Transcript Employment Research Institute Employability and Disadvantaged Parents: the Case of Working for Families Ronald McQuaid, Vanesa Fuertes, Sue Bond Employment Research Institute, Napier University, Edinburgh UK Paper.

Employment Research Institute
Employability and
Disadvantaged Parents:
the Case of Working for Families
Ronald McQuaid, Vanesa Fuertes, Sue Bond
Employment Research Institute,
Napier University, Edinburgh UK
Paper presented at the ERSA Conference, Liverpool
1
August - September 2008
Employment Research Institute
Structure of the presentation
• Background of Working for Families Fund
(WFF)
• Aims of WFF
• Delivery Model
• Methodology for the evaluation
• Results
• Conclusions
2
Employment Research Institute
Background - policy issues
• “Closing the Opportunity Gap” – eliminating child
poverty by 2020
• 23% of Scottish children in poor households (UK
ranked 22nd of EU25 on child poverty in 2005)
• Link between worklessness and poverty (lone
parents especially vulnerable to worklessness)
• UK: aim of 70% lone parents in work (57% in
2005); high levels of general employment (72% in
2005)
• 1998 – National Childcare Strategy
• Childcare: access and cost key barriers to work3
Employment Research Institute
‘Holistic’ approaches to
employability
Scottish Government definition of employability:
• “The combination of factors and processes which
enable people to progress towards employment, stay
in employment, and ‘move on’ in the workplace”.
McQuaid and Lindsay (2005): Employability defined
by:
• Individual factors – literacy, health, skills, confidence
• Personal circumstances – caring roles, household
circumstances (‘chaotic lifestyle’), debt, social capital
4
• External factors – jobs, transport, benefits, services
Employment Research Institute
Approach of WFF
• Key worker model – a single worker contact to
engage and support parents through providing and
signposting mentoring, advice, counselling, etc.
• Help both inactive and those in work (breaking the
low pay-no pay cycle)
• In rural areas, support also provided to combat the
barriers created by poor transport, limited services
and the lack of a critical mass of clients
• Referral by various means: Public Employment
Service and other agencies, informal reputationbuilding and ‘word of mouth’
5
Be
fo
re
O
c
O t- 04
ct
No - 04
De v-0
4
Jac-0 4
n
Fe -0 5
b
M - 05
ar
Ap - 05
M r- 0
ay 5
Ju -05
n
Ju -0 5
Au l-05
Seg- 05
O p- 05
c
No t- 05
De v-0
c 5
Ja -0 5
n
Fe -0 6
bM 06
a
Apr- 06
M r- 0
ay 6
Ju -06
n
Ju -0 6
Au l-06
Seg- 06
p
O - 06
ct
No - 06
De v-0
c 6
Ja -0 6
n
Fe -0 7
b
M - 07
a
Apr- 07
M r- 0
ay 7
Ju -07
n
Ju -0 7
Au l-07
Seg- 07
p
07 - 07
07 Oct
07 -No
- v
08 Dec
08 -Ja n
08 Feb
-M
ar
Employment Research Institute
Numbers of New Clients Registered by Month to 31 December 2008
Total: 25,508 clients
Total
Phase 1 LAs
Phase 2 LAs
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
6
Employment Research Institute
Type of Qualification of Clients Registered to 31 March 2008 (%)
compared to Scotland (Census 2001)
No Qualifications/ below SVQ1
SVQ1-2 or equiv
WFF
SVQ3 or equiv
Scotland
SVQ4-5 or equiv
Other
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
7
Employment Research Institute
Barriers to Progression for sustained contact WFF Clients to 31
March 07
80%
75.10%
68.80%
70%
60%
50%
44.70%
40%
35.50%
30%
20%
6.30%
10%
1%
0%
Opportunities
and Skills
Caring
Responsibilities
Transport
Other Issues
None
Missing
Barriers to Progression
8
Employment Research Institute
TYPES OF OUTCOMES
‘Hard’ Outcomes
(Key Transition)
Outcomes
Intermediate
Activities
‘Soft’
Outcomes
Employability
Measures
9
Employment Research Institute
Type of Latest KEY Transitions to 31 December 07
Training/Educ
22% (1368)
Voluntary work
16+hrs week
0% (19)
PT 16to29
hrs/wk
20% (1262)
M ove
Employment
1% (91)
31%
47%
PT Less16
hrs/wk
6% (342)
Improve
Employment
3% (212)
Sustainted
Activity
27% (1703)
Full-Time
18% (1147)
Take up a Job
offer
1% (71)
Total Number of Transitions = 13,095 by March 2008
SelfEmploy
2% (115)
10
Employment Research Institute
Intermediate Activity Outcomes (w/o Key Transition) to 31 March 07
Voluntary work
btw 3 to 16 hrs
a week
5% (45)
Work
placement 30
hrs or more
3% (27)
Accumulated
activity 20 hrs
or more
92% (778)
Total IA outcomes without Key Transition = 850
11
Employment Research Institute
Distance travelled: Change on Employability Measures – Change in
Average Score between Registration and at Six-Month Review
How confident are you when meeting new people?
