The document describes an evaluation of a two-day training course called "Let's Leave It Till Later" for youth workers. The training aimed to help youth workers discuss pressures around early sex with young people and help them delay sexual activity. The evaluation assessed youth workers' views of the training and its impact on their work with young people. It also assessed young people's experiences of sex education delivered by youth workers who attended the training. The evaluation found that youth workers viewed the training positively and many reported implementing aspects of it in their sex education work. However, the full impact was difficult to determine due to limitations in the study design.

1. An evaluation of ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later’ training for
youth workers
Mary Sawtell, Vicki Strange
May 2007
Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London

2. Contents
Page number
INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………...1
AIMS OF THE EVALUATION……………………………………………...............................2
METHODS………………………………………………………………………………………..2
THE ‘LET’S LEAVE IT TILL LATER’ TRAINING COURSE…………………………. ……..4
THE PARTICIPANTS……………………………………………………………………. ……..4
TRAINING COURSE OBJECTIVES…………………………………………………… ……..4
TRAINING METHODS AND STYLE…………………………………………………………..5
THE CONTENT OF THE COURSE…………………………………………………….……..6
DATA ANALYSIS………………………………………………………………………………...7
FINDINGS………………………………………………………………………………………...7
SAMPLE…………………………………………………………………………………………..7
YOUTH WORKERS’ VIEWS……………………………………………………………………8
USING THE TRAINING WITH YOUNG PEOPLE…………………………………………..12
EXPERIENCE OF THE TRAINING BY YOUNG PEOPLE AND YOUNG PEOPLE’S
PERCEPTIONS OF THE IMPACT ON THEMSELVES……………………………………13
DISCUSSION…………………………………………………………………………………...14
RECOMMENDATIONS………………………………………………………………………..15
REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………………….15

3. Introduction
The ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later’ training1
being evaluated here was a two day sexual health
training course provided to youth workers in June 2006. The training aimed to look at
current research findings about the causes and effects of early sex and to explore
practical strategies for working with young people to help them make positive and
healthy decisions for themselves about becoming sexually active. These strategies
include helping them to build self-esteem and develop the skills to resist pressure and to
delay early sex until they feel ready to make an informed positive choice.
Research, suggests that a high proportion of young people who have heterosexual
sexual intercourse (sex) under 16 regret this first experience and that regret is
associated with earlier first intercourse, particularly amongst girls (e.g. Wellings et al
2001). Furthermore, regret of first sexual intercourse has been shown to be related to
not having planned first intercourse with a partner, feelings of pressure towards or from a
partner and a lack of control over the sexual experience (Wight et al 2000, see also
Redgrave and Limmer 2006). Sex under 16 is also strongly associated with non-use of
contraception and with pregnancy before 18.
Helping young people resist pressure to have early sex has always been a key strand of
the Teenage Pregnancy Strategy – through the national media campaign and in sex and
relationships education guidance. The ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later’ programme is intended to
strengthen the skills of professionals and others working with young people to be able to
discuss these pressures in a way that helps young people think through the issues and
make their own choices. It is not intended to replace the current evidence based
approach to giving young people the knowledge and skills they need to make informed
choices in relation to sex and relationships. Furthermore the ‘Let’ Leave it till Later’
approach is intended to be entirely different to abstinence programmes that promote no
sex until marriage2
. The ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later’ training has been carried out across the
UK from June 2005, either as a four day ‘train the trainers’ course, a two day training
course or a one day study day or workshop. It is also available in a one and two day
format via Teenage Pregnancy Coordinators in some areas of the country.
Approximately 160 participants took part in these courses during the first six months. A
postal survey sent to these participants was completed by 55 individuals (34%). This
survey found that all respondents rated the impact of the training very
significant/significant or helpful. Nearly three quarters of those who responded reported
that staff training had occurred as a result of the ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later’ training and a
third reported that it had influenced sex and relationships education with young people in
the community. Other actions included policy development, work with sexual health
services and work with parents (Adams 2006). The training has also been carried out
with Sexwise phone line advisors. Sexwise is a free telephone helpline for under 18s –
supporting the Teenage Pregnancy Strategy media campaign - that aims to provide
information and advice about sex and relationships and referral to local services. An
evaluation carried out by BMG research trained 12 young people to make and evaluate
calls to the phone line with a focus on how the advisers responded to queries around
1
 Also described by the trainer and course participants as ‘Delay’ training.
2
See www.mathematica-mpr.com/abstinencereport.asp for 2007 report on a US Government
funded study of four abstinence programmes. This shows no evidence of impact on behaviour or
other sexual health outcomes.
1

