Supporting the Integration of Disadvantaged Groups Into the Labour Market and Society Final Report Volume III- Analysis of In-Depth Countries

ESF 2007-2013 Ex-post evaluation: Supporting the integration of disadvantaged groups into the labour market and society Final Report Volume III- Analysis of in-depth countries

Written by ICF International

February, 2016

Social Europe EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Directorate G — Audit and evaluation Unit. G4 - Evaluation & Impact Assessment E-mail: [email protected]@ec.europa.eu European Commission B-1049 Brussels

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

ESF 2007-2013 Ex-post evaluation: Supporting the integration of disadvantaged groups into the labour market and society Final Report Volume III- Analysis of in-depth countries

Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs & Inclusion.

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union.

Freephone number (*):

00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you).

LEGAL NOTICE This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.europa.eu). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2016 © European Union, 2016 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Please quote this report as: ICF (2016) 2007-2013 Ex-post evaluation on supporting the integration of disadvantaged groups into the labour market and society, for the European Commission, Directorate-General Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion The opinions expressed are those of the Contractor only and do not represent the Commission’s official position.

AIR Annual Implementation Report CIE Counterfactual impact evaluation CSR Country Specific Recommendations EEN ESF Evaluation Network ESF European Social Fund IB Intermediary body MA Managing Authority MS Member State NRP National Reform Programme OP Operational Programme PA Priority Axis PES Public Employment Service SI Social Inclusion SFC System for Fund Management

Table of Contents

1 Introduction ...... 1 2 The overall strategy for ESF investment to assist the integration of disadvantaged groups ...... 2 2.1 The priority ‘social inclusion’ (integration of disadvantaged groups) as defined by the ESF Regulation ...... 5 2.2 National ESF thematic objectives and Priority Axes – coverage of SI priority theme and structure ...... 6 2.3 Significance of ESF investment in ‘Social Inclusion’ in the OPs of the eight Member States covered ...... 35 2.4 Target groups for ESF investment in ‘Social Inclusion’ in the OPs of the eight Member States covered ...... 37 2.5 Outputs and results indicators for the SI priority axis ...... 58 2.6 Links between national ESF thematic priorities and objectives and European priorities ...... 60 2.7 The ESF OPs Intervention logics ...... 63 3 Analysis of interventions selected for in-depth study ...... 67 3.1 Introduction ...... 67 3.2 Overview of interventions covered in the Phase 2 research ...... 68 3.3 Cluster 1 - Supporting and enabling actions ...... 80 3.4 Cluster 2a: Labour market integration through advice, counselling, guidance and training ...... 103 3.5 Cluster 2b: Labour market integration: actions with employment as an output 143 3.6 Cluster 3: Pathways approaches ...... 164 3.7 Cluster 4: Systemic measures ...... 201 4 Cross-cluster analysis ...... 221 4.1 Financial implementation rates ...... 221 4.2 Participation ...... 222 4.3 Outputs and results - the in-depth interventions...... 226 4.4 Cost per output ...... 232 4.5 Cost per result ...... 233 4.6 Analysis of in-depth interventions by convergence, competitiveness and multi-objectives ...... 235 4.7 Sustainability of interventions aimed at individuals ...... 236 4.8 Sustainability of interventions after ESF support ...... 238 4.9 Community Added Value ...... 240

1 Introduction This is the third volume of the report for the study: ESF 2007-2013 Ex-post Evaluation: Supporting the integration of disadvantaged groups into the labour market and society. The main purpose of this report is to provide an assessment of the 58 ESF funded interventions selected in the eight Member States (Austria, Cyprus, Finland, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Romania and the UK) which were studied in depth for this ex-post evaluation. Furthermore, this report analyses the overall strategy for ESF investment in Social Inclusion (SI) in the eight countries. The remainder of this report is structured as follows: . Section 2 presents the overall strategy for ESF investment in integrating disadvantaged groups in the eight in-depth study countries; . Section 3 provides a cluster analysis of in-depth interventions based on the data available from the national information collection phase of the evaluation; and . Section 4 presents conclusions and lessons learned based on the experiences of the eight Member States.

February, 2016 1

2 The overall strategy for ESF investment to assist the integration of disadvantaged groups The aim of this chapter is to provide an overview of the strategic objectives for ESF investment in the integration of disadvantaged groups in eight Member States, setting this in the context of the social inclusion (SI) challenges faced by each Member State and the overall priorities of the ESF and other European policies1 in relation to social inclusion. The chapter provides an assessment of the extent to which the strategic priorities set out in the Operational Programmes (OPs) respond to national SI challenges by: addressing the right target groups; and by providing for the implementation of measures to allow disadvantaged individuals move towards the labour market and thus combat social exclusion. An overview of the main findings in this chapter is provided below.

Main findings National ESF thematic objectives and Priority Axes – coverage of Social Inclusion priority area and structure . Interventions in the field of SI are positioned differently within the Operational Programmes across the eight Member States. Three groups emerge: - Countries where SI interventions are grouped within a single Priority Axis – for example in Austria (Priority Axis 3 - the integration of those furthest from the labour market), Finland (Priority Axis 2 - promoting access and sustainable inclusion in the labour market and promoting social inclusion2) and Romania (Priority Axis 6); - Where SI interventions can be found among sub-priorities of Priority Axes which bring together mainly Access to Employment and SI Activities (e.g. Cyprus, AT- Burgenland, Lithuania, Netherlands); and - Where SI interventions are mainstreamed across all Priority Axes – for example in the case of the UK, where SI is predominantly mainstreamed across all Priority Axes. . However even when the main SI interventions are contained within specific Priority Axes, it is common for disadvantaged or vulnerable groups to feature as target groups in other Priority Axes. This is not surprising as both adaptability and access to employment priorities are of great significance for groups at a greater disadvantage in the labour market. The former can, for instance, assist in supporting older workers or lower skilled individuals to retain their jobs, while the latter encompasses a wide range of relevant active labour market policy measures. Significance of ESF funding in the national context . Mapping the volume of financial investment of the OPs in the SI policy area is challenging. In some countries, it is not possible to calculate the exact amount of such investment, since SI interventions are spread across different sub- priorities. The calculated share of investment in SI – when assessing funding by Priority and sub-priority axes - varies from just under 10% in Luxembourg to about 12% in CY, and over 20% in Austria and Finland; however, such figures

1 Under the Lisbon and EU2020 Strategies, as well as the 2008 Commission Recommendation on the Active Inclusion of People Excluded from the Labour Market and the Country Specific Recommendations provided to each Member State. 2 This also covers interventions in relation to Access to Employment.

February, 2016 2

should be treated with caution and probably underestimate the actual volume of funding supporting the SI priority area, because of the difficulty in calculating investment in SI. . In those countries in which ESF investment is considered to represent a modest fraction of total investment in SI policies, ESF nonetheless makes an important contribution by supporting national policy. The significance of ESF contributions was particularly strong in the context of austerity measures in Romania and Lithuania. . It is important to note that except for EC regulations playing a significant role in ESF programme implementation, there is no defined and codified implementation process that the different stakeholders have to follow. Target group selection . With regard to target group selection a wide range of disadvantaged or vulnerable target groups can be identified across the eight Member States. . Groups commonly targeted include: young people (including those not in education, employment or training - NEET, early school leavers and those at risk of early school leaving, and facing single or multiple disadvantage); individuals with disabilities or limiting health conditions (which include physical and sensory disabilities and those facing mental health issues); migrants and individuals from ethnic minority communities (including Roma); and individuals furthest from the labour market. This final group includes individuals from the previous categories as well as the long-term unemployed and the economically inactive, older workers and the low skilled, and those facing specific issues such as alcohol or drug addiction, refugees and asylum seekers, offenders, ex- offenders and lone parents. . There is a strong emphasis on the needs of women seeking to access, and progress within, the labour market. In four OPs, all women were seen as a target group, in others only certain sub-groups of women were targeted, such as women returners, those wishing to enter non-traditional sectors or occupations, part-time workers, lone parents or victims of domestic violence (predominantly female in both cases). With a few exceptions (e.g. FI, some projects in AT, LU) there was no particularly strong emphasis on addressing gender segregation in the labour market – although it is possible that more of an emphasis on this issue may emerge at the project level (rather than the PA or action level). . The selection of target groups appeared to be based on the analysis of the situations in each Member State, with no significant gaps being identified in coverage between the disadvantaged groups targeted and the national priorities for SI in each Member State (the only exceptions being the inclusion of individuals with mental health issues in Cyprus and blind and deaf women in Austria, both of which were included either because of new research showing them to be particularly disadvantaged – as in Austria, or because of a commitment to a relevant UN Resolution). The lack of gaps is also not surprising given the wide range of target groups addressed in all Member States (adopting almost a ‘catch all’ approach). While aspects of multiple disadvantage are recognised they are not specifically mentioned (or targeted) at the OP level. Alignment with EU policies . The thematic priorities and objectives selected for ESF funding in the eight Member States show a clear alignment with the priorities of the ESF Regulation, those set out in the Lisbon and subsequent Europe 2020 strategies, and the

February, 2016 3

2008 Recommendation on active inclusion – both in terms of reference to them within the OPs and in terms of the activities and target groups supported. . Although Country Specific Recommendations were also referenced, their influence on both the original OPs and subsequent revisions was limited in most cases. This is mainly because OPs were already drafted when the process of delivering CSRs became part of what has come to be known as the ‘European semester’, but also because the priorities highlighted therein are largely already taken on board in national social inclusion and employment strategies. . With regard to the Active Inclusion Recommendations, Member States responded by drawing up and implementing an integrated comprehensive strategy combining inclusive labour market measures and tailor made personalised services. While there is some differentiation in the degree to which Member States focus on the various priorities set out in the recommendation (e.g. AT, FI and RO focus particularly on support for social enterprises), the main focus is on addressing the needs of excluded groups and on providing tailored support (e.g. coaching, linguistic training, tailor made learning pathways). The latter has been a particularly strong theme throughout the European Employment Strategy, including in the reform of Public Employment Services. Intervention logics . Overall intervention logics underpinning each OP were assessed and found to be internally coherent. . The review of the target groups selected for support and the approach to selecting activities to be funded mirrors overall national approaches to active labour market policy support for disadvantaged groups. While ESF therefore allows for the establishment of innovative partnerships to deliver such activities at the national level, the fundamental rationale behind such activities is not generally different overall from national policy approaches. Changes made to programming . Throughout the programme period, few changes were observed in the composition of the disadvantaged groups targeted in each of the eight Member States. Where changes were identified, for example in the Netherlands and Austria, these were found to be the result of the economic crisis and the development of responses to mitigate the problems. . The economic crisis impacted each of the study countries (with the exception of Austria) with employment rates declining and unemployment rising, with varying degrees of severity. Young people were particularly affected by the crisis, with youth unemployment remaining at over 20% in four of the eight Member States in 2013. In six of the eight Member States responses to youth unemployment were identified in their ESF programming, which ranged from substantial reallocations of funds to more of a change in emphasis, to support measures for the young unemployed. These shifts in allocation meant that funding was transferred from elsewhere – for example, away from provision for migrants in Finland, or away from provision for the economically inactive in Wales. . The economic crisis also led to changes in programming beyond that for young people. In several Member States new provision was developed, or existing provision extended, to support individuals recently made redundant, or at risk of redundancy. Although often directed to individuals made redundant irrespective of their characteristics, the intention from the social inclusion

February, 2016 4

perspective was to prevent long term unemployment.

2.1 The priority ‘social inclusion’ (integration of disadvantaged groups) as defined by the ESF Regulation In both national and European contexts, the term ‘Social Inclusion’ refers to a wide field of activity, covering aspects such as fundamental rights, access to adequate income support and quality services. However, within the ESF Regulation, ‘Social Inclusion’ priority emphasises inclusion into the labour market as the best way to integrate individuals into society and combat social exclusion. ESF therefore supports job creation and active labour market policy measures, as well as measures going beyond employability, but still with the goal of moving individuals closer to the labour market wherever possible. The ESF Regulation provides the following description of the social inclusion priority area within ESF funding and the measures to be funded to support the integration of disadvantaged groups.

Convergence, Regional Competitiveness and Employment Within the Social Inclusion priority, disadvantaged people will be supported to enable their sustainable integration in employment, and all forms of labour market discrimination combated, through the promotion of: . “pathways to integration and re-entry into employment for disadvantaged people, such as people experiencing social exclusion, early school leavers, minorities, people with disabilities and people providing care for dependent persons, through employability measures, including in the field of the social economy, access to vocational education and training, and accompanying actions and relevant support, community and care services that improve employment opportunities; and . acceptance of diversity in the workplace and the combating of discrimination in accessing and progressing in the labour market, including through awareness- raising, the involvement of local communities and enterprises and the promotion of local employment initiatives”. Source: Regulation EC No 1081/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the European Social Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1784/1999

The Regulation acknowledges that disadvantaged groups can also be supported in other priority areas than Social Inclusion, such as Adaptability or Access to employment3. The links with, and degree of alignment between, the OPs in the eight Member States and the ESF Regulations and other European priorities for social inclusion are discussed below.

3 Regulation EC No 1081/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the European Social Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1784/1999: ‘However, specific target groups which could be considered to be facing disadvantage in the labour market are also referred to under other priorities, namely: Within the ‘adaptability’ priority – where references are made to improving access to skills training for low-skilled and older workers; and Within the ‘access to employment and sustainable inclusion in the labour market’ priority – with the long-term and young people unemployed being given particular prominence, and with measures including keeping older workers in work, improving access to and progress within work for women, and increasing the participation of migrants in work to improve their social integration’.

February, 2016 5

2.2 National ESF thematic objectives and Priority Axes – coverage of SI priority theme and structure The SI-relevant thematic objectives and priority axes are intended to contribute to, or further develop existing national strategies for SI. Interventions in the field of SI are positioned differently within the OPs across the Member States. In some OPs, most SI interventions are grouped under one single Priority Axis (though other priority axes may include other relevant interventions, e.g. in Austria, Romania, Finland4, while in others SI interventions are spread across identifiable sub-priority Axes, e.g. Cyprus, AT- Burgenland, Lithuania and the Netherlands. In the UK national Ops, social inclusion is mainstreamed through all Priority Axes (although in some there is a degree of concentration of activity within specific Priority Axes). The key social inclusion objectives for each of the eight Member States, and the Priority Axes under which they are addressed, are summarised below. In Austria, PA3 is specifically dedicated to the integration of individuals furthest from the labour market. It is broken down into two sub-PAs, one focussing on the integration of disabled individuals into the labour market (3a), whereas the other focusses on the integration of those with the greatest distance from the labour market (3b). That said, PA2 on combatting unemployment is also significant in supporting the integration of individuals from disadvantaged groups into the labour market. The most significant measures here are production schools for young people and employment in socio- economic companies. In the OP of the Burgenland, sub-priority axis 2.2 specifically focusses on the integration of individuals furthest from the labour market. In Cyprus, the OP EHCSC 2007-2013 ESF was aligned with the targets and policies set in the NRP throughout the programming period. The SI objective focused on interventions relating to the labour market, as part of the second strategic objective “Attracting and retaining more people in employment and enhancing social integration” linked to Priority Axis 2. This Priority Axis aims to increase the labour force participation and employment of inactive and unemployed women and young people, to improve the functioning of labour market institutions and increase the number of economically active persons from vulnerable social groups. Parts of PA2 are also dedicated to Access to Employment measures. Sub-priority axis 2.4 is of greatest relevance to the SI theme. Priority Axis 1 also contains some relevant measures aimed at developing interventions for disadvantaged groups in the education system (e.g. migrant pupils). The OP strategy focused on the integration of vulnerable groups into the labour market through active labour market policies and supporting measures (targeted services by Public Employment Services, promotion of flexible forms of employment, better care services for children and other dependents). In addition, the strengthening of structures and mechanisms for stakeholders to design and implement social programmes was also supported, giving special emphasis to geographical areas experiencing multiple problems. In Finland, at the time of planning the OP, persistent long-term unemployment was acknowledged as a key challenge for SI, aligned to several factors: ageing, low education, structural changes in traditional industries and multiple health and social problems of certain target groups. The OP was drafted with a view to addressing such issues and complementing existing national policies in the area. Among the Priority Axes, PA 2 ‘Promoting access to employment and sustainable inclusion in the labour market and preventing social exclusion’ is the most relevant for SI. The objective of PA-2 is to decrease structural unemployment, with measures aimed at the employment of hard-to place unemployed individuals and inactive persons and at

4In Finland the relevant priority Axis (2) also covers A2E initiatives.

February, 2016 6

young people who may drop-out of education. PA 2 brings together activities on SI and Access to Employment. In Lithuania, most of the SI interventions relate to the Priority Axis 1 ‘Quality Employment and Social Inclusion’ of the HRD OP (sub-priority axis 1.3 being the most relevant). Furthermore, Priority Axis 2 (Lifelong Learning) and especially the sub-priority ‘increasing accessibility of lifelong learning’ is partly relevant to SI objectives. The focus of ESF-funded SI interventions was consistent with the legal framework which governs the allocation of resources for active labour market policies, as well as national strategies seeking to support youth, address disability, poverty or discrimination policies5. No unified strategy for SI in Lithuania can be identified in the 2007-2013 period. In Luxembourg, the national strategy in the field of SI during the programming period focused on maintaining social cohesion and the fight against poverty based on integration policies6. The relevance of the ESF objectives for SI and complementarity with other national programmes were guaranteed by the active participation of the management authorities in the national strategic framework, the national reform programme, the governmental programme as well as the ex-ante evaluation. The ESF investment in SI focused on increasing the employment rate of older workers and of women, and reducing youth unemployment and early school leaving. These activities are a sub-priority of PA1 (1.4). In the Netherlands, two Priority Axes of the OP clearly focused on SI: Priority 1 ‘Increasing labour supply’ and Priority 2 ‘Improving labour market integration of people with a significant distance from the labour market’. In addition, some interventions as part of Priority 3, ‘Improving employability and investing in human capital’, and especially those focusing on low-qualified workers are partly relevant to SI objectives. ESF supported existing policies in the field of SI (rather than creating additional policies), for instance by bridging any gap between responsibilities of different organisations (e.g. prisons and municipalities, or school and municipalities). The most important sub-priority is considered to be 2B. In Romania, Priority Axis 6 of the SOP HRD 2007-13 specifically focused on the promotion of SI and aimed at facilitating access to the labour market of vulnerable groups and promoting an inclusive and cohesive society. The main objectives defined for PA 6 were: to promote and support job generation through structures specific to the social economy; to increase the level of qualification and training for individuals belonging to the vulnerable groups and to improve competences for specialists in the field of social inclusion. The strategic approach of the entire OP – and SI Priority Axis 6 – was consistent with national strategies and documents (including the Joint Inclusion Memorandum, the National Anti-Poverty Strategy, the National Employment Strategy 207-13, the National Lifelong Learning Strategy 2007-13, and the National Strategic Reference Framework). Across the UK, SI was mainstreamed across all Priority Axes, although in the different nations’ OPs there was a degree of concentration of activities for disadvantaged groups: . In England provision for disadvantaged individuals was concentrated in Priority 1 of the Competitiveness, and Priority 4 of the Convergence programmes (both of which sought to increase employment and reduce unemployment and inactivity,

5 This includes: the Law on Social Integration of the Disabled, the National Programmes for Social Integration of the Disabled for 2010–2012 and 2013–2019, the Strategy for the Development of Vocational Rehabilitation Services 2007–2012, the Law on Support for Employment, the National Youth Policy Development Programme for 2011–2019, the Action Plan 2012–2016 of the Government of the Republic of Lithuania, the measures for Poverty and Social Exclusion Reduction in 2007–2008, the National Reports of Lithuania on Social Protection and Social Inclusion Strategies for 2006–2008 and 2008–2010, the Inter-Institutional Action Plan for the Promotion of Non-Discrimination, National Programme on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men 2010–2014. 6 Rapport de stratégie national sur la protection sociale et sur l’inclusion sociale 2008-2010, http://www.snas.public.lu/.

February, 2016 7

and with a focus on named disadvantaged groups). However Priorities 2 and 5 , which targeted individuals in employment, also described interventions for those disadvantaged to help them retain their jobs and secure their progress within the workplace. In addition, under the co-financing model followed, contracts let by the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) focussed solely on offenders and ex-offenders (in both prisons and in the community). . In the Northern Ireland OP, Priority 1 also focussed on helping people secure sustainable employment, and was where provision for disadvantaged groups was concentrated. Priority 2 focussed on Government programmes, i.e. funding for the apprenticeship programme. . In Scotland – the two OPs (Highlands and Islands Convergence and Lowlands and Uplands Competitiveness) featured Priority Axes aiming to increase the workforce through support to unemployed, inactive and people facing disadvantages (Priority 1 in both cases, although again Priority 2 also included interventions to facilitate skills development amongst employed, but vulnerable, individuals). In 2010 the Lowlands and Uplands introduced a new Priority Axis 5, Strategic Skills Pipeline, which structured interventions around integrated services needed to help more disadvantaged individuals progress into or within work. . In Wales, the West Wales and the Valleys Convergence programme Priority 1 aimed to prepare young people for future employment by raising aspirations and increasing participation in learning, while Priority 2 sought to increase employment and tackle economic activity, with disadvantaged groups being targeted under each. In the East Wales Competitiveness programme, provision for disadvantaged groups was concentrated in Priority 1 which sought to increase employment and address economic inactivity. An overview of relevant priority axes for the SI theme is presented in Table 1 below, with a detailed mapping of PAs, objectives, output indicators and targets, and result indicators and targets.

February, 2016 8

Table 1. Overview of Priority Axes and sub-priorities of full or partial relevance to Social Inclusion, with associated objectives, output and results indicators and targets

target groups into the regular labour market. As intermediate objectives, the completion of the measure is explicitly recognised.

Strategic objective: Integration of people . Number of supported cases . "Whereabouts" six months with disabilities in the regular labour after a supporting measure market and improvement of equal . Share of supported women opportunities in a broader sense. . Share of individuals . Number of innovative projects

Priority Axis supported who attained Targeted impacts: Trial and supported annually 3a: employment six months implementation of measures supporting a Integration of after the measure stable integration of target group persons . Number of innovative projects people with in the regular labour market. Measures supported annually . Share of individuals disabilities should: (expenditure): 2.5 supported who secured their into jobs six months after the employment - enable individuals to become more measure actively engaged in labour market Share of individuals brought closer - provide job-placement to the labour market six months

Austria EmploymentOP Austria - aim for secure jobs. after the measure.

February, 2016 9

Strategic objective: Improvement of the . Number of calls for submitting No results indicators included in labour market integration of people project ideas: 2 SFC database. furthest from the labour market through development and testing of new measures . or Calls 1, 2 and 3: and through better cooperation of involved Institutions. - Number of projects per PA 3b: federal state and call: 8 Integration of Targeted impacts: Main objective is the people testing and implementation of measures - Number of projects furthest from supporting the stable integration of the supported the labour target group in the regular labour market. market This objective can only – if at all – be achieved stepwise. Intermediate objectives for distinct steps with respect to the particular objectives of the individual innovative projects were explicitly recognised.

2.1 Demand-oriented training of job . Number of supported persons . Share of participants in seekers. in qualification measures: qualification measure who PA 2: 5320 receive an employment offer Integration after the measure has into the - of which women: 2815 ended: 50 labour market Out Burgenland of which men: 2505

- - and Social . Share of employment among Integration the supported persons 6 months after the

OP EmploymentOP qualification measure: 50

Phasing

February, 2016 10

2.2 Stable integration of certain target . Number of persons . Share of participants in groups (older unemployed, young participating in integration integration measures for unemployed school drop-outs, long-term measures: 2030 disadvantaged group who and low-qualified unemployed, people re- receive an employment offer entering the labour-force) on the labour - of which women: 1080 after the measure has market through measures for orientation, ended:35 training and supported employment. - of which men: 950 . Share of participants in work three months after the end of the integration measure:35

2.3 Reduction of gender-specific . Number of women supported: . Share of women supported segregation on the labour market. 1000 who take-up employment or training in a "non-female

traditional" vocation:30 . Share of women supported who take-up employment

February, 2016 11

2.4 Improvement of labour market chances . Number of supported cases . Share of people with for people with disabilities. concerning people with disabilities supported six disabilities per year: 2500 months after measure (attained employment): 20 - of which women: 1250 . Share of people with - of which men: 1250 disabilities supported six months after measure (secured their job): 15

. Situation of people with disabilities supported six months after the end of the measure (brought "closer" to the labour market): 17

2.5 Improvement of labour market chances . Number of projects for socially disadvantaged people and supported: 6 individuals furthest from the labour market through development and trial of new . Number of supported cases measures and improvement of the co- concerning socially operation of relevant institutions. disadvantaged people as well as groups remote from the labour market: 120

February, 2016 12

Human resources development and adaptability

OP Employment, Human Capital Employment, HumanOP Capital

Cyprus Inclusion and Social

February, 2016 13

MS OP Priority axis Main objectives Output indicators and targets in Result/impact indicators and SFC database (2013 AIRs, final targets in SFC database (2013 targets provided if available in AIRs, final targets provided if the database) available in the database) Only indicators relevant to Only indicators relevant to disadvantaged groups are displayed, disadvantaged groups are Priority Axis 2 contains four thematic no baseline target or final targets displayed, no baseline target or specific objectives as follows: available: final targets available: . Increase of the labour force and . Number of economically . Percentage of unemployed employment of women inactive women benefitting (15-24, 18-30) served by . Increase of the labour force and from training and work the PES network and placed employment of new entrants experience in private sector jobs, by gender . Widening and upgrading the . Number of socially vulnerable groups included in training Percentage of registered Priority 2 functioning of labour market . institutions programmes, by gender. unemployed young people Broadening Number of persons with who are given job labour market . Increase of economically active disabilities who benefit from placement, training and social persons from vulnerable social employment promotion opportunity, or work inclusion groups. actions, by gender. experience, etc., within six months

. Number of inactive female population remaining in the labour market six months after the completion of a vocational training and work experience programme . Percentage of individuals from vulnerable groups who remain in jobs six months after discontinuation of the grant

February, 2016 14

To follow, support and model the results of Participants: 5841 of which 3157 regional development and to implant them women and 3954 immigrants and Completed project: 3517. as part of national operating models. 1261 young people 15-24 years old; Employed to open labour market group hard to employ 68 % 870 (25 %) of which 547 women, employed elsewhere 106, (migrants: 3932 of which 2094 unemployed 1451, outside labour women, 22 minorities). force 1090, training and workdays 220523 . Development programme “Better skills and Source: national report (not possible Source: national report (not through education to employment to identify relevant indicators in the possible to identify relevant SFC at the PA or sub PA level). indicators in the SFC at the PA or To optimise transitions from elementary to sub PA level). secondary education, and accomplish it without dropping out, by gaining degree in Participants: 1568 of which women preferred time and enhancing employment 1015, 245 persons 15-24 years old, Completed project: 1054. 850 after education. 85 in weak labour market position employed to open labour market,

(1 immigrants, 154 disabled, 26 in of which 526 women, 61 employed other). elsewhere, unemployed 57, outside labour market 86, 44 degrees,

Finland Mainland for FinlandOP 12919 education and work days

February, 2016 15

MS OP Priority axis Main objectives Output indicators and targets in Result/impact indicators and SFC database (2013 AIRs, final targets in SFC database (2013 targets provided if available in AIRs, final targets provided if the database) available in the database) Gender Mainstreaming Development Source: national report (not possible Source: national report (not Programme ”Valtava” to identify relevant indicators in the possible to identify relevant SFC at the PA or sub PA level). indicators in the SFC at the PA or To develop gender mainstreaming and its sub PA level). assessment; to dismantle gender segregation in education and work; to Participants: 374, of which women support and develop the expertise of 196, 20 15-24-years old. Hard to Completed project: 316. Employed gender equality actors and project funders; employ 85, of which 84 immigrants, to open labour market 122, of to increase general knowledge of the minorities 1. which 90 women, employed gender perspective; to support the elsewhere 34, unemployed 92, activities of resource centres for women outside labour force 68, 3 degrees, and female entrepreneurial potential. 11831education and work days Development programme of intermediate Source: national report (not possible Source: national report (not labour market. to identify relevant indicators in the possible to identify relevant SFC at the PA or sub PA level). indicators in the SFC at the PA or To provide job opportunities under national sub PA level). labour market and social policy and services that promote job placement and Participants: 14508 of which 7338 coping at work to maintain people’s women and 3721 15-24 years, hard Completed project: 10044. functional capacity and improve the way to employ 3264, of which 1301 Employed to open labour market they manage their lives. immigrants, 110 minorities, 796 2610, of which women 1489, disabled, and 1057 others. employed elsewhere 1521, unemployed 4478 outside labour

market 1435. New jobs 1061 and new companies 57196 degrees, 766438 education and work days, companies with projects 1271 and other organisations 1365

February, 2016 16

MS OP Priority axis Main objectives Output indicators and targets in Result/impact indicators and SFC database (2013 AIRs, final targets in SFC database (2013 targets provided if available in AIRs, final targets provided if the database) available in the database) Promote employment and participation of Only indicators relevant to Only indicators relevant to people in the labour market through: disadvantaged groups are disadvantaged groups are displayed; final targets are indicated displayed; final targets are . General services of employment indicated assistance . Number of disabled persons who participated in . Rate of disabled persons' . Vocational training and non-formal professional rehabilitation employment 6 months after education of unemployed people and programmes: 2000 participation in professional workers who are threatened with rehabilitation programmes unemployment . Number of persons who (40%). experience social exclusion . Supported employment and work and belong to social risk . Share of participants who rotation group and who participated in experience social exclusion PA 1 Quality activities: 25,500, of which: and belong to social risk employment . Vocational rehabilitation of people with disabilities group who are employed or and social continue training 6 months inclusion PA Enhance social inclusion through: - Disabled: 4000 after participation (25%), among which: . Reduction of discrimination and - convicted and discharged prevention of social problems from custodial institutions: - Disabled: 27% 6000 . Services aimed at promoting the - Convicted and inclusion of people at social risk and - Persons who suffer from discharged from persons experiencing social exclusion addiction to psychoactive custodial institutions into the labour market substances:2000 (20%)

- Persons who suffer from addiction to psychoactive substances (28%)

Lithuania Development OP Human Resources

February, 2016 17

PA 1 Improve . Specific objective 1.1: Increasing Only indicators relevant to Objective Only indicators relevant to access to and employment rate of older workers 1.4 are displayed; baseline targets Objective 1.4 are displayed; sustainable are indicated (final targets not baseline targets are indicated (final integration in . Specific objective 1.2: Increasing available). targets not available). Positive exit employment employment rates of women rate is the share of participants . Number of male beneficiaries who were in employment, Specific objective 1.3: Facilitate the . (people distant from the undertaking new training or had integration of the young into the labour market): 255 found a job immediately after employment market finishing the programme. . Number of female Specific objective 1.4: Activate those . beneficiaries (people distant . Positive exit rate for male categories of persons who are from the labour market): 255 beneficiaries (people distant distant from the labour market from the labour market:

65%

. Positive exit rate for male beneficiaries (people distant from the labour market: 65%

Luxembourg National OP

February, 2016 18

PA 1: Action A: Labour market integration of . Number of participants Results Increasing people with a labour market distance (older reached: male: 16555, Percentage of completed labour supply people, (female) returners (often not female: 16555 . entitled to a benefit), people with a reintegration trajectories:

(partial) work disability . Number of participants who male: 12418, female: 12418 are non-benefit entitled Percentage of participants unemployed job-seekers, . that flow into paid work: . Number of participants being male: 1323, female: 1323 55 plus of age with a WWB Impacts benefit, male: 5516, female: 5523 . Number of participants that

flow into sustainable paid . Number of participants work partially disabled with an additional or sole WWB benefit: male: 5516, female: 5516

Netherlands National OP

February, 2016 19

Action J: Youth aged below 27, among . Number of participants: male: Results which (potential) early school-leavers, 10000, female: 10000 young people with specific problem . Number of participants placed on a job

. Number of participants placed on a internship or trainee job

. Participants in training (including BBL or BOL) or training Impacts

. Sustainable exit to employment

February, 2016 20

PA 2: Action B: Helping detained to prepare for . Number of annual participants Results: Improving returning to work and education after their (prisoners and young people Percentage of completed labour market release in youth detention centres): . integration of reintegration trajectories: male: 5530, female: 5530 people with a male: 4424, female: 4424 significant . Number of adult prisoners . Number of participants that distance from participating: male: 1379, achieve a (sub-) qualification the labour female: 1386 at level 1 market . Number of forensic patients Number of participants that participating: male: 1379, . achieves a (sub-) female: 1386 qualification at level 2-4 . Number of participants from Number of participants that juvenile custodial institutions . achieve a "start qualification" (by penal legislation): male: (i.e. minimum education 1379, female: 1386 level required to be able to . Number of participants from find sustainable juvenile custodial institutions employment) (by civil legislation): male: 1379, female: 1386

February, 2016 21

Action C: Help school leavers from special . Number of participants Results: education who have learning deficiencies reached (of students involved Number of completed into a job or into further education in secondary practical . pathways: male: 2464, education (pro) and female: 2471 secondary special education (VSO) for the labour market): . Achieved outflow to MBO- male: 2625, female: 2625 level 1

. Achieved outflow to BBL (occupation supported learning way) . Achieved outflow to (normal or sheltered) paid work Impacts:

. Outflow into labour achieved

. Achieved sustainable outflow to paid work

February, 2016 22

PA 6: Social Objectives . Number of structures of the . Number of jobs created by Inclusion social economy established: the entitites of the social (1)Promoting and supporting job . 830 economy: 5000 generation through structures specific to the social economy . Number of participants in . Share of participants to the programs of qualification / training/retraining (2) Increasing the level of . requalification for vulnerable programmes for vulnerable qualification and training for groups: 150000 groups who obtain individuals belonging to the certification: 55 vulnerable . Number of participants (Roma) qualification programs . Share of (Roma) participants (3) Improving competences for . / retraining for vulnerable to the training/retraining specialists in the field of social groups: 65000 programmes for vulnerable inclusion. groups who obtain Key Areas of Intervention . Number of participants certification: 60 (people with disabilities) . (1) development of social economy programs qualification / . Share of (disabled) requalification for vulnerable participants to the . (2) improving access and groups: 20500 training/retraining participation of vulnerable groups on programmes for vulnerable the labour market . Number of participants groups who obtain (young people leaving the certification: 60 . (3) promoting equal opportunities state system of protection) to programs of qualification / . Share of participants to the . (4) trans-national initiatives for an requalification for vulnerable training/retraining inclusive labour market. groups: 5400 programmes for vulnerable groups who obtain . Number of dependents certification - children who supported: 40000 leave the State childcare system: 50 . Number of participants in training programs for . Share of participants in

professionals in the field of training programmes for social inclusion: 10000

professionals in the field of social inclusion having . Number of trans-national obtained certification: 85 initiatives and partnerships supported: 120

