Transcript UK Pilot Employment Project Evaluation Results

Dr. Karen Wolffe
Dr. Philippa Simkiss
[email protected]
UK Pilot Project Evaluation
 Background: Work Focus was established by RNIB
subsequent to feedback from private sector chief executives
(initially three pilots with RNIB; one with Action for Blind
People). An external evaluation of the four pilots provided
insight into employment program offerings for adults with
visual impairments in the United Kingdom and helped shape
current service delivery options.
Work Focus Overview
 Timeframe: Two year period (2008 – 2010) .
 Locations: London, Norfolk/Suffolk (Norwich), South
Yorkshire (Sheffield), and Aberdeenshire (Aberdeen).
 Staff: Manager, Client Liaison, Employer Liaison, and
Employment Officers (nine).
 Mission: Teams focused exclusively on moving
unemployed individuals into employment, without
externally imposed contract restrictions.
Evaluation Process
Methodology
 Quantitative data were collected for each client using an Excel
spreadsheet that was completed on a monthly basis by each of
the Employment Officers. Data collected were:
 Personal information (name, contact information).
 Demographics (age, gender, ethnicity, marital status, level of
sight, onset of vision loss, preferred reading format, education,
vocational background, registration status, benefits).
Methodology
 Assessment information (education level, time unemployed, ever
worked, lost job, lost job due to disability).
 Activity (referral source, start/close dates, number applications
& CVs submitted, number of interviews, research time, face-toface time, group time, work experience).
 Outcomes (employment, education, support, other; employment
sector, salary, full- or part-time).
 Follow-up information (three, six, twelve, twenty-four months).
Methodology
 Qualitative data were collected in the following ways:
 Interviews with staff and participants.
 Interviews with management.
 Focus groups with staff and participants.
 Observations (individual and group).
Outcomes
 Approximately 450 clients were engaged.
 Ninety-three clients found jobs.
 Forty-one clients moved into training.
 These figures evidence an overall 21% conversion rate for
movement into employment and a 9% conversion rate for
movement into training.
Work Focus Outcomes
Site
Engagements
Employed
London
160
39 (24% )
Sheffield
41
10 (24%)
Aberdeen
79
23 (29%)
Norwich
171
21 (12%)
Totals
451
93
Targets
288
96
Note: Conversion rates are shown parenthetically.
Qualitative Lessons Learned
 One of the most important elements of the pilot projects
was the ‘open door’ policy that encouraged individuals to
engage with Work Focus staff. In other words, services
were not contingent upon external funding sources that
tend to be restrictive in terms of who’s eligible for
services delivered. The open door policy enabled Work
Focus staff to reach harder-to-employ people than those
enrolled in other employment-related offerings.
 Segmentation facilitated matching clients’ needs to services
rather than requiring clients to conform to contract options;
thereby, facilitating a client-centred model. Service providers
need to recognize that all referrals are not equal and may want
to campaign for funding sources to reward delivery of service
outcomes based on a segmented model.
 Weighted outcomes make more business sense than
unweighted outcomes as clients further removed from the
labour market require more intensive services than those
ready to move into work.
 Bespoke training (pre-employment skills training, disability
disclosure workshops, peer support groups, and job clubs) in
addition to referrals to other organisations or departments for
disability-specific skills training (orientation and mobility,
access technology training, benefits advice) enabled clients to
access services needed to enhance their ability to look for
work. When clients participated in such group activities, they
reported learning a great deal from one another. This
acknowledgement of the importance of peer support
underscores the need for an organization-wide peer support
effort.
 What seemed to be missing in terms of services needed,
but unavailable to clients, was adequate local provision of
the following types of: Literacy and numeracy training
and vocational skills training, including computer literacy,
designed to meet the entry-level needs of blind and
partially sighted applicants; and disability-specific skills
training to enhance independence such as orientation
and mobility, alternative communication modalities such
as use of braille or optical devices, and access technology
training.
 Staff development is critical. There were significant
differences in the work performed by staff with and
without experience in working with blind and partially
sighted individuals and a background in careers and
guidance or vocational rehabilitation. Employment and
employability programme administrators and staff need
to either come to the project with disability-specific skills
and careers guidance/rehabilitation competencies or be
immediately trained-up through structured learning.
 Ongoing and consistent evaluation is integral to the
delivery of quality services over time. This evaluative
effort requires consistent data collection tools, quality
assurance measures to be in place between the staff,
clients, and project management; as well as, external
programme evaluation for objective assessment of the
programme’s ongoing effectiveness.
 Working with related service providers and mainstream
employment service providers to secure referrals to WF
has proven effective and should be encouraged in the
future. While these organizations may not be equipped to
work successfully with hard-to-employ blind and partially
sighted people, they can serve as a clearing house and
refer such clients to the more appropriate services
delivered by RNIB and Action.
 The selection, assessment, and services provided to clients are
of critical importance and must be consistently applied by all
participating staff. Client assessment needs to include both
standardized measures and informal assessment by the
Employment Officers. With appropriate evaluation,
Employment Officers should be able to apply market
segmentation to determine what services clients need and
offer those services to clients or make appropriate referrals to
other departments or organizations. In this way, clients’ needs
drive programming.
 The selection, assessment, and services provided to clients are
of critical importance and must be consistently applied by all
participating staff. Client assessment needs to include both
standardized measures and informal assessment by the
Employment Officers (EOs). With appropriate evaluation, EOs
should be able to apply market segmentation to determine
what services clients need and offer those services to clients
or make appropriate referrals to other departments or
organizations. In this way, clients’ needs drive programming.
In addition to client outcomes, there
were programme outputs worth
mentioning…
Programme outputs
 Pre-employment programme overviews: for trainers
working with blind and partially sighted people (Wolffe
& Cheddie, 2010) – an outline of the fifteen-week
bespoke training designed to build participants’ selfconfidence in career decision making, job seeking, and
job maintenance.
Programme outputs
 A clearly described and widely-shared Market
Segmentation Model that focuses on blind and partially
sighted individuals’ abilities and need for intervention in
order to provide programme participants with the most
appropriate services available.
Programme outputs to come…
 Pre-employment programme trainer’s manual – the
companion piece to Pre-employment programme
overviews that will make-up the core training materials
for ongoing facilitation of pre-employment skills training
specific to blind and partially sighted people in the UK.
 Market Segmentation Screening Tool to assist staff in
selecting the right programme with clients.
How what we’ve learned can lead
to improved programming…