Making Work a Real Choice Where next for specialist disability employment support?

Final Report About Shaw Trust

Shaw Trust is a leading national charity with a thirty year history of supporting disabled, disadvantaged and long term unemployed people to achieve sustainable employment, independent living and social inclusion. Last year Shaw Trust delivered specialist services to over 50,000 people from 200 locations across the UK, supporting its beneficiaries to enter work and lead independent lives. In 2012 Shaw Trust merged with fellow welfare-to-work charity Careers Development Group (CDG), forming a new entity under the Shaw Trust brand.

Shaw Trust is one of only two voluntary sector prime contractors of the Work Programme, operating in the London East Contract Package Area (as CDG). We further deliver services as a Work Programme subcontractor in seven different CPAs. Our extensive experience in the welfare-to-work sector includes delivery of the Work Programme’s predecessor contracts – New Deal, Pathways to Work and Flexible New Deal – as both a prime contractor and subcontractor.

As the main provider of specialist disability employment programme Work Choice we deliver 16 prime contracts, six subcontracts and an additional prime contract through the special purpose vehicle CDG-WISE Ability, providing specialist support for people with disabilities, health problems and impairments across the UK. Shaw Trust also delivers direct contracts for the Skills Funding Agency, and further operates a range of social enterprises and retail shops generating stepping stone employment opportunities for those furthest from the job market.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 2 Contents

Foreword 4

Chapter 1 5-10 Executive Summary

Chapter 2 11-15

Introduction

Chapter 3 16-31 Making Work a Real Choice – Response to Shaw Trust’s Consultation

Chapter 4 32-41 Identifying the key elements of a future specialist disability employment programme: results of customer and staff focus groups and employer interviews

Chapter 5 42-48 Conclusions and recommendations: encouraging an evolution in specialist disability employment support

Annexes Annex One: ‘What works’ to support disabled people, 50-59 and those with health conditions, into sustained work? An independent chapter written by Inclusion

Annex Two: List of consultation respondents 60

Acknowledgements 61

Making Work a Real Choice final report 3 Forew0rd

The findings of our report employment support to our beneficiaries. This will play an important role in depth is crucial if we are to successfully use ensuring more people with this opportunity to help those with disabilities disabilities, health problems and impairments overcome the economic and and impairments can find, social barriers they face. enter and sustain meaningful employment. This is the We must emphasise that we all have a role overarching aim of our charity and the reason to play. Our report highlights the need for Shaw Trust was founded. more robust evidence to demonstrate ‘what works’ in helping people with disabilities to When we launched the Making Work a Real truly fulfil their potential and enter work. It is Choice consultation in June, we wanted down to each and every one of us to share to galvanise the sector to develop a set our own examples of ‘what works’ through of proposals that will help to make a real testing and sharing new ideas and through difference to the lives of those we serve. innovative pilots. It is only by all of us working The response we have had from our peers, collaboratively that the most effective person- partners, employers, customers and the centred support can be made available to the wonderful staff members working in this field people we serve. has exceeded our highest expectations. I and the trustees of Shaw Trust would like to thank all of those who contributed.

The government is reviewing its strategy to improve employment prospects of people with disabilities, health conditions and impairments. Roy O’Shaughnessy, As part of this review, government will need to Chief Executive, Shaw Trust consider what comes after Work Choice, the government’s specialist disability employment programme, which comes to an end in 2015. This is the foundation of our report, which sets out our belief that the government can use the best practice from Work Choice to evolve and sculpt an even better specialist employment

programme.

The consultation responses, in addition to the in-depth research collected through the staff, customer and employer focus groups and interviews, have given this report a level of intellectual, practical and personal depth that can only serve to support the government’s analysis and thinking on how to provide future

Making Work a Real Choice final report 4 Chapter 1 Executive Summary Chapter 1 Executive Summary

Shaw Trust is a national charity with a thirty- Stage One: Interim report and year history of supporting people with consultation disabilities, health problems and impairments into sustainable employment. Last year the The interim report, launched in June 2013, asked charity delivered specialist services focused whether there is a need to retain a separate on supporting its beneficiaries to enter work disability employment programme when the and to lead independent lives to over 50,000 current Work Choice programme comes to an people from 200 locations across the UK. end in 2015. 417 Work Choice delivery staff, One of the key services Shaw Trust delivers stakeholders such as employers and customers is Work Choice: the Department for Work participating in Work Choice took part in our and Pensions’ (DWP) specialist disability initial research. The report concluded there is employment programme. Shaw Trust is the a demonstrable and clear need to retain this largest contracted-out prime contractor for essential source of employability support Work Choice in the country, delivering sixteen for people with disabilities, health problems prime contracts, six subcontracts, and an and impairments. 78 per cent of customers additional prime contract through the special responding to our survey stated that they purpose vehicle CDG-WISE Ability. Since the were extremely satisfied with the service they commencement of Work Choice delivery in had received on Work Choice, and could not October 2010, Shaw Trust has supported think of any additional support that could have 31,780 people with disabilities, health improved their experience of the programme. A problems and impairments on their journey consultation was launched alongside the report into sustainable employment opportunities1. to gauge the views of our industry peers and partners on the findings of our initial report, the As a registered charity dedicated to results of which are detailed in this report. supporting disabled and disadvantaged people into sustainable work, Shaw Trust has Since the launch of the interim report, one of a responsibility to promote and protect the our recommendations to enhance the support interests of the people it serves. This is why, in offered by Work Choice has already been June 2013, Shaw Trust launched its ambitious addressed by the DWP. From September 2013, research project ‘Making Work a Real Work Choice customers have been able to Choice’. The purpose of Making Work a Real access funded vocational training from the Skills Choice is to catalyse a debate about the future Funding Agency. Shaw Trust welcomes this provision of specialist disability employment service enhancement and believes that is a step support amongst employability providers, the in the right direction for creating parity between staff delivering frontline services, employers, mainstream and specialist disability employment stakeholders, and, most importantly, the people programmes.2 who use these services. The project has taken shape in two stages.

1 Data taken from DWP’s August 2013 Work Choice statistics release: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/work- choice-official-statistics-august-2013

2 The opening up of Skills Funding Agency delivery to Work Choice customers is outlined in DWP’s provider guidance: http:// www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/work-choice-annex4.pdf

Making Work a Real Choice final report 6 Chapter 1 Executive Summary

Stage Two: Final report What our participants told us Through Making Work a Real Choice, Shaw Trust also wanted to identify what key features 1) Enhancing and extending existing should underpin a future specialist disability Work Choice delivery employment programme. Identifying these key elements is the focus of this final report. Overcoming barriers to delivery To further our understanding of ‘what works’ In the interim Making Work a Real Choice in supporting people with disabilities, health report, Shaw Trust highlighted a number of problems and impairments to access and systemic barriers to the delivery of existing sustain employment opportunities: Work Choice contracts. These included:

• Shaw Trust commissioned independent • the cap on referrals to Work Choice delaying labour market research centre Inclusion when people with disabilities, health to conduct a series of focus groups and problems and impairments can access the interviews with 73 staff, customers and available support. employers involved in Work Choice. • a lack of clarity regarding the eligibility • Inclusion has also written an independent criteria for Work Choice and Work chapter found in annex one of this report Programme – the government’s mainstream evaluating the best practice approaches to back-to-work programme – resulting in delivering specialist disability employment inappropriate referrals to both programmes. support identified in published academic, industry and government reports. • the limited duration of pre-employment support available on Work Choice, at just six months with a possible six month extension. • This evidence base, combined with the results of the 49 consultation responses Our consultation respondents and focus group received from Shaw Trust’s industry peers participants reinforced the challenge posed by and partners, has enabled the charity these systemic barriers. Participants further to pinpoint the crucial elements needed suggested that the government could use a to drive a future specialist disability staged approach to addressing them: employment programme. • Barriers that would bring immediate benefits to Work Choice customers, such as clarifying the eligibility criteria for the programme, should be addressed immediately.

• However, barriers that had the potential to adversely impact on the quality of Work Choice delivery if removed – such as increasing the number of customers accessing provision by removing the referral cap – should be removed at a later date as part of a future disability employment programme.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 7 Chapter 1 Executive Summary

Aligning specialist and mainstream support • Extending pre-work support: Customers on a future specialist scheme should Our consultation respondents felt that as Work receive a minimum of 12 months’ personally Choice is due to end in 2015, it would be tailored pre-employment support and prudent to extend the existing Work Choice should be supported to achieve a number of contracts until after the 2015 election and milestones on their journey back into work, design a future national specialist disability including the achievement of qualifications employment programme in parallel with the and undertaking voluntary work. successor contract to the Work Programme. However, respondents emphasised the need for contract procurement to take place at • Extending in-work support: Once in staged intervals to ensure organisations have employment customers should receive the resources to bid for each contract, and that support tailored to their level of need for up a high quality service continues to be delivered to two years, and should be encouraged to by both programmes. progress their careers.

• Quality control: Finally, to ensure the support delivered is consistently of the highest standard, an independent quality 2) Key features of a future programme evaluation using feedback from customers A best practice approach and employers should be undertaken at regular intervals. Customers, staff, employers and industry peers and partners all passionately identified Engaging employers existing best practice approaches to delivering specialist disability employment support. The employers interviewed highlighted a need Combined with academic evidence from for a greater awareness of the existing support the both the UK and abroad, as highlighted available, including that which is provided by by Inclusion in annex one, Making Work a Work Choice and Access to Work providers. Real Choice makes a number of evidence- The government’s Disability Confident based recommendations regarding the key campaign is a welcome step in the right characteristics any future specialist disability direction but more needs to be done. employment programme should have: It is the responsibility of the government, • Voluntary participation: The voluntary providers, industry trade bodies and user-led nature of Work Choice should be maintained organisations to actively promote the existing to ensure customers can flexibly manage support package to employers. However, participation alongside their disabilities, if the employment rate of disabled people health problems and impairments. is to increase, a national ‘culture-changing campaign’ focused on helping employers and • Flexible referrals: A proportion of referrals wider society see past an individual’s disability to a new programme should be generated – and understand instead their abilities – needs by providers themselves to extend the reach to be undertaken. Only then will the workplace of the programme to customers with the become fully accessible to people with most complex needs. disabilities, health problems and impairments.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 8 Chapter 1 Executive Summary

3) The need for further evidence and Recommendations: piloting 1. The eligibility criteria identifying which The evidence collated from the 539 customers, individuals are most suited to Work staff, stakeholders and partners participating Choice and the Work Programme in the Making Work a Real Choice research should be immediately clarified. highlights some strong examples of best practice from those involved in provided 2. DWP should tackle the systemic support. However, the ‘What Works’ chapter barriers to delivery in the design written by Inclusion and found in annex one of future specialist disability identifies gaps in our knowledge of the most employment. effective approaches of delivering specialist disability employment support. 3. Work Choice contracts should be extended to enable a new specialist In particular, there is a lack of national and disability employment programme scalable evidence to show what works in to be designed in parallel with the supporting people with different types of successor contract to the Work disability. Only through providers, employers, Programme. trade bodies and user-led groups collaborating with service users to design, implement and share the findings of their pilots or new 4. A new specialist disability innovative approaches will we be able to fill employment programme should the gaps in the evidence base, and deliver the remain voluntary in nature. To expand most effective and highest quality support to the reach of the programme to ensure people with disabilities, health problems and those with the most complex needs impairments. are able to access provision, the referral routes to the programme should also be opened up.

5. A triage assessment tool needs to be introduced for Jobcentre Plus staff to holistically assess the needs of customers with disabilities, health problems and impairments.

6. A new specialist disability employment programme should offer pre-employment support for a longer period of time.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 9 Chapter 1 Executive Summary

7. A new specialist disability employment programme should adopt an innovative new payment structure that financially rewards providers for supporting customers to achieve progression milestones.

8. An independent external quality inspection should be introduced to evaluate the quality of any future specialist disability employment programme.

9. A national marketing campaign advertising the support available to employers wanting to employ people with disabilities, health problems and impairments should be progressed.

10. A culture-changing campaign aimed at challenging employers’ attitudes (and those of wider society) towards employing people with disabilities, health problems and impairments should be introduced.

11. DWP should rigorously evaluate the effectiveness of the delivery methods used in any new specialist disability employment programme, so it can clearly identify ‘what works for whom’ and commission future programmes based on this evidence.