How would you rate your job skills (in relation to the
type of work you are looking for or would like to do)?
If you are not currently in work, how confident do you
feel about starting work?
How confident are you that you know what benefits
you are entitled to (include work-related benefits, tax
How aware are you of the childcare services
available in your area?
How easy do you find it to organize childcare
services for your children?
How confident are you that your children would be
well looked after by the childcare services available
How able are you to call on friends and family in your
area to help with looking after your children?
0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
1
1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
12
2
Employment Research Institute
All Client Outcomes to 31 March 2007 to 31 March 2008
No significant
Outcome
28% (7,202)
Key transition
51%
Registered in
(13,095)
previous 6 month
(no outcome
expected)
7% (1,666)
Valid Six Month
monitoring
4% (906)
Intermediate Activity
Outcome
10% (2,576)
13
Employment Research Institute
Progress for unemployed
• Unemployed at registration who had a
transition → 33% (1103) FT employment and
36% (1223) PT (>16 hrs) employment
• Sick/disabled at registration who had a
transition → 27% (94) FT employment and
28% (97) PT (>16 hrs) employment
14
Employment Research Institute
Logistic regression model:
transition
• Probability of achieving transition given range
of independent variables/factors (individual,
personal circumstances, external)
15
Employment Research Institute
Logistic regression model:
• More likely to move into work, major
training or education if:
• the person has qualifications (SVQ level 2
or above).
• being in either part time or full time
education
• having English as their first language,
• being a lone parent
16
Employment Research Institute
Logistic regression model:
Less likely to move into work, etc. if:
• pregnant,
• having more than two children;
• being over 45 years old;
• being unemployed over 2 months;
• having other forms of stress (such as drug
dependency);
• living in accommodation that is not owner
occupied (especially if in hostel or
17
supported care).
Employment Research Institute
Conclusions
• Major initiative that reached targets
• ‘Holistic’ model works well
• Reached the relatively disadvantaged
• But within this ‘group’ the less disadvantaged
had greatest progression
• Range of employability factors that are
important is large, and need to consider
motivations etc.
18
Employment Research Institute
Thank you for listening
[email protected]
www2.napier.ac.uk/depts/eri/home.htm
Employment Research Institute
END
20
Employment Research Institute
Hard Outcomes
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
entered full-time employment;
entered part-time employment;
entered self-employment;
being able to take up a job offer;
moved into different employment (changed jobs, moved to a
better paid job, etc.);
improved current employment (gain promotion, change
hours or pay, etc.);
sustained activity (employment, education or training);
entered or completed education or training course of at
least Six-Months duration;
entered voluntary work of 16 hours or more a week.
21
Employment Research Institute
‘Soft’ Outcomes
• Intermediate Activity Outcomes
• Employability Measures: Distance Travelled
22