4. early sex. This suggested that advisors were generally able to address the issue of
pressure, delay and positive choices in different ways. Issues for further consideration
included how to develop a message around pressure and early sex which had
resonance with boys (girls perceived it to be more important), how to reduce the
possibility that advisors will be perceived as ‘lecturing’ and how to share the skills of the
most confident and empathetic advisers with all those working on the Sexwise line (see
Coleman 2006).
The following report describes a small scale evaluation, of the two day training with
youth workers, carried out by a team at The Social Science Research Unit at the
Institute of Education, University of London. The evaluation was carried out as part of
the data collection activities planned for the wider evaluation of the Young People’s
Development Programme (YPDP) 3
. It employed interviews with youth workers
attending the training, and young people with whom they have worked, to assess
workers responses to the training and the likely impact of this on their work with young
people.
The study was limited by small sample sizes and a study design which was required to
fit with that of a wider on-going evaluation of youth provision. Various factors contributed
to the intervention being ‘diluted’. For example, some staff who had attended the ‘Let’s
Leave It Till Later’ training moved organizations and were not available for interview,
others, used a few aspects of the learning in their work but embedded them within an
already very similar sex education programme. This made it difficult to identify the
impact of the training on the delivery of sex education or on the young people involved.
The findings should be viewed in the context of these constraints.
Aims of the evaluation
• To describe the ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later’ training provided to YPDP workers
• To assess youth worker views about the ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later’ training and
how it has influenced their work with young people
• To assess young people’s experiences of sex and relationships education and
support following project workers’ attendance on the ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later’
training and discuss the impact of this education and support on them.
Methods
Data collection for the evaluation of the ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later’ training was carried out
as part of the data collection activities planned for the wider evaluation of the YPDP
programme. The focus was on staff and young people in the seven selected case study
sites in the YPDP evaluation. These sites were youth projects, which as a group reflect
the range of types of provision across the programme. The bulk of the data collection
was carried out by one member of the research team, though three other members of
the team carried out some of the interviews with young people and/or staff.
3
The Young People’s Development Programme is a demonstration initiative funded by the
Department of Health and Department for Education and Skills. It aims for youth work providers
to address risk behaviour in 13-15 year olds through the delivery of a long term, broad based
programme of education and support.
2

5. Observation of ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later’ training course with YPDP staff in June 2006
One of the research team attended both days of the two day training course. The
course participants had been informed in advance that this was going to be the case. As
requested by the trainer the researcher’s role was participative and no notes were taken
during the sessions. Notes were therefore made during breaks.
Telephone interviews within one month of the course with YPDP staff who had attended
the training.
These were done approximately three weeks after the training course. Interviewees for
these early interviews were purposively selected. Selection criteria were designed to
capture a range of views. These criteria were: experience in youth work; experience in
delivering sex and relationships education; experience of previous sexual health training;
satisfaction with the training (this was assessed using the evaluation forms completed
after the training and observations during the training). Notes were taken during the
interview but they were also taped. The tapes were not transcribed – they served as a
back up in case data needed checking4
.
Face to face or telephone interviews with YPDP case study site staff who had intended
the training five months after the training.
Extra questions on the training were added to the interview schedule used for the wider
evaluation of YPDP and used with staff from case study sites. Most of the case study
site staff, who were still in post, were interviewed. Hence some case study site staff
were interviewed once for the evaluation, others twice. These interviews were taped
and transcribed.
Evaluation forms
Participants were asked by the National Youth Agency (NYA) (who had helped organise
the training) and the trainer to complete short evaluation forms immediately the course
finished. Copies were made available to the evaluation team. The NYA forms were
anonymous; the forms designed by the ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later’ trainer asked for the
participant’s name.
Face to face or telephone interviews with young people in case study sites
Extra questions relating to the training were added to the interviews with young people in
case study sites that were scheduled for wider YPDP evaluation in the autumn of 2006.
Most of the interviews were conducted face to face but some were done on the
4
Data collection methods and times were selected to coincide with those being used for the
general YPDP evaluation. In the event some changes were made to those originally
proposed for the evaluation of the ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later’ training. This was because
opportunities arose to collect data in other ways. For example the original plan was to collect
staff data by adding extra questions to the YPDP staff questionnaire distributed in Autumn
2006. The opportunity to collect interview data arose instead, and at two time points rather
than just one. This allowed for relatively in-depth data to be collected both soon after the
training when recall would be better and five months later when the learning was more likely
to have been used.
3

