Impact of summer programmes on the outcomes of disadvantaged or ‘at risk’ young people: A systematic review

By Daniel Muir, Cristiana Orlando, Becci Newton

Review Rationale and Context: Many intervention studies of summer programmes examine their impact on employment and education outcomes, however there is growing interest in their effect on young people's offending outcomes. Evidence on summer employment programmes shows promise on this but has not yet been synthesised. This report fills this evidence gap through a systematic review andmeta‐analysis, covering summer education and summer employment programmes as their contexts and mechanisms are often similar.Research Objective: The objective is to provide evidence on the extent to which summer programmes impact the outcomes of disadvantaged or ‘at risk’ young people. Methods: The review employs mixed methods: we synthesise quantitative information estimating the impact of summer programme allocation/participation across the outcome domains through meta‐analysis using the random‐effects model;and we synthesise qualitative information relating to contexts, features, mechanisms and implementation issues through thematic synthesis. Literature searches were largely conducted in January 2023. Databases searched include: Scopus; PsychInfo;ERIC; the YFF‐EGM; EEF's and TASO's toolkits; RAND's summer programme evidence review; key academic journals; and Google Scholar. The review employedPICOSS eligibility criteria: the population was disadvantaged or ‘at risk’ young people aged 10–25; interventions were either summer education or employment programmes; a valid comparison group that did not experience a summer programme was required; studies had to estimate the summer programme's impact on violence and offending, education, employment, socio‐emotional and/or health outcomes;eligible study designs were experimental and quasi‐experimental; eligible settings were high‐income countries. Other eligibility criteria included publication in English,between 2012 and 2022. Process/qualitative evaluations associated with eligible impact studies or of UK‐based interventions were also included; the latter given the interests of the sponsors. We used standard methodological procedures expected byThe Campbell Collaboration. The search identified 68 eligible studies; with 41eligible for meta‐analysis. Forty‐nine studies evaluated 36 summer .continued......

Campbell Systematic Reviews
Volume 20, Issue 2

June 2024