publication

30/06/2010

Dr. Ronit Davidovich – Marton, Inna Tabak

Strategic Plan for Jerusalem’s Youth at Risk

Introduction

Today, one of the challenges facing planners and policy makers in many urban areas is to expand the meaning of sustainability from familiar aspects of “reduction” (emissions, waste, air pollution, energy usage etc.) to broad planning concept that integrates physical, social and economic aspects of sustainable development. Planners and architects often refer to the social aspects as complementary to physical and environmental facets of sustainability.

This time it was the social issue that became the starting point of the planning process. It was decided to promote a master plan for children and youth at risk – a classic welfare population which is usually dealt with classical welfare tools – implementing a broad urban concept that combines the spatial, economy and society aspects.

Jerusalem Municipality in collaboration with the Ministry of Social Affairs and JDC – Ashalim, initiated a process which is rather innovative on national and even international level: the preparation of a strategic plan for children and youth at risk by means of broad urban vision. The intention is to provide an urban program of services that makes the best usage of the social, environmental, spatial, cultural and other resources of the city, for the sake of children and youth at risk and their families. All this in order to find opportunities in the city that will allow expanding the supply of services for the children and youth at risk – around the city’s numerous sites, streets, distinctive institutes and special events that are not exposed to this population and not used enough by them.

To enter such a process in Jerusalem was not an easy and rather challenging decision due to its political, socio – economic, demographic and segmentation complexity. To enter the process concerning children at all – and children at risk in particular – in Jerusalem was the decision to enter the extensive process that is relevant to almost every household in the city, either directly or indirectly. However, such a process, in spite of its complexity, is a rare opportunity to raise the most relevant issues that are faced by the risk treatment and prevention professionals all over the world. The worrying tendency of a growing risk and its severity as a universal phenomenon breaks the administrative boundaries of social and welfare services and requires another kind of tools and approaches that are compliant with rapidly changing reality and reflect the updated treatment patterns in the field.

The process methodology is built on the base of a typical master plan pattern. It supposes to include a few main stages: mapping (the city main tendencies survey, the mapping of the target population and services provided to her today at the municipal level, etc.), the policy definition and the program of social and other services building for the children at risk’s sake. The process includes constant common work and brainstorms with municipal officials on the basis of defined forums and with the recipients of the facilities on the basis of focus groups.

The main input of the process is building the opportunities for an optimal realization of the resources of the city – for the benefit of children at risk as well as for the improving the quality of the city life on the whole. By improving the universal services for Jerusalem children, defining preferred “children friendly” areas and its development, promoting projects that connect children and youth to urban public space and institutions and make the best use of urban resources, advancing the quality of community life – can the city make a progress in decreasing the rates of children at risk as well as in contributing to the city life quality and its image.

This program proves that sustainability is indeed a broad concept which can be implemented also by focusing preliminary on social aspects. Promoting plans with significant social features, when bearing in mind and connecting physical, spatial, environmental and economic features, will lead to a wide urban discourse while resulting in more sustainable community in the more sustainable city.

The process is now in the midst of planning and at the beginning of policy building stage. Recently, a decision was made to define this process as a pilot on a national level and to use the model in progress for examination and implementation in other cities in the country, with emphasis on major cities.

In this paper we present the rationale of the program, the knowledge sources, the short facts and figures about Jerusalem and its services system for children and risk and their families, and the main insights which were received from the case study of the process in Jerusalem in the meanwhile. The strategic plan for children and youth at risk and their families in Jerusalem is reviewed as a case study which is supposed to end up with the innovative model building of the children at risk treatment on the city level.

  1. 1.   The Planning Approach – contemporary concepts  

The main added value of the urban strategic plan for children and youth at risk and their families in Jerusalem is changing the paradigm that lies in the basis of social services provision for this population nowadays. The purpose of this change is the exposure of contemporary concepts and approaches, including those in the field of city planning and development, and integrating them with innovative approaches in social work and in current therapeutic theories. This mutual “feeding” between disciplines is likely to lead to connection of the systems currently operating in the field of children at risk to the urban agenda of sustainability, resulting in improving both the service system for children at risk and the city’s qualities.