Romania National OP February, 2016 23

Priority Axis Focus on unemployed / inactive . Number of Priority 1 . (a) Number of Priority 1 1: Extending individuals; and participants: 887,000 participants in work on Employment leaving: 195,000, (b) Opportunities . a) Number of unemployed Proportion of Priority 1 participants (aged over 19) in participants in work on Priority 1: 371,000 (b) leaving: 22% Proportion of Priority 1 participants (aged over 19) . (a) Number of participants in who are unemployed: 42% work six months after leaving: 231,000 (b) . (a) Number of inactive Proportion of participants in participants (aged over 19) in work six months after Priority 1: 303,000 (b) leaving: 26% Proportion of Priority 1 participants (aged over 19) . Proportion of Priority 1 who are inactive: 34% economically inactive participants who on leaving . (a) Number of Priority 1 are engaged in job search participants who are 14-19 activity or enter further year old NEETs or at risk of learning to prepare them for becoming NEET: 177,000 (b) work: 45% Proportion of Priority 1 participants who are 14-19 . a) Number of Priority 1 year old NEETs or at risk of NEETs or at risk, in becoming NEETs: 20% education, employment or training on leaving: 80,000 . Proportion of Priority 1 (b) Proportion of Priority 1 participants with disabilities NEETs or at risk, in and health conditions: 22% education, employment or training on leaving: 45% . Proportion of Priority 1 participants who are lone parents: 12% . Proportion of unemployed and inactive Priority 1 participants aged 50 or over (i.e. indicator 1.2): 18% February, 2016 24 . Proportion of Priority 1

participants who are female: 51% UK andProgramme England Competitiveness Employment

Priority Axis Focus on the unemployed and economically . Number of Priority 4 . (a) Number of Priority 4 4: Tackling inactive. participants: 24,500 participants in work on Barriers to leaving: 5,900 (b) Proportion Employment . (a) Number of unemployed of Priority 4 participants in participants (aged over 19) in work on leaving: 24% Priority 4: 10,200 (b) Proportion of Priority 4 . a) Number of participants in participants (aged over 19) work six months after who are unemployed or leaving: 7,300 (b) Proportion inactive: 42% of participants in work six months after leaving: 30% . (a) Number of inactive participants (aged over 19) in . Proportion of Priority 4 Priority 4: 8,400 (b) economically inactive Proportion of Priority 4 participants who on leaving participants (aged over 19) are engaged in job search who are inactive: 34% activity or enter further learning to prepare them for . a) Number of Priority 4 work: 45% participants who are 14-19 year old NEETs or at risk of . a) Number of Priority 4 becoming NEET: 4,900 (b) NEETs or at risk, in Proportion of Priority 4 education, employment or participants who are 14-19 training on leaving: 2,200 year old NEETs or at risk of (b) Proportion of Priority 4 becoming NEETs: 20% NEETs or at risk, in education, employment or . Proportion of Priority 4 training on leaving: 45% participants with disabilities and health conditions: 27%

. Proportion of Priority 4 participants who are lone parents: 8%

. Proportion of unemployed and inactive Priority 4 participants aged 50 or over (i.e. indicator February, 2016 4.2): 30% 25 . Proportion of Priority 4 participants who are from ethnic minorities: 1% . Proportion of Priority 4

England Convergence Programme

Programme - Focus on integrated packages of support . Number of participants . Number of participants Priority Axis for unemployed and inactive people and receiving support - 3,000 entering employment - 1: Increasing young people at risk, including 1,000 the workforce engagement, basic skills development, . Number of participants with work experience. multiple deprivations (i.e. . Number of participants those who qualify in 2 or entering education or

more of the target groups training - 1,000 listed above) - 1,400 . Number of participants gaining a partial (i.e. a completed unit towards a full qualification) or full qualification - 1,400

. Number of participants in employment six months after leaving - 500

Scotland Highlands and Islands Highlands andScotland Islands Convergence

Programme - Focus on integrated packages of support . Number of participants . Number of participants Priority Axis for unemployed, inactive and young people receiving support - 17,600 entering into employment - 1: at risk formulated by Community Planning 5,800 Progressing Partnerships, including engagement, basic . Number of participants with into skills development and work experience. multiple deprivations - 6,600 . Number of participants employment Subsequently Priority Axes merged into entering education or Number of participants in the Priority 5: Strategic Skills Pipeline. . training - 5,800 NEET group - 3,400 . Number of participants . Number of participants in completing a partial or full ethnic minority groups - 800 qualification - 8,800 . Number of participants who are aged 50 or over - 2,100

Scotland Lowlands and Lowlands Uplands Scotland Competitiveness

February, 2016 26

Priority Axis Focus on specialised services and training . Total participants (11-19 year . Participants gaining 1: Supplying to tackle underachieving in education or olds) - 35,000 qualifications – 11-19 year Young People training among young people aged 11 – 19 olds – 10,500 with Skills for years; . Female Participants - 40% Learning and - 14-19 year old Key intervention groups: Future . participants - Employment . 11-13 year old participants – - NEET participants - 30%; 14-19 year old Convergence participants – 70% - Female participants – 3%

. NEET participants – 25%; - Female participants Female participants receiving gaining qualifications in training in Maths, Science, Maths, Science, Engineering and Technology – 3% - Engineering and Technology – 60%

. Qualification levels to be gained: basic skills (60%), at Level 2 (25%), at Level 3 (15%)

West Wales and the Valleys the Valleys West andWales

February, 2016 27

Priority Axis Focus on engagement, employment . Total participants 135,000 . Participants gaining 2: Increasing services and training for the economically qualifications – Economically Employment inactive and unemployed, and help for . Female participants 51% inactive and unemployed – and Tackling people at risk of job loss through health 31,500 Participants – Economically Economic issues. . inactive and unemployed – Inactivity - Economically inactive 110,000 - Unemployed - Economically inactive – 50% - NEET participants - Unemployed – 50% - Female participants - NEET participants - - BME participants - Female participants – 52% - Older participants - BME participants - - Participants with health condition or disability - Older participants – 64% - Lone parent - With work-limiting health condition or disability - . Qualification levels to be 55% gained:

- Lone parents – 8% - Basic skills – 55% . Participants – Employed – - at Level 2 – 30% 25,000 - at Level 3 – 10% - with health condition or disability – 100% - Level 4 and above – 5%

- receiving assistance with . Participants entering health employment – Economically conditions/disabilities – inactive and 4% . Unemployed – 36,700 - receiving assistance with - Economically inactive health February, 2016 conditions/disabilities – - Unemployed 28 96%

- NEET participants - Female participants – 47% - Female participants - Older participants – 27% - BME participants

Priority Axis Focus on outreach, employment services . Total participants . Participants gaining 1: Increasing and training for the economically inactive (Economically inactive and qualifications – Economically employment and unemployed people. unemployed) - 14,000 inactive and and tackling economic . Economically inactive - 85% . Unemployed – 4,200 inactivity of total participants

. Qualification levels to be . Unemployed - 15% of total gained: participants . Basic skills – 55% . BME participants - 12% of total participants . Level 2 – 30%

. Older participants - 35% of . Level 3 – 10% total participants . Level 4 and above – 5% . Female participants - 59% of total participants

. Participants with work-limiting health condition or disability - 45% of total participants

. Lone Parents - 8% of total participants

East Wales Competitiveness Programme Competitiveness Wales East

February, 2016 29

qualifications. over 19) – 16,500 engaged in job search activity or enter further learning to prepare Number of Priority 1 participants them for work – 45% aged 16 to 19 who are not in education, employment or training Number of Priority 1 NEETs in (NEET) – 4,500 education, employment or training on leaving – 2,000 Proportion of Priority 1 participants

Northern Ireland who are female – 40%

February, 2016 30

2.2.1 Overview of activities supported Given the wide variety of types of intervention and activities to support the integration of disadvantaged groups into the labour market, a framework of clusters was developed for this study to group similar activities together7. Within the ‘Social Inclusion’ priority area, four relevant clusters can be distinguished: . Cluster 1: supporting and enabling actions – this cluster comprises actions which deliver support to individuals facing disadvantage to enable their active engagement with the labour market. Such actions are intended to directly tackle the issues which hinder such progression, and can be seen as having a preparatory or supporting function. Therefore such actions may not directly result in entry to employment, but rather reduce barriers, establish momentum and equip individuals to engage in actions with more direct employment outcomes, as in Cluster 2. . Cluster 2: labour market integration – here actions are intended to support the labour market entry of disadvantaged individuals, and include actions most readily described as active labour market policy measures. Three sub-sets of actions can be distinguished: - a) Actions which support the labour market integration of disadvantaged groups through advice, counselling, guidance and training, etc.; - b) Actions which have employment as an output - such as subsidy measures, sheltered employment, employment in the ‘second’ labour market etc.; and - c) Actions aimed at sustaining employment for new entrants or for disadvantaged groups in work, but at risk8. . Cluster 3: pathways approaches - this cluster features interventions which follow a pathways approach, recognising that disadvantaged groups may not achieve immediate labour market outcomes but may require a linked set of actions and interventions to move them closer towards, and into, work. This cluster can therefore include combinations of measures which appear in Clusters 1 and 2. . Cluster 4: systemic measures - this cluster features measures with the objective of influencing systems, institutions or cultural contexts. These could include capacity building actions, as well as activities to tackle underlying discriminatory attitudes among employers or wider society. The following table presents the links between each of the clusters and the priorities for investment in Social Inclusion laid out in the ESF regulation and maps the types of activities in place in the eight Member States reviewed. For each country and cluster, indications of specific target group coverage are provided. However, the mapping of target groups is not exhaustive, as many actions supported under the SI priority, target multiple groups of disadvantaged individuals. A more detailed overview of target groups for ESF investment in ‘Social Inclusion’ in the eight countries covered is provided in Section 2.4.

7 The cluster framework was developed in the inception phase and adapted from proposals made in the preparatory study. 8 It was later found that there are rarely activities which focus on this aspect, but that the objective of sustaining employment is often included in interventions assigned to other clusters, primarily 2a and 2b.

February, 2016 31

Table 2. Overview of clusters and activities and MS target group coverage

Relevant Priorities for ESF Activities Relevant MS (and specific clusters investment in ‘social target group coverage inclusion’ (ESF among disadvantaged Regulation) groups, if relevant) Cluster 1 Pathways to integration and Prevention of drop out AT (disadvantaged young re-entry into employment people) Supporting Qualification measures for disadvantaged people and CY (young people om Basic skills provision, enabling Acceptance of diversity in disadvantaged areas) individualised forms of actions the workplace and the learning outside FI (migrants, young people) combating of discrimination mainstream training in accessing and LU (older workers, women and opportunities to engage/re- progressing in the labour young people; people furthest engage with learning and market, including through from the labour market) training awareness-raising, the LT (people at social risk, involvement of local Outreach and engagement communities and disabled individuals, individuals enterprises and the Area-based initiatives with substance abuse issues etc.) promotion of local Group mentoring employment initiatives RO One-to-one guidance UK-England (offenders and ex- Voluntary work offenders) Paid work placements / UK- Northern Ireland (young work tasters people NEET or facing Specialist support, e.g. disadvantage, people with drug and alcohol issues physical, sensory and learning disabilities, minority ethnic Arts based approaches groups, women away from the labour market for some time) UK- Wales (economically inactive females, lone parents, NEETs or at risk of NEET, minority ethnic young people, disadvantaged families) UK-Scotland (young people including NEET, offenders and young people at risk, individuals with mental illnesses) Cluster 2a Within pathways to Supported work search AT (disadvantaged young integration and re-entry into Vocational guidance people) Advice, employment for counselling Training needs analyses CY (pupils at risks of drop out) disadvantaged people: , guidance ‘access to vocational Promotion of self- FI and education and training employment training accompanying actions and LU (older workers, women and relevant support’ Vocational rehabilitation young people; people furthest from the labour market) Training and skills development (core and LT (people at social risk, people vocational) measures, to with disabilities; unemployed

February, 2016 32

Relevant Priorities for ESF Activities Relevant MS (and specific clusters investment in ‘social target group coverage inclusion’ (ESF among disadvantaged Regulation) groups, if relevant) meet the needs of individuals and people individuals with different threatened with unemployment) disadvantages (and NL (pupils with learning plugging gaps in difficulties, unemployed youth, mainstream employment people with a disability, people programmes) who do not receive benefits, ex- Promotion of lifelong offenders and people in young learning offenders institutions, people with mental health issues)

UK-England (individuals facing

skills barriers, former employees recently made redundant or under notice of redundancy) UK- Northern Ireland (young people NEET, women, disabled etc., older workers, women returners, individuals from minority ethnic groups, disadvantaged groups in rural areas). UK-Wales (inactive individuals, unemployed youth) UK-Scotland (young people leaving care and others in touch with intensive services) Cluster 2b Within pathways to Support for intermediate AT integration and re-entry into labour markets, Actions CY (disabled and disadvantaged employment for employment in the social which have individuals) disadvantaged people: economy, sheltered employmen ‘employability measures, employment FI t as an including in the field of the output Subsidised social economy’ LU (older workers, young people employment/Grant and people furthest from the schemes labour market) Development of social LT (young people) economy (supported jobs) NL

RO Cluster 2c Within pathways to In work assistance, AT (disabled individuals) integration and re-entry into through skills development Actions LU (young people) employment for and guidance/mentoring aimed at disadvantaged people: UK-England (vulnerable to sustaining Supported employment ‘accompanying actions and future unemployment / recently employmen (non-wage subsidy) relevant support’ left the unemployment register) t UK-Northern Ireland (older workers) UK-Wales (workers with a disability or limiting health

February, 2016 33

Relevant Priorities for ESF Activities Relevant MS (and specific clusters investment in ‘social target group coverage inclusion’ (ESF among disadvantaged Regulation) groups, if relevant) condition) UK-Scotland (individuals with mental health problems, socially excluded individuals) Cluster 3 Pathways to integration and Holistic approaches AT re-entry into employment including integrated Pathways FI for disadvantaged people provision, covering various approaches of the following aspects: LU (women, young people and engagement, confidence people furthest from the labour building, individualised market) development plans, pre- employment training, job LT (people at social risk search support, wages including disabled individuals, subsidies and on-going individuals with substance abuse support in the workplace issues etc.) (tailored training, NL (people over 55, people with assistance, mentoring etc.) a disability and people who do New co-operation and not receive benefits, partnership models for unemployed youth, ex- integration offenders, people with mental health issues, and people in young offenders institutions) UK-England (ex-offenders, young people aged 14-19 NEET, families facing multiple challenges) UK- Northern Ireland (disabled individuals / those with limiting health conditions, ex-offenders, lone parents) UK-Wales (people made / under notice of redundancy, inactive individuals, carers, care leavers, disabled individual, individuals with significant substance abuse issues, offenders, ex-offenders and those at risk of offending) UK-Scotland (people with learning and physical disabilities, ex-offenders, the long-term unemployed and young people NEET facing labour market disadvantage) Cluster 4 Acceptance of diversity in Expansion and upgrading CY the workplace and the of the operation of labour Systemic FI combating of discrimination market institutions measures in accessing and LU Awareness raising on equal progressing in the labour opportunities/addressing market, including through LT discrimination, increasing awareness-raising, the the employment rate of RO involvement of local

February, 2016 34

Relevant Priorities for ESF Activities Relevant MS (and specific clusters investment in ‘social target group coverage inclusion’ (ESF among disadvantaged Regulation) groups, if relevant) communities and older workers enterprises and the Development of social promotion of local economy (developing employment initiatives. infrastructure) Transnational initiatives for an inclusive labour market 2.3 Significance of ESF investment in ‘Social Inclusion’ in the OPs of the eight Member States covered Available information on the scale of ESF investment in Social Inclusion in the eight Member States, and the analysis of the significance of ESF funding devoted to Social Inclusion, compared to total ESF investment and to national funding in similar activities is presented in Volume II (overview across the EU 27 Member States). In the eight in-depth countries, ESF SI expenditure was compared to the data collected by national researchers concerning national funding on similar interventions. As it is difficult to identify reliable consolidated data on national expenditure on this type of intervention, an estimate could only be provided for three out of the eight countries reviewed: Finland, Lithuania and Austria. In Cyprus, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Romania and the UK, there are no figures available on the funding for comparable activities at the national level. The basis for estimating the level of national funding dedicated to similar interventions is provided below Table 3 in footnotes. Table 3. Expenditure on similar activities by Member State (EUR million) and assessment of the scale of ESF contribution

MS Annual national funding Allocated Community Certified eligible for similar activities contribution (Category expenditure for PA SI / (estimates) 71) / national funding national funding for for similar activities similar activities AT 4,705.5* 0.31% 0.62% FI 383.5** 3.69% 8.65% LT 56.4*** 27.34% N/A *AT: This calculation includes national measures similar to those funded by ESF: PES expenditure on socio-economic enterprises; third sector employment projects supported by the PES; training measures for LTU; support measures for disabled individuals ** FI: Concerning the national budget 2010, the figure would be above €383.5 million, (based on figures from the National Audit Office 2011) including approximately 350 €m for municipalities’ wage-subsidized work, co-ordination of employment and workshops for young people, 17 €m for Employment service centres, 16.5 €m for rehabilitative work and some miscellaneous funding. *** LT: The calculation includes state budget and other national sources of funding allocated for SI related interventions In Austria, certified expenditure under the SI PA only amounts to 0.62% of estimated national expenditure, suggesting that the scale ESF of investment is limited compared to national funding sources. In Finland, this percentage is significantly higher (8.65%), but calculations should be taken with caution, as the volume of relevant national funding is likely to be

February, 2016 35

underestimated. Overall, it can be considered that ESF expenditure on SI in Finland only accounts for a very small fraction of the national investment in ALMP and of investment by municipalities in promoting social work and training and fighting exclusion. The significance of ESF in Finland derives primarily from its contribution to development and innovation, rather than from the scale of funding. In Lithuania, it is estimated that the amount of national funding on SI policies is about EUR 56.4 million per year. As certified expenditure under the SI PA could not be estimated, a comparison with allocated Community contribution for expenditure code 71 for the OP was made. Allocated Community contribution for expenditure code 71 amounts to 27.34% of the estimated national funding for similar activities. In Cyprus, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and the UK, where it is not possible to estimate the amount of national funding for similar activities, ESF is considered to represent a modest fraction of total investment in ‘Social Inclusion’, but nonetheless makes an important contribution in these countries by supporting national policy. In the UK, consultations with the Managing Authorities in each of the four countries of the UK suggested that while ESF made a valuable contribution to efforts to integrate disadvantaged groups, it was recognised that this would represent a very small share of overall national SI spend. In Cyprus, ESF investment in SI supported specific priorities of the national SI policy with a focus on the labour market. In the Netherlands, ESF SI investment complemented national policy by supporting specific interventions targeting youth, as well as people distant from the labour market, offenders, and school leavers with special needs. Similarly in Luxembourg, ESF SI interventions complemented existing national SI policies. It appears that the ESF has played a key role in supporting SI interventions in Lithuania and Romania. The significance of ESF contribution was particularly strong in a context of austerity policies, as described below. . In Lithuania, the Priority Axis ‘Quality Employment and Social Inclusion’ has supported the country’s capacity to fulfil the statutory obligations9 defined by the law on Support for Employment during the economic crisis. ESF became by far the main source of funding for the active labour market policies implemented by the Lithuanian Labour Exchange. The ESF also played a crucial role in terms of ensuring special services for disadvantaged groups as prisoners and ex-offenders, people infected with HIV/AIDS or addicted to psychoactive substances, as national provisions to support the inclusion of such groups were minimal. With regard to the Priority “Increasing accessibility of lifelong learning”, the ESF also played a vital role in funding tailored measures for persons at risk, as such measures could not easily be funded through national provisions. . In Romania, the 2009-2013 period was characterised by the scarcity of public resources and austerity policies. In this context, most of the SI interventions for Roma (with an emphasis on labour market, education and training measures) were made possible by ESF funding. The same may be said with regard to the training of social assistance staff; limited national resources were supplemented by ESF funding.

9 Assessment of the preparation of the situation analysis and outlook for 2014-2020 in the Areas of Human Resources Development and Social Cohesion. Final report. PPMI Group, October, 2013. p. 110-111.

February, 2016 36

2.4 Target groups for ESF investment in ‘Social Inclusion’ in the OPs of the eight Member States covered This section focuses on the specific groups of individuals targeted by ESF SI interventions in each of the eight Member States. Following a description of the target groups, the extent to which this mirrors the groups most likely to face social inclusion challenges at Member State level is discussed. Finally this section looks at any changes in the groups targeted by ESF funding throughout the programming period, specifically assessing the impact of the crisis. 2.4.1 Overview of target groups for SI interventions Overall, SI interventions targeted a wide variety of groups of people, both in employment and out of employment, who could be identified as disadvantaged or in vulnerable situations. In all eight Member States some categories were systematically targeted by SI interventions . Young people in the NEET group, including early school leavers; among them, different subgroups were identified in some cases (e.g. up to five categories of target groups among youth in the OP West Wales and the Valleys in the UK, such as young people with special educational needs, young offenders, young people at risk of joining the NEET group , etc.). . Individuals with disabilities and health conditions, regardless of their labour market status; this can include different types of barrier (including addiction). . Individuals that are furthest from the labour market; this very broad category can include (in addition to individuals from the above-mentioned categories) long- term unemployed individuals, inactive individuals, returners to the labour market, low-skilled jobseekers, older unemployed, etc. . Migrants and ethnic minorities, including Roma, were considered as an explicit target group in all countries reviewed, except in the Netherlands (where it is considered that this category would largely overlap with other existing target groups). The OPs of Cyprus, Finland, Luxembourg and the nations of the UK included women as a broad target group. A more detailed analysis of the gender sensitivity of target group selection is provided in section 2.4.4. All selected Member States target, as part of ESF-funded SI interventions, individuals that are already in the labour market but are considered to be in a precarious situation, at a risk of losing their job and/or falling into social exclusion. This includes for instance low-skilled individuals, older workers and workers with atypical contracts10. In addition to the broad categories outlined above, specific groups facing particular types of challenge to access or remain in the labour market are targeted by SI interventions; this includes people facing alcohol or substance addiction problems, Roma, refugees and asylum seekers, victims of domestic violence, offenders and ex-offenders, homeless individuals and lone parents. It is important to note that the level of detail in the definition of target groups across countries – and OPs – varies; for this reason, it is not possible to carry out a comprehensive or exhaustive mapping of all target groups. Some groups are considered as a distinct target group in some OPs, while other OPs refer to a broader category of

10 In the Netherlands, it is reported that it is not clear whether this category falls under the SI target group as well, depending on the source.

February, 2016 37

‘socially excluded/disadvantaged individuals’ (e.g. national OPs from Austria and Luxembourg), which may encompass sub-groups. Three OPs in the UK (England and Gibraltar, Lowlands and Uplands Scotland, Highlights and Islands) also referred to concepts such as ‘single and multiple disadvantages’ and ‘barriers to work’ in defining their target groups for SI. In addition, national OPs for Cyprus and Lithuania mention that ‘other vulnerable groups’ can be targeted by SI interventions. Table 4 below provides an overview of the target groups identified in the OPs for each of the eight Member States. Table 5 presents in more detail the definition of disadvantaged groups adopted in each OP.

February, 2016 38

Table 4. Overview of main SI target groups across the 8 selected Member States

traditional

offenders offenders

paid, in atypical paid,contracts) in atypical

skilled jobseekers

uals with disabilities of health health of ualsdisabilities with

Early leavers/NEET school ethnic Young from people minorities Refugees, asylum seekers Roma Low Inactiveindividuals Olderunemployed inactive or Mentally individuals disabled Individuals an suffering occupational diseases HIV/AIDS infected people Individuals alcohol/substance with abuse issues

time female workers

......

Young people labour integrate facing to the difficulties market Migrants and ethnic minorities Women Part awayUnemployedthe from individuals labour market/LTU Recipients benefits of Individ conditions Offenders/ Ex (low individualsEmployed ‘at risk’ skilled, low Older workers Lone parents Homeless people Victims domesticof violence Carers Men and women in non occupations

AT              

CY      

FI        

LT           

LU                 

NL              

RO               

UK                      

11 Only if falling into disadvantaged category – specific mention of deaf and blind women.

February, 2016 39

Table 5. Disadvantaged groups defined by OPs in the 8 in-depth study countries

Country OP Definition of disadvantaged groups Austria OP Employment Austria  Disabled individuals (in general as well as specifically young people, older individuals, including older 2007 – 2013 workers, deaf and blind women)  Individuals furthest from the labour market and socially excluded individuals12  Individuals with limited productivity and particular challenges entering the labour market  Young people facing difficulties with labour market integration (particularly with migration background; facing significant problems in the education and training system) OP Phasing out 2007 –  People with disabilities 2013 Burgenland - ESF  Individuals furthest from the labour market  Socially disadvantaged individuals (e.g. social assistance recipients, Roma, migrants and recognised asylum seekers) Cyprus OP ‘’Employment  People with disabilities; Human Capital and  Public aid recipients; Social Cohesion” 13  Migrants;  Mentally disabled people;  Young people who leave prematurely from the formal education system;  Women;  Other vulnerable groups. Finland OP for Mainland Finland  Low skilled, long-term unemployed  Long-term unemployed affected by structural change  Difficult to employ jobseekers (e.g. migrants, disabled individuals, people with multiple health and social problems)

12 This target group is not further defined in the OP, but at project level. The study Inception Report provided an overview of the target groups addressed by the projects funded under this sub-priority axis. 13 Revised OP EHCSC I2007-2013, p. 186. The OP does not incorporate a thorough analysis and explanation of eligible target groups.

February, 2016 40

Country OP Definition of disadvantaged groups  Young people in transition from education to employment and threatened by NEET and social exclusion because of poor educational attainment, poor connections and social skills, and/or family problems  People in atypical employment relationships with loose ties and a precarious position to the labour market  Unemployed women and men in projects aimed at addressing gender segregation Lithuania Human Resources  Women Development OP  Young people  Disabled individuals  Older workers  Prisoners and ex-offenders  Roma  Individuals facing discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation  Early school leavers HIV/AIDS  People addicted to psychoactive substances  Victims of domestic violence and human smuggling

Other groups:  Employed people  Self-employed people  Unemployed people and threatened with unemployment  Long-term unemployed  Inactive people  Older people (aged 55+)  Migrants  Ethnic minorities (except Roma)

February, 2016 41

Country OP Definition of disadvantaged groups  Other disadvantaged people Luxembourg OP 2007-2013  Young people  Early school leavers  Older workers  Unqualified individuals  Wage earners at risk of falling under benefits  Unemployed, including older unemployed  Women  People threatened by social exclusion (Disabled, Drug abusers, Young delinquents, Homeless, Refugees)  Migrants Netherlands OP The Netherlands,  People who have a significant distance to the labour market (priority 1: Action A): focus on women (also ESF 2007-201314 female returners), unemployed aged over 55, people who have a (partial) disability to work/work incapacity; include both long-term unemployed and inactive individuals  Ex-offenders (Priority 2: Action B)  School leavers from special education with learning deficiencies (Priority 2: Action C)  Young people aged <27 (Priority 1: Action J): focus on youth who have additional problems (e.g. unstable situation at home, debts). This particular target group was added to the ESF-activities after the crisis. Romania SOP HRD – Sectoral OP  Roma Human Resources  Disabled persons Development  Young people leaving the State Protection System  Single parents  Offenders and ex-offenders

14 Another group targeted by Action D are low skilled workers who have a job. This group may be considered as one of the target groups for SI.

February, 2016 42

Country OP Definition of disadvantaged groups  Individuals facing problems with drugs and alcohol addiction  Homeless people  Victims of domestic violence  HIV/AIDS infected people  Individuals affected by occupational diseases  Refugees and asylum-seekers  Young and over-45 long-term unemployed UK OP England and  Unemployed or inactive individuals experiencing single or multiple disadvantages Gibraltar  Ethnic minorities  People with, or developing, disabilities or health conditions  Refugees  Lone/other disadvantaged parents  Persistent Jobseekers Allowance claimants  Older workers (either as '50+' or '55-64 years')  Older people (aged 50+) unemployed or inactive  People with low or no qualifications  People with poor basic skills  Young people 14-19 NEET/at risk of NEET.  Offenders/ex-offenders  Homeless individuals  Carers  Individuals with alcohol / substance abuse issues  Women and men in sectors or occupations where they have been traditionally underrepresented  Individuals facing or recently made redundant

February, 2016 43

Country OP Definition of disadvantaged groups  Women disadvantaged in the labour market  Women in part-time work  Low skilled / low paid women workers  Disadvantaged groups least likely to receive training - e.g. over 50's, disabled / with health conditions, minorities  People facing disadvantage making the transition from unemployment to work UK OP West Wales and the  Young people NEET or at risk of NEET Valleys  Young people aged 11 to 19 at risk of under achieving  Young people with special educational needs  Young offenders  Young people from black and minority ethnic communities  Individuals with disabilities and health conditions  Individuals with low skills/ poor basic skills  Older people  Lone parents  Individuals from black and minority ethnic communities  Carers  Men and women in non-traditional employment sectors  Female workers facing disadvantage – e.g. part-time female workers UK OP East Wales  Young people aged 16-18 NEET  Individuals from black and minority ethnic communities  Individuals with work limiting disabilities and health conditions  Lone parents  Older people  Individuals with low skills

February, 2016 44

Country OP Definition of disadvantaged groups  Women working part-time  Men and women in non-traditional employment sectors  Migrant workers UK OP Northern Ireland  People with disabilities and health conditions  Lone parents  Older people (aged over 50)  Young people aged 16 to 19 NEET  Women  Low paid or low skilled women workers  Females in part-time work;  People with low or no qualifications  People with basic skill needs  Individuals without full Level 2 qualifications  Individuals with Level 2 but without Level 3 qualifications  Men and women in non-traditional employment sectors/occupations UK OP Lowlands and  Long-term unemployed or inactive individuals with no or low qualifications and facing barriers to work Uplands Scotland  Young people 16-19 NEET or at risk of NEET – particularly care leavers, with physical/mental health issues, and those abusing alcohol or drugs  Lone parents  Carers  Individuals with disabilities, health conditions or learning difficulties  Low skilled and vulnerable workers  Low income workers  Unemployed/inactive individuals from minority ethnic groups  Men and women seeking to re-enter the labour force

February, 2016 45

Country OP Definition of disadvantaged groups  Men and women in non-traditional employment sectors/occupations  Offenders/ex-offenders  Individuals with drug and alcohol problems  Homeless people  Refugees UK OP Highlands and  Unemployed, inactive people, esp. with no or low qualifications and facing multiple barriers Islands  Young people 16-19 NEET, particularly care leavers, young offenders, with health/mental health issues, abusing drugs or alcohol,  Young people at risk of becoming NEET  Low-paid, low skilled and vulnerable workers  Individuals with poor basic skills  Individuals with poor qualification levels  Older people (and those seeking to re-enter the workforce)  Disabled people or those with health conditions  Individuals made/facing redundancy  Homeless individuals  Individuals with drug or alcohol issues  Unemployed/inactive individuals from minority ethnic groups  Migrant workers and refugees  Women returners  Offenders and ex-offenders  Men and women in non-traditional employment sectors/occupations  Lone parents  Carers  Individuals affected by physical peripherality

February, 2016 46

Country OP Definition of disadvantaged groups  Individuals disadvantaged by their recent employment history

February, 2016 47

2.4.2 Meeting the challenges: Responsiveness of target group selection to national social inclusion challenges Data available at the European level on key indicators of disadvantage (for example, poverty levels) and on the representation of different ESF SI target groups among the unemployed and the long-term unemployed, is not sufficiently granulated to allow for an analysis of whether the appropriate groups have been targeted with sufficient funding in order to address the challenges facing them. National experts were therefore asked to comment on the responsiveness of target group selection to national social inclusion challenges. On the whole, their assessment does not indicate any significant gaps and suggests that the selection of the target groups in the OPs was based on a thorough analysis of national challenges (even if some cases quantified data on the target groups are lacking, for example in Cyprus). For example in the Netherlands, the OP’s strategy for SI was based amongst other elements on a SWOT-analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) of the Dutch labour market, drawing on a wide range of data sources. 2.4.3 Mirroring national policy priorities: level of match of ESF SI target group selection with national SI policy priorities Across the eight Member States the ESF SI target groups matched with national policy priorities on social inclusion, reflecting the previous finding that OPs were consistent with the objectives set by national policy documents. It is worth noting that in the Netherlands, national policies do not clearly distinguish particular target groups at national level; yet, if there are specific obstacles for certain groups, special interventions might be justified. In this context, ESF-funded actions dealing with target groups only supported existing national policy and programmes and did not introduce new target groups. Minor differences with national policy priorities were only reported in Cyprus and Austria. In Cyprus, the 2007-2013 OP presented individuals with mental health problems as an eligible target group more explicitly than national policy documents. In Austria, women with severe sight and hearing impairments where identified as a specific ESF target group (beyond what would be the case in national policies). This resulted from a study indicating the particular labour market integration challenges facing this group. The evidence collected suggested complementarity with measures funded by national sources to support selected target groups during the 2007-2013 period: . In Austria, the national OP clearly mirrored the priorities of the National Action Plan for Social Inclusion, aiming to support the same target groups. The NAP on Social Inclusion makes direct references to the European OMC in Social Inclusion and the relevant CSRs received by Austria. . The target groups of the Cypriot OP are seen to be a good match with those of national interventions. Although individuals with mental health issues are not clearly identified as target groups at the national level, Cyprus has ratified the UN convention on the rights of persons with disabilities (which includes those with mental disabilities) and ESF was therefore used to underpin the commitment to the integration of such individuals. . In Romania, the OPs complemented national interventions (the key rationale for defining target disadvantaged groups is to complement the limited national resources available to support those most in need). . In The Netherlands, ESF supported existing programmes for disadvantaged groups by, for instance, the increasing the number of participants and/or supporting particularly vulnerable individuals. In addition, ESF funding helped to ‘close the gap’ with national provision for groups such as ex-offenders and

February, 2016 48

school leavers with learning difficulties (at times combined with physical challenges), who normally hardly benefit from specific support. . In Finland, groups targeted under Priority Axis 2 were also eligible for support from national measures to combat unemployment and promote social inclusion. ESF-funded measures have a stronger focus on the hard-to-place than other national measures, although the latter also focus on the long-term unemployed facing multiple problems in entering the labour market. . In Lithuania, the Human Resources Development (HRD) OP supported various programmes, strategies, and laws aimed at the social inclusion of disadvantaged individuals – including the Law on the Social Integration of the Disabled, Vocational Guidance Strategy, Law on Social Services, and the National Strategy of Overcoming the Consequences of Ageing. . In Luxembourg, the target groups supported by the ESF SI actions closely mirror those supported by national social inclusion actions. This is confirmed in implementation reports and interviews with the Managing Authority. . Across the four nations of the UK, the ESF OPs made reference to a range of national policy documents and strategies of relevance to Social Inclusion, and interviewees in the Managing Authorities also described how this alignment with national policy had continued through the programme period. For example: - In England ESF supported key employment policies and mainstream provision including the New Deal, Pathways to Work and subsequently the Work Programme for unemployed individuals, alongside policies related to offenders, ethnic minorities, lone parents and older workers amongst others. In addition ESF was used to trial new approaches to working with challenging groups, for example thorough the ESF Families with Multiple Problems programme; - In Wales the youth employment agenda, and strategies to respond to increased unemployment as a result of the economic crisis, such as Pathways to Employment and Traineeships, became a focus for ESF provision; and - In Northern Ireland the ESF contribution to national policies included Success through Skills, Pathways to Success and Steps to Work policies. 2.4.4 Gender sensitivity of target group selection Some of the SI target groups identified are directly related to gender: . All women were considered as a target group in four of the reviewed OPs (Cyprus, Finland, Luxembourg, and East Wales-UK). By 2006, only Luxembourg had a female employment rate below the EU average (and a significant gender employment gap); in Cyprus the female employment rate was slightly above the average but the gender employment gap was close to 20 percentage points. In contrast, the UK and Finland appeared as relatively good performers with employment rates of about 65%. . Some OPs included as target groups women disadvantaged in the labour market (UK England and Gibraltar) and part-time female workers (e.g. UK England and Gibraltar, East Wales, Northern Ireland, West Wales and the Valleys). The UK had a relatively high share of female workers in part-time employment in 2006, which may have contributed to selecting this group as a target. The Austrian OP had a target of 50% of female beneficiaries and also specifically targeted sight and hearing disabled women.