12. Shaw Trust will commit to expanding the ‘what works’ evidence base by piloting, evaluating and sharing the results from the delivery of innovative pilots publicly.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 10 Chapter 2 Introduction Chapter 2 Introduction

The employment rate of people with Since the launch of the interim Making Work disabilities, health problems and impairments a Real Choice report, the debate surrounding in the UK is unacceptably low. Just 46 per the future of specialist disability employment cent of working age people with disabilities are support has been unequivocally galvanised. in employment, compared to 76 per cent of New reports have been launched by the British non-disabled adults.3 As a charity dedicated to Association of Supported Employment (BASE)4, supporting disadvantaged and disabled people the Disability Charities Consortium5 and at to enter sustained work and live independent Disability Rights UK 6outlining their vision for lives, Shaw Trust has a responsibility to its the future of specialist disability employment beneficiaries to review what more it and wider support. In addition, the second independent society can do to support those it serves. In evaluation of Work Choice has been published addition, as the largest prime provider of DWP’s by the Department for Work and Pensions. specialist disability employment programme, The evaluation also supports the evidence Work Choice, the charity is delivering the main presented in Making Work a Real Choice employment programme aimed at supporting that there is a “definite need” for a separate people with disabilities, health problems and specialist disability employment programme impairments into sustainable employment. to exist alongside mainstream back-to-work provision.7 Finally, Shaw Trust itself received 49 This is why in June 2013 Shaw Trust launched responses from industry peers and partners its interim report and consultation, ‘Making to its Making Work a Real Choice consultation, Work a Real Choice’. The purpose of this outlining their views on the direction of current initial report was to use the evidence-based and future disability employment support. A full research the charity collected through list of respondents can be found in annex two. interviews, focus groups and surveys of 417 Work Choice delivery staff, customers participating in Work Choice, and industry and employer stakeholders to set out the case for retaining a specialist disability employment programme post-2015. A secondary aim of the report was to challenge the silence across the welfare to work industry and in policy circles on the future of specialist disability employment support. As such, Shaw Trust aimed to catalyse the debate regarding what a future specialist disability employment programme should look like by launching an 3 Department for Work and Pensions (2013), Fulfilling Potential. Making it Happen pg 39 open consultation alongside the interim report. 4 BASE (August 2013), Submission to the Government Review of Disability Employment Strategy

5 Trotter, R (July 2013), Work in Progress: Rethinking employment support for disabled people

6 Crowther, N and Sayce, L (October 2013), Taking Control of Employment Support, Disability Rights UK

7 Purvis et al (July, 2013), Evaluation of the Work Choice Specialist Disability Employment Programme- Findings from the 2011 Early Implementation and 2012 Steady State Waves of the research, pg 21

Making Work a Real Choice final report 12 Chapter 2 Introduction

Shaping future provision people with disabilities, health problems and impairments driven by evidence-based best The purpose of this second and final report practice. is to identify the key features that should underpin any future specialist disability This is why an additional aim of this final employment programme. Our findings are report is not only to identify what key elements based on: should underpin a new specialist disability employment programme, but to also provide a • the 49 responses submitted to the charity’s challenge to ourselves and our industry peers consultation and partners – representative bodies and disabled people’s user-led organisations – as • the results of three Work Choice customer well as to DWP, to pilot, evaluate and share and focus groups three Shaw Trust staff delivery best practice across the welfare to and supply chain partner focus groups work industry. To demonstrate its commitment • 17 in-depth employer interviews to sharing its best practice widely, Shaw conducted independently on behalf of Shaw Trust will be evaluating its own pilot, ‘Bridging Trust by Inclusion, and the Gap’, and publishing the results of this pilot publicly in 2014. Although competition • an independent academic review of between providers has had positive effects, national and international best practice, by working together to establish and use the conducted by Inclusion and published in most effective, personalised approaches more Annex One as part of this report. working-age disabled adults will be able to enter and sustain meaningful employment. Identifying ‘what works’

The qualitative research collected through the research process, alongside Inclusion’s independent review, has enabled Shaw Trust to add to the evidence base detailing ‘what works’ in supporting people with disabilities, health problems and impairments into sustained work. However, the independent literature review outlines a number of areas where more robust research is required to demonstrate ‘what works’ in supporting people with disabilities, health problems and impairments into work. Without this evidence, government policy makers and providers will struggle to design and deliver employability programmes for

Making Work a Real Choice final report 13 Chapter 2 Introduction

What is Work Choice? • Module Two offers customers who have Work Choice was introduced in October entered work, and their employers, short- 2010 by the Department for Work and to-medium term in-work support for a Pensions as the only centrally-funded national minimum of eight hours a month, for up to specialist disability employment programme. two years. Work Choice replaced the three incumbent specialist disability employment programmes: offers customers with Work Preparation, WORKSTEP and the Job • Module Three more complex needs a longer duration Introduction Scheme. In contrast, contracted- of in-work support for a minimum of four out Work Choice provision is delivered by eight hours a month. Module Three is focused prime providers and their supply chains across on customers in supported employment 28 contract package areas across Great Britain. and is aimed at helping these customers to transition into unsupported employment Work Choice is also delivered by Remploy in the open labour market. As part of Work through grant-in-aid funding from the Choice, the government has provided government. Work Choice is delivered in a funding for over 2,400 supported business modular format as follows: places.8

• Module One focuses on helping people The aim of Work Choice is to move customers to prepare for, search for and secure into supported or unsupported employment. A employment. Lasting six months in job start payment is achieved when customers duration, with a possible six-month have entered employment which lasts for 16 extension, providers offer customers or more hours a week. Providers can also tailored CV development support, support claim a sustainment payment for customers in to improve confidence and motivation and unsupported employment who have sustained employability support such as interview work for 26 out of thirty weeks. Data published preparation as well as a range of specialist 9 in August 2013 shows that to date , 31 per support to tackle customers’ health related cent of customers participating in Work Choice and non-health related barriers to work. have secured employment.

8 Sayce, L (2011), Getting in, staying in and getting on: Disability employment support fit for the future, Department for Work and Pensions, pg 72

9 Data taken from DWP’s August 2013 Work Choice statistics release: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/work- choice-official-statistics-august-2013

Making Work a Real Choice final report 14 Chapter 2 Bridging the Gap Case Study

Michael Kestin

As a charity committed to supporting people The importance of the role played by Bridging with disabilities into sustained employment, the Gap in helping Michael to realise his Shaw Trust is reinvesting a proportion of potential cannot be underplayed. Michael’s the received funding on Work Choice into employers reiterate this, with David of Merlin the charity’s ‘Bridging the Gap’ pilot. The Medieval Closet, saying: pilot creates new job opportunities for Work Choice customers by making available a ‘New “As a small family business we would not have Opportunities Grant’ grant of up to £2,500 been able to offer this opportunity to Michael to incentivise local employers to give a Work without the support and funding offered by the Choice customer a job for at least six months. Bridging the Gap initiative. Shaw Trust has been operating the pilot since “We would definitely recommend Shaw Trust to March 2013, and has considerable success, other employers. The support we have received with 802 customers such as Michael Kestin from the charity has been great. It has helped (below) securing employment through the us to create a good job opportunity for Michael, scheme. and we will be able to expand the business and hopefully we will be able to sustain the post at 28 year old Michael Kestin from Cross Hands, the end of the funding period.” Llanelli sustained a brain injury in September 2006, and had struggled to find employment Michael also spoke of his delight at being since. Michael was referred to Shaw Trust in employed. He said: November 2012 by his disability employment “I felt frustrated that I was unable to secure advisor (DEA) based in the Llanelli JobCentre unemployment and this had a knock-on effect Plus (JCP). on my self-confidence, leaving me feeling really Guided by Shaw Trust, Michael was given demotivated. invaluable support by the charity. Staff at the “The support and encouragement I have charity’s Llanelli centre helped Michael to since received from Work Choice and my boost his confidence, search for employment employer has helped me to address many of and improve his prospects, leading to Michael my concerns and has increased my confidence securing employment. considerably. Shaw Trust staff liaised with local employer, “I would recommend Work Choice to others. Merlin Medieval Closet – a family-run business The support and encouragement I have specialising in the sale of medieval costumes received has been invaluable. I had tried for - guiding Michael into work as an admin years to secure employment without success. assistant. With the help of Bridging the Gap Work Choice helped me to look at new Michael was supported into the 16 hour a week approaches and avenues to get me back to role. work.”

Making Work a Real Choice final report 15 Chapter 3 Making Work a Real Choice: response to Shaw Trust’s Consultation Chapter 3

Shaw Trust launched a two-month consultation disabilities and impairments into sustainable in June 2013 alongside its interim report to gain employment. The responses additionally feedback from our industry peers, partners outlined a number of pragmatic approaches and stakeholders on the proposals outlined in to enhancing current Work Choice delivery, as Making Work a Real Choice. The responses well as suggestions to shape a future specialist from the consultation also enabled Shaw disability employment programme. Trust to explore respondents’ views on what underlying principles should be at the centre a) ‘Should a specialist disability of a future specialist disability employment employment programme be maintained programme. post-2015? If so, should the government Shaw Trust received 49 responses to the design a new programme or introduce an consultation from 38 different organisations. enhanced version of Work Choice?’ Submissions were received from: Although Shaw Trust’s evidence-based research in the interim report demonstrated • four local authorities such as Peterborough City Council a clear need to retain a separate specialist disability employment programme, Shaw Trust 10 • six supported businesses such as MTIB wanted to test this assertion more widely and Clarity through public consultation. • two Residential Training Colleges (RTCs)- St Loye’s Foundation and Queen Elizabeth On the whole, respondents were passionate Foundation about the need to retain a specialist disability • one Work Choice prime contractor- Ingeus, employment programme, with 48 out of the 49 and respondents stating that a specialist disability employment programme should be maintained • a range of end-to-end and specialist post-2015. This future programme should subcontractors involved in Work Choice remain separate from any mainstream back-to- delivery with a number of prime contractors. work programme. This includes user led organisations such as The Action Group, specialist disability In addition, respondents believed that any charities like Neurosupport and community future programme should remain distinct and focused organisations like Craigowl separate from mainstream provision through, Communities. for example, the Work Programme. Shaw Trust also received some anonymous submissions to the consultation. A full list of respondents can be found in annex two. Employers and Work Choice customers were consulted separately via focus groups and in- 10 Supported Businesses are defined in the DWP Evaluation depth interviews, the findings of which can be of Work Choice as: “A business established within a current or legacy provider organisation to employ disabled people. found in Chapter Four. Public Contract Regulations (2006) defined a supported business as a service where more than 50 per cent of the workers are disabled persons who by the nature or severity of The received responses were overwhelmingly their disability are unable to take up work in the open labour positive about the role Work Choice and other market.” Purvis et al (July, 2013), Evaluation of the Work Choice specialist disability employment programmes Specialist Disability Employment Programme- Findings from the 2011 Early Implementation and 2012 Steady State Waves play in supporting people with health problems, of the research, pg 15

Making Work a Real Choice final report 17 Chapter 3

This is to ensure that the relatively small offered by Work Choice advisers and relatively caseload sizes that enable Work Choice low caseload sizes compared to mainstream advisers to deliver a personalised service to contracts like the Work Programme11, to customers can be maintained, and that the drive the success of any future programme. unique identity of this separate and specialist However, there was also an acknowledgement programme to be promoted. Only one that the design and delivery of the service respondent disagreed, stating that people with should evolve. Respondents stated that disabilities, health problems and impairments enhancements would deliver improvements would be best supported by a single back to to service delivery both, to customers and work programme. Typical comments included: providers. These included the following:

• The extension of Module One to at least “We believe there is a need for a specialist twelve months in duration with a six-month disability employment programme post-2015 extension. Some respondents also thought to assist those with complex needs who are customers should receive pre-employment furthest away from the labour market to help support for two years, as is the case for the provide a route into employment.” government’s mainstream employability programme, the Work Programme. “Removal of specialist provision with expert help and support to promote people with • Greater flexibility in contract delivery, for disabilities into work would dilute any example tailoring the amount of in-work provision considerably.” support to a customer’s needs, rather than prescribing eight hours a month for each There was also a high level of consensus Module Two customer. regarding what form a future specialist disability employment programme should take. 75 per • Introducing a payment mechanism focused cent of respondents stated that rather than a on distance-travelled measures involving completely new programme being introduced a “celebration of outcomes other than when the current Work Choice contracts expire, employment”, both pre-employment and for a new contract based on an enhanced version those customers in work. of Work Choice should instead be introduced. • An automated job outcome claims “An enhanced version of Work Choice should verification process similar to the Work be introduced using evidence and experience Programme to reduce the amount of time of what works to date, also from WORKSTEP, spent on paperwork. Work Prep and the Job Introduction Scheme. Work Choice should be extended and not replaced.”

Respondents emphasised the need to retain the perceived successful elements of Work 11 Purvis et al (July, 2013), Evaluation of the Work Choice Choice, such as the personalised support Specialist Disability Employment Programme- Findings from the 2011 Early Implementation and 2012 Steady State Waves of the research, pg 21

Making Work a Real Choice final report 18 Chapter 3

A third of respondents declaring a desire for a which recommended that DWP should review future enhanced version of Work Choice stated its referral criteria to all specialist disability these enhancements should be made to the employment provision to ensure each customer existing Work Choice contracts, which should is referred to the right provision at the right then be extended. time. 12A consolidation and mapping of existing programmes to make the most effective use of The remaining respondents held a mixture existing resources could prevent duplication of views regarding what a future specialist of delivery, and provide a more cost-effective disability employment programme should future for specialist disability employment look like. Some respondents stated that support. a completely new specialist disability employment programme should be created. Overall, the majority of respondents agreed Alternatively, four respondents stated that in that a specialist disability employment addition to Work Choice, a new programme programme should be maintained, and that a should be introduced to engage customers future programme should take the form of an with the most complex needs. This group enhanced version of Work Choice. of respondents stated that although Work Choice had been successful for customers b) ‘Should the government procure a with moderate health needs, more support was new specialist disability employment needed for those with the most severe mental health problems: programme jointly alongside the commissioning of the successor contract “Those with more significant health barriers to the Work Programme?’ will require a more specialist provision, therefore a ‘Work Choice plus’ option with In the interim Making Work a Real Choice more resources would be worth considering.” report, Shaw Trust recommended that DWP should extend the current Work Choice Finally, the two RTCs submitting evidence to contracts and procure a new specialist the consultation suggested that an alternative disability employment programme alongside provision was not needed for those with the the successor contract to the Work most complex needs. Rather, customers with Programme. the most complex needs could be referred to the intensive residential support offered This parallel procurement would enable DWP to by the RTCs. The RTCs also added that make consistent policy decisions regarding the Jobcentre Plus should develop a framework of complementary provision that customers on employment support for people with disabilities both contracts could access, such as existing to access, with clear eligibility criteria defined Skills Funding Agency provision, and would for each employment support programme. facilitate join-up between mainstream and This framework should consist of the support specialist employment support. offered by the Work Programme, Work Choice, RTCs and any local provision.

This alternative view echoes the findings of the recent Independent Advisory Panel review of Residential Training College provision, 12 Department for Work and Pensions (July 2013), Residential Training Provision, Independent Advisory Panel report, pg 10

Making Work a Real Choice final report 19 Chapter 3

Contractual join-up could address some of the delivery challenges identified in Shaw “We would argue that the successors to Work Trust’s interim report, such as clarifying the Choice and the Work Programme should be eligibility criteria to Work Programme and Work – at the very least – designed alongside one another to maximise clarity on the purpose Choice. As DWP has declared in its recently- published Commissioning Strategy document and eligibility for each programme. It would that a successor contract to Work Choice will follow that commissioning of each should be procured13, it is imperative that the timing happen at the same time, for the same of any future procurement exercise enables programme duration, to give referral agencies the most effective programme possible to be a clear choice.” designed and delivered.

