DOCSLIB.ORG

The Work Programme: Factors Associated with Differences in the Relative Effectiveness of Prime Providers

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Work Programme: Factors Associated with Differences in the Relative Effectiveness of Prime Providers The Work Programme: factors associated with differences in the relative effectiveness of prime providers August 2016 The Work Programme: factors associated with differences in the relative effectiveness of prime providers DWP ad hoc research report no. 26 A report of research carried out by NIESR on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions. © Crown copyright 2016. You may re-use this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU,or email: [email protected]. This document/publication is also available on our website at: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/research-reports If you would like to know more about DWP research, please email: [email protected] First published 2016. ISBN 978-1-78425-617-3 Views expressed in this report are not necessarily those of the Department for Work and Pensions or any other Government Department The Work Programme: factors associated with differences in the relative effectiveness of prime providers Summary The Work Programme is delivered by 18 private, public and voluntary sector organisations, working under contract to DWP. These organisations are known as prime providers, or "primes", and operate within a geographical Contract Package Area (CPA). Each CPA has either two or three primes and individuals entering the Work Programme are randomly assigned to one of these. Comparing the outcomes of individuals assigned to each prime within a CPA provides robust estimates of relative effectiveness. Overall, there are 40 contracts across Britain, allowing 26 within-CPA comparisons. An interim report confirmed both that randomisation had worked well and that there was statistically significant variation in outcomes between primes. This report extends the interim analysis to relate the variation in outcomes to differences in the services offered by primes. By doing so, it aims to understand what makes some primes more effective than others. The results provide evidence of certain aspects of service being more associated with better outcomes than others and that much of this is concentrated among particular subgroups. Several relationships have been revealed which could provide some clues as to what is driving the variation in provider performance. However, the analytical approach provides evidence of an association only and does not enable us to establish whether these relationships are causal in nature. In addition, much of the variation in performance is not associated in a statistically significant way with the provider characteristics that we have been able to measure. This may suggest that the key characteristics have not been taken into account. The Work Programme: factors associated with differences in the relative effectiveness of prime providers Contents List of tables ....................................................................................................................................................... 3 Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................................... 4 Authors ................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Glossary of Terms ............................................................................................................................................. 6 Abbreviations ...................................................................................................................................................... 8 1 Executive summary .................................................................................................................................... 9 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 9 1.2 Empirical approach ............................................................................................................... 9 1.3 Results .................................................................................................................................. 11 1.4 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 12 2 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 13 3 An overview of the Work Programme .................................................................................................... 15 4 Data and measures of outcomes and service delivery ....................................................................... 21 4.1 Outcomes ............................................................................................................................. 21 4.2 Characterising aspects of service delivery ..................................................................... 22 4.3 Payment amounts ............................................................................................................... 23 4.4 The nature of the supply chain ......................................................................................... 23 4.5 Nature of service provided ................................................................................................ 24 4.6 Descriptive statistics on service characteristics ............................................................. 25 5 Econometric approach ............................................................................................................................. 28 5.1 Identification strategy ......................................................................................................... 28 5.2 Inference .............................................................................................................................. 30 5.3 Estimation ............................................................................................................................ 30 5.4 Subgroup analysis .............................................................................................................. 31 5.5 Time-varying service provision ......................................................................................... 32 6 Establishing service variation within CPAs ........................................................................................... 34 7 Results ........................................................................................................................................................ 36 7.1 Format of the results .......................................................................................................... 36 7.2 The nature of support ......................................................................................................... 43 7.3 The nature of the supply chain ......................................................................................... 45 8 Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................. 48 9 References ................................................................................................................................................. 