1. Benelux – Nordic countries meeting on Child Indicators Introduction Erik Jan de Wilde

2. 2 Content Purpose of this meeting The well-being indicator debate A local example: the Rotterdam Youth Monitor The programme: what to expect?

3. Purpose of this meeting To be updated: –state of the art debate of indicators of well-being To be informed and inspired: –practices from other countries Your companions these three days: –policymakers on different levels, –scientists, –facilitators.

5. Empirical cycle hypothesis testevaluation observation

6. Clinical cycle Treatment plan Treatmentevaluation Problem assessment

7. Policy cycle Policy formulation Policy Implemen- tation Policy evaluation Agenda setting

8. PDSA cycle Plan DoStudy Act

9. The Well-being indicators debate Started around late ’40’s Rapid development 1980-2005 –UNICEF’s “State of the World’s Children” annual report published since 1979. –The United Nation’s Convention on the Rights of the Child –A number of national and multi-national projects and studies (e.g., Annie E. Casey Foundation’s Kids Count (early 90’s). ISCI

10. Issues with indicators Well-being vs well-becoming Self-report vs other-report Positive vs negative measures Data-driven vs theory-driven Child-centered vs other Age

11. Two major studies: UNICEFOECD

12. Suicide rates for adolescents aged 15-19 per 100,000 – 2006 Source: Eurostat

13. Well-Being indicator Suicide rank females Suicide rank males OECD Material Well-being-.526*-.665** Housing and Environment-.625*-.781** Educational Well-being-.826**-.795** Health and Safety-.015-.068 Risk Behaviours.182-.087 Quality of School Life-.324-.389 Overall rank-.635**-.799** UNICEF Material Well-being-.275-.547* Health and Safety.064-.166 Educational Well-being-.671**-.638* Family and Peer Relations.375.263 Behaviours and Risk-.236-.372 Subjective Well-Being.118-.257 Overall rank-.214-.520*

15. The Netherlands: A beautiful country! But is it?

16. Youth care in the Netherlands OBSTACLES 12.000 children on waiting lists for specialized help raise in specialized help 5% every year lack of effective programs for prevention of psychosocial problems no systematic screening fragmented services

17. Cause?

18. 18 A local example: the Youth Monitor Rotterdam

19. The Rotterdam youth situation: Significant problems in a complex population Low resources in schools Shortage of mental youth care Many actors in the field

20. A method in YHC What is the Rotterdam Youth Monitor?

21. Initial goals of the RYM Collecting data on the (mental) health and its determinants Determining risk groups for interventions Feedback the individual and aggregated results to those involved in youth policy: parents, children and adolescents, schools, various parts of the municipality. Supporting all those involved in starting, designing, executing and maintaining action.

22. Youth Health Care in the Netherlands Below 4 yrs: “babyclinics” monitor growth development and vaccination status 4-19 yrs: monitoring children’s health in general

23. Youth Health Care in the Netherlands last century this century

24. What is the Rotterdam Youth Monitor?

25. parent questionnaire teacher questionnaire school doctor individual feedback anonymous database individual action school/neigh- bourhood fb municipality feedback district feedback collective action parent/child feedback routing YMR primary education

26. 18 monthsparents, nurses 30 monthsparents, nurses 5-6 yr.parents, teachers, school doctors 9-10 yr.pupils, parents, teachers 12-13 yr. pupils, school nurses 14-15 yr. pupils, school nurses 16-17 yr.pupils Measurements / data sources

27. pupil questionnaire analysis individual analysis school nurse individual action anonymous database school feedback municipality feedback district feedback collective action parent/child feedback routing YMR Secondary Education two-step-screening longitudinal screening

28. An intervention Research infrastructure A screening instrument A policy instrument A method in YHC What is the Rotterdam Youth Monitor?

29. Some results

30. Van de Looij, 2003 Suïcidaal gedrag bij VO-3 leerlingen in Rotterdam

31. Carrying a weapon

32. % 15-yrs old that do not want homosexuals as their friends

33. Why starting a youth monitor? To collect data on the (mental) health and behaviour, and its determinants To determine risk groups for interventions To feedback the individual and aggregated results to those involved in youth policy: parents, children and adolescents, schools, various parts of the municipality. To support all those involved in starting, designing, executing and maintaining action.

34. Key players: local government(s) / local services schools parents children and adolescents

35. A few results: new angles in Rotterdam youth policy Focus on weapon possession Focus on parenting support Focus on depression Focus on overweight and diabetes

36. Is it a succes? Criteria for succes: Is the cycle running? Have policies changed because of the indicators? Will it run again? And again?

37. Is it a succes (2)? And above all: Is there an increase in well-being? And, by the way: Is that increase attributable to the use of indicators?

38. YMR: What looks good? the structural nature involvement of primary process action-invoking character involvement of other actors in the local system of youth health policy

39. Issues yet undebated (?) Theory of well-being Reliability/validity of other-report What report is needed on what level? What kind of report? Sustainability of indicators?

40. The program: Today, after this talk: dinner! Monday: –Morning: state of the art (plenary) –Afternoon: Country examples (workshops) Tuesday –Morning: Lessons learned & Future perspectives (plenary)

41. Have a good time In Amsterdam!