Consultation respondents demonstrated a mix It is worth noting that many of the respondents of views on when a future programme should in favour of parallel procurement highlighted be procured: the considerable strain the simultaneous procurement of two new programmes would • Fifty per cent of respondents supported place on bidding resources. In particular, Shaw Trust’s view that a new programme organisations would struggle to access the should be designed in parallel to the re- capital needed to bid for two separate sets procurement of the Work Programme. of contracts and to invest in the bid writing and partnership staffing resources needed to Respondents in favour of parallel programme secure new prime and subcontracts. Procuring design believed it would enable DWP to: both contracts at exactly the same time could therefore exclude smaller organisations – and • set clear eligibility criteria for each indeed many prime contractors – from bidding programme for either contract. Therefore, although both contracts should be designed in tandem, a • develop a streamlined and easy-to-use staged procurement process, with separate mechanism to cross-refer between both bidding rounds with an appropriate time period programmes separating them is advisable. • design and implement a holistic assessment tool to ensure the right customer is referred Furthermore, Shaw Trust supports the official to the right programme at the right time, Work Choice Evaluation’s call for DWP to learn and the lessons from the previous procurement of Work Choice.14 Work Choice was procured in • ensure changes to the welfare system – late 2009, however due to the 2010 general such as how a job outcome is defined and election the contracts could not be awarded evidenced under Universal Credit – are until after the election. consistently factored into the design of both future programmes.

13 Department for Work and Pensions (July 2013), Commissioning Strategy 2013: Consultation, page 8 14 Purvis et al (July, 2013), Evaluation of the Work Choice Specialist Disability Employment Programme- Findings from the 2011 Early Implementation and 2012 Steady State Waves of the research, pg 150

Making Work a Real Choice final report 20 Chapter 3

This squeezed the implementation timeframe contracts to be extended. However, there for Work Choice from six to three months.15 is a degree of hesitancy over the parallel With a general election due in 2015, Shaw Trust procurement of both programmes due to the urges DWP and all political parties to consider resourcing pressures a simultaneous bidding the impact of the election on the procurement round would place on providers. Therefore a timescales for a specialist disability joint design process, but a separate and staged employment programme, and indeed any future procurement process, is recommended. contracts. c) ‘If a new specialist disability • 38 per cent of respondents did not want employment programme is to be Work Choice and Work Programme to be introduced, what funding structure jointly procured. should this programme have?’ These respondents were concerned that joint procurement would lead to Work Choice Throughout Shaw Trust’s Making Work a being merged into the Work Programme and Real Choice research there has been an that the Work Choice contract package areas acknowledgement by staff directly delivering would be expanded in scale, further rendering Work Choice services that if people with the it difficult for smaller providers to compete for most complex needs are to be supported into support. There were also concerns that parallel employment, an alternative contract funding procurement could affect the unique identity of structure is needed. In particular, many staff Work Choice: have conveyed a desire to move away from a funding structure that purely incentivises the achievement of job starts and sustained job “Any future joint procurement alongside the outcomes. successor contract to the Work Programme would diminish the separate identity of a specialist disability employment programme.” Instead, many would like to see the achievement of milestone outcomes such as participation in voluntary work rewarded in addition to job outcome payments, to ensure • The remaining 12 per cent of respondents those furthest from the labour market will be were undecided about how and when a genuinely engaged in programme delivery. new contract should be procured. Simultaneously, with the Work and Pensions Select Committee recognising that the In summary, the largest group of respondents Work Programme has not delivered the best emphasised that the successor programmes outcomes possible for customers with health to both Work Programme and Work Choice problems to date, now is the time to question should be designed in parallel. This joint design how to get the best value out of payments by would enable consistent policy decisions to results contracting for people with disabilities, be made to benefit both programmes, and health problems and impairments.16 would enable clear eligibility criteria for both to be developed. An integrated programme design would require the current Work Choice

15 Purvis et al (July 2013), ibid 16 Work and Pensions Select Committee (May 203), Can the Work Programme Work for all User Groups? First Report of Session 2013- 2014, House of Commons, pg 5

Making Work a Real Choice final report 21 Chapter 3

Shaw Trust received a rich and diverse set of attending a centre regularly, or undertaking responses from respondents answering this voluntary work were major successes for question. There was no consensus regarding some Work Choice customers, and this what the funding structure of a future specialist should be recognised financially. disability employment programme should look like: Respondents also wanted distance-travelled milestones recognised for customers in work. • 13 per cent of respondents stated that Suggestions included receiving funding at a future specialist disability employment different job entry and sustainment milestones, programme should be funded entirely by a for example, payments at job entry, 13 weeks service fee in recognition of the complexity of employment, 26 weeks of employment of the needs of Work Choice customers. and 52 weeks of sustained work, as well as A service fee supported contract would acknowledging that some customers may need enable providers to invest in the staffing to work in part time positions for less than 16 resources and specialist support needed hours a week, due to the nature of their health to support people with disabilities, health condition. The reforms to the benefit tapers and problems and impairments into work. earnings introduced through Universal Credit could result in it being considerably easier to • 22 per cent of respondents stated that they reward milestones for increasing the number thought the current funding structure of hours an individual works. The DWP ESF worked well. Currently, 70 per cent of Troubled Families contract was cited as an Work Choice funding is delivered through a area where a milestone type payment approach service fee. The remaining 30 per cent can had been used, and it was suggested that best be achieved by supporting customers into practice could be drawn from this programme. supported or unsupported work, and also by sustaining customers in unsupported “In addition to rewarding job outcomes, the employment. achievement of milestones on the journey towards employability should be recognised • 48 per cent of respondents stated that financially in order to prevent those with the the funding structure should be revised. highest support needs being ‘parked’ on In particular, respondents were in favour benefits.” of keeping a larger service fee relative to other DWP programmes. However, • The remainder of the respondents had a mix respondents also outlined a number of of views on how a future contract should be innovative ideas regarding how some of the funded. These included asking employers service could be re-allocated to different to match fund delivery, using differential milestones throughout the contract delivery. payments to incentivise working with Respondents wanted to see a range of customers with the most complex needs. distance-travelled payment milestones – personalised to the needs of each Although there was no clear consensus on individual – introduced to financially what funding structure a future programme recognise the achievements that customers should have, the innovative ways identified of who may need more time to achieve full funding a future programme through distance time work make. In particular, respondents travelled milestone payments should warrant emphasised that undertaking a qualification, further exploration by DWP.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 22 Chapter 3

d) ‘Should the systemic barriers affecting needed to be tackled. Respondents also Work Choice delivery, such as the cap on identified an additional systemic barrier: the Work Choice referrals, be removed at this claims and verification process for job entries stage of the contracting cycle or during and job outcomes on Work Choice. The current process involves Work Choice delivery staff the procurement of any future contract?’ collecting and collating significant volumes of paperwork, which employers also need to Shaw Trust identified a number of systemic sign, to demonstrate a job outcome is genuine. barriers that impacted on the delivery of Work Although all providers acknowledge the need Choice in the charity’s Making Work a Real for robust evidence to exist, respondents Choice report. Factors such as the referral cap outlined how an automated system using an and the lack of clear eligibility criteria between off-benefits check, as in Work Programme, Work Choice and Work Programme were cited could cut bureaucracy, would save providers by the staff, customers and stakeholders and employers time, consequently freeing up participating in the research as barriers to staff resources to provide more support to supporting people with disabilities, health customers. This would also utilise DWP best problems and impairments entering sustained practice in other programmes such as the Work employment. Our initial report also identified Programme. the lack of access to Skills Funding Agency provision as a barrier. However, DWP removed Again, there was a diversity of views regarding this barrier in late September 2013. when and how each barrier identified should be removed. The timings and rationale for the Respondents to our consultation agreed that removal of each barrier are outlined in Figure the challenges identified in the initial report One below.

Figure One

Barrier Timescales for removal

The referral cap: Referrals to Work Choice are There was consensus across respondents’ submissions currently capped each month. Shaw Trust’s research that the referral cap needs to be removed. In particular, has highlighted that customers have had to wait up respondents were interested in a future model where to six months to access provision due to the cap. customers could self-refer to provision, or where it was Additionally, specialist providers responding to the compulsory for a proportion of referrals to be recruited by consultation stated that the cap has contributed to providers voluntarily. their reduced delivery volumes. However, respondents were concerned that if the cap was lifted immediately they would not have the staffing capacity to increase in the rise in referral volumes. Therefore, respondents suggested the cap should be lifted as part of a new contract, so new delivery models can be developed to address this change.

Eligibility criteria: There is a lack of clarity regarding Respondents suggested that this barrier could the eligibility criteria for Work Choice and the Work be addressed immediately through the training of Programme. Jobcentre Plus staff. The RTCs highlighted that they should also be included in any clarification of the criteria to access specialist disability employment support. The cross-referral mechanisms between programmes could also be strengthened and clarified at this point.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 23 Chapter 3

Duration of Module One: Customers with Again, there was a consensus that this barrier should more complex health problems, disabilities and be removed. However, respondents indicated that impairments reported that the duration of Module the barrier should be tackled in the next contracting One – with a possible six-month extension – was too cycle, as it would involve a fundamental change to short a time to address their barriers to employment providers’ delivery models. Also, further evaluation and and find and enter work. research should be undertaken by DWP to ascertain the most appropriate length of pre-employment support for customers with moderate-to-severe disabilities, health problems and impairments.

Claims and verification process: Providers report Respondents were passionate about the extent to which that the lengthy paperwork involved in verifying this barrier negatively impacts on their service delivery. job outcomes detracts from their ability to deliver However, respondents pragmatically suggested that this support to Work Choice customers. barrier would be best tackled during the introduction to the successor programme to Work Choice.

Overall, respondents agreed that systemic 44 per cent of respondents stated that a barriers to the delivery of the current Work single assessment of customers’ employability Choice contracts need to be removed. and holistic needs should be introduced at However, due to the potential adverse impact the benefit stage. Respondents stated that that addressing some of these barriers would clearer identification of the specific support have on the delivery of existing contracts, it an individual requires at the initial stage is recommended the barriers are removed in of a customer’s benefit claim would result stages, with some being tackled immediately in the right customer being referred to the and others as part of a future specialist right programme at the right time. With the disability employment programme. introduction of Universal Credit nationwide from October 2013, respondents felt it was the ideal e) ‘What are your views on whether and time to review how an individual’s needs (rather how a single assessment of customers’ than benefit type) could determine which employability and holistic needs could be provision would be most effective in supporting introduced at the benefit claim stage?’ them back into sustainable employment. Respondents also expressed a preference for Jobcentre Plus to conduct these assessments, Shaw Trust argued in its interim report that an with partners from stakeholders such as in-depth assessment of customers’ barriers, community mental health teams, the NHS and needs and aspirations should be conducted at local authorities contributing to the assessment the point of benefit claim. The purpose of the of need where appropriate. However, assessment would be to determine which is respondents acknowledged that carrying out the most appropriate back-to-work programme such an assessment would place resource (including Jobcentre Plus provision) for an pressures on Jobcentre Plus colleagues. individual, and to highlight any additional specialist support that an individual may need to access.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 24 Chapter 3

Adding to this view, 17 per cent of respondents problems and impairments. The remainder of highlighted the importance of the assessment respondents were undecided in their views. process being conducted at regular intervals throughout contract delivery. The regular Although respondents did not fully agree on assessment of customers’ needs would when a single and holistic assessment of ensure their changing needs and abilities were customers’ employability needs should be identified and addressed, including referral introduced, there is an overall consensus that to a more suitable back-to-work programme the introduction of a triage-type assessment if appropriate. The regular assessment of would be beneficial. Such an assessment customer needs could also support the would help to direct the right customer to the measurement of distance travelled. Some right programme at the right time. respondents stated the assessment process should begin at week thirteen of the benefit f) ‘How can employers be more claim to ensure customers’ Jobcentre Plus effectively supported to employ people advisers had built a thorough understanding with disabilities, health problems and of the needs of an individual before the impairments? assessment. The results of the assessments should – with customers’ consent – be shared The employers interviewed as part of Shaw with providers to avoid duplication and to Trust’s initial research perceived that it streamline the continuity of support. Providers was financially risky to employ customers should build on the assessment review with disabilities, health problems and regularly to respond to the evolving needs of impairments during a time of financial austerity. customers. Typical comments included: Consequently, in the first Making Work a Real Choice report, Shaw Trust recommended that “To enable effective signposting to the government should explore how it could support, training and indeed employment use wage incentives to encourage employers opportunities, an accurate assessment of to employ more people with disabilities, health employability and needs is absolutely key. problems and impairments. Introduction of such an assessment at Respondents provided a varied mix of views the benefit claim stage would be entirely to this question based on their organisations’ appropriate. However, it is important experiences of working with employers. The to note that needs can change and respondents’ evidence provides an interesting regular reviews of assessments should contrast to the views of employers (outlined be undertaken as a check that the right in chapter four). The primary ways in which measures are being offered.” employers could become more effectively supported were highlighted as the following: However, 12 per cent of the respondents did not want the assessment to be • Bespoke advice and support should introduced. Respondents expressed concerns be provided to enable employers to that with the Work Capability Assessment recruit, employ and retain employees and the new assessment for Personalised with disabilities, health problems and Independence Payment, the introduction impairments. This support should be of another assessment would place added extended beyond the scope of the in- stress on individuals with disabilities, health work support delivered by Work Choice to

