Implementing a National Citizen Service
Key features of the NCS scheme—including: its more specific aims and content; staff roles, recruitment and training; the recruitment and retention of participants and its emphasis on ‘social mixing’; evaluation assessments of its short-term and long-term impacts, outcomes and ‘monetised’ benefits; its funding and costs per participant. Some critical responses to the scheme from politicians, a House of Commons Select Committee and the National Audit Office. Critical scrutiny of NCS as a possible alternative provider of open access youth work and replacement for lost local Youth Service facilities.
- Booth, Caroline, et al. 2015. National Citizen Service 2014 Evaluation: Main Report. Ipsos Mori.Google Scholar
- Cameron, Daniel, et al. 2017. National Citizen Service 2015—Evaluation: Main Report. Ipsos Mori. March.Google Scholar
- de St Croix, Tania. 2015. ‘Volunteers and Entrepreneurs? Youth Work and the Big Society’, in Bright, Graham (ed), Youth Work: Histories, Policy and Contexts. London: Palgrave, pp. 58–79.Google Scholar
- de St Croix, Tania. 2017. ‘Time to Say Goodbye to the National Citizen Service?’ Youth and Policy. June 2017. http://www.youthandpolicy.org/articles/time-to-say-goodbye-ncs/.
- Mills, Sarah and Waite, Catherine. 2017. ‘Brands of Youth Citizenship and the Politics of Scale: National Citizen Service in the United Kingdom’. Political Geography. Vol 56. January, pp. 66–76.Google Scholar
- NatCen. 2012. Evaluation of National Citizen Service Pilots: Interim Report. NatCen Social Research. May.Google Scholar
- National Audit Office. 2017. National Citizen Service. National Audit Office. January.Google Scholar
- Panayiotou, Sally, et al. 2017. National Citizen Service 2016 Evaluation. Kantar/LSE. December.Google Scholar
- House of Commons Public Accounts Committee. 2017. National Citizen Service Enquiry.Google Scholar