The No Way Trust Report

Stay safe and aspire
- educating young peoples choices

Prison! Me! No Way!!!
Evaluation of the No Way Trust Ltds Crime and Safety Awareness Days
funded by the Department for Education (2008-2011)
Shehnaaz Latif
with Deborah Smith
Charities Evaluation Services
September 2011
Acknowledgements
Our thanks to all the staff, pupils and teachers who participated in this evaluation by
responding to our online survey, allowing us to observe the Crime and Safety
Awareness Days held at their premises and engaging in discussions and interviews
with us.
We would also like to thank all the delivery agencies and PMNW staff who gave us
their views.
Finally to Dr Jean Ellis, Senior Consultant at CES, for her support in carrying out this
evaluation and producing this report.
Abbreviations
ASB(O) Anti-social Behaviour (Order)
CES Charities Evaluation Services
CSADs Crime and Safety Awareness Days
DfE Department for Education
PSHE Personal, Social and Health Education
PMNW Prison! Me! No Way!!!
RE Religious Education
RJ Restorative Justice
SSP Safer Schools Partnership
YJB Youth Justice Board
YJT Youth Justice Team
Charities Evaluation Services, 4 Coldbath Square, London EC1R 5HL

Registered charity number 803602 in England and Wales and SCO40937 in Scotland.
A company limited by guarantee registered in England & Wales. Company registration no: 2510318
Contents
Executive Summary i
1. Introduction 1
1.1. The No Way Trust Ltd, Prison Me! No Way!!! Crime and Safety
Awareness Days 1
1.2. The evaluation 2
1.3. Report overview 4
2. Crime and Safety Awareness Days in context 5

2.1. Introduction 5
2.2. Policy background 5
2.3. Youth crime statistics 6
2.4. Preventing youth crime the role of schools 10
2.5. Effectiveness of youth crime prevention schemes 11
2.6. Postscript 12
3. Evaluation findings on the delivery of and satisfaction with Crime and

Safety Awareness Days 13
3.1. How schools accessed CSADs 13
3.2. What the project delivered 13
3.3. Content and format of CSADs 15
3.4. Planning and preparation 16
3.5. Implementation a tried and tested formula 17
3.6. Prizes 18
3.7. Case examples 18
3.8. Satisfaction with the Crime and Safety Awareness Days 24
3.9. Ways to improve the day 30
3.10. Monitoring the Crime and Safety Awareness Days 36
4. Benefits from the Crime and Safety Awareness Days 38

4.1. What PMNW wanted to achieve 38
4.2. What pupils remembered of the day 39
4.3. Overall gains in knowledge and understanding 41
4.4. Specific learning 47
4.5. Further benefits of the Crime and Safety Awareness Day 49
4.6. How pupils used the information and learning gained at Crime and
Safety Awareness Days 53
4.7. Less positive effects 57
5. Looking ahead 58
6. Conclusions and recommendations 60

6.1. Conclusions and learning points 60
6.2. Recommendations 61
Appendices 64
A. Further details on methodology 64
B. Survey to pupils 68
C. Survey to teachers 80
D. Outline of group discussion with pupils at two schools 92
E. Telephone interview schedule for delivery partners 93
F. Workshop descriptions 98
G. Cross tabulation of pupils knowledge before and after CSADs 102
Tables
Table 1: Offence type 2007-10 - percentage of total recorded offences of young
people 9
Table 2: Number of CSADs delivered from 2008-2011 14
Table 3: Regional spread of CSADs in 2010 14
Table 4: Number of pupils finding CSAD valuable 2008-2010 25
Table 5: Teachers overall rating of the CSADs 25
Table 6: Delivery agents overall rating of the CSADs 26
Table 7: Teachers views on how well CSAD aims were met 27
Table 8: Pupils knowledge before the CSAD pupils perspectives: 42
Table 9: Pupils understanding before the CSAD teachers perspectives: 43
Table 10: Pupils knowledge after the CSAD pupils perspectives 44
Table 11: Pupils understanding after the CSAD teachers perspectives 44
Table 12: Group discussions with pupils 46
Table 13: Pupils views on what they learnt from the CSAD 47
Table 14: Pupils perspectives on additional benefits of CSADs 50
Table 15: Benefits by age comparison 51
Table 16: Teachers perspectives on additional benefits of CSADs 52
Table 17: Responses per year 65
Table 18: Responses per school 66
Case studies
A rural, co-educational school 19
A selective, single sex school 20
Metropolitan urban school 21
Suburban school 22
2 Charities Evaluation Services

Executive Summary
The aim of education should be to teach us how to think, not what to think.1
Introduction
The No Way Trust also known as Prison! Me! No Way!! (PMNW)2 is an
educational charity set up in 1995 by prison officers who wanted to turn young people
away from crime and its consequences. The Trusts core aim is to raise awareness
among young people about the causes, consequences and penalties of crime, and
the effects of anti-social behaviour.
To date (August 2011) the Trust has reached 4.5 million young people through 2,000
secondary schools and more than 1,800 youth organisations. On average the Trust
reaches 100,000 individuals each year through its work.
In 2008 the Department for Education (DfE) awarded the the Trust a three-year,
strategic grant of 480,000 from its Young Peoples Fund. This has enabled the Trust
to continue to deliver its Crime and Safety Awareness Days (CSADs) across the UK.
CSADs have been running since 2000. CSADs are one-day experiences for
secondary school pupils primarily in Year 8 and Year 9 designed to encourage
young people to make positive choices and to reduce offending so that they stay safe
and aspire. CSADs adopt an overarching prisoners for a day theme which
manifests in various ways throughout the day. The structure of CSADs is usually a
launch session and some core workshops delivered by partner agencies such as, the
prison service, alcohol awareness organisations, drugs and crime agencies,
ambulance, fire and police services, magistrates court, Victim Support, and Youth
Justice Teams (YJTs). Each CSAD ends with a prize-giving ceremony to
acknowledge outstanding participation by pupils.
From April 2008 to April 2011 a total of 487 CSADs were delivered to over 260
unique schools, across the nine English regions. Approximately 115,000 pupils in
the age range 12 to 14 years from culturally diverse backgrounds were reached by
these CSADs. Each CSAD involved considerable planning to ensure the day was
tailored to the specific needs of the school and to ensure sufficient communication
with delivery agents to make sure their workshops were targeted and effective.
Charities Evaluation Services (CES) is an independent charity which has provided
evaluation support to voluntary and community organisations and their funders for
over 20 years. CES carried out an independent, small-scale, qualitative evaluation
1
Quote seen at a school visited by the evaluators. This school had received crime days from PMNW.
2
More information can be found on www.pmnw.co.uk
Evaluation of PMNW Crime and Safety Awareness Days, September 2011 i

from April to August 2011. The evaluation focused on what had been delivered
between 2008 to 2011, how satisfied pupils, teachers and delivery agents had been
with the CSADs and what benefits pupils had gained by participating in the CSADs.
The evaluation also highlighted the lessons learnt and what improvements could be
made to CSADs in the future.
Through two online surveys the evaluators gathered the views of 296 pupils and 13
teachers from nine schools that had participated in the CSADs between 2008 and
2010. The majority (68 per cent) had attended a CSAD in 2010. Over half the pupils
responding were aged 15. There were almost equal numbers of male and female
pupils responding (45 per cent and 55 per cent respectively). Two group discussions
were held in two different schools with 23 pupils who had been unable to complete
the survey. In addition, the evaluators observed four CSADs at four different schools
around the country, and carried out telephone interviews with two PMNW staff and
10 delivery partners (from three of the four schools visited).
The evaluators also carried out background research of PMNW documents and other
reports. This provided a range of relevant contextual data, such as: the age of youth
crime is increasing; criminal behaviour is mostly likely to occur between ages 14 to
18, with the highest incidence being between 16 to 17 years; the geographical
spread of youth crime is also changing, and the types of youth offences that have
remained consistently high during the period 2007 to 2010 are criminal damage,
motoring offences, breach of statutory order and drugs offences.
In the light of this data on youth crime, both PMNWs focus on 12 to 14 year olds
across the UK and the topics covered by the CSADs were well targeted. The riots
across England in August 2011 further emphasise the relevance of PMNWs work
with young people.
Satisfaction with Crime and Safety Awareness Days

Overall pupil satisfaction rates were high between 98 to 99 per cent of pupils said
they found the CSAD valuable or very valuable in their feedback forms to PMNW.3
Pupils were particularly complimentary about taking part in live action such as,
cutting people out of a car in the car crash scenario, taking on roles of defendant or
prosecutor in the court case enactment, acting like drunken people in the PMNW
street scene role play, and seeing things such as drugs with their paraphernalia, and
police equipment (taser, baton, pepper spray).
3
PMNW evaluation reports can be found online at: www.pmnw.co.uk
ii Charities Evaluation Services

Benefits for pupils
The evaluation found that between one to three years after participating in CSADs,
pupils had retained information, gained knowledge and applied it in their lives. This
suggests significant lasting benefits for teenage pupils.
Overwhelmingly, the findings show that the content around prison life was most
memorable, demonstrating that CSADs are effective in getting pupils to think about
the potential effects of prison on their lives and therefore deterring them from making
ill-informed choices. Some comments include:
I will remember the experience in that cell, which showed me its not worth
risking time in jail.
Drinking can lead up to many other crimes meaning a longer sentence to
serve.
Overall, pupil respondents viewed the day as adding to their knowledge.
Unsurprisingly, this most memorable aspect of the day was also the area of greatest
knowledge growth: 62 per cent of pupils said their knowledge of prison had grown a
lot more. This was a topic that had the fewest pupils (13 per cent) saying they knew
a lot about it before the day, suggesting that the day gave pupils considerable new
knowledge and insights.
Between 42 per cent and 65 per cent of pupil respondents fully agreed that the
CSADs had made them:
think more about how their behaviour could affect others (42%)
more aware of how getting into crime could affect their future and the lives of
people around them (49%)
think more about how to stay safe and avoid crime (50%)
more aware of how crime and anti-social behaviour could affect others (65%).
Almost 60 per cent of pupils said that what they learnt on the CSAD was not covered
in any of their other school lessons.
In addition, between 41 per cent and 46 per cent of pupil respondents said the CSAD
had made them:
much more aware of the consequences of their actions

a lot less likely to behave anti-socially
more motivated to take up education, employment or training opportunities
increase their hopes for the future.
These findings were echoed in the views of the teachers. Teachers responding to
the CES survey were overall very positive about different aspects of the day. In
particular, both teachers and other delivery agents found both the engagement of
pupils on the day and the delivery of the workshops to be excellent, and said that the
aims of the day were well met. All teachers thought that the CSADs had added value
Evaluation of PMNW Crime and Safety Awareness Days, September 2011 iii
to some if not all pupils and had increased their understanding of crime and its
consequences.
The evaluation findings also show that a year or more later, some pupils have used
the information and knowledge gained at CSADs to varying degrees. For example,
they have discussed the day with friends or family (more so than with their teachers).
Although 77 per cent of pupil respondents said they had not been in any situations
where they could have become involved in crime since the CSAD took place, almost
half of those that had been involved in a situation agreed that learning gained from
the CSAD had affected what they did in the situation.
Some of the evaluation evidence gathered from pupils points in the direction of
positive changes in attitude and behaviour which are likely to contribute to a
reduction in youth crime.
Areas for improvement

Most evidence gathered through this evaluation highlights the positive effects of the
CSAD on pupils. However a few less positive aspects of the day were shared by
pupils and teachers, and some potentially negative effects were predicted by some
delivery agents and teachers. Some of these are out of the direct control of PMNW
while others could be given consideration.
Some pupils said they did not like the fact that they could not attend all the different
workshops:
We didn't get to participate in some of the activities. We also missed some of
the activities like the car crash and the cells.
However, given the challenges of developing a programme to meet the needs of

individual school timetables and group sizes it may be difficult to avoid such
disappointment.
In contrast to this, a few pupils shared the view that their involvement, for example,
as actors in the street scene role play, limited their ability to participate overall. A few
pupils also mentioned that in some cases the same pupils were being asked to
contribute or get involved each time.
This was a recurring observation by the evaluator that often the same pupils raised
their hands to answer questions and contribute to role plays. Workshop facilitators
would not have been aware of this as they saw each class only once, but the
teachers accompanying each class would have been and could have encouraged
other pupils to participate more. In addition, the evaluator observed that the prize
winners were often the most vocal pupils who had dominated discussions throughout
the day, rather than those who may have made other forms of contribution. This
seems to have gone unnoticed by teachers especially in those pupil groups where
teachers were rotating duties. In one school, a teacher commented that the prize
winners were indeed the usual suspects, but then noted at least three prize winners
iv Charities Evaluation Services

that were usually low achievers, quiet or disruptive class members.
One teacher thought that teachers could be more involved:
When engaging with young people the 'delivery' and the 'wow' factor of any
presentation always catches their attention and then allows you to make
your point. Teachers could help some of the presentations to engage the
pupils more, both in terms of ICT delivery and the way your staff interact with
the pupils.
Although PMNW staff and trustees regularly observe delivery agents workshops, it
may be worth considering setting some broad criteria against which to make
assessments in order to suggest ways to alleviate some of these concerns and to
enhance pupils learning experience.
Some pupil respondents said they did not like being treated as prisoners and did not
like the strictness of the PMNW staff.
A handful of pupil respondents said that they found the day boring and three
commented that they found it patronising.
These less positive comments resonate with the evaluation teams observations that
some pupils found the day rather taxing. However, it could be argued that one of the
cornerstones of the day was to attempt to convey some of the harsh realities of life in
prison. For those pupils who did not reject the approach, feeling negative or overly
disciplined was part of the necessary experience, and therefore could be deemed a
success insofar as it made the day memorable.
Finally, some teachers and delivery agents were wary that by raising awareness of,
for example, how arson is committed and what drugs look like, pupils might become
more intrigued, and potentially encouraged to commit the crime.
In terms of lasting benefits, a significant minority of pupil respondents said that the
CSADs: had not increased their self-confidence (36 per cent); had not made them
less likely to miss school (24 per cent); nor given them higher hopes for the future (20
per cent) nor increased their motivation to take up education, employment or training
opportunities (19 per cent). These figures may be noted, given that school absences
and poor access to employment opportunities are high risk factors for youth crime. It
is not possible from the data collected to say whether these pupils felt that they would
be unlikely to miss school anyway or were already confident, motivated, aspirational
pupils. Furthermore, increased self-confidence, improved aspiration and motivation,
and a reduced likelihood of truancy were not stated aims of the CSADs.
Conclusion and recommendations

Overall, CSADs have been well received. Evaluation evidence has shown that
CSADs have left lasting effects on pupils and observations have shown this to be a
very good, one day experiential, learning event. PMNWs approach has been
Evaluation of PMNW Crime and Safety Awareness Days, September 2011 v

deliberate and specifically designed to create a sense of what life might be like if
freedom was removed. This approach has met with mixed responses; some have
seen it as overly strict, others have found it to not be strict enough, but it had a
profound effect on many.
School staff have appreciated CSADs being designed in conjunction with them which
has allowed key areas of need to be highlighted and some topics to be covered to
more depth than others (if at all). Workshop content has been found to be good
overall.
Most pupils report knowing quite a lot already on some topics but have reported
learning and gaining benefit from participating. Knowledge and understanding of life
in prison has grown most, whereas knowledge and understanding of the effects of
alcohol or drugs has grown least most likely because this is already covered in
other areas of the school curriculum.
Stakeholders made a number of suggestions and recommendations that PMNW
might consider:
PMNW should review some of the content and format of workshops at CSADs
such as the datedness of DVDs and the level of interactivity in workshops.
PMNW should consider providing more take-aways after each day to remind
pupils of key messages.
In order to maintain high standards, PMNW should carry out more quality control
checks, including reviewing the facilitation skills of delivery agents and ways to
engage teachers more.
PMNW should consider asking all CSAD attendees to participate in surveys one
and/or two years after the day to see what has been retained, learned and/or
used.
In order to increase the effects of CSADs, PMNW should consider ways to
maintain awareness of the issues of crime and safety, and enable pupils to
implement their learning in everyday life through follow up such as engaging prize
winners from CSADs to become PMNW ambassadors or offering parenting
workshops.
vi Charities Evaluation Services

1. Introduction
1.1. The No Way Trust Ltd, Prison Me! No Way!!! Crime and Safety
Awareness Days
The No Way Trust is an educational charity set up in 1995 by prison officers who
wanted to turn young people away from crime and its consequences. Following an
earlier project entitled Prison! Me! No Way!!! (launched in 1993) the Trust is often
referred to by this name (hereafter referred to as PMNW).
The Trusts core aim is to raise awareness among young people about the causes,
consequences and penalties of crime, and the effects of anti-social behaviour. Their
approach is designed to encourage young people to make positive choices and to
reduce offending so that they stay safe and aspire.
To date (August 2011) the Trust has reached 4.5 million young people through 2,000
secondary schools and more than 1,800 youth organisations. On average the Trust
reaches 100,000 individuals each year through its work.
Working with a range of delivery partners including voluntary youth groups, charities,
groups of excluded and disaffected young people, pupil referral units, Youth Justice
Teams (YJTs), magistrates, secure units and attendance centres, police, fire and
ambulance services to name but a few, the Trust has produced a range of
programmes and resources including CD-roms, DVDs, worksheets, school modules
and information packs.
One of the main focuses for the Trust and the subject of this evaluation is their
Crime and Safety Awareness Days (CSADs).
Crime and Safety Awareness Days crime prevention through schools