February, 2016 49

Figure 1. Female employment rates, shares of female employment in part-time employment and gender gaps in terms of employment rates (2006)

80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 -20.0 -40.0 EU-28 AT CY FI LT LU NL RO UK

Female employment rate (%) Share of female employment in part-time employment (%) Gender employment gap (percentage points)

. The OP in Romania and the six OPs in the UK identified SI target groups which included larger proportions of women than men, or groups almost exclusively composed of women, such as lone parents and carers. . Some OPs targeted as a group women and men in specific occupations, with a view to addressing segregation across 'female' and 'male' professions, for instance in Finland and the UK (where the OPs from England and Gibraltar, West Wales and the Valleys considered ‘women and men in non-traditional occupations’ as a target group). In the Netherlands, the OP promoted a similar objective. . Austria and the UK set an overarching target of having 50% female beneficiaries in ESF funded actions (51% in the UK; in both countries irrespective of a gendered assessment of need). Table 6. Gender-related disadvantaged groups defined by Ops in the 8 in-depth study countries

Country OP Gender-related SI target groups (including groups that may include higher proportion of one gender)

Austria OP Employment Austria . Disabled individuals (in general as well 2007 – 2013 as specifically young people, older individuals, including older workers, deaf and blind women)

OP Phasing out 2007 – . None 2013 Burgenland – ESF

Cyprus OP ‘’Employment . Women Human Capital and Social Cohesion”

Finland OP for Mainland Finland . Unemployed women and men in projects aimed at addressing gender segregation

Lithuania Human Resources . Women

February, 2016 50

Country OP Gender-related SI target groups (including groups that may include higher proportion of one gender) Development OP

Luxembourg OP 2007-2013 . Women

Netherlands OP The Netherlands, . People who have a significant distance ESF 2007-2013 to the labour market (priority 1: Action A): focus on women (also female returners),

Romania SOP HRD – Sectoral OP . Single parents Human Resources Development

UK OP England and . Lone/other disadvantaged parents Gibraltar . Carers . Women and men in sectors or occupations where they have been traditionally underrepresented . Individuals facing or recently made redundant

. Women in part-time work . Women disadvantaged in the labour market.

. Low skilled / low paid women workers

UK OP West Wales and the . Lone parents Valleys . Carers . Men and women in non-traditional employment sectors

. Female workers facing disadvantage – e.g. part-time female workers

UK OP East Wales . Lone parents . Women working part-time . Men and women in non-traditional employment sectors

UK OP Northern Ireland . Lone parents . Women . Low paid or low skilled women workers . Females in part-time work; . Men and women in non-traditional employment sectors/occupations

UK OP Lowlands and . Lone parents Uplands Scotland . Carers . Men and women seeking to re-enter

February, 2016 51

Country OP Gender-related SI target groups (including groups that may include higher proportion of one gender) the labour force

. Men and women in non-traditional employment sectors/occupations

UK OP Highlands and . Women returners Islands . Men and women in non-traditional employment sectors/occupations

. Lone parents . Carers

2.4.5 Target group evolution across the programme period The SI target groups in the eight selected Member States remained broadly unchanged during the programme period, although there were some changes in the Netherlands and Austria as a result of the economic crisis. In the Netherlands, youth was added as a target group for ESF intervention when youth unemployment became a relevant issue both in the national and in the European context. The Netherlands re-allocated some ESF funds to address rising youth unemployment. ESF sources were used to support its Action Plan Youth Unemployment (2009 to 2011); activities addressed education and labour market issues and provided extra support to young people who faced (multiple) problems, such as debts, or unstable conditions at home. In Austria, where the initial emphasis of the national OP had been on low skilled individuals and older workers, as a result of the crisis, the focus shifted more to young people in response to deteriorating labour market conditions for this target group. Around €33 million of funding was shifted from PA1 to PA2 to support measures for young people facing difficulties with labour market integration (particularly with migration background and facing significant difficulties in the education and training system). As a result of this programme change, the share of young unemployed supported by co-financed measures in PA2 increased from 15% (in 2007/2008) to 40.2% (in 2012). In Finland, the crisis had an impact on the structure of beneficiaries among target groups, but categories and definitions of SI target groups were not modified: . Youth become a more prominent target group during the implementation period: the share of younger beneficiaries among all ESF beneficiaries rose by 15% and 18% for Priority Axis 1 actions, and by 26% to 31% within Priority Axis 2 actions. . Due to the drop in labour demand, the emphasis on immigrants as a target group was down-played; projects were launched focussing on job retention and addressing structural unemployment. Similarly across the nations of the UK, the target groups were broadly unchanged across the programme period, although in some cases there was a shift in emphasis towards the needs of young people NEET and individuals made redundant, or at risk of becoming so, as a response to the crisis. Thus, for example, in Wales, the balance between resources directed towards the inactive under Priority 2 shifted from 80:20 to closer to 50:50 to respond to those made redundant.

February, 2016 52

2.4.6 The impact of the economic crisis on programming and target group coverage One of the key features of the 2007-2013 ESF programming period was that planning was largely undertaking during a period of economic upswing, whereas implementation took place during a significant economic downturn. This impacted on the size and the specific needs of social inclusion target groups, as is demonstrated by the figures below. In 2007 most of the selected Member States had employment rates which were relatively close to the EU average or above; the exception was Romania, where it did not reach 60%. Employment rates declined in most countries from 2007 to 2010 with the exception of Austria and Romania; with this decrease being particularly marked in Lithuania (from 65% to 57.6%). Unemployment rates rose in most countries in the same period, with the exception of Austria. Between 2010 and 2013 unemployment continued to increase very strongly in Cyprus, and to some extent in Luxembourg and in the Netherlands, but decreased significantly in Lithuania. Most of the eight Member States experienced significant fluctuations in their youth unemployment rates over the 2007-2013 period, with the exception of Austria and Luxembourg. As Figure 2 below shows, youth employment rates in 2013 were higher than in 2007 in each Member State. In Lithuania, youth unemployment quadrupled between 2007 and 2010; the situation eased after 2010 but levels of youth unemployment remained above 20% in 2013. Youth unemployment rates in Romania and the UK were also above 20% in 2013, at 19.9% in Finland, and reached 38.9% in Cyprus. Figure 2. Employment rates (15-64 years old) in 2007, 2010 and 2013 in selected Member States in the EU

80.0

75.0

70.0 2007 65.0 2010 60.0 2013

55.0

50.0 EU CY LT LU NL AT RO FI UK

February, 2016 53

Figure 3. Unemployment rates (15-64 years old) in 2007, 2010 and 2013 in selected Member States and in the EU

20.0 18.0 16.0 14.0 12.0 2007 10.0 2010 8.0 6.0 2013 4.0 2.0 0.0 EU CY LT LU NL AT RO FI UK

Figure 4. Youth unemployment rates (15-24 years old) in 2007, 2010 and 2013 in selected Member States and in the EU

45.0 40.0 35.0 30.0 25.0 2007 20.0 2010 15.0 2013 10.0 5.0 0.0 EU CY LT LU NL AT RO FI UK

The sudden change in the economic cycle had implications on the implementation of ESF actions. Not all OPs have been modified, although a reallocation of funds across Priority Axis and or actions have taken place in Lithuania, Finland, the Netherlands and Luxembourg. Table 7 below summarises the main changes to OPs and target group coverage across the 2007-2013 period; these are discussed in more detail below. Table 7. Overview of types of changes to the OP related to the integration of disadvantaged groups in the period 2007-2013

Country OP Type of change Reasons Any impact on specific target groups

AT OP . Reallocation of . Increased youth . Stronger focus on Employment funding to unemployment the integration of Austria 2007 – measures for young people at 2013, OP young people the expense of Phasing out measures for 2007 – 2013 older workers Burgenland – ESF

CY OP . Limited changes to . The initial N/A

February, 2016 54

Country OP Type of change Reasons Any impact on specific target groups ‘’Employment allocate funding to objectives of the Human Capital assess the work OP and PA were and Social ability of still considered Cohesion” individuals with appropriate to disabilities address challenges in the mid-term.

FI OP for . Reallocation of . The OP was . More emphasis on Mainland funding within realigned to SI measures, but Finland existing funding national the impact on categories (no responses to the specific target formal changes to crisis in 2009. groups cannot be the OP) identified

. Priority given to job retention, job creation and SI measures. . Less emphasis on priority 4 ’Transnational and inter- organisational co- operation in ESF activities’

LT Human . Reallocation of . Due to the crisis, . More emphasis on Resources funding within the the initial focus unemployed Development OP towards on measures to individuals OP reintegration of increase the unemployed supply of labour . More emphasis on people into the was less youth, persons labour market relevant. with addictions, and students with . Some changes in special needs measures specific (targeted by new to social inclusion measures)

. Less emphasis on disabled individuals (one measure cancelled)

LU OP 2007-2013 . Reallocation of . The OP was . Shift in the budget among ‘relaunched’ balance of priority axes and taking into funding allocated lower budget for account the away from older PA1 (most closely structure of the workers and related to SI) effective women towards consumption young people . Shifting priorities during the first within half of the programming . PA 1 period 2007- 2013 as well as the impact of economic crisis.

February, 2016 55

Country OP Type of change Reasons Any impact on specific target groups

NL OP The . Frontloading of . Changes were . More emphasis on Netherlands, ESF funding in the introduced in supporting young ESF 2007- first years of the result to the people 2013 recession economic crisis, which had . Inclusion of youth affected the as a separate labour market target group in position of young 2009 (reallocation people of a funds from Action A to Action J)

RO SOP HRD – . No change made . The initial N/A Sectoral OP to the *OP objectives of the Human OP and its PA Resources were still Development considered appropriate to address challenges in the mid-term.

UK OP England . Reallocation of . The changes . More emphasis on and Gibraltar, budgets made were supporting youth OP West Wales introduced in (England, Wales, and the . Introduction of reaction to the Scotland and Valleys, OP new ‘response to crisis and Northern Ireland) East Wales, OP redundancy’ redundancies Northern programmes . In Wales, shift in Ireland, OP targeting among the balance of Lowlands and other groups funding allocated Uplands participants at risk away from the Scotland, OP of labour market economically Highlands and disadvantage inactive and Islands toward individuals made redundant/at risk of redundancy

No changes affecting ESF SI interventions were observed in Cyprus and Romania, although both countries have been affected by the crisis: . In Cyprus, although the effects of the socio-economic and financial crisis contributed to a re-thinking of national SI policy, no significant changes were made to the OP concerning SI-related interventions. The only change was the addition of a funding priority to establish a national system for assessment of the level of disability a worker faces and to what extent they still have a capacity to perform certain tasks. . In Romania, the OP and its funding priorities, including the SI dimension, were not changed. As the ESF had only started to operate at the onset of the crisis, Romanian authorities opted to maintain the planned Priority Actions and corresponding budgets.

February, 2016 56

A significant impact of the crisis on the funding priorities within the OP can be observed in Lithuania (on overall ESF priorities and specific SI interventions) and to some extent in Finland, Netherlands, Luxembourg and the UK. Young people benefited from more significant support than initially planned in Luxembourg, the Netherlands and the UK, in reaction to increases in youth unemployment rates, while the focus shifted to supporting the unemployed (including youth) in Lithuania and to young people, job retention, job creation and SI measures in Finland. As mentioned above, Austria also enhanced its focus on the integration of young people (at the expense of measures for older workers). . In Lithuania, the crisis had an impact on overall ESF priorities. When the OP was launched, the focus of ESF measures was in a context of job creation and labour force shortages, on increasing labour supply in the country (e.g. promoting the return of Lithuanian emigrants, creating conditions for the disabled to integrate into the labour market, etc.). However, following the economic crisis in 2008-2009, priorities shifted towards reintegration of unemployed people into the labour market. Funding for some measures to increase labour supply was drastically reduced15 and most of the funds were redirected for the measure ‘Integration of job-seekers into the labour market’. During the period between December 2007 and May 2013, funding of this measure more than doubled and increased by LTL 431 million (EUR 125 million). Some changes were also made to specific SI interventions within the 2007-2013 period: one measure focusing on the ‘Development and Implementation of Vocational Rehabilitation Programmes for the Disabled, Training of Professionals’ was cancelled, while new measures were launched to address youth integration into the labour market, psychological and social rehabilitation of persons with addictions, and better access to studies for students with special needs. . In Finland, no major changes have been made in the OP, but a realignment of ESF to national responses to the crisis was done in 2009. This did not require formal amendments as the funding was reallocated within existing funding categories. The changes mostly affected PA-2, the most relevant concerning SI, where the number of projects and resource allocation had been lower than originally planned. Regional offices were advised to favour calls emphasising job retention, job creation and SI measures. Another impact of the crisis was that Priority 4 ’Transnational and inter-organisational co-operation in ESF activities’ was down-played. Before the crisis, it was expected that Finland would enter a period of labour shortage, and therefore Priority 4 was designed to promote cooperation in labour immigration. . In the Netherlands, the most significant change was the inclusion of youth as a separate target group in 2009 as a result of the economic crisis, which had affected the labour market position of young people. This resulted in a transfer of funds from Action A to Action J within Priority 1. Another impact of the crisis was the fact that some ESF funds were frontloaded during the early years of the recession. . In Luxembourg, the OP was ‘relaunched’ taking into account its implementation during the first half of the programming period, as well as the impact of the economic crisis. Funding for PA2 (specific objective 2.2 ‘adapting the competences and the knowledge of workers’) almost tripled. On the other hand,

15 “Development of human resources in enterprises“, “Development of human resources in public sector“, “Reorientation of workforce in rural areas from agriculture to other activities“, “Establishment and implementation of vocational rehabilitation programmes for the disabled, training of specialists“, “Reduction of discrimination and prevention of social problems in the labour market“, “Promotion of the return of Lithuanian emigrants” . Assessment of the preparation of the situation analysis and outlook for 2014-2020 in the Areas of Human Resources Development and Social Cohesion. Final report. PPMI Group, October, 2013.

February, 2016 57

the budget for PA1 (most closely related to SI) was reduced from EUR 19.3 to 15.0 million. Within PA1, priorities also shifted: while the budget of older workers and women was significantly reduced (both from EUR 4.8 to 2.0 million), and the budget of the measures concerning persons distant from the labour market slightly decreased (from EUR 4.8 to 4.4 million), the funding of measures aimed at the integration of youth increased from EUR 4.8 to 6.5 million. . In the UK the crisis led to a change in emphasis in groups targeted and the profile of funding, with young people/NEETs taking on a greater priority across all four nations (although in Wales there was a shift in the balance of funding allocated away from the economically inactive and toward individuals made redundant, or at risk of redundancy as a result of the crisis). Although not specifically targeting disadvantaged groups, other ‘response to redundancy’ programmes were introduced which would again have included participants at risk of labour market disadvantage, such as the low skilled. 2.5 Outputs and results indicators for the SI priority axis For each PA of (partial) relevance to SI, a list of output and result indicators included in the SFC database is provided in the Annex to Volume II of this report. There is a considerable heterogeneity regarding the number and type of outputs and result indicators set at the PA level, across the OPs and PAs reviewed. Baseline targets and/or final targets are not available for part of indicators. 2.5.1 SI PA output indicators and targets and their relation to funding priorities Most of output indicators set at the PA (or sub-PA level) relate to the number of participants (direct beneficiaries) involved. Relatively few OPs had defined indicators and targets concerning the number of supported entities, or related to products. Examples of such indicators include: the number of projects launched under PA3 of the Employment OP and under PA2 of the Burgenland OP in Austria; and the number of structures of the social economy established and the number of transnational initiatives and partnerships supported under PA 6 in Romania. . Most output indicators related to participants (expressed in numbers or in proportion of participants) concern specific target groups: - disabled individuals (e.g. in CY, AT, LT, NL, RO, UK) - young people (e.g. AT, FI), including early school leavers and young people in the NEET group/or at risk (NL, various OPs in the UK) and participants form juvenile custodial institutions (NL) - women (e.g. AT, FI), focusing on economically inactive women (CY) - lone parents (various OPs in the UK) - dependent individuals (RO) - detainees (NL) and ex-offenders (LT) - people who suffer from addictions (LT) - unemployed not entitled to benefits (NL) - older individuals (e.g. AT, various OPs in the UK) - migrants (FI) - ethnic minorities (FI, various OPs in the UK) - Roma (RO) - number of professionals in the field of social inclusion (trained) (RO). In addition, indicators for other categories of participant less narrowly defined (e.g. ‘individuals at social risk’, ‘vulnerable’ or ‘distant from the labour market’, facing ‘multiple deprivations’) can also be identified, for example in Luxembourg, Lithuania and Romania.

February, 2016 58

In the UK OPs, some PAs supporting access to employment opportunities, (which also had the highest degree of concentration of ‘Social Inclusion’ activities) aimed to reach a large number of participants. In England for instance, a total of 887,000 participants were targeted under PA1 and 24,500 under PA4, including 177,000 14-19 year old NEETs (or at risk of NEET) under PA1, and 4,900 under PA4. In addition, indicators were set for the proportion of participants with disabilities, lone parents, unemployed and inactive aged 50 and over, ethnic minorities and female participants. Baseline targets and/or final targets are not available for all indicators included in the SFC database. For most of the indicators where a final target is available, the number of participants targeted seems low considering the size of the total population and of the target group population in the geographical area covered by the OP. This suggests that ESF interventions generally target a small fraction of the target group at the national level. For example, in Luxembourg, only 510 participants were targeted in total as part of Objective 1.4 focusing on supporting individuals at a distance from the labour market. In the Netherlands, Action J, focusing on youth aged below 27, targeted 20,000 participants in total. However, for a few OPs, a higher coverage of the target group can be seen. This includes for instance Romania, with a target of 150,000 participants from vulnerable groups in qualification programmes (including 65,000 Roma and 20,500 individuals with disabilities). In Lithuania, 25,500 individuals in ‘social risk’ groups were targeted. 2.5.2 SI PA result indicators and targets and their relation with funding priorities Overall, indicators used at the PA level focus on results and impacts which are measurable relatively easily, such as access to a job, participation in a training course or achievement of a qualification. However, for SI interventions, such ‘hard’ indicators may be insufficient to measure the results achieved by participants. ‘Hard results’ are clearly-definable and quantifiable and can show the progress a participant has made towards the intended outcomes of a programme. In contrast, ‘soft results’ refer to the intermediary stages on the road to securing a ‘hard’ outcome, and can include changes in personal attributes, attitudes and behaviours, representing positive progress towards, rather than the achievement of, the ultimate intended outcomes. For many individuals facing greatest disadvantage and at most distance from the labour market, soft results may represent a key way by which their achievements under ESF provision can be recorded. Soft results represent steps towards the ultimate intended education, training and employment outcomes, which for some may be unlikely to be achieved through a single intervention. Consequently soft results may, for the most disadvantaged participants, be the only means of identifying their achievements and the result of the ESF expenditure. It is therefore notable that across the range of OPs reviewed, very few of the indicators included in the SFC database measured the ‘soft results’ achieved by participants - which are particularly important for individuals facing barriers to access the labour market. Only four indicators in two countries aimed to measure the progress made in the activation of participants towards integration of disadvantaged groups into the labour market: . One of the indicators for PA3a of OP Employment Austria, focusing on the integration of people with disability into employment, concerns the share of participants brought closer to the labour market; a similar indicator was formulated under PA2 of the OP Burgenland, also for disabled participants. . In England (under PA4 of the Convergence programme and PA1 Competitiveness and Employment programme) and Northern Ireland ( under

February, 2016 59

PA1), one of the targets was to reach a share of 45% of economically inactive participants who on leaving are engaged in job search activity or enter further learning to prepare for work. Most of the result indicators relevant to SI in the SFC database concern the number of participants in employment at the end of the programme. Not all countries included indicators in the SFC on the sustainability of jobs obtained by participants; although this type of indicator was not included in the SFC at the PA level, it may be in place at the intervention level. When available, sustainability indicators generally measure the status of participants six months after the end of the intervention. Such indicators can be found at the PA level in AT (within both OPs), CY, LT, NL (PA 1 Action A on people with a labour market distance, and Action J on youth, PA 2 Action C on people in special education) and in some OPs in the UK (England- Convergence and Competitiveness programmes, Northern Ireland and Scotland- Highlands and Islands). Other result indicators for PA relevant to SI concern the number (or share) of participants who entered a training course at the end of the measure, or have achieved a (partial) qualification. These can be identified for instance in the NL (PA1 Action J on youth, PA2 Action B on detainees and Action C for young people in special education), RO (differentiating between target groups: vulnerable individuals, Roma, disabled, children who leave the care system, professionals in the field of social inclusion) and the UK OPs. In Luxembourg, concerning PA 1, the only type of result indicator included in the SFC database is the ‘result ratio’, or the percentage of participants in employment or training at the end of the measure16. Therefore, the same type of result indicator is used for objective 1.4, focusing on supporting individuals at a distance from the labour market, and objectives 1.1 to 1.3, focusing on older individuals, women and youth. 2.6 Links between national ESF thematic priorities and objectives and European priorities National ESF thematic priorities and objectives in the eight selected countries were found to be closely aligned with the priorities set in the Lisbon strategy and Europe 2020 for disadvantaged groups, and with the Employment Guidelines. While the degree of fit between the OPs and EU policies was rated as ‘good’ for each Member State, evidence was more limited on the impact of CSRs (and points to watch) on the initial development of the OP priorities. This was also true in terms of the extent to which subsequent CSRs during the programming period appeared to influence programme implementation, although over the period 2007-2013 countries have received CSRs relating to the situation for specific groups already targeted within national ESF thematic priorities and within their OPs. The assessment of the alignment between ESF priorities and European priorities is summarised in Table 8 below. In countries with several OPs, all are jointly addressed.

Table 8. Assessment of overall alignment between the OPs and the EU level priorities

Countr OP Fit with EU Key aspects y priorities

AT OP Good fit . The Austrian national OP was directly influenced Employment by the National Action Plan on Social Inclusion Austria 2007 which clearly references European priorities, – 2013, OP including those of the OMC Social Inclusion and

16 More detail is available in the 2013 AIR for Luxembourg, where a breakdown is provided by gender and age groups.

February, 2016 60

Countr OP Fit with EU Key aspects y priorities Phasing out the CSRs 2007 – 2013 Burgenland

CY OP Good fit . Alignment of the OP with seven out of the total ‘’Employmen of eight Guidelines for the Employment Policies17 t Human Capital and . Alignment of the OP with four of the eleven Social main priorities / challenges of the NRP and with Cohesion” the National Strategy Report on Social Protection and Social Inclusion (NSPSI-2006).

FI OP for Good fit . In Finland, the government reforms, and the Mainland ESF activities have been very consistently Finland aligned with the Lisbon and Europe 2020 Strategy and CSRs on NRPs and the AGS throughout the Programme period.

LT Human Good fit . Clear alignment of ESF sub-priorities ‘Promote Resources employment and participation of people in the Developmen labour market’, ‘Enhance social inclusion” with t OP Lisbon/ Europe 2020 targets of employment increase, reduction of population at risk of poverty and social exclusion and reduction of early school leaving18

LU OP 2007- Good fit . The OP was drafted taking into account the 2013 revisited Lisbon strategy as well as the Employment Guidelines19 (especially Guidelines 17 and 18)

. Alignment with ‘points to watch’ (2007-2009) and CSRs (2011-2013) concerning focus on older workers, early school leavers and unemployed youth

NL OP The Good fit . Good fit with priorities of the Lisbon and Europe Netherlands, 2020 strategies. ESF 2007- 2013 . The selection of priorities and target groups was at least partly influenced by CSRs, in particular on improving labour market supply.

. In 2009, the introduction of a new action focusing on youth reflected in part priority attached by the Commission and EU strategies to youth issues20.

17 OP EHCSC 2007-2013, Ex-ante evaluation, p. 93-113. 18 Lithuania has received a number of CSRs in these areas during the 2007-2013 period: 2012-2013 CSR 3: “Tackle high unemployment amongst low-skilled and long-term by refocusing resources on active labour market policies while improving their coverage and efficiency. Improve the employability of young people […]”; 2007 and 2008 CSR 4: “[…] intensify efforts to increase the supply of skilled labour […]”; 2007 and 2008 CSR 5&6: “[…] improving youth employability”; CSR 2004-2006: “Strengthen active labour market policies to help unemployed or inactive people move back into employment” and 2013 CSR 4: “Implement concrete targeted measures to reduce poverty and social exclusion […]”. 19 In 2007-2009, Luxembourg did not receive CSRs but received points of watch concerning the employment rate of older workers, the number of early school leavers and the youth unemployment rate of youth, these points to watch have been converted to CSRs for the years 2011, 2012 and 2013. 20 The Netherlands did not receive any CSRs in the area, as youth unemployment remained low compared to other Member States.

February, 2016 61

Countr OP Fit with EU Key aspects y priorities

RO SOP HRD – Good fit . The development of the OP was based on pre- Sectoral OP accession exercises (2006 Joint Inclusion Human Memorandum, 2006 Joint Assessment Paper on Resources Employment Policies). Developmen t . Good fit with Employment Guidelines (and more specifically Guidelines 17, 18 and 19 concerning PA 6 on SI) with the objectives of the Lisbon Strategy as regards the integration on the labour market of the inactive as well of the vulnerable groups such as the long-term unemployed, the Roma, placing an emphasis on training and vocational training as the main vehicle for labour market integration.

UK OP England Good fit . The OPs made explicit reference to the Lisbon and (and subsequently Europe 2020) strategies, the Gibraltar, UK National Reform Programme and the OP West relevant CSRs to the programme. Wales and the Valleys, . These links were reflected in the priorities, OP East target groups and activities selected. Wales, OP Northern Ireland, OP Lowlands and Uplands Scotland and OP Highlands and Islands Furthermore, the 2008 Commission Recommendation on the active inclusion of people excluded from the labour market called on Member States to ‘design and implement an integrated comprehensive strategy for the active inclusion of people excluded from the labour market, combining adequate income support, inclusive labour markets and access to quality services’. It called for comprehensive policy design defining the right mix of the three strands, as well as integrated implementation across the strands. This should involve policy co-ordination at the national, regional and local level and with all relevant partners. Closely interlinked in relation to the implementation of the Recommendation, from the perspective of ESF SI interventions, the most relevant strand is that relating to inclusive labour markets. Table 9 assesses the extent to which ESF SI priorities and activities were suitable to meet the priorities of the Recommendation (which was adopted after the OPs were drafted). Two of the ‘practical guidelines’ by which the priorities are to be implemented are excluded here, as they either fall in the realm of human capital development or relate to addressing incentives and disincentives in the tax system, which is outside the scope of ESF SI investment.

February, 2016 62

Table 9. Assessment of the extent to which ESF priorities were suited to meet the priorities for inclusive labour markets outlined in the 2008 Recommendation on active inclusion

Country

work supportwork

omy

Addressexcludedneeds of labourpeople facilitate to market integration qualityPromote jobs retention job Promote and advancement Provide and tailored responsive personalised seekersservicesjob to Provide supportsocial to econ adaptabilityPromote and provide in

AT      

CY   

FI     

LU      

LT   

RO   

UK     Note  denotes strong emphasis;  denotes some emphasis.

2.7 The ESF OPs Intervention logics An assessment of the intervention logics in the OPs of the eight countries is provided below. It is based on the information gathered through the desk review of the OPs and of other relevant documentation regarding the ESF 2007-2013 programming period, as well as initial interviews with the MAs. The key building blocks of the intervention logics are discussed in turn. 2.7.1 Main objectives of relevance to the theme of SI The SI-relevant thematic objectives and priority axes are intended to contribute to, or further develop existing national strategies for SI, while supporting the high-level ESF priorities formulated in the Regulation. Overall, SI interventions targeted a wide variety of groups, both in employment and out of employment that could be identified as disadvantaged or in vulnerable situations. In all eight Member States some categories were systematically targeted by SI interventions: young people in the NEET group, including early school leavers; individuals with disabilities and health conditions, regardless of their labour market status; individuals that are furthest away from the labour market; migrants and ethnic minorities, including Roma, were considered as an explicit target group in all countries reviewed, except in the Netherlands (where it is considered that this category would largely overlap with other existing target groups).The OPs of Cyprus, Finland and Luxembourg, and the nations of the UK included women as a broad target group. . There was a wide variety of types of intervention and activities to support the integration of disadvantaged groups into the labour market. Within the ‘Social Inclusion’ priority area, six relevant clusters of action can be distinguished, each of them addressing different groups. These clusters are relevant for all or most of the eight countries:

February, 2016 63

. Cluster 1: supporting and enabling actions (relevant for AT, CY, FI, LU, LT, RO and UK); . Cluster 2a: actions which support the labour market integration of disadvantaged groups through advice, counselling, guidance and training (relevant for AT, CY, FI, LU, NL LT, RO and UK-England, Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland); . Cluster 2b: actions which have employment as an output - such as subsidy measures, sheltered employment, employment in the ‘second’ labour market etc (relevant for AT, CY, FI, LU, NL LT and RO); . Cluster 2c: actions aimed at sustaining employment for new entrants or for disadvantaged groups in work but at risk (relevant for AT, LU and UK-England, Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland); . Cluster 3: pathway approaches (relevant for AT, FI, LU, LT, NL and UK- England, Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland); and . Cluster 4: systemic measures (relevant for CY, FI, LU, LT and RO) 2.7.2 Choice of objectives and their relevance for SI Secondly, the motivation behind the choices of particular actions and target groups was analysed, in particular considering to what extent the ESF SI objectives were a response to country/territory specific problems or opportunities, and to what extent they followed the drivers from the EU policy (indications in strategic guidelines, coordination policy processes, country specific recommendations). While it is difficult to assess the responsiveness of target group selection to national social inclusion challenges (due to the lack of available data), on the whole, no significant gaps can be identified. In a number of countries, the development of the OP resulted from background socio-economic assessments. Furthermore, national ESF thematic priorities and objectives in the eight countries were found to be closely aligned with the priorities set for disadvantaged groups in the Lisbon strategy and Europe 2020 and by the Employment Guidelines. While the degree of fit between the OPs and EU policies was rated as ‘good’ for each Member State, evidence was more limited on the impact of CSRs (and points to watch) on the initial development of the OP priorities. This was also true in terms of the extent to which subsequent CSRs during the period appeared to influence programme implementation, although countries have received CSRs relating to the situation for specific groups already targeted within national ESF thematic priorities and within their OPs. 2.7.3 The scale and reach of outputs, results and impacts Furthermore, a preliminary assessment was undertaken of the significance of the planned reach of groups targeted by the OP and the appropriateness of the outputs and results, given the nature of activities. Overall, the information gathered so far indicates that the selection of target groups is comprehensive, but it is difficult to assess if the scale and nature of activities implemented is appropriate. Baseline targets and/or final targets are not available for output and result indicators included in the SFC database. Overall, ESF activities are considered to support national policy in most of countries, but ESF investment only represents a fraction of total national investment.