51 1 The Work Programme: factors associated with differences in the relative effectiveness of prime providers Annex A - Descriptive Statistics .................................................................................................................... 52 Annex B - Summary of Phase 1 results ....................................................................................................... 56 2 The Work Programme: factors associated with differences in the relative effectiveness of prime providers List of tables Table 3-1 Work Programme Referral points and participation requirements ............................ 15 Table 3-2 Work Programme Referral points and participation requirements ............................ 16 Table 3-3 List of prime provider contracts ...................................................................................... 17 Table 3-4 Payment structure by payment group............................................................................ 20 Table 4-1 Variation in service provision, contract level ................................................................ 26 Table 4-2 Variation in service provision, contract-year level ....................................................... 27 Table 6-1 Within-CPA variation in service characteristics ............................................................ 35 Table 7-1 Aggregate correlations with impacts .............................................................................. 39 Table 7-2 Inter-quartile marginal effects ......................................................................................... 41 3 The Work Programme: factors associated with differences in the relative effectiveness of prime providers Acknowledgements The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) colleagues; in particular, Janet Allaker and Matt Garlick. The research formed part of a broader evaluation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • DWP Work Programme PDF 108 KB
    WIRRAL Council REGENERATION & ENVIRONMENT POLICY & PERFORMANCE COMMITTEE 3RD DECEMBER 2014 SUBJECT: DWP WORK PROGRAMME WARDS AFFECTED: ALL REPORT OF: STRATEGIC DIRECTOR OF REGENERATION & ENVIRONMENT RESPONSIBLE PORTFOLIO COUNCILLOR PAT HACKETT HOLDER 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 This report provides Members with information on the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) Work Programme launched throughout Great Britain in June 2011. Locally DWP has contracted with two ‘prime’ contractors (A4E and Ingeus) to deliver this provision which aims to support local people in receipt of DWP benefits into sustainable employment. The report will provide the latest performance data for delivery in Wirral as published by DWP and will seek to provide comparators where available. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 The DWP Work Programme introduced in June 2011 is a nationally contracted programme which has rolled out a payment by results model on a large scale, where Prime Contractors are paid on sustainable job outcomes. The payments are designed to incentivise the contractors to work with the full range of benefit claimants with larger payments on securing job outcomes and ongoing payments for up to two years for those furthest from the labour market. All referrals to the Work Programme are through Jobcentre Plus. There are different thresholds for referrals to the Work Programme depending on age and benefit type. 2.2 DWP contract with providers over large geographical areas known as Contract Package Areas (CPA) with Wirral being part of the Merseyside, Halton, Cumbria & Lancashire CPA. The payment group for a claimant is the group that Jobcentre Plus assigns the claimant to, on the basis of the benefit they receive.
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Decision Notice
    FS50441818 Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) Decision notice Date: 1 October 2012 Public Authority: Department for Work and Pensions Address: IGS Directorate The Adelphi 1-11 John Adam Street London WC2N 6HT Decision (including any steps ordered) 1. The complainant asked the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) for the names of the organisations that JHP Group use when delivering Mandatory Work Activity in the Scotland Contract Package Area (CPA). 2. The Commissioner’s decision is that by withholding the information under sections 43(2) and 36(2)(c) the DWP did not deal with the request for information in accordance with the FOIA. 3. By failing to state or explain in its refusal notice that section 36(2)(c) was applicable to the requested information the department breached sections 17(1)(b) and (c) of the FOIA. 4. The Commissioner requires the department to disclose the information within 35 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. 5. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of the FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt of court. FS50441818 Request and response 6. On 11 January 2012 the complainant requested the following information: “Please could you provide me with the names and locations of organisations which are participating in the Work Programme in the Scotland Contract Package Area, by providing mandatory work placements through the DWP’s prime providers Ingeus, and Working Links, through JHP Group Ltd or any relevant sub-contractors.” 7.
    [Show full text]
  • Bridges Into Work Overview
    The Bridges into Work project started in January 2009. Its aim is to support local people gain the skills and confidence to help them move towards employment. The project is part funded by the Welsh European Funding Office across 6 local authorities in Convergence areas of South Wales – Merthyr Tydfil , Rhondda Cynon Taf, Torfaen, Blaenau Gwent, Bridgend and Caerphilly. In Merthyr Tydfil the project is managed and implemented by Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council, which has enjoyed massive success with its recent venture The Neighbourhood Learning Programme. It has helped to engage local people to secure full time employment and to progress onto further learning in recent years. Carrying on from the achievement is the Neighbourhood Learning Centre, Gurnos and the newly established Training Employment Centre in Treharris. Both centres seek to engage with local people from all parts of Merthyr Tydfil and fulfil the Bridges into Work objective of providing encouragement, training, advice and guidance for socially excluded people with the view to get them back into work. The Neighbourhood Learning Centre has a range of training facilities covering a variety of sectors including plumbing, painting and decorating, carpentry, bricklaying, plastering, retail, customer service and computer courses. There are a team of experienced tutors who deliver training for local people within the community. Bridges into Work successfully delivered a Pre-Employment course for Cwm Taf Health Trust to recruit Health Care Assistants. With the help and support of the Neighbourhood Learning Pre-Employment Partnership fronted by the Bridges into Work Programme which includes organisations such as Voluntary Action Merthyr Tydfil, Remploy, Working Links, Shaw Trust, A4E, JobCentre Plus and JobMatch successfully provided and supported participants interested in becoming Health Care Assistants.