Making Work a Real Choice final report 25 Chapter 3

include the provision of tailored support “There is a great deal of work to be done in for employers to adapt their recruitment terms of educating employers about the various processes, as well as a helpline – types of disability, and then showing and particularly for SMEs – to deal with any supporting how to work with someone’s ability,

human resources issues which may arise. whilst supporting the element of disability.” Respondents were complementary about the support offered to employers to adapt • Providing financial incentives to employers their workplaces through Access to Work, to encourage them to employ an individual but also highlighted that if the process was with disabilities, health problems and less labour intensive, more employers would impairments. Respondents stated that make use of the scheme. such incentives should include a national wage incentive scheme for employers to • Marketing available support more subsidise the employment of people with effectively to employers. Respondents disabilities during their initial stages of noted that the employers they worked with employment, as well as a tax break scheme were often not aware that Work Choice and for employers committed to employing Access to Work existed before contact with people with disabilities. their organisation. More effective promotion

of the support available and of the benefits

of employing individuals with disabilities, “Some employers are not disability-aware, and

health problems and impairments was therefore assume an individual will not be able to

therefore identified as being crucial in sustain a job. A job start incentive would allow

encouraging employers to increase the employer to start a disabled person and the number of disabled people in their have funds available should additional training workforce. The new Access Ability website17 be required.” and the government’s Disability Confident campaign, including a local radio campaign, Respondents overall suggest employers and resources were cited as a step in the could be more effectively supported if they right direction by respondents. had greater awareness and access to the support already available to them from both the • Educating employers about the benefits government and providers. Education regarding of employing people with disabilities, health different disabilities and health conditions, in problems and impairments, and proactively addition to the provision of financial incentives, addressing any misconceptions they also were identified by respondents as crucial may have about employing Work Choice ways in which employers could be supported customers. The role models campaign to employ more people with disabilities, health launched in Fulfilling Potential: Making it problems and impairments. Happen18 and the Disability Confident19 campaign promoting employer case studies were cited as welcome examples of how 17 Work Choice and Access to Work providers launched www. the business case for employing people accessability.info in July 2013. The website maps where Work Choice with disabilities, health problems and and Access to Work support can be accessed across the UK. impairments can be made to employers. 18 Department for Work and Pensions (2013), Fulfilling Potential: Making it Happen, pg 6 However, as the recent ‘Fulfilling Potential’ 19 20 Details of the government’s Disability Confident campaign cab be report outlines , a complete ‘culture found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-ad-campaign- change’ in employer and societal attitudes launched-at-uks-first-disability-employment-conference is needed before a tangible impact can be 20 Department for Work and Pensions (2013), Fulfilling Potential: Making made. it Happen, Action Plan, pg 21

Making Work a Real Choice final report 26 Chapter 3

g) ‘How could personalisation, the to-work provision they participate in, or which (individual placement and support) IPS elements they undertake, the overall quality of model or any alternative model of support the services received would excel. be piloted and used to enhance the However, respondents were generally employability support offered to people apprehensive about the use of personal with disabilities?’ budgets. This was due to their own challenging experiences of personal budgets delivery to A brief review of the existing literature in date through pilots such as the Right to Control Making Work a Real Choice highlighted Trailblazers. Respondents echoed the results that alternative approaches to the delivery of Shaw Trust’s interim Making Work a Real of employability support to people with Choice report that their customers found the disabilities, health problems and impairments concept of personal budgets both stressful and had the potential to enhance the effectiveness concerning. of current and future specialist disability employment programmes. Our consultation respondents deliver a diverse range of employment support programmes and shared “Personalisation should be distinct from their wealth of experience with Shaw Trust personal budgets, which are unproven and through their submitted responses. untested at scale.”

Personalisation: Shaw Trust received a “We recognise the potential of approaches variety of responses regarding the role of such as personalised budgets for increasing personalisation and personal budgets in the performance of back-to-work delivery the future delivery of specialist disability by improving client engagement and employment programmes. Firstly, respondents empowering clients through service choice. highlighted the need to distinguish between However, we believe that any personalised personalised delivery and personal budgets. approach should be first piloted to assess In general, respondents were supportive of its cost effectiveness and to understand the Work Choice adopting an even more ‘person- additionally to performance before being centred’ approach than currently, with adopted at scale.” providers being given the flexibility to work collaboratively with partners such as the NHS and social care services to manage customers’ journeys back into work.

As highlighted in the DWP Work Choice Evaluation21, many respondents followed the principles of the Supported Employment model throughout their Work Choice delivery, and emphasised they already delivered a highly- personalised service. Respondents were also supportive of exploring how customers could be given more choice over their back-to- work support. One respondent noted that by empowering customers to choose which back- 21 Purvis et al (July, 2013), Evaluation of the Work Choice Specialist Disability Employment Programme- Findings from the 2011 Early Implementation and 2012 Steady State Waves of the research, pg 20

Making Work a Real Choice final report 27 Chapter 3

However, some respondents thought there was Alternative approaches: Other ideas included value in developing small-scale personal extending the use of supported work budget pilots that could be introduced placements or intermediate labour markets as part of Work Choice delivery. A popular (ILM) through Work Choice, similar to Shaw option focused on customers being given Trust’s ‘Bridging the Gap’ project. Through a discretionary budget where they could Bridging the Gap, Shaw Trust offers employers purchase additional specialist support, such new opportunities grant of up to £2,500 to as specific vocational training, that would incentivise local employers to give a Work help them on their journeys back to work. Choice customer a meaningful and genuine Integrating personal budgets within Work job for six months. The scheme is targeted Choice would enable customers to access at providing stepping stone employment specialist information, advice and guidance opportunities for customers with the most needed to make an informed choice on how complex needs. Customers participating in best to spend this budget. the pilot receive on-going training and support at work from a Shaw Trust adviser, as well as Individual Placement and Support (IPS): support to remain in the job or progress into a Similarly, consultation respondents adopted a new job after six months. Since the scheme’s cautious stance on the use of the IPS or ‘place launch in March 2013, 720 customers have and train’ model to enhance the employability been supported into work. support offered to people with disabilities, health problems and impairments. Under the If employers could commit to offering people IPS model participants are rapidly matched to with disabilities six months’ paid work on a a suitable job and then trained on how to do rolling basis – after which they could progress the job once they have entered work. It has into a different job – more people with delivered successful results, particularly in the disabilities, health problems and impairments United States, for people with severe mental would be able to gain the work experience health problems and learning disabilities. and skills needed to secure and sustain Although respondents recognised the success employment. The use of an ILM approach of existing IPS schemes, they were concerned to create new employment opportunities of about the scalability of the projects, both community benefit should be particularly in terms of cost and the extension beyond encouraged, using the wealth of existing best supporting customers with mental health needs practice and evidence of effective ILM delivery. and learning disabilities: The independent ‘What Works’ chapter written by Inclusion in this report highlights “IPS should be widened further to test its some successful approaches of generating initial small scale successes. It could be employment opportunities through an ILM. unwise to significantly upscale this model of service at the expense of more established Overall, providers welcomed the benefits provisions.” that increased personalisation and customer choice could bring to the delivery of a future Respondents suggested that a role for IPS specialist disability employment programme. existed outside of Work Choice provision, with However, respondents remained unconvinced future pilots and contracts being commissioned that a national rollout of personal budgets by local authorities to enable joined up health or a scheme like IPS provided a tangible and social care support. alternative to the delivery of specialist disability employment support.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 28 Chapter 3

Rather, localised IPS contracts could be used the recommendations in the Sayce Review22 to complement national delivery, and ways in policymakers are committed to moving away which to increase customer choice could be from a model of ‘sheltered employment’. piloted in existing delivery, rather than piloting a personal budgets programme. Other innovative In acknowledgement of the evolution in solutions such as using IPS should also be government policy towards supported piloted. businesses, Shaw Trust has piloted an innovative approach in using its protected h) Do you have any other comments place funding for its own supported business or views that could contribute to this – Shaw Trust Industries – in Doncaster. Shaw consultation? Trust, with the support of DWP, created the RiSE project (Routes into Sustainable Employment) to offer customers entering One important additional view came from supported employment a choice of where they the supported businesses responding to this could work. Using the protected place funding, consultation. Currently Work Choice customers Shaw Trust matches customers to employment are able to access a number of protected opportunities tailored to their needs, and uses employment places in supported businesses. this additional funding to provide both the Supported businesses receive £4,800 a year employer and the customer with intensive for each protected place. This protected place in-work support. This innovative way of using funding is due to expire when the Work Choice protected place funding enables customers contracts come to an end in 2015. Shaw to receive intensive in-work support whilst Trust works with 37 supported businesses experiencing employment in a ‘mainstream’ responsible for 1,320 protected places workplace. 162 customers have benefitted through its 16 Work Choice prime contracts from this project and have entered employment across the UK. The supported businesses we to date. work with provide a diverse range of services including the manufacture of furniture frames, Shaw Trust is still developing its own position the creation of signage and the management of on the future of supported businesses and we a garden centre and plant nurseries. note the pressure on government expenditure and difficult choices that need to be made. The supported businesses responding to However, it is clear that the supported the consultation urged DWP to consider businesses the charity works with make a maintaining funding for protected places valuable contribution to the delivery of Work post-2015. They stated that not only do they Choice provide a valuable source of employment for people with the most complex disabilities, Overall, consultation respondents wanted health problems and impairments who to see an enhanced version of Work Choice mainstream employers may struggle to introduced post-2015, designed using best support, but they also match fund the practice from the existing contract and government’s investment by four times the alternative programmes, and designed in value through their investment in supporting parallel with a future mainstream programme. and training Work Choice customers. However, the supported businesses responding to the consultation were also aware that through 22 Sayce, L (2011), Getting in, staying in and getting on: Disability employment support fit for the future, Department for Work and Pensions, pg 108

Making Work a Real Choice final report 29 Chapter 3

Respondents also wanted to explore how an innovative funding structure based on distance- travelled measures could be introduced and explore further how a single assessment of customer needs could be implemented in addition to more promotion and bespoke support offered to employers to encourage them to employ more people with disabilities, health problems and impairments.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 30 Chapter 3 RiSE case study

Paul Corbally Paul Corbally was referred to Shaw Trust due to the challenges his health issues presented to him finding and sustaining full time work. Working with his Work Choice advisor, Stephen McGuire, Paul experienced a boost in his confidence while guided by Shaw Trust. Most significantly, Paul was given invaluable support to realise his potential and land his dream job as a dance instructor.

Paul, who has downs syndrome, was offered a placement funded by Shaw Trust as a dance “After completing a six month Routes to class assistant at dance company Indepen- Sustainable Employment placement, Indepen- Dance. The placement opportunity was funded dance was able to sustain Paul’s position as by Shaw Trust’s RiSE project. a dance class assistant. Stephen at Shaw Trust has been very supportive in making At the end of Paul’s RiSE contract, Paul was Paul’s journey into our organisation possible, taken on as a full-time member of staff. This considering both the needs of our third sector proved to be great news for Paul and his family, organisation and Paul’s’. with Paul praising Karen Andersen – Director of Indepen-Dance and Shaw Trust for helping him, “We continue to work with Shaw Trust and others, to take full control of their lives and to support more people into sustainable turn their dreams into realities. employment. It’s been a pleasure working with Shaw Trust.” “Shaw Trust and Karen helped me a lot,” Paul said.

Sharing Paul’s delight, Karen also added: “Initially, Paul attended our core programme of weekly creative involvement classes and training courses. Paul expressed his desire to be part of our inclusive teaching team and was able to realise this with the support of Shaw Trust.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 31 Chapter 4 Identifying the key elements of a future specialist disability employment programme: results of customer and staff focus groups and employer interviews Chapter 4

In addition to evaluating the views of our Many of the features supported the views of industry peers and partners through the the organisations responding to Shaw Trust’s Making Work a Real Choice consultation, Making Work a Real Choice consultation. Shaw Trust commissioned Inclusion to conduct focus groups with Work Choice staff i) Personally tailored and flexible delivery: and customers, and to conduct in-depth The customers participating in the focus interviews with employers. The purpose of groups strongly felt that they had received a the staff and customer focus groups was to personally tailored service throughout Work explore which current features of Work Choice Choice delivery. Customers stated that staff delivery should be used to shape the delivery took the time to understand how their disability, of a future specialist disability employment health problem or impairment impacted on their programme, as well as highlighting any areas daily lives, and had worked collaboratively with where further development work may be them to produce a development plan tailored to needed. As the interim Making Work a Real their needs. Customers also emphasised that Choice report only considered the views of a the flexible and ‘friendly’ interaction they had small number of employers, the purpose of the with staff helped to build their confidence and employer interviews for this final report was motivation. Finally, many customers praised to build on our initial findings and to identify Shaw Trust for employing delivery staff who what additional support employers themselves have a disability or experience of managing perceive that they need to increase the a health problem, as this has increased employment of people with disabilities, health staff members’ understanding of the barriers problems and impairments in their workforce. customers face to employment. Customers therefore identified receiving a highly a) Staff and customer focus groups personalised package of employability support as a critical success factor in progressing into Inclusion’s researchers conducted three employment. customer focus groups involving the participation of twenty seventy Work Choice customers. The majority of customers were currently participating in Module One, however, “They understood the problem from the start… a quarter of the customers were in work or on a The two advisers here embraced it… it’s settled work trial. Three staff focus groups, attended me down and it’s focused me. Everybody is by 26 staff from both Shaw Trust and supply classed as an individual.” chain partners, were conducted, in addition to three supplementary staff interviews to “Every member of Shaw Trust, they never see ensure that the research involved participants themselves as above you. Every member of staff from across England, Scotland and Wales. 29 has either got a disability or has been in our staff participated in the research in total. boat, and that’s why they understand us. They’re not being patronising, they do understand.” Recommended approaches to the delivery of a future specialist disability employment programme Staff and customers participating in the focus groups and interviews identified a number of key features that should underpin any future specialist disability employment programme.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 33 Chapter 4

Similarly, staff delivering Work Choice also felt support. Although staff and customers that they delivered a personally-tailored service. acknowledged some customers are able to Staff commented that there was no one stand- quickly find and sustain employment, both alone intervention that acted as a ‘silver bullet’ sets of focus group participants felt that an in supporting people with disabilities, health increased length of pre-employment support problems and impairments into employment. would ensure that more people with disabilities, Rather, a flexible and tailored approach from health problems and impairments would be the referral stage right through to the in-work able to find and sustain work. One customer support delivered was the essential ingredient commented: to delivering successful disability employment support. “Six months does seem a bit of a short time. At least if it was 9-12 months you could get “One size fits all doesn’t work, it needs to most of a year in and you would have more of be individualised and that’s the key for us a chance.” going forward. We need to have flexibility and adaptability and each organisation needs to look at their staff skills set. If you want to be Other customers highlighted that the successful, that’s what you have to do.” government should take into account how seasonal factors affect customers’ abilities to “We obviously have targets to reach but we’ll find work into the duration of the programme. only reach those targets if we consider each person and their values and do an individual In addition, staff highlighted that by extending learning plan and development plan.” the duration of pre-employment support, customers with more complex disabilities Staff also noted how this flexibility extends to would be able to find and sustain employment. the activities delivered to support customers with complex needs into work, which often go “Some people need, you do need extra time beyond delivering a package of employability and training and extra support and you can’t support: fit it into six months. That’s why sometimes, sustainable employment can’t be reached.”