6. telephone. All the interviews were taped and transcribed. For the purpose of the wider
evaluation staff were asked to identify young people for interview from all three YPDP
years (where possible). Only young people currently participating in the YPDP
programme (ie receiving the YPDP programme since June 2006) could be expected to
have experienced practice influenced by the Let’s Leave It Till Later training. This
clearly had implications for the sample size for the evaluation. Given the target
population of YPDP, it was known that these would be very hard to reach, socially
excluded young people who may need considerable support to articulate themselves in
the context of an interview.
The ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later’ training course
The ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later’ training ran over two consecutive midweek days in June
2006. It was residential and participants were expected to stay over night. The course
was designed and delivered by Jo Adams, a very experienced HIV and sexual health
trainer. A senior member of staff from NYA was present during the two days to offer
practical support as required.
The participants
Places on the course were in the first instance offered to staff in case study sites. All
case study sites were asked to send two members of staff. Unfilled places were later
offered to staff in other projects involved in the YPDP. Eighteen people attended the
course, twelve were from the seven case study sites. Each case study site had at least
one member of staff on the course.
Of the 18 participants, 12 were women and six were men. One was a project manager
and two were volunteer young people’s mentors. The remainder were youth workers.
Some had specialist areas of responsibility, for example, two were YPDP co-ordinators
and one was a teenage pregnancy/sexual health worker. Over 75% were very
experienced youth workers – many had done at least some sexual health training
previously and most had been delivering sexual health sessions to young people for
some years.
Training course objectives
These are stated in ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later – A Manual for Training Delay Trainers’
(see appendix - p.19) as follows:
o To look at the causes and effects of early sex and current research findings.
o To understand the role played by media and peer pressure on young people and
early sex.
o To come to an understanding of what the Delay approach is.
o To become clearer about the distinction between Delay and Abstinence.
o To explore a range of practical ways of working with young people to help them
to make positive and healthy decisions for themselves.
4

7. o To consider the concept of “readiness” for young people and to introduce a
decision-making resource for them to use in assessing this.
o To gain skills to hand on to young people in how to say ‘no’ and resist pressure.
o To focus on alternatives to having sex for example in terms of exploring intimacy
and sensuality in non-sexual ways.
o To consider the role played by friendships, supportive adults and professionals in
supporting delay.
o To reflect on ways in which we can offer guidance and support to young people
about delaying early sex.
o To try out a new approach to building young people’s self-esteem.
o To share methodologies and insights drawn from our own experiences.
o To consider, clarify and recognize the values we bring to this work.
o To plan ways in which to implement the course learning, how to integrate these
approaches into all aspects of practice and how to present and develop this work
with young people.
Training methods and style
The course was well organized and thoughtfully presented. The approach was a
participative one with self-awareness work for participants an integral component. An
array of training methods was used including small and large group discussions,
practical exercises and a PowerPoint presentation. Throughout the course factual
evidence was interspersed with illustrative ‘stories’ and examples from the trainer’s life,
with encouragement to the participants to do the same.
The applicability of the work to young people with respect to gender and sexuality was
discussed intermittently through the course, but was particularly emphasized in certain
sessions, for example, The Pressure Cooker and the work on senses5
.
The rationale behind the training methods and style employed was explained during the
course, in the introduction to an exercise or in response to questions from participants as
to why things were being done in a certain way. The list below contains some of these
explanations. It is not exhaustive but serves to give some context to staff data from
interviews with participants that follow:
• The practical exercises that were the focus of many of the sessions in the course
‘were designed for use with adult staff and professionals when training them to
integrate delay approaches into their work, or to refocus these. But all of them
can either be used or adapted for use directly with young people’. (Training
Manual, p.17 – see appendix).
5
see training manual for a description of the exercises referred to in this report (appendix).
5