February, 2016 64

2.7.4 Programme Theory (why ESF investment should work) Programme theory is a term used to describe the assumptions, implicit in the way a programme is designed, which describe how the programme's actions are supposed to achieve their intended results. It encompasses the ‘intervention logic’ which underpins the programme or individual activity, and considers the inputs (financial and non- financial), activities and outputs generated, and the impacts resulting. A clearly set-out programme theory and intervention logic can be helpful in establishing a common understanding amongst delivery staff and stakeholders of what the programme is intended to achieve and how. Programme theory and the development of intervention logics is consequently a key element in programme development. In reviewing the intervention logics for each OP, the national experts followed a common structure (as shown in Annex 1), and drew upon the analysis of the information collected and interviews undertaken to first establish the components of the intervention logic, and second, to review the rationale for the decisions made and their contribution towards the achievement of their intended objectives. According to the experts’ assessments, the rationale for the OPs and the priorities chosen were judicious, although they may have been challenging to implement in a context of recession. In Austria, a key rationale behind the national OP was to stabilise the level of support for people with disabilities achieved through the Employment Offensive of the Austrian Federal Government for occupational reintegration of people with disabilities. In addition, the OPs backed the implementation of the means-tested guaranteed minimum income (which implied the access of former recipients of social assistance to active labour market measures by the public employment service), with the development of specific integration measures for people furthest from the labour market. For further development of specific measures for this target group, the regional partnerships implemented by the Territorial Employment Pacts in all nine Bundesländer were invited to carry out innovative projects co-financed by the ESF. The process of preparation of the Austrian OP was supported by the experience and the results of the prior programme planning period. Concerning the OP for the region of Burgenland, the actions implemented are in line with the National Strategic Reference Framework and mirror those in the OP for Austria. In the Netherlands, the rationale for national policies is that having a job is the best way to fight poverty and exclusion; the approach chosen was to support existing policies via the ESF and focus on those furthest from the labour market. In the UK, work was similarly seen as the main route out of poverty, with ESF funding being used to support national policies and programme (e.g. the New Deals and subsequently the Work Programme) by providing ‘pre-entry’ assistance to potential participants, as well as helping move more marginalised individuals (e.g. offenders, individuals with substance abuse issues, and others) to take steps towards sustainable employment. In Luxembourg, similarly the SI ESF interventions complemented the existing social inclusion policies, while in Cyprus the funding priorities of the OP reflect a strategic choice for co-financing selected national policies, in order to avoid fragmentation of expected policy results. In Romania, it was envisaged that ESF and its actions would support the country’s efforts to close the development gap with the rest of the EU. The OP was drafted while preparations were underway for Romania’s accession into the EU. To this end, interventions focused on job creation, participation in education and training, innovation and experimentation, including institutional development to achieve multiplier effects and induce positive change in the medium and long-term. It was assumed that ESF funding would increase both scale and scope for existing national

February, 2016 65

intervention, as well as supplement it by covering new actions or target groups, with a special focus on those at a severe disadvantage. In Finland, the underlying programme theory was that more individualised, tailored and integrated interventions would lead to better impact for disadvantaged groups and that better cooperation and partnerships at the local and regional level and inter- disciplinary teamwork would also achieve better results. However, this theory has proved difficult to implement in a period of economic recession, with financial pressures on local authorities (the main coordinators), and simultaneous reforms of PES and local authorities causing turmoil and hampering performance. In Lithuania, the main assumption was that investment would help to achieve a higher equilibrium between labour supply and demand, and that employment incentives would increase labour demand. On the other hand, helping individuals to acquire knowledge and practical skills valued on the labour market and increasing their motivation to work were assumed to increase the labour supply and foster participation in the labour market. Higher levels of employment would help to improve the social situation and guarantee higher standards of living and quality of life. However this ‘theory of change’, did not take into account the low wages paid by some employers in Lithuania, which discourage participation in the labour market and make the above-mentioned measures to promote employment ineffective. A greater focus on job quality would have been required according to the expert.

February, 2016 66

3 Analysis of interventions selected for in-depth study This section provides an analysis of 58 interventions reviewed in the eight Member States. 3.1 Introduction A wide variety of interventions and activities are supported by ESF at national level, with the aim of enabling disadvantaged groups to move closer to the labour market, ultimately achieve sustainable reintegration, or to maintain their position in the labour market21. Given the wide variety of types of intervention and activity to support the disadvantaged groups identified, a framework of clusters was developed for this study22. In this section, Phase 2 interventions are analysed using this cluster framework. The different clusters are: . Cluster 1: supporting and enabling actions – this cluster comprises actions which deliver support to individuals facing a range of disadvantages, to enable their active engagement with the labour market. Such actions are intended to directly tackle the issues which hinder such progression, and can be seen as having a preparatory or supporting function. Therefore such actions may not directly result in entry to employment, but rather reduce barriers, establish momentum and equip individuals to engage in actions with more direct employment outcomes, as in Cluster 2. . Cluster 2: labour market integration – here actions are intended to support the labour market entry of disadvantaged individuals, and include actions most readily described as active labour market policy measures. Three sub-sets of actions can be distinguished: a) Actions which support the labour market integration of disadvantaged groups through advice, counselling, guidance and training, etc.; b) Actions which have employment as an output - such as subsidy measures, sheltered employment, employment in the ‘second’ labour market, etc.; and c) Actions aimed at sustaining employment for new entrants or for disadvantaged groups in work, but at risk. However, as described below, the number of interventions classified under Cluster 2c were limited, with efforts to sustain new employment secured sometimes being a feature of interventions under different Clusters (or indeed under the Human Capital Priority Axes), and so presented under the section focusing on Cluster 2a, 2b and Cluster 3 interventions. Although no separate analysis is therefore presented for Cluster 2c, the importance of such follow-up actions should be noted, as they often help to sustain employment which would otherwise fail in the early months of integration. Where such approaches have been used, they have been successful and should therefore arguably become of feature of such social inclusion activities more widely. . Cluster 3: pathways approaches - this cluster features interventions which follow a pathways approach, recognising that disadvantaged groups may not achieve immediate labour market outcomes but may require a linked set of actions and interventions to move them closer towards, and into, work. This

21 Actions to sustain employment tend to be funded under the Human Capital Priority. 22 The cluster framework was developed in the inception phase and adapted from proposals made in the preparatory study.

February, 2016 67

cluster can therefore include combinations of measures which appear in Clusters 1 and 2. . Cluster 4: systemic measures - this cluster features measures with the objective of influencing systems, institutions or cultural contexts. These could include capacity building and networking actions, as well as activities to tackle underlying discriminatory attitudes among employers or wider society. In the following sections, actions/interventions pertaining to each of the clusters are presented and key information categories are analysed by cluster: . The aims and objectives of interventions selected, scale of funding, and target groups; . The effectiveness of interventions to date (outcomes and results),versus expectations – with reasons for under- or over-performance; . The efficiency of supported interventions: how do the costs compare with the outputs and results achieved; . The sustainability of the outcomes resulting from participation in the intervention – such as continued employment or learning outcomes, where data are available; . The sustainability of the interventions themselves – either through the continuation/mainstreaming of their activities wholly or in part, or any influence on policy or practice elsewhere, following the end of ESF support; . The gender sensitivity and Community Added Value of these actions; and . The success factors and elements of good practice across the reviewed intervention, as well as what has worked less well and lesson learnt for further interventions. 3.2 Overview of interventions covered in the Phase 2 research The analysis focuses on 58 interventions across eight countries (AT, CY, FI, LT, LU, NL, RO UK), covering 14 OPs in total (see Table 10). Table 10. Number of in-depth interventions for Phase 2 assessment

MS OPs Number of in-depth interventions for Phase 2 assessment OP Employment 5 AT OP Phasing Out Burgenland 2007-2013 ESF 2 CY OP Employment, Human Capital and Social Cohesion 5 FI OP ESF for Continental Finland 7 LT Human Resources Development OP 7 LU ESF OP 5 NL ESF OP 823 Sector Operational Programme Human Resources RO 924 Development

23 Two of the interventions in the Netherlands eventually proved to have ultimately received little or no ESF support because of misunderstandings about eligible funding and are therefore not discussed in detail here (55 Plus and Niet-uitkeringsgerechtigden naar werk - Gem. Ede (Bringing those not receiving or not being entitled to a benefit back to work in the municipality of Ede (mid NL). 24 The expert report discusses- with varying levels of detail – 14 interventions. For the purposes of this analysis 9 have been included.

February, 2016 68

MS OPs Number of in-depth interventions for Phase 2 assessment OP England and Gibraltar, Convergence and Regional 4 Competitiveness and Employment OP West Wales and the Valleys Convergence 1 OP East Wales Regional Competitiveness and 1 Employment UK OP Highlands and Islands of Scotland Convergence 1 OP Lowlands and Uplands Scotland Regional 1 Competitiveness and Employment OP Northern Ireland Regional Competitiveness and 2 Employment Most of the interventions selected could be allocated to a single main cluster, even when some of their activities could be included under different clusters. However, two of the interventions in Lithuania grouped under Cluster 2 are best described as belonging to two sub-clusters (one intervention under Cluster 2a and 2c and another intervention under Cluster 2b and 2c). Given the limited number of interventions classified under Cluster 2c, these interventions are presented under the section focusing on Cluster 2a and Cluster 2b interventions. The table below provides an overview of the characteristics of the interventions analysed in detail, in terms of cluster allocation and target group coverage.

February, 2016 69

Table 11. Overview of reviewed interventions

MS and OP Intervention Cluster Target groups

abusers

term unemployed

Interventions with Interventions

LM integration integration LM

Supporting/enabling Supporting/enabling

–

1 interventions 2a counselling, through training and guidance 2b employment outputs aimed at Actions 2c: employment sustaining Pathway approaches 3: Systemic interventions 4: Long Disabled/health ill conditions/mental health people Young disadvantaged/NEET Immigrants migrants / / refugees minorities Ethnic drug or Alcohol exOffenders and offenders Families multiple facing disadvantages Mixed those / groups multiplefacing disadvantages Individuals redundant/at risk Older people/ older workers Women market institutions Labour

Heidenspass extended   AT: OP Employment Production School VIA   

Clearing  

Mosaik  

Lebensarbeit  

Female Migrants: AT: OP Phasing Information – Activation –   Out Burgenland Integration’ 2007-2013 ESF Qualified personnel in the   metal sector

CY: OP Educational Priority Zones    Employment, Human Capital  and Social Implementation of a New System for Assessing Cohesion   Disability and  Functionality

February, 2016 70

MS and OP Intervention Cluster Target groups

abusers

term unemployed

Interventions with Interventions

LM integration integration LM

Supporting/enabling Supporting/enabling

–

Grant Scheme for Facilitating Access to

Employment for People   with Disabilities

Greek language training programme for   immigrants  Grant Scheme for Facilitating Access to

Employment for   Vulnerable Groups 

FI:OP ESF for Välkky     Continental Finland Välke    

Suunto  

ANKKURI  

Youth support-project for

youngsters  

February, 2016 71

MS and OP Intervention Cluster Target groups

abusers

term unemployed

Interventions with Interventions

LM integration integration LM

Supporting/enabling Supporting/enabling

–

Pointti  

Valtaväylä  

Support for temporary

employment  

Vocational training (Project “Improvement of     LT: Human employment possibilities”) Resources Development OP Support for skills acquisition (Project

“Improvement of   employment possibilities”)

Subsidised employment (Project “Improvement of   employment possibilities”)

Job rotation (Project “Improvement of    employment possibilities”)

Labour market integration of psychotropic substance   addicts treated in VšĮ Meikštų

February, 2016 72

MS and OP Intervention Cluster Target groups

abusers

term unemployed

Interventions with Interventions

LM integration integration LM

Supporting/enabling Supporting/enabling

–

“Towards employment” – development of intermediation services    for employing individuals with impaired hearing”

Forward  

LU: ESF OP Process  

ValiFlex  

Fit4Job Seniors     ANELO   

ESF 2009 AB/GA    

NL: ESF OP People with a disability     Amsterdam

February, 2016 73

MS and OP Intervention Cluster Target groups

abusers

term unemployed

Interventions with Interventions

LM integration integration LM

Supporting/enabling Supporting/enabling

–

55 plus   

Reintegration custodial   institutions agency Jeugd aan zet in Midden Holland (youth first to take      action Mid Holland). " Niet- uitkeringsgerechtigden naar werk” - Gem. Ede (Bringing those not

receiving or not being      entitled to a benefit back to work in the municipality of Ede

Door naar werk (Transition

into work)    

Developing skills and RO: Human     Resource qualifications for women Development OP (Femina - cresterea abilitatilor si calificarilor

February, 2016 74

MS and OP Intervention Cluster Target groups

abusers

term unemployed

Interventions with Interventions

LM integration integration LM

Supporting/enabling Supporting/enabling

–

Counselling and training     for the unemployed (Consilierea si instruirea somerilor CIS 2012, ID 58477)

‘Lifeguards and divers’ for

the RO economy      (Salvamari şi scafandri pentru economia romanească ID 32508)

Improving access of      youngesters in detention to vocational training and Labour market integration (Imbunatatirea accesului tinerilor aflati in

penitenciare la programe de formare profesionala si integrarea pe piata muncii pe parcursul si dupa executarea pedepsei", ID 4127)

February, 2016 75

MS and OP Intervention Cluster Target groups

abusers

term unemployed

Interventions with Interventions

LM integration integration LM

Supporting/enabling Supporting/enabling

–

Together for the future

(Impreuna pentru viitor;     ID 78018)

Centre for HR       development in the rural areas (Centru de

dezvoltare a resurselor umane din mediul rural, ID 47674)

Infomation and       professional couselling for the roma (Centre de consiliere şi mediere profesională pentru persoanele de etnie romă, ID 4587)

Innovative activities

aimed at facilitating        labour market integration for groups at a disadvantage (COMPETENT – Activităţi inovatoare în vederea

February, 2016 76

MS and OP Intervention Cluster Target groups

abusers

term unemployed

Interventions with Interventions

LM integration integration LM

Supporting/enabling Supporting/enabling

–

Training, Counselling,     Employment – interregional model for LM reintegration for former detainess (Formare,

Consiliere, Ocupare – Model interregional de reintegrare a persoanelor private de libertate; ID 64274)

Cooperation for the  faciliation of employment

amongst the blind via ICT skill (ID 28124)

OP England and Leicester and Rutland Gibraltar, Probation Service –   Convergence and REACH Regional Competitiveness Female sex worker pilot

and Employment project, Exit     

February, 2016 77

MS and OP Intervention Cluster Target groups

abusers

term unemployed

Interventions with Interventions

LM integration integration LM

Supporting/enabling Supporting/enabling

–

ESF Support for Families with Multiple Problems

(ESF Families    programme)

YPLA KickStart your

Future    

OP West Wales and the Valleys Potensial   Convergence

OP East Wales Regional The Peer Mentoring

Competitiveness Programme RCE   and Employment

OP Highlands Outer Hebrides and Islands of Employability Support

Scotland Programme, Comhairle   Convergence nan Eilean Siar

OP Lowlands and Uplands Scotland Regional Glasgow Works     Competitiveness and Employment

February, 2016 78

MS and OP Intervention Cluster Target groups

abusers

term unemployed

Interventions with Interventions

LM integration integration LM

Supporting/enabling Supporting/enabling

–

The Cedar Foundation’s OP Northern Vocational and

Ireland Regional Employability Service,   Competitiveness Cedar and Employment The Give and Take

Scheme  

February, 2016 79

3.3 Cluster 1 - Supporting and enabling actions 3.3.1 Introduction The cluster mapping exercise showed how Cluster 1 interventions were distributed across the eight Member States (summarised in Table 12 below). Six countries (AT, CY, FI, LT, LU and UK) have activities that clearly fall into this cluster25. The main target group focus is on disadvantaged groups that are hardest to help as they face multiple challenges to integration. The most frequently mentioned target groups in order of importance are: . Young people at risk of dropping out; in the NEET group- and very low skilled young people with other challenges (e.g. migration background, disability, etc.); . Migrants; . Disabled individuals; . Long-term unemployed individuals with complicating challenges such as substance abuse issues, mental health issues; . Ex-offenders; and . Older job seekers. Table 12. Summary of Cluster 1 Interventions by Member State

Country Cluster 1 - Supporting and enabling actions AT Qualification and support measures for disadvantaged young people and other target groups CY Increasing labour market participation among vulnerable groups (eliminating obstacles) FI Support for the integration of migrants Preventing the social exclusion of young people LU Increasing the employment rate of older workers and for women (eliminating obstacles) Facilitating the integration of young people into the labour market (eliminating obstacles) Activating people furthest from the labour market (eliminating obstacles) LT Addressing discrimination and promotion of activities for people at social risk (eliminating obstacles, e.g. for disabled individuals, substance abusers etc.) Developing individualised forms of learning UK By nation: England Provision to help offenders and ex-offenders re-integrate, develop employability skills and move towards work. Northern Ireland Support for individuals with a range of disadvantages: to improve their employability and engage/re-engage with work, learning and training; and take up voluntary opportunities. Addressing the barriers to participation for young people NEET or facing disadvantage. Improving the employability, self-esteem and confidence of young people (and other disadvantaged groups) unable to access mainstream training. Arts based approaches to improve literacy for young people and others Supporting people with physical, sensory and learning disabilities to improve their

25 Romania and the Netherlands have some relevant interventions, but their focus is more clearly on advice, guidance, and training aiming at labour market integration. As a result these have been allocated to cluster 2a.

February, 2016 80

Country Cluster 1 - Supporting and enabling actions confidence, skills and employability. Area-based initiatives to engaged disadvantaged groups to improve employability and progress towards work, and reduce inequalities of those in marginalised areas Integration, ESOL and intensive one to one support and guidance for minority ethnic groups Promoting employability for women away from the labour market for some time. Wales Overcoming barriers to work for economically inactive females, lone parents and those facing additional disadvantages through personal and soft skill development. ILM Programme including confidence building, self-esteem training and paid work placements for people economically inactive. Targeting young people far from the labour market to explore the feasibility of self- employment. Increasing labour market participation for economically inactive individuals (esp parents/lone parents) linked to progression routes – e.g. group mentoring and 1:1 support; building confidence and qualifications; addressing specific needs; and information, advice and funding. Work experience to help disabled people make the transition to employment. Projects for young people 11-25 in school, NEET or at risk of NEET, including in-school provision. Training for 16+ economically inactive in CV writing, ICT, work tasters, interview techniques and job search. Practical workshops to engage young people in STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) studies and careers. Helping black and minority ethnic young people overcome barriers to participating in learning. Family employment initiatives to engage with disadvantaged families and referrals to mainstream provision. Scotland Programmes for young people to build confidence, increase employability and support self-employment.

Re-engaging vulnerable young people and supporting their progression. Support for offenders and young people at risk, including core skill development, job search skills and support, confidence building, information on training and work experience placements. Provision for recovery from mental ill-health through education and employment. Planning and workplace skills provision for young people 15-19 NEET or at risk of becoming so. As Table 12 shows, Cluster 1 interventions across the six Member States focus on overcoming obstacles and offering individualised guidance and counselling, for example when intervening to prevent school drop-out. The activities focus on psychological support, counselling, help with substance abuse issues, activities to build self-esteem and motivation (including group work and individual counselling); guidance; the acquisition of core and soft skills; language training; work with whole families and the development of support structures26 (including the assessment of functional ability for disabled individuals). The emphasis is firmly on individualised and tailored support to address personal, psychological and social obstacles that would mitigate against successful participation in skills development, work experience or workplace integration.

26 This measure, implemented in Cyprus, has been classified as containing actions relevant to clusters 1 and 4 as they combine the establishment of a support structure with the provision of targeted support services to disabled individuals. It is presented in detail as part of Cluster 4.

February, 2016 81

3.3.2 The Cluster 1 interventions reviewed The remainder of this section considers the Cluster 1 interventions that were reviewed in- depth. A total of seven interventions pertaining to Cluster 1 were reviewed as part of Phase 2, covering four Member States (AT, CY, FI and the UK), namely: . Female Migrants: Information – Activation – Integration (AT, Burgenland); . Greek language training programme for immigrants (CY); . Youth support-project for youngsters (FI); . Pointti (FI); . Female sex worker pilot project, Exit (UK); . Potensial (UK, Wales); and . The Give and Take Scheme (UK, Northern Ireland). An overview of the interventions reviewed is provided as shown below. As the table illustrates, the target groups served and activities undertaken were broadly representative of the Cluster 1 population as described above. Availability of evaluation evidence for the Cluster 1 interventions

Out of the seven interventions reviewed within Cluster 1, only the three interventions in the UK have been made the object of an evaluation: . Interim and final evaluations are available for the ‘Potensial’ project (Wales). . ‘The Give and Take’ (Northern Ireland) was the object of an external evaluation report (Locus Management). . The ‘Female sex worker pilot project’ (England) has been evaluated by the National Offender Management Service (NOMS). Concerning the Pointti project in Finland, an intermediate report on the intervention was prepared in 2014.

3.3.3 Aims, objectives, target groups and scale of funding The scale of the interventions reviewed varied significantly in terms of the total budgets (ESF and matched funding) allocated to them. The budgets ranged from EUR 83,000 for the smallest intervention targeting female migrants (Austria), to EUR 17.1 million for the Potensial project (UK, Wales). Four interventions had budgets of between 2.5 and 5.1 EUR million.

February, 2016 82

the Give and Take project (UK, Northern Ireland) and the Youth support for youngsters project (FI). Three out of the seven interventions reviewed under Cluster 1 targeted disadvantaged young people. Their objectives were as follows: . The aim of the Potensial project (UK, Wales) was to help 11 to 19-year-olds in North West Wales achieve their full learning and economic potential through the provision of additional, tailored and intensively supported services. Operating through three strands, the project targeted young people: aged under 16 at risk of underachieving at school, aged 16-19 attending further education provision but at risk of not achieving their potential, and aged 14 to 19s NEET or at risk of becoming so. The project offered a range of new provision including enhanced curriculum and qualifications, School Youth Workers, Learning Coaches, On-Site Inclusion Centres, and Careers Advisors and Mentors. It sat within the wider context of support mechanisms, strategies and action plans to engage and support young people in Wales, tackle poverty and raise aspirations – particularly for NEET or those at risk of becoming so. . The Give and Take Scheme implemented by Include Youth (UK, Northern Ireland) aimed to improve the employability and increase the self-esteem and confidence of vulnerable young people aged between 16 and 21, the majority of whom have experience of the care system. Recognising that the target group faces a range of barriers to learning and work, provision was tailored to individual need following a robust assessment and action planning process, providing incremental steps towards improved employability skills. . The objective of the Youth-support project for youngsters (FI) was to enhance educational and vocational possibilities for young people, especially NEETs. The aim of the project was to offer opportunities to gain everyday life skills, to develop guidance and counselling capacity and to avoid marginalisation and social exclusion of young people. Another three interventions focused on migrants; they aimed at improving their social integration and communication skills, and lifting barriers to their socio-economic integration: . The project Female Migrants: Information – Activation Integration (AT, Burgenland) targeted unemployed female migrants of Turkish origin. The objective was to improve the social integration of this group who had very little experience of and self-confidence in engaging in social life outside their family environment. The measure followed a holistic approach to encourage the social integration of participants and helped them to overcome difficulties in their social environment and in contacting public authorities. Subsequently, skills relevant for labour market integration were also developed, including linguistic competences. . The aim of the Greek language training programme for immigrants (CY) was to achieve effective social inclusion of third country nationals living in Cyprus who do not speak Greek (estimated to be more than 12% of the total inhabitants). The objective was to help beneficiaries to communicate with ease in their daily lives, participate in the labour market, as well as in the political, cultural and social activities in Cyprus. . The aim of the Pointti project (FI) was to help immigrants and related authorities to cope with the Finnish norms, bureaucracy and new Integration Act. In 2008– 2010, its objectives were to develop a model for a guidance and counselling system for immigrants in the country, a model for employment-based immigrant reception, as well as job-coaching and vocational education for immigrants. The objectives were revised during the 2011–2013 period to focus on the mainstreaming of practices at the customer and stakeholder level, developing a web information database for immigrants, publishing guides and supporting the restructuring of existing municipal and employment services.

February, 2016 83

In addition, one of the interventions analysed in the UK targeted a very specific and narrow target group. The Female sex worker pilot project (UK, England) targeted female offenders with experience of working in the sex industry, to test a new approach to building resilience for their subsequent release into the community. The project aimed to improve offender education, training and employment opportunities, increase access to existing resettlement provision, and fill gaps in existing provision for offenders in custody and in the community. The project rationale is that women engaged in sex work are a hidden population within the criminal justice system, being unlikely to disclose their history due to concerns over recrimination, bullying and stigmatisation. They commonly suffer from multiple disadvantages, including substance abuse, violent or abusive relationships and financial pressures, and are often reluctant to access mainstream services. An overview of Cluster 1 interventions is provided in Table 13 below, including their allocated and actual expenditure. 3.3.3.1 Financial implementation rates of the interventions Financial implementation rates for interventions in Cluster 1 range from 64% to 100%. Lower implementation rates relate to some interventions which are still ongoing (such as the Greek language training programme in Cyprus and Potensial in the UK (Wales). In other cases, where implementation rates were somewhat below target, this is usually attributable to a longer than anticipated preparatory phase, leading to a delayed full utilisation of project funds. 3.3.4 Contribution to national policy priorities All intervention in this cluster can be seen as contributing to national/regional policy priorities, although the scale on which they are able to do so clearly varies. The Greek language training programme in Cyprus is intended to make an important contribution to the civic integration of migrants, particularly in areas where such communities are concentrated. Linguistic skills are a bedrock not only for integration into the host society (and the reduction of social tension) but are also generally a pre- requisite for labour market integration, thus serving several goals. A focus on the integration of migrants is also offered by the Pointti project in Finland. The specific contribution here is a recognition of the lack of transferability of qualifications or issues linked to aborted qualifications (specifically in the health sector, which attracts a significant share of migrant workers). The youth support project for youngsters in Finland can be seen as a contribution to the implementation of the Youth Guarantee – and indeed a preventative measure to support retention in education and smoothing of transitions from school to work. Both the Give and Take and the Potensial projects in the UK (Northern Ireland and Wales, respectively) are also aimed at supporting young people in preventing school drop-out and aiding transitions at a time when youth unemployment has become an ever increasing concern across the EU.

February, 2016 84

Table 13. Overview of Cluster 1 interventions

Allocated Actual Implementation Short description of objectives and MS Project name expenditure expenditure Rate Duration Target groups activities

AT Female Migrants: EUR 83,000 EUR 83,000 100% 04/12 – Female migrants at risk of social Intercultural training (in Turkish Information – 12/12 exclusion, in particular of Turkish language), individual counselling, Activation – origin personal development, communication Integration’ training, practical training (e.g. relevant statutory rules, contact with legal authorities), and project work.

CY Greek language EUR 3.25 million EUR 2,077,762 64% 11/10 - Third country nationals resident Greek Language Courses offered free of training 05/15 in Cyprus, over 15 years of age, charge during 50 and 90-minute programme for and who do not speak Greek sessions, taking place twice a week for immigrants each group. Each group consisted of 10 to 15 persons.

FI Youth support- EUR 5.06 million EUR 4.25 million 84% 01/12/09- 15-24-year-old NEET young A Counselling and Guidance Centre project for 31/12/14 people (CGC) provided easy access to career youngsters counselling services for young people. CGC offered voluntary confidential counselling and career advice, and supported transitions to education. The project applied dialogical, activating and counselling side-by-side, divided into short (under 7 hours) and long-term counselling.

FI Pointti EUR 2.92 million EUR 2.56 million 88% 01/01/08 – Immigrants families, with no As part of the immigrant population adequate vocational targeted ALPO programme, a national 31/12/14 qualifications and registered with development programme coordinated by the PES. the Ministry of Employment and Economy, the Pointti project (2009– Indirect target groups: 2014) helped immigrants and related employers, job coaches, authorities to cope with the Finnish vocational teachers and norms, bureaucracy and new Integration institutes, Employment and Act (1.9.2011). Economic Development Offices, and regional authorities.

UK Female sex worker N/A (Included in N/A N/A 08/11 – Female prisoners with a history The project was based on the premise pilot project, Exit main REACH 06/15 of working in the sex industry. that women engaged in sex work are a contract) hidden population in the criminal justice system. Project aimed to support female prisoners with a history of working in the

February, 2016 85

Allocated Actual Implementation Short description of objectives and MS Project name expenditure expenditure Rate Duration Target groups activities sex industry face two main challenges: identification and pressures placed on women to return to the industry following their release.

UK Potensial EUR 16.7 million EUR 10.9 million 65% 06/11 – Young people: aged under 16 Three strands of activity helping engage, 12/14 years at risk of exclusion; aged re-engage, motivate and inspire 11 to 19 16-19 moving to further year olds at risk of underachievement or education but at risk of becoming NEET to realise their full underachievement; and aged learning and economic potential, through 14-19 years NEET/at risk. the provision of additional, tailored and intensively supported services.

UK The Give and Take EUR 3.6 million EUR 3.6 million 100% 06/2011 - Young people aged 16-21 years, Project aims to improve the Scheme (1.4 EUR 04/14 NEET, and with experience of the employability and self-esteem and million from care system confidence o f vulnerable young people ESF) aged 16 - 21, most with experience of the care system and facing barriers to learning and work. Participants are offered a menu of personalised support, over a period of two years, to improve their employability, self-esteem and confidence.

February, 2016 86

3.3.5 Effectiveness This section reports the outputs and results of the Cluster 1 interventions reviewed. The effectiveness of an intervention can be assessed in a number of ways: . Against the targets set for the intervention in terms of outputs and results; . Against similar interventions (aimed at similar target groups in comparable socio- economic contexts), whether funded by ESF or solely from national sources. An assessment against own targets needs to take into account how targets were originally formulated and how appropriate these targets were vis à vis the specific target group and the context in which the intervention is operating. Available evidence on how such targets are set is relatively limited. Generally speaking, stakeholders (project promoters, implementing bodies, etc.) interviewed for this study indicate that where an organisation has prior experience of delivering similar projects under ESF funding, targets are adapted experientially. Often a dialogue takes place between implementing bodies, MAs and promoters of individual interventions around such targets. There is no clear indication that comparators outside the scope of ESF interventions provide an important benchmark for such target setting. In the section on efficiency below, an attempt is made – where methodologically feasible – to compare performance against comparable interventions. Due to a dearth of counterfactual impact evaluation, as will be seen below, the extent to which this can be achieved is limited. Table 14 sets out the types of output and result indicators available for interventions in this cluster. Table 14. Types of output and results indicators for Cluster 1

Output indicators Result indicators Participants  Number of individuals  Number of participants in employment participating  Number of participants entering further learning  Number of participants gaining a qualification/certification  Number of vocational examinations passed  Number of trainers trained  Number of employers offering work placements for clients  New jobs created  New jobs for women  New enterprises created  Individuals attending briefings  Number of participants preparing a CV  Number of participants completing mock interviews/developing interview skills  Number of participants taking part in job tasters/placements  Participants gaining further positive outcomes The outputs and results of the considered interventions are shown in the tables below.

February, 2016 87

Table 15. Outputs achieved (number of persons supported) against expected, Cluster 1

MS Intervention Actual Expected Achievement outputs outputs against target AT Female Migrants: Information – Activation 26 Not specified N/A – Integration

CY Greek language training programme for 10,800 15,000  72% immigrants

FI Youth support-project for youngsters 857 980  87%

FI Pointti 380 325  117%

UK Female sex worker pilot project, Exit 55 100  55%

UK Potensial 5,393 6,930  78%

UK The Give and Take Scheme 301 218  138%

Note: arrows indicate the following  Over performance (>110%)  Performance between (90%-110%)  Under performance (<90%) N/A indicates that the indicator is not available for the intervention. The number of persons supported was close to, or above, target for all interventions, except for the Greek language training programme for immigrants (CY), which had an initial target of 15,000 participants, and the Female sex worker pilot project (UK, England), which was trialled for the first time. The latter project had a target of reaching 100 women; by July 2014, it had engaged with 55. Since the project has been extended to June 2015, the project lead was confident that this target would be met. As mentioned above, the Greek language training programme and Potensial are also still ongoing, which impacts the extent to which the targeted number of participants has been reached. Table 16. Target versus actual results, Cluster 1 MS Intervention Results Expected Achievement results against target AT Female Migrants: Information – Activation – Integration Number of participants in employment at 1 N/A(no target N/A the end of the programme set) CY Greek language training programme for immigrants Share of participants receiving a 33.7% 70%  48% certification Number of trainers trained 136 50  272% FI Youth support-project for youngsters

Completed qualifications 17 15  114%

Number of employers offering work 4 12  33% placements for clients FI Pointti New work placement n/a 10 n/a

February, 2016 88

MS Intervention Results Expected Achievement results against target New jobs for women n/a 6 n/a Integrated into employment (additional compared to 37 No target set n/a prior to intervention) New enterprises 1 n/a n/a Completed qualifications 6 15  40% Attended briefings 10,243 2,195  467% UK Female sex worker pilot project, Exit Employability(share of participants who 49% N/A (no target N/A have prepared their CV) set) Interview skills (share of participants who 30% N/A (no target N/A received outcomes for completing mock set) interviews or developing interview skills provision) UK Potensial Number of participants gaining 1,037 1,856  56% qualifications Number of participants entering further 299 600  50% learning Participants gaining further positive 1,046 1,770  60% outcomes UK The Give and Take Scheme Number of participants achieving essential 234 153 153% skills qualifications Number of participants achieving at least 250 174 144% one other recognised qualification Number of participants taking part in job 245 174  141% taster/job placement Number of participants entering 37 22 168% employment

Note: arrows indicate the following  Over performance (>110%)  Performance between (90%-110%)  Under performance (<90%)

The results obtained in relation to originally established targets differ across and indeed within projects. No targets had been set for some small-scale pilot projects and for some aspects of interventions. It is notable that only the interventions in the UK report employment targets (as well as results), whereas interventions in other countries which report results data linked to integration into employment (e.g. Female migrants, AT) had not elaborated any targets. This could be seen as indicative of a fundamental difference in approach. UK projects – even within Cluster 1, which is arguably aimed at the most disadvantaged groups – have a significant focus on targets and the achievement of these targets, whereas in other countries, such as Austria, there was an explicit desire not to set targets for such intervention, ostensibly to avoid any potential perverse incentives (e.g. gaming, creaming) and allowing for low threshold access approaches. In the UK, this is indicative of the wider approach within labour market policy which emphasises not only a ‘work

February, 2016 89

first’ approach, but also an increasing focus of ‘payment by results’, which encourages target setting. The difficulties faced in integrating the target groups of these interventions rapidly into the labour market are reflected in the fact that none of the interventions which have set employment related targets have (thus far) met them. In the absence of longer- term monitoring, it is thus difficult to monitor the impact of such ‘early supporting interventions’ – an issue which will be picked up in the conclusions around monitoring and evaluation of SI interventions more generally. The performance against targets on qualifications gained also remains somewhat disappointing, with interventions generally achieving between 40-65% of their targeted completed qualifications. Only the Finnish youth support project over-performs in this area. In a number of cases this is linked to data not being available on final results, for example the evaluation of the Pointti project is currently under way and this seeks to assess reasons for under-performance in certain areas. Over-performance against targets can be found in relation to the training of trainers and the provision of briefings in the Pointti (FI) and Greek language training (CY) projects. Providing a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of Cluster 1 interventions is challenging due to gaps in available information, lack of formal evaluation evidence, and types of result expected. As Cluster 1 interventions aim to lift barriers to employment for disadvantaged groups, rather than foster their direct integration into the labour market, one of the key expected results would be soft results, which can also be described as ‘the distance travelled’ by participants. This covers, for instance, improvements in self- confidence, autonomy, and a lower perceived distance to the labour market, etc. The Potensial project (UK, Wales) achieved a range of ‘soft’ outcomes among participants in addition to supporting people to acquire qualifications or engage in further learning. Of the 5,393 participants, 1,046 obtained other positive outcomes from the project. Similarly, there were benefits for project partners, who reportedly worked well together (despite being new to each other); referrals between the partners also worked well. Moreover, the project evaluation report provided insights on the perceived results and wider benefits drawn from surveys and consultations with young beneficiaries, delivery staff, wider stakeholders, as well as parents and guardians27. The report described that overall participants respected and valued the support provided to them, appreciated that participation was voluntary, and felt that the project had resulted in a range of benefits for them. The main benefits cited by participants included both ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ results, such as the achievement of qualifications and acquisition of basic skills, and improved confidence, raised aspirations and heightened motivation. The majority of participants interviewed also stated that without Potensial they would no longer be attending school or college. The evaluation of the Female sex worker pilot project (UK, England) showed that all 55 participants had high levels of resettlement needs - over 90% had attitude and life skills, education, employment and training issues - and significantly differed from the wider female offender population in terms of drugs and relationship needs. The evaluation noted that for this group, while employment will be a key issue for their sustained social inclusion, there may be many other barriers (such as housing needs and having to arrange care for dependent children) which must be addressed before progress can be made. Indeed, the report described how “finding full-time employment is the very last step for these women”. While the majority of outcomes achieved were ‘soft’, such as improved confidence, self-esteem and resilience (key for their return to the community on release), at the time of study almost half (49%) had achieved an employability outcome ( CV preparation, and 30% received outcomes for completing mock interviews training and developing interview skills.