The concept underlying the Urban Strategic Plan draws from different sources of knowledge which reflect changes that took place in recent years. It seems that any significant move today has to be done in awareness of these trends and changes, in order to reach a coordinated action of the systems and to receive results which are relevant to the city and its residents.

1.1  Global trends

Sustainability: the term sustainability appeared in the sixties as a response to concern that consumption of environmental resources happens faster than its renewal. According to one of the first definition of sustainability, “sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs“. (WCED,1987). During the next two decades the sustainability has become a growing international movement, which succeeded to form the highest common denominator between citizens from different backgrounds and different cultures and it became one of the leading organizing concepts in the world today.

Agenda 21st emphasizes the significant role of local authorities in integrating the concept of sustainability on the local level and translating this concept to the local policy and activities. Many bodies, including OECD, stress today the importance of implementing policies of sustainable development (sustainability) as the integral part of the authorities’ mainstream decision-making processes and policy building. Only authority that will operate a comprehensive strategy to promote integration between the three forces Environment, Economy, Society (Triple Bottom Line of Sustainability), will be able to balance between the different trends so that will ensure urban responsible development, maximize social benefits, promote urban quality of life on the one hand, and reducing environmental damage – on the other (1).

And yet much less attention has been paid until recently to the social dimension of so-called triangle of sustainability and pursue in it is relatively new. The issues that are social usually are not situated in the focus but rather treated as by-products or as a means to achieve environmental and economic objectives. The rather poor professional literature dealing with social aspects of sustainability raises questions of social justice, equal access to public goods for all population groups, multi-generational bounds, added value of community, public involvement in decision-making processes, a healthy society in the broadest sense of the word and more. Today it is clear that the city that advocates sustainability as a leading concept, must relate to “social pollutions” in the same severity at least as it relates to the environmental contaminants, if not more. Not to mention that any process that promotes environmental, economic and any other urban objectives cannot be advanced without public extensive awareness, involvement and its commitment for the better and more sustainable urban society.

Jerusalem today is one of the cities that promote sustainability, on declarative and practical level – it is signed on international conventions promoting sustainable development; it is one of 18 large and medium cities in Israel that are committed  to the ICLEI international convention to air pollution reduction (not less than 20% by 2020) and climate protection, by means of preparation of municipal action plan to achieve these goals; it is a member of global network of health cities; and promotes a variety of other projects designed to make the city more sustainable. Yet the main emphasis in these processes has been placed on the development of economic and environment issues, while the social aspects are less emphasized, or at least not in the same extant. This is not that there are no significant social processes; on the contrary, the high concentration of various populations in the city force the municipality and a tremendous number of organizations operating in the city to develop variety of special projects directing to these population groups’ advancement. The problem is that all these processes are not necessarily linked both in practical and conceptual level, to the sustainability agenda of the city. One of the goals of the strategic process is to tie the existing extensive social activities of the city to the city, the country and global sustainability agenda, and to expand the social implications of sustainability in terms of new ways of promoting disadvantaged populations at all and children and youth at risk in particular.

New governance – the contemporary concept of governance is expanding the circle of responsibility, involvement and action. This approach perceives the government as core of the whole network that encourages partnerships between the public, private and voluntary sector. This view sees the general public as a partner actively involved in decision-making mechanisms on the ongoing basis, during the planning stages and especially on the implementation stages of plan and projects.

Jerusalem citizens community is rather active and involved in promoting community processes, including participation in master plans preparation and leading public struggles aimed to building neighborhood and urban nature uniqueness preservation.