“People don’t often come to you with just a Staff recommended that a future programme health condition. Quite often they’ve been should offer support for up to two years, as on benefits for a really long time... So you’re is the case with the current Work Programme helping things with people that are not to do contracts. However, there is little evidence with the health condition, but without that to date regarding how effective the extended they wouldn’t get into work.” period of employment support has been on the Work Programme. This is as only customers The continued delivery of a flexible package commencing on the Work Programme between of support personally tailored to the needs June and August 2011 would have reached of each individual should therefore remain a the full two years on the programme from June crucial element of a future specialist disability 2013. A clear picture of whether customers employment programme. continue to enter employment in the latter stages of a two-year period of pre-employment ii) Longer duration of pre-employment support can only be painted once further support: Like the consultation respondents, performance data is collected over the next both staff and customers felt six months was twelve to eighteen months. too short a time to receive pre-employment

Making Work a Real Choice final report 34 Chapter 4

iii) Payment structure: Both staff and iv) Alternative claims and verification customers had interesting views regarding a system: Finally, staff members echoed revised payment structure for a future specialist consultation respondents’ views of that an disability employment programme. Some staff automated job outcome claims and verification stated that the current split between the service system would be needed in any future contract. fee and job outcome rate enabled them to Staff expressed frustration that they lose time keep relatively lower caseloads and deliver a from delivering frontline support to collecting personalised programme of support. However, job outcome evidencing paperwork. customers highlighted concerns that by placing financial and performance targets on contract “A new scheme would need to include a delivery, they could feel pressured into taking different way of auditing, where there is more an inappropriate job. One commented: time with your client than with your computer.” “When you compare it to something like the “If Shaw Trust is paid on productivity it Work Programme, whose compliance and does put pressure on clients.” verification is really quite simple… it seems to me a system that’s far too complicated, and it’s not beneficial to anyone.” Alternatively, some staff felt the payment structure could be changed to measure and incentivise ‘milestone outcomes’ alongside job The demand for alternative approaches outcomes. Some staff were concerned that the progressions some customers with complex Shaw Trust was also interested in participants’ needs made towards achieving sustained work views on if and how a specialist disability were not acknowledged by the current payment employment programme could be joined structure on Work Choice. This could lead to up to health and social care support. This negative behaviours. For example, staff felt that included asking customers about their views by specifying that a job outcome could only be on using personal budgets to purchase their achieved by securing work for at least sixteen employability support. In our interim report, hours a week, employment opportunities of Shaw Trust was surprised that only 28 per cent fewer hours were not always being considered. of survey respondents wanted more choice and Overall, staff agreed with the consultation control over their employability support. We respondents that a distance-travelled payment wanted to further explore the reasons behind model would enhance their abilities to achieve this hesitancy, to enable us to evaluate what positive outcomes for every single customer on role, if any, personal budgets should have in a specialist disability employment programme: the delivery of a future specialist disability employment programme.

“We have an example of one client who is not going to be work-ready. We have an end goal for him. He has been on the programme and he has come so far, and he is going to leave the programme achieving his own goals. But they aren’t going to be a job outcome. It’s such a shame that the work being done with him is not going to be recognised. So if there was some softer outcome recognition for people like this, that would be great.”

Making Work a Real Choice final report 35 Chapter 4

Firstly, both staff and customers took a comprehensive employment support for people cautious view to how a future specialist with disabilities available in some areas and disability employment programme could not others. Customers additionally expressed be integrated with health and social care concerns that joint working could lead to their support. Staff members were positive about confidential information being shared without the benefits of closer partnership working with their consent. the health and social care support delivered by local authorities, the NHS and community Secondly, customers participating in services such as community mental health this final set of focus groups were also teams. Staff felt closer partnership working hesitant about the concept of personal would generate more referrals to a future budgets. Customers stated that they liked specialist disability employment programme, the way they received their employability allowing them to help a greater number of support currently, as they can access all of people. There was also an appetite for a future the advice and support they need to move programme to enable customers to self-refer back into work directly from one place – their to provision. Staff felt joint working would help Work Choice providers’ delivery centre. They deliver a seamless service to customers and expressed concerns that using a personal prevent delays in helping customers to access budget to choose their own back-to-work health-related support. support would be complicated, and would result in employability support becoming more difficult to access. Customers also felt the “We get lots of [people with] mental health experience would be stressful, and could lead issues and then, when you have to refer to individuals being harassed by providers them to a third party it takes a lot of effort to encourage them to purchase their specific and time. Sometimes it is difficult to get back-to-work programmes: them appointments. If we had close links these time barriers would be broken down.” “You don’t want to go shopping for it.”

“Having direct referral routes to get

access to health and social care service “If you have got issues or you’re unemployed

would allow for a more fluid process for that’s the last thing you want to deal with as

the customer.” well. It is better to go to one place, see one adviser, and then get them to decide.”

“Everyone is going to be fighting for your However, staff emphasised that a future money.” specialist disability employment programme should not be co-commissioned between DWP

and local authorities. Staff expressed concerns With the recent evaluation of the Right to that this could lead to a ‘ ’ de-investment Control Trailblazers for the Office of Disability financially in service delivery, as it could Issues also concluding that to date, there is not lead to an overall reduction in the range of “any evidence of the Right to Control having a disability employment programmes available significant positive impact on customers, both to people with disabilities, health problems and overall and by subgroup”23, the role of impairments. Staff were also concerned that

a movement to locally commissioned delivery could lead to a ‘ ’, with postcode lottery 23 Tu et al (July 2013), Evaluation of the Right to Control Trailblazers: Synthesis Report, pg 3

Making Work a Real Choice final report 36 Chapter 4

personal budgets in the delivery of a future processes and concerns regarding the disability employment programme needs to be feasibility and affordability of making carefully considered. Together with the findings adjustments as the key reasons why they had from the Right to Control evaluation, Making not adapted their recruitment processes to Work a Real Choice has highlighted a lack of date. evidence and appetite from customers, staff, industry peers and partners and academic “I have never thought about it before… if research for a personal budgets based someone did apply I would go to my line approach to the delivery of employability manager or HR department, but I have never support. had to think about it.”

b) Employers’ experiences of recruiting “We are tied into a lease on an industrial estate and employing people with disabilities, that is not very accessible for those with physical disabilities. Even though it is just one health problems and impairments step, it would be a difficult job to convince the 17 in-depth thirty-minute interviews were landlord to provide a lift.” conducted with employers. The employers Those employers with experience of adapting interviewed were from different areas of their recruitment processes were typically the country, industries and had differing from a voluntary sector background. These experiences in employing people with employers cited using a work trial instead of a disabilities, health problems and impairments. paper- or interview-based application process Some employers had no experience of as being crucial to increasing the accessibility employing disabled people, others a wealth of their recruitment processes. Additionally, of expertise in this field. The employers employers had made changes to language and interviewed ranged in size from being micro- formats of their application forms. businesses with fewer than five employees to being a large employer employing more than Employers were then asked about their 250 members of staff. experiences of employing people with disabilities, health problems and impairments. i) Current experiences of employing people There were many positive examples given of with disabilities, health problems and how employers had adapted their workplaces impairments and working practices to provide tailored Firstly, employers were asked what experiences support to their disabled employees. Some they had of making special provisions during employers had set up buddying and mentoring their recruitment processes for people with schemes in their workplaces to provide disabilities, health problems and impairments. additional support to their new disabled The results were surprising, with the majority employees from longer serving members of of employers – even those with significant staff. Others had made physical adjustments experience of employing disabled people to their workplace, hired British Sign Language – having little experience of increasing the translators to help their deaf employees accessibility of their recruitment processes communicate more effectively with other for people with disabilities, health problems members of staff, and flexibly adapted their and impairments. Employers cited a lack of working hours to the needs of their employees. knowledge of how to adjust their recruitment

Making Work a Real Choice final report 37 Chapter 4

One employer had changed its business model impairments had helped to demonstrate their to use the strength of its disabled employees. commitment to equality and diversity, and A security company recruited a number of demonstrated to their local communities that disabled people who other local employers they were socially responsible employers: were reluctant to hire. The employer then employed these individuals to work short shifts “[Our experience of employing disabled around their healthcare needs. The recruitment people] is going to be a massive part of our of these additional staff led to the employer upcoming audit. All of our approved contractor taking on a new set of contracts. The employer services will be audited and we are looking to commented that recruiting this set of disabled get recognition for what we are doing… We people had: wanted something to prove that we work in the community as that would help us because “…helped us to turn around our business and people would want to buy from us as we look take on contracts that we wouldn’t have been after the people.” able to. It gives us more staff and made us more competitive.” However, employers with little experience of employing people with disabilities, health Employers also stated that using the financial problems and impairments demonstrated a support offered by Access to Work was crucial number of negative misconceptions regarding to helping them to adjust their workplaces. the nature of those issues and the challenges that employing a disabled person would bring Employers with experience of employing to their workforce. These employers tended to people with disabilities, health problems and equate ‘disability’ with physical disabilities only, impairments were also positive about the and perceived that an individual’s disability benefits their disabled employees brought would prevent them from undertaking a number to their businesses. Employers valued the of job roles: different strengths their disabled employees offered their businesses, as well as the strong “In the café environment I have never seen a work ethic and commitment their disabled person with disabilities working there. I can’t employees brought to their jobs: imagine that they would be able to cope with the demands.” “The one person who we have in the kitchen I wouldn’t class as any different. He is hard Other employers emphasised they would working and we haven’t had to make any not be able to make the required physical adjustments. He is a real asset, a good adaptations to their workplaces if they were worker, he does a good job.” to employ people with disabilities, health problems and impairments, or meet their legal “[An employee] has difficulties with learning. health and safety duties. Finally, one employer So everything he does is very slow but in terms stated they perceived the cost of employing of hospitality it can be good because he has an individual with a disability to be so high, time and he talks to people. We are so quick the only way they would consider increasing and we don’t spend time with the customers. the number of people working for them was But he does and he talks to people and they if disabled people would be willing to work appreciate it.” for free. Such a negative and challenging attitude suggests that if we are to increase the Other employers commented that employing employment rate of people with disabilities, people with disabilities, health problems and health problems and impairments in the UK a

Making Work a Real Choice final report 38 Chapter 4

significant culture change in both employer people with disabilities, health problems and and wider societal perceptions of disability impairments. The government is already is desperately needed. doing a lot of work through their Disability Confident campaign to market the support ii) What additional support can be offered available to disabled employees, and this to employers to increase their capability should be strengthened further through the to employ people with disabilities, health work of providers, industry trade bodies, and problems and impairments? employers themselves.

The employers interviewed demonstrated a Employers with experience of engaging diversity of views regarding what support would with Work Choice and Shaw Trust were be most useful in encouraging them to employ complimentary about the support they more people with disabilities, health problems had received throughout the recruitment and impairments. However, one common process and their employment of people with theme conveyed by the majority of employers disabilities, health problems and impairments. was the need for more information regarding Employers were very positive about using work the services and support available to them. trials as a key way of recruiting people with Although some of the employers had used disabilities, health problems and impairments, Access to Work and Work Choice services, the as it gives the employer and the employee the employers tended to initially equate the service opportunity to evaluate whether the role is right they had received with the provider delivering for them. They also welcomed the advice and the service. Many employers were unaware support offered by Shaw Trust and other Work that these nationwide programmes dedicated Choice providers in helping them to understand to helping employers recruit and support how a customer’s disability, health problem and disabled employees were in place. Employers impairment impacts on their daily lives. Lastly, were equally unaware of the information on the employers interviewed were also positive websites like www.gov.uk, which provide about the support offered to both themselves a comprehensive overview of the support and their employees through Work Choice. available to employers to recruit people with They welcomed having an adviser they can disabilities, health problems and impairments: call and ask questions to and the help offered applying for financial support from Access to Work, as well as support to adjust other “It would be useful if there was information elements of their working practices. Employers in a government handbook that the commented: Government could distribute to employers. Because at moment, say if someone can’t get to work on the bus – is there some form “If I need anything, like if an employee of support? How do we get hold of them or doesn’t have any money, and I can ring to receive money for a taxi to work? There them up and say ‘they are really struggling, are probably a lot of small things out there what support can you offer them?’ and they at the moment we don’t know about that organise taxis and stuff like that. They have could make a difference to us.” been there for me and if I pick the phone up they will come straight away. But to be honest, I don’t often have problems, but I Actively marketing the existing support have the number there just if I need it.” available to employers could, therefore, make a significant impact in changing employers’ perceptions of their own capabilities to employ

Making Work a Real Choice final report 39 Chapter 4

“If I have a guy who hasn’t turned up for work, I can ring them and find out what is wrong. They could be genuinely ill or sometimes they need some prompting; then Shaw Trust will just be there to sort that out.”

The bespoke recruitment and in-work support offered by Work Choice is therefore a crucial element in helping employers to employ more people with disabilities, health problems and impairments.

Finally, interviewees identified a range of other ways they could be encouraged to employ more people with disabilities. Some employers wanted access to wage incentives to help cover the transitional costs of employing people with disabilities. Other employers were satisfied with the financial support received through schemes like Access to Work. However, they wanted to see the paperwork simplified as the existing bureaucracy proved extremely time-consuming for smaller employers to complete. This could potentially be addressed as part of the Cabinet Office’s red tape challenge proposals. 24Lastly, some of the larger employers highlighted that their local managers need convincing of the business benefits of employing people with disabilities, health problems and impairments. In a time of austerity, they reported that area managers were unwilling to make any changes to local working arrangements that could potentially prove costly. This last suggestion supports the view that a wider culture change is needed to address the low employment rate in the UK of people with disabilities, health problems and impairments.