The purpose of the CSADs is to increase young peoples ability to make well-
informed choices about their attitudes, behaviour and actions as they go through their
youth and into adulthood.
CSADs are designed for delivery to a whole year group of secondary pupils usually
Year 8s, 9s and 10s. They are multi-agency, one-day events. A range of agencies
are contacted by the PMNW volunteer organiser for each CSAD to work in
partnership to deliver the workshops.
Those facilitating workshops can include the Police, Fire and Rescue, Youth
Justice Teams, Victim Support, Magistrates, O2 Nuisance Calls Bureau and
many others besides. They are joined by Prison Staff from various prison
Evaluation of PMNW Crime Safety Awareness Days, September 2011 1

service establishments throughout the United Kingdom who volunteer their
time to deliver these invaluable learning days.4
They are run throughout the UK in different regions at different types of schools with
diverse student populations.
Funding
In 2008 the Department for Education (DfE) awarded PMNW a strategic grant of
480,000 from its Young Peoples Fund. This was for three years from April 2008 to
April 2011. This enabled PMNW to establish three new offices in the North West,
Midlands and London and to increase the number of CSADs delivered.5
Each CSAD costs upwards of 2,500 for the day. Additional costs are incurred
depending on the location and elements included on the day. For example, schools
can request entertainment at the end of the day which costs an additional 350.
Schools have often sought sponsorship from external organisations (many of whom
are also delivery agents on the day), for example, the fire service and police, as well
as trusts and foundations, to help them to lay on the CSADs.
The DfE has not renewed funding for CSADs from April 2011. Despite this loss,
PMNW has managed to maintain a good level of service with a total of 120 CSADs
already booked for the year6 and staff reporting that schools which have held a
CSAD in 2011 have already signed up for 2012.
However, given the current economic climate within the UK there may well be
schools that are no longer able to afford these in the future either due to a lack of
their own resources or inability to secure sponsorship.
1.2. The evaluation

Purpose
In April 2011 Charities Evaluation Services (CES) was commissioned to carry out a
summative evaluation of the DfE-funded CSADs run by PMNW.
A scoping meeting with senior management was held in late April 2011. Data
collection tools were prepared with reference to the following key evaluation
questions which emerged during this process.
4
Crime and Safety Awareness Days Evaluation 2010. Available from www.pmnw.co.uk
5
As above.
6
PMNW hope to increase this to around 165 in total for 2011

1. What has PMNW delivered in terms of CSADs from 2008-2011 and how
satisfying have they been for various stakeholders?
2. How have young people (and others) benefited from these days?
3. What lessons have been learnt and what improvements could be made to
CSADs in the future?
The evaluation findings are presented in sections three, four and five and include:
What the project delivered, including case examples

Satisfaction with the CSADs
Ways to improve CSADs
Benefits of CSADs
Looking ahead.
Overview of methodology data collection and response rates

From April to August 2011 the evaluation team carried out the following evaluation
activities:
Observation of CSADs four different schools were visited to gain insight into the
way in which the CSADs are run, to hear and see the level and types of
responses and engagement by pupils and teachers, to speak with delivery agents
on site and establish contact for later follow up.
Two online surveys one for teachers, the other for pupils were carried out with a
sample of schools that had received CSADs in the recent past. The purpose of
these surveys was to find out what pupils remembered of the days, how, if at all,
they had used what they had learnt since participating in the CSADs, and to
suggest improvements for future CSADs. Invitations were sent to a list (provided
by PMNW) of 19 schools that had received CSADs over a number of years. Five
100 vouchers were offered as an incentive to encourage schools to participate.
Teachers were asked to request pupils who had attended CSADs no later than
2010 to complete the survey. Response rates were good a total of nine of the
19 schools responded which represents a 47 per cent response rate. In total 408
pupils and 13 teachers from across these nine schools completed the surveys.7
Unfortunately, 112 of the 408 pupil responses had to be discounted as they were
received from pupils who had attended the CSADs in 2011 rather than a year or
more ago. This brought the total number of pupil responses to 296. Over half the
pupils responding were aged 15 years. There were almost equal numbers of
male and female pupils responding (45 per cent and 55 per cent respectively).
7
In total we received 416 responses to the pupil survey and 15 to the teacher survey. Eight responses to the
pupil survey and two responses to the teacher survey were removed from the data because they were considered
inauthentic responses, resulting in 408 pupil responses and 13 teacher responses.
Evaluation of PMNW Crime and Safety Awareness Days, September 2011 3

The majority (68 per cent) had attended a CSAD in 2010 and 18 per cent had
attended in 2009. The remaining 14 per cent either could not remember which
year they had attended or said they had attended earlier than 2009.
Two group discussions at two different schools were carried out with 23 pupils
who had been unable to complete the survey. The CES evaluator spoke with
pupils who had received the CSADs in 2010 about what they had remembered,
learned and used since the CSADs, and what suggested improvements they had.
In each discussion a teacher was present and each school was offered a 50
voucher for participating.
Telephone interviews ten delivery agents/partners were interviewed by
telephone. They included school staff from two schools, six external delivery
agencies (two from each of three of the schools visited) and two PMNW team
members.
Review of PMNW documents, resources and data including four evaluation
reports8 and various other promotional material.
Internet research on schools, youth crime and other relevant contextual data was
also carried out.
Further detail on the methodology including the profile of respondents and issues
affecting the quality of the data can be found in Appendix A. The pupil and teacher
surveys, group discussion outline and telephone interview script for delivery partners
can all be found in Appendices B, C, D and E respectively.
1.3. Report overview

Section two provides some background context within which the CSADs operate.
Sections three, four and five present the data collected through the evaluation and
discussion of these findings.
Section six draws conclusions and learning points from the evaluation.
Recommendations for consideration are also provided.
8
PMNW collects feedback using two, one-page forms one for teachers, one for pupils. These are given to the
Head of Year to distribute to teachers and pupils after the CSAD and then returned to the PMNWs Head Office.
These forms ask six questions including how valuable pupils and teachers found the day as well as what learning
points they gleaned from attending the workshops. PMNW produces annual reports based on this feedback as
well as unsolicited feedback from the website and other sources. The reports for 2008, 2009 and 2010 can be
downloaded from the PMNW website: www.pmnw.co.uk

2. Crime and Safety Awareness Days in context
2.1. Introduction
PMNWs Crime and Safety Awareness Days have been running since 2000 within a
changing landscape of youth offending rates, locations, ages and types of crime, and
policy approaches towards crime prevention.
The purpose of this section is to explore key aspects of this context to provide some
relevant background against which to consider the PMNW CSADs. Questions
guiding this section include:
What has been the key focus of national, regional and/or local policy towards
tackling youth crime?
In which UK regions is youth crime most prevalent? And are PMNW CSADs being
held in these areas?
What age group and what types of youth crime are most prevalent? And does the
focus and content of CSADs respond to these?
2.2. Policy background

The Labour Government published No More Excuses: A New Approach to Tackling
Youth Crime in England and Wales in 1997. This seminal white paper addressed the
problems of the youth justice system identified in the 1996 report, Misspent Youth,
and stated that the youth justice system's aim should be to prevent offending.
Subsequent to this, the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 was passed as law and the
creation of the Youth Justice Board (YJB) and Youth Justice Teams (YJTs (formerly
known as Youth Offending Teams)) resulted.
In the last decade, issues of youth crime have been subject to intense media interest
and have sparked much political debate. Significant developments have taken place,
including the launch of the Safer Schools Partnership (SSP) in 2002, which came
under the YJB strategy to improve police connections with schools. In 2003, Every
Child Matters, one of the most important policy initiatives about children, came into
force a reform to support multi-agency working to achieve the best outcomes for
every child, no matter what their circumstances.
Later in 2003 the Anti-Social Behaviour Act was introduced, strengthening the anti-
social behaviour order, better known as the ASBO.
The focus on prevention was highlighted again in the report, Youth Justice 2004: A
Review of the Reformed Youth Justice System. This report reviewed the radically
overhauled youth justice system and looked at what had changed since Misspent
Youth was published in 1996; its recommendations addressing the need to increase
focus on the prevention of youth offending.

In answer to the need for an emphasis on prevention, the YJBs current youth crime
prevention techniques aim to tackle underlying problems in the lives of young people.
The programmes includes the Youth Inclusion Programme, which works with those
young people who are most at risk of offending and runs positive activities that can
open up new opportunities for them, and the Youth Inclusion and Support Panels,
which help YJTs and other local and national agencies to identify the problems
affecting each young person and to tackle them in a targeted way.
2.3. Youth crime statistics

Regional statistics
The Ministry of Justices statistics bulletin (published 14 October 2010)9 shows that,
from 2009 to 2010, the rates of young people aged 10 to 17 years receiving their first
reprimand, warning or conviction have been highest (over 1200 per 100,000) in the
North East, East of England, London, and Yorkshire and the Humber regions.
However, despite having the highest rate of first time young offenders in 2009-10,
the North East region has also seen the largest falls in these rates [over 30 per cent]
between 2008-09 and 2009-10, followed by West Midlands and the South West.10
The least falls in these rates have been in the East of England, East Midlands and
the South East (17 per cent or less).
The first time youth offender rate has fallen by over 20 per cent across England
between 2008-9 and 2009-10, continuing a trend highlighted in the Governments
Youth Crime Action Plan:
The number of young people entering the criminal justice system for the first
time is falling by 21.6% between 2007-08 and 2008-09 and the rate of
youth reoffending is down by almost a quarter between 2000 and 2008.11
The regional spread of CSADs is discussed in section 3.2.
Ages of young offenders

The age at which young people first offend is changing: it is getting higher.
Data from the YJBs 2009 Youth Survey suggests that:
9
http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/youth-crime-10-17.pdf
10
As above.
11
(April 2010) Youth Crime Action Plan: Update. Available at:
https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/YCAP-Update.pdf

young people in mainstream education are increasingly committing their
first offence at an older age. In 2009, 35% of self-reported offenders
reported being aged 11 or under when they first committed an offence,
compared with 39% in 2008 and 43% in 2005.12
The Youth Crime Commission published, Time for a Fresh Start in 201013 which adds
information about the age group of young offenders:
A large minority of children and young people get into trouble with the law at
least once in their lives, with criminal behaviour most likely to occur between
the ages of 14 and 18.
The Ministry for Justices statistics bulletin says that:
in 2009-10 16-17 year olds were the largest group of first time offenders
(24,266) closely followed by 14-15 year olds (23,382). There has been a
similar trend across all four of these age groups, with all showing a decrease
in numbers since 2006-07, a particularly sharp decrease in the 14-15 age
group.14
This data suggests that crime prevention work would be best focussed on pupils
under the age of 14 years. PMNWs CSADs are primarily designed for pupils in Year
8 and Year 9, that is, pupils aged 12 to 14 years which is the appropriate target
group.
Types of offences
Data from the YJB provides an overview of the types of offences being carried out by
young people15 see Table 1 below.
The offences which have remained consistently high over the period 2007 to 2010
are: criminal damage, motoring offences, breach of statutory order and drugs
offences. Interestingly, there has been a significant drop in theft and handling (not
including robbery or burglary) from 2007/8 to 2009/10 and a significant increase in
vehicle theft in these same periods. Violence against a person and public order
offences have dropped significantly, while sexual offences have increased greatly.16
12
http://www.yjb.gov.uk/publications/Scripts/prodView.asp?idproduct=490&eP=
13
(2010) Youth Crime Commission Time for a Fresh Start. Available at:
http://www.youthcrimecommission.org.uk/attachments/076_FreshStart.pdf
14
http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/youth-crime-10-17.pdf
15
Available at: http://www.yjb.gov.uk/publications/scripts/prodView.asp?idproduct=441&eP page 12
16
However, crimes may have been reclassified explaining these large shifts in figures.

Overall CSADs have focussed on a mixture of issues; some of which reflect the
increasing trends, for example, criminal damage, and others declining trends such as
public order offences (which include ASB). This is consistent with a day that seeks to
take a holistic approach to crime and safety awareness and aims to deter choices
that may lead to criminal or unsafe behaviour. The content of CSADs is discussed
further in section 3.3.
Reasons for youth offences

The reasons for young people getting involved in crime can be complex. Some of the
most common factors include: 17
lack of education and playing truant

poor family relationships
peer pressure (having friends who commit crime)
having family members who commit crime
drug and alcohol abuse
mental health issues such as attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
There is also evidence that those that have been victims of crime are more likely to
offend and re-offend within a year.18
The CSADs respond especially to the peer pressure factor.
17
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Parents/CrimeAndYoungOffenders/DG_4003031
18
Source: http://www.youthcrimecommission.org.uk/attachments/076_FreshStart.pdf - see page 7. A 2010 fact
sheet from the Institute for the Study of Civil Society states that 68.6 per cent of children aged under 18
discharged from prison in 2004 were reconvicted within 1 year . Available from:
http://www.civitas.org.uk/crime/factsheet-YouthOffending.pdf

Table 1: Offence type 2007-10 - percentage of total recorded offences of
young people
Offence 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
Arson 1,232 1,132 913
Breach of Bail 5,821 4,460 3,371
Breach of Conditional Discharge 1,683 1,577 1,172
Breach of Statutory Order 16,751 15,877 12,544
Criminal Damage 38,524 32,328 23,611
Death or Injury by Reckless Driving 122 130 95
Domestic Burglary 6,784 6,267 5,813
Drugs Offences 13,268 14,435 13,461
Fraud and Forgery 2,325 2,093 1,768
Motoring Offences 26,225 20,515 14,992
Non Domestic Burglary 5,016 4,134 3,515
Other 7,607 20,965 16,886
Public Order 24,045 2,458 1,945
Racially Aggravated Offences 2,784 6,079 5,384
Robbery 6,699 1,907 1,952
Sexual Offences 2,088 49,183 41,702
Theft and Handling 54,802 6,877 5,170
Vehicle Theft 8,280 47,490 38,744
Violence against a person 53,930 6,676 5,411
TOTAL Recorded Offences 277,986 244,583 198,449

2.4. Preventing youth crime the role of schools
Her Majestys Inspection of Constabulary 2010 report: A joint inspection of youth
crime prevention19 identifies schools as being one of the four key areas in which
youth crime prevention work focuses. The other three areas being: the family;
lifestyle, neighbourhood and community; and self, personal and individual practices.
Various crime prevention programmes use schools as the location for their work; the
most prominent of these is the well-established SSPs which use a multi-agency
approach to tackle crime in and around schools, and place a police officer in the
school to work with school staff and other local agencies. Like many youth crime
prevention programmes, it focuses on hot spots where crime is most prevalent and
targets the most at risk.
Since the rise of knife crime among teenagers has been well-publicised, there has
been a marked focus on knife crime prevention programmes, including the Be Safe
project that delivers knife crime talks in schools. There are also many locally-based
anti-knife schemes in London boroughs and other UK cities. In early 2011 the
government allocated 18 million to tackling knife, gun and gang crime.
Crime prevention: the role and potential of schools20 explores the different ways in
which schools can be at the heart of preventing crime at all levels: enhancing positive
behaviour in an individual and creating a sense of community; encouraging the
interest of parents in a childs education and achievement and providing an
opportunity a place to advance socially and avoid the temptation into crime.
One particular method that is increasingly used in schools is restorative practice
methods.21 Although informal methods are common in schools, some more formal
programmes of Restorative Justice (RJ) have also been introduced.
19
http://www.hmic.gov.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/Joint%20Inspections/CJI_NFS_20100909.pdf
20
Community Justice (2005) Crime prevention: the role and potential of schools. Available at:
http://eprints.port.ac.uk/123/1/CrimePreventionSchools.pdf
21
Restorative practice involves bringing victims and offenders into communication to help repair the harm of the
crime or conflict that has occurred. This can include setting up formal conferences where those involved
communicate to find a positive way forward.