Networks approach – contemporary systems management approach that relies on the structure of the network as a collection of unique elements and interaction between them. Network structure allows each component to achieve the best realization, encourages uniqueness of each element, while enforcing interaction and synergy between them that produce value-added complex. Implementation of the network access means rejection of perceptions of hierarchy, quotas, templates and uniform formulas and transforming to diversity and local initiatives that reflect the best of each region, community, environment and heritage.

Network structure is seen as much more suitable for facing the modern world changing reality than the classic hierarchical structure of the most existing bureaucratic systems. This is a flexible structure that is able to adapt to rapid changes without disrupting the whole system, every element of the structure has its own uniqueness and value, the responsibility is spread more evenly and information flows without interruption between the spots. The network reinforces the ability of the entire system without lowering the value of each element.

Jerusalem is connected to various networks – on the international level these are political, cultural, religious etc. networks, on the national level there are governmental, cultural, social, etc. networks, and on the city level there are various municipal services networks that are provided to different population groups. Are networks of services designed for children and youth at risk meet the normative networks; moreover, do these groups benefit from national and international anchors located in the city, whether they themselves are the elements of the system that strengthen or weaken it?

1.2. Contemporary urban concepts

What is a good city?

Quality of contemporary urban setting now includes a number of essential characteristics that:

• Intensity – density, optimal utilization of built areas, extensive use of streets and public areas for urban events in various areas, at convenient hours range and for various audiences.

• Mixed-use development of space and buildings – city is required to produce “glue”, friction, integration and connection between the variety of people around a range of activities in various hours of the day, week, month, year period. Such kind of development saves spatial and financial resources and produces the intensity which is unique for city life experience

• Attractive public space – that makes audiences to “go out” to the streets. An attractive public space is the key to the overall city quality. It is required to attract city’s residents and visitors to enter the public space, to stay there, to create and consume urban street culture – on a variety of meanings

• Accessible urban traffic – as an artery of the city organism. Contemporary city is required to produce infrastructure for mass transit system that is accessible and environmentally friendly and, at the same time, should enable human movement, meeting and bringing together audiences and activities.

• Ongoing urban story – city development that respects the past, benefiting from its heritage and exploiting it as a basis for adding the contemporary contribution to city development that make the best use of current tools, technologies, etc., and simultaneously – leaving enough room for future generations’ pursuits.

All these and more are the basis of a comprehensive concept that emphasizes the quality of urban synergy between economics, environment and society with stressing social processes as the basis for urban growth, highlighting the linkage between audiences, land uses, compliant timing, and especially – a public space that opens opportunities for creativity and self-fulfillment for various communities in the city.

1.3. Current trends in general welfare services and services for children and youth at risk

Review of current trends in general and social services and social services for children and youth at risk in particular was made as a basis and enrichment of the planning process. This review allowed the concentration and exposure of current concepts and trends that lies in the core of contemporary professional social discourse in the world, and included examples of programs and projects that made use of these approaches:

• Comprehensive Community Initiatives – focus on the overall community aspect, acknowledge the need for intervention at all levels over time in order to improve the lives of individuals and families as well as enhance the neighborhood environment and experience as supportive for growing children (representing project – Harlem Children Zone, USA (2))

• Focus on cultural sensitivity that admit that in each culture there is a different system of values and traditional perception of mental and physical recovery to be considered when providing therapeutic intervention. (Sample Project: PACT – a program to promote Ethiopian preschool children and their families according to multicultural approach (3), Israel)

• Partnerships in social and welfare services – including communication, planning and action between more than one discipline or within the same discipline. Creation of a partnership is critical both in the planning and execution phase and can add up to mutual feeding and information transfer (representing project: SchoolPlus, Canada (4)).

• systemic and ecological theory – an understanding of the importance of systems surrounding an individual for his/her well-being, and the ability of these systems to intervene in order to bring a change to the individual’s life. According to this approach to improve the life of one person one has to ask what are the systems that surround an individual and try to improve these systems (family, school, neighborhood, etc.). In addition, changes in one system usually can benefit the other systems (representing project: Community Schools (5), the Netherlands).