    [Show full text]
  • Nigel Lawrence [email protected] DWP Central Freedom of Information Team Caxton House 6-12 Tothill Stre
    DWP Central Freedom of Information Team Caxton House 6-12 Tothill Street London SW1H 9NA Nigel Lawrence freedom-of-information- [email protected] [email protected] DWP Website Our Ref: FOI2020/69472 7 December 2020 Dear Nigel Lawrence, Thank you for your Freedom of Information (FoI) request received on 12 November. You asked for: “Please provide a list of all private sector organisations to which DWP has awarded a contract to purchases services in connection with the provision of any interventions designed to help claimants to enter the labour market. My request includes, but is not limited to, employability courses and individual employment advice including tailored assistance with completing employment applications.” DWP Response I can confirm that the Department holds the information you are seeking for contracts awarded since 2009. Since 2009 DWP Employment Category has awarded contracts for interventions designed to help claimants enter the labour market to the following providers. 15billion 3SC A4e Ltd Aberdeen Foyer Access to Industry Acorn Training Advance Housing & Support Ltd ADVANCED PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT GROUP (UK) LIMITED Adviza Partnership Amacus Ltd Apex Scotland APM UK Ltd Atos IT Services UK Limited Autism Alliance UK Babington Business College Barnardo's 1 Best Practice Training & Development Ltd Burnley Telematics and Teleworking Limited Business Sense Associates C & K Careers Ltd Campbell Page Capital Engineering Group Holdings Capital Training Group Careers Development Group CDG-WISE Ability
    [Show full text]
  • A4e Ltd Independent Learning Provider
    Further Education and Skills inspection report Date published: June 2015 Inspection Number: 461179 URN: 50083 A4e Ltd Independent learning provider Inspection dates 18–22 May 2015 This inspection: Good-2 Overall effectiveness Previous inspection: Requires improvement-3 Outcomes for learners Good-2 Quality of teaching, learning and assessment Good-2 Effectiveness of leadership and management Good-2 Summary of key findings for learners This provider is good because: . the majority of learners receive good support to overcome multiple barriers to achieve their qualifications . learners develop good personal, social and employability skills that prepare them well for work . effective initiatives with major employers help learners find employment . senior managers work effectively with Local Enterprise Partnerships to redesign the curriculum to meet regional skills’ shortages . English and mathematical skills are successfully developed through their practical application in realistic vocational settings . pre-course information, advice and guidance are good and, coupled with thorough initial assessment, ensure that learners are placed and retained on the right courses . equality of opportunity is skilfully promoted, and through carefully planned activities, learners develop a good understanding of life in a diverse society . board members and senior managers have worked successfully and quickly to address the majority of the areas for improvement identified at the last inspection . performance management of staff and the use of management information are effective and enable managers to drive improvements in all areas of delivery. This is not yet an outstanding provider because: . not enough apprentices achieve their qualifications on time . written feedback is not sufficiently detailed, and targets are not always specific enough to inform learners what they need to do to progress .