2.5. Effectiveness of youth crime prevention schemes
Despite an array of schemes and initiatives, evidence of their effectiveness is still
limited.
However there has been some evaluation of RJ programmes. The YJB carried out an
RJ in schools programme that comprised nine local YJTs working across 26 schools
(20 secondary and six primary). In 2005 an evaluation of the programme was
published which highlighted positive findings, including:
In pilot projects, over 90% of conferences reached satisfactory, lasting
agreements, which pupils felt were fair and which dealt with the behaviour
causing victimisation. 89% of the pupils were satisfied with the outcome and
the staff reported improvements in student behaviour.22
There is growing evidence to support the restorative approach: the Restorative
Justice Council have carried out evaluations of some more recent programmes in
schools, which are providing robust evidence. For example:
In Barnet, 16 primary schools were trained in restorative justice. A 2008 evaluation
by the local authority compared these schools with non practising schools and found
a reduction in exclusions of 51% in RJ trained schools; compared to a 65% increase
in exclusions in the 32 Barnet schools that have received no RJ training.23
However, addressing the evaluation of other types of schemes and initiatives, in
2009 the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies published the report, A
comprehensive review, analysis and critique of gun and knife crime strategies. It
confirms that:
Despite the wealth of anti-knife crime initiatives being carried out in the UK,
there is very little research about their impact on knife use and carrying by
young people and very few interventions are independently assessed.24
Furthermore, a 2011 report by the Department for Children, Schools and Families,
Prevention and Reduction: A review of strategies for intervening early to prevent or
reduce youth crime and anti-social behaviour, considers the UK far behind the US in
terms of the evaluation of intervention programmes:
the evidence base for the UK remains rather slender with very few
prevention or early intervention programmes being subject to the kinds of
robust evaluation research that has generated clear conclusions about
22
http://www.yjb.gov.uk/en-gb/practitioners/Workingwithvictims/Restorativejustice/RJinschools.htm
23
http://www.restorativejustice.org.uk/what_is_restorative_justice/with_young_people/schools/
24
Silverstri, A; Oldfield, M; Squires, P; Grimshaw, R (2009) Young people, knives and guns. Available at:
http://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/opus1638/Young_people_knives_and_guns.pdf

effectiveness as seen in the international literature and, in particular, the
US.25
Evaluating the effectiveness of PMNWs programme of CSADs therefore adds to this

currently limited pool of evidence. The CSADs should be considered in the light of
these various contextual factors presented in this section.
2.6. Postscript
At the time of writing this report August 2011 communities across the UK are
recovering from days of riots and looting by people from different backgrounds and
various age groups, including young men and women. This adds an important
dimension to the context in which to consider the work of PMNWs CSADs.
In the Evening Standard26 (30 August 2011) a report on the a joint initiative between
the Metropolitan Police and surgeons, called Growing Against Gangs and Violence
is being launched to show children in primary school some of the consequences of
knife crime.
It is interesting to note that PMNW presently works in 11 London boroughs only
one of these boroughs was affected by the recent rioting and looting. PMNW has a
good presence in Leeds and Nottingham, neither of which had anything like the
disturbances seen in other big cities. In Hull, one of the most deprived cities in the
UK, where PMNWs Head Office is situated and where it has some of its biggest
audiences, there was no trouble reported whatsoever.
By contrast, PMNW is not currently working in Birmingham, Wolverhampton or
Manchester which saw some of the worst problems.
Though it is not possible to establish a causal link between CSADs and the
prevention of youth crime generally or to suggest that the geographical spread of
CSADs and the locations of the riots are directly related, it is an interesting
observation.
PMNWs work does aim to make a contribution to the behaviour of young people
when faced with situations that could result in criminal behaviour, so that they are
aware of the impact on their own and others lives of making the wrong choices. This
kind of education would arguably steer those who might be persuaded to engage in
behaviour such as the rioting and looting that England recently witnessed, towards a
more positive path. In addition, for those who have already offended, CSADs would
offer the opportunity to reconsider actions and perhaps limit the risk of reoffending.
25
https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/DFE-RR111.pdf
26
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23982312-anti-gang-lessons-for-nine-year-olds-police-to-shock-
pupils-over-knife-crime.do

3. Evaluation findings on the delivery of and satisfaction
with Crime and Safety Awareness Days
This section comprises four key areas. The first is a discussion of the delivery of
CSADs including, planning and implementation phases, and how PMNW works in
partnership with delivery agencies. Secondly illustrations of the range of CSADs
observed are given through four case examples which relay some of the consistent
messages of CSADs. The third area shares the level of satisfaction experienced by
pupils, teachers and delivery agents. Finally, suggestions of how CSADs can be
improved are given and the monitoring of the CSADs is commented on.
3.1. How schools accessed CSADs

Evaluation data shows that there were five main ways in which schools found out
about PMNWs CSADs:
News of the CSADs travelled by word-of-mouth; this was the main way in which
PMNW signed schools up.
Visitors to the website found details of PMNWs work, including tasters of video
resources available, some of which feature as workshop material at CSADs.
Staff at the PMNWs Head Office proactively contacted schools by email and
phone to raise awareness about the CSADs and to explain its merits.
Referrals were often received from local agencies.
Some funders specified locations and/or schools in which they would like to
sponsor a CSAD so these locations and schools were proactively sought out.
3.2. What the project delivered

PMNWs own data shows that from April 2008 to April 2011 inclusive, PMNW
delivered a total of 487 CSADs to 115,000 pupils in over 260 unique schools across
the nine English regions. The schools receiving CSADs have a diverse student
population in terms of gender, ethnicity and socio-economic background. The target
group has been pupils aged 12 to 14 years which speaks to the fact that the age of
first time youth offenders is increasing.

Table 2: Number of CSADs delivered from 2008-2011
Year No. of days No. of pupils
2008 146 35000
2009 176 40000
2010 166 40000
2011 165
(projected)
In 2010, the regional spread of CSADs was as follows:
Table 3: Regional spread of CSADs in 2010

Region No. %
Yorkshire & Humber 50 30%
East Midlands 40 24%
Greater London 20 12%
North West 16 10%
South East 16 10%
West Midlands 11 7%
East of England 7 4%
North East 3 2%
South West 1 1%
Wales 2 1%
TOTAL 166
This table shows that the largest percentage of CSADs (over 65% in total) have been

delivered in Yorkshire and the Humber, East Midlands and London which broadly
follows the regional concentration of youth crime as highlighted in section 2.3 above.
3.3. Content and format of CSADs

Content of CSADs
All CSADs adopted a prisoners for a day theme and year groups were divided into
wings. Each CSAD followed a similar structure: a launch session, some core
workshops such as life in prison and a street scene on anti-social behaviour,
complemented by a range of activities including meeting a current prison inmate
(called the prisoners insight), visiting a replica prison cell in a PMNW van,
workshops on alcohol awareness, drugs and crime, electricity safety, and knife crime,
sessions run by the ambulance, fire and police services, magistrates court, Victim
Support, and Youth Justice Teams. The full list of topics is given in Appendix F.
These complementary workshops were chosen in consultation with the school to
reflect not only types of youth crime that were nationally significant (as illustrated by
Table 1 in section 2.3 above) but also those that were of local concern.
To get a sense of what the local issues of concern were, delivery agents and school
staff (when interviewed) were asked to list key youth crime issues and their level of
severity within the local area. Anti-social or nuisance behaviour, theft and robbery
were mentioned by four of the eight delivery partners. Other issues raised were:
inappropriate use of violence, assault, gangs, knife crime, arson and alcohol-related
crimes especially among girls. All these were categorised as between medium to
high severity.
One police officer commented that in central areas, ASB was certainly higher and
they would get reports between three to four days a week more during school
holidays. An assistant head teacher commented on the fact that the school linked
into two big communities, one of which was by a dockland and that led to feelings of
isolation and lack of identity. Therefore there was a high incidence of fist fighting
and random attacks [and] pupils with alcohol problems, especially girls.
The pupils participating in the discussion groups were also asked what young people
got into trouble for. Common issues raised by both groups included:
violence against the person including fighting, killing/murder, beating teachers
up, grievous bodily harm and knife crime
anti-social and disruptive behaviour including dropping litter, trespassing and
under-aged drinking/taking drugs
criminal damage including vandalism and graffiti
theft, that is, stealing and street robbery
generally doing bad things and hanging around with the wrong people.
The CSADs observed included elements of most of these issues.

Format of CSADs
The timetables for the four CSADs observed showed some variety in terms of topics
chosen, number, and length of workshops. This depended on the amount of time
allocated for the day, logistical arrangements and needs of the school.
The school day ranged from five and a half hours to six and a half hours, one with
just a 30 minute lunch break (and a shorter school day overall) and others with lunch
and breaks totalling between 60 to 80 minutes.
The length of workshops varied from school to school from 30 minutes to 45 minutes.
The size of the year groups also varied; this meant that in some schools the year
group was divided into five wings and, in others, as many as 10 wings. Group size
ranged from 24 to 30 pupils.
Due to logistical challenges it was not always possible for each group of pupils to
attend every workshop or activity. Sometimes the number of workshop topics on
offer was greater than the number of time slots available, sometimes the number of
pupil groups was more than the number of time slots available, for example, 10 wings
but only five class slots.
3.4. Planning and preparation

Each CSAD involved considerable planning to ensure the day was tailored to the
specific needs of the school and to ensure sufficient communication with delivery
agents to make sure their workshops were targeted and effective.
Most delivery agents were happy with the level of communication prior to delivery
and felt sufficiently well informed to prepare for and deliver on the day. One had
mentioned an invitation to an open day in London that they were unable to attend.
Another mentioned being involved quite last minute. A third said that they did not
know much about the school but because they knew most schools in the area they
were happy to be placed wherever.
All the teachers who had communications with PMNW staff prior to the day said that
the communication was either excellent or good (9 out of 13 teacher respondents).27
Furthermore, all 13 teachers said they were adequately briefed in advance of the
day.
One teacher said: Our school has a good relationship with the staff from Prison Me
No Way, therefore communication is excellent, anything asked is answered.
Another teacher who organised the CSAD for a school added:
27
The remaining four respondents did not have any communications with PMNW prior to the day because they
were not involved in this.

[the organisers] are always organised and the day always runs smoothly a
pleasure to work with them both!... they always get in touch 3 to 4 weeks
ahead of the event and have already started to organise things.
One PMNW organiser talked about the need to create a second timetable as a
contingency plan, for example, in case an external delivery agency cancelled their
workshop at the last minute, leading to teachers or PMNW staff having to fill in with a
standby workshop drawn from PMNW resources.
Contingency planning for no shows on the day was one of the key, and frequent,
challenges faced by PMNW organisers. Others included: not having ample time per
session to cover topic areas sufficiently, last minute logistical changes to room
locations and the overall management of large numbers of groups of pupils. This
made timetabling and the running of CSADs more of an art than a science!
Most delivery agents were complimentary about the logistical arrangements of the
CSAD they facilitated on. Complaints included: not knowing how to operate the
equipment supplied, lack of variety and insufficient quantity of refreshments and
distance to the hospitality suite, which reduced the amount of time allowed for
breaks. However, most of those reporting problems acknowledged that such
problems were rarely to do with PMNW, whose hands were tied by [the] schools.
3.5. Implementation a tried and tested formula

PMNW CSADs were premised on a strong ethos of learning through hard-hitting
messages combined with elements of humour and fun throughout the school day.
They were experiential, interactive and engaging. Pupils were encouraged to put
away pens and paper to be able to fully participate in the day.
As one delivery agent put it:
From what I saw it was a high-spirited fun but serious [day].
Each CSAD launched with a DVD from PMNWs list of resources shown to the whole
year group. This was often one of, if not, the most hard-hitting aspect of the day with
powerful images and storylines. At one CSAD observed by the evaluator, a teacher
commented that:
A child with special needs left during the DVD didnt like the knife scene
just got frightened hes a walker anyway. But they got him through the day
he spoke and participated so they did well.
The introduction of the prisoner for a day theme followed this opening. The PMNW
organiser emphasised that each class within the year group would be assigned a
letter denoting the prison wing to which they would now belong for the day. The
prison theme was further enforced by calling for discipline among all pupils. For
example, asking them all to tidy their attire and turn off mobile phones. The prison
rules for the day were then set out, for example, following regimented times for

breaks in their rooms to consume basic brand snacks, and to remember to move
between workshops in an orderly fashion.
3.6. Prizes
As a way to reward pupils for their efforts as real prisoners are within prison each
CSAD ended with a prize-giving ceremony. Teachers accompanying their wing were
asked to look out for pupils from their class whom they felt had participated
exceptionally well during the day. Teachers were asked to nominate two outstanding
pupils whose names were put into a hat and drawn by the PMNW organiser to
receive a prize. Each winning pupil collected a prize from a range of confectionery,
soft toys and footballs/rugby balls/basket balls and received applause from their
peers.
An observation made by the evaluator was that often the prize winners were the most
vocal pupils who had dominated discussions throughout the day. This seems to
have gone unnoticed by teachers especially in those pupil groups where teachers
were rotating duties. In one school, a teacher commented that the prize winners
were indeed the usual suspects but then noted at least three prize winners that were
usually low achievers, quiet or disruptive class members. There may therefore be
some merit in asking teachers to encourage full participation by as many members of
the class as possible and to try to identify and nominate those class members who
normally contribute less or are more disruptive on normal school days.
In one school a pop concert was requested (at an additional cost to the school). This
helped to end the day in a fun way, to thank everyone for their participation and make
the day more memorable. This final touch was enjoyed by pupils and teachers. In
another school the Head of Year declared the next day a no uniform day as a
reward to pupils impressive participation in the CSAD.
Finally all the delivery agents, staff and pupils were thanked for their contribution.
3.7. Case examples

Following are case examples based on the observations carried out at four different
schools. They illustrate the look and feel of each CSAD some unique aspects and
some consistent messages from the evaluation teams perspectives, and give a
sense of the diversity of schools and pupils reached by CSADs.

A rural, co-educational school
With just under 700 pupils aged 11-16, this is a rural co-educational school with
boys and girls mostly from White British backgrounds. The 2009 Ofsted inspection
for the school stated that the proportion of pupils eligible for free school meals was
below average. Area figures for claiming benefits and jobseekers allowance are
also below the average. Crime rates in the area are much below the average across
the board. The school had particularly highlighted a problem with girls drinking.
The day began with a hard-hitting DVD following the murder of a boy. It was
paused part way to describe that similar crimes had been committed near the local
area. Six groups, called wings of approximately 24 pupils per wing attended five,
40 minute workshops covering all but one of the following six topic areas: alcohol
awareness, fire service, electricity safety, prison service, police service and the
street scene. The evaluator followed one wing throughout the day and observed all
the workshops except the police service workshop.
Each workshop provided useful information, and opportunities for interaction and/or
asking questions. In all but one workshop, one (and in one case, two) DVDs were
shown as part of the workshop. PowerPoint presentations were also made to
convey information or to show images of consequences of actions like stealing cars.
The class seemed engaged throughout indeed one of the teachers remarked that
she had never seen them so quiet [perhaps we] should have prison officers in all
the time! Another said: I think its been quite a shock but some comments have
been insightful questions so [pupils] are paying attention.
All the workshops seemed to balance presentation with space for discussion and/or
interaction with pupils. Two workshops at this CSAD particularly stood out as
different in content and format to others on the day and at other CSADs. These
were the alcohol awareness and electricity safety workshops. Both facilitators at
these workshops took creative, hands-on approaches to their respective subject
matters, and combined them with hard-hitting messages and audiovisual material to
provoke understanding and depict the realities of unsafe behaviour.
For example, in the alcohol awareness workshop beer goggles were provided for
pupils to try on and see what it would be like to be intoxicated. This was fun but
also conveyed serious messages. Indeed one teacher conveyed that one pupil said
she would not drink alcohol as she did not like the beer goggle experience. In the
electricity safety workshop pupils were given hand-held voting pads to take a quiz at
the start of the day, the results of which were stored by the facilitator and compared
across other schools. This workshop ended with a take-away plastic ruler which
conveyed some key facts on electricity safety (see page 23 for a photo of the ruler).
The day ended with the usual prize-giving ceremony.

A selective, single sex school
This selective single sex school has just over a thousand pupils aged 11-18 from the
immediate and wider area. Its 2008 Ofsted inspection reported that over half of the
pupils are White British, with other pupils from a range of minority ethnic
backgrounds. The largest groups are Indian, Pakistani and Caribbean. Some crime
rates for the area are higher than average. One teacher highlighted that bullying
incidents occurred in school as well as minor theft.
Beginning with PMNWs short introductory workshop and then Deans story DVD,
pupils were informed that they were going to experience one day imprisonment and
would not be permitted to chew gum, put hands in pockets, be in a state of undress
or have mobile phones on. Pupils were also informed of the alternative breaks they
would be having in classrooms (instead of outdoors) with a basic brand snack.
Five groups or wings of approximately 30 pupils were formed across the year
group. Each wing attended all five workshops for 40 minutes each. These were run
by the following delivery agencies: police, prison service, YJT, court magistrates
and PMNW street scene staff. The evaluator accompanied one group throughout
the day and observed all five topics.
All five workshops covered key messages and provided opportunities for pupils to
participate in scenarios and activities in order to reinforce their understanding of the
work of these various services. For example, the YJT made a floor map to take
pupils through key stages of their work from pre-contemplation to maintenance.
Pupils also acted out different parts in a court room drama with real magistrates and
legal advisors giving key messages on how the justice system works in the UK.
In the police workshop, pupils were asked to think about what the police do; a photo
on page 23 shows some of the pupils thoughts.
Pupils were shown a DVD and were given key messages about legal rights and
wrongs.
Pupils also experienced some PMNW staple offerings: the prison workshop and the
street scene. In the prison workshop half the group were sent to see a prison cell
inside a van to get a sense of what it would feel like to be locked up and to discuss
what a prisoners day consisted off, while the other group discussed other aspects
of prison life. In the street scene some pupils were chosen to act alongside PMNW
staff to convey some of the realities of anti-social behaviour and its potential
consequences.