• Social inclusion, equal rights, empowerment and community work – these attitudes  are sourced in recognizing the right of everyone to equality, full potential and live full PC in a society where he lives. Some of the major change includes a community empowerment intervention group (eg Project: Nuestras Raices, USA (6)).

The following are some current trends in children’s welfare services at risk:

• evidence Aunivslit prevention – of these approaches better advocates that the development stages of childhood and adulthood better connected and to avoid future social problems it is necessary to turning the universal services to all children. Some argue that large-scale prevention for children and youth is the best future investment company. (Sample Project: Our children – their lives, Ireland (7)).

• Perspective of strength – according to this intervention is focusing on the key factors that bring success, the intervention focuses on reducing risk. The interventions also contact the family to empowering the child by reinforcing self-confidence and self-worth of the child, strengthening ties between the child and his parents to the inclusion of child and family community peer group (eg project: National system of youth and children’s orchestras of

Venezuela (8)).

• Wraparound Approach and Family Center – the main approaches is the transfer of responsibility for interference with a child by a team of professionals and family. This by establishing a team for each child that unites professionals from several areas along with family members not Formalim factors other support. The prevention and treatment programs focus on the entire family. The emphasis is to strengthen families and enrichment of children and youth at risk so they can take care of themselves for the welfare of their children (eg Project: Kashmere school-based wraparound project (SWAP))

View content world approaches and concepts in different designs have enriched the perceptions of all parties contributed to the formulation of relevant access and creating a common language for all systems relating to children and youth in general and children and youth at risk and their families in particular. This combination creates a broad platform for implementing the concept as a basis for common discourse-oriented cooperation and joint goals.

2. Approach to planning – Guiding Principles

Children at risk are an integral part of other population groups in the city – are scattered all parts of the city, walking the streets and parks, urban services are universal at the municipal system – directly (targeted services for children and youth) extensively (through family services and thus affect the quality of family life economically, socially, emotionally, etc.).

Important to see these children in their living environment in isolation, not their social environment (around shared interests, age groups and more), just try to connect to a meeting between them and the points of the normative population, services Henourmteibim Vhikochma with normative populations and highest quality outstanding.

This approach sees the children and youth are defined as not at risk Tal municipal systems (which of course the city pays a heavy social and economic price for being integrated in a variety of different frames and get a variety of services and ‘unique’ to them, not to mention the high price of domestic spending outside of these children ), but sees them as potential population share qualities that may contribute to Jerusalem’s childhood experience improvement, and enhancement of urban qualities at all.

Deployment of a wide network of social and cultural activities and community access, connecting the urban happenings, opportunities for expansion of early detection, intervention proportional according to the difficulty, a variety of options for consulting major turning points over the years of infancy, childhood, adolescence for the child and his parents and extended family – may lead to create balanced systems which contribute at all municipal systems to promote and deploy services Normteibim issue as much as possible well before the arrival of high-risk children and these are significantly lower New Phone “classical welfare systems currently responsible for all these children scale risk, and extend the services Henourmteibim Basket all children and youth.

Seeing the issue of youth at risk Ilidma urban issues as one of its major implications on the image of the city, on improving the forest, its appeal – bringing investment covers all urban systems (not only social systems) and leads for a better city, safer, and creates opportunities for fulfillment self-promotion all residents, etc.. Lilidma good city youth at risk – good for all Hilidm youth, good families, good for all residents who enjoy safe and pleasant urban environment, safer streets, urban rich and varied activities trapped.

Connecting children and youth at risk agenda of the city, may make them Maman Tal asset, from weakness to capture excellence in design partners active in the city an urban society.

Connecting Indigenous youth at risk in the urban and exploitation of the assets of the city best open countless possibilities to enrich the work patterns with weakened populations and in particular children and youth at the city’s population – around their homes in the public sphere, the benefit of all parties.

