Different institutions undertake various interventions to address cases of delinquency. However, there have not been streamlined procedures to enhance coordination and oversight of multiple stakeholder interventions, risking duplication and overlaps. Due to the absence of a central and joint planning framework, there has not been coherence of interventions. Further, due to a lack of harmonised policy orientation to guide most interventions are not comprehensive enough to address issues of delinquency in their entirety but fragmented interventions that address only a part of the problem.
According to the 4th EICV report, overall unemployment was reported low at 2 percent. Urban unemployment stood at 8.7 percent and 11 percent for the secondary school graduates (11%). Unemployment rate among the active youth (16-30) is at 3.3 percent a national level and reaches 12 percent in urban areas. (NISR, EICV 4, 2015/2016). Unemployment is blamed for the increasing cases of delinquent behaviours especially among the urban youth
Most of the options offered by institutions of learning are traditional courses that do not necessarily match emerging labor market needs. Evidently, there are high rates of unemployment among university graduates (14%) than other levels of education. However, this problem could have another bearing. Most of university graduates have a tendency to aim for white collar jobs that are not readily available, rendering them more unemployed than their counterparts with lower levels of education who are willing to rest for any job in their reach.
Efforts to eliminate delinquency has hit a dead end, despite commendable efforts. There has been a viscous cycle of cases of prevention, rehabilitative re-integration and recidivism. Whereas former delinquents receive some support upon graduation, these efforts have only been short term. There has not been sustainable and long term strategies to ensure reintegrated persons are self-sustaining. The lack of well-established mechanisms to document former delinquents, providing follow-up support, some of the helpless former delinquents slide back into the same problem. Further the lack of follow-up mechanism for reintegrated former delinquents coupled with the lack of community awareness and readiness to accommodate and cope with former delinquents create potential stigma, forcing them into recidivism.