Metropolitan urban school
This school is situated in metropolitan, urban area. It has just under 1500 pupils
aged between 11-16 years. Most pupils are from minority ethnic backgrounds. An
Ofsted report said that the school has pupils [with] moderate learning difficulties,
behavioural, emotional or social difficulties, and communication difficulties. There is
a small but significant number of pupils with severe and moderate learning
difficulties and physical disabilities. Key deprivation figures show that numbers
claiming benefits and jobseekers allowance in the area is above average. The
school is based in an area of high crime certain crimes including robbery and
violence against the person are particularly high, and drug offences are more than
double the average, as are offences involving vehicles.
The launch consisted of an introductory talk and DVD. All pupils were informed that
they would be prisoners for the day. They had been divided into 10 groups of
approximately 30 pupils in each. Each group attended five of eight possible
workshops, lasting 30 minutes each. The topics were the prison service including
visiting the prison cell van, ambulance service, fire service, police, knife crime, YJT,
victim support and the street scene. The evaluation team followed one to two
groups to cover six of the eight topics.
The logistical arrangements at this school were commented on by some as not

being as good as at other CSADs observed there was a high level of security to
get through different parts of the school and the workshop locations were fairly
spread out. Also the 30 minute limit for workshops was really short. However, the
content of each workshop was well put together and mutually reinforcing. There
seemed to be less interactivity during this CSAD and much more structure and
discipline to most sessions, which was good for some but not for others. For
example, the YJT workshop was approached quite seriously and pupils were fairly
engaged throughout. However, when they were invited to be interactive, less than
half participated. In the fire service workshop, levels of interest waned when the
presenter just talked to the group but were livelier in the earlier part of the workshop
where they had a quiz.
Overall pupils seem to take on the key messages, sometimes being shocked by
some of the images, for example, of burnt out cars or people with burns. Pupils
were forewarned of the intensity of some of the images but many still chose to view
them.
This day ended not just with the usual prize-giving ceremony but a short pop concert
which the school had chosen to reward the efforts of all involved.

Suburban school
This suburban school serves around 1,350 pupils aged 11-18. Approximately 70 per
cent of pupils are White British, with a higher than average number of pupils from
minority ethnic backgrounds. There is a proportionately lower than average number
of pupils eligible for free school meals. Local figures for the take up of benefits and
jobseekers allowance are higher than average, and crime rates are relatively high in
certain types of crime, including drugs (double the average rate), vehicle offences,
robbery and violence.
A DVD of Sam and Dans story on theft was shown at the start of this day. The
PMNW organiser introduced the prisoner for a day theme. The year group was
divided into eight wings of around 27 pupils in each. Each wing attended six
workshops from a possible seven topic areas: fire service, ambulance service, knife
crime, drug crime, prisoners insight, prison life and the street scene. Each session
lasted 45 minutes. One of the workshops prison life, including visiting the prison
cell van, was a double group. This day was also attended by colleagues from the
PMNW Jersey organisation. The evaluator followed one group round for the day.
All but two of the workshops knife crime and the prisoners insight included
activities as well as presentations. The knife crime workshop (put at the end of the
day) was heavily geared towards presentation by the prison officer. Although there
were two short DVDs, pupils struggled to stay engaged. By contrast, the prisoner
insight workshop in which pupils were invited to ask questions of a serving prisoner
was simple in format but extremely powerful, and the group was most attentive and
disciplined in this session. No-one spoke over their peers or the presenter (prison
inmate) and pupils had a steady stream of questions to ask.
The other workshops were highly participatory. In particular the drug awareness
workshop included three exercises that the group did in smaller groups. Pupils were
also shown real drugs and quizzed on some key facts on drugs with the assistance
of a resource booklet see the photo on page 24 of a box of drugs the pupils were
shown.
The workshop led by the ambulance service provided opportunities for pupils to
practise the recovery position on one of the facilitators as well as on one another
and were praised for doing so.
The day ended with the usual prize-giving ceremony in which winning pupils were
photographed with the PMNW organiser. According to one teacher, some of the
prize winners were the usual suspects but others were welcome surprise
recipients.

Case example photos
Ruler from electricity safety workshop held at the rural co-educational school:
Responses to the question: what do the police do? from a workshop at the selective,
single-sex school:

A box of drugs shown at a workshop at the suburban school:
3.8. Satisfaction with the Crime and Safety Awareness Days

PMNW staff try to bring a fun element to the day and want pupils to enjoy
themselves. They also have serious messages to convey in order to educate young
people about crime and its consequences. The success of the CSADs must therefore
be judged both on pupil and teacher satisfaction which is covered in this section, as
well as on learning and/or changed attitudes and behaviours resulting from the day
the subject of section four.
Pupil satisfaction
Since 2008, PMNW has presented data from a sample of 127 of the 487 schools (26
per cent) that have received CSADs during the period 2008-2010. The data shows
that overall satisfaction rates are high with between 98 to 99 per cent of pupils saying
they found the CSAD valuable or very valuable as seen in Table 4 below.

Table 4: Number of pupils finding CSAD valuable 2008-2010
Year Number Sample of Very Valuable Not No
of pupil valuable valuable Answer
schools feedback
sampled forms
2008 36 2967 57% 41% 1% 1%
2009 39 3294 54% 44% 1% 1%
2010 52 3075 54% 45% 1% -
Teacher and delivery agent satisfaction
Overall satisfaction
Those teachers who responded to the CES survey were overall very positive about
different aspects of the day see Table 5 below and no-one rated anything as
poor, though one rated the delivery of workshops as average. The delivery agents
two of whom were assistant head teachers were similarly positive, rating the CSAD
as either good or excellent see Table 6.
In particular, both teachers and other delivery agents found both the engagement of
pupils on the day (16 of 21 respondents) and the delivery of the workshops to be
excellent (14 of 21 respondents).
Table 5: Teachers overall rating of the CSADs

n=13 Excellent Good Average Poor
Delivery of workshops 11 1 1 -
Content of the day 11 2 - -
Engagement with pupils 10 3 - -
Impact on pupils 7 6 - -

Table 6: Delivery agents overall rating of the CSADs
n=8 Excellent Good Average Poor Unsure
Delivery of 3 3 - - 1
workshops
Content of the day 3 5 - - -
Engagement with 6 2 - - -
pupils
Impact on pupils 3 1 3 - 1
Meeting aims
Teachers and delivery agents were asked their opinion on the extent to which they
felt the (summarised) aims of the CSADs were met. All teachers thought that all
aims were fully or partially met as Table 7 below shows.

Table 7: Teachers views on how well CSAD aims were met
n= 13 It fully It met It did Not sure
met the the aim not meet
aim to some the aim
extent at all
Increase young people's 92% (12) 8% (1) - -

awareness of types of crime
(including anti-social behaviour)
and the realities of a prison
sentence
Increase awareness about the 69% (9) 31% (4) - -

effects of crime and anti-social
behaviour on victims and the
community
Develop in young people a 31% (4) 69% (9) - -

greater respect and
understanding of others
Increase young people's 77% (10) 23% (3) - -

awareness about being
responsible for their own actions
and personal safety
Enable young people to make 77% (10) 23% (3) - -

informed life choices, adopt
positive lifestyles, stay safe, free
from crime and anti-social
behaviour
Delivery agents were asked to share what they thought were the main aims of the
CSADs. These echoed all of the aims above28 but also added others such as:
To make professionals more accessible to young people.

To break down barriers so that young people can talk to police whom they may
rarely see or speak to.
To raise awareness of safety in the community.
To inform young people about what crimes exist and how vulnerable they may be
even indirectly through association with others and the impact crime could
have on their own lives.
28
These also echoed PMNWs long list of aims which are listed in Section 4.1.

Most of the delivery agents thought these and PMNWs overall aims were well to
excellently met.
In addition, seven of the eight delivery agents responding to the question of whether
the aims of the CSADs appeared to meet the needs of the school, thought needs
were met.
Views on CSAD content

As Tables 5 and 6 above show both teachers and delivery agents rated the content
of the CSADs either as good or excellent.
Reflecting on the workshops they had personally facilitated, all six delivery agents
(that is, those who were not teaching staff) rated their workshops as a seven out of
ten or above.
Some of these delivery agents were able to observe other content during the CSADs
they were participating in or had previously participated in. They were particularly
complementary about:
The prison cell van and prisoner insight workshop.

The alcohol awareness workshop which presented scary facts but not in a scary
way. In particular, use of beer goggles enabling the young people to experience
drunkenness.
The street scene which increased pupils awareness of what will get them into
prison.
One delivery agent would have liked to have seen a workshop on drug awareness
but was also concerned that it could cause intrigue if not presented in a balanced
way.
Teachers comments on the content of the day were mixed:

The session with an ex-prisoner had to be cancelled so it lost a little of the
impact of the effect of crime. The best session [was] about brain trauma
following a car crash.
They were shocked re arrest ages and life in prison. They were really
interested in the magistrates and the prisoners. Some of them were
emotionally moved by what they saw and heard.
Many were surprised by the regime in prison its a common feeling that
prison is like a holiday camp as a result of media coverage, TV
programmes, etc.
Themes emerging from the group discussions are given below. These show the
areas of content that pupils had found most interesting. For example:
Seeing things such as drugs with their paraphernalia, and police equipment

(taser, baton, pepper spray).
Watching or taking part in live action such as: cutting people out of a car in the car
crash scenario, or taking on roles of defendant, prosecutor in the court case
enactment, or acting like drunken people in the street scene role play.
What pupils did not like

The CES pupil survey asked an optional question: Please tell us if there was
anything you didnt like about the day.
Forty-one per cent (that is 47 of 114 respondents to this question) took this as an
opportunity to say that there was nothing they did not like and that they enjoyed it all.
By contrast, seven respondents said they did not like anything at all about the day.
Some gave details about particular aspects of the day that they did not like. Although
this number is small, the comments are worthwhile considering.
Eleven respondents said they did not like the fact that they could not attend all the
different workshops:
We didn't get to participate in some of the activities. We also missed some of
the activities like the car crash and the cells.
It may be difficult to avoid this type of disappointment, given the challenges of
developing a programme to meet the needs of individual school timetables and group
sizes.
Seven respondents said they did not like being treated as prisoners and did not like
the strictness of the PMNW staff. This was also a sentiment expressed by some of
the pupils in one of the group discussions. (See the section on the learning
environment on page 32.)
During observations of CSADs the evaluation team noted the intentional creation of a
strict, disciplined environment as part of the experience of what life can be like in
prison and that it was balanced by humour and opportunities for fun. As the creation
of the strict environment is fundamental to PMNWs approach it is to be expected that
it may cause discomfort for pupils. Where this discomfort has left a lasting
impression on pupils and served to deter pupils away from ill-informed choices, this
could be claimed as a success of the day. Where it has been ineffective in educating
choices and left an unsettling feeling, it could be argued to have been a less
successful tactic and against PMNWs intended approach. Further research would be
required to ascertain whether pupils felt discomfort but took learning points away with
them or whether the discomfort meant that they did not engage with learning.
Six respondents said that they found it boring and three commented that they found it
patronising: The speeches were sometimes as if the people were talking down to
us, as if we weren't mature individuals.

Through the evaluation teams observations it was revealed that a few workshops
were not of the same standard as others. For example, one of the workshops on
knife crime was basically two, short DVDs with a lot of animated talking by the
workshop facilitator. This did not engage the pupils in the same way that other
workshops had.
However, it could be argued that having one or two workshops that are less
interactive in format is a good blend of learning styles rather than forcing interaction
at every workshop which may feel repetitive to some pupils.
Seven commented on some other specific aspects of the day that they did not like,
including two who said they did not like meeting or being in the same room as the
prisoners. One pupil commented that the drug lessons were too obscene and
graphic for my liking.
One delivery agent was:
Disappointed dogs didnt come this time eg they sniff out the cell; we plant
drugs onto kids for dogs to sniff out - prison service didnt have funding to do
this time!
3.9. Ways to improve the day

PMNWs feedback forms invite pupils to make suggestions to improve the day these
comments are collated in their annual evaluation reports. Some of the recurring
themes from the 2008-2010 reports include:
Make it longer.
Hold CSADs more than once a year.
Allow all pupils the chance to do all workshops.
Make all workshops hands on.
Teachers and pupils, both in survey responses and group discussions, provided a
number of suggestions related to the content and format of CSADs. The evaluation
teams observations of CSADs (as presented in the case examples above) also
yielded some improvements for consideration. These are all shared below under the
following headings:
Content of CSADs including (a) number and types of activities and (b) real-life
experience workshops.
Format of CSADs including (a) the prisoners for a day theme and the learning
environment and (b) level of interactivity.
Follow-up sessions
Other suggested improvements.

Content of CSADs
Number and types of activities

Almost a quarter (29 of 120 respondents to this question) wanted to do more
activities or increase the range of activities.
Some specific suggestions from respondents and group discussants include:
Look at police equipment / show pupils police weapons.

Do more on prisons less on drugs.
Do a Who Wants to be a Millionaire type quiz about crime.
Make a trip out of it.
In the CSADs observed, the first suggestion of showing police equipment did actually
feature in some of the police workshops. The second suggestion of showing more on
life in prison and less on drugs is a personal preference but also further supported by
the section below on real-life experience workshops.
Teachers and delivery agents were also asked if there was anything missing from the
content of the CSADs or if anything could be improved. One teacher had been
hoping for a prisoner workshop but understand it is not always possible. We have
been promised one this year. Three of the seven delivery agents responding to the
question about what improvements could be made to the content of CSADs said
nothing. One school organiser commented:
Pupils often ask for the dog team. Personally I think the prisoners have the
most impact would be good to get a female in as well as a male.
Real-life experience workshops
Bring in actual people that have

been to prison themselves.
For us to meet an actual criminal
person and for them to tell us their
experiences.
Bring in criminals to interact more.

Seventeen per cent (20 respondents) had some quite specific ideas about what could
improve the day. Seven said that having (or having more)29 prisoners there would
help, as one pupil suggested: I thought if they brought in a person from prison, we
would actually get a sense of how they felt and stuff.
This was also a suggestion from some of the individuals at one of the group
discussions as shown in the photograph above.
The observations revealed the powerful effects of the prisoners insight workshop
which supports pupils request for these. At one CSAD the evaluator observed a
class that had been quite unruly in previous workshops suddenly become completely
quiet, disciplined and attentive in this workshop. They asked questions in an orderly
fashion, did not talk across one another and were fully engaged throughout the
dialogue.
PMNWs ability to bring in serving inmates released on licence to the CSAD is of

course dependent on the locality of the day which makes it only possible
occasionally. However, given the profound effects on the pupils of hearing from a
real inmate, it may be worthwhile considering making this a feature of as many
CSADs as possible.
Format of CSADs
The prisoners for a day theme and learning environment

Three survey respondents, from different schools, as well as some pupils in the
group discussions at two other schools, made comments on aspects of the learning
environment at CSADs.
Some of these were about the workshop facilitators:
The police officers could have been nicer.
I didnt like the way we were treated during this day be a bit nicer.
Have people who like to work with pupils do the days.
Better class management.
29
Not all schools have a session with real prisoners.

Less shouting!
The prison officers need to
stop moaning at us and let
us do some stuff we
wanted to do.
The only thing that would
have made it better is if
they didnt thre(a)ten us.
There were some comments about the overall atmosphere and feel of the day:
Too strict on phones.
More freedom.
Let us go out for break.
Three respondents said that having refreshments would have improved the day; with
one saying it would be improved by giving out sweets or chocolates, just to keep us
going?
These comments resonate with the evaluation teams observations: they saw that
some pupils found the day rather taxing. However, it could be argued that one of the
cornerstones of the day was to attempt to convey some of the harsh realities of life in
prison. For those pupils who did not reject this experience, it was a successful
approach and pupils found it memorable, even though some of them did not like the
disciplined atmosphere.

Level of interactivity
The CSADs are designed to use innovative techniques to create an engaging, fun
day with serious messages. Overall this seems to have been the experience of most
pupils and teachers. However, there was a minority of pupils who did not find the day
sufficiently interesting and/or fun. Some of their suggestions for improvement are
listed here.
Pupils from the group discussions commented on the lack of interactivity in some
workshops and called for this to be improved:
Make us join in with the activities.
Maybe if you make it more interesting and include teenagers its boring.
I think we should run the day again but improve it by making it more fun and
interactive and let the kids get more involved.
This was also the concern of 13 per cent (15) of survey respondents who said that
making the day more participatory would help:
Make it more exciting and not just talk all the time, and let the pupils get
involved with some activities as people would love that more.
Five of the respondents who wanted to increase participation specifically suggested
having: more role plays and different activities and do less writing work.30
Nine pupils said that making it more fun would improve the day, one added: make
the day more memorable, by doing more fun activities rather than just the usual
lectures.
One teacher thought that teachers could be more involved:
When engaging with young people the 'delivery' and the 'wow' factor of any
presentation always catches their attention and then allows you to make
your point. Teachers could help some of the presentations to engage the
pupils more, both in terms of ICT delivery and the way your staff interact with
the pupils.
One delivery agent wanted to improve the level of interactivity of their own workshop
and to be more hard-hitting in the messages being given about personal safety.
The evaluation teams observations showed reliance in most of the workshops on
DVDs. This tended to be repetitive and did not engage pupils as much as the more
innovative methods used in a few workshops. For example, a quiz where pupils
used voting pads, and beer goggles to experience drunkenness, as mentioned in the
case examples above, also engaged pupils not least because they were novel and
an alternative to DVDs and discussion.
30
It is assumed that this pupil was referring to work done on a whiteboard as opposed to pupils doing writing as
the latter is not a feature of CSADs.