In an age of risk level on a global trend, most important to develop tools to deal systemic phenomenon and review of the array of services according to an update relevance reality of contemporary trends variable.

  1. 2.     Jerusalem – a case study

How to deal with the issue of children at risk in one city complex, consisting of cleft in the world politically, economically, sectors, religious, etc.? How to plan an age risk of growing demand for a global trend? How to overcome the numerous conflicts, tears, separations mobilize for a common goal that it touches directly or indirectly in almost every household in the city? How to change complex and rigid systems, combining a huge variety of factors, budgets, countless projects and to – flexible, open, and expand a sheet? How to rise above the load day – Sisyphean labor day pass without finding phase of growth and development – for children, community, city, society as a whole? That is, how to deal with complex issues – concerning a wide range of aspects of life and population groups – in one of the most complicated cities in the world?

These questions are not enough to get engaged in the work with regard to children and youth at risk in Jerusalem.

2.1. Jerusalem – Facts & Figures

• Israel’s largest city of the capital: more than life in Jerusalem – 750,000 inhabitants

• Holy City for three religions, the city of global importance, a historical city

• Young city: about 300,000 of the total population are children and youth up to age 18 (40% of the total).

• The city population is divided to three main sectors: Jews – general (46% of the total population), ultra-Orthodox Jews (20%) and Arabs (34%) (CBS 2007 data ).

  • The city undergoing rapid changes in the composition of the population – the population’s negative migration, natural increase – especially among Orthodox Jews and Arabs, Ahatahrdoat City Bank. The situation requires changes in matching these municipal services, but not all enough to keep up.

• High rate of poverty – the last poverty report showed that 55% of children in the city live below the poverty line. The city’s socio – economic rank is 4 (of 10), which is the lowest among major cities in Israel, while very different levels of socio – economic among different population groups within city.

• Haulkosah in two groups – Orthodox Jews and Arabs – they have similar characteristics in terms of large households, a high natural increase, a high poverty level, percent of low labor force participation, high density and so on.

• City center of national conflict – a city divided, torn aspects socio – economic, national, religious, cultural, and more.

• City with major cultural, religious and educational centers on the national and international level

• Low labor force participation. Public sector occupies a significant portion of the employment system in the city.

• The segment of the population and nature at its socio – economic status creates a high rate of requiring welfare services, in addition to existing array of municipal services in various associations and organizations, some international, providing material support especially in certain areas around specific topics.

• Active community – public battles leading etc.

3.2 Array of services for children and youth at risk and their families in Jerusalem

About 43 482 children and youth welfare services and they sell are about 14% of all children and youth in the city. Of this, about 21.4 thousand children are risk ** (6.9% of all children and youth). Of these, about 11,500 children and families receive a direct service (participate), the rest receive services indirectly, through care and assistance provided to families.

Welfare services are now almost the only actor who is responsible for providing help to children at risk and deals almost exclusively with intervention and treatment, and is poorly engaged at prevention. In other systems, particularly education, society and youth, health, culture, employment, community managers, are partially prevention system in a variety of normative (educational, baby clinics, community managers, employment services, etc.).

Created great stress on the welfare system, which actually deals with regard to children and youth in a variety of risk levels, continuous development of programs and projects designed to meet the growing needs, varying sizes of population. Despite the many and varied programs which focus on both the child and youth are their parents, there is always a shortage of manpower, lack of customer satisfaction, and increase in demand did not receive a response. As the developers more services, so the scope of the population requiring increasing response.

Today the great mass of urban layout provided services when these services focus primarily on the child or youth and fewer families, children and youth at risk and are intended to moderate high very high. Meanwhile, the city is divided to four areas of relief, as each region develop regional plans tailored to the needs of unique space. The mapping was done as part of the process, found that most regional programs focused on services for families and for children and youth at risk Medium Medium Low.