27 Potensial, Final Evaluation of the Potensial Project, Wavehill, March 2014 – survey base 89 participants, 31 parents or guardians, and 63 staff and stakeholders

February, 2016 90

Interviews for the current study confirmed that the focus on soft results was ongoing and that it was here that the main immediate benefits lay, with hard results and progression into work targeted at a later stage. As part of the project ‘Female Migrants: Information – Activation – Integration’ (AT), qualitative improvements were observed by project promoters in terms of greater self- confidence. In particular, intercultural training in a group setting provided an opportunity for participants to interact and integrate with non-migrants in their locality, as well as with public administration officials. 3.3.6 The characteristics of participants Information on the characteristics of participants was analysis based on Annex XXIII data made available by Managing Authorities. It should be noted that not all MA were able to provide these data and where this could not be collected centrally, data gathered at the project level are used in the table below. 17,812 participants took part in the seven interventions studied in this cluster. Gender data are not available for all interventions. For those where this could be provided, 48% of participants were women. Unsurprisingly for projects aimed at supporting steps towards labour market integration, 80% of participants were inactive prior to entering the intervention. Young people between the ages 15-24 made up 23% of participants, whereas older individuals were not significantly represented. Data on the representation of vulnerable group and information on the education level of participants are missing for three interventions (four in the case of education levels), making these data more difficult to interpret. On the face of it, it is surprising that individuals from vulnerable groups only made of a small proportion of participants, but this could be a function of the missing data.

February, 2016 91

Table 17. Participation data by socio-economic characteristics (Annex XXIII data): Cluster 1

AT Female CY Greek FI Youth FI Pointti UK Female UK Potensial UK Give and Total migrants language support sex workers (Wales) take scheme29 training28

Number of participants 26 10,80030 857 380 55 5,393 301 17,812

Gender Male 0 NA 433 113 0 2,897 169 3,612

Female 26 NA 424 267 55 2,496 132 3,400

Labour Employed 0 NA 10 168 NA 0 0 178 market 31 status Unemployed 26 NA 715 70 NA 302 0 1,113 Inactive 0 NA 132 142 NA 5,091 301 5,666

Age Youngpeople(15-24) 1 NA 820 35 NA 2,875 301 4,032

Olderpeople(55-64) 0 NA 0 42 NA 0 0 42

Vulnerable Migrants 2632 NA 25 239 NA 14 NA 304 groups Minorities 0 NA 10 0 NA 61 NA 71

Disabled 0 NA 107 1 NA 175 NA 283

Others 0 NA 135 0 NA 0 NA 135

Education Primary or lower secondary NA NA 681 94 NA 824 NA 1,599 (ISCED1-2)

Upper secondary (ISCED3) NA NA 176 132 NA 293 NA 601

Post-secondary non tertiary NA NA 0 35 NA 0 NA 35 (ISCED4)

Tertiary (ISCED5-6) NA NA 0 119 NA 0 NA 119

28 Based on expert report. MA indicated no Annex XXIII data available at present. 29 Data from MA is pending; data based on country expert report. 30 Data not reliable: It refers to participations and not to actual number of people. 31 Estimation based on the Austrian National report. 32 Participants from a migrant background.

February, 2016 92

3.3.7 Efficiency Where available, the table below provides the costs per output (i.e. participant/person supported) and result for the interventions reviewed in Cluster 1. Table 18 presents the cost per output data, whereas the second table looks at cost per result. Information on comparators was only available for a very limited number of interventions. Data from Volume II shows that the average cost per output for all ESI SI and SI+A2E interventions was in the region of €1,500. This lower cost can at least partly be explained by the fact that five of the eight countries had above average costs per participant. Furthermore, costs for advice and training measures were on average lower and these tend to be more represented among the wider field of SI and SI+A2E measures which were monitored in Volume II. Table 18. Cost per output (person supported), Cluster 1 interventions reviewed

MS Intervention name Cost per participant Available comparators

AT Female Migrants: Information EUR 3,192 Average expenditure in training – Activation – Integration measures paid by the Austrian PES in 2011: 2.537 € CY Greek language training EUR 192 programme for immigrants

FI Youth support-project for EUR 4,962 youngsters FI Pointti EUR 6,747 UK Female sex worker pilot N/A project, Exit UK Potensial EUR 4,104 Engage participant costs €2,166, Building the Future Together - participant unit costs €1,740 UK The Give and Take Scheme EUR 11,960 New Deal 25+ - €9,091, Working Neighbourhood Pilots €11,896, Local Employment Intermediary Service €6,008 The table above demonstrates that, based on a crude calculation of cost per participant in an intervention, costs vary significantly from intervention to intervention, ranging from EUR 192 to EUR 11,960. The average cost per output in this cluster is EUR 5,193. The most costly intervention per participant, the Give and Take Scheme (UK), provided a holistic set of interventions for very vulnerable young people (leaving the care system). Similarly, the greater vulnerability of the specific target group of Potensial (UK) could also be part of the reason behind the higher per capita cost of this intervention. For the Austrian intervention in this cluster, the only available comparison is with mainstream training measures funded by the Austrian PES, which address a wide range of targeted groups, compared to the rather narrowly focussed provision for female migrants of Turkish origin which face language, cultural as well as skills barriers to labour market entry. Table 19 provides the cost per result achieved for the Cluster 1 projects reviewed. This table has to be viewed with significant caution, for a number of reasons: . It was only possible to use a crude assessment of cost per result for which a result indicator was available; . Where several result indicators are provided, it is not possible to break down the funding into different aspects of delivery as interventions often contribute to multiple results, therefore each indicator is calculated against the same total funding;

February, 2016 93

. Result indicators were not stated for all aspects of projects, and all costs are therefore deemed to have been used to achieve the limited measured outcomes; Among the seven interventions in this cluster, three measured the number of individuals entering employment upon completion (no sustainability indicators are used - e.g. level of employment six months post intervention). The average cost of the integration of a participant into employment was €105,310. Five of the interventions had at least one indicator assessing the number of completed qualifications. The average cost here was €121,139 with some significant variation between interventions. Among the interventions with high costs per result achieved, it must be borne in mind that at least some of them also contained a significant focus on other activities not directly leading to qualifications or employment. For instance, the preparation of studies on inter-cultural exchange and the recognition of qualifications formed an important part of the Pointti project, which shows a relatively high cost per qualification achieved. Other positive outcomes (such as the number of participants entering further learning, etc.) were also measured by some interventions. The average cost here was €22,625. No information was available at the national level on similar costs per result for comparators. Table 19. Cost per result, Cluster 1 interventions reviewed

MS Intervention name Indicator Cost per result Available comparators AT Female Migrants: Number of participants in EUR 83,000 n/a Information – employment at programme end Activation – Integration CY Greek language Share of participants receiving a EUR 565 n/a training programme certificate for immigrants Number of trainers trained EUR 41,555 n/a FI Youth support-project Number of vocational examinations EUR 250,146 n/a for youngsters passed Number of employers offering work EUR 1,063,119 n/a placements for clients FI Pointti New jobs created n/a n/a New jobs for women n/a n/a Additional individuals integrated EUR 69,294 n/a into employment New enterprises EUR 2.56 million n/a Completed qualifications EUR 427,312 n/a Attended briefings EUR 250 n/a UK Female sex worker Share of participants who have n/a n/a pilot project, Exit prepared a CV Share of participants completing n/a n/a mock interviews or developing interview skills provision UK Potensial Number of participants gaining EUR 10,581 Engage project qualifications – EUR 4,516 Building the Future Together – EUR 5,606 Number of participants entering EUR 36,697 Engage – EUR

February, 2016 94

MS Intervention name Indicator Cost per result Available comparators further learning 6,808 Building the Future Together – EUR 28,442 Participants gaining further positive EUR 10,490 Engage – EUR outcomes 9,145 Building the Future Together – EUR 3,840 UK The Give and Take Number of participants achieving EUR 23,529 n/a Scheme essential skills qualifications Number of participants achieving at EUR 20,690 n/a least one other recognised qualification Number of participants taking part EUR 20,690 n/a in job tasters/job placements Number of participants entering EUR 163,636 n/a employment 3.3.8 Sustainability 3.3.8.1 Sustainability of outcomes for participants For the interventions reviewed in Cluster 1, there are no available data on the degree to which outcomes have been sustained, as no formal follow-up of participants was undertaken. Partners involved in the Potensial project (UK, Wales) stated the intention to include follow-up activity in future projects. A problematic issue for the sustainability of results in the Female sex worker pilot project (UK, England) was the dispersal of participants after leaving prison, which limited opportunities for ‘through-the-gate’ support and follow-up post-release. In one case, the Give and Take project, the provider had recently introduced an approach to following up with previous participants, after a survey identified high levels of drop-out from employment and learning destinations. Despite the lack of hard evidence, according to project managers of the two interventions reviewed in Finland, sustainable results have been achieved both for participants and participating bodies: . Youth support for youngsters (FI): the use of services and returning rates to the employment services has been reduced, suggesting that the guidance provided allowed young people to find sustainable solutions. . Pointti (FI): according to the project manager, the customers’ returning rate to the employment services is very low. The nature of the intervention is such that it influences not only the customer flow at Employment and Economic Development Offices, but also facilitates dealing with other authorities. 3.3.8.2 Continuation of activities The extent to which individual projects were able, or were likely, to sustain their activities following the end of ESF support was explored. As demonstrated in the summary table below, two of the interventions in this cluster will not continue, despite what project promoters considered as positive outcomes achieved. Four interventions will continue with local funding, although in the case of the two UK interventions, it is hoped that assistance provided can be scaled up with funding from the new ESF funding period 2014-2020.

February, 2016 95

Table 20. Sustainability of interventions beyond ESF 2007-2013 funding

Intervention sustained Country/OP Title of intervention (yes/no) with which source of funding AT: OP Phasing Out No, better targeting being Burgenland 2007-2013 Female Migrants: Information – considered for future interventions ESF Activation – Integration’ but general approach still considered relevant

CY: OP Employment, No Human Capital and Greek language training programme Social Cohesion for immigrants

Youth support-project for Yes, local youngsters FI:OP ESF for Continental Finland Yes, local Pointti

OP England and Potentially, if new funding Gibraltar, Convergence application under ESF granted and Regional Competitiveness and Employment Female sex worker pilot project, Exit

Yes, pupil referral unit being OP West Wales and the Potensial continued with local funding; new Valleys Convergence ESF application being considered OP Northern Ireland Yes, but scale will depend on Regional success of ESF funding application Competitiveness and The Give and Take Scheme Employment

Source: Country reports prepared for this ex-post evaluation Several of the reviewed interventions were expected to continue their activities beyond the lifetime of the project. . Concerning the Youth project supporting youngsters (FI), it is foreseen that three models of counselling and guidance centres will be implemented in three areas of North Karelia. . The Give and Take Scheme (UK, N Ireland) project is expected to continue its activities, although the coverage and the number of young people involvedwill rely heavily on the funding available in the 2014-2020 ESF programme. . Discussions are ongoing regarding the continuation of the Potensial project (UK, Wales) via a new regional ESF bid. Currently in the early planning stage, a similar approach is envisaged and a bid will be prepared for ESF 2014-2020 funding. An additional benefit of the Potensial project has been the legacy of new and changed practice among both the lead and associated partners. Certain elements of the project have been continued – for example, the Pupil Referral Unit (PRU) in Conwy received funding from the local authority to continue its work. In Denbigh, additional funding has been allocated to allow Year 10 students to continue the second year of their courses, and for new Year 10 students to take part, as well as to keep staff in place for the next

February, 2016 96

project. The Careers Service also described how it now has advisers based in social services offices, which assist the process of engagement with participating children. Two of the interventions targeting migrants have been discontinued, due to the limited size of the target group. Concerning the project ‘Female Migrants: Information – Activation – Integration’ (AT, Burgenland), according to the assessment of project promoters, the potential target group should be analysed in more detail to support the planning of future measures for this group. Despite the fact that the measure has been discontinued, project promoters considered the approach useful. Similarly, concerning the Greek Language training in Cyprus, there are no plans for the implementation of a similar intervention within the ESF programming period 2014-2020. The need for such training is currently lower than in past years, as a large number of migrants left Cyprus when the economic recession hit. The implementing agency has argued, however, that valuable experience has been gained through the project. 3.3.9 Gender sensitivity Cluster 1 activities are arguably those (together with Cluster 3 interventions) aimed at the most disadvantaged target populations, which have significant obstacles (beyond, for instance, a lack of skills) to overcome, before being able to access the labour market. As indicated above, this means that such interventions tend to be aimed at very specific populations facing multiple disadvantage. Gender is sometimes one of the aspects considered to contribute to such multiple disadvantage. For instance, it is often the case that female migrants are more isolated from society than their male counterparts, particularly if they have caring responsibilities which limit their interactions in their host society and the labour market (sometimes exacerbated by persistent language barriers). Available data on social inclusion indicators (see also section 2.4.4) show that women tend to be at greater risk of poverty or social exclusion – often because of their limited engagement with the labour market. Having said that, there are also a number of population groups among the most disadvantaged, which tend to be male dominated, for instance the groups of offenders and ex-offenders and individuals with substance abuse issues. There are also certain disabilities or health impairments, which are more likely to be found among men (e.g. the example of individuals affected by brain injury33). This does not mean that within these groups there cannot be sub-groups of women suffering from very particular disadvantage or discrimination, thus requiring targeted support (e.g. female former sex workers among the prison population). Overall, it might therefore be assumed that the share of female participants in Cluster 1 interventions would be higher or at least equal to that of men, because of their potentially greater preponderance among the most disadvantaged target groups in society (see the gender breakdown in Table 21). The data that are available, from five of the seven interventions, show that 48.3% of the 8,351 participants were women. However, it is worth bearing in mind that two of the five interventions were aimed solely at female participants (the Female Sex Worker Pilot Project (UK) and the project for Female Migrants: Information – Activation – Integration (AT). The Female Sex Worker Pilot Project was indeed part of a larger project aimed at offenders, among which women only made up 12% of participants, reflecting their lower representation in the wider prison population. The intervention in the Austrian region of the Burgenland was specifically targeted at female migrants from Turkey. This group displays particularly low employment rates (39%, compared to 69% among women with Austrian nationality) and is particularly at risk of poverty and social exclusion. This is due to poor social integration, often poor (German) language skills, low self-confidence and factors relating to traditional cultural values which can inhibit their interaction with authorities and integration into the labour market.

33 Such injuries often result from road traffic accidents, particularly among motorcyclist which are predominately male.

February, 2016 97

Table 21. Male and female participation in Cluster 1 interventions

MS Project name Target groups Female participants AT Female Migrants: Female migrants at risk of social exclusion, in 26 (100%) Information – particular of Turkish origin Activation – Integration’ CY Greek language Third country nationals resident in Cyprus, over n/a training programme 15 years of age, and who do not speak Greek for immigrants FI Youth support-project 15-24-year-old NEET young people 410 (49.6%) for youngsters

FI Pointti Immigrants and their families, with no adequate 267 (70.2%) vocational qualifications and who are registered with the public employment service. Indirect target groups: employers, job coaches, vocational teachers and institutes, Employment and Economic Development Offices, NGOs and regional authorities in Southern Savo region. UK Female sex worker Female prisoners with a history of working in the 100 (100%) pilot project, Exit sex industry.

UK Potensial Young people: aged under 16 years at risk of 2496 (46%) underachievement or exclusion; aged 16-19 moving to further education but at risk of underachievement/drop-out; and aged 14-19 years NEET or at risk of becoming so. UK The Give and Take Young people aged 16-21 years, NEET, and with n/a Scheme experience of the care system

A further two projects, Pointti (FI) and the Greek language training programme (CY) targeted immigrants. Pointti (FI) had a target of 325 participants of whom around 47% were intended to be women. Activities aimed to support the integration primarily of Russian, but also other immigrants, whose unemployment rates where three times higher than that of the native population. No specific gender issues in relation to unemployment or social exclusion trends among this target group are mentioned. The Greek language training programme in Cyprus was equally aimed at men and women, with no specific information being presented about particular gender based challenges in the target group. The remaining three projects in this cluster, the Youth support-project for youngsters (FI), Potensial (UK), and the Give and Take Scheme (UK), were aimed at young people NEET. According to 2013 data, NEET rates were higher for young women in the UK overall than for young men. The opposite is true in Finland and indeed in Northern Ireland, where the Give and Take Scheme was offered. These NEET projects attracted a similar number of male and female participants, which appears to be broadly in line with their representation in the target group. The Finnish project was able to attract slightly fewer female participants than originally intended. This was linked to the fact that transitions to the labour market for young men were more significantly (negatively) affected than for young women, partly as a result of the fact that young women showed a greater willingness to leave the countryside and move to cities where more jobs were available. The Potensial (UK) Project also sought to address gender segregation by aiming to attract young women into education and training in STEM subjects; however, this only proved successful to a limited extent.

February, 2016 98

Gender specific results data have only been provided for a limited number of interventions in the sample. With regard to the two projects focussing only on female participants, no results data are available. The Female Sex Worker Pilot Project was not completed at the time of study (autumn 2014) and the intervention for Female Migrants in the Burgenland specifically did not set quantitative targets. As this group was seen to face particularly significant obstacles to integration, only soft results in terms of enhanced self-confidence or ‘moving closer to the labour market’ were assessed. Results in this regard were considered to be positive. Another project targeted at immigrants, Pointti (FI), specifically reported not only on new jobs created (10), but also on new jobs for women (6). No gender breakdown is available for other project result indicators. The NEETs targeted projects did not report any specific differences in results between young male and female participants. The Greek language learning scheme in Cyprus attracted more female participants than originally envisaged. This was considered to result from the fact that women were likely to have more time to attend the training as they were less likely to be employed. Overall the number of certifications achieved by this project was significantly lower than the target, but no gender breakdown is available to indicate whether men or women are more likely to achieve such certification. 3.3.10 Community added value of supported interventions Within Cluster 1 activities, volume effects of ESF support primarily revolve around providing significant enhanced access to interventions (in terms of number of participants), which can support the integration into advice, guidance, training and employment measures to additional individuals from vulnerable groups. It is difficult (if not impossible) to quantify these volume effects, as limited national data (and no European data) are available on existing spending on similar measures. However, stakeholder interviews indicate that such volume effects are likely to be more significant in countries with more limited overall resources for social inclusion and related active labour market policy (e.g. LT, RO). This does not mean that the impact of such resources cannot – nonetheless – be significant on the level of provision at regional or local level in other countries. Scope effects were evident in so far as ESF funding allowed for provision to be made available to more specific target groups, which would otherwise not have received this tailored support. These groups include female migrants, female sex workers in the prison population and care leavers. In the context of the economic crisis, it is also considered that ESF funding allowed Member States to (continue to) target groups which might have otherwise lost out as more limited resources for active labour market policy measures became – in some cases – more targeted on ‘quick wins’. Some of the interventions represented in Cluster 1 had role effects by demonstrating good practice and triggering the development of similar services elsewhere (mostly as a result or local or regional learning rather than national mainstreaming). For instance, the youth guidance and counselling concept funded by the Youth Support for youngsters (FI) project was not only adopted in other localities, but has also been continued under the new funding period. The Female Sex Workers Pilot project (UK) has influenced the development of similar provision in other prisons. Process effects, on the other hand, were considered to be less in evidence in this cluster, with only the Potensial (UK) project pointing to the importance of the partnerships established as part of the intervention, which continued beyond the lifetime of the project and supported the delivery of other services to the client group at the local level. Table 22. The Added Value of ESF in cluster 1

Volume effects  Greek language training for immigrant (CY): the ESF funded provision supported other similar programmes in existence for this  the extent to which vulnerable target group the ESF supported actions add to  Youth support project for youngsters (FI): additional resources for existing actions multi-professional career counselling services for young people  Pointti (FI): significant extension of service offer for advice and integration services to migrants

February, 2016 99

 Potensial (UK): extension of funding for vulnerable young people and NEETs  Give and take scheme (UK): ESF funding allow the extension of the project to a wider group of participants

Scope effects  Female migrants: Information – Activation – Integration (AT - BG): the project broadened and targeted the existing integration support  the extent to which offer to a specific target group of female migrants from Turkey who the ESF broadens did not have access to other integration offers in the region existing action  Female sex workers pilot project (UK): Development of pilot complementary provision for specific sub-group of offenders otherwise not served with targeted support  Potensial (UK): Extension of the range of services being offered to needs in the locality  Give and Take Scheme (UK): ESF allowed the delivery of a unique service for care leavers/NEETs across Northern Ireland, filling a recognised gap in provision.

Role effects  Youth support project for youngsters (FI): the project has triggered the launch of similar cross-sectoral projects for the development of  the extent to which counselling services elsewhere; such efforts will be funded in the the ESF supports 2014-2020 ESF funding period local/regional innovations that are  Female sex workers pilot project (UK): Pilot project had a role taken up at national effect for similar provisions in other prisons level or national innovative actions  Potensial (UK): replication of similar activities in the new ESF that are then programming period ‘mainstreamed’

Process effects  Potensial (UK): Continuation of partnerships developed for the project for other activities  the extent to which the ESF action influences the Member State administrations and organisations involved in the programmes 3.3.11 Lessons learnt The following section summarises the main lesson learned from the interventions reviewed in Cluster 1. a) Policy choices In terms of policy choices and policy focus the interventions studied here again confirm the increase in personalised interventions for particularly disadvantaged target groups. There is also a recognition that the delivery of standard active labour market policy instruments on their own may fail to reach those most in need, or may not be accessible to them without addressing other, more fundamental obstacles first (or at the same time). The greatest challenge for such interventions is to ensure that they are clearly interlinked with follow-up and a pathways approach which guarantees that this early support investment is built upon to ultimately generate tangible results. A priori, project- based funding may not be the best way to achieve this as it does not guarantee follow-up or stability of supply. b) Target groups The breadth of target groups, their varying characteristics and nature/intensity of needs illustrate both the complexity of the environment in which the interventions operate and the provision required to meet their needs. The Cluster 1 interventions reviewed arguably work for some of the individuals at greatest distance from the labour market, and who experience either extreme disadvantages. Many of the challenges of working with individuals facing extreme and multiple disadvantage are well known, and are reflected under the ‘Implementation’ lessons

February, 2016 100

below. The Cluster 1 projects either focussed their attentions on single target groups with ‘niche disadvantages’ (e.g. Pointti targeted immigrant families, the female sex worker project targeted female prisoners), or had broader target groups (e.g. young people NEET or facing underachievement in education as in Potensial). However, in both cases participants were often found to be facing additional disadvantages, which were only identified in detail subsequently, but often underpin the individual status of being ‘at risk’ or disadvantaged. Key principles for working with the target groups in the Cluster 1 interventions are included under Target groups and Implementation below. c) Programming The Cluster 1 reviews identified a series of lessons for programming and intervention development, with those of relevance to ‘enabling and supporting’ activities (but with wider relevance) including: . The importance of effective referral, outreach and engagement approaches – not least as the target groups for Cluster 1 interventions included some of the most disadvantaged groups. In the case of the Austrian project ‘Female Migrants: Information – Activation – Integration’, the potential target group at the local level (female migrants of Turkish origin) was limited in size. As part of the second round of training, women from other backgrounds were also included. According to the project promoters, the potential target group for such measures should be analysed in more detail to support adequate planning. Despite the fact that the measure has been discontinued, project promoters considered the approach as useful to activate female immigrants, in terms of both social and labour market integration. . The consideration of continued support to individuals – to ensure positive achievements can continue to be built upon, support can be offered if results are ‘at risk’, and data collected on sustained achievements. . The ability to include a variety of services (either directly or through referral to partners) as part of the project ‘offer’ – enabling a wide range of needs and preferences to be met. . Maintaining a focus on employability – while employment may not be a realistic outcome for all participants, maintaining a focus on eventual work outcomes was a central principle of several of the projects reviewed (here and elsewhere). c) Implementation The review of the Cluster 1 interventions identified a series of features which were considered to represent ‘effective practice’ in delivering preparatory actions for disadvantaged individuals. Many of these applied across other clusters, although the nature of the target groups served under Cluster 1 meant these factors are likely to be applicable more widely. Gaining the trust of participants and increasing their confidence were found to be important for providing effective provision: . In the case of the Female sex worker pilot study (UK), an effective and discrete identification approach and not using stigmatising terms (such as ‘sex worker’) allowed vulnerable women to be engaged in the project without stigmatisation, resulting in improved trust and participant confidence. . The Give and Take Scheme (UK) placed considerable emphasis on celebrating the participants’ achievements, both individually and collectively, to build trust and engagement, and promote what might represent the first ‘success’ for many. . Intercultural group work has shown to increase the self-confidence of participants in a situation of social isolation and with a low participation in civic life (‘Female Migrants: Information – Activation – Integration, AT).

February, 2016 101

Initial assessment and action planning – key to identifying needs (recognising that additional issues may emerge as trust is developed) and developing robust and realistic action plans. Providing long-term support and guidance – underpinned by trust and a comprehensive understanding of the issues facing the individual: . The Female sex worker pilot study (UK) promoted engagement by offering one- to-onesupport, which helped both cement key worker relationships and participant confidence. The setting of short-term goals also boosted individuals’ self-esteem and motivation. . Key success factors identified as part of the Give and Take Scheme (UK) were the long-term relationships with beneficiaries, repeated placement offers, and the delivery of post-project support (through a Transition Support Service introduced to provide continued support to individuals after completion and progress to education, training or employment). . Within Potensial (UK), the extra support provided to young people through youth workers, learning coaches and careers staff, and the fact that this extra support was seen as different to school, were considered as key strengths. A degree of choice concerning activities, to suit individual needs, was identified as an important strength of several interventions: . A choice was offered in terms of available courses so that participants were allowed to choose what they wanted to learn (Female sex worker pilot study, UK). . Young people were allowed to choose courses and providers that best suited their preferences (Potensial UK). . Activities offered were tailored to individual needs/ability. The availability of both personal development and Essential Skills provision, in addition to other vocational training, provided a good mix to meet the needs of participants at all levels (Give and Take Scheme, UK). . Making overall participation voluntary, rather than mandatory, was also widely considered to be key, especially in projects working with young people. The reviews, and interviews with intervention staff and stakeholders found that the quality of communication between stakeholders/partners was a key factor of effective implementation: . The development of a shared perspective among stakeholders was shown to impact on the results of the Youth support project for youngsters (FI). A well- informed and engaged stakeholder group was a key factor influencing the creation of functional networks, in this case through marketing its services directly to TE-offices, schools and other organisations by offering counselling, and organising seminars and training events to share practice. . Concerning the female sex worker pilot study (UK), the interviews undertaken also referred to the strength of the relationship between all partners in the project. Project partners’ shared commitment and willingness to learn from one another had been beneficial for Women in Prisons in their wider work in women’s prisons. Common implementation problems included a lack of sufficient resources and the difficulty of making services easily accessible: . One challenge identified during the Give and Take Scheme project (UK, Wales) was the lack of sufficient volunteer mentors (with a coordinator being appointed in response, to focus on mentor recruitment and training). . One challenge for the Youth support project (FI) has been the pressure on counselling provision due to the popularity of the service. Moreover, long distances between municipalities in the region made offering face-to-face counselling a challenge; a solution was the use of e-counselling. Differences persist in the

February, 2016 102

accessibility of services for youth, including counselling, and mental health services. Other reported implementation issues included: . The timing of project phases: Concerning the Potensial project (UK), lessons for the future included allowing for a mobilisation and closure phase, ensuring project timings fit with the academic year, and informing schools of potential activities early, to fit their planning cycle. . Administrative burdens: this resulted in delays for the implementation of the Greek language learning programme (CY). . The institutional context: the Pointti project (FI) encountered some problems in mainstreaming activities in one partner municipality. The responsibility of municipalities to support immigrants (as foreseen by the new Integration Act) is the object of heated debate linked to the restructuring of the central and local government relationship. A challenge for the future will be to ensure the commitment of municipalities to these activities. . The overall complexity of the project was also highlighted by the external evaluator as another challenge in relation to the Pointti project (FI). d) Monitoring and evaluation Finally, the Cluster 1 interventions also highlighted potential improvements in relation to monitoring and evaluation. Many of these lessons applied to other Clusters, although they were perhaps illustrated most starkly here. . Participant follow-up – as described above - is key to both evidencing impact and offering support if outcomes are at risk, but not routinely identified across the Cluster 1 (or other) projects. The Potensial project (UK, Wales) partners described the intention to include follow-up activity in future projects. As authorities followed different approaches to measure soft outcomes, the results could not be consolidated or effectively compared. The lead described how they are working on a simple IT-based system for sharing soft outcome data, which has been agreed across the partners. . Appropriate indicators – while the issue of soft results is discussed elsewhere, the benefits of Cluster 1 interventions were perhaps the most difficult to capture in that, by definition, they would not necessarily result in ‘hard’ (and so more easily measurable) results. . Efforts should be made to develop national benchmark data and/or to plan evaluation (including counterfactual evaluation) early, to ensure that it is possible to measure the success of ESF funded measures against similar interventions (where no similar national interventions are available, comparisons with other similar ESF funded interventions could be envisaged). 3.4 Cluster 2a: Labour market integration through advice, counselling, guidance and training 3.4.1 Introduction Cluster 2 interventions are intended to support the labour market entry of disadvantaged individuals, including actions which can most readily be described as active labour market policy measures. Cluster 2a features actions which support the labour market integration of disadvantaged groups through advice, counselling, guidance and training. Examples of interventions in Cluster 2a were identified in each of the eight Member States, with the Cluster representing activities of particular relevance and most frequently identified as being used to support disadvantaged groups. Activities delivered by interventions in this cluster focus on moving disadvantaged individuals closer to the labour market by offering individualised career guidance, advice and counselling, as well as tailored training support. Training is often accompanied with

February, 2016 103

mentoring and ongoing assistance to help address any underlying issues and to prevent drop-out from the measures. Target groups cover the whole array of disadvantaged groups prioritised at national level, with a particular emphasis on low skilled individuals and in some cases focussing on spatial areas of particular disadvantage and on the challenges facing rural areas. In the UK, for example, ESF funding supports the work of the National Careers Service/Next Step, which provides individual guidance and support to a range of groups including those facing disadvantage. Training measures can also include skills development for self-employment. In at least one country (Luxembourg) explicit emphasis is placed on skills development for shortage sectors. Table 23 provides an overview of the type of interventions, and target groups served, by interventions in Cluster 2a.

Table 23. Summary of Cluster 2a Interventions by Member State

Member State Cluster 2a - Advice, counselling, guidance and training AT Qualification measures for disadvantaged young people (training) Training and guidance measures for disadvantaged groups in the labour market CY Interventions to limit school drop-outs in disadvantaged areas. Promoting LLL, mainly through upgrading of education and training Increase of economically active and employed persons from vulnerable groups (advice, guidance, counselling and training) FI Integration of vulnerable groups into the labour market Equal opportunities (advice, guidance, counselling and training) LU Increasing the employment rate of older workers (advice, guidance, counselling and training) Increasing the employment rate of women (advice, guidance, counselling and training) Facilitating the integration of young people into the labour market (advice, guidance, counselling and training)

Activating people furthest from the labour market (advice, guidance, counselling and training) LT Vocational rehabilitation of people with disabilities (advice, guidance, counselling and training) Employment support, guidance and supported employment for unemployed individuals and people threatened with unemployment (advice, guidance and training) Addressing discrimination and promotion of activities for people at social risk (advice, guidance and training) NL Labour market integration of people with a disability and people who do not receive benefits (advice, guidance and training) Fighting/preventing youth unemployment (advice, guidance and training) Re-integration of ex-offenders, people with mental health issues, and people in young offenders institutions (advice, guidance and training) Practical support for pupils with learning difficulties (advice, guidance and training) RO Improving access and participation of vulnerable groups (advice, guidance and training) Promoting equal opportunities in the labour market (advice, guidance and training) UK By nation

February, 2016 104

Member State Cluster 2a - Advice, counselling, guidance and training England Skills development (core and vocational) for unemployed individuals facing skills barriers. Supporting in-work progression through skills development and guidance – focussing on those vulnerable to future unemployment / recently left the unemployment register. Support for former employees recently made redundant or under notice of redundancy – training needs analyses and training to update skills. Provision for individuals facing barriers to employment to enter sustained employment through advice, guidance, supported work search and employability skills provision. Northern Provision of advice and vocational guidance services for a range of disadvantaged Ireland groups – young people NEET, women, disabled etc. Training provision at a range of levels, targeting sectors including: retail, ICT, media, re-cycling, hospitality (disabled young people), administration, health and social care (older workers) Work experience provision Promoting self-employment as an employment option – all groups, women Workforce skills and employment placements for women returners, individuals from minority ethnic groups Training for disabled individuals to become sports coaches. Provision for individuals unable to access mainstream national labour market provision – through alternative or pre-initiative support. Provision for disadvantaged groups in rural areas delivered through outreach approaches. Wales Identifying, plugging gaps in mainstream employment programmes and creating additional opportunities for inactive individuals. Employment support for 16-24 year olds not in work, providing 6-month paid work experience, fully integrated with existing employability and skills programmes. Also strands for graduates and to support young people enter self- employment. Working with employers to identify skills gaps and design provision targeted at disadvantaged groups to raise their skills, competitiveness and employment prospects. Scotland Employability provision for young people leaving care – including essential skills and vocational training, and work experience Provision for young care leavers and others in touch with intensive services to improve skills (youth justice, social services) to raise core skills. Skills development / training, designed flexibly to meet the needs of individuals with different disadvantages / capabilities. 3.4.2 The Cluster 2a interventions reviewed The remainder of this section considers the Cluster 2a interventions reviewed in Phase 2 of the evaluation. A total of 21 interventions in seven countries (AT, FI, LT, LU, NL, RO and the UK) grouped under Cluster 2a are analysed, including one intervention in Lithuania which can be classified under both Cluster 2a 2c (which aims to sustain employment). The interventions reviewed under Cluster 2a were: . Clearing (AT) . Qualified personnel in the metal sector (AT) . ANKKURI (FI)

February, 2016 105

. Vocational training (LT) . Support for skill acquisition (LT) . Valiflex (LU) . Fit4Jobs Seniors (LU) . ESF 2009 AB/GA (NL) . People with a disability Amsterdam (NL) . Berg en Boschschool (NL) . Jeugd aan zet in Midden Holland (NL) . " Niet-uitkeringsgerechtigden naar werk” (NL) . Developing skills and qualifications for women (RO) . Counselling and training for the unemployed (RO) . Lifeguards and divers for the RO economy (RO) . Improving access for youngsters in detention to vocational training and labour market integration (RO) . Centre for HR development in rural areas (RO) . Information and professional counselling for the Roma (RO) . Innovative activities aimed at facilitating labour market integration for groups at a disadvantage (RO) . Adaptability and access to the labour market through training and active job search (RO) . YPLA KickStart your future (UK). An overview of the interventions reviewed is provided as shown below. As the table illustrates, the target groups served and activities undertaken were broadly representative of the Cluster 2a population as described above. The evaluation evidence used in the reviews is summarised below. Availability of evaluation evidence for the Cluster 2a interventions

Several interventions were the object of internal evaluations, which mostly focused on measuring and assessing output indicators. . A self-evaluation approach was implemented for the project Ankkuri project (FI). . The project Valiflex (LU) was internally evaluated by the managing organization (Caritas). . The interventions reviewed in Lithuania were not evaluated separately, but were covered in an overall impact evaluation of EU structural assistance (Evaluation of impact of EU structural support on quality of life and reduction of poverty and social exclusion in Lithuania. Final report. Estep, June 2014). . An external evaluation was carried out on the Cleaning project (AT) in 2006 (the project was also developed during the 2000-2006 programming period).