The evaluation team also observed a variation in the facilitation skills from delivery
agent to delivery agent. Most facilitators were engaging, many were creative and
invited pupil interaction throughout the workshop. Sometimes pupil participation was
requested too frequently. Some struck a good balance between making specific input
and seeking pupil participation. A few lacked the appropriate skills to involve
participants sufficiently and spent the majority of their workshop time talking to pupils
rather than offering them space to learn by doing or asking questions.
Although PMNW staff and trustees regularly observe delivery agents workshops, it
may be worth considering setting some broad criteria against which to make
assessments in order to suggest ways to alleviate some of these concerns and to
enhance pupils learning experience. Criteria could include:
minimum levels of interaction per workshop; maximum amount of time that

facilitators should talk uninterrupted
maintaining levels of discipline within the class and being clear on timetabling
ensuring that quieter members of the class are encouraged to contribute.
In addition, the briefing of delivery agents prior to the CSAD and at the start of the
day should emphasise further the importance of facilitation rather than instruction of
pupils.
Finally, on the subject of involvement of pupils, six survey respondents said that
something should be done to allow everyone to attend everything and one suggested
allowing pupils to choose what workshops they do.
However, a couple of comments from the group discussions gave a different

dimension to this:
Dont get pupils to act as then they are not involved.
Get different pupils involved.
This last point was a recurring observation by the evaluator: that often the same
pupils raised their hands to answer questions and contribute to role plays.
Facilitators would not have been aware of this but the accompanying teachers would
have been and could have encouraged others to participate.
Follow-up sessions
A few delivery agents also suggested additional or follow-up workshops. For
example, one delivery agent thought two days would be better than one day. The
second day could be run a few weeks later to enable follow-up discussions and/or
some after care for young people to ask questions rather than leaving teachers to
deal with after care. Another suggested having a parents session at the end of each
CSAD.

PMNW staff do return to some schools annually and sometimes pupils from the
previous year group are given special permission to attend the CSAD for a second
time.
Other suggestions to improve CSADs

Three teachers offered suggestions as to how they think the CSADs could be
improved, including comments on logistical arrangements:
Preferred it when lunchtime and breaks were also run as 'prison', so the
whole day was part of the experience.
Ensure that all presenters are suitable.
A couple of delivery agents also suggested better and more advertising, and
connecting with potential delivery partners such as YJTs and Pupil Referral Units.
Definitely a need to promote as much as possible and give schools the

opportunity to have a day like this.
I was at pupil referral unit at a school in [town name] talked to kids; teacher
had been trying to get in touch with PMNW.
3.10. Monitoring the Crime and Safety Awareness Days

In the final session of each CSAD, pupils were asked to raise their hands in answer
to three basic questions: Did they enjoy the day? Did they find something
interesting? Did they learn anything? In all cases the majority of pupils raised there
hands to indicate positive responses to all these questions.
Schools were also all left with feedback forms for both teachers and pupils which
they were requested to complete and return to PMNW head office.
One delivery agent suggested adding a question to the evaluation form asking pupils
if they needed help or were worried about anything. The responses could be fed
back to teachers to pick up.
However, it seems that no proactive follow up of forms is made by either organisers
or office staff which means that results presented in the annual reports are likely to
be a self-selecting small sample of approximately ten per cent of pupils receiving the
CSADs.
Delivery agents including PMNW staff that facilitate sessions on the day said they
did not to get sight of these feedback forms to be able to see how their individual
workshops are rated or any detailed comments about the content. A few delivery
agents commented that they would like access to this information to be able to learn
from and improve on their offer to schools. PMNW staff reported that they do
communicate any negative comments to delivery agents or end the partnership if no
mutually acceptable solution to amending future workshops can be found. It would
be interesting to compare feedback received from PMNW on the workshops to see
how pupils and teachers rated these workshops in comparison to self assessment by
delivery agents.
Comments are also proactively gathered from the PMNW website and included in the
annual reports.
Although no follow-up data collection is carried out in the years following the CSADs,
staff often receive unsolicited feedback which is sometimes cited in PMNWs annual
reports.

4. Benefits from the Crime and Safety Awareness Days
This section begins with the aims of the CSADs (see section 4.1: what PMNW
wanted to achieve) and then discusses the findings that convey the benefits gained
by pupils and others. The findings have been grouped under the following headings:
What pupils remembered of the day

Overall gains in knowledge and understanding in relation to six areas: life in
prison, anti-social behaviour, laws on arrest, consequences of carrying a knife,
effects of using drugs and alcohol, and awareness about personal safety
Specific learning gained by pupils
Further benefits of CSADs
How pupils used the information and learning gained at CSADs
Less positive effects.
4.1. What PMNW wanted to achieve

PMNWs list of aims for the CSADs is as follows:
To help young people develop an awareness of crime and its consequences

To help young people gain a greater respect and understanding for others
To increase awareness about being responsible for ones own actions
To make young people more aware that the law is there to protect as well as to
punish
To build a greater understanding of Citizenship within young people
To help young people recognise the difference between real prison life and that
portrayed in TV dramas
To show effects of different drugs, legal and illegal, and the link between drugs
and crime
To increase awareness about the effects and impact of crime upon victims and
the community
To help young people stay safe, free from crime and anti-social behaviour
Seek to discourage the vulnerable young from making a mistake that could ruin
their adult lives
Effects of anti-social behaviour in local communities
Looking at legal and human rights
To promote the value of adopting positive lifestyles

As part of the evaluation process these aims were summarised as follows:
To increase young people's awareness of types of crime (including anti-social

behaviour) and the realities of a prison sentence.
To increase young peoples awareness about the effects of crime and anti-social
behaviour on victims and the community.
To develop in young people a greater respect and understanding of others.
To increase young people's awareness about being responsible for their own
actions and personal safety.
To enable young people to make informed life choices, adopt positive lifestyles,
stay safe, free from crime and anti-social behaviour.
The following sections demonstrate what pupils said they had remembered, learned
and used since they attended their CSAD over a year ago.
4.2. What pupils remembered of the day

PMNWs feedback forms, CES surveys and group discussions asked pupils to share
what was most memorable about the day.
Overwhelmingly the findings from both the survey and group discussions showed
that the content around prison life was most memorable demonstrating that these
days are effective in getting pupils to think about the potential effect of prison on their
lives and therefore deterring them from making ill-informed choices.
Prison life
Almost a quarter of survey respondents (23 per cent, 51, n=218) said they were likely
to remember the prison cell van. One pupil said: I will remember the experience in
that cell, which showed me its not worth risking time in jail.
Fifteen per cent (33) said that they would most remember the prisoners that came in
and talked to them. One pupil was struck by the afterlife of prisoners and how much
they regretted what they did and that prison isn't nice. One of the group discussion
participants said, the two prisoners that came in told us how it was in prison and
what they did to get put in prison.
Twelve per cent (26) said that they will remember most what it is like to be in prison.
One described what they had learned about prison life: what sort of clothes they got,
what food they eat, if theyre good they maybe allowed a TV and maybe allowed a
room mate.
The prisoner for a day theme and experiencing the strictness of prison officers,
being disciplined (sometimes harshly in their opinion), for example, not having a
break, not being able to talk, being in different groups to their friends, having to keep

attire smart, was also memorable for some. The picture below shows some of the
things that the pupils in the group discussion remembered:
Anti-social behaviour and its consequences

The role play street scene that was aimed mainly at (a) increasing pupils awareness
about the effects and consequences of crime and anti-social behaviour on others and
(b) developing greater respect and understanding within the community, was
memorable for 12 per cent (27) of respondents.
Even though I did it last year I still remember in the hall there was a
performance about the community and drinking on a wall or something, and
I remember all the consequences and how our actions can affect other
people.
Seven per cent (16) said they would remember things they learnt about drugs and
alcohol. One said: Drinking can lead up to many other crimes meaning a longer
sentence to serve.
One CSAD organiser pointed out that the CCTV footage of alcohol-induced violence
had more effect on adults than kids showing how normalised to violence they are.

Other memories of CSADs
Six per cent (13) said they would remember most something about the effects of
crime either the effects on themselves or on others. For example, one pupil said:
I think I will remember about anti-social behaviour and how it affects the
people around us and the use of drugs and basically I think I will remember
everything that the crime prevention day was about.
Another pupil recalled how much it could affect their future:
That once you have a criminal record, its with you for life and when applying
for jobs they will see this so less chance for me to be employed in the future,
depending on what it is, I wouldn't even be allowed out of the country on a
holiday.
4.3. Overall gains in knowledge and understanding

Pupils and teachers rated pupils knowledge and understanding in six areas before
and after the CSAD:31 life in prison; what anti-social behaviour is; what young people
can be arrested for; the consequences of carrying a knife; the effects of taking
alcohol or drugs, and awareness about their own personal safety.
Pupils knowledge before the CSADs

As Table 8 below shows pupils own perspectives of their knowledge before the
crime day in the six areas mentioned above. Table 9 below shows teachers views of
pupils understanding and knowledge in these six areas.
The data shows that between 46 per cent and 77 per cent of pupils said they knew a
bit about each of the six areas before the CSAD. Teachers were more confident of
pupils knowledge in some areas than others.
Between 29 per cent and 49 per cent of pupils responding said they knew a lot
about five of the six areas before the crime day. In particular, 49 per cent of pupil
respondents said that knew a lot about the effects of taking alcohol or drugs before
the CSAD. This was echoed in the teachers findings: eight teachers thought some
pupils understood this area, the remaining five thought that most pupils understood
this area.
31
The survey was carried out after the delivery of CSADs so asking pupils and teachers to rate themselves
before and after required them to rely on their own memory. Ideally the before questions should have been
asked at the start of the CSAD and the after questions at the end of the CSAD.

In contrast only 13 per cent of pupils responding said they knew a lot about life in
prison before the CSAD. This was echoed by the teachers views: almost all
teachers said they thought very few pupils understood about life in prison.
In five of the six areas there was a small number of respondents (between five and
ten per cent) who said they didnt know anything. In particular 16 per cent of pupil
respondents said they did not know anything about the consequences of carrying a
knife before the CSAD. Teachers views were split on this area: seven teachers
thought that very few pupils understood this area; six teachers thought that some
pupils understood this.
Table 8: Pupils knowledge before the CSAD pupils perspectives:

I didn't know I knew a bit I knew a lot n=
anything about about this about this
this
Life in prison 10% (27) 77% (205) 13% (35) 267
What anti-social 7% (18) 64% (171) 29% (78) 267

behaviour is
What you can get 6% (15) 60% (160) 35% (92) 267
arrested for
The consequences 16% (42) 52% (138) 33% (87) 267

of carrying a knife
The effects of taking 5% (13) 46% (122) 49% (131) 266

alcohol or drugs
Awareness of my 7% (19) 53% (140) 40% (107) 266

own personal safety

Table 9: Pupils understanding before the CSAD teachers
perspectives:
n=13 Very few Some of them Most of them
understood this understood this understood this
Life in prison 92% (12) 8% (1) 0.0% (0)
What anti-social 0.0% (0) 85% (11) 15% (2)

behaviour is
What they could get 31% (4) 69% (9) 0.0% (0)
arrested for
The consequences of 54% (7) 46% (6) 0.0% (0)

carrying a knife
The effects of taking 0.0% (0) 61.5% (8) 38.5% (5)

alcohol or drugs
Awareness of their own 7.7% (1) 84.6% (11) 7.7% (1)

personal safety
Pupils knowledge after the CSADs

As Table 10 below shows, respondents overall viewed the day as adding to their
knowledge.32
Across all topic areas, those that said they knew a bit before the CSAD said they
gained the most knowledge, that is, they said they knew a lot more after the CSAD.
Across all topics, between 11 per cent and 17 per cent of respondents said they
knew about the same as before the CSAD. However on average, across the six
areas, 58 per cent of pupils said they knew a lot more about the area than they had
known at the start. In particular, 62 per cent of pupils said their knowledge of prison
had grown a lot more, which is interesting as this was the area that had the fewest
pupils (13 per cent) who said they knew a lot about it before the day.
This was also the area that some pupils expressed some discomfort about.
32
Appendix G contains a more detailed cross tabulation.

Table 10: Pupils knowledge after the CSAD pupils perspectives
n=265 I know about the I know a bit I know a lot
same as before more about this more about this
Life in prison 11% (28) 27% (72) 62% (165)
What anti-social 13% (34) 34% (89) 54% (142)

behaviour is
What you can get 12% (32) 28% (74) 60% (159)
arrested for
The consequences 13% (33) 30% (80) 57% (152)

of carrying a knife
The effects of taking 17% (46) 24% (63) 59% (156)

alcohol or drugs
Awareness of my 14% (36) 31% (83) 55% (146)

own personal safety
Teachers overwhelming view was that pupils understanding in the six areas grew as
a result of the CSADs. In particular, all but one teacher felt that very few pupils
understood about life in prison before the CSAD and all teachers felt that most pupils
understood about life in prison after the CSAD. Most teachers (11 out of 13) thought
that some pupils had an understanding of what anti-social behaviour is before the
CSADs, and all thought that most pupils understood this after the CSADs.
Table 11: Pupils understanding after the CSAD teachers perspectives

n=13 Very few Some of them Most of them
understand this understand this understand this
Life in prison - - 100% (13)
What anti-social - - 100% (13)

behaviour is
What they could get - 15% (2) 85% (11)

arrested for
The consequences of - 15% (2) 85% (11)

carrying a knife
The effects of taking - 15% (2) 85% (11)

alcohol or drugs
Awareness of their own - 15% (2) 85% (11)

personal safety

There are a number of factors that could explain the above findings including: the
different emphases of each CSAD where some topics may be covered in less depth
than others (if at all). Also, information on some topic areas may form part of the
school curriculum and be taught in other classes such as citizenship or PSHE, or
come from other sources. Twelve of the 13 teachers thought that the information
pupils had before attending a CSAD would likely have come from family or the school
curriculum.
In the group discussions, pupils rated the extent to which their knowledge of the six
areas had increased as a result of the crime days. As Table 12 below shows, the
participants from one school discussion group said that their knowledge had
increased a bit or a lot across the six areas. In the other school discussion group
some participants said their knowledge had not increased at all.

Table 12: Group discussions with pupils33
Question: The crime day increased my knowledge of .
Yes, a bit Yes, a lot No, not at

all
Sch1 Sch2 Total Sch1 Sch2 Total Sch1 Sch2 Total
Life in prison 4 7 11 6 1 7 0 4 4
What anti- 7 6 13 4 2 6 0 6 6
social
behaviour is
What you can 6 7 13 7 1 8 0 8 8

get arrested
for
The 6 no 6 3 no 3 0 no 0
consequences data data data
of carrying a
knife
The effects of 4 5 9 8 0 8 0 6 6
taking alcohol
or drugs
Awareness of 7 9 16 0 1 1 0 1 1
my own
personal
safety
33
The discrepancy in totals is because some pupils put multiple scores (with sticky dots) against questions.

4.4. Specific learning
Pupils were asked to judge the extent to which CSADs had influenced their
knowledge and behaviour.
As Table 13 below shows, between 42 and 65 per cent of respondents fully agreed
that the CSADs had made them:
think more about how their behaviour could affect others (42%)
more aware of how getting into crime could affect their future and the lives of
people around them (49%)
think more about how to stay safe and avoid crime (50%)
more aware of how crime and anti-social behaviour could affect others (65%)
However, between five and seven per cent of respondents definitely did not agree
with the above statements, and between three to five per cent were unsure.
Table 13: Pupils views on what they learnt from the CSAD
Definitely do
n=247
some extent
Fully agree
not agree
Not sure
Agree to
I think more about how my behaviour 42% 50% 5% (11) 4% (9)

could affect others (103) (124)
I am more aware of how crime and 49 % 41% 6% (15) 4% (10)

anti-social behaviour can affect (122) (100)
victims and the community
I am more aware of how getting 65% 26% (63) 7% (16) 3% (7)

involved in crime could affect my (161)
future and the lives of people around
me
I think more about how to stay safe 50% 39% (96) 7% (17) 5% (11)
and avoid crime (123)
Pupils also mentioned specific learning points from the CSADs. Some examples are
given below.

Life in prison
Thirty-nine survey respondents said that they had learnt about aspects of life in
prison, such as what prisoners wear. Sixteen particularly mentioned learning about
the prison cell and 16 said they had also learnt something about the consequences
of crime. For example, one respondent said:
How it [crime] can affect you personally ranging from the social impact it has
on your life to sometimes your own family turning their back on you, and also
the employment side as no one wants to employ a 'criminal' no matter if it
was a petty little crime or it wasnt your fault, it only shows up on your record
as the crime it doesnt explain the circumstance it was under.
In group discussions, participants also highlighted their learning about life in prison,
including how to work to get things and how youre treated in prison.
Other learning points

Twelve pupil survey respondents talked about learning about the effects of drugs or
alcohol and eight mentioned peer pressure. One explained: I learnt that not to give
into people pressuring me to try new things like drugs and smoking just to act cool
around them.
Six others said they had learnt about the consequences of carrying weapons and
four mentioned the court system.
In group discussions, two general points were made by two different individuals: they
learnt to deal with problems instead of making them worse, and to make the right
choices and not to get in trouble with the police.
Delivery agents thought their workshops had made pupils realise things such as:
how fire spreads and the consequences of committing arson

how a criminal record can affect your job prospects
car crime happens daily.
One delivery agent highlighted that pupils gained understanding of why police do
what they do, for example, stop and search. Two delivery agents mentioned how
pupils showed an interest in joining the police, for example, the forensic team and
the fire brigade.