Still, the system cannot meet increasing demands, especially in certain areas of the city (especially with the Arab population of East and North – with the ultra-Orthodox Jewish population), which is characterized by several features:

• socio – economic low

• Lack of training institutions of the state / town and consequently reluctant to turn for help – especially true among the Orthodox population

• A high percentage of various types of assistance needed, partly to get from various sources (voluntary organizations, associations and self-organization, etc.), but if there is a serious problem no answer other than welfare, and then turn to acute situations of high risk which requires more radical intervention (Expenditure house, etc.).

• need for cultural codes, respectively, the clock activities, unique cultural characteristics

•Language barrier – among Arabs, new immigrants from Ethiopia

All these create an image does not encourage that at least half a defined at-risk children and youth are not directly in response to welfare programs. When it is clear that there are many more who are at risk, not detected or recognized welfare.

This situation requires new thinking on the whole array of activities aimed at youth at risk Lilidma and current work patterns.

4. Framework for the strategic process

The strategic process is suppose to last for approximately two years and it is progressing according to the usual steps of a strategic plan or master plan: reviewing the current approaches in various relevant fields (global trends, urban quality, contemporary approaches in social services for children and youth in general and at-risk in particular – See chapter 1), characterization of municipal context – main development trends of Jerusalem, mapping of existing services for children and youth at risk at all Villidm in particular – including services provided by social services, as well as those of other municipal officials, policy formulation, definition of program development and direction over, beyond design and implementation. Simultaneously, great emphasis is placed on issues that are raised during the process in “real time” and require immediate attention. These issues provide the opportunity to feel the area Ulkoonnene the process and you really relevant directions easier to implement later in the process. In addition, the process of making access advocates to During the design process when the scheme has been operational thinking may lead to the consolidation of models to implement before the official end of all phases of planning.

At the same time, there were about 15 focus groups with a combined audience welfare programs around the risk of children and youth. Groups held in different areas, all major population sectors and groups reflecting different levels of risks. During meetings with parents whose children embedded frames and youth who receive welfare services themselves – flooded most significant issues regarding the image of welfare services and relevance of these services and their needs.

Process primarily focuses on social services and youth at risk and their families Lilidma, so it takes place while working closely with officials in the field directly and immediately, but the broad nature of the strategic process and the need to bring significant changes in attention far more broad and connecting many other factors among the different departments municipality. During the progress of the process is designed to create widening Forums authors and public officials, business, cultural, the city’s deliberate action Ourtimtam children’s welfare at risk in particular.

Jerusalem is a unique process that he went to a social issue with a combination of classical Achabichl planning tools from the physical and spatial environmental striving optimal utilization of city resources on Achllutm. System over the years dealing with the treatment of children and youth at risk has been updated and moved to change depending on changing professional perceptions, and specific organizational changes – all within the same Social Welfare Department Child Youth and Family and a department within the same paradigms of the field of welfare. Overall the dominant pattern in controls close to 30 years did not change significantly. Although the last decade have changed the perception of the client, recognizing the central role of cooperation and importance of family and home life of the child as a result, efforts were invested in trying to recruit new partners in the task array, experiential and creative ways to care, to empower the poorest populations, to invest in empowering the community, transmit the weight therapeutic frameworks in the community Ulahadipne Foreign arrangement home, adjust the customer’s needs services, and more. Yet, all the efforts and innovations and updates left social services arena with attempts to expand the circle of participants who carried a specific character and leaned primarily on initiatives in the surrounding persons The connection between the systems operating in the neighborhood or another.

As a result and in view of the worsening trends in risk levels, a situation which the load is traditionally earned because of the nature can not absorb all the populations in need of assistance effectively handle growing needs of the target audience. Most of the time busy in responding to this system is in a constant response.