3.4.3 Aims, objectives, target groups and scale of funding The scale of the interventions reviewed varied in terms of the total budgets (ESF and matched funding) allocated to them. The budgets ranged from EUR 86,000 for the smallest intervention targeting qualified personnel in the metal sector (Austria,

February, 2016 106

Burgenland), to EUR 17 million for projects supporting vocational training to boost employment integration in Lithuania.

Due to a lack of comprehensive data on funding allocated to all social inclusion interventions in this cluster in the eight countries, it is not possible to reliably estimate the share of total intervention funding represented by the selected interventions. Groups targeted by Cluster 2a interventions included disadvantaged youth (NEET or at risk), disabled individuals, ethnic minorities, migrants, long-term unemployed individuals, offenders and ex-offenders, those suffering from a mix of factors leading to labour market disadvantage, and senior workers. Several interventions focused on developing recognised training that could promote participants to re-enter the labour market or start in new economic sectors. . In order to increase the employment possibilities of job seekers, the Vocational Training project (LT) offered formal and non-formal vocational training programmes. During the period of training, the job seekers were granted an education allowance of 70% of the minimum monthly wage. The Support for Skills Acquisition project (LT) provided similar support for training specifically aimed at young people. . The main purpose of Valiflex (LU) was to train registered unemployed (both men and women) to enter the childcare profession or support them in the validation of prior experience, with the ultimate goal of increasing their employability. The training culminated in participants receiving a certificate recognized at the national level. . The project Fit4Job Seniors (LU) was linked to a strategy to promote active ageing, in line with the EU Employment Guidelines. The aim of the project was the vocational rehabilitation of individuals over 45, who had previously lost their jobs. Participants received training, an individual session to prepare a personal career plan and a follow-up workshop. . Targeting those unemployed (particularly youth) and those entering the labour market for the first time, Support for skills acquisition (LT) sought to provide professional skills to the person directly in the workplace. The duration of the support for the acquisition of professional skills was up to 12 months. Employers received a subsidy for each employed person and were compensated for their costs. . The Ankkuri project (FI) developed a model for workplace mentoring in order to encourage and enable employees to continue any suspended studies and enable them to gain qualifications in social and health care. Additionally, the project included two studies of the needs for multicultural competences among vocational teachers. . The Lifeguards and Divers project (RO) supported the establishment of a training facility and the delivery of nationally recognised training for lifeguards and divers, for unemployed individuals in the coastal regions of Romania. Other interventions also involved the provision of training, although in those cases the training was complemented with other services such as language courses, financial support or promotion of social skills. These services were aimed at facilitating access to the programme as well as increasing the positive impact of the actions carried out. . Qualified Workers for the Metal Sector (AT) provided training programmes (language and technical education) for unemployed people from a migrant background, aimed at increasing their employability. The main objective of the project was to support labour integration in the metal sector. In addition to the training course, the project offered advice and counselling to the participants in areas such as housing, child-care, finances and dealing with public administration.

February, 2016 107

. ESF 2009 AB/GA (NL) provided training combined with work experience for those beneficiaries deemed closer to labour market integration (for instance in restaurants, pubs or the security sector). Skills gained were often basic but intended to increase overall employability. For other beneficiaries the project offered guidance and counselling and assistance with specific issues acting as a barrier to integration. The project could therefore be seen as sitting between Clusters 1 and 2a/b. . The project People with a disability in Amsterdam (NL) tailored support (advice, guidance, training, etc.) to the specific requirements of each disabled participant. . Most of the training projects in Romania focussed on combining tailored advice, guidance and counselling with the provision of training courses. In a number of cases these courses aimed at delivering training for specific activities or in specific sectors, including entrepreneurial advice, guidance and support. For instance, the Developing skills and qualifications for women project delivered short (five day) sewing training as well as providing each participant with a sewing machine and advice on setting up entrepreneurial activity based on this skill. The Adaptability and access to the labour market through training and active job search project focussed on providing training in traditional skills and crafts for the tourism industry, combined with business management and language training. Concerning interventions targeting youth, some interventions focus on integrating NEETs into the labour market as well as preventing exclusion. . The rationale of Clearing (AT) is to prevent disadvantaged young school leavers from becoming NEETs by supporting them in planning and completing of an individually appropriate education of training and during the school to work transition. Clearing delivered counselling and guidance to the pupils based in a personal plan that was developed involving all the relevant persons in the environment of the participant. Federal Social Welfare Office (dependent of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs) and the Network Job Assistance organized and managed the project. . Berg en Boschschool (NL) aimed to provide school pupils with learning difficulties with the required skills and capacities to help them move towards sustainable sheltered or open employment or further education. A tailor-made approach to counselling and coaching was developed for each participant. . The project Jeugd aan zet in Midden Holland (NL) similarly offered tailor-made advice and counselling to young people lacking a formal qualification.34 . With the aim of preventing young people (14-18 years old) from disengaging from learning, the project, YPLA KickStart your future (UK), was implemented across eight local authorities in the East of England region. The project partnership was led by Hertford Regional College, which coordinated the development of the project in the 55 private, college and third sector providers. The activities developed comprised a wide range of options such as support from a learning mentor, assessment of individual needs, guidance, training or in-job experiences. 3.4.3.1 Financial implementation rates of the interventions Among those interventions where information was available, the financial implementation rates are close to target in almost all cases. The exception was the projects ESF 2009 AB/GA (NL) and Fit4JobSeniors (LU), for which the financial implementation rate reached 5.6% and 27%, respectively. In the Dutch case, the low implementation rate was mainly attributed to misunderstanding what could be funded with ESF, with the project beneficiary arguing that a significantly greater amount of resources was actually

34 The intervention "Niet-uitkeringsgerechtigden naar werk” also aimed to assist young people from a migrant background, but is excluded from further evaluation here, as it finally only received a limited amount of ESF funding.

February, 2016 108

expended (but did not prove eligible for ESF funding). In the case of Fit4JobSeniors, the full implementation of the project ran into some difficulties and the project was not able to attract the number of participants expected (67%). A large number of potential participants did not meet the selection criteria. Additionally, the intervention focused on promoting training in the banking sector, which was no longer in demand due to the financial crisis. Implementation rates close to target were achieved by other interventions in this cluster 3.4.4 Contribution to national policy priorities While all activities can be considered to be in line with national social inclusion priorities, a number of the interventions assessed can be considered to be particularly significant in terms of scale and prioritisation. For instance, the Clearing project in Austria was an important initiative acting as a pre-cursor for the now mainstreamed youth coaching programme which provides advice and guidance to young people in schools and seeks to smooth transitions between education and the workplace. The programme is therefore also relevant in the wider context of the Youth Guarantee.

Of even greater significance and scale in terms of national labour market impact was the vocational training project in Lithuania, which allowed for training to be provided to job seekers and those threatened by dismissal in order to improve their employability. Similar training provision would not have been possible in the country in the context of the recession had it not been for the availability of ESF funding.

Albeit not on a similar financial scale, the project ‘Support for skills acquisition’ (LT) also provided an important contribution to in-work training for low skilled individuals, intended as a preventative and employability measure.

Many of the other projects in this cluster focus on disadvantaged young and disabled people – target groups increasingly in focus during the crisis, as employment opportunities for individuals in these groups diminished further. A number of the Romanian projects particularly focus on improving the infrastructure of advice, guidance and counselling for young and LTU target groups and in rural areas.

February, 2016 109

Table 24. Overview of Cluster 2a interventions

Allocated Actual Implementation MS Project name expenditure expenditure Rate Duration Target groups Short description of activities

AT Clearing EUR 13.1 13.1 million 100% 2007- 2011 Young people with The aim of the project is to prevent million disabilities or in need of disadvantaged young school leavers to become social-pedagogical NEETs by supporting young individuals in support. planning and completing of an individually adequate education of training and during the Young individuals with school to work transition. Clearing aimed at learning disabilities, social facilitating school to work transition. The or emotional impairment. activities developed were coaching, internships Pupils in the lowest and short-term practical training as key elements (third) performance of the occupational orientation. group of lower secondary schools

AT Qualified personnel EUR 89,600 86,000 EUR 96% 4th of March Low-skilled unemployed The project objective was to support the in the metal sector 2013 and persons, who had integration of individuals with migration 31st of migration-background background into the labour market by combining December above 18 years, including language training and technical training for 2013 female occupations in the metal sector. The course offered the possibility to achieve a certificate (European Qualifications Framework, 2nd level) in 8 different occupations in the metal sector. The course had a duration of 40 weeks and ended with an exam.

FI ANKKURI EUR 672,063 EUR 672,063 100% 2011–2013 Immigrant students who The intervention developed a model for had already gained workplace mentoring in order to encourage and qualifications but had enable employees to continue any suspended trouble finding studies and enabling them to gain qualification in employment the field of social and health care. The other part of the project involved the Education and Development Centre Palmenia of the University of Helsinki carrying out two intercultural studies. The aim of these studies was to clarify the needs for multicultural competence among vocational teachers in the field of social and health care more generally.

February, 2016 110

Allocated Actual Implementation MS Project name expenditure expenditure Rate Duration Target groups Short description of activities

LT Vocational training EUR EUR 94% From 1 Unemployed persons The project aimed at improving occupational (Project 17,524,038 16,498,830 December possibilities of job-seekers. Vocational training of ‘Improvement of 2008 the unemployed and of the employees who have employment through 31 been given a notice of dismissal was carried out possibilities’) May 2011 according to formal and non-formal vocational training programmes. During the period of training, the unemployed persons were granted an education grant in the amount of 0.7 of the minimum monthly wage (MMW).

LT Support for skill EUR 958,526 EUR 883,918 92% From 1 Unemployed and Support for skills acquisition was organised acquisition (Project December individuals entering the seeking to provide professional skills to the ‘Improvement of 2008 labour market for the first person directly at the workplace. The duration of employment through 31 time (mainly young the support for the acquisition of professional possibilities’) May 2011 people) skills is up to 12 months. Employers received a subsidy for each employed person and were compensated for the expenses of organising the acquisition of professional skills directly at the workplace.

LU Valiflex EUR 389,178 EUR 376,944 96% From 1st of Registered unemployed The main purpose of "Valiflex" is to train January registered unemployed (both men and women) 2011 to 31st to enter the childcare profession or support them of December in the validation of prior experience, with the 2013 ultimate goal of increasing their employability. The training provided did not lead to a degree but a certificate, recognized at the national level. Another planned component of the project was the provision of individual support and group work to support validation processes (VAE).

LU Fit4Jobs Seniors EUR 849,750 EUR 233,243 27% 1st of Individuals over 45 years The procedure used Fit4job includes successive January who have previously lost phases (following a logical sequence): 2012 until their jobs 31st of Information session for participants, online self- December assessment (test) of individual capacity, 2013 analysis of the test by the IFBL and personal interview, training course and individual session and follow-up workshop. In principle, all registered unemployed over 45 years can participate.

February, 2016 111

Allocated Actual Implementation MS Project name expenditure expenditure Rate Duration Target groups Short description of activities

NL ESF 2009 AB/GA EUR 1,683,420 EUR 93,930 5.6% January – Assists individuals with Tailor made support, guidance and training offers December mixed set of challenges based on distance to the labour market. Work 2009 preventing them from experience and training were offered in the accessing the labour catering and security sectors. market

NL People with a EUR 3,011,056 2,365,704 79% June 2009 – Disabled individuals Tailor made support for individuals with disability June 2010 disabilities partially restricting their ability to Amsterdam work. This included assessment, advice and guidance, as well as training provision to maximise the likelihood of labour market integration.

NL Berg en EUR 245,290 EUR 193,400 79% July 2007 – Special needs pupils This project aimed to give pupils the necessary Boschschool Jul 2008 skills to help them take steps towards sheltered or open employment, or further education. This included guidance, counselling and training using tools such as work tests, short training courses and assistance with overcoming other individual issues.

NL Jeugd aan zet in EUR 520,000 EUR 444,820 86% tbc Young people without a Activities for young people facing barriers to Midden Holland school leaving accessing the labour market (due to lacking qualification school leaving qualification) were offered a range of measures delivered by different providers including advice, guidance and counselling, work experience, the delivery of hard and soft skills and cultural education for young migrants.

RO Developing skills EUR 1,497,308 EUR 99% January Unemployed or inactive The project offered a short (5 days) training and qualifications 1,488,632 2010 – women without specific course in sewing and equipped individuals with for women December qualifications in rural sewing machines at the end of the project in 2012 areas order to enable individuals to start their own business.

RO Counselling and EUR 1,728,707 EUR 1,409,512 82% 2010-2012 Unemployed individuals The project provided information and counselling training for the and support for entrepreneurship unemployed

RO ‘Lifeguards and EUR 4,019,595 EUR 3,718,218 92% December Unemployed individuals in Establishment of a facility for – a provision of divers’ for the RO 2009 – the south-east of the training for lifeguards and divers, offering a economy December country nationally certified qualification. 2012

February, 2016 112

Allocated Actual Implementation MS Project name expenditure expenditure Rate Duration Target groups Short description of activities

RO Improving access EUR 4,064,785 EUR 1,571,193 39% Information Young offenders in Delivery of vocational training to young offenders of youngsters in up to detention serving custodial sentences to improve their detention to October transition to employment post release. vocational training 2014 and Labour market integration

RO Centre for HR EUR 1,599,594 EUR 1,344,233 84% Information Unemployed and low Provision of training and job placement for development in the up to skilled individuals in rural individuals facing difficulties accessing the labour rural areas October areas market 2014

RO Infomation and EUR 549,624 EUR 504,147 92% Information Unemployed individuals Delivery of careers guidance and counselling professional up to from the Roma couselling for the October community roma 2014

RO Innovative EUR 1,444,940 EUR 1,388,039 96% Information Individuals with mixed Delivered of tailored careers advice and activities aimed at up to disadvantages, making counselling as well as training provision facilitating labour October access to the labour market integration 2014 market more difficult for groups at a disadvantage (COMPETENT)

RO Adaptability and EUR 774,755 EUR 675,680 87% Information Unemployed, long-term Training was offered in traditional crafts and access to the up to unemployed and occupations, as well as advice and counselling, labour market October unemployed young tourism management training and language through training 2014 people training. and active job search

UK YPLA KickStart EUR 11.2 EUR 11.2 100% April 2011 - Young people aged 14-18 The programme was intended to be short in your future million million July 2014 at risk of disengaging duration (on average 4 to 6 weeks, generally from learning or NEET longer for pre 16s), with a focus on helping progression (or re-engagement and progression).

It included support from a learning mentor, an assessment of individual needs, the provision of advice and noN/Accredited learning, focused on personal development.

February, 2016 113

3.4.5 Effectiveness The outputs and results reported for the Cluster 2a interventions are presented below. As indicated above, the effectiveness of an intervention can be assessed against its own targets or comparable interventions, with an understanding required of how such targets were initially set. As indicated above, limited information is available about the formulation of targets, beyond those being set experientially on the basis of the outcomes achieved in previous ESF funded interventions for similar target groups. Due to the overall lack of evaluation of ALMPs at Member State level and the dearth of counterfactual impact analysis, it is virtually impossible to compare the performance of ESF interventions against similar activities at national level. The ability to do so is also further restricted by the fact that such approaches would have to take into account the wider socio-economic environment and provide a sufficient close match of target groups. Very often similar actions are not provided from national funding, demonstrating the volume and scope effects of ESF funded activity. Table 25 sets out the types of output and result indicator available for interventions in this cluster. Table 25. Types of output and result indicator for Cluster 2a

Output indicators Result indicators Participants  Number of  Share of participants realising their development plan individuals  Number of participants employed on completion participating  Number of participants accessing regular employment  Number of participants accessing sheltered employment  Number of participants accessing work experience or traineeship  Increased options for sustainable integration (e.g. through coaching)  Share of participants finding employment 6 months after leaving measure  Number of participants taking up job on completion  Share of participants in employment, undertaking new training or finding a job immediately after completing  Share of participants in employment, undertaking new training or finding a job 3 months after completing  Number of participants accessing further education  Number of participants passing final exams of specific courses  Number of participants completing basic qualifications in health and social care  Number of participants gaining partial qualifications  Share of participants in training programmes who obtain certification  Share of certified LTU participants in the programme  Share of persons in employment 6 months post intervention  Share of participants from rural areas in the integrated programmes obtaining certification  Share of participants from vulnerable groups who obtained

February, 2016 114

Output indicators Result indicators certification  Number of participants in training that will prepare another form of access to the labour market The outputs and results of the interventions are shown in the tables below. The first distinction to note between interventions in this cluster and those of Cluster 1 is that more output and results targets are set in the case of these interventions. This may be linked to the fact that participants in these interventions are arguably already a step closer to the labour market and the interventions themselves are aimed at more tangible outcomes in terms of employment or training outcomes. Furthermore, target groups may be easier to reach, requiring more limited efforts for outreach (and therefore having lesser uncertainty with regard to reaching intended target groups). Overall, performance against output targets in this cluster is significantly higher than in Cluster 1, with 16 of the 21 interventions either meeting or exceeding their output targets, in some cases significantly. Table 26. Outputs achieved (number of persons supported) against expected, Cluster 2a

Actual Expected Achievement MS Intervention outputs outputs against target 6,000 to AT Clearing N/A N/A 8,000 per year AT Qualified personnel in the metal sector 12 12  100% FI ANKKURI 247 400  62% Vocational training (Project ‘Improvement LT 10,157 10,025  101% of employment possibilities’) Support for skill acquisition (Project LT ‘Improvement of employment 1,323 1,303  102% possibilities’) LU Valiflex 102 100  102% LU Fit4Jobs Seniors 199 300  67% ESF 2009 AB/GA NL 2269 3950  57%

People with a disability Amsterdam NL 1653 1540  107%

Berg en Boschschool NL 129 100  129%

NL Jeugd aan zet in Midden Holland 567 525  108% RO Developing skills and qualifications for 708 696  102% women (Femina - cresterea abilitatilor si calificarilor femeilor, ID 60838/FEMINA)

RO Counselling and training for the 376 325  116% unemployed (Consilierea si instruirea somerilor CIS 2012, ID 58477) RO ‘Lifeguards and divers’ for the RO Participants 1,000  215% economy (Salvamari şi scafandri pentru 2148

economia romanească ID 32508) Trainers

February, 2016 115

Actual Expected Achievement MS Intervention outputs outputs against target trained 576  134% 772 RO Improving access of youngesters in 140 100  140% detention to vocational training and Labour market integration (Imbunatatirea accesului tinerilor aflati in penitenciare la programe de formare profesionala si integrarea pe piata muncii pe parcursul si dupa executarea pedepsei", ID 4127)

RO Centre for HR development in the rural 660 450  147% areas (Centru de dezvoltare a resurselor umane din mediul rural, ID 47674) RO Infomation and professional couselling for Participants 600  126% the roma (Centre de consiliere şi mediere 756

profesională pentru persoanele de etnie

romă, ID 4587) Dependants 1000 supported  160% 1600 RO Innovative activities aimed at facilitating 42 30  140% labour market integration for groups at a disadvantage (COMPETENT – Activităţi inovatoare în vederea îmbunătăţirii accesului şi participării grupurilor vulnerabile pe piaţa muncii, ID 62934/COMPTENT) RO Adaptability and access to the labour 1,685 1,440  117% market through training and active job search

UK YPLA KickStart your future 4,544 4,538  100%

Note: arrows indicate the following  Over performance (>110%)  Performance between (90%-110%)  Under performance (<90%) N/A indicates that the indicator is not available for the intervention. Of the 21 projects in the cluster, 16 also set results targets, with the most important indicators relating to completing training, receiving certification, as well as employment outcomes. A number of interventions in Lithuania, Romania and Luxembourg set employment targets three or six months post intervention, thus requiring a degree of participant follow up. Albeit not included as official targets, an extensive counterfactual impact evaluation in Lithuania also comments upon employment outcomes after 12 months, net impact on the number of days worked by participants and net impact on income. The study finds that for both projects in this cluster, between 50-60% of participants were still in employment after 12 months. The vocational training measure lead to a net increase in number of days worked (in 2012) by 40, whereas the project ‘support for skills acquisition’ generated 118 additional days in employment (maybe unsurprising as this was a measure focussed on job retention). Both projects thus generated a net positive impact on employment in the country in the year of study, as well as a positive impact on net income. Overall, the two programmes in Lithuania did, however, not meet their results target of 85% of participants integrated into employment

February, 2016 116

– achieving just shy of 55%. This could be linked to deteriorating situation of the labour market during the crisis. Particularly positive results were achieved by two projects aimed at supporting the transition of young people; one in the Netherlands (Jeugd aan zet in Midden Holland) and the other in Romania (Improving access of youngsters in detention to vocational training and Labour market integration). An evaluation of Clearing was completed in 2006 which offers detailed insights into implementation and results (Lechner et al., 2006). Since the design of the intervention did not undergo fundamental changes until 2011, the results of this evaluation can give some pointers on the effectiveness of the measure during the 2007-2011 period. According to this evaluation, more than two third of the participants are between 13 and 15 years old, shortly before the end of compulsory school. Nearly 30% belonged to the age-group 16 to 20 years and the rest of less than 3% was above 20 years. A crucial component and outcome of the Clearing process is the development plan, which could be realised for 87% of the participants. In a comparison group of similar young people, who didn’t participate in Clearing, only 44% could realise their initial career aspirations. A further proof of the effectiveness of Clearing is the higher inactivity rate among non-participants. Altogether, participants assessed Clearing very positively: on a scale between 1 (best) and 5 (worst), the average rating was of 1.8. The evaluation of Clearing also contains information on further careers of Clearing- participants based on information from social security register information: 28% if former participants spend most of time (counted in days) in the third half-year after the end of Clearing in an apprenticeship. This share probably increased further due to the implementation of integrated vocational training (IBA)35. Further 25% of former participants were in measures of active labour market policy and 10% were employed. About 13% were unemployed and 20% out of labour force or in school-education (which can’t be distinguished in the data). Again comparison with non-participants indicates the improvement of career paths: Clearing participants showed only half the share of unemployed compared to non-participants. A counterfactual approach was followed in the evaluation of five ALMPs funded with ESF SI funds in Lithuania (2012). Amongst other variables, the evaluation assessed the number of net additional working days and income resulting in the longer term for project participants (i.e. one or two years after participation). The results of the evaluation showed that the ALMPs focussing on ‘support for skills acquisition’ had the greatest impact and public works interventions the least36. Table 27. Target versus actual results, Cluster 2a

Expected Achievement MS Intervention Results results against target AT Clearing Share of participants realising their N/A (no target 87% N/A development plan set) AT Qualified personnel in the metal sector Number of participants who took up a job 4 N/A N/A directly after

35 See: http://www.bmwfw.gv.at/Berufsausbildung/LehrlingsUndBerufsausbildung/Seiten/Integra tiveBerufsausbildung%28IBA%29.aspx 36 Evaluation of impact of EU structural support on quality of life and reduction of poverty and social exclusion in Lithuania. Final report. Estep, June 2014

February, 2016 117

Expected Achievement MS Intervention Results results against target Number of participants who passed the 7 N/A N/A final exam for the technical course FI ANKKURI Number of participants who completed basic qualifications in the social and health 17 24  70% care Number of participants who gained partial 7 16  44% qualifications Number of participants employed after the 837 N/A n/a intervention Number of training and staff days 682 738  92% Vocational training (Project ‘Improvement LT of employment possibilities’) 14,073 (54.45 21,679 (85 In employment 6 months post intervention percent of percent of  65% participants) participants) Support for skill acquisition (Project LT ‘Improvement of employment N/A N/A possibilities’) 14,073 (54.45 21,679 (85 In employment 6 months post intervention percent of percent of  65% participants) participants) LU Valiflex Share of participants who were in employment, undertaking new training or 50% N/A N/A had found a job immediately after finishing the programme Share of participants who were in employment, undertaking new training or 72-73% 70%  Nearly 100% had found a job three months after finishing the programme LU Fit4Jobs Seniors Share of participants who were in 30% of employment, undertaking new training or 30  78% participants had found a job ESF 2009 AB/GA NL

Total number of individuals reintegrated 2,268 n/a n/a People with a disability Amsterdam NL N/A N/A N/A

Increased options for sustainable labour market integration (e.g. through n/a 1,300 n/a counselling delivered) Accessed regular employment n/a 240 n/a Completed actions 32 n/a n/a

37 230 participants were employed before the start of the project, while at the end of the project the number rise to 238. Therefore, 8 participants changed to employed status.

February, 2016 118

Expected Achievement MS Intervention Results results against target Still in trajectory 3,517 n/a n/a Drop out 141 n/a n/a Berg en Boschschool NL

Number of participants accessing regular 3 4  75% employment Number of participants accessing sheltered 0 3  0% employment Accessing further education 15 18  83% Still in trajectory 101 83  122% Drop out 10 n/a n/a NL Jeugd aan zet in Midden Holland Accessed paid job 196 132  148% Accessed work experience or traineeship 23 4  575% Accessed further education 30 88  34% Increased options for sustainable 318 36  883% integration (e.g. through coaching) RO Developing skills and qualifications for women (Femina - cresterea abilitatilor si calificarilor femeilor, ID 60838/FEMINA)

Share of participants in training 0.9% 0.99%  100% programmes who obtain certification RO Counselling and training for the unemployed

(Consilierea si instruirea somerilor CIS 2012, ID 58477) Share of certified LTU participants in the 32% 100%  32% programme RO ‘Lifeguards and divers’ for the RO economy (Salvamari şi scafandri pentru economia romanească ID 32508) Share of participants in professional 73% 72%  101% courses RO Improving access of youngsters in detention to vocational training and Labour market integration (Imbunatatirea accesului tinerilor aflati in penitenciare la programe de formare profesionala si integrarea pe piata muncii pe parcursul si dupa executarea pedepsei", ID 4127)

Share of participants in training obtaining 71% 40%  177% certification Share of persons in employment 6 months 24% 10%  240% post intervention

February, 2016 119

Expected Achievement MS Intervention Results results against target RO Centre for HR development in the rural areas (Centru de dezvoltare a resurselor umane din mediul rural, ID 47674) Share of participants from rural areas in the integrated programmes obtaining 46% 29%  159% certification

RO Infomation and professional couselling for the roma (Centre de consiliere şi mediere profesională pentru persoanele de etnie romă, ID 4587)

Share of participants from vulnerable 134 100  134% groups who obtained certification RO Innovative activities aimed at facilitating labour market integration for groups at a disadvantage (COMPETENT – Activităţi inovatoare în vederea îmbunătăţirii accesului şi participării grupurilor vulnerabile pe piaţa muncii, ID 62934/COMPTENT) Share of participants from vulnerable groups in training/retraining programmes 97% 90%  107% obtaining certification Number of participants in training who 23 4  575% found a job within 6 months Number of participants in training that will prepare another form of access to the 1411 1400  101% labour market RO Adaptability and access to the labour market through training and active job search Rate of long-term unemployed participating in training who obtained 61% 100%  61% certification UK YPLA KickStart your future Participants achieving qualifications 85% 80%  106% Participants progressing to education, 69-70% 87%  80% training or employment outcomes Of those progressing to education, training

or employment outcomes above: Education or training outcomes 93% Employment outcomes 7%

Note: arrows indicate the following  Over performance (>110%)  Performance between (90%-110%)  Under performance (<90%)

February, 2016 120

N/A indicates that the indicator is not available for the intervention. Soft results One of the main soft results reported was the increase in self-confidence and motivation among participants. For the Support for skills acquisition intervention (LT), 45% of participants indicated that their “participation in the project improved their mood and self-confidence”. This same effect was also identified in the YPLA KickStart your Future programme (UK), where the implementing organisation underlined the improvements in confidence, motivation and even in the appearance of individuals at the start of the programmes and at closing events. The participants of the Vocational Training project (LT) revealed having changed their behaviour patterns and attitudes to more positive ones. In another example, 36% of the participants from the Valiflex project (LU) indicated that they felt more confident in their job. Another relevant soft outcome identified within several interventions was the acquisition of working skills and knowledge additional to the ones that were the focus of the intervention. Concerning the Vocational Training (LT) intervention, an evaluation carried out in 201138 revealed that the training offered “strengthens the human capital by providing knowledge and skills”. In the Support for skills acquisition (SSA) intervention (LT), more than half (56%) of the participants said that participation in the project helped them to acquire skills required for work in a specific organisation. Another positive outcome was the capacity for participants to better plan their professional careers. The participants of the Clearing programme (AT) perceived that their experience had helped them to clarify their professional aspirations. Additionally, as a result of participation, they were able to single out their professional strengths and weaknesses. Other programmes included specific resources providing support in other areas additional to the main objective pursued. For instance, the Qualified Workers for the Metal Sector intervention (AT), although aimed at increasing the qualification of participants (people with a migrant background), also provided a German language course and socio- pedagogic counselling on issues such as housing, child-care or contact with public authorities. Participants largely appreciated this service and considered it very useful for their social integration. In the case of the Valiflex project (LU), a survey was carried out to assess impacts on participants beyond the direct objectives pursued. The survey showed that 41.7% of the total number of participants agreed that they benefited from advantages in their personal life after the training. Moreover, 38.9% of the respondents agreed that the training was useful from a professional point of view, and 36.1% agreed that the training had an overall positive impact in their life. 3.4.6 The characteristics of participants Information on the characteristics of participants was analysis based on Annex XXIII data made available by Managing Authorities. It should be noted that not all MA were able to provide the data and where these could not be collected centrally, data gathered at the project level is used in the table below. Based on the available information, 100,291 participants took part in the 21 interventions studied in this cluster. Unfortunately, gender data are not available for all interventions. For those where this could be provided, 47% of participants were women. The somewhat greater proximity of Cluster 2a participants to the labour market (compared to Cluster 1) is demonstrated by the fact that 60% of participants were registered unemployed prior to entering these interventions, with 29% being inactive. Based on the data provided by Managing Authorities, young people between the ages of 15-24 made up only 5% of participants in this Cluster. However, taking into account that some of the interventions, for which detailed data based on Annex XXII could not be collected, targeted exclusively young

38 Efficiency evaluation of employment promotion measures financed from the ESF. ProBaltic consulting, PWC, 18 May, 2011

February, 2016 121

people, it can be estimated that about 38% of participants within this Cluster were young people. Older individuals were not significantly represented. Data on the representation of vulnerable groups are missing for seven interventions (nine in the case of education levels), making these data more difficult to interpret. On the face of it, it is surprising that individuals from vulnerable groups only made up a small proportion of participants (7%), but this could be a function of the missing data. The largest share among this group were ‘other’ disadvantaged groups, followed by disabled individuals. Compared to Cluster 1, individuals with upper secondary education were more significantly represented than those with primary or lower secondary education.

February, 2016 122

Table 28. The participation data by socio-economic characteristics (Annex XXIII data): Cluster 2a

AT AT Qualified FI LT LT Support LU LU NL People NL NL NL NL Niet Clearing personnel ANKKURI Vocational for skills Valiflex Fit4Jobs with a Berg Jeugd ESF uitkeringsgerechitg for the Training acquisition Seniors disability en aan zet 2009 en naar werk metal sector Amsterdam Bosch miden 39 ool Holland

Number of participants 27,949 12 247 26,613 26,613 102 199 NA 129 567 2,269 NA

Gender Male 17,164 12 25 12,975 12,975 17 107 NA 111 NA NA NA

Female 10,785 0 222 13,384 13,384 85 92 NA 18 NA NA NA

Labour Employed NA NA 234 NA NA 0 2 NA NA NA NA NA market status Unemployed NA NA 3 NA NA 102 197 NA NA NA NA NA Inactive NA NA 10 NA NA 0 0 NA NA NA NA NA

Age Youngpeople( NA* NA 9 70 790 25 0 NA NA* NA* NA NA 15-24)

Olderpeople( NA NA 29 37 0 2 49 NA NA NA NA NA 55-64)

Vulnerabl Migrants NA NA 16 4 23 4 0 NA NA NA NA NA e groups Minorities NA NA 0 5 10 0 0 NA NA NA NA NA

Disabled NA NA 1 1 105 2 0 NA NA NA NA NA

Others NA NA 6 370 135 0 0 NA NA NA NA NA

Education Primary or NA NA 33 NA NA 49 66 NA NA NA NA NA lower secondary (ISCED1-2)

Upper NA NA 32 NA NA 47 95 NA NA NA NA NA secondary (ISCED3)

Post- NA NA 11 NA NA 4 38 NA NA NA NA NA secondary non tertiary (ISCED4)

39 MA in NL indicates Annex XXIII data only available at aggregate level; data based on country expert report.

February, 2016 123

Tertiary NA NA 171 NA NA 2 0 NA NA NA NA NA (ISCED5-6)

Notes: * Interventions focusing on young people; it can be assumed that all participants were young people.