    [Show full text]
  • Econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Maddock, Su Working Paper A MIOIR case study on public procurement and innovation: DWP work programme procurement - Delivering innovation for efficiencies or for claimants? Manchester Business School Working Paper, No. 629 Provided in Cooperation with: Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester Suggested Citation: Maddock, Su (2012) : A MIOIR case study on public procurement and innovation: DWP work programme procurement - Delivering innovation for efficiencies or for claimants?, Manchester Business School Working Paper, No. 629, The University of Manchester, Manchester Business School, Manchester This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/102375 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur
    [Show full text]
  • Adult Training Network
    ADULT TRAINING NETWORK ATN REPORT FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 2013 – JULY 2014 1 | P a g e Adult Training Network Annual Report 2013-2014 Contents Page Organisational Details 3 Mission Statement 3 Aims & Objectives 3 Company Structure 4 Training Centres 5 Business Plan & Aims and Objectives 6 - 7 Company Accounts 7 Staffing Establishment 7-8 Staff Development & Training 8 - 10 Partnership Agreements 10 Accreditation 11 Activities 2013 – 2014 11 -18 Richmond upon Thames College 10 – 14 Waltham Forest College 14 – 15 A4e - JCP Support Contract 16 A4e Professional and Executive and Graduate Programme 16 - 17 Ingeus Work Programme – Routeway Provider 17 Reed in Partnership – Work Programme Pilot 18 G4s – Community Work Placements (CWP) Programme 18 Reed – ESF Families Programme 19 Matrix Accreditation 19 External Verification & Inspection Reports 19-22 Extension Activities 22 -27 Good news stories & Case Studies 27-31 Future Developments & Priorities 31 Conclusion 32 2 | P a g e Adult Training Network Annual Report 2013-2014 ORGANISATIONAL DETAILS The Adult Training Network is a Registered Charity Number 1093609, established in July 1999, and a Company Limited by Guarantee number 42866151. The Head Office is at Unit 18, Arches Business Centre, Merrick Road, Southall, Middlesex, UB2 4AU. The Adult Training Network has a Board of Trustees and a Managing Director, who is the main contact person for the organisation. Further information on the Adult Training Network can be found on the organisation’s website at http://www.adult-training.org.uk. The Chair of the Board of Trustees is Mr Pinder Sagoo and the Managing Director is Mr Sarjeet Singh Gill.
    [Show full text]
  • Foi Blog Site
    DWP Central Freedom of InformationAnnex ATeam e-mail: [email protected] Our Ref: FOI 699 01 March 2012 Annex A Dear Mr Smith, Thank you for your Freedom of Information request which we received on 16 February 2012. In that request, you asked: Please could you provide a list of organisations signed up to provide unpaid work placements under the Mandatory Work Activity and Mandatory Work Programme schemes as referred by Jobcentre Plus, and the name of the linked providers in the Poole and Bournemouth area. The information you have requested is being withheld under Section 43(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, this exemption relates to the commercial interests of the Department for Work and Pensions and any other company or organisation delivering services on our behalf. I consider that the exemption applies because disclosure could, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of companies providing work-experience placements and the ability of the Department and its contracted providers to work in partnership with these companies to secure such opportunities. In line with the Department’s transparency commitments, we have previously provided information about companies who participate in a number of our programmes that offer work experience, where we can collect this information without disproportionate cost. However, we are now invoking the exemption because it has become clear in recent weeks that there are a minority of people who appear to be seeking to undermine the goodwill of employers who are prepared to offer opportunities to unemployed people by attempting to harm those companies’ commercial interests.
    [Show full text]
  • A Micro-Econometric Evaluation of the UK Work Programme
    'I, Daniel Blake' revisited: A micro-econometric evaluation of the UK Work Programme Danula K. Gamage∗ Pedro S. Martinsy Queen Mary University of London Queen Mary University of London CRED & NovaSBE & IZA June 19, 2017 Work in Progress Abstract Although many countries are making greater use of public-private partnerships in em- ployment services, there are few detailed econometric analysis of their effects, in contrast to a large body of small-sample or qualitative case studies. This paper contributes to this literature by examining the case of the UK Work Programme, drawing on popula- tion data of all nearly two-million participants between 2011 and 2016. We also exploit the original structure of the programme to disentangle the impact of different provider and jobseeker characteristics from business cycle, cohort, regional and time-in-programme effects. Moreover, we consider both transitions to employment and transitions out of unemployment. Our main results indicate considerable differences in performance across providers and across jobseeker profiles. The latter results suggest that, by changing the incentive structure offered to providers, the government could obtain better results at the same cost. Keywords: Public employment services, job search, public policy evaluation. JEL Codes: J64, J68, J22. ∗Corresponding author. Email: [email protected], Address: School of Business and Management, Queen Mary, University of London, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom. yEmail: [email protected]. Address: School of Business and Management, Queen Mary, University of London, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom. Web: http://webspace.qmul.ac.uk/pmartins 1 1 Introduction Focusing on the individual case of a fictional elderly widower, the award-winning film 'I, Daniel Blake' portraits a negative facade of UK welfare-to-work programmes over the last years.