24 http://www.redtapechallenge.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/category/news- updates/

Making Work a Real Choice final report 40 Chapter 4 Work Choice case study

Damien Lewis Damian, 23, from Somerset has successfully found work with the help of our Work Choice staff in Taunton

Damian, who has Asperger syndrome, lives in a very rural part of the country where opportunities are limited. Damian also finds using public transport hard which has meant that he has been out of work for over a year. Unemployed for about 13 months and worried about the future, he joined Work Choice last year.

Guided by Shaw Trust’s Work Choice office in Taunton, Damian was given extra support to enable him to use public transport, and he was eventually placed into work with Sharpak - a local food packaging company.

“Damian has settled in well,” said manager Stephen Gaylor. “He is reliable and completes every task with 100% commitment.”

“Sharpak is a fantastic company,” said Jacqui Markham, Shaw Trust employer account manager. “They really do care about the community and the people that work for them”.

Damian’s confidence has grown, and we are now supporting him to get his moped licence, giving him even more freedom to travel to work. “Damian’s goal is to own his own motorbike,” continued Jacqui. “With our help I feel sure he will achieve this.”

Making Work a Real Choice final report 41 Chapter 5 Conclusions and recommendations: encouraging an evolution in specialist disability employment support Chapter 5 Conclusions and recommendations

In this report Shaw Trust has used the results people with disabilities, health problems of primary evidence-based research with 73 and impairments to move into sustained staff, customers and employers alongside the employment. consultation contributions of 49 industry peers and partners, and academic research from a) Enhancing and extending current both the UK and internationally (detailed in Work Choice delivery annex One) to identify the key recommended features of a future national specialist disability employment programme. Shaw Trust’s initial Making Work a Real Choice report identified a number ofsystemic impacting on the effectiveness From the evidence presented in this report, it is barriers of Work Choice delivery of people with clear that the government’s existing specialist disabilities, health problems and impairments. disability employment programme, Work Through the Making Work a Real Choice Choice, makes a real and positive difference consultation and staff focus groups, Shaw to the lives of customers with disabilities, Trust gauged participants’ opinions on when health problems and impairments, and and how these systemic barriers to current employers offering Work Choice customers job Work Choice delivery could be tackled. opportunities. Not only have 31 per cent 25 of Participants felt that the barriers to delivery, Work Choice customers secured supported many of which are bureaucratic in nature, or unsupported employment as a result of the would be best , to prevent support they have received, but employers tackled in stages existing contract delivery being adversely interviewed with experience of using Work affected. Choice felt they would not have been able to employ an individual with a disability, health problem or impairment without the support Participants also acknowledged that by offered by Work Choice providers.Therefore, designing a future specialist disability any future specialist disability employment employment programme in tandem to the programme implemented post-2015 needs successor contract to the Work Programme, to build on the best practice from current policy inconsistencies between the two delivery and deliver an enhanced version programmes could be addressed. However, of Work Choice support, rather than reinvent participants emphasised that future specialist the scope and format of national disability and mainstream back-to-work programmes employment support. should be procured and implemented separately and at different intervals to ensure providers had sufficient capacity to deliver However, it is important to note that the high quality services while bidding for new recommendations made in this report contracts. are only the beginning of designing and implementing a future specialist disability employment programme. There is a need for further innovative approaches to be developed, evaluated and shared widely amongst customers, trade bodies and user led organisations, providers, policy makers and employers. The sharing and implementation of such best practice will enable more 25https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for- work-pensions/series/work-choice-statistics-number-of-starts-and- referrals--2 . The statistic was taken from the August 2013 data release.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 43 Chapter 5 Conclusions and recommendations

Recommendations

1. The eligibility criteria identifying which that the programmes will need to be individuals are most suited to Work procured separately to ensure the industry Choice and the Work Programme should – at both prime and subcontractor level – be immediately clarified. In addition, has enough resource to bid effectively for DWP should clarify, as part of this review, the contracts and offer the best possible which individuals would be best suited to options to government. participating in their specialist disability employment support at a residential training college. All Jobcentre Plus staff should be trained to understand how they can refer b) Key features of a new specialist customers to each programme, and cross- disability employment programme referral between each programme should be simplified. This would help to ensure Our research highlighted that a future the right customers are accessing the right disability employment programme programme at the right time. should build on existing best practice,

2. DWP should tackle the systemic gained through the delivery of existing programmes like Work Choice, legacy barriers to delivery in the design of future specialist disability employment. programmes such as WORKSTEP, and by using identified best practice – such as Shaw Trust recommends that removing the referral cap, extending the duration the Supported Employment model – from academic research and alternative disability of Module One, and implementing an automated job outcomes claims and employment programmes. The evidence Shaw Trust has collated suggests that an verification process, similar to the current Work Programme system, as part of the enhanced model of Work Choice could be implemented, involving: design and delivery of a future specialist disability employment contract. • a simple triage assessment of

3. Work Choice contracts should be customers’ employability and holistic

extended to enable a new specialist needs to ensure they are directed to the

disability employment programme to be most appropriate employment support

designed in parallel with the successor programme

contract to the Work Programme.

However, a new specialist disability • an extended period of pre-employment

employment programme should be support to ensure customers with the

procured and implemented at a different most severe barriers to work can continue

time to a future mainstream programme. to receive support to help them enter and This would ensure both programmes would sustain work effectively complement each other from the start of contract delivery, and would enable • continued in work support for up to consistent and equitable policy decisions two years, albeit with the intensity of the to be made to benefit both programmes. support available tailored completely to However, it is important to acknowledge the needs of customers and employers

Making Work a Real Choice final report 44 Chapter 5 Conclusions and recommendations

• an innovative new funding model a proportion of their own referrals for a based on distance-travelled payments new programme. This not only would open to incentivise providers to work with up access to the provision, but would also customers furthest from the labour encourage providers to engage and work market, and with individuals with the most complex needs and disabilities. Providers could also • the implementation of a new external work with young people leaving school and quality inspection to ensure every wanting to work to help facilitate a smooth customer on a future specialist disability transition into their first sustainable job. employment programmes receives the Future customers should also be able to highest quality service possible. self-refer to the programme. This would help to facilitate individual choice over when and This quality assessment could be who they would like to deliver their back-to- complementary to the current DWP Merlin work support package, which would in turn inspection by focusing on both customer drive up the quality of providers’ services. and employer experience of Work Choice Jobcentre Plus could still provide an eligibility delivery, and should be shaped by direct check for each customer to ensure providers feedback from both parties. The performance were complying with the eligibility criteria for of each contract and the accessibility of the the programme. A potential referral process provision for people with disabilities, health for a new specialist disability employment problems and impairments should also be programme can be found in Figure Two evaluated as part of this inspection. The below. inspection could be funded by providers, as is the case with the current Merlin inspection and other complementary inspections such as the ISO27001 inspection, to maximise Figure Two: Referral to specialist disability value for money for the government. employment support

A future programme should also remain voluntary for customers to ensure those facing challenging health problems can Provider marketing and engagement Claim Universal Credit from Jobcentre of community partners and individuals Plus due to being out of work and participate in back-to-work support at with disabilities, health problems and having a disability, health problem or the most suitable time for them. It would impairments impairment also ensure individuals needing to stop Individual is not Individual is Jobcentre Plus conducts triage participating in the programme due to the claiming the out of claiming the out of assessment to determine the most work element of work element of appropriate back to work support changing nature of their health conditions Universal Credit Universal Credit programme would be able to do so without their benefits

being affected. Referral from A need for specialist disability statutory referral employment support (on a non- Self-referral organisations and residential basis is identified) leading To encourage individuals who are not in community partners to Jobcentre Plus contact with Jobcentre Plus to engage with a future specialist disability employment New specialist disability employment programme programme, including individuals in contact with statutory referral organisations, providers should be required to recruit

Making Work a Real Choice final report 45 Chapter 5 Conclusions and recommendations

Recommendations The current duration of in-work support of two years for customers entering 4. A new specialist disability employment unsupported employment, and longer for programme should remain voluntary those in supported employment, should in nature. To expand the reach of the remain. programme to ensure those with the most complex needs are able to access 7. A new specialist disability employment provision, the referral routes to the programme should adopt an innovative programme should also be opened up. new payment structure that financially Providers should be able to actively recruit rewards providers for supporting a proportion of customers from a range of customers to achieve progression referral sources such as GPs’ surgeries, milestones. Due to the complex nature community mental health teams and local of many current Work Choice customers’ authority provision, alongside receiving disabilities, health problems or impairments, referrals from Jobcentre Plus. Customers it may take a considerable amount of should also be given the opportunity to self- time before a customer enters sustained refer to the programme. work. To ensure providers work with those furthest from the labour market, they 5. A triage assessment tool needs to be should be financially incentivised to support introduced for Jobcentre Plus staff customers to achieve distance-travelled to holistically assess the needs of milestones tailored to their individual customers with disabilities, health needs. At the pre-employment stage this problems and impairments. This would could involve undertaking a qualification enable Jobcentre Plus staff to identify or participating in a work trial or work which back-to-work programme is the most experience. Progression payments should appropriate for each customer. Jobcentre also be introduced for customers entering Plus should build a framework of support work. In particular, customers could be programmes they can refer to, including encouraged to build up the number of mainstream and specialist disability hours they work over time. The gradual employment support, residential training build-up of working hours and the removal colleges and local authority provision. The of the ’16-hour rule’ for a job outcome introduction of Universal Credit provides would complement DWP’s Universal the ideal opportunity for Jobcentre Plus to Credit reforms aimed at making work pay. review how customers are referred to back- Providers could also receive distance- to-work support. Providers should continue travelled payments at job entry, and job to enhance their own assessment tools, sustainment for 13, 26 and 52 weeks (and ensuring they work collaboratively with longer) to help customers remain in work. partners such as community mental health A high level of service fee (relative to teams to develop truly personalised support mainstream programmes) should also be plans for each customer. retained to ensure lower staff-to-customer caseloads can be maintained. 6. A new specialist disability employment programme should offer pre-employment 8. An independent external quality support for a longer period of time. inspection should be introduced to Based on the findings of this report, evaluate the quality of any future specialist customers, staff and our industry partners disability employment programme. and peers recommend that support is Feedback from customers using the delivered for a minimum of twelve months.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 46 Chapter 5 Conclusions and recommendations

services, as well as |supply chain Recommendations members and employers, should feature in any evaluation of programme quality. 9. A national marketing campaign Consideration needs to be given to how any advertising the support available to new quality inspection complements the employers wanting to employ people Merlin Standard. with disabilities, health problems and impairments should be progressed. DWP and providers of Work Choice, Access to Work, residential training Support for employers colleges and other specialist disability The results of the employer interviews employment support programmes should highlighted there are many positive work together to promote to employers examples of employers successfully the package of support already available employing people with disabilities, health to employers wanting to employ people problems and impairments. Many employers with disabilities. This support includes have made adaptations to their workplaces the materials from the government from and working practice to tailor job roles to the GOV.UK and the Disability Confident needs of their individual employees. Some Campaign, the new Access Ability of the employers interviewed commented website, and the services from providers on how employing people with disabilities, themselves. The benefits of employing health problems and impairments had people with disabilities should also be enhanced their workplaces and their abilities promoted throughout the campaign. If to deliver community-focused services. employers are aware of what support is accessible to them, more employment However, not all employers viewed the opportunities for people with disabilities, employment of people with disabilities, health problems and impairments could health problems and impairments in a be opened up. positive light. Some of the employers interviewed had negative misconceptions 10. A culture-changing campaign aimed of the abilities of disabled people. The at challenging employers’ attitudes employers interviewed – even those with (and those of wider society) towards experience of employing disabled people employing people with disabilities, – also had a lack of awareness of the health problems and impairments support available to them to support their should be introduced. DWP, providers, employment of people with disabilities, trade bodies, user-led organisations and health problems and impairments. employers with positive experiences of employing disabled people should work together to educate employers and society to understand the impact of disability on individual’s lives. Employers should be challenged to focus on people’s abilities and what they can do, rather than what they cannot. People with disabilities, health problems and impairments should work collaboratively with DWP, providers and employers to develop and deliver this campaign.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 47 Chapter 5 Conclusions and recommendations

d) The need for further evidence and pilots publicly. Shaw Trust will initially piloting evaluate and publish the findings from the charity’s Bridging the Gap project in 2014. The independent literature review conducted Shaw Trust is also committed to designing by Inclusion, and found in annex one, future pilots in collaboration with its identifies that there is a rather limited service users and sharing the results of evidence base to show ‘what works’ at a these pilots widely. We also call on our national or scalable level, in supporting industry peers to develop innovative pilots people with disabilities into sustained and share their own delivery best practice employment in the UK. In particular, there is widely. It is only by working collaboratively a lack of consistency in the language used with policymakers, user groups and our to describe different delivery methodologies, industry partners to share delivery best and the achievement of different outcomes practice, and by learning from each other’s renders it difficult to make direct comparisons experiences – both positive and negative between different provisions. There is also – that a future disability programme a lack of evidence to show what works in delivering the best possible outcomes for supporting individuals with different types of people with disabilities, health problems disabilities into work. and impairments can be developed.

Recommendations Through Making Work a Real Choice, Shaw Trust has worked with 539 customers, staff, 11. DWP should rigorously evaluate the employers and stakeholders to make the case effectiveness of the delivery methods for retaining a specialist disability employment used in any new specialist disability programme post-2015. Our research employment programme, so it can has identified the foundations on which clearly identify ‘what works for whom’ and a future specialist disability employment commission future programmes based programme should be built, in addition to on this evidence. Future evaluations ways in which current provision can be should assess the effectiveness of enhanced. Fundamentally, however, it is only different delivery models, both in terms by providers, employers and policymakers of generating employment outcomes, working in partnership with our customers achieving contractual milestones and who use specialist disability employment delivering a positive experience for services to tailor programme delivery that customers. The evaluations should also a future specialist disability employment assess the effectiveness of support programme can tangibly contribute to for customers with a range of different raising the employment rate of people with disabilities, health problems and disabilities, health problems and impairments impairments to ensure a future disability in the UK. employment support programme addresses the needs of every single customer.