8. • Workers may well have used practical exercises, similar to those being
demonstrated, in their work already. However, they would be encouraged to
carry them out in full within the course, with the expectation that even the most
experienced workers would: learn some new adaptations; benefit from the
opportunity to explore wider issues; contribute by sharing their own experiences;
explore their own feelings and values.
• Certain tasks that participants were asked to do in the course would be familiar
and may therefore seem unnecessary, for some. These tasks were included
however because they were too important to miss out; for example the
agreement of specific ground rules at the beginning of the course.
• Exploration of workers’ own self-awareness was an important aspect of the
training in order that staff were adequately equipped to do such work with young
people. While some might find the personal focus easy others would be less
comfortable. While humour and light heartedness had a role to play, and it was
important to have fun, the general tone would be very focused in order to
maintain a safe environment for participants.
• Confidentiality and respect and ‘watching each other with kind eyes’ was
paramount to allow course participants to feel safe.
• Youth workers should not under-estimate the power of what they can do - despite
the apparent enormity of the challenges they face in their work.
The group showed enthusiasm and high levels of participation. In the whole group
verbal feedback sessions, led by the trainer at the end of days one and two of the
course, comments were predominantly very positive.
The content of the course
For the purpose of this short report the titles of the sessions/exercises that were carried
out over the two day course are presented below in the order that they took place.
Detailed descriptions of the aims, content, method and time requirements of most of
each of these can be found in the Training Manual (see appendix).
Day one
Introductions/working together
Our issues and concerns about young people/early sex -
Presentation on theory and model of self-esteem – the ten practical strategies
Values Continuum
Young people’s rights – Bill of Rights and Bill of Sexual Health Rights
Lines to take with young people -The Scenarios Carousel
Working on sensuality - My Senses Star, Senses Feast
Senses treat homework
6

9. Day two
Dealing with pressure – The Pressure Cooker
Saying ‘No’ – what stops us, the Assertiveness Guidelines and the Gains from Saying
No
The power of friendship – The Friendship Flying Carpet – ways of working with young
people to strengthen friendships
Building self-esteem – Our Precious and Special Flowers. Ways of working with young
people to build self-esteem
Action Planning Snowball on Integrating the Learning
Evaluations and endings
Data analysis
Key topics and issues that emerged from the data were identified through familiarisation
with observation and interview notes, and interview transcripts. Pertinent excerpts that
illustrated emerging themes were then coded and summaries of these themes were
written. In an iterative process, analysis was refined, ensuring that the themes built up
were cross-checked with other data, firstly within a transcript or set of notes and then
between transcripts and sets of notes. This ensured that the validity of emerging
explanations was tested and improved. While much of this process was carried out by
the lead researcher for the evaluation, validity was checked by involving the rest of the
team in regular discussions.
Findings
Sample
Fifteen (83%) of each of the two types of evaluation forms were completed.
Six telephone interviews were conducted shortly after the training (four with case study
site staff and two with non case study site); face to face interviews were carried out with
four staff at the YPDP National Conference in November 2006 and telephone interviews
with three others, soon after (all case study site staff). Three of the face to face
interviews and two of the telephone interviews were follow ups to earlier telephone
interviews. Hence 10 different participants were interviewed, eight of whom were from
case study sites. Four of the case study site staff were therefore interviewed twice (the
second interview was treated as a follow-up and explored any changes in views and
experience of using the learning in the three months that had passed between the two
interviews).
7