Growing risk of data could lead to the collapse of charged them with it, but these systems will not change my perception that no joint effort in a more equal spread among all the factors relating to urban children and youth in general in the city. Due to the dimensions of risk that does not allow it at some point take over the various individual frames – the solution should be systemic, normative frameworks, overall adjustment to the changing reality, Ahgmastam, giving them tools for dealing with light to medium risk and integration of relevant professional functions. All this, along with times to connect the urban area

From survival to growth

Discourse of growth and development departments are generally a single physical development of the Strategic Planning Authority. Weakened populations, including children at risk, who are mostly under the banner of providing care, accommodation and other needs and issues Rovhitiut. The goal of the process is to connect the discourse surrounding children at risk of bush growth and enhancement of quality urban city, for the implications of a growing number of children at risk, especially those due to non-detected systems generated clutter, pose a danger to all the urban development process, however it has received planning , but he will be doomed to failure in the city where children and youth at risk are a significant portion thereby endangering public space, the residents’ satisfaction with their environment, loss to urban events, festivals etc..

Strategic process went existing systems and services less familiar perspective welfare system – comprehensive urban vision at the forefront of the urban systems that operate in areas relating to child and youth life in general, children and youth at risk and their families in particular, connects us to the urban space. The process refers to the array of services for children and youth at risk in all strata when it comes array include urban residential environment, public buildings, industrial areas and employment, open spaces and green, traffic system, an array of events in urban culture, society and the community. This approach sees the boy at all Villidm children and youth at risk in particular another layer penetrates into the city and getting all the layers of reference at all levels. This entry is the core of the approach and opens endless opportunity to connect these urban populations, urban events and trends of development of the city.

Improving the living environment of the child the best use of it, exploiting the potential of educational institutions, higher education, cultural enrichment varied, outstanding in quality, optimal utilization of public buildings while extending operating hours and times of use, maximum use of open areas and green variety of children’s enrichment activities, youth and families, teens revival of industrial zones, employment and trade – while incorporating a variety of activities at different population groups, development and access to transportation channels accessible and friendly Lilidma, youth and families, use of space and making the streets safe and inviting and gives visibility in social action, connecting a diverse group of urban population in the city for events , and more.

Also, connecting at-risk children and youth involvement in activism and encouraging urban open them as full partners in activism opportunity for the neighborhood and the city contributes to the sense of belonging and local pride and a desire to take part in shaping the city according to their needs.

It will be possible at all levels to enjoy the fruits of urban possibilities: building, street, neighborhood, region, city center, all of the city. Process a number of potential products in various levels of reference:

  • Children and youth at risk – tools for repertoire enrichment, intervention children and youth at risk and their families connected to an agenda urban basket of services relevant and current.
  • Ilidma youth in general – an array of activities to enrich quality and significant, expanding range of opportunities for consultation with relevant professional bodies accessible and friendly, raising the chances of early prevention of risk as possible. Expanding the ability to influence and lead moves in as full partners, expanding the variety of possibilities for support for parents at every stage in parenting.
  • City – lowering the risk, comprehensive social policy inputs urban, creating a high quality universal services relevant to the entire population of Ilidma and youth in the city, city city branding input quality, good Lilidma youth, the city has higher values
  • Israeli society – lowering risk of crime, reducing public expenditure on care at risk, creating a more balanced system of care to disadvantaged populations

4.2. Facing the Interior to proceed with – where the change?

Process is now on the policy formulation stage, stage discussions are held with all parties involved in the matter tested municipal fundamental issues which will form the basis to design the system of services for children and youth at risk and their families in Jerusalem. Examples of issues that came out of discussions so far with various Boards, characterization and analysis of existing system in light of current approaches to examination through the relevant areas:

• closed system with an open system – look for action, transparency, marketing and advertising, image, knowledge management

• down face area – flexibility, creativity, matching the needs, cultural sensitivity

• Arrange a home with other services in the community – the sequence, synchronization systems

• Prevention with intervention – collaboration, the best use of city resources

• Adding dimensions – social, space, time