12. Shaw Trust will commit to expanding the ‘what works’ evidence base by piloting, evaluating and sharing the results from the delivery of innovative

Making Work a Real Choice final report 48 Annexes Annex One: An independent chapter by Inclusion

robust quantification of employment outcomes and the cost/benefit analysis of many interventions27. This latter issue has, in part, been linked to the fragmentation of support ‘What works’ to support disabled people, across multiple agencies and programmes and and those with health conditions, into which makes it difficult to plan, design and sustained work? evaluate interventions28.

An independent literature review a) Evidence on ‘what works’ researched and written by Inclusion Despite these challenges there are many useful sources of evidence on the interventions used In order to support the research and to support disabled people into sustained consultation process carried out as part of work. A DWP report, which reviewed evidence ‘Making Work a Real Choice’ a short review from the evaluations of previous programmes, of the evidence on ‘what works’ in supporting aimed to identify what works for particular disabled people, and those with health groups of participants29. This review noted conditions, into sustained work has been the heterogeneous nature of disability and the carried out. This review primarily focused wide range of issues disabled people face in on practice within European Union (EU) and entering and retaining work. Linked to this, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and report noted that personalisation of service Development (OECD) countries. In addition to delivery (so it meets the specific needs of drawing out lessons for delivery, it raises some individuals) was seen as crucial by providers key issues for commissioners and providers and valued by participants. In particular, of employment related services about the provider staff noted the importance of having future shape of commissioning models and adequate time to spend with participants developing service quality. and the opportunity to tailor services to meet individual need as key factors in moving 1) The evidence base disabled people towards work. A review of lessons from the United States (US) carried out When reviewing the evidence a number of for DWP30 also reported that initiatives that had key constraints to clearly identifying ‘what the largest positive impacts on employment for works’ should be noted. Firstly there is a this group generally offered more intensive and lack of consistency in the definitions used to personalised services. categorise participants, support models or methods of service delivery and programme 26Wilkins, A., Love, B., Greig, R. and Bowers, H. (2012) Economic outcomes. For example, a recent review of Evidence Around Employment Support. National Development Team the economic evidence around employment for Inclusion / School for Social Care Research, National Institute for support for disabled people26 found definitions Health Research. 27Dibden, P et al, (2012) Quantifying effectiveness of interventions for of some models of service delivery were People with common health conditions in enabling them to stay in or subject to liberal interpretation, making return to work: A rapid evidence assessment DWP research report 812 comparisons difficult. 28Wittenburg, D et al, (2013) The disability System and programs to promote employment for people with disabilities IZA Journal of Labor Policy 2:4 In addition to these issues of definition, there 29Hasluck, C. and Green, A. (2007) What works for whom? A review of are more general concerns about the way evidence and meta-analysis for the Department for Work and Pensions. some research evidence has been formulated, Department for Work and Pensions Research Report No. 407. 30Rangarajan, A, et al, (2008) Programmes to Promote employment for with an overall view that there is a lack of disabled people: Lessons from the United States, Department for Work and Pensions Research Report 548

Making Work a Real Choice final report 50 Annex One: An independent chapter by Inclusion

Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest and recommended a single specialist disability generalist programmes do not work well employment programme to run alongside for disabled people. A Disability Charities mainstream provision. On the basis of this and Consortium report31 on employment support the findings noted above, the Work Choice for disabled people highlighted that Work evaluation recommended that DWP continue Programme performance for disabled to fund and develop specialist disability people has been disappointing. The Work employment support as a separate specialist and Pensions Committee inquiry into the area of provision. Work Programme, which considered its effectiveness for different groups of jobseekers Some of the most recent evidence on including disabled people32, also noted that employment-focused interventions within the the programme appeared not to be reaching US disability system37 has also noted that this group. This finding was supported by an interventions with a broad focus do not work analysis of the Work Programme performance as well as those where support is individually statistics, released in June 2013 and carried customised. This paper reviewed a number out by Inclusion33, which noted a performance of evaluations of supported employment of 5.3 per cent against a minimum performance interventions which offer robust evidence level of 16.5 per cent for the new Employment that the Supported Employment38 model, Support Allowance (ESA) claimant group. which includes the Individual Placement and Support (IPS) approach, offered a Research carried out as part of the DWP Work significant positive impact on participant Choice evaluation34 offered some comparison employment and earnings. For example, of the support offered to disabled people findings from the Employment Intervention through Work Choice with that offered through Demonstration Programme39 found supported the Work Programme. In general, providers employment participants were more likely to be reported there was less participant contact on competitively employed than those in a control the Work Programme than on Work Choice, group (55 versus 34 per cent). and Work Programme provision was reported to be less personalised to meet individual needs. In addition to this, initial research 31Trotter, R (2013) Work in progress: Rethinking employment support for carried out as part of the evaluation of the disabled people Disability Charities Consortium 35 Work Programme has indicated that many 32House of Commons Work and Pensions Committee (2013) Can the Work Programme work for all user groups? First Report of Session Work Programme providers may be prioritising 2013-14. more ‘job-ready’ participants for support ahead 33http://stats.cesi.org.uk/website_documents/WP_stats_inclusion_ of those who are assessed as having more briefing_June_2013.pdf complex or substantial barriers to employment. 34Purvis, A., et al (2013) Evaluation of the Work Choice Specialist Disability Employment Programme, Department for Work and Pensions Research Report 846 The majority of provider and Jobcentre Plus 35Newton, B., Meager, N., Bertram, C., Corden, A., George, A., Lalani, M., Metcalf, H., Rolfe, H., Sainsbury, R. and Weston, K. (2012) Work staff involved in the Work Choice Evaluation Programme evaluation: Findings from the first phase of qualitative also articulated a strong belief that there research on programme delivery. Department for Work and Pensions Research Report No. 821. was a definite need for a specialist disability 36Sayce, L. (2011) Getting in, staying in and getting on: disability programme alongside mainstream provision. employment support fit for the future. Department for Work and Pensions. This view is in line with the findings of the 2011 37 36 Wittenburg, D et al (2013) Op. Cit. Sayce Review , which identified a clear role 38Also known as the ‘place, train and maintain’ model or job coaching for specialist disability employment support 39Cook, J.A. et al (2008) The Employment Intervention Demonstration Programme: major findings and policy implications. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal 31 (4)

Making Work a Real Choice final report 51 Annex One: An independent chapter by Inclusion

Another study40 reviewed of a number of Employment which are outlined below: randomised controlled trials which have compared the use of Supported Employment Participant engagement: The Supported with ‘train and place’ vocational rehabilitation Employment model recognises the models and reported an average of 61 per cent importance of raising the employment of participants were placed in employment, related expectations of disabled people, compared to 23 per cent in the sites that their families, and relevant education, health followed other approaches. and social care professionals.

b) Supported Employment Vocational profiling: Supported Employment should include a mechanism 41 The Work Choice evaluation reported that the for the identification of the aspirations, use of the Supported Employment approach learning needs, skills, and job preferences is widespread across Europe and in OECD of the participant. This vocational profile countries. It noted that in its broadest sense then informs job searching to ensure a high Supported Employment is described as quality job match is obtained. support for disabled people in obtaining and maintaining paid employment in the open Job matching: The accuracy of job labour market42. Supportive measures noted as matching should ensure the long- good practice within European models include term suitability of employment. Once assistance to the participant before, during, an employer’s commitment to offering and after obtaining a job, as well as support to work is secured, a job analysis is usually the employer. undertaken. This may suggest ways of carving together parts of job descriptions More clearly defined models of Supported that suit a participant’s talents and are cost- Employment are also found within Europe and effective for the employer. in the US, where the model was developed. These approaches offer the most robust Employer engagement: is seen as a key evidence on the impact of the model43. Within element, where employers are partners the the European context, the European Union provider has an ongoing relationship with. It for Supported Employment (EUSE) has can help to overcome traditional recruitment developed a best practice model of Supported barriers through the use of working Employment which is supported by quality interviews, and recognises that most people standards and a number of ‘how to’ guides and learn skills better in situ, adopting a ‘place toolkits44. This model, which is also endorsed and train’ approach. by BASE, offers a framework previously used by government to define and agree standards for Supported Employment in England. The Valuing Employment Now (VEN) policy paper 40 Bond, G.R., Drake, R.E., Becker, D.R., et al (2008) An update on 45 randomised controlled trails of evidence-based supported employment. on Supported Employment described the Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 31 model as ‘a well evidenced, personalised 41Purvis et al, (2013) Op. cit. approach to working with people with 42 European Commission (2011) Supported Employment for people with disabilities in the EU and EFTA-EEA: good practices and considerable disabilities to access and retain recommendations in support of a flexicurity approach. employment, with support’. The VEN paper 43 Beyer, S. and Robinson, C. (2009), Wittenburg, D et al (2013) Op. Cit. also described the key stages of Supported 44 EUSE http://www.euse.org/process 45 HM Government (2010) Valuing Employment Now: Job Coaching or Supported Employment- Approach and Progress in Developing Standards. HM Government.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 52 Annex One: An independent chapter by Inclusion

In-work support: Vocational profiling and delivery of personalised and flexible support job analysis should ensure in-work support and facilitated accurate job matching was is individually tailored. Where appropriate, also seen as key. Adopting a place then this support may include specialist elements train approach which included work-based such as systematic instruction46, alongside interventions such as placements and work the development of natural supports in the trials (in place of more traditional interviews) workplace. Providers should also ensure was reported to be very beneficial. goals are agreed and progress recorded, and that ongoing training takes place and In-work support: While there were no specific offer out-of-work support if needed. reports of job analysis or job carving many providers referred to advising on workplace The Work Choice evaluation47 noted that the adjustments as part of flexible and tailored core elements of Supported Employment in-work support. This usually involved input described above are also found in related from the employer and appeared to work well. models of employment support developed to support particular groups of disabled people. Successfully engaging with and supporting For example, the IPS model, which has been employers was also seen as vital, and found to be successful for supporting people maintaining the continuity of existing with mental health conditions into work48 , relationships by having contact and support and Project SEARCH supported internships, delivered by someone known to the participant which support young people with a learning and the employer was also seen as a key factor disability in their transition from education for effective delivery. into employment49. One study of IPS50 found participants were twice as likely to gain For both pre-work and in-work support, many employment compared with more traditional providers also described the need to offer a alternatives (55 per cent compared to 28 per holistic service which considered the wide cent.) range of factors which may have an impact on employment. Thus, in addition to health The Work Choice evaluation also explored and disability-related barriers, issues such evidence of best practice within programme as personal finances and housing should be delivery. It noted that many elements of delivery considered and addressed. which providers identified as contributing to good performance align with the Supported Employment model and these are outlined below. 46 Systematic instruction is a particular method of job coaching that supports disabled people in the workplace, and it is felt to be a Pre-work support: Regular one-to-one particularly useful approach for those with a learning disability. support from an adviser was reported to build 47 Purvis et al, (2013) Op. cit. participants’ confidence and motivation, with 48 Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health (2009) Doing what works, many staff notingparticipant motivation as a Individual placement and support into employment. Briefing 37. key factor in achieving successful outcomes. 49 Purvis, A., Small, L., Lowrey, J., Whitehurst, D. and Davies, M. (2012) Project SEARCH Evaluation: Final Report. Office for Disability Issues. Development planning which facilitated the 50 Burns, T., Catty, J., Becker, T. et al (2007) The effectiveness of supported employment for people with severe mental illness: A randomised controlled trial. The Lancet, 370

Making Work a Real Choice final report 53 Annex One: An independent chapter by Inclusion

Employer engagement: Wider employer An exploration of financial support to engagement which includes a knowledge employers within Work Choice54 did not appear of the local labour market was regarded as to offer any clear evidence on the effectiveness crucial by providers in terms of their ability of this approach. Many providers reported a to source and secure job opportunities for move away from their use, in particular the participants. There were clear benefits and longer-term subsidies. Some providers did limitations to the approaches to employer report some benefit from using short-term engagement that were identified within the incentives, although this was not universal. evaluation (individually-based and employment Findings from the related review of the Work agency models51) and consideration of a Choice wage incentive for young people were combined use of both approaches was also mixed55. therefore recommended. An OECD review of what works for who56 Within Work Choice there were also two reported that evaluations of active labour elements of support which link back to the market policies in several countries have found historical development of employment support financial support to employers can enhance for disabled people. These are the provision of employment prospects, but tends to have a financial support to employers and employment relatively high deadweight, substitution and in supported businesses. displacement effects (benefiting individuals who would have got jobs anyway or getting c) Financial support to employers people into work at the expense of other workers). For example, the review noted that Many countries, including Britain, have a evaluations of wage subsidies in Australia, history of giving financial support to employers Belgium, Ireland and the Netherlands have to encourage the employment of disabled suggested combined deadweight and people. The terms ‘incentive’ or ‘subsidy’ substitution effects amounting to around ninety are in some cases used interchangeably, per cent, implying that for every hundred jobs although in this discussion ‘incentive’ is used subsidised by these schemes, only ten were to describe a short-term encouragement to net gains in employment. employ someone and address any initial needs. ‘Subsidy’ is an older model of compensating an employer on an ongoing basis for employing a disabled person who is potentially regarded as less productive than other employees. In 51 The WORKSTEP Evaluation (Purvis, A., Lowrey, J. and Dobbs, L. (2006) WORKSTEP evaluation case studies: Exploring the design, Britain there has been a move away from the delivery and performance of the WORKSTEP Programme. Department use of long-term financial subsidies, as they for Work and Pensions Research Report No. 348) described these two approaches to employer engagement. The former focused on finding can become a barrier to progression to open jobs for individual participants based on their individual requirements employment52. In many European countries, and capabilities, and the latter which focused on developing large scale relationships with employers and adopting an employment agency however, these still form a proportion of approach to filling their employment needs. spending on active labour market programmes 52 Purvis, A., Lowrey, J. and Dobbs, L. (2006) Op. Cit. 53 for disabled people . For example, Poland 53 European Commission (2011) Op. Cit. and Denmark provide permanent subsidies, 54Purvis et al, (2013) Op. cit. although in both countries progression to 55 The Work Choice wage incentive for young people was introduced in unsubsidised employment is low. July 2012 and was examined as part of the Work Choice Evaluation. 56 Martin, J and Grubb, D. (2001) What works for whom: a review of OECD countries’ experiences with active labour market policies OECD

Making Work a Real Choice final report 54 Annex One: An independent chapter by Inclusion

d) Supported Businesses and Intermediate with wider programme delivery via an ILM Labour Markets (ILMs) approach, and a recent review exploring ILMs within social enterprises64 noted there is good Supported businesses57 are workplaces evidence they are successful at achieving that have been set up specifically to offer employment goals. This review did, however, employment to disabled people. In some EU note that further research is required to define and OECD countries there have been some and measure their success. moves away from supported business provision 58 towards jobs in the open labour market , and in Britain the supported business model has been criticised on the grounds of creating a 2) An overview of ‘what works’ segregated environment for the employment of Overall, this evidence review supports the need disabled people and low levels of progression to maintain specialist employment support to open employment59. However in European for disabled people and those with health countries such as Germany, Finland and conditions. A summary of the evidence of what Italy, there have been moves to expand this works within this area of specialist employment approach60, suggesting that some support for support is offered below. this approach remains at an international level. The most robust evidence on what works Research on the WORKSTEP programme61 comes from evaluations of the Supported noted a number of positive attributes related Employment (and related IPS) model65. These to the supported business model, such as interventions originate in the US and were high levels of satisfaction reported by their designed to offer support to people with supported employees. This research, along learning disabilities, autism conditions and with the Work Choice evaluation62 also long term mental health conditions. Evidence reported an increasing use of short-term on what works to support people with other contracts within supported businesses as types of impairment or health conditions is part of developing an ILM model. This model less clear66 although there are a number of offers the experience of real work coupled characteristics which have been identified as with additional support to help participants features of effective employment support for move into external employment (usually a disabled people more generally. supported job with the longer-term goal of

open employment).