10. Case
study
site
Number
of staff
on
training
course
Number of
staff
interviewed
at 3 weeks
after
training
Number of staff
interviewed at 5
months after training*
Number of young
people interviewed
who were on YPDP in
June 2006
1 1 1 1 7
2 2 0 0 (1 LEFT) 0
3 2 0 1 0
4 1 0 1 0
5 2 1 1 (1 LEFT) 3
6 2 1 2 3
7 2 1 2 6
+ 6 non
case
study
site
+ 2 non case
study site
* Two staff (of 12) each from one site were no longer working for the YPDP projects by
the time of the five month interviews. Two others were not on the list of people in
particular roles to be interviewed for the general YPDP evaluation.
Thirty-one interviews were carried out with young people aged 13 – 17 years, in four
case study sites. The three remaining sites were either not able to arrange access for
interviews in the time available, or a key member of staff who had attended the training
had left the project soon after the course. These interviews were carried out in late
October and November 2006 – either face to face or over the telephone. Questions
about the Let’s Leave It Till Later training were incorporated in the general YPDP
interview schedule. Of the 31 young people who were interviewed 22 were in the final
YPDP cohort and hence had been on the programme in June 2006. All 22 were on the
programme until at least the end of July 2006 and most were still on it at the point of
interview. It appeared from what staff and young people said that about 11 of the 22 had
attended some formal sexual health sessions since the course. At some projects young
people were not scheduled to receive the sexual heath component of the YPDP course
in this part of the year.
The following section of the report addresses the evaluation aim; to assess youth
workers’ views about the training and how it has influenced their work with young
people.
Youth Workers’ Views
These are considered with respect to the method, content and usefulness of the training.
In general there is a correlation between the experience of the worker and how they
viewed the training. All those with little experience of sexual health work and training
(and the most inexperienced in youth work generally) were almost entirely positive.
There were others with more experience that were also predominantly positive – often
only offering criticisms and suggestions for improvement when asked specifically to think
what the least good aspects were. A few had more criticisms. Often these were of a
similar nature to those of their more positive colleagues but they were more keenly felt.
8

11. This group was clear that their criticisms should be viewed in the context of their
expectations before the training (see discussion and recommendations).
The responses on the evaluation forms were overwhelmingly positive. For example 12
(80 %) said either ‘very useful’ or ‘useful’ on the NYA form and ‘excellent’ or ‘good’ on
the trainers form. Similarly, of the 10 staff interviewed seven (70%) were generally
positive, three (30%) had reservations about the course.
The majority of those interviewed were positive about the training methods and style
used.
She was good at keeping sessions on track and a brilliant trainer.
The way she taught us was quite inspirational.
When asked what the best aspects of the content of the training were, those mentioned
most commonly as being both enjoyable and useful were: the PowerPoint presentation
on theory (this covered evidence on for example why early sex happens and the
differences between Let’s Leave It Till Later and abstinence programmes) and the work
on senses and sensuality – particularly the Senses Feast. The senses work was new
even to the more experienced workers in the group. The RU Ready work, the Values
Continuum, the Lines to Take work and the Pressure Cooker exercise were all picked
out by at least one person as specific aspects they found valuable. Several people also
mentioned the usefulness of the Training Manual as a resource for themselves and their
colleagues.
They were also positive about more general aspects of the course. Themes included:
• The focus in the training on their own self-awareness.
• Learning new things to inform their sexual health work. For some ‘delay’ was a
new concept and workers acquired specific tools to use in day-to-day work. For
others the training validated and /or added to what they were already doing with
young people around sexual health or served as a reminder of previously used
skills and approaches.
• Learning transferable skills that could be used in types of work other than sexual
health.
• The course being fun but also focused and serious.
• Meeting and talking with others doing similar work.
We are going down the delay route already [at our project]; it validated what we are
doing already and gave us ideas for things.
One interviewee made the general point that the allocation of any resources to making
sexual health training a priority is to be commended in view of the fact that youth
workers have a duty of care, in a sexually exploitative current culture, and workers
should be trained and supported in the work they do around this.
Most considered the training was successful in addressing issues regarding working with
boys and girls, and gay and lesbian, as well as heterosexual young people.
9