4.5. Further benefits of the Crime and Safety Awareness Day
Pupil responses indicate that the CSADs did create some shifts in attitudes and
awareness in line with PMNWs original extended list of aims. The list presented in
Table 14 below is inspired by the longer list of PMNW aims.
The data shows that 46 per cent of pupils said the CSAD had made them much more
aware of the consequences of their actions; 46 per cent said it had made them a lot
less likely to behave anti-socially; 43 per cent said it had increased their motivation to
take up education, employment or training opportunities, and 41 per cent said it had
given them higher hopes for the future. This is shown in the table below.
In contrast, in relation to some known risk factors associated with youth crime such
as: truancy; lack of ambition or motivation to pursue education, training or
employment, and low self-confidence, CSADs had not positively affected these for
some pupils. A significant minority had said that the CSADs had not: increased their
self-confidence (36 per cent); made them less likely to miss school (24 per cent);
given them higher hopes for the future (20 per cent) nor increased their motivation to
take up education, employment or training opportunities (19 per cent). However, it is
not possible from the data collected to say whether these pupils felt that they would
be unlikely to miss school anyway or were already confident, motivated, aspirational
pupils. Furthermore, increased self-confidence, improved aspiration and motivation,
and a reduced likelihood of truancy were not stated aims (as listed in section 4.1
above) of the CSADs.

Table 14: Pupils perspectives on additional benefits of CSADs
Yes, a lot Yes, a No, not at n=
little all
Increased my self-confidence 22% (55) 42% (103) 36% (87) 245
Given me a better understanding 37% (91) 53% (130) 10% (25) 246
of different people
Made me think before I do 40% (97) 43% (105) 17% (42) 244
something
Made me more aware of the 46% (112) 41% (99) 14% (33) 244
consequences of my actions
Made me less likely to behave 46% (112) 37% (90) 17% (42) 244
anti-socially
Made me less likely to miss 37% (90) 40% (96) 24% (57) 243
school
Given me higher hopes for the 41% (100) 39% (95) 20% (48) 243
future
Increased my motivation to take 43% (104) 38% (93) 19% (47) 244
up education, employment or
training opportunities
However, these figures are completely open to interpretation as pupils were not
asked prior to the CSADs to state their levels of confidence, motivation and so on. It
is therefore not possible to report on the extent to which the CSADs led to major,
minor or no shifts in each of these areas.
What can be commented on is a comparison of pupils responses by age. This

further analysis revealed that those aged 13 or 14 appear to be much more likely to
benefit in all areas as Table 15 below shows. Sixteen per cent of 15 year olds said
that the day increased their self-confidence, which is significant in the context of the
other scores given by 15 year olds where figures are higher across the board, but
also when compared to 44 per cent of 13 year olds who felt that their self confidence
had increased a lot this is an aim that is not being achieved very successfully
amongst the older age group.
These findings were echoed in the views of the teachers. All 13 teachers thought
that the CSADs had added value to some if not all pupils. In particular, 12 of the 13
teachers believed that the CSAD had made most pupils more aware of the

consequences of their actions; 10 thought that most would think before doing
something and 12 thought that the confidence of some pupils had improved.34
Table 15: Benefits by age comparison

Age 13 Age 14 Age 15
Increased self-confidence A lot 44% 23% 16%
A little 42% 53% 41%
Better understanding of A lot 54% 27% 34%

different people
A little 43% 67% 54%
Made me think before I do A lot 53% 30% 38%

something
A little 36% 63% 42%
More aware of A lot 60% 30% 45%

consequences of actions
A little 35% 67% 38%
Less likely to behave anti- A lot 54% 43 % 44%

socially
A little 32% 50% 36%
Less likely to miss school A lot 54% 23% 35%
A little 43% 63% 35%
Higher hopes for the future A lot 53% 23% 41%
A little 34% 63% 36%
Increased motivation to take A lot 57% 33% 40%

up education, employment
or training opportunities A little 35% 60% 36%
34
Some teachers are also more sceptical about the ability to shift pupils around school attendance, hopes for the
future and increased motivation. This suggests that they feel there will be effects for the more easily converted.
This would need further follow up.

Table 16: Teachers perspectives on additional benefits of CSADs
n=13 For most of For some of For few or
them them none of them
It has improved their self- 8% (1) 92% (12) -

confidence
Given them a better 46% (6) 54% (7) -

understanding of different
people
Made them think before doing 77% (10) 23 % (3) -

something
Made them more aware of the 92% (12) 8% (1) -

consequences of their actions
Made them less likely to 46% (6) 54% (7) -

behave anti-socially
Made them less likely to miss 39% (5) 46% (6) 15% (2)
school
Given them higher hopes for 39% (5) 46% (6) 15% (2)
the future
Increased their motivation to 31% (4) 62% (8) 8% (1)

take up education,
employment or training
opportunities
Delivery agents were also asked if they were aware of any positive effects directly on
pupils or within the school or local community. Most were unable to make any such
judgements saying it was: too hard to quantify and/or link back to a particular
school or that it was too early to tell or that they simply did not know.
However one delivery agent had received some feedback:
It has made a difference perhaps to kids on the edge of committing crime.
One little girl and she was little asked: Were they real people? and I
said yes, so ask myself Do I need to target specific kids to whom this would
make a difference?
The evaluation teams observations also suggested some other potential benefits
that would need to be followed up and tested. For example:

Did having the prison officers in school disciplining the pupils for a day help to
restore classroom etiquette within the year group?
What were the effects on the prison inmates who attended the CSADs to share
their stories?
Have teachers subsequently regarded some of their more disruptive pupils in a
new light, given that these CSADs often bring out their participation and
constructive classroom engagement?
Have pupils also asked career-related questions to different professionals in the
workshops maintained their interest?
4.6. How pupils used the information and learning gained at Crime and
Safety Awareness Days
Pupils were asked about if and how they had used learning from the CSAD:
Pupils talked to others about the CSAD primarily to friends.

Topics on the CSAD were often not covered by the school curriculum, but those
that were, featured on the Personal, Social and Health Education (PSHE),
Citizenship or Religious Education (RE) classes.
There was evidence for a few pupils, that some of the learning points from the
CSAD did get applied to a real-life challenge.
Talking about the CSAD

Pupils responding to the survey were more likely to discuss the day with friends or
family than with teachers. Sixty-nine per cent spoke to friends and 59 per cent spoke
to family about aspects of the day. Forty-three per cent discussed it with teachers
and 15 per cent discussed it with someone else. This was illustrated by some of the
responses:
I told my mum about what happens in life in prison and about how you get
searched before you are put into a cell and also I told her that I went into a
prison cell and saw how prisoners lived and I also told her that the clothes
they we[a]r in prison were not nice and also I told her what they eat in
prison. After I told her about the prisoner I told her about the consequences
of holding a knife I told her that if you hold knife you will be arrested. She
was very shocked about what I told her :)
With my friends I discussed how we should respect each other outside of
school and what sort of things we should or shouldnt do. Also with my
parents I told them how [our] safety is the most important thing.
We discussed the safety of myself with my parents and how I would have a

curfew of what time to be home when out alone with friends so I can be safe.
Seventy-seven per cent of teachers responding to the survey said that pupils had
spoken to them about the CSAD since it took place. For example,
They were shocked re[garding] arrest ages and life in Prison. They were
really interested in the Magistrates and the Prisoners. Some of them were
emotionally moved by what they saw and heard.
Asking for help because of siblings involved in drug use.
Many were surprised by the regime in prison - it's a common feeling that
prison is 'like a holiday camp' as a result of media coverage, TV
programmes etc.
They were very interested in talking to the prisoners and what sentence they
got for the crime they did. A lot of the pupils was shocked about how long
the sentence was. Also listening to stories about life in prison. I think the
male pupils w[ere] quite shocked at how the male prisoner got quite
emotional when talking about missing his family etc.
Helping pupils in other areas of the curriculum

Almost 60 per cent of pupils said that what they learnt on the CSAD was not covered
in any of their other school lessons.
If topics were covered in other classes, they were likely to feature in PSHE,
citizenship or RE classes.
Nine out of the 13 teacher respondents believed that learning from the CSAD helped
pupils in these other areas of the curriculum. One teacher explained:
In other aspects of PSHE and RE which I teach. They are more aware of
their responsibilities as well as rights. They also talk about criminal
responsibility, age of consent in terms of conscience and sentence. As well
as looking more closely at the consequences of the choices they make.
Another teacher was less sure if the CSAD could support aspects of the curriculum,
but encouragingly said:
I suspect it has had an impact, but very difficult to pinpoint specifics. Older
pupils still remember the day several years later and will mention it in
conversation.

Involvement in crime after the CSAD
A year or more later, a total of 77 per cent of pupils said they had not been in any
situations where they could have become involved in crime since the CSAD took
place.
Almost half of those that been involved in a situation agreed that learning from the
CSAD affected what they did in the situation.
Sixteen of those who had been involved in a situation mentioned that alcohol was
involved. One described their situation:
There was a few friends at the park while most people were consuming
alcohol, the police turned up but didn't realise we had alcohol. But I know
that we could of been arrested.
Ten survey respondents and one group participant said that drugs were involved in
one of the situations they encountered. One survey respondent described:
I was out with some friends and we saw a few teenagers and they
approached us and asked us if we wanted to try some drugs but I refused
but some of my friends stayed with them.
The group participant, when probed, said: I used the information about drugs
because I was offered it and turned it down.
Seven said that some form of anti-social behaviour was at the centre of the situation
they were involved in. Four said these were arguments or fights: My friend had a
fight and there was a lot of violence and weapons, I walked away because I didnt
want to get involved. Three said that they were arrested for something and two
mentioned robbery.
Most (10) that said it affected the way they dealt with the situation, said it stopped
them from getting involved or that they walked away. Four said it made them think
about the consequences; one described this: It helped me remember if I get involved
it would lead to bigger consequences. One said they called the police and another
said it got them to tell the police the truth.
Some of the group discussion participants in both schools said they had used some
of what they learnt (seven of 22 participants) by: using manners, being safe and
keeping in mind the consequences of crime. A couple of participants categorically
stated that they had not used any of the information. Most participants did not
answer the question about being in a situation where they could be involved in crime,
even when prompted in the group work.
This is likely to be due to either peer pressure or a genuine reluctance to share in a
group setting what may have been individual personal challenges.

Likelihood of crime prevention
Some of the evaluation evidence gathered from pupils points in the direction of
positive changes in attitude and behaviour which are likely to contribute to a
reduction in youth crime.
Over half of the pupil survey respondents (52 per cent, 128, n=247) said that they
thought the learning from the CSAD would definitely prevent them from becoming
involved in crime in the future. A further 36 per cent (89) answered maybe and 12
per cent (30) said no. It is not possible to discern the extent to which each
respondent was already predisposed towards crime. For example, those who replied
no may not think they would be likely to get involved in crime anyway so the CSADs
effect on them was different to those who were more likely to and felt more deterred.
For many of those that said yes, it was about the potential effect on their future or
about the loss of freedom:
I now know what it is like to be in prison and its not very nice, prison me no
way has prevented me for getting my self into trouble because I know it will
affect your future maybe you wont have a future.
Because I have seen it is not very nice in prisons and it puts your life on hold
and restricts you from doing things in the future.
Yes because the time or punishment you can get for committing a crime is
very long and can affect your lives badly. e.g. getting a job in the future. Also
being in prison isnt a nice place to be and dont get much freedom and I like
my freedom.
None of the teachers could cite a change in a specific pupil that had occurred since
the CSAD took place. However, one commented on what they thought might be a
more general change in behaviour in the local area:
Cannot be specific, but feeling it is a deterrent as attitudes have been
changed. One year report in local paper of less anti-social behaviour during
summer holidays following PMNW.

4.7. Less positive effects
Most evidence gathered through this evaluation highlights the positive effects of the
CSAD on pupils. However, a few less positive potential effects were predicted by
some delivery agents and teachers.
For example, by raising awareness of how arson is committed and what drugs look
like, teachers and delivery agents were wary that this might cause intrigue or plant
the seed of arson.
Commenting on the street scene, one organiser said that familiarity with [name of
PMNW actor] in street scene could [mean] see[ing] him as a cool rebel and also
that our kids will pick up on the being pushed by an adult (as is about childs rights:
you touch me, you can get into trouble!) They will use this to their advantage.

5. Looking ahead
Funding for the PMNW CSADs from DfE came to an end in April 2011. Despite this
PMNW expects to deliver approximately 165 CSADs in 2011. It is possible however
that demand will reduce given the cost of CSADs which may prove unaffordable
given the current economic climate and cuts in funding.
The evaluation explored the continued need for CSADs and their potential future
through interviews with delivery agents. This section explores these findings under
two headings:
Are CSADs unique enough?

Do CSADs reach the right schools and pupils?
Are CSADs unique enough?

All eight delivery agents interviewed said they carried out some of their own activities
to try to combat certain aspects of youth crime. This included giving advice on safety
devices, making presentations to pupils and parents, running poster campaigns,
inputting to PSHE or citizenship classes, providing mentoring and other pupil
interventions, and, at one school writing a soap opera for student radio to highlight
issues.
Asked if they had come across other organisations that do similar activities to
PMNWs CSADs, all but one mentioned some other agency, including:
YJT programme with small groups of offenders so bit too late!

Activity days, for example, Stay Alive days and the Crucial Crew. Also, Junior
Citizens for primary-aged pupils, and Safety works and Safety central where
pupils go in to a warehouse and do various scenarios, such as crash scenarios,
with police/ambulance/fire services.
Ex-PMNW staff running activity days similar to CSADs.
An internet search for similar days mainly found references to PMNWs CSADs. In
addition, there are lesson plans available for schools wishing to put together their
own crime day.35
However no crime days were found where a whole year group is worked with for a
full day on school premises, divided into prison wings with a central theme and
needs-based workshop topics. As one delivery agent commented, the way PMNW
do it making them all prisoners is unique. Another said:
35
http://www.tes.co.uk/teaching-resource/Unit-15-Crime-and-amp-safety-Plan-a-crime-awareness-day-6073876/
and www.secondarymathsite.co.uk/Whole%20School%20Issues/.../citunit15.pdf - the latter cites PMNW as a
resource.

As far as I can see, there isnt anything else out there like this with real
people. Could do DVDs and get teachers to tell you but it doesnt feel the
same as a real prisoner story .
Do CSADs reach the right schools and pupils?

As illustrated in section 3 above, a total of 487 CSADs have been run since 2008,
reaching over 35,000 pupils per year. The question of whether these schools are in
areas with high crime rates and whether the correct year groups are targeted needs
to be asked. The data shows that the target group is correct and that the regionality
of CSADs is, to some extent, reflective of youth crime statistics.
However, CSADs cost upwards of 2,500, depending on location. This is prohibitive
for some schools that cannot afford to pay either directly or are unable to secure
funding from a sponsoring agency.
Delivery agents were asked whether they thought CSADs were reaching those most
in need. Most said yes and that targeting Year 9s and Year 10s was the right age
group. A couple of delivery agents said:
I think every school needs this. Just because [name of school] is not
currently on the radar still need it even if not in a hotspot. Even if keep one
young person out of prison would be good.
Should look at other mainstream secondary schools very different to ours.

PMNW should continue to provide CSADs to those schools that contact them directly
about the CSADs but should also continue to proactively seek out schools whose
pupils would really benefit, especially in regions showing growing rates of youth
crime.
Reflecting on the day itself, the evaluation team noted that sometimes the facilitation
skills of delivery agents were lacking which meant that pupils who were less vocal or
of a quieter demeanour were not always reached.
On contemplating the future of CSADs, delivery agents wanted to see them continue
and valued the commitment of PMNW staff to give schools and pupils the opportunity
to participate in what they considered to be a critically important day of learning.