57Sometimes referred to as sheltered employment 63 In an independent report for DWP Professor 58OECD (2010) Sickness, Disability and Work: Breaking the Barriers: A Paul Gregg noted that the ILM model can Synthesis of Findings across OECD Countries 59 be particularly useful as a means of tackling Sayce, L. (2011) Op. Cit. 60Greve, B. (2009) The Labour Market Situation of Disabled People barriers to employment faced by those in European Countries and Implementation of Employment Policies: furthest from the labour market. His report A summary of evidence from country reports and research studies. Report prepared for the Academic Network of European Disability went on to recommend that providers should experts (ANED), University of Leeds. 61 be encouraged to provide this model as an Purvis, A., Lowrey, J. and Dobbs, L. (2006) Op. Cit. 62Purvis et al, (2013) Op. cit. option for support. The Work Choice Evaluation 63Gregg, P. (2008) Realising Potential: A Vision for Personalised also found positive evidence of the benefits Conditionality and Support, Department for Work and Pensions of integrating existing supported businesses 64Nockolds, D., (2012) Exploring success for intermediate labour market social enterprises. A literature review. Brotherhood of St. Lawrence 65 Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health (2009), Beyer, S. and Robinson, C. (2009), Wittenburg, D et al (2013) Op. Cit., 66 Dibden, P et al, (2012) Op. Cit.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 55 Annex One: An independent chapter by Inclusion

Much of the evidence reviewed here highlights include a focus on achieving an accurate job the need for personalised and intensive match and work-based interventions, such service delivery, an approach based on as the use of work placements, job trials and personal adviser support to participants and ILMs. employers which is supported by an effective development planning process. a) Models of commissioning employment support Key features to the success of this approach are the attributes of personal advisers, although In addition to exploring programme delivery, it does also require adequate capacity and the Work Choice Evaluation70 examined the resources within provider organisations. effect of the DWP commissioning approach71 This is needed to ensure adviser caseloads on specialist disability employment provision. and targets allow them work flexibly, deliver The findings from this research noted some intensive one-to-one support and offer significant tensions between elements of the specialist interventions where required. These commissioning approach and its use within a specialist interventions may be related to specialist disability employment programme. health or disability needs, such as the use In particular, issues related to the position of of systematic instruction or access to sign local authority and smaller specialist providers language interpretation. They may also be (and the services they offer) were felt to require related to addressing other issues which may attention in any review of commissioning72. also present a barrier to employment, such as The research also noted the importance of housing needs. an element of service fees in the funding model for this type of specialist support, and The importance of adviser attributes in terms recommended future funding models should of their skills, commitment and enthusiasm also recognise this. was noted in the DWP review of ‘what works’67. This review also cited the importance An alternative commissioning model proposed of continuity in adviser relationships with in the Sayce Review73 was the use of individual participants, particularly at times of transition. (personal) budgets. The use of individual This latter point was noted in relation to budgets to commission specialist disability adviser relationships with employers and employment support has been subject to some participants in the Work Choice Evaluation68 evaluation and, to date, there is little evidence and the evaluation of WORKSTEP69, which to support their use. The interim report on also attributed the positive outcomes for many the evaluation of Jobs First sites in England74 participants to the commitment of advisers. noted a number of difficulties related to implementation, so little progress on delivery or The focus on employers needs to include in- the assessment of outcomes was possible. work support to individual employers to build their capacity to support disabled employees and wider engagement with employers and 67 Hasluck and Green (2007) Op. Cit. 68 Purvis et al, (2013) Op. cit. local labour markets, to source and secure job 69 Purvis, A., Lowrey, J. and Dobbs, L. (2006) Op. Cit. opportunities. 70 Purvis et al, (2013) Op. cit.

71 DWP 2008 Commissioning Strategy 72 Other key features which appear to support the The DWP has subsequently announced a consultation on their 2013 Commissioning Strategy https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/ delivery of sustainable employment outcomes system/uploads/attachment_data/file/225753/dwp-commissioning- strategy-2013.pdf 73 Sayce, (2011) Op. Cit.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 56 Annex One: An independent chapter by Inclusion

This mirrors findings from a piloted provision in the welfare to work, health, education and of employment support and Access to Work social care settings, funded by local and alongside Individual Budgets75, which reported central government and the charitable sector. implementation difficulties and very low uptake. A number of disability related organisations have therefore suggested the need to consider The early evaluation of the Right to Control local commissioning approaches through Trailblazers, which include Work Choice and collaborative partnerships including social care, Access to Work budgets, described similar health and education agencies81. difficulties76 and reported a number of teething issues. This meant that in some areas or The future role of locally based commissioning funding streams the Right to Control was is therefore important to consider, although it is not being delivered, or not being delivered also an area where evidence is limited. Some of as originally intended. Despite subsequent the pilot initiatives which have used a ‘braided’ progress made in delivering Right to Control, approach to funding support such as Project the recently published Right to Control SEARCH, Jobs First and Right to Control have evaluation77 report found no evidence of it proved to be very complex to implement and having a measurable impact on customers’ difficult to sustain. This suggests that further lives, either in terms of their experiences of development, piloting and evaluation of such accessing services or of their day-to-day approaches may be required to achieve a lives. Fulfilling Potential78 also noted that sustainable and effective model of locally many disabled people experience difficulties based commissioning. managing an individual budget, and a BASE

discussion paper Disability Employment Strategy79 (BASE, 2013) reported evidence of a low desire for individual budgets for employment support among disabled people. Overall, therefore, while there is considerable evidence to support the need for the delivery of personalised services as a key element of successful specialist disability employment provision, there is a lack of evidence to support the use of individual budgets as an effective route for the commissioning of such support. Alongside DWP commissioned programmes there is a wide range of other employment 74 Stevens, M. and Harris, J. (2011) Jobs First Evaluation: Interim support for disabled people currently found Report. London: Social Care Workforce Research Unit Kings College within Britain. A scoping review on the 75 Aston, J. (2009) Evaluation of Access to Work: Individual Budget Pilot economic evidence around employment Strand. Department for Work and Pensions Research Report No. 620 support for disabled people80 found “a 76 Tu, T., Lambert, C., Shah, J.N., and Westwood, P. (2012) Right to Control Trailblazers complex interrelated array of approaches pilots Process Evaluation Wave One. Office for Disability Issues. and schemes”. This review reported provision 77 Tu, T et al (2013) Evaluation of the Right to Control Trailblazers Synthesis Report, Office for Disability Issues 78 DWP (2013) Fulfilling Potential. Building a deeper understanding of disability in the UK today 79 BASE (2013a) Disability Employment Strategy: A discussion paper 80 Wilkins et al (2012) Op. Cit. 81 BASE (2013 b), Trotter, R (2013) Op. Cit.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 57 Annex One: An independent chapter by Inclusion

3) Developing quality and the workforce This need for workforce development is relevant for all staff offering employment- 82 While the Work Choice Evaluation identified related services to disabled people and those a number of areas of good practice it also with health conditions, including advisers in found that, in general, the mechanisms Jobcentre Plus. For example, both the Work used to manage performance appeared to Choice Evaluation88 and an evaluation of focus primarily on monitoring and managing the Jobcentre Plus offer89 noted potential outcomes rather than developing service difficulties with the identification of claimant quality. A lack of external quality inspection support needs within Jobcentre Plus. This was felt to have compounded this issue. can result in the support on offer not being Evidence from the evaluation of the appropriately tailored, and effectively block predecessor to Work Choice, WORKSTEP83, access to specialist support. noted the positive influence of an external inspection process in developing the quality of 4) Developing the evidence base provision. Such inspection processes linked to As noted throughout this evidence review a quality framework also forms a core element there are constraints to clearly identifying what of contracted employment services in some 84 works in both the delivery and commissioning other countries such as Australia . The Work of employment support for this group. While Choice Evaluation therefore recommended the research examined in this chapter aims to development of a quality framework for offer an overview of current evidence. there specialist disability employment services, along are clearly a number of areas where existing with the reintroduction of external inspection. evidence does not offer a comprehensive view. This recommendation has also been supported It is, therefore, important for commissioners by BASE in its submission to the Government and providers to engage with emerging Review of Disability Employment Strategy85 research to ensure services are developed (BASE, 2013). In addition to introducing a in line with relevant evidence as it becomes system of independent quality inspection, available. it also advocates more support for provider development, including the need for ongoing workforce development. The BASE submission notes the highly skilled nature of the adviser role in this area of service provision and the evidence on ‘what works’ highlights the key 82 Purvis et al, (2013) Op. cit. role adviser staff play in successful service 83 Purvis, A., Lowrey, J. and Dobbs, L. (2006) Op. cit. delivery. The BASE paper reports on current 84 In Australia all disability employment services must meet the developments such as National Occupational requirements of the independently assessed quality assurance system 86 to receive funding from the Australian Government. Standards for Supported Employment 85 BASE (2013b) Op. Cit. and the level three certificate in Supported 86 Approved by the UK Commission for Employment and Skills in 2012 Employment87. It recommends all providers - National Occupational Standards: http://www.excellencegateway.org. uk/node/61 must ensure staff are appropriately trained to 87 Approved by Ofqual and forming part of the Qualification Curriculum support customers with complex needs. Framework OCNER: http://www.ocner.org.uk/qualification_search/646_ ocn-eastern-region-level-3-certificate-for-supported-employment- practitioners-qcf 88 Purvis et al, (2013) Op. cit. 89 Coulter, A., Day, N., Howat, N., Romanou, E. and Coleman, N. (2012) The Jobcentre Plus Offer: Findings from the first year of the evaluation. Department for Work and Pensions Research Report No. 814.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 58 Annex One: An independent chapter by Inclusion

For example the ongoing OECD Mental Health and Work Project90 is exploring policy initiatives aiming to keep people with mental health conditions in employment or bring those outside of the labour market back to it. This project will be producing a further five country- based reports during 2013-14. It is also crucial that commissioners and providers proactively shape and contribute to the research agenda to ensure it addresses existing gaps in the evidence, and supports the development of effective services to support disabled people and those with health conditions into sustained work.

90http://www.oecd.org/employment/emp theoecdmentalhealthandworkproject.htm

Making Work a Real Choice final report 59 Annex Two: List of consultation respondents

Abilities Neurosupport Armstrong Learning Papworth Trust Azure Charitable Enterprises Peterborough City Council Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council Prospects Services Ltd BEP Group Queen Elizabeth Foundation Bootstrap Enterprises Realise Futures Bradford Council RNIB Cheshire West and Chester Council Salvation Army Cornwall Council Scottish Association for Mental Health Craigowl Communities SEQOL: Enterprise Works Dare to Fly Shaw Trust supported businesses working group ( The Sign Factory, MTIB, Clarity, County ELITE Supported Employment Agency Print Finishers and Shaw Trust) Enterprise Mentoring Limited Somerset Skills and Learning Gower College, Swansea St Loye’s Foundation Hansel TaylorITex CIC Ingeus TCV Employment and TrainingServices Jobsteps Employment Services Ltd The Action Group Medway Youth Trust Work Solutions MTIB (Merthyr Tydfil Institute for the Blind)

Making Work a Real Choice final report 60 Acknowledgements

Shaw Trust would like to thank all of its staff, supply chain partners, Work Choice customers and employers who participated in the focus groups and interviews for this research. Shaw Trust would also like to thank all of the organisations that have taken the time to submit responses to the ‘Making Work a Real Choice’ consultation.

Additionally, Shaw Trust would like to thank all of the staff at Inclusion for their help and support conducting the research for this report. In particular, Shaw Trust thanks Ann Purvis, Associate Director of Research as the author of Inclusion’s ‘What Works’ chapter, and Sarah Foster, Senior Researcher, who managed the research project.

Finally, Shaw Trust’s Policy and Research team would like to thank all of the staff across the charity who have contributed to the development and publication of this report.

Making Work a Real Choice final report 61 Careers Development Group has merged with Shaw Trust to form a new organisation that builds on the successes of both charities.

© Shaw Trust 2013 Registered Office: Shaw House, Epsom Square, White Horse Business Park, Trowbridge, Wiltshire BA14 OXJ. Registered Charity Number in England & Wales: 287785 Registered Charity Number in Scotland: SC039856