12. We were using the concept already in boys and girls groups. Now after the training
we can do more.
All bar one said they would recommend the training to colleagues – though some added
the proviso that this would be on the understanding that certain changes were made,
such as that it was offered over one day rather than two.
In contrast three of the interviewees were less positive about the methods and style
used – in some instances criticising the same aspects that others had found beneficial,
such as the degree of control that was imposed on the group.
At times it all got a bit up tight when the group was very relaxed - [the trainer] could
have gone with it a bit more, the group would not have lost the plot.
There was a range of views about the acceptability of the focus on self-awareness work
with course participants. Observation of the training suggested that a few individuals
were clearly uncomfortable and reluctant to participate fully at times. Individuals also
spoke about this, and their feelings about how certain situations were managed, in the
interviews.
Q: What were the least good aspects of the course for you?
A: The concentration on self and self-esteem. There were a couple of sticky
situations that in a sense showed up some of the dangers of that style, that
therapeutic approach……
The idea of pushing people/spotlighting for growth – I don’t agree with this.
Sometimes it’s ok but to do it for two days – I didn’t really go for therapy.
Some were dissatisfied with the trainer’s response to ambivalence expressed by
participants about aspects of the course. Two people felt that the views of all
participants were not always afforded the same respect.
Again certain specific sessions were not enjoyed or found useful by some, most notably
the session on ground rules. Several people thought these were given too much
emphasis particularly with such an experienced group.
We are very familiar with this stuff doing it all the time with young people, it created an
awkward atmosphere people thinking ‘why are we doing this’
One worker did not envisage using the RU Ready questionnaire, feeling it is too complex
for the young people she works with.
A few, in particular those with a lot of experience, expressed the view that it was not
necessary to spend time actually doing in full the exercises designed for young people.
The senses stuff with objects – nice session but [it was] superfluous to requirements
to get the message across.
However it is worth noting that both the RU Ready questionnaire and the senses work
were aspects chosen by other participants as ‘best things’ about the course.
10

13. General aspects of the content of training were also discussed. In particular a number of
interviewees said that ‘delay’ is not a new concept.
It is marketed as something new – new title but the content is not new. Are we
supposed to use her package?
Some expressed confusion about what the delay approach was exactly, given the
overlaps with the previous SRE training that they had done. These participants felt
unclear about how this training would markedly change the sex and relationships
education that they had been delivering with young people for some years. One
interviewee suggested that the main messages got lost as a result of the full and diverse
content.
As noted previously most said that the course did address issues about how the
materials and activities could be used with boys as well as girls and with gay and lesbian
as well as heterosexual young people. Interviewees stressed however the particular
complexities of working on sexual health with the socially excluded boys that they target.
There was a suggestion that further opportunities to explore ways of engaging these
young boys would have been welcome. One worker said:
The exercises were definitely more applicable to girls then boys. You could use them
with boys but you would just need to be clever about how you did this. With boys you
need to start with something else (get them in to do a different practical activity) and
then slip in discussion about feelings.
There was a general feeling from participants that they arrived at the course unprepared
for what to expect both in terms of the method and the content. In some cases, senior
staff had expected the level to be different, with the focus more on wider issues, such as
social context and which type of young people in particular would benefit most, rather
than the details of how to deliver sessions.
I thought I was going to get something new – it was going to be something
I’d never heard of, never seen…and it wasn’t. So I was a little bit disappointed.
It was not aimed at the right level. There are two levels: 1. for people who manage
resources (I thought this was what we were going to get), 2.for ‘what am I going to do
with the kids tomorrow?’
In response to being asked what were the least good aspects of the training two, who
felt they had a lot to learn about sexual health, felt inhibited at times by the level of
experience of most in the group and the attitude of some of the more experienced
participants in particular sessions.
A few people had been to quite a lot of training sessions…if they had been there/done
that they should have sent someone else. You felt inhibited in saying what you didn’t
know because so many people knew much more.
11

14. Using the ‘Let’s Leave ItTill Later’ training with young people
The course addressed the capacity to incorporate delay messages in work with young
people either: in a formal, pre-planned way – with groups or in 1:1 mentoring sessions;
or informally through opportunistic, spontaneous interactions with young people. It also
addressed sharing learning from the course with colleagues. There was general
enthusiasm from many during the course about its usefulness:
So often I come away from training and think ‘that was a waste of time’, but this time I
didn’t.
Formal work with young people
The interview data showed that most workers had used aspects of the training, with
young people in a group setting, since the course. In terms of specific exercises - those
most used were the Special and Precious Flower exercise and the senses exercises.
The RU Ready questionnaire had been used by one worker and the Pressure Cooker by
another. More commonly workers had adapted activities that they had done in the past
with new learning from the training. The learning had not been used solely in sexual
health sessions; a number of participants had used it in other types of sessions such as
those on drugs and alcohol and anger management. All those who had used it were
positive about it.
In some projects only certain aspects of the training had so far been thought appropriate
for their current YPDP groups. For example staff from several projects commented that
they had only used aspects of the training most suited to younger age groups (e.g. 13
year olds) or newly established groups, for example, the work around friendships. In
time they would use the learning more specifically designed to look at issues around
sexual relationships e.g. the Pressure Cooker.
In the training participants shared ways in which they anticipated using specific sessions;
for example the senses material – ‘to calm people down’ - and the evidence in the
PowerPoint presentation to provide support to young people in withstanding pressure to
have sex early. Some spoke about their plans to use what they had learnt with particular
groups for example those with learning difficulties and young parents. One worker had
run a training session on delay for colleagues at her project.
Informal interactions with young people
A few workers could recall some impromptu conversations they had had, drawing in
particular on the ‘Lines to Say’ work.
Two relatively inexperienced workers referred to the increased confidence they now felt
about using opportunities to steer discussions with young people about sexual health
issues.
I’ve done nothing like this before. it changed my thinking…made me more confident
about intervening or joining in so (for example) if I am on the minibus with a group of
girls and they start talking about something saying like ‘she’s a slut’ of something,
12