    [Show full text]
  • Work Programme Supply Chains
    Work Programme Supply Chains The information contained in the table below reflects updates and changes to the Work Programme supply chains and is correct as at 30 September 2013. It is published in the interests of transparency. It is limited to those in supply chains delivering to prime providers as part of their tier 1 and 2 chains. Definitions of what these tiers incorporate vary from prime provider to prime provider. There are additional suppliers beyond these tiers who are largely to be called on to deliver one off, unique interventions in response to a particular participants needs and circumstances. The Department for Work and Pensions fully anticipate that supply chains will be dynamic, with scope to flex and evolve to reflect change within the labour market and participant needs. The Department intends to update this information at regular intervals (generally every 6 months) dependant on time and resources available. In addition to the Merlin standard, a robust process is in place for the Department to approve any supply chain changes and to ensure that the service on offer is not compromised or reduced. Comparison between the corrected March 2013 stock take and the September 2013 figures shows a net increase in the overall number of organisations in the supply chains across all sectors. The table below illustrates these changes Sector Number of organisations in the supply chain Private At 30 September 2013 - 367 compared to 351 at 31 March 2013 Public At 30 September 2013 - 128 compared to 124 at 30 March 2013 Voluntary or Community (VCS) At 30 September 2013 - 363 compared to 355 at 30 March 2013 Totals At 30 September 2013 - 858 organisations compared to 830 at March 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Mobility Business Compact List of Signatories A4E Aberdeen Asset
    This list has been withdrawn and replaced: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/social-mobility-business-compact-list-of-signatories Social Mobility Business Compact List of signatories A4E Aberdeen Asset Management PLC ACCA Accenture Acorn Environment Addleshaw Goddard LLP Adecco Group UK & Ireland AGR Airbus Allen and Overy Alliance Boots Anchor Trust AOL Arriva Asda Ashurst LLP Aspire Group Associated Newspapers Association of Accounting Technicians (AAT) Aston University Atkins Aviva plc AXA BAE Systems Baker & McKenzie LLP Bank of America Merrill Lynch Bank of England Bar Council Barcelo Hotels UK Barclays Bauer Media Group BBC Be Wiser Insurance Ltd BP British Land BSkyB BT Group Cabinet Office Cancer Research UK Capgemini Capita Capp & Co Ltd Carillion This list has been withdrawn and replaced: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/social-mobility-business-compact-list-of-signatories Caterpillar Centrica Channel 4 Charted Institute of Public Relations Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) Chartered Insurance Institute CH2M Hill Citi City and Guilds City of London Corporation Clifford Chance CMS Cameron McKenna LLP Coca Cola Enterprises Coca Cola Great Britain Compass Group Credit Suisse Crown Prosecution Service Dell Deloitte Department for Business, Innovation and Skills Department for Communities and Local Government Department for Education Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Department for International Development Department for Transport Department for Work and Pensions Department
    [Show full text]
  • Work Programme: Background and Statistics
    BRIEFING PAPER Number 6340, 21 March 2016 Work Programme: By Aliyah Dar background and statistics Inside: 1. Who participates on the Work Programme? 2. Statistics 3. Payment model 4. Cost of the Work Programme 5. Work Programme best practice group 6. How the Work Programme works for unemployed people 7. Service delivery 8. ESA claimants and the Work Programme 9. Smaller suppliers and financial risk 10. Concerns over creaming and parking 11. After 2015 www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | [email protected] | @commonslibrary Number 6340, 21 March 2016 2 Contents Summary 3 1. Who participates on the Work Programme? 4 2. Statistics 5 2.1 Job outcomes 5 Analysis by monthly cohort (12 month job outcome measure) 5 2.2 Referrals 6 2.3 Sustainment payments 7 2.4 People completing the Work Programme 7 2.5 Variations by provider and geography 7 2.6 Comparison with minimum performance levels 8 3. Payment model 10 3.1 Minimum performance levels 11 3.2 Managing provider performance 12 Market Share Shift 12 Contract termination 12 4. Cost of the Work Programme 14 5. Work Programme best practice group 15 6. How the Work Programme works for unemployed people 16 6.1 Referral 16 6.2 Duration of Work Programme support 16 6.3 What happens when individuals leave the programme? 16 Help to Work 16 6.4 Complaints 17 6.5 Interaction with the Youth Contract: Wage Incentives 17 7. Service delivery 19 7.1 Prime providers and the ‘black box’ 19 7.2 How prime providers were selected 20 7.3 Supply chains and subcontractors 20 7.4 Merlin Standard 21 8.
    [Show full text]