6. Conclusions and recommendations
In considering the future of the CSADs the various conclusions, learning points and
recommendations drawn from the data collected from various perspectives pupils,
teachers, delivery agents and PMNW staff are presented and discussed in this
section.
6.1. Conclusions and learning points

Overall, CSADs have been complimented and observed as very good, one-day
experiential events leaving lasting effects on pupils. The evaluation found that pupils
had retained information, gained knowledge and applied it in their lives. PMNWs
approach has been deliberate and specifically designed to create a sense of what life
might be like if freedom were removed. This approach met with mixed responses.
Some pupils experienced it as overly strict, while others found it to be not strict
enough. The significant finding was that the approach left a lasting impression on
pupils of the implications of imprisonment; for some of the pupil respondents this was
found up to three years later.
The youth crime data presented in this report and evidence from the evaluation point
towards the conclusion that CSADs are targeting the right aged young people in the
right locations, with the right topics.
Teachers and delivery agents valued having the days seeing it as a unique way to
educate the pupils on crime and its consequences. Schools have appreciated
CSADs being designed in conjunction with school staff, highlighting key areas of
need so that some topics might be covered in more depth than others. For teachers
in particular, it was positive to see the effects of the day on pupils behaviour and for
it to support learning in other areas of the curriculum. However, information on some
topic areas for example, alcohol and drug awareness may form part of the school
curriculum and be taught in other classes such as citizenship or PSHE. The
evaluation data did not produce any specific evidence of the extent to which CSADs
reinforced curriculum messages, or how far pupils found those topic areas in the
CSADs repetitive a potential risk although this might be a useful area for any
future evaluation.
Delivery agents felt well briefed before the CSADs, but had some suggestions for
logistical improvements; these included improving the welcome to new contributors
and exploring the potential for involving parents.
Workshop content has been good overall. In some cases, however, a review of
workshop topics, dates of DVDs and the quality of facilitation could be carried out.
The format of workshops, especially the level of interactivity, needs to be reviewed
across CSADs.
Observations of the workshops revealed that facilitators used a range of different
facilitation styles, which could significantly affect pupil engagement. Sometimes

facilitators responded more to the particularly vocal pupils, rather than connecting
with the whole group, resulting in a lower level of engagement by less vocal pupils.
Most pupils reported knowing quite a lot already on some topics but reported learning
and gaining benefit from participating. Knowledge and understanding of life in prison
had grown most, whereas knowledge and understanding of the effects of alcohol or
drugs had grown least. This is likely to relate to a relatively high pre-existing
knowledge about alcohol and drugs, not least because this topic is covered in the
school curriculum. It would also be useful for PMNW to monitor whether the CSADs
are reaching those who feel they know least about the topics and to assess if those
pupils gain in knowledge.
Overall response rates to the evaluation were good and group discussion provided
useful information. This would suggest that this approach could be replicated by
PMNW to obtain rich follow-up information about the effectiveness of its work.
It has been possible to collect evidence on some short to medium-term outcomes.
However, information on the longer-term outcomes or impact of CSADs would
require further follow up in schools and ongoing tracking of pupils. In assessing the
value of impact tracking, consideration would need to be given to the large number of
other factors that will likely bear on pupils as they go through their teenage years,
which will make it difficult to isolate, or even to identify, any longer-term positive
effects that could be attributed to the CSADs.
6.2. Recommendations
A number of recommendations emerge from the data collected. These are grouped
as follows:
recommendations for considering the content and format of CSADs

considerations around the quality and evaluation of CSADs
ideas for follow up.
All these recommendations will have resource implications and may not be
practicable due to cost, human resource or other factors.
Content and format of CSADs

With regard to the content and format of CSADs, PMNW should:
Continue the prisoner for a day theme, as this was found to have lasting effects.
However, care should be taken to avoid implementing the approach in such a way
that it produces negative effects.
Continue to brief schools before the CSAD as is currently done, as this contact
proves to be a positive experience for the schools organisers.
Continue to broaden its network of delivery agents, for example, to Teach First,

charities that do workshops on glue-sniffing, YJTs, and so on.
If not already done so, give schools the full range of options available to them. For
example, some schools were unaware they could have the prisoners insight
workshop (although this may not have been on offer because of logistical
difficulties).
Explore with schools how to better link CSADs to the content of PSHE, RE and
citizenship classes, and ways in which the messages of CSADs can be reinforced
in subsequent classes.
Review DVDs, as some seem quite dated and/or too long.
Consider varying the format of CSADs, for example, consider trips, bring in real
prisoners to as many CSADs as possible, and use a greater variety of interactive
tools throughout the workshops.
Consider involving parents in some part of the CSADs.
Consider providing more take-aways after each day to remind pupils of key
messages as pupils are not allowed to take notes during CSADs. For example, a
ruler was given out at the end of the electricity safety workshop. PMNW and
delivery agents could, for example, produce postcards, key rings or other memory
aids with key messages such as H-A-D (harassment, alarm or distress) the
definition of anti-social behaviour, or DR ABC to remind pupils what to do in a
medical emergency. Alternatively, facilitators could be encouraged to bring
something as a memory aid.
Quality control and evaluation

In order to maintain more consistent standards and collect more information on the
effects of the CSADs, PMNW should:
Attend more of the workshops delivered by partner agencies to observe and make
sure the prisoners for the day theme is more consistently upheld throughout the
day.
Review partner agencies facilitation skills and workshop formats against some
agreed criteria based on good practice in teaching and learning for this age group.
Criteria could include:
- minimum levels of interaction per workshop; maximum amount of time that
facilitators should talk uninterrupted
- maintaining levels of discipline within the class and being clear on timetabling
- ensuring that quieter members of the class are encouraged to contribute.
Engage teachers more. For example, ask them to encourage full participation by
as many members of the class as possible and to try to identify and nominate
those class members who normally contribute less or are more disruptive on
normal school days.
Reinstate the youth panel to test out ideas for content and format, and to see if
there have been any lasting effects of CSADs.

Continue to ask the three questions at the end of the day but also consider getting
pupils to express their answers differently (rather than just through a show of
hands), for example, give each pupil a post-it note to write a comment and stick it
on a wall on their way out of the last plenary session.
Consider inviting all CSAD attendees to participate in a survey. Ideally this would
be carried out before and after the day, but it would at least be run after the day.
Schools could be offered incentives to encourage good levels of pupil and teacher
participation.
Send summaries of the specific feedback received from schools to delivery
partners so that they can improve future workshops that they run for PMNW and
others.
Follow-up
To increase the effects of CSADs, maintain awareness of the issues of crime and
safety and enable pupils to implement their learning in everyday life, PMNW should
consider:
Adding a question to the PMNW feedback form asking pupils if they need help or
are worried about anything, and feed these back to teachers to pick up.
Encouraging prize winners to champion crime and safety awareness in their
schools. For example, teachers might invite pupils to write short articles for their
school magazine or the PMNW website stating what they learnt and used from
the day. They could be asked to become PMNW ambassadors and be trained to
become peer mentors who could signpost those who might need support and
guidance.
Offering workshops for parents.
Following up a sample of pupils who attended the CSADs the previous year. For
example, hold small group discussions, similar to those carried out by the
evaluators, to get feedback one or two years after the CSAD. Incentives could be
offered to increase participation levels. In addition, pupils from the previous year
group could be asked to design a poster of what they had learnt; the best poster
could be rewarded.
Signing pupils up to receive e-alerts with key messages each month on crime and
safety matters.
Finally PMNW should consider how to support schools that would like CSADs but
may not be able to afford them. As the report outlines, this problem could increase
with budget cuts. Using key findings from this evaluation could help schools to raise
the profile of CSADs in their area and support them in obtaining funding or
sponsorship.

Appendices
A. Further details on methodology

Profile of respondents
Schools observed
The four schools chosen for observation were selected on the basis of location and
type of school. This was in order to get a view on the diversity of schools that PMNW
delivers CSADs in. Brief profiles of each school and crime-related information are
given below.
All four schools were secondary level (aged 11 to 16 or 18 years) with between 700-
1,500 pupils. Two were located in different parts of the London region, one in the
Midlands and one in the North East. Three of the schools had a majority White,
British student population (two of which had 70 per cent or above White British
pupils). One was a selective, single-sex school and one had a significant number of
pupils with special educational needs. The selective school was seen to be a
particularly interesting choice by one delivery agent who said that:
Often opinion is that they dont commit crimes. But [they] hang around with
[the opposite sex]; plus geographically [this] area brings together very
different social groups single parents to wealthy.
The socio-economic backgrounds of pupils varied within each school. Both the
London schools were based in areas of high crime.
Further information on the schools and their CSADs is given in the case examples in
section 3.7.
Survey respondents
From the nine (of 19 invited) schools that participated in the survey a total of 408
pupil responses and 13 teacher responses were received.
Except for one, all nine participating schools were mixed gender.
In total 55 per cent of pupils responding were female and 45 per cent were male.
Over half the pupils (51%) were aged 15 years, 34 per cent were aged 13 years and
the remainder were aged 12, 14 or 16 years.
The schools responding were located in four of the nine English regions.
Six schools had pupils from a predominantly white, British background. The
remaining three schools had pupils from a mixture of white British and minority ethnic
backgrounds.
All the schools are state schools.

Information from teachers shows that three schools had received CSADs for between
four to six years (or possibly less for one school), and four schools for over seven
years. Information on two schools was not captured as no teachers completed the
survey. The most recent CSAD was in 2010 for 11 of the 13 teachers. The
remaining two had most recently had a CSAD at their school in 2011.
Teachers were requested to issue surveys to pupils who had attended CSADs 2010
and earlier only. Of the 408 responses, 112 had been issued to pupils attending
CSADs in 2011, so these were withdrawn, reducing the sample to 296 responses.
The majority of pupil respondents (68 per cent) said they had attended the CSAD in
2010.
Table 17: Responses per year

Year No. of pupils
2007 1
2008 6
2009 52
2010 201
Cant remember 35
Did not answer 1
Total 296
The 296 total across nine schools provides a mean average of 33 pupils per school,
that is, approximately one class group per school, which is a good rate.
Table 18 below shows the actual pupil responses per school.

Table 18: Responses per school
School Pupils Teachers
Q 82 5
R 61 3
S 50 -
T 44 1
U 39 1
V 20 -
X - 1
Y - 1
Z - 1
TOTAL 296 13
Teachers and delivery agents

Six of the 13 teachers who completed the survey were the main organisers of the
CSAD at their school. Five sat in on workshops and/or escorted pupils to and from
the workshops. One organised some of it and a further one said they had been the
main organiser in the past, but in more recent years their role had been to escort
pupils and sit in on the workshops.
A total of ten delivery agents were interviewed over the phone. Of these, two were
senior teaching staff from two different schools in two different UK regions. Both staff
had been responsible for organising the CSAD in their respective schools.
The remaining six were made up of: three police officers; two safety officers and one
youth crime prevention officer; two each from three different schools in three different
UK regions. There was an (almost) even split between delivery agents who were
encountering PMNW CSADs for the first time and those who had participated twice
or more in recent years.

Issues affecting the quality of the data
The evaluation was a small-scale, qualitative evaluation, which necessarily sought
data from a sample of schools, pupils, teachers and delivery agents.
There were some issues that may have affected the quality of the data collected.
These are listed below.
The evaluation may not have captured the full range of possible ways the CSADs
were organised. Of the four CSADs observed, three though located in schools in
different UK regions happened to be organised by the same organiser (one of four
possible organisers). One CSAD observed was organised by a different organiser as
was the initial CSAD attended by the evaluator at the interview stage. It may have
been the case that the other two organisers may have run aspects of the CSAD
differently but this was not observable by the evaluator.
At each CSAD observed many of the same PMNW volunteer team members were
present which may have had its advantages and disadvantages.
The timing of the evaluation meant that surveys were carried out at the end of the
school year. This is likely to have reduced the number of responses. In some cases,
year 11 pupils who would have been eligible to complete the survey had already left
school. Others were in the middle of exams and therefore some teachers did not ask
or expect them to participate. The timing also affected telephone interviews with
teachers, who were busy with examinations and end-of-term activities.
The group discussions carried out in the two schools gathered some first-hand
information directly from the pupils who had experienced the CSADs in 2010. The
discussion had to be lively and energetic as pupils were aged 13 and 14, and there
was a 40-minute limitation. This meant that it was difficult to involve all group
members or to have in-depth discussions. There were also difficulties in keeping
participants focused on participatory tasks, which limited the completeness of the
response. Finally, a comparison could be made across only five of six questions put
to participants.

B. Survey to pupils

Crime and Safety Awareness Day survey to pupils
Charities Evaluation Services is evaluating the Crime and Safety

Awareness Days run by Prison! Me! No Way!!! These were held at your
school in the last one or two years. Now we would like to find out:
a) What you thought of it at the time

b) What you still remember about the day.
This survey should only take you 10 minutes to complete. We wont ask
or use your name and all answers will be treated confidentially.
Questions with a * next to them need a full response before you can go
on to the next page.
There are five 100 vouchers to win! The five schools that complete
the most surveys (pupils and teachers) will win a voucher which will be
given to the Head of Year to use in the school. We look forward to
getting your responses!
PLEASE COMPLETE THE SURVEY BY 24 JUNE 2011.
If you have any questions about the survey please contact Deborah
Smith from Charities Evaluation Services on deborah@ces-vol.org.uk or
020 7078 9381.

About you
1. What is the name of the school you attend?*
2. In which year did you attend a Crime and Safety Awareness Day at your
school?*
2008
2009
2010
Cant remember
None of the above (please say when):
3. Are you...?*
Male
Female

4. What is your age?*
12
13
14
15
16
Your learning from the Crime and Safety Awareness Day
5. How much did you know about these issues BEFORE the Crime and Safety
Awareness Day?*
Please tick one answer per row
I didnt know I knew a bit I knew a lot

anything about this about this
about this
Life in prison
What anti-social behaviour is
What you can get arrested for
The consequences of carrying a

knife
The effects of taking alcohol or

drugs
Awareness of my own personal

safety

If you did know about some of these, please tell us where your information came
from:
6. How much do you know now AFTER having attended the Crime and Safety
Awareness Day?*
I know about I know a bit I know a lot

the same as more about more about
before this this
Life in prison
What you can get arrested for

knife

drugs
Awareness of my own personal

safety

7. What were the other main things you learnt about on the Crime and Safety
Awareness Day?
8. Did you talk later on about the issues raised during the Crime and Safety
Awareness Day?*
Yes No
To friend(s)
To family
To teacher(s)
To someone else

If yes, what did you discuss?
9. Has anything youve learnt been covered in any of your other lessons?*
Yes
No
If yes, please describe:

The choices you make
10. Since the Crime and Safety Awareness Day, have you been in any situations
where you could have become involved in crime?*
Yes If yes, go to the next question
No If no, go to question 13 on page 6
11. Please tell us a little bit more about the situation you were involved in and
what happened
12. Did anything you learnt from the Crime and Safety Awareness Day affect
what you did in this situation?
Yes
No

Please describe:

Benefits of the Crime and Safety Awareness Day
13. Thinking about what you learnt at the Crime and Safety Awareness Day,
how far do you agree with the following statements:*
Fully agree Agree to Definitely Not sure

some do not
extent agree
I think more about how my

behaviour could affect others
I am more aware of how

crime and anti-social
behaviour can affect victims
and the community
I am more aware of how

getting involved in crime
could affect my future and the
lives of people around me
I think more about how to

stay safe and avoid crime
If you would like to explain

any of your answers, please
do so here:

14. Do you think what you learnt on the Crime and Safety Awareness Day will
prevent you from becoming involved in crime in the future?*
Yes, definitely
Maybe
No, it won't affect it at all
Please explain your answer:
15. Has the Crime and Safety Awareness Day benefited you in any of the
following ways?*
Yes, a lot Yes, a little No, not at all
Increased my self confidence
Given me a better understanding of

different people
Made me think before I do something
Made me more aware of the

consequences of my actions
Made me less likely to behave anti-

socially

Made me less likely to miss school
Given me higher hopes for the future
Increased my motivation to take up

education, employment or training
opportunities
Your views on the Crime and Safety Awareness Day
16. Please tell us if there was anything you didnt like about the day:
17. How could the Crime and Safety Awareness Days be improved?

18. Of all the things you learnt about during the day what will you remember
the most?*

C. Survey to teachers

Crime and Safety Awareness Day survey to teachers
Charities Evaluation Services is evaluating the Crime and Safety
Awareness Days run by Prison! Me! No Way!!! These were held at your
school in the last one or two years. Now we would like to find out:
a) What you thought of it at the time

b) What you thought of how it was organised
c) How you think it affected the pupils.
This survey should only take you 10 minutes to complete. We wont ask
or use your name and all answers will be treated confidentially.
Questions with a * next to them need a full response before you can go
on to the next page.
There are five 100 vouchers to win! The five schools that complete
the most surveys (pupils and teachers) will win a voucher which will be
given to the Head of Year to use in the school. We look forward to your
participation!
PLEASE COMPLETE THE SURVEY BY 24 JUNE 2011.
If you have any questions about the survey please contact Deborah
Smith from Charities Evaluation Services on deborah@ces-vol.org.uk or
020 7078 9381.

About you and the school you teach at
1. Which of the following best describes what capacity you were you involved
in the Crime and Safety Awareness Day?*
I was the main organiser
I organised some of it
I sat in on one or more of the workshops/escorted

students between classrooms
Other (please specify)
2. What is the name of the school you teach at?*
3. For how many years has your school had the Crime and Safety Awareness
Days?*
1-3
4-6
7 or more
Not sure

4. When did the most recent Crime and Safety Awareness Day take place at
your school?*
2008
2009
2010
Cant remember
None of the above (please specify when):

Pupils learning from the Crime and Safety Awareness Day
5. The Crime and Safety Awareness Day has a range of aims as detailed below.
How far did the day achieve these aims?*
You will need to complete one answer per row

It fully met It met the aim It did not Not
the aim to some meet the sure
extent aim at all
Increase young people's

awareness of types of crime
(including antisocial
behaviour) and the realities of

a prison sentence
Increase awareness about the

effects of crime and antisocial
behaviour on victims and the
community
Develop in young people a

greater respect and
understanding of others
Increase young people's

awareness about being
responsible for their own
actions and personal safety
Enable young people to make

informed life choices, adopt
positive lifestyles, stay safe,
free from crime and antisocial
behaviour
If you would like to explain any of your answers, please do so here:

6. How much do you think pupils understood about these issues BEFORE the
Crime and Safety Awareness Day?*
Very few Some of them Most of them

understood understood understood
this this this
Life in prison
What they could get arrested for

knife

drugs
Awareness of their own personal

safety

7. Where could previous information about the above issues have come
from?*
Friends
Family
School curriculum
Other crime and safety days
Other (please specify):

8. How much do you think they now understand AFTER having attended a
Crime and Safety Awareness Day?*
Very few Some of them Most of them

understand understand understand
this this this
Life in prison
What they can get arrested for

knife

drugs
Awareness of their own personal

safety

Effects of the Crime and Safety Awareness Day
9. How has the Crime and Safety Awareness Day affected the pupils?*
For most For For few

of them some of or none
them of them
It has improved their self confidence
Given them a better understanding of different

people
Made them think before doing something
Made them more aware of the consequences of

their actions
Made them less likely to behave anti-socially
Made them less likely to miss school
Given them higher hopes for the future
Increased their motivation to take up education,

employment or training opportunities
10. Have any of the pupils talked to you about the issues raised during the
day?*
Yes
No

If yes, please describe any examples:
11. If you have seen any specific changes in any of the pupils since the Crime
and Safety Awareness Day, for example, a pupil that was previously involved
in crime has since been deterred from it, please tell us here:

12. Do you think any of the learning from the Crime and Safety Awareness Day
has helped pupil's learning in other areas of the curriculum?*
Yes
No
If yes, please describe:
Your views on the Crime and Safety Awareness Day
13. Overall, how do you rate the Crime and Safety Awareness Day in the
following areas:*
You will need to complete one answer per row:
Excellent Good Average Poor Unsure
Delivery of
workshops
Content of
the day
Engagement
with pupils
Impact on
pupils

14. What did you think of the communication from Prison! Me! No Way!!! staff
prior to the day?*
Excellent
Good
Average
Poor
N/A I wasnt involved
15. Do you feel you were adequately briefed in advance of the day?*
Yes
No
Unsure
Please explain your answer:

16. If there was anything relevant or important missing from the Crime and
Safety Awareness Day, please tell us here:
17. How could the Crime and Safety Awareness Days be improved?