15. then I can ask them ‘why do you think that’, I can open the conversation up. Before I
would have just stayed quiet.
Some had shared their learning with fellow workers in quite an informal way –such as
showing them the Training Manual or discussing particular activities.
Experience of ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later’ by young people and young people’s perceptions
of the impact on themselves
The third aim of the evaluation was to assess young people’s experiences of sex and
relationships education and support, following project workers attendance at the training,
and discuss the impact of this education and support on them.
The focus of the interview questions was two fold; experience and impact of formal
sexual health sessions and experience and impact of informal spontaneous sexual
health discussions with staff.
All of the 11 who spoke of formal sessions, did so positively. One girl remembered
doing the Special and Precious flower exercise, but no one else mentioned specific
exercises from the course or key delay messages. They were more likely to recall
discussions around condom use, prevention of STIs and personal hygiene. Some
alluded to messages such as ‘RU Ready’, but their comments were general and could
not be specifically attributed to the course. For example:
A: Good like…so if a girl comes up to me now and said like… do you wanna do this,
I’d be like…’no’.
Q: Would you?
A: Yeah it, got me thinking now, I don’t wanna be a dad or nothing like that.
Q: Is that do you think entirely because of that programme or would you have
thought that anyway?
A: Really because of the programme…..the programme got me thinking, I don’t
wanna be like that.
Q: What was it about it cos that’s quite a big result, isn’t it, what do you think it was
about what you did?
A: Just the thought of being a young dad and making that girl… like me not going
out anymore… my brother… like that girl…..being stuck in all the time with a
baby.
Q: That made you change how you think?
A: Yeah.
(13 year old boy, in third year of YPDP)
For some of the 11 who recalled attending sessions it was not always a member of staff
who had been on the ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later’ training that was mentioned as the person
delivering the session. When this was the case it was generally difficult to ascertain the
extent to which learning from the course had influenced the sessions. None of the 19
who had been at the project since the training spoke of having informal conversations
with staff about sexual health – though it was apparent that they would feel comfortable
doing so if the need arose.
13

16. Discussion
The evaluation found that in general the training course was thought to be enjoyable,
useful and worth recommending to colleagues, by the majority of the participants. For
most the course objectives appeared to have been met. Participants with the least
experience of youth work and delivering sexual health education were the most positive,
and would change little about the training. Those with more experience were also often
very positive, but in general felt it could usefully be condensed into one day. Others, in
most cases the more experienced staff, could see its value – but had reservations about
the training style and methods used and the level at which it was ‘pitched’. More
detailed information prior to the course would have either prepared individuals better or
alerted them to the fact that this was not the course for them.
Specific sessions that were mentioned most frequently as positive aspects of the training
were those focusing on the senses and the PowerPoint presentation on theory. Other
specific aspects, such as the RU Ready questionnaire and the Pressure Cooker
exercise, were also mentioned as particularly useful by at least one person. However
contradictions arose frequently in the data – the aspects that some liked most were often
those that others liked least. Some had made opportunities to share the learning with
their colleagues.
Five months after the course most staff interviewees felt the training had influenced their
work with young people, and would continue to do so. Most commonly, current work
was enhanced and adapted as opposed to radically changed mainly because the
approach they had been using in their work were already in line with those covered on
the course. The aspects of the training that most had used to date with young people
were those on building self-esteem and supporting friendships. Strategies and exercises
addressing pressure and early sex had in some projects been transferred to work on
drug awareness and anger management. Levels of worker confidence, particularly in
the least experienced, had been raised and this may have impacted on 1:1 work with
young people.
There was general agreement that the course was relevant to different ‘types’ of young
people, principally boys as well as girls and gay and lesbian as well as heterosexual
young people. Our findings suggested however that staff working with the most
marginalized boys, as with YPDP, would find more exploration of the challenges of
working with this group and how to overcome them, helpful.
There was no firm evidence from the interviews with young people of an impact on them.
This is likely to be a result of the limitations in the process of this small scale evaluation.
Certainly practical constraints compounded the known difficulties of engaging young
people in the research process, particularly on a sensitive topic. Also the data from staff
showed that the learning from the training had often been applied more to general work
on issues such as self-esteem building and friendships then to work specifically on
sexual health. While at some projects the young people viewed the general and specific
work on the same continuum, at others sexual health was seen as separate. In the
interviews with young people for this evaluation we asked specifically about sexual
health sessions. Those viewing it as a separate ‘subject’ may not have reflected on
general work being carried out by staff, during their interview. However, what we did find
was generally positive and suggests further research would be valuable.
14

