Tekijät

• Mäkelä, Pertti (University of Vaasa)

Asiasanat

adolescents, decision making, elected officials, job characteristics, local community facilities, local finance, local government policy, local government services, municipalities, public services, satisfaction, youth, youth work

Sisällön kuvaus

The survey focused on the scope, service provision, management, and development policies of youth affairs departments of Finnish municipalities. The respondents were municipal officials responsible for youth affairs. Similar surveys were carried out in 1999 and 2002.

First, the respondents were asked how many employees there were in the youth affairs departments of their municipalities, and what their responsibilities were. Further questions explored what kind of youth services the municipalities provided, how they were located, and whether the municipalities allocated funds for them. The respondents were also asked to assess the current expenditure and income of youth affairs services in their municipalities in 1994. One topic pertained to youth facilities, for example, whether the municipalities owned or rented them.

In relation to service provision, the respondents were asked about the bodies organising youth services in their municipalities, the volume of youth services, the number of youth service users in 1994, youth organisations, contracted-out services, and competitive tendering. Some questions covered satisfaction with municipal youth services at the present, whether the respondents' municipalities sold services to other municipalities, and whether they collected fees from the users of youth services.

In relation to management and decision-making, the respondents were asked which elected body was in charge of youth affairs in their municipalities. They were also asked about their duties and responsibilities as the heads of the youth affairs departments. Views on the use of client surveys and performance measures were explored, as well as changes in the youth affairs departments of their municipalities, and development policies for the future.

Background variables included the respondent's gender, age, education, work experience in the field of youth affairs, responsibility areas at work, and whether R held any elected offices in the municipality or elsewhere.