Table 29. The participation data by socio-economic characteristics (Annex XXIII data): Cluster 2a (continued)

RO RO RO RO RO Centre for RO RO RO UK YPLA Total (for Developing Counselling Lifeguards Improving HR Information Innovative Adaptability kickstart tables 2 skills for and training and divers access for development and activities your and 3) women for youngsters counselling future40 unemployed for Roma

Number of participants 708 376 2,380 527 1,274 1,600 2,497 1,685 4,544 100,291

Gender Male 0 132 2,020 391 496 783 450 707 2,999 51,364

Female 708 244 360 136 778 817 2,047 978 1,545 45,583

Labour Employed 0 0 0 302 376 53 348 0 NA 1,315 market status Unemployed 708 376 2,380 0 466 936 0 1,594 NA 6,762 Inactive 0 0 0 225 432 420 2,149 91 NA 3,327

Age Youngpeople(15-24) 194 81 1,117 223 400 694 608 433 NA 4,644

Olderpeople(55-64) 78 13 46 10 36 30 33 68 NA 431

Vulnerable Migrants 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 NA 50 groups Minorities 0 4 25 1 4 0 60 0 NA 109

Disabled 1 0 2 0 0 0 48 0 727 887

Others 0 171 303 225 782 1,600 1,980 0 NA 5,572

Education Primary or lower 10 0 23 211 593 308 1,496 662 NA 3,451 secondary (ISCED1-

40 Awaiting data from MA; information based on country expert report.

February, 2016 124

Upper secondary 395 233 143 35 494 798 730 536 NA 3,538 (ISCED3)

Post-secondary non 33 14 22 10 65 480 45 52 NA 774 tertiary (ISCED4)

Tertiary (ISCED5-6) 133 129 100 266 122 14 226 412 NA 1,575

Source: Data provided by Managing Authorities, with exception of those indicated in footnotes

February, 2016 125

3.4.7 Efficiency The data available on costs per output (i.e. participant/person supported) and per result are provided below for the interventions reviewed in Cluster 2a. Table 30 presents the cost per output data. No comparator information could be found at the national level to measure these costs against a domestic benchmark for similar interventions. Table 30. Cost per output (person supported), Cluster 2a interventions reviewed

Cost per MS Intervention participant Available comparators AT Clearing 936euro Average expenditure in training measures paid by AT Qualified personnel in the metal sector 7,166 euro the Austrian PES in 2011: 2.537 € FI ANKKURI 2,720 euro n/a Vocational training (Project n/a LT ‘Improvement of employment 1,624 euro possibilities’) Support for skill acquisition (Project n/a LT ‘Improvement of employment 668 euro possibilities’) LU Valiflex 3,695 euro n/a LU Fit4Jobs Seniors 1,172 euro n/a ESF 2009 AB/GA n/a NL 41 euro

People with a disability Amsterdam n/a NL 1,431 euro

Berg en Boschschool n/a NL 1,500 euro

NL Jeugd aan zet in Midden Holland 785 euro n/a RO Developing skills and qualifications for n/a 2,102 euro women RO Counselling and training for the n/a 3,748 euro unemployed RO ‘Lifeguards and divers’ for the RO n/a economy 1,731 euro Individuals trained 4,816 euro Trainers trained RO Improving access of youngsters in n/a detention to vocational training and 11,222 euro Labour market integration RO Centre for HR development in the rural n/a 2,036 euro areas RO Information and professional n/a 666 euro counselling for the roma 315 euro Participants trained

February, 2016 126

Cost per MS Intervention participant Available comparators Dependants supported

RO Innovative activities aimed at n/a facilitating labour market integration for 33,048 euro groups at a disadvantage (COMPETENT) RO Adaptability and access to the labour n/a market through training and active job 401 euro search UK YPLA KickStart your future 2,460 euro41 n/a N/A indicates that the indicator is not available for the intervention. Costs per participant vary significantly from EUR 33,048 for the project Improving Innovative activities aimed at facilitating labour market integration for groups at a disadvantage (RO), to EUR 315 for the project on vocational counselling for Roma (RO)42. Given the differences in delivery and the fact that price parity comparisons have not been taken into account, these comparisons must be considered with caution. The average cost per output in this Cluster is EUR 3,831. Data from Volume II shows that the average cost per output for all ESI SI and SI+A2E interventions was in the region of €1,500. This lower cost can at least partly be explained by the fact that five of the eight countries had above average costs per participant. Overall, advice and guidance measures are less costly than training measures and training for more skilled personnel tends to be more costly than more basic skills and employability training. Other findings are the intervention level are as follows: . An average unit cost per participant was applied by the co-financing organisation (the Skills Funding Agency, SFA) for the KickStart your Future project (UK), with the actual cost per participant, based on latest available forecast, being slightly below this. . According to an evaluation of the impact of the quality of life and reduction of poverty and social exclusion project in Lithuania (Final report, Estep, June 2014), the measure ‘support for skills acquisition’ was more efficient than vocational training. - The estimate for the costs of employment of one additional person for at least one working day during 2009–2012 was EUR 29,934 for vocational training, against EUR 2,399 for support for skills acquisition. - The cost of one additional working day per person was EUR 473 for vocational training, against EUR 9.9 for support for skills acquisition. - The cost of one additional litas of income per person in 2009–2012 was EUR 9.1 (LTL 31.3) for vocational training and EUR 0.26 (LTL 0.9) for support for skill acquisition.

41 Is an estimation as figures for participation and cost remain to be finalised. 42 This does not take into account intervention ESF 2009 AB/GA (NL) which was only partly implemented and support for dependents in the infomation and professional counselling for the Roma project (RO).

February, 2016 127

Table 31 provides the cost per results achieved for the Cluster 2a projects reviewed. As in the case of Cluster 1, this table has to be viewed with significant caution, for a number of reasons: . It was only possible to use a rather crude assessment of cost per result for which a result indicator was available; . Where several result indicators are provided, it is not possible to break down the funding expended into different aspects of delivery, therefore each indicator is calculated against the same total funding; . Result indicators were not stated for all aspects of projects, which may have achieved measurable soft or hard outcomes, and all costs are therefore deemed to have been used to achieve the limited measured outcomes; . Different result indicators are used by different projects, making comparability between projects limited. It should therefore be borne in mind that the costs per result quoted can over- estimate the funds used to achieve a particular result. It must also be noted that for some projects (e.g. the Dutch projects), costs per result are skewed by the fact that a significant number of individuals are still taking part in a measure, and outcomes are not yet known. Of the 21 interventions in this Cluster, 10 had measurable indicators against which to assess costs per employment outcome. The average cost for such results was €30,050. A further eight interventions measured performance against one or more result indicators linked to qualifications achieved. The average cost per qualification gained was €43,031. Seven interventions measured more ‘generic’ positive outcomes, e.g. clustering together employment, training and other positive outcomes or measuring completion of the actions in a development plan and the performance of steps towards employment. The average cost for such positive results achieved was €6,002. Here it is worth bearing in mind that a recent study found that the average cost of unemployment per annum (calculated on the basis of a comparison of six EU countries) could be estimated conservatively at around EUR 25,00043. No comparators regarding cost of results of similar national measures were available. Table 31. Cost per result, Cluster 2a interventions reviewed

MS Intervention name Indicator Cost per Available result comparators AT Clearing Share of participants realising their Average of n/a development plan 2,150 euro AT Qualified personnel in Number of participants who took up 21,500 euro n/a the metal sector a job directly after the intervention Number of participants who passed 21,285 euro n/a the final exam for the technical course Number of participants who 39,533 euro n/a FI ANKKURI completed basic qualifications in the social and health care

43 Gerard M, Valsamis D and Van der Beken W (2012); Why invest in employment: A study on the cost of unemployment; http://www.efsi- europe.eu/fileadmin/MEDIA/publications/Cost_of_unemployment_report/English_Stud y_on_the_cost_of_unemployment_January_2013.pdf

February, 2016 128

MS Intervention name Indicator Cost per Available result comparators Number of participants who gained 96,009 euro n/a partial qualifications Number of participants employed 84,007 euro n/a after the intervention Number of training and staff days 1,117 euro n/a LT Vocational training Share of participants who found 1,172 euro n/a (Project ‘Improvement employment 6 months after leaving of employment the measure possibilities’) LT Support for skill Share of participants who found 63 euro n/a acquisition (Project employment 6 months after leaving ‘Improvement of the measure employment possibilities’) LU Valiflex Share of participants in 7,391 euro n/a employment, undertaking new training or had found a job immediately after finishing the programme Share of participants in 2,636 euro n/a employment, undertaking new training or had found a job three months after finishing the programme LU Fit4Jobs Seniors Share of participants who were in 4,664 euro n/a employment, undertaking new training or had found a job NL ESF 2009 AB/GA Total number of individuals 41 euro n/a reintegrated NL People with a disability Increased options for sustainable n/a n/a Amsterdam labour market integration (e.g. through counselling delivered) Accessed regular employment n/a n/a Completed actions 73,928 euro n/a Still in trajectory 672 euro n/a NL Berg en Boschschool Number of participants accessing 64,446 euro n/a regular employment Number of participants accessing n/a n/a sheltered employment Accessing further education 12,893 euro n/a Still in trajectory 1,914 euro n/a NL Jeugd aan zet in Accessed paid job 2,269 euro n/a Midden Holland Accessed work experience or 19,340 euro n/a traineeship Accessed further education 14,827 euro n/a Increased options for sustainable 1,399 euro n/a integration (e.g. through coaching) RO Developing skills and Share of participants in training 212,661 euro n/a

February, 2016 129

MS Intervention name Indicator Cost per Available result comparators qualifications for programmes who obtain certification women (Femina - cresterea abilitatilor si calificarilor femeilor, ID 60838/FEMINA) RO Counselling and Share of certified LTU participants in 11,745 euro n/a training for the the programme unemployed (Consilierea si instruirea somerilor CIS 2012, ID 58477) RO ‘Lifeguards and divers’ Share of participants in professional 2,371 euro n/a for the RO economy courses (Salvamari şi scafandri pentru economia romanească ID 32508) RO Improving access of Share of participants in training 15,870 euro n/a youngsters in detention obtaining certification to vocational training and Labour market Share of persons in employment 6 46,211 euro n/a integration months post intervention (Imbunatatirea accesului tinerilor aflati in penitenciare la programe de formare profesionala si integrarea pe piata muncii pe parcursul si dupa executarea pedepsei", ID 4127) RO Centre for HR Share of participants from rural 4,436 euro n/a development in the areas in the integrated programmes rural areas (Centru de obtaining certification dezvoltare a resurselor umane din mediul rural, ID 47674) RO Information and Share of participants from 3,762 euro n/a professional vulnerable groups who obtained counselling for the certification roma (Centre de consiliere şi mediere profesională pentru persoanele de etnie romă, ID 4587) RO Innovative activities Share of participants from 33,854 euro n/a aimed at facilitating vulnerable groups in labour market training/retraining programmes integration for groups obtaining certification at a disadvantage (COMPETENT – Activităţi inovatoare în vederea îmbunătăţirii accesului şi participării grupurilor vulnerabile pe piaţa muncii, ID 62934/COMPTENT)

February, 2016 130

MS Intervention name Indicator Cost per Available result comparators Number of participants in training 60,349 euro n/a who found a job within 6 months Number of participants in training 938 euro n/a that will prepare another form of access to the labour market RO Adaptability and access Rate of long-term unemployed 658 euro n/a to the labour market participating in training who through training and obtained certification active job search YPLA KickStart your Participants achieving qualifications 2,900 euro n/a future Participants progressing to 3,522 euro n/a education, training or employment outcomes UK Of those progressing to education, n/a training or employment outcomes above: Education or training outcomes 3,787 euro n/a Employment outcomes 50,450 euro n/a 3.4.8 Sustainability Sustainability of outcomes for participants The analysis of sustainability of the outcomes is based predominantly on follow-up contacts with former participants at different points in time after their involvement with their projects had ended. In general, in Lithuania the projects contributed to an increase in participants’ income. The analysis of the impact on employment at a micro level and the findings of the counterfactual evaluation suggest that persons who had participated in Active Labour Market Policy Measures focused on support for skills acquisition, vocational training and job rotation managed to retain employment for longer. Additionally, in general EU-funded interventions had effects on changes in employment indicators and contributed to the mitigation of negative trends. These were the results of a counterfactual impact evaluation, which looked at the net impact of ESF interventions in 2012 on employment, number of days worked and income. In the case of the YPLA KickStart your future programme (UK), participant follow-up procedures were carried out six months after completing the project. The information collected was used to detect if additional supportive measures are required, but was not used in the project’s formal reporting processes. The most recent analysis undertaken by the project suggested that 73% of participants were in employment, education or training six months after they left the programme. On the contrary, in several other interventions, no follow-up information has been collected. In many cases, an evaluation had not been undertaken. Therefore, there is insufficient data to provide relevant analysis on the sustainability of the outcomes for participants. No quantitative information on the sustainability of outcomes achieved is available for the Dutch projects in this cluster, although in relation to the ESF 2009 AB/GA promoters argued that participants were less likely to re-enter the benefit register. Continuation of activities Among the interventions analysed, there is a range of situations regarding their continuation in future years. In some cases, the projects were expected to continue

February, 2016 131

with the support of the ESF 2014-2020, while others were not expected to bid for future funding. This meant continuation with national or local funding for some projects, while other interventions will not continue. As demonstrated in the summary table below, for the interventions where information is available, three will not continue, nine will continue with national or local funding (often on a more limited scale), and four aim to continue their activities with ESF funding under the new programming period. Table 32. Sustainability of interventions beyond ESF 2007-2013 funding

Intervention sustained Country/OP Title of intervention (yes/no) with which source of funding

AT: OP Employment Yes, now known as Youth Coaching Clearing – extended to broader target group with national funding

AT: OP Phasing Out Yes, regional funding Burgenland 2007-2013 ESF Qualified personnel in the metal sector

FI:OP ESF for Continental No Finland ANKKURI

Vocational training (Project Yes, similar ALMP measure under “Improvement of employment new ESF funding period LT: Human Resources possibilities”) Development OP Support for skills acquisition (Project Yes, similar ALMP measure under “Improvement of employment new ESF funding period possibilities”)

No, but working group is ValiFlex considering future funding of childcare training LU: ESF OP Yes, for financial market skills Fit4Job Seniors under new ESF funding period

ESF 2009 AB/GA Yes, with national funding, but with fewer participants People with a disability Amsterdam Yes, on a more limited scale with municipality funding NL: ESF OP Berg en Boschschool No, due to significant reorganisation of the school Jeugd aan zet in Midden Holland No (youth first to take action Mid Holland). Developing skills and qualifications for Yes, national and organisational women (Femina - cresterea abilitatilor funding; ESF funding application si calificarilor femeilor, ID being considered RO: Human Resource 60838/FEMINA) Development OP

Counselling and training for the Yes, for young people under Youth unemployed Guarantee

February, 2016 132

Intervention sustained Country/OP Title of intervention (yes/no) with which source of funding (Consilierea si instruirea somerilor CIS 2012, ID 58477)

‘Lifeguards and divers’ for the RO Yes, for young people under Youth economy (Salvamari şi scafandri Guarantee pentru economia romanească ID 32508)

Improving access of youngsters in Yes, for young people under Youth detention to vocational training and Guarantee Labour market integration (Imbunatatirea accesului tinerilor aflati in penitenciare la programe de formare profesionala si integrarea pe piata muncii pe parcursul si dupa executarea pedepsei", ID 4127)

Centre for HR development in the Yes, national funding under Youth rural areas (Centru de dezvoltare a Guarantee resurselor umane din mediul rural, ID 47674)

Infomation and professional couselling n/a for the roma (Centre de consiliere şi mediere profesională pentru persoanele de etnie romă, ID 4587)

Innovative activities aimed at n/a facilitating labour market integration for groups at a disadvantage (COMPETENT – Activităţi inovatoare în vederea îmbunătăţirii accesului şi participării grupurilor vulnerabile pe piaţa muncii, ID 62934/COMPTENT)

Innovative activities aimed at n/a facilitating labour market integration for groups at a disadvantage

OP England and Gibraltar, Yes, limited continuation with local Convergence and Regional funding YPLA KickStart your Future Competitiveness and Employment

Source: Country reports prepared for this ex-post evaluation

Clearing (AT) has continued under the name Youth Coaching, with some modifications to the design, a broader target group of young people, including those with problems in school to work transition, and on a larger scale than before. Youth Coaching is part of the ESF OP Employment Austria 2014-2020, and is intended to be co-financed by the ESF during this programme-planning period.

February, 2016 133

Qualified personnel in the metal sector (AT) continues to offer technical training leading to a certificate and metal worker degrees financed by national sources. For younger individuals, the organization responsible of managing the project, (BUZ), currently offers other training such as an intensive craftsmen course. Most interventions remain unsure if they will continue to be supported by ESF in the next programming period. However, these interventions have already had an impact on other activities. The activities of the project Fit4Job Seniors (LU) included supporting the adoption of similar approaches for the activation of unemployed people in other economic sectors, such as civil engineering, trade and financial markers. Therefore, while the project is no longer running, its approach is being used in, for instance, the Fit4GenieCivil operated during 2011-2012, the Fit4Commerce during 2012-2013 and currently Fit4FinancialMarket project (supported by ESF). The YPLA KickStart your Future programme carried out by the Hertford Regional College (UK) reported several unexpected outcomes as a result of participation in the ESF programme. Firstly, participation by the College improved knowledge about the target population, which led it to take steps to improve retention and result ratios in future actions. Secondly, the College established new relationships with other organisations relevant for future activities supporting NEETs in the region. Finally, some of the services offered by the project were maintained after the end of the ESF support, for example, the provision targeted at Travellers to engage them in learning activities. In the case of the Ankkuri project (FI), the networks established for the development of the project were mostly temporary. On the positive side, the sustainability of the project activities was promoted through the dissemination of achieved good practices. Moreover, the project also offered positive examples for social and health care planning of teacher training in multicultural issues. Other interventions were not renewed. The project Valiflex (LU) did not continue after its expected period of implementation. For the next round of projects, the Ministry of Labour is considering whether to carry out training actions for job seekers in the childcare sector. The action of the ESF 2009 AB/GA and People with a Disability Amsterdam projects (NL) continue without ESF funding, albeit on a smaller scale. The other two Dutch projects were discontinued. In the case of the Berg en Boschschool, the school which ran the project ran into financial difficulties and the whole department which had run the project was closed down. In Romania, according to the contractual provisions, all projects and therefore all beneficiaries have to keep their services or the developments realised during the project phase operational for three years after the termination of the financing agreement. The most sustainable are considered to be the projects run by local authorities or by partnerships between local authorities and several NGOs, such as the Centre for Alcohol Addicts or projects such as CONECT, which offers services for the blind. Also highly sustainable and with their services integrated into the mainstream of activities are projects undertaken by the National Administration of Prisons (the “Improving the access of young in detention to vocational training and job placement following the execution of their prison sentence”). Projects that have created their own infrastructure, such as the one dedicated to the training of lifeguards and divers, are also showing high sustainability as they are able to replicate and improve the programmes developed with project financing. 3.4.9 Gender sensitivity Cluster 2a activities focus on advice, guidance and counselling as well as training and are thus aimed at individuals somewhat closer to the labour market than those served by Cluster 1 activities. This type of support could, for instance, be of particular value

February, 2016 134

to individuals with low skill levels who have never worked or who have been unemployed for some time (but do not necessarily face other barriers to integration). In the EU overall, women and men are almost equally represented among low skilled job seekers, although low skilled women are more likely to be at risk of poverty. In the eight study countries, women are more represented among the low skilled unemployed in Lithuania, whereas in all other countries, men predominate. Data available for 17 interventions (of the 20 in this Cluster) show an average share of 51% female participants. However, this disguises some significant differences between interventions. The majority of projects in this category are targeted at unemployed or long-term unemployed individuals. Some focus on young people (either NEETs, young offenders, etc.) and a number are specifically aimed at disabled individuals or migrants. None of the projects in this cluster are specifically targeted at women. The AT Burgenland project ‘Qualified personnel in the metal sector’ – albeit not specifically targeted at men – had no female participants as a result of their low participation in this sector. Three interventions, ANKKURI (FI), Innovative activities aimed at facilitating labour market integration for groups at a disadvantage (RO), and Valiflex (LU), had a particularly high share of female participants (89.9%, 82% and 83% respectively), whereas the Berg en Boschschool (NL), and Lifeguards and divers (RO) interventions had very low female participation (14% and 15% respectively). In both the Finnish and the Luxembourg project, the high representation of women is influenced by the sector of the intervention (health and childcare), where female employment predominates. Indeed the project report for ANKKURI (FI) highlights the fact that around 10% of beneficiaries were male, as a contribution to gender equality in a sector where men are currently under-represented. The reason for the imbalance in favour of female participants in the Romanian project is less clear. The low representation of girls in the Dutch project is explained by the fact that the special needs supported by the school lead to the group of pupils being dominated by boys, which was reflected in the group of participants. In the Lifeguards and divers project this could be explained by the greater attractiveness of the profession of lifeguard to men. The KickStart your future project (UK) was aimed equally at young men and women. Project promoters emphasised that when working in areas with a minority ethnic population, female-only training sessions were arranged in the evenings to avoid the barrier of male and female learners learning together. The project also included examples of provision which sought to influence the views of young females about potential jobs and careers – including inputs to empower them to consider alternative occupations.

February, 2016 135

Table 33. Male and female participation in Cluster 2a interventions

Female MS Project name Target groups participants AT Clearing Young people with disabilities or in need of social-pedagogical 10,785 (38.6%) support. Young individuals with learning disabilities, social or emotional impairment. Pupils in the lowest (third) performance group of lower secondary schools AT Qualified personnel in the metal sector Low-skilled unemployed persons, who had migration-background 0 (0%) above 18 years, including female

FI ANKKURI Immigrant students who had already gained qualifications but had 222 (89.9%) trouble finding employment

LT Vocational training (Project ‘Improvement Unemployed persons Approx.. 49% of employment possibilities’) (detailed data not

available at

intervention level)

LT Support for skill acquisition (Project Unemployed and individuals entering the labour market for the first Approx.. 49% ‘Improvement of employment time (mainly young people) (detailed data not possibilities’) available at intervention level) LU Valiflex Registered unemployed 83 (83%)

LU Fit4Jobs Seniors Individuals over 45 years who have previously lost their jobs 92 (46%)

NL ESF 2009 AB/GA Assists individuals with mixed set of challenges preventing them from n/a accessing the labour market

February, 2016 136

Female MS Project name Target groups participants NL People with a disability Amsterdam Disabled individuals n/a

NL Berg en Boschschool Special needs pupils 18 (14%)

NL Jeugd aan zet in Midden Holland Young people without a school leaving qualification n/a

RO Developing skills and qualifications for Unemployed or inactive women without specific qualifications in rural 708 (100%) women areas

RO Counselling and training for the Unemployed individuals 244 (65%) unemployed

RO ‘Lifeguards and divers’ for the RO Unemployed individuals in the south-east of the country 360 (15%) economy

RO Improving access of youngsters in Young offenders in detention 136 (26%) detention to vocational training and Labour market integration RO Centre for HR development in the rural Unemployed and low skilled individuals in rural areas 778 (61%) areas

RO Information and professional counselling Unemployed individuals from the Roma community 817 (51%) for the Roma

RO Innovative activities aimed at facilitating Individuals with mixed disadvantages, making access to the labour 2047 (82%) labour market integration for groups at a market more difficult disadvantage (COMPETENT)

February, 2016 137

Female MS Project name Target groups participants RO Adaptability and access to the labour Unemployed, long-term unemployed and unemployed young people 978 (58%) market through training and active job search UK YPLA KickStart your future Young people aged 14-18 at risk of disengaging from learning or 1,544 (34%) NEET

February, 2016 138

3.4.10 Community added value of supported interventions The advice, counselling, guidance and training activities delivered by interventions in cluster 2a demonstrated strong volume, scope, role and process effect. Volume effects were detected both for relatively large scale national interventions such as Clearing (AT) and Support for Vocational Training (LT), Support for Skills Acquisition (LT) and Counselling and Training for the Unemployed (RO) as well as for more modest interventions (in terms of financial scale), such as Valiflex (LU) and Kickstart Your Future (UK). However, due to the lack of quantitative information on comparable social inclusion actions at the national level, it is not possible to quantify this volume effect. The Clearing (AT) initiative provided an additional dimension to guidance services for young people and lead to the development of the Youth Coaching approach in 2011 (a role effect). In Lithuania, the ESF (and the two interventions in this Cluster) played a significant role in enabling the offer of training to disadvantaged job seekers in the context of limited national resources for ALMP, particularly during the years of the crisis. The same is also true for the guidance and counselling service provision in Romania. Scope effects were primarily focussed on the ability to offer personalised provision to particularly vulnerable target groups, which would otherwise not receive the same level of support, particularly at times when scarce resources are aimed at individuals with a shorter distance to travel to the labour market. Such a targeted approach was supported by important outreach activities to ensure that such vulnerable groups access these services (e.g. Kickstart Your Future (UK)). Mainstreaming, or at least local level learning through good practice demonstration effects, were achieved by a number of interventions, including Clearing (AT), Counselling and Training for the Unemployed (RO) and Kickstart Your Future (UK). Process effects were in evidence and interventions required a range of local actors to work together to deliver more tailored services and outreach activities. Such partnerships, once established, developed their own momentum and often continued beyond the lifetime of a project. Of particular importance were partnerships between PES, municipalities, local NGOs and social partner organisations. Table 34. The Added Value of ESF in cluster 2a

Volume effects  Clearing (AT): the implementation of the clearing service throughout Austria had a significant volume effect  the extent to which the ESF supported  Valiflex (LU): support for the additional delivery of childcare actions add to services throughout the country existing actions  Support for vocational training (LT): during the crisis, LT would have been unable to offer the same scale of support for vocational training and resulting labour market integration without ESF funding  Support for skills acquisition (LT): during the crisis, LT would have been unable to offer the same scale of support for vocational training and resulting labour market integration without ESF funding  People with a disability Amsterdam (NL): expansion of existing services to disabled individuals  Jeugd aan zet in Midden Holland (NL): expansion of support for national priority action to support young people  Developing skills and qualifications for women (RO): increase of service offer in rural communities  Counselling and training for the unemployed (RO): significant volume effect in context of limited national funding for similar

February, 2016 139

provision  Adaptability and access to the labour market through training and active job search (RO)/Centre for HR development in rural communities (RO): extension of support to vulnerable groups in rural areas with limited service provision and job opportunities  Kickstart your future (UK): ESF provision extended the scope of existing provision to a significant number of additional individuals throughout eight counties. Scope effects  Clearing (AT): the clearing services is complementary to other actions supporting school to work transitions  the extent to which the ESF broadens  Qualified personnel for the metal sector (AT - BG): the combination existing action of sector specific training with German language training broadened the scope of such training provision and made it accessible to migrants  ANKKURI (FI): offer of support to a non-typical target group (those having suspended their qualifications in the health care sector)  ESF 2009 AB/GA; including of additional vulnerable groups not previously supported  Berg en Boschschool (NL): extension of services to pupils with specific needs to support transitions to the labour market  Lifeguards and divers for the Romanian economy (RO): very targeted training provision for a specific group of unemployed for identified job opportunities  Kickstart your future (UK): allowed the targeted of niche sub- groups at the local level, including through outreach activities Role effects  Clearing (AT): The Cleaning approach introduced in 2001 had a positive role effect and ultimately led to the introduction of the  the extent to which Youth Coaching model in 2011 the ESF supports local/regional  Counselling and training for the unemployed (RO): Successful innovations that are mainstreaming of project practices across communities. The taken up at national practice of integrated service provision for young unemployment level or national has now been replicated for the delivery of the Youth Guarantee innovative actions  Adaptability and access to the labour market through training and that are then active job search (RO): project aim to diversify a largely rural ‘mainstreamed’ economy acted as a role model for other regions  Kickstart your future (UK): refining of the key worker approach which acted as a model for similar provision Process effects  ANKKURI (FI): impact on development of curriculum for health care professions (and qualification criteria)  the extent to which the ESF action  Fit4Jobs Seniors (LU): Fostering of greater co-operation between influences the the PES and sectoral employers’ and trade organisations Member State  Valiflex (LU): Establishment of new partnerships between NGOs administrations and and public sector organisations in the delivery of training and organisations integration of workers involved in the programmes  Developing skills and qualifications for women (RO): improved networking between actors in rural communities  Lifeguards and divers for the Romanian economy (RO): Increased partnership activities between municipalities and with trade unions  Adaptability and access to the labour market through training and active job search (RO) Centre for HR development in rural communities (RO): improved partnerships between actors in rural communities

February, 2016 140

 Kickstart your future (UK): enhanced collaborative working throughout the region which can continue beyond the project 3.4.11 Lessons learnt The Cluster 2a interventions provide lessons of potential relevance across the wider clusters, as described below. a) Policy lessons Cluster 2a type activities related to the provision of counselling, guidance and training are among the most commonly used to support the integration of disadvantaged individuals into society. From the perspective of the priority areas of action supported by ESF, there is a particularly significant overlap between Cluster 2a activities and Access to Employment measures, with these only being distinguished by the nature of the target group. This distinction is in reality not easily drawn, leading some Member States, for instance Finland, to combine social inclusion and access to employment measures in one Priority Axis. While this can be considered to be an entirely sensible approach from a policy perspective, it can pose challenges to the evaluator if the intention is to assess the impact of such activities separately. In the context of the wider debate on the use and effectiveness of guidance, counselling and training measures, it is notable that little evident emphasis appears to be placed by interventions to combine an assessment on local or indeed future skills needs with decisions on the provision of specific training (with a few exceptions, such as, for instance, the Romanian Lifeguards and Divers project). It is possible that such considerations are inherent in the personalised action planning approaches, but this is not immediately evident from the review of the interventions. b) Target groups The individuals targeted by the Cluster 2 interventions featured a combination of unemployed individuals and others facing more specific disadvantages (including disabilities, migrants, young people NEET/with limiting qualifications, offenders and older workers). However, each group faced barriers to participation in the labour market which the interventions sought to address. b) Programming Several lessons emerged for future programming. The importance of the clear targeting of interventions and selection of suitable support was highlighted. For instance in the Developing skills and qualifications for women project (RO) the identification of a suitable activity for individuals in rural areas combined with entrepreneurial support was considered to be helpful in achieving positive outcomes. Interventions focusing on the social inclusion of disadvantaged groups should be designed to cover areas where gaps exist in national, regional and local policies and provision. In the case of the Clearing project (AT), the project’s scope was relevant as it focused on filling a gap in the provision of assistance to disadvantaged young pupils by supporting their transition towards employment. The same was also true for the Berg en Boschschool project (NL). This also applies to the delivery of training for sectors in which there is currently insufficient provision, as in the case of lifeguard and traditional craft skills training offered by two projects in Romania. Making interventions beneficial for both the employer and the employee, and giving the employer financial incentives to employ a worker for a longer time, also featured amongst the Cluster 2a interventions. For the Support for Skills Acquisition scheme (LT), employers who recruit individuals referred by the labour exchange under the SSA measure were paid wage subsidies equal to 50-75% of the wage, with the insurer’s compulsory state social insurance contributions being calculated from this wage. In this case, employers also provided individuals lacking skills with workplace training. Employers taking part in the measure had to take relatively high

February, 2016 141

administrative costs associated with the skills provision at the workplace. It appeared that the employers who took part in the SSA scheme pursued long-term positive effects rather than short-term ones44, and appeared to be more likely to employ referred individuals for longer periods than employers participating in the subsidised employment measure. It should be noted that support for skills acquisition is beneficial to both the employee (wage, skills) and the employer (wage subsidy, appropriate professional). Interventions that work with disadvantaged groups should incorporate approaches that are more comprehensive and provide complementary services, in addition to the more employment-focussed activities. In the Ankurri (FI) project, the effectiveness of the experimental pedagogic coaching model was clearly positive for continuing suspended studies and obtaining qualifications. Language training is key to supporting individuals from migrant backgrounds, alongside actions such as guidance or other training. The Qualified personnel in the metal sector project (AT) was an example of this successful innovation of combining language training and technical training for occupations in the metal sector. A common risk is that projects may try to achieve what can be numerous and diverse objectives – which if not adequately understood and structured can pose problems for implementation. In the Ankurri (FI) project, the integration of two different approaches was problematic. The approaches focused on two very different themes: tackling the suspension of studies among adults on the one hand, and multicultural issues in vocational education on the other. While it may have been more efficient to have a single and highly specific objective, this dual approach strengthened cooperation on the learning methods, which was useful for authorities and education institutes themselves. c) Implementation The review of the interventions revealed the importance of delivering services with an adequate project team and personnel. This is the case of all interventions working to integrate people into the labour market, but to a greater extent when working with disadvantaged groups. Having the adequate skills, background and experience by the project organisation and provider staff was identified as a key issue for the YPLA KickStart your Future project (UK). The ability of such a team offering tailor made approaches was highlighted in the case of the ESF 2009 AB/GA project. More widely, the ability to access additional services, or the involvement of other organisations in delivery, was important. In fact, it seems that well-coordinated, cooperative working methods can be a key aspect for the success of the intervention. For example, the Clearing project aimed to replace other initiatives but to cooperate with existing projects and organisations to achieve its objectives. In this example, the cooperative approach followed was useful to reach NEETs that were not accessible through traditional channels. Therefore, collaboration arrangements were made with projects with low entry requirements as well as open youth organisations. As in the other clusters, the early consideration and use of follow-up support was found to be key in ensuring that outcomes achieved and momentum developed were not lost. In order to reduce the risk of failure, new interventions should take into account the lessons from previous experiences. In addition, and to a greater extent when working with the more specific disadvantaged clients, initial piloting may be appropriate. Both aspects were relevant for the implementation of the YPLA KickStart your Future project (UK).