D. Outline of group discussion with pupils at two schools
Icebreakers (10minutes):
Throw a soft ball to each participant and ask them to say their name
and what they are looking forward to in the summer holidays, then they
throw the ball to someone else in the group.
Repeat the ball throwing and ask them to say what young people get
into trouble for.
In small groups (split boys and girls, no more than 5-6 per group) (15-20minutes):
Give out some poster paper and ask each group to discuss three questions, and
record their answers as a brainstorm on the paper:
a. What do remember of the crime day?
b. What did you learn?
c. What information have you used since?
Then ask each group to, using these answers, design a poster to sell the idea of a
crime day to next years group.
Final exercises as individuals (10minutes):
Ask each person to answer 6 questions using the sticky dots onto a flip of questions
(everyone gets 6 dots) these were 6 key questions from the survey that they didnt
get online to complete, around outcomes:
Ie, as a result of attending the crime day, did your understanding increase?
Yes, a little Yes, a lot No, not at all
Lastly, write on post-its, as many suggestions for what could be improved about the
crime days.

E. Telephone interview schedule for delivery partners
Introduction:
Thanks for your time!
Reminder of which CSA day we met at:
Sutton Coldfield Girls Grammar
Peele Community College
Kingsford School
Huxlow College
Fulham Cross Girls School
Doing an evaluation of PMNWs Crime Safety Awareness Days (2008-11). About 40mins
interview to go through various aspects including:
About your organisation
About your involvement with PMNW CSA days
Outcomes for cyp, teachers and schools
Changes and improvements
About you and your role/organisation:
Whats your role?
Name of your organisation?
Location?
What are the key cyp crime-related issues in the area?

How severe do you think crime is in the area (very. Mild/not)
What does your organisation do to combat these?
About PMNW Crime Safety Awareness Days (CSADs):
How did you get involved with PMNW? (Was this the first CSA day?)
Overall how would you rate the CSA day: excellent / good / average / poor / unsure
Please rate the following:
Excellent Good Average Poor Unsure
Delivery of
workshops
Content of the day
Engagement with
pupils
Impact on pupils
Anything else?
What do you think are the main aims of CSADs?
And how well do you think these were met on the day?
These were the stated aims (see attached list) to what extent do you think these were met?

Did these aims appear to meet the needs of the school?
Yes
No
If yes, please elaborate:
Prompt: could there have been any other aims/focus that could have helped them to meet
their needs?
How were you involved in planning the day?
Did you feel sufficiently well-briefed to be able to prepare and deliver on the day?
What did you think of the logistical arrangements of the day (eg, rooms, timetable, hospitality
suite etc.)?
What could have been improved about the arrangements?
What did you think of the content (other than your own) of the day?
(nb, some may not have had the chance to visit other workshops)
What could have been improved about the content?
Benefits for yp/teachers/school/community/others:
Thinking about your particular session:
Overall, how do you think your session went (1 = low, 10 = high)?
(nb, will have run their session multiple times)
Supplementary:
a) Were there occasions when the session went particularly well? If so, why was that?
b) Were there occasions when the session didnt go so well? If so, why was that?

What do you think the cyp gained from your workshop? (prompt: did you get any specific
feedback/comments?)
What do you think the teachers gained from your workshop? (prompt: did you get any
specific feedback/comments?)
Have you been aware of any positive changes in terms of attitudes or behaviour in relation
to crime in the school or local community?
To what extent would you say that the CSADs have contributed to these? What else
has contributed?
Have there been any wider-reaching effects eg, family? school? community?
Have there been any less positive effects?
Working in partnership
Have you worked on similar days with others?
Yes If yes, go to 28
No If no, 29
28. For whom?
What part of the curriculum?
What went well?
Not so well?

29. Do you know of other organisations who do similar activities? Do your activities
fit/complement?
Do you think PMNW is getting to all those who need help? Are some people not being
reached? Why? Any duplication of services?
Is there anything else you could be doing to increase effectiveness?
Finally, looking forward
The DoE funding has come to an end (April 2011). Our report will hopefully provide useful
information for considering a continuation/improvement of the service by others, please tell
us
Which aspects of the project have worked well?
Which aspects have been less effective?
What improvements / changes would you make? What other activities would you offer?
Any last learning points from this project stuff not already mentioned already. What is
working well, what could be done differently? Learning points?
Is there anything else youd like to add before we finish?
Ending: Many thanks; What will happen to the information etc

F. Workshop descriptions36
Workshop themes are determined by each individual school to address local

issues.
POLICE
The workshop looks at anti- social behaviour within young people and the effect this
can have in the local community. The workshop also looks at issues surrounding
the polices role and helps contribute towards creating better relations between
police, young people and their communities. Other possibilities include a
presentation on how police take and use fingerprints. The Street Scene, consisting
of a house, shop and graffiti wall, where young people get to act out various anti-
social situations as both police and offenders, is often used and the interaction
created has a great impact and makes for a very popular and pro-active workshop.
FIRE SERVICE
This is a very powerful workshop and every care is taken to ensure this is
educational rather than a shock tactic. Presentations are used, both power-point
and DVDs, to show the devastation that house fires can cause. This is a very
emotional workshop and proves effective in making pupils more aware of the
dangers of fire. The workshop covers the consequences of arson and hoax calls.
Real life 999 telephone recordings are occasionally used when available. The main
emphasis of this workshop is to educate young people in fire safety and the
dangers of arson and hoax calling.
AMBULANCE SERVICE (and St. Johns Ambulance)

The workshop demonstrates to young people what they should do if they are ever in
the situation where they need to give first aid. Young people are also educated in
car safety, accidents, injuries and drug related effects. Basic first aid skills are
demonstrated and taught to young people involved.
DRUGS & CRIME

Using basic, yet very effective methods, effects of both legal and illegal drugs are
investigated practically and through participation and demonstration. The subject is
investigated thoroughly throughout the workshop period and has through feedback
proved to be one of the most effective learning modules offered.
36
Taken from PMNW evaluation reports.

PRISON EXERCISE
Time allowing, young people are provided with an authentic period of prison
exercise. This usually entails real prison life inmates walking around a caged yard
in circles in one direction only. This is replicated through this experience.
YOUTH JUSTICE TEAMS

This puts young people in the decision-making position. The workshop often
incorporates role-play, DVD and exercises devised to engage young people in
examining effects of illegal actions and potential long-term consequences of such
behaviour.
PRISON CELL & / OR PRISON OFFICERS PRESENTATION
A life- size replica and fully furnished prison cell brings to the audience a realistic
experience of conditions and contents of a prison cell. Occasionally dependant on
workshop structure, young people will be asked to create a piece of poetry, essay
or drawing expressing their opinions about the conditions / effects of their visit to the
cell.
The cell is usually combined with a prison officers presentation giving an overview
of how crime and prison affects those who commit crime, their families and victims
of crime.
STOLEN CARS, STOLEN LIVES
Presented by the charity SCARD and involving families bereaved by offenders

involved in car crime. The workshop is sensitively delivered and provides audiences
with an emotive insight into the tragic consequences of what sometimes happens to
victims of car crime and what the consequences can be for the perpetrator.
WORK IN PRISON
Using role play and exhibits, prison workshop instructors look, with subtle humour,
at the rules and regulations for prisoners when working within prisons. Also
investigates types of work, bullying, pay and conditions.
MAGISTRATES ASSOCIATION/ YOUTH COURT/PROCURATOR FISCAL

Local magistrates/procurator fiscal stage mock trials together with real solicitors and
court clerks. Young people act out the various roles and are taken through the
procedures of a youth court. Everyone gets to participate in the sentence decision
making process and has an opportunity to air their views and opinions. The court is
set up and played out as would be done in a real court setting. Due to the busy
nature of professionals required to operate this workshop it is not always possible to
stage full mock trials, but in full or part the workshop is still a very useful and
thought provoking opportunity.
GUNS AND KNIVES

The rising tide of gun and knife crime in some areas of the country has led to this
workshop being more widely introduced in recent times. It deals with the potential
lethal consequences of being involved in gun and knife crime and the danger of
carrying replica guns, real knives and guns. The seriousness of the issue requires
the workshop to provide a dynamic and a powerful message to students.
DOGS
If available prison dogs will demonstrate their ability in detecting illegal substances
and other unauthorised articles when working in prisons. A display on
apprehending escaping inmates is also often demonstrated.
O2 (Nuisance Calls Bureau)
Looks at how the network operates in tracing nuisance and malicious hoax callers
and the consequences of hoax calls. There will be an explanation of sophisticated
surveillance techniques utilised and advice on preventing theft of mobile phones
and reducing the risk of being the victim of a mobile phone theft / mugging, text
bullying, and the craze known as Happy Slapping are also covered. Using the
internet safely is another recently introduced feature of this workshop.
VICTIMS OF CRIME
Looks at the effects of crime upon victims and their families and friends. DVD role
plays and exercises clearly and emotively at times carry through strong messages.
Awareness of actions without thought for the consequences are thoroughly
analysed and discussed.
YOUNG PRISONERS INSIGHT (Michaels Story)

Looks at the effects upon Liberty, Privacy and Dignity through imprisonment. A
powerful and moving CD encapsulates a young prisoners emotions in coming to

terms with serving a life sentence. There does not exist a more emotive interview
than the one used for this workshop. After listening to the 8-minute interview, young
people will be asked to place themselves in Michaels position and to then express
through poetry, script, essay, or by drawing, how they would feel faced with his
predicament.
INMATES INSIGHT
Dependant on the locality of a Crime Day, it is occasionally possible to have serving

inmates released on licence to attend. They will then be accompanied by a Prison
Officer into schools to deliver a question and answer workshop covering their
lifestyles prior to custody and in custody, crime and sentence, victim empathy,
impact on themselves and their families and long term aspirations. This is a
profound experience for pupils and inmates.
LOCAL ISSUES
There is usually at any crime day location a local issue that will be incorporated.
For instance Ministry of Defence, British Transport Police, Trespass issues, Street
crime etc. We are advised if a particular issue needs emphasis and devise a plan
with appropriate agencies to incorporate any such subject.
G. Cross tabulation of pupils knowledge before and after CSADs
The before and after knowledge of pupils below, from their own perspective,
demonstrates that prior knowledge doesnt affect what learning can be gained from
the day; across all topics covered, between 40 and 66 per cent said they now know a
lot more.
It is worth noting that knowledge of life in prison is an area where the pattern differs;
of those that considered themselves to know a lot about it before the day, 40% said
their knowledge stayed the same, and equally 40% said they know a lot more after.
However, we should bear in mind that life in prison was the area which had the
lowest number of people reporting they knew a lot about it prior to the day, and also
showed the greatest number of people who reported knowing a lot more after the day
which ties in with the almost 50 per cent of pupils that reported that learning about
aspects of prison life was the most memorable part of the day for them.
Another trend across all topics is that those who knew a bit before were least likely to
report knowing about the same as before, and are therefore the group most likely to
gain from the CSAD.

BEFORE the CSAD
I didn't know
anything about I knew a bit I knew a lot
AFTER the CSAD this about this about this
Life in 19% 4% 40%

prison I know about the
same as before 5 9 14
19% 30% 20%

I know a bit more
about this 5 60 7
63% 66% 40%

I know a lot more
about this 17 134 14
Total 27 203 35
What anti- 17% 7% 26%

I know about the
social
same as before
behaviour 3 11 20
is
33% 38% 25%
I know a bit more
about this
6 64 19
50% 56% 49%

I know a lot more
about this
9 95 38
Total 18 170 77
What you 27% 5% 22%

I know about the
can get
same as before
arrested 4 8 20
for
20% 31% 23%
I know a bit more
about this
3 50 21
53% 64% 54%

I know a lot more
about this
8 102 49
Total 15 160 90
The 12% 5% 24%

I know about the
consequen
same as before
ces of 5 7 21
carrying a
knife 31% 38% 18%
I know a bit more
about this
13 51 16
57% 57% 58%

I know a lot more
about this
24 78 50
Total 42 136 87
The effects 31% 7% 25%

I know about the
of taking
same as before
alcohol or 4 9 33
drugs
23% 26% 22%
I know a bit more
about this
3 32 28
46% 66% 53%

I know a lot more
about this
6 80 69
Total 13 121 130
Awareness 16% 7% 21%

I know about the
about my
same as before
own 3 10 22
person
safety 32% 37% 24%
I know a bit more
about this
6 52 25
53% 56% 55%

I know a lot more
about this
10 78 58
Total 19 140 105

Charities Evaluation Services Prison Me! No Way!!!
4 Coldbath Square The Deep Business Centre
London EC1R 5HL
Tower Street
020 7713 5722
Hull HU1 4BG
www.ces-vol.org.uk
enquiries@ces-vol.org.uk www.pmnw.co.uk

The No Way Trust Report

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

The No Way Trust Report

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Stay safe and aspire

- educating young peoples choices

Charities Evaluation Services, 4 Coldbath Square, London EC1R 5HL

2. Crime and Safety Awareness Days in context 5

3. Evaluation findings on the delivery of and satisfaction with Crime and

4. Benefits from the Crime and Safety Awareness Days 38

6. Conclusions and recommendations 60

2 Charities Evaluation Services

Evaluation of PMNW Crime and Safety Awareness Days, September 2011 i

Satisfaction with Crime and Safety Awareness Days

ii Charities Evaluation Services

much more aware of the consequences of their actions

Areas for improvement

However, given the challenges of developing a programme to meet the needs of

iv Charities Evaluation Services

Conclusion and recommendations

Evaluation of PMNW Crime and Safety Awareness Days, September 2011 v

vi Charities Evaluation Services

Crime and Safety Awareness Days crime prevention through schools

Evaluation of PMNW Crime Safety Awareness Days, September 2011 1

1.2. The evaluation

2 Charities Evaluation Services

What the project delivered, including case examples

Overview of methodology data collection and response rates

Evaluation of PMNW Crime and Safety Awareness Days, September 2011 3

1.3. Report overview

4 Charities Evaluation Services

2.2. Policy background

Evaluation of PMNW Crime and Safety Awareness Days, September 2011 5

2.3. Youth crime statistics

The regional spread of CSADs is discussed in section 3.2.

Ages of young offenders

6 Charities Evaluation Services

Evaluation of PMNW Crime and Safety Awareness Days, September 2011 7

Reasons for youth offences

lack of education and playing truant

8 Charities Evaluation Services

Arson 1,232 1,132 913

Breach of Bail 5,821 4,460 3,371

Breach of Conditional Discharge 1,683 1,577 1,172

Breach of Statutory Order 16,751 15,877 12,544

Criminal Damage 38,524 32,328 23,611

Death or Injury by Reckless Driving 122 130 95

Domestic Burglary 6,784 6,267 5,813

Drugs Offences 13,268 14,435 13,461

Fraud and Forgery 2,325 2,093 1,768

Motoring Offences 26,225 20,515 14,992

Non Domestic Burglary 5,016 4,134 3,515

Other 7,607 20,965 16,886

Public Order 24,045 2,458 1,945

Racially Aggravated Offences 2,784 6,079 5,384

Robbery 6,699 1,907 1,952

Sexual Offences 2,088 49,183 41,702

Theft and Handling 54,802 6,877 5,170

Vehicle Theft 8,280 47,490 38,744

Violence against a person 53,930 6,676 5,411

TOTAL Recorded Offences 277,986 244,583 198,449

Evaluation of PMNW Crime and Safety Awareness Days, September 2011 9

10 Charities Evaluation Services

Evaluation of PMNW Crime and Safety Awareness Days, September 2011 11

Evaluating the effectiveness of PMNWs programme of CSADs therefore adds to this

12 Charities Evaluation Services

3.1. How schools accessed CSADs

3.2. What the project delivered