I could have gone the other way, I could have blamed everybody else for my problems. Instead l went on to get two GCSEs"

2.Eric

Eric spent part of his early life in a children's home. He returned to his mother and a step-father when they moved into Southdown. He was a lonely, even depressed child but found acceptance and friendship at the Southdown Project. On leaving school, he experienced unemployment and Homelessness and eventually found jobs in gardening. He was determined to be a youth worker and maintained contact with Bob Holman and Dave Wiles. He secured a job at the very hostel where he was living as homeless, in 1999,he completed a university Diploma in Youth and Community Work and obtained a full time youth worker post. He said, "If the project had not existed,) would not be where I am today. I'd be doing something like farming, going from job to job, living for today.) would never have contemplated going back into education. Since I was 16.1 wanted to do youth work, t saw it in the way that Bob, Dave and Jane worked."

3,Wynn

Wynn had a very unhappy home life with a long-term unemployed and heavy- drinking father. He constantly truanted and was frequently in court for theft. The Southdown Project became his second home The leaders gave him daily friendship, placed him in positions of responsibility within the clubs, took him to school, and persuaded magistrates not to send him away. After one divorce, he is now in a stable marriage and is in a responsible position in a glazing company. He said.
"Without the project I would almost certainly have got into more trouble. If I had been kicked out of school permanently what would have happened? What would have happened if I had been sent away?"

Lessons from the Project

The Southdown Project was not the sole reason why the youngsters did so well. Their own qualities, schools, partners, the availability of jobs, all contributed. None the less, the Southdown Project was important and, according to the former youngsters, it improved the quality of their childhood. diverted some from delinquency and drug abuse, and enabled them to make better relationships. Despite the fact that many came from very disadvantaged backgrounds, few have shown serious problems in adulthood In short, it worked. The reasons for its achievements appear to be as follows

1. MoreThan A Club
   The Southdown Project ran well attended youth clubs which did divert bored youngsters away from trouble, in addition, the leader's house was open to them. A lean-to on the side of the house became a teenagers' den where they had some independence
2. Individual Relationships
   65% of the former youngsters formed individual relationships with the leaders for help on matters such as delinquency, tensions with their parents, education and jobs.
3. A Community Project
   The Southdown project was a neighbourhood project. It was open to any youngsters on the estate and not Just to delinquents. Consequently, the project was never stigmatised as being for "the baddies" Moreover. teenagers who did have problems mixed with and were influenced by those who did not.

The project also involved adults. Jane Sellars ran parent and toddlers groups in the house while the regular outings were for families All the volunteers for the youth activities were drawn from residents, particularly parents. Consequently, the Southdown Project always had the support of the community which eventually took over its running.

1. Living There
   The leaders lived in the area. They were able to acquire close knowledge of local needs, weaknesses and strengths. Unlike statutory workers who tend to commute in and out of deprived areas, they were always there and so were always available
2. Long-Term
   The leaders were committed to staying for at least ten years. They grew up with some youngsters and families. Bob's children went to local schools. The staff went to local churches and pubs. Their commitment to the area did enable more people to have trust in them.

Implications for Government

The Southdown approach does not fit easily with contemporary government approaches. The Home Office style, as expressed in the Crime and Disorder Act(1998) and the cabinet strategy, as shown in the report Supporting Families, has the following limitations:

• it imposes policies from above.
• it does not give priority to a mixed or neighbourhood approach. "it favours swift intervention rather than slow diversion.
• it says nothing about the value of staff living locally
• it is not aware of the value of long-term projects.
• it is a professional, highly regulated system which may engender bureaucracy and stifle creativity

Bob Holman is not wanting to stop the government's approaches. Rather. he wants them to encourage alternatives which place resources in the hands of local residents to organise projects which are rooted in their neighbourhoods, which are tailored to their needs, and which are staffed by their people He says, "Unfortunately, the basic ingredients of the Southdown Project are not fashionable today But if a National Neighbourhood Fund or a reformed National Lottery were to support such projects. then a new generation of youngsters would benefit in like manner to their predecessors on the Southdown estate."

Top

Main Menu