17. Recommendations
It is recommended that:
• The training for youth workers is offered at two different levels; a half to one day
version for more experienced workers and those at management level, and the
current two day version for those with less experience. The one day version will
focus less on the details of how to deliver delay messages, more on the theory
and wider issues including for example policy clearance, supervision networks,
public relations and legal issues.
• Detailed pre course information is available on both the content and methods in
the course to allow staff to decide if it is appropriate for their level and preferred
learning style.
• Greater clarity and detail is introduced about what the aims of the ‘Let’s Leave It
Till Later’ training and how its messages should be integrated into sex and
relationships education programmes.
• More consideration is given in the course to the barriers to working successfully
around sexual health with the most marginalized boys.
• Further research is conducted involving larger numbers of young people who
have received sex and relationships education and support that has clearly been
informed by the ‘Let’s Leave It Till Later’ training in order that the acceptability
and impacts of the training can be assessed.
References
Adams, J (2006) Impact of the delay training June 2005-March 2006. Results from a
survey with Participants to date. Unpublished.
Coleman, L (2006) Sexwise Mystery shopping. Presentation prepared by Lys Coleman
24 April 2006.
Redgrave, K and Limmer, M (2006) Sexual Health risk taking among vulnerable young
people Rochdale Teenage Pregnancy Strategy.
Wellings K, Nanchahal K, Macdowall W, McManus S, Erens B, Mercer C, Johnson A,
Copas A, Korovessis C, Fenton K, Field J (2001) Sexual behaviour in Britain: early
heterosexual experience. The Lancet 358: 1843-1850.
Wight D, Henderson M, Raab G, Abraham C, Buston K, Scott, S, Hart G (2000) Extent
of regretted sexual intercourse among young teenagers in Scotland: a cross sectional
survey. British medical Journal, 320, 1242-1244.
15

18. This document is available in a range of alternative formats;
please contact the Institute of Education’s Marketing and
Development Office for assistance.
Telephone: 020 7947 9556
Email: info@ioe.ac.uk
First published in 2007 by the
Social Science Research Unit
Institute of Education, University of London
18 Woburn Square
London WC1H 0NR
Tel: 020 7612 6367
www.ioe.ac.uk/ssru
Founded in 1990, the Social Science Research Unit (SSRU) is based at the Institute of
Education, University of London. Our mission is to engage in and otherwise promote
rigorous, ethical and participative social research as well as to support evidence
informed public policy and practice across a range of domains including education,
health and welfare, guided by a concern for human rights, social justice and the
development of human potential.
The views expressed in this work are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect
the views of the Department of Health and Department for Education and Skills. All
errors and omissions remain those of the authors.
This report is available to download from:
http://www.ioe.ac.uk/ssru/publications/Letsleavei.pdf
ELECTRONIC VERSION
ISBN: 978-0-9556026-0-3
This report should be cited as:
Sawtell M, Strange V (2007) An Evaluation of ‘Let’s Leave it Till Later’ training for Youth
Workers (2007). London: Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education,
University of London.
16