44 Evaluation of impact of EU structural support on quality of life and reduction of poverty and social exclusion in Lithuania. Final report. Estep, June 2014

February, 2016 142

Useful lessons for future interventions were also identified when interventions, or elements of them, had not been as effective as expected. For example, the importance of ensuring that any training provided was fully aligned with the requirements of local labour markets was important in ensuring longer term employment outcomes. This is important in terms of intervention design, where local labour market needs and potential opportunities should be considered in advance. This factor was emphasised by responses from participants in the Valiflex (LU) and Vocational training (LU) projects. In the former, just 14% of participants considered that the content of the training received matched the practical aspects of a daily job, and in the latter only a third of participants stated that the qualifications acquired were relevant for the labour market. Another issue relevant for the performance of interventions is having a clear understanding of how the project will identify and attract the expected participants. This process needs to be carefully planned and adapted to the characteristics of the specific target group. In the case of the YPLA KickStart your Future project (UK), this issue caused challenges in the early stages, when the number of participants was low. In this case, the contract holder considered that earlier collaborative work with local authorities and other partners tasked with identifying participants would have been beneficial. Although positive relations were subsequently established, their experience emphasised the importance of securing the involvement and commitment of key partners early in the project planning stage. d) Monitoring and evaluation Monitoring Several project managers expressed the opinion that excessive administrative effort is required to manage an ESF supported intervention. In some cases, this was considered to be one of the major barriers to effective current and future participation. One area referred to was the monitoring requirements imposed in many Member States – which were described in some cases as excessively burdensome. The high level of emphasis placed on hard outcomes and the lack of systems to capture soft results were also identified as being of particular relevance to projects addressing disadvantaged groups. Evaluation As indicated above the lack of measurement of soft indicators and the absence of reliable comparators hamper evaluation efforts which should be established in the planning phase of programmes and interventions. 3.5 Cluster 2b: Labour market integration: actions with employment as an output 3.5.1 Introduction Cluster 2b focuses on interventions which have employment as an output, such as subsidy measures, sheltered employment, employment in the ‘second’ labour market, etc. These interventions are of significance in most countries, in supporting measures through the intermediate labour market and providing wage subsidies, intended to overcome some of the perceived shortcomings of the target group and encourage employers to offer employment opportunities for often hard to place groups. Austria, Cyprus, Finland, Luxembourg, Lithuania, the Netherlands and Romania have actions in this area. The main focus of Cluster 2b interventions is on supporting employment in the intermediate (or ‘second’) labour market and offering subsidised employment in the open labour market. The intermediate labour market is often perceived as offering a more ‘sheltered’ environment for certain groups to gain employment experience. This

February, 2016 143

can include sheltered employment as such (primarily for disabled individuals), as well as third sector employment offering more supportive working conditions. For individuals where placement in the open labour market is feasible (because of prior work experience, holding relevant skills, etc.), subsidies are often used to encourage employers to recruit from a target group they would not otherwise have considered because of perceived limitations on their (immediate) productivity. Target groups for such subsidies therefore include: . Individuals with some distance to the labour market . Disabled individuals . Individuals from other disadvantaged target groups (older workers, low skilled young people, Roma, etc.). In Lithuania, measures in this cluster are mainly aimed at young people, whereas target groups are broader in other countries. In Austria and Finland, the focus is only on intermediate labour markets, whereas Luxembourg and Lithuania focus on job subsidies. In Romania, both types of measure are used. In Cyprus, job subsidies aim at supporting the employment of disabled and disadvantaged individuals. In the Netherlands, many actions support integration into sheltered employment and are decided at the municipality level (Action J). Table 35. Summary of Cluster 2b interventions by Member State

Member Cluster 2b - Actions which have employment as an output State AT Employment in socio-economic companies CY Grant schemes – job subsidies to support the employment of disabled and disadvantaged individuals FI Support for intermediate labour markets LU Increasing the employment rate of older workers (subsidised employment)

Facilitating the integration of young people into the labour market (subsidised employment)

Activating people furthest from the labour market (subsidised employment)

LT Employment support, guidance and supported employment for young people (subsidised employment) NL Employment subsidies and initiatives to support sheltered employment are supported with ESF funding administered by the local authorities. RO Development of social economy (supported jobs) 3.5.2 The Cluster 2b interventions The remainder of this section focuses on the eight interventions - in AT, CY, LT and RO - which can be classified under Cluster 2b (including one intervention in Lithuania which can be classified under both Cluster 2b and under Cluster 2c, which aims to sustain employment). The interventions are: . Heidenspass extended (AT) . Grant Scheme for Facilitating Access to Employment for People with Disabilities (CY) . Grant Scheme for Facilitating Access to Employment for Vulnerable Groups (CY)

February, 2016 144

. Support for temporary employment (LT) . Subsidised employment (LT) . Job rotation (LT) . Transition into work (NL) . Co-operation for the facilitation of employment amongst the blind via improving ICT skills (RO). An overview of the interventions is provided as Table 36 below. As this illustrates, the target groups served and activities undertaken were broadly representative of the Cluster 2b population as described above. Availability of evaluation evidence for Cluster 2b interventions

None of the seven interventions reviewed within Cluster has been the object of a specific external evaluation. However, some form of evaluation has been carried out for all interventions: . A self-evaluation approach was implemented during the project Heidenspass extended (AT). The report documents feedback from project participants, staff members, focus groups as well as interviews during the self-evaluation process. . Two grant schemes in Cyprus were the object of an internal evaluation from the Department of Labour. . The three interventions reviewed in Lithuania were not evaluated separately, but were covered in an overall impact evaluation of EU structural fund assistance (Evaluation of impact of EU structural support on quality of life and reduction of poverty and social exclusion in Lithuania. Final report. Estep, June 2014).

3.5.3 Aims, objectives, target groups and scale of funding The interventions under review targeted beneficiaries from different categories of vulnerable groups, including disabled individuals and young people (15 to 25 years of age) furthest from the labour market. Three interventions carried out in Lithuania as part of a programme called ‘Improvement of employment possibilities’ had a wider scope, and were open to all unemployed individuals.

One intervention reviewed in Austria (Heindenpass extended) focused on identifying employment opportunities for a target group of youth and young adults (15 to 25 years of age) at a great distance from the labour market, and particularly those from a migrant background. The project combined different elements: improved easy access to employment opportunities for trial periods (on an hourly basis) and opportunities for part-time employment, a written assessment of obtained competences to help participants develop individual employment targets, the provision of counselling and support by social workers and cross-linking with education and training institutions.

Two interventions reviewed in Lithuania, which were part of a broader programme called ‘Improvement of employment possibilities’, aimed at supporting temporary placements or offering opportunities of sheltered employment to unemployed persons (and employees who had been given notice of dismissal): . Support for temporary employment: this intervention was based on a public works programme, offering participants an opportunity to maintain their skills or redevelop skills and to earn a living. Participants were paid by the employer to perform work that had social benefits for the community; and employers

February, 2016 145

received subsidies to cover wage costs. Participation in public works per person was limited to six months per year. . Job rotation: the principle of this intervention is that jobseekers could temporarily replace employees during a special leave (or in the cases provided for in collective agreements). Employers received a subsidy covering part of the wage and social insurance contribution for the person hired in replacement. Other interventions focused on the use of subsidies for employers to incentivise recruitment and maintain beneficiaries in jobs for longer periods (for up to 12 or even 24 months): . Subsidised employment (LT) consisted of a subsidy for employers hiring an unemployed person (portion of the wage costs), for a period of up to 12 months . The Grant Scheme for Facilitating Access to Employment for Vulnerable Groups (CY) targeted different categories of individuals considered as socially vulnerable45. The activities took the form of grant for a period of 12 months, covering up to 65% of the annual salary of the employee (maximum of EUR 13,000 per person per year) and travel expenses for employees. . A similar scheme in Cyprus was more specifically targeted at people with disabilities. The activities covered are financial assistance up to 75% of the annual wage cost of an employee (up to EUR 15,000 per person per year) for the first 24 months of employment. In addition, the scheme provided financial assistance up of 25% of any additional costs, with a maximum of EUR 5,000 per person (including adaptation and staff costs resulting directly from hiring disabled workers). An intervention in Romania (Co-operation for the facilitation of employment amongst the blind via improving ICT skills) combined the delivery of training to sight impaired individuals with the development of additional sheltered work placements. Transitions through sheltered workshops was also at the heart of the Transition to work project for pupils with learning difficulties (NL).

An overview of the six interventions reviewed within Cluster 2b is provided in Table 30. 3.5.3.1 Financial implementation rates of the interventions Financial implementation rates in this cluster are relatively high, ranging from 64 – 107%. The financial implementation rate below target in the NL Transition to Work project occurred despite higher than targeted participation in the programme. The lower budget implementation rate was attributed to the fact that not all expenditure proved ultimately to be reimbursable. In the other cases of underspend, no clear reasons were provided for this. Concerning the grant scheme targeting disadvantaged groups in Cyprus, an increase in available budget was required over the course of the project to accommodate the high level of demand from both by both employers and employees, as well as due to the need to include a special allowance for the participants to move to and from the job premises.

45 This includes: Early school leavers; persons aged 15 to 24 or over 50 years; persons living alone looking after one or more dependents members of a minority; recipients of public assistance ; persons (formerly) under the legal care of the Director of Social Welfare Services (SWS); members of families with psychosocial problems ; individual released from prison; former drug users ; disabled individuals or recognized as victims of trafficking.

February, 2016 146

3.5.3.2 Contribution to national policy priorities ESF supported interventions offering advice, guidance and training are considered to make an important contribution to national priorities for the integration of disadvantaged groups into the labour market by adding to the catalogue of ALMP measures aimed at particularly vulnerable groups for whom more mainstream measures may not be suitable. The groups selected for support generally reflect national priorities and remain relatively broad.

February, 2016 147

Table 36. Overview of Cluster 2b interventions

MS Project name Allocated Actual Implementation Duration Target groups Short description of objectives and activities expenditure expenditure rate

AT Heidenspass EUR 800,000 EUR 800,000 100% 01/12 - Young people (15 to 25 years This pilot project aims at the reduction of exclusion from extended (ESF: EUR 12/13 of age) furthest from the the labour market and an improved equality of 368,000) labour market, in many opportunities The project comprises the following cases NEETs with additional elements: Easily accessible employment on an hourly problematic situations and basis, possibility of part-time employment, (written) particularly with migrant confirmation for obtained competences (no formal background. certificates), counselling and support by social workers, cross linking to education and training institutions and investigation of effectiveness of low-threshold work- integration social enterprises and projects.

CY Grant Scheme EUR 1 million EUR 1.07 107.4% Stating date People with disabilities, as The main aim of the Grant Scheme is to encourage for Facilitating million not available well as companies willing employers to hire people with disabilities using financial Access to them with to provide job incentives. The activities covered are financial assistance Employment for - 2013 opportunities. up to 75% of annual wage cost of an employee, with a People with maximum of euro 15.000 per person per year, for the Disabilities first 24 months of employment. In addition the scheme provides financial assistance up of 25% of the eligible costs, with a maximum of euro 5.000 per person (adaptation and staff costs, resulting directly from the hiring of disabled workers).

CY Grant Scheme EUR 9 million EUR 8,2 million 91.2% Starting date Individuals from vulnerable The main aim of the Grant Scheme is to create for Facilitating not available groups: members of a subsidized job opportunities to people belonging to Access to - 2013 minority; recipients of public socially vulnerable groups of the population for a certain Employment for assistance, members of period of time. The project aims to encourage employers Vulnerable families with psychosocial to hire people from vulnerable groups (in full-time Groups problems; released from employment) by providing financial incentives for a prison; former drug users; limited period. The activities take the form of grant for a disabled individuals or period of 12 months, covered the up to 65% of the recognized as victims of annual salary of the employee (up to EUR 13.000 per trafficking). person per year) and travel expenses for employees for each working day).

LT Support for EUR 5.3 million EUR 4.5 million 84% 01/01/09 - Unemployed individuals and The objective was to support a temporary return of the temporary 21/12/09 employees who had been unemployed to the labour market, help them to employment given notice of dismissal maintain their skills or recover the lost skills and to earn a living through participation in one of the active labour market policy measures, the public works programme.

February, 2016 148

MS Project name Allocated Actual Implementation Duration Target groups Short description of objectives and activities expenditure expenditure rate

LT Subsidised EUR 14.9 EUR 14.8 99% 01/12/08- Unemployed individuals The objective is to strengthen the position of the target employment million million 31/05/11 employees who have been group in the labour market or become employed. (Project given a notice of dismissal Subsidies for employers may be paid for a period of up ‘Improvement of to 12 months. employment possibilities’)

LT Job rotation EUR 536,560 EUR 504,209 94% 01/12/08 – Unemployed individuals The objective is to offer temporary placements (Project 31/05/11 (temporary replacement of employees in special leave or ‘Improvement of cases provided for in collective agreements with employment jobseekers). Employers receive a financial compensation possibilities’) – a subsidy for a part of the employee’s wage and social insurance contribution.

NL Transition to EUR 553,113 353,593 64% 2008-2009 Young people with learning Delivery of sector orientated courses allowing for the work difficulties delivery of skills to enable pupils with learning difficulties to enter employment through sheltered workshops.

RO Co-operation for EUR 1,657,441 1,297,641 78% 2009-2011 Sight impaired job seekers The project aimed at training sight impaired individuals the facilitation of in job search skills, as well as creating additional employment sheltered workplaces where these skills could be amongst the applied. Contacts were also established with employers blind via ICT to support them and seek to place the individuals skills trained.

February, 2016 149

3.5.4 Effectiveness The outputs and results reported for the Cluster 2b interventions are presented below. As indicated above, the effectiveness of an intervention can be assessed against its own targets or comparable interventions. An assessment against own targets needs to take into account how targets were originally formulated and how appropriate these targets were, vis à vis the specific target group and the context in which the intervention is operating. As indicated above, very little information is available about how targets for interventions are set beyond experiential learning from previous ESF projects or indeed the results of ALMP (e.g. in the case of the Lithuanian projects). As the experience of the Cypriot grant scheme for vulnerable groups shows, it is possible for demand to significantly exceed what was originally planned, particularly in the context of the economic crisis. The availability of benchmark data for similar national measures is limited. The only example of the availability of counterfactual impact evaluation is in Lithuania (see also below). Table 37 sets out the types of output and result indicators available for interventions in this cluster. Table 37. Types of output and results indicators for Cluster 2b

Output indicators Result indicators Participants  Number of  Share of participants either on the regular labour individuals market or in education participating  Percentage of participants who remain in employment two years after the termination of the grant  Percentage of participants who remain in employment two years after the termination of the grant  Percentage of participants employed 6 months after participation in the measure  Access to sheltered employment  Access to further education The outputs and results of the considered interventions are shown in the tables below. Table 38 shows that outputs were generally close or above target for all interventions, with the exception of Heidenspass extended (AT), which was still ongoing at the time of writing. Two interventions - Heidenspass extended (AT) and the Grant Scheme for disadvantaged groups (CY) - were small-scale and each targeted about 70-80 participants. Concerning Heidenspass extended (AT), the applications from young unaccompanied refugees/asylum seekers rose unexpectedly in 2012. The change in the composition of participants affected the average duration of participation in the project and as a result, a waiting list for participation in the project had to be created. Heidenspass was not externally evaluated, but a self-evaluation approach was implemented during the project that was perceived as very helpful and motivating both, for project staff and participants. Additionally, an evaluation of the instrument of in work-integration social projects (regardless whether ESF co-financed or not) was commissioned by the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (see Eppel et al., 201446). This counterfactual impact evaluation shows positive average impacts of participation in such projects.

46 Rainer Eppel, Thomas Horvath, Manuel Lackner, Helmut Mahringer, Trude Hausegger, Isa Hager, Christine Reidl, Andrea Reiter, Sara Scheiflinger, Michaela Friedl-Schafferhans, „Evaluierung von Sozialen Unternehmen im Kontext neuer Herausforderungen“, WIFO-Monografien, 2014

February, 2016 150

For the Grant Scheme for disadvantaged groups (CY), outcomes almost doubled the initial target due to an increase in the available budget, to accommodate the high number of requests from employers and potential beneficiaries. An Evaluation of impact of EU structural support on quality of life and reduction of poverty and social exclusion in Lithuania47 found that: . almost half (49%) of the subsidised employment participants said that the participation helped them to find a job, i.e. it was a critical factor leading to employment; 40% of the respondents indicated that participation in the project “inspired them to acquire profession/improve qualification/retrain”; . job rotation participants greatly valued the project benefits related not only to employment but to social integration as well. For example, the majority (82%) of them said that “participation in the project improved their mood and self- confidence“; more than half of the respondents said that participation in the project helped to acquire professional skills, find a job or establish useful contacts. In addition, even 85% of the respondents indicated that “participation in the project encouraged them to actively look for a job”. The majority of the respondents who have participated in the public works measure indicated that the temporary guarantee of income security was the main element which attracted them to the measure. Evaluation48 results show the development of personal attitudes in participants towards further improvement and job search as well. More than half of the respondents indicated that participation in the project has encouraged them to continue training/learning, improving acquired skills and searching actively for job. Table 38. Outputs achieved (number of persons supported) against expected, Cluster 2b

MS Intervention Actual Expected Achievement outputs outputs against target AT Heidenspass extended 81 100  81.0% CY Grant Scheme for Facilitating Access to 73 69  105.8% Employment for People with Disabilities CY Grant Scheme for Facilitating Access to 979 500  195.8% Employment for Vulnerable Groups LT Support for temporary employment 15,983 15,000  106.6% LT Subsidised employment (Project 14,277 13,506  105.7% ‘Improvement of employment possibilities’) LT Job rotation (Project ‘Improvement of 891 902  101% employment possibilities’) NL Transition into work 161 140  115% RO Co-operation for the facilitation of 175 150  117% employment amongst the blind via improving ICT skills Participants who were from vulnerable groups

Note: arrows indicate the following  Over performance (>110%)  Performance between (90%-110%)  Under performance (<90%)

47 Evaluation of impact of EU structural support on quality of life and reduction of poverty and social exclusion in Lithuania. Final report. Estep, June 2014 48 ibid

February, 2016 151

N/A indicates that the indicator is not available for the intervention Table 39 below provides information on results achieved by the interventions against targets. Five of the seven interventions in this Cluster met or exceeded their results targets. In the case of the Austrian intervention (Heidenspass), it is difficult to assess results against targets as the measures were still ongoing at the time of writing. The overall target of placing at least half of participants into the labour market or education has already been exceeded. Out of 60 project leavers, nine moved to the regular labour market and 28 started education and training (apprenticeship). In addition, eight went into the secondary labour market and six started another project (e.g. Youth Coaching). Whilst the intervention, Transition into work (NL), over-performed against its targets), the actual number of individuals obtaining results was relatively small. In the case of two of the Lithuanian interventions (subsidised employment and job rotation), no separate breakdown of results is available (hence the same data are presented for both interventions). The positive results recorded by the support for temporary employment measure could be explained as a function of the economic cycle, during which the intervention was implemented, meaning that the pick-up in economic fortunes towards the end of this period mean that more of those individuals supported on temporary contracts were able to obtain permanent employment. It is acknowledged that subsidised employment measures (largely in the form of public works) are generally less likely to have long-term positive employment outcomes, and were indeed partly seen as a way to bolster incomes during the height of the economic crisis. Having said this, this Cypriot Grant schemes for disabled individuals and vulnerable groups appear to have generated positive and significant outcomes for participants. These results have also been sustainable two years post-intervention (see also section on sustainability below). Table 39. Target versus actual results, Cluster 2b

MS Intervention Results Expected Achievemen results t against target AT Heidenspass extended  Share of participants either on the Above target* 50% Above target regular labour market or in education CY Grant Scheme for Facilitating Access to Employment for People with Disabilities  Percentage of participants who remain 70% N/A N/A in employment two years after the termination of the grant CY Grant Scheme for Facilitating Access to Employment for Vulnerable Groups  Percentage of participants who remain Over 60% 30%  200% in employment two years after the termination of the grant LT Support for temporary employment  Number of individuals employed post- 2,534 2,250  113% intervention

LT Subsidised employment (Project ‘Improvement of employment possibilities’)  Percentage of participants employed 6 14,073 21,679  65% months after participation in the measure LT Job rotation (Project ‘Improvement of employment possibilities’)

February, 2016 152

MS Intervention Results Expected Achievemen results t against target  Percentage of participants employed 6 14,073 21,679  65% months after participation in the measure NL Transition into work  Access to regular employment 9 7  128%  Access to sheltered employment 10 5  200%  Total outflow to employment 19 12  158%  Accessed further education 12 23  52% RO Co-operation for the facilitation of employment amongst the blind via improving ICT skills Rate of participants from vulnerable 99% 80%  124% groups obtaining certification as a result of training

Note: arrows indicate the following  Over performance (>110%)  Performance between (90%-110%)  Under performance (<90%) N/A indicates that the indicator is not available for the intervention. * No consolidated figure provided, some participants still receiving support under the scheme. * The results concern unemployed persons who participated in Vocational Training or Subsidised Employment schemes within the framework of Improvement of Employment Possibilities. 3.5.4.1 Soft results Although the main objective of Cluster 2b is to (re)integrate participants into employment, interventions have also pursued a range of soft results. Concerning Heidenspass extended (AT), a key objective was to contribute to the personal development of participants and their ‘stabilisation’ (including developing a more structured daily routine, better social contacts and integration, and improved social competences). It is important to keep in mind that participation was entirely voluntary and that most young participants approached the project on their own initiative. The working environment helped participants to accumulate experience and informal skills, which are explicitly acknowledged by the project staff. Amongst the interventions in Lithuania, implemented as part of the programme ‘Improvement of employment possibilities’, surveys of participants were carried out, with the following results: . For the support for temporary employment (public works), more than half of the respondents indicated that participation in the project had encouraged them to continue training or learning, improving acquired skills and searching actively for work. . For subsidised employment, almost half (49%) of surveyed participants considered participation helped them to find a job, i.e. it was a critical factor leading to employment; further, 40% indicated that participation in the project “inspired them to acquire a profession/improve qualification/retrain”. . For job rotation, the participants greatly valued the benefits of participation in the project not only related to employment but also to social integration. For example, the majority (82%) agreed that participation improved their mood and self-

February, 2016 153

confidence; more than half considered it helped to acquire professional skills, find a job or establish useful contacts. In addition, 85% of respondents indicated that “participation in the project encouraged them to actively look for a job”. 3.5.5 The characteristics of participants Information on the characteristics of participants was analysis based on Annex XXIII data made available by Managing Authorities. It should be noted that not all MA were able to provide these data and where they could not be collected centrally, data gathered at the project level are used in the table below. Based on the available information, 71,170 participants took part in the eight interventions studied in this Cluster. Unfortunately, gender data are not available for all interventions. For those where this could be provided, 49% of participants were women. The vast majority of participants in this Cluster where previously unemployed. Participant age data are not available for all interventions, but existing data show that 11% of participants were young people between the ages 15-24. Data on the representation of vulnerable group are missing for two interventions (four in the case of education levels), making these data more difficult to interpret. 21% of participants fall into the category ‘other’ disadvantaged groups; 4% were disabled. Compared to Cluster 1, individuals with upper secondary education were more significantly represented than those with primary or lower secondary education.

February, 2016 154

Table 40. The participation data by socio-economic characteristics (Annex XXIII data): Cluster 2b

AT CY Grant CY Grant LT Support for LT LT Job NL RO Co- Total Heidenspass scheme for scheme for temporary Subsidised rotation Transition operation for extended facilitating facilitating employment employment into work50 the faciliation access to access to of employment employment employment (disabilities)49 (vulnerable among blind groups)

Number of participants 81 73 979 15,983 26,613 26,613 161 667 71,170

Gender Male 35 39 NA 8,902 12,975 12,975 95 269 35,290

Female 46 34 NA 7,081 13,384 13,384 66 398 34,393

Labour Employed 0 0 NA 0 511 NA NA 345 856 market status Unemployed 14 73 NA 15,983 25,848 NA NA 105 42,023 Inactive 67 0 NA 0 0 NA NA 217 284

Age Youngpeople(15-24) 81 NA NA 1,814 6,004 43 NA 112 8,054

Olderpeople(55-64) 0 NA NA 2,640 2,120 42 NA 40 4,842

Vulnerable Migrants 50 0 NA 0 0 239 NA 0 289 groups Minorities 0 0 NA 8 0 NA NA 99 107

Disabled 1 73 NA 928 1,421 NA NA 279 2,702

Others 30 0 NA 15,011 0 NA NA 78 15,119

Education Primary or lower secondary 70 NA NA 3,806 5,062 NA NA 209 9,147 (ISCED1-2)

Upper secondary (ISCED3) 11 NA NA 6,486 13,084 NA NA 125 19,706

Post-secondary non tertiary 0 NA NA 3,394 2,203 NA NA 86 5,683 (ISCED4)

Tertiary (ISCED5-6) 0 NA NA 2,270 6,010 NA NA 237 8,517

Notes: The figures shown as total accounts for all categories with data. Therefore, data could be underestimated.

49 CY MA indicates no Annex XXIII data available at this stage. 50 NL MA indicates Annex XXIII data only available at aggregate level.

February, 2016 155

3.5.6 Efficiency The data available on costs per output (i.e. participant/person supported) and per result are provided below for the interventions reviewed in Cluster 2b. Table 34a presents the cost per output data. Unfortunately, no comparator information was available at the national level to compare these costs against those of similar, nationally funded interventions. The average cost per participant varied widely across the interventions; the average cost per output was €5,519. Data from Volume II show that the average cost per output for all ESI SI and SI+A2E interventions was in the region of €1,500. This lower cost can at least partly be explained by the fact that five of the eight in-depth countries had above average costs per participant. Furthermore, costs for advice and training measures were on average lower and these tend to be more represented among the wider field of SI and SI+A2E measures which were monitored in Volume II. Cost per participant was by far the highest for the grant scheme targeting individuals with disabilities in Cyprus, Heidenspass extended in Austria and the intervention delivering ICT skills for blind people in Romania. However, higher costs seem justified taking into account the nature of the target group (disabled jobseekers, NEETs with a migrant background, blind people), the objective of long-term job placement of individuals, with a grant provided over 24 months (in Cyprus), and the availability of extra funding to cover adaptation costs in the workplace (in Cyprus), as well as the development of ICT systems, teaching modules and awareness raising work with employers in Romania. In the Cypriot project, as many as 70% of beneficiaries were still in employment two years after the end of the co-financed period, which suggested that the measure actually proved cost-effective. A positive performance above target was also achieved by the Romanian project. The AT Heidenspass initiative was still ongoing at the time of study but was also on course to reach its integration targets. A similar grant for other categories of vulnerable groups in Cyprus (offering a lower amount of financial support for a 12 month period) has also proven cost effective over time, as more two thirds of participants were still in employment two years after the end of the co-financed period. According to the evaluation of the impact of EU structural support on quality of life and reduction of poverty and social exclusion in Lithuania (Final report. Estep, June 2014), some of the Cluster 2b interventions implemented under the project ‘Improvement of employment possibilities’ were more efficient than other interventions. Indeed, the estimates for the costs of employment of one additional person for at least one working day during 2009–2012 were EUR 2,622 for the job rotation scheme, EUR 6,036 for subsidised employment and EUR 6,179 for public works (support for temporary employment). The cost of one additional working day per person in 2009–2012 was EUR 2,622 for Job rotation, EUR 6,036 for Subsidised employment and EUR 6,179 for Public works. The cost of one additional litas of income per person in 2009–2012 was EUR 0.29 for (LTL 1) for Job rotation, EUR 2.2 (LTL 7.6) for Subsidised employment and EUR 0.6 (LTL 2.2) for Public works. Table 41. Cost per output (person supported), Cluster 2b interventions reviewed

MS Intervention Actual Available comparators

AT Heidenspass extended EUR 9,876 n/a CY Grant Scheme for Facilitating Access to EUR 14,712.59 n/a Employment for People with Disabilities CY Grant Scheme for Facilitating Access to EUR 8,384.6 n/a

February, 2016 156

MS Intervention Actual Available comparators Employment for Vulnerable Groups

LT Support for temporary employment EUR 284 n/a LT Subsidised employment (Project EUR 1,039 n/a ‘Improvement of employment possibilities’) LT Job rotation (Project ‘Improvement of EUR 558 n/a employment possibilities’) NL Transition into work EUR 2,196 n/a RO Co-operation for the facilitation of EUR 7,415 n/a employment amongst the blind via improving ICT skills

N/A indicates that the indicator is not available for the intervention. Table 34.b provides information on the cost per result achieved for the Cluster 2b projects. As in the case of the previous two clusters, this table has to be viewed with caution, for a number of reasons: It was only possible to use a rather crude assessment of cost per result for which a result indicator was available; Where several result indicators are provided, it is not possible to break down the funding expended into different aspects of delivery, therefore each indicator is calculated against the same total funding; Result indicators were not stated for all aspects of projects, which may have achieved measurable soft or hard outcomes and all costs are therefore deemed to have been used to achieve the limited measured outcomes; Different result indicators are used by different projects, making comparability between projects limited. It should therefore be borne in mind that the quoted costs per result over-estimate the funds used to achieve a particular result. Focussing only on indicators linked to individuals’ access to regular employment post-intervention, the average cost per integration is EUR 16,076. Only one intervention measured certification achieved (at a cost of €7,500 per certification). As mentioned above, it is worth bearing in mind that a recent study found that the average cost of unemployment per annum (calculated on the basis of a comparison of six EU countries) could be estimated conservatively at around EUR 25,00051. No available comparators could be found in relation to costs per result for comparable national measures. Table 42. Cost per result, Cluster 2b interventions reviewed

MS Intervention name Indicator Cost per result Available comparators AT Heidenspass extended Share of participants either on the n/a n/a regular labour market or in education CY Grant Scheme for Percentage of participants who 20,980 euro n/a Facilitating Access to remain in employment two years

51 Gerard M, Valsamis D and Van der Beken W (2012); Why invest in employment: A study on the cost of unemployment; http://www.efsi- europe.eu/fileadmin/MEDIA/publications/Cost_of_unemployment_report/English_Study_o n_the_cost_of_unemployment_January_2013.pdf

February, 2016 157

MS Intervention name Indicator Cost per result Available comparators Employment for People after the termination of the grant with Disabilities Grant Scheme for Percentage of participants who 13,531 euro n/a Facilitating Access to remain in employment two years CY Employment for after the termination of the grant Vulnerable Groups LT Support for temporary Number of individuals employed 1,776 euro n/a employment post-intervention LT Subsidised Percentage of participants 1,052 euro n/a employment (Project employed 6 months after ‘Improvement of participation in the measure employment possibilities’) LT Job rotation (Project Percentage of participants 36 euro n/a ‘Improvement of employed 6 months after employment participation in the measure possibilities’) NL Transition into work Access to regular employment 39,288 euro n/a Access to sheltered employment 35,359 euro n/a Total outflow to employment 18,601 euro n/a Accessed further education 29,466 euro n/a

RO Co-operation for the Rate of participants from 7,500 euro n/a facilitation of vulnerable groups obtaining employment amongst certification as a result of training the blind via improving

ICT skills

3.5.7 Sustainability of the supported interventions 3.5.7.1 Sustainability of results for participants As mentioned above, sustainable results were obtained by some grant schemes in Cyprus, according to internal evaluations. Two years after the end of the grant, a majority of beneficiaries remained in the same job (70% in the case of the Grant Scheme for People with Disabilities and more than 60% concerning the Grant Scheme for vulnerable groups).

In contrast, a lack of sustained impacts was identified for other interventions in Lithuania, as their effects were only felt in the short-term. According to the findings of a counterfactual evaluation on the effects of five active labour market policy measures, including some of the interventions in Cluster 2b:

Public works appeared to have had the weakest effect in the mid- to long-term; however, this type of policy was appropriate and socially necessary during the crisis to provide a ‘safety net’ for some individuals. After the end of the project ‘Support for temporary employment’, effects for entering employment and the number of days in employment disappeared at all and even became negative. Concerning subsidised employment, the post-intervention impact for the participants was also limited. A major shortcoming of the scheme is that employers tend to dismiss workers after expiration of their subsidy and the terms and conditions of support under this scheme did not mitigate against employers’ abuse of the subsidies. Another

February, 2016 158

shortcoming in the implementation of the subsidies is insufficient control during subsidy periods.

Concerning the Heidenpass extended scheme (AT), long-term impacts are unknown as the trajectories of participants post-project were not followed over the mid- to-long term.

Continuation of activities As demonstrated in Table 43 below, for the interventions where information is available, one is not scheduled to continue, two will continue with national funding and four are expected to continue with ESF funding under the new funding period. Table 43. Sustainability of interventions in Cluster 2b beyond the 2007-2013 ESF funding period

Intervention sustained Country/OP Title of intervention (yes/no) with which source of funding AT: OP Employment Yes, national funding Heidenspass extended

Grant Scheme for Facilitating Yes, new ESF funding period CY: OP Employment, Access to Employment for People Human Capital and Social with Disabilities Cohesion Grant Scheme for Facilitating Yes, new ESF funding period Access to Employment for Vulnerable Groups No, Public Works mainly Support for temporary considered suitable measure employment during crisis (income stabilisation) LT: Human Resources Subsidised employment (Project Yes, similar ALMP measure under Development OP “Improvement of employment new ESF funding period possibilities”) Job rotation (Project Yes, similar ALMP measure under “Improvement of employment new ESF funding period possibilities”) Door naar werk (Transition into Not yet decided NL: ESF OP work)

RO: Human Resource Cooperation for the faciliation of Yes, national funding Development OP employment amongst the blind via ICT skill (ID 28124)

Source: National reports prepared for this ex-post evaluation In Cyprus, the Managing Authority and the Department of Labour are in the process of designing a similar Grant Scheme for vulnerable individuals in the new programming period, with significantly higher targets. Furthermore, the increased demand for the small-scale grant scheme for people with Disabilities calls for the implementation of similar interventions in the next programming period. The Heidenpass extended project (AT) was considered a useful approach to reach some groups of disadvantaged youth, especially migrants, who would otherwise not be easily integrated into existing labour market policies or education measures. Heidenspass will be continued with national funding. The Sozialministeriumsservice acts as co-operation partner and brings additional financing. Heidenpass will be used as an ‘up-stream’ support measure to identify and prepare potential participants for other youth programmes under the responsibility of the Sozialministeriumsservice (such ‘Youth

February, 2016 159

Coaching’ and ‘ausbildungsfit’ for disadvantaged youth with difficulties in school to work transition). In Lithuania, it is foreseen that the support for temporary employment (via public works) will not be financed by ESF in the next programming period. As indicated above, activities have to be maintained by ESF beneficiaries for at least three years after the funding period. The project for sight impaired individuals is considered to have particularly high sustainability because of the tools and systems developed during the project phase, as well as the relationships established with employers, resulting in awareness-raising of the target group. 3.5.8 Gender sensitivity Activities in this cluster aim at employment creation and the integration of individuals into sheltered or open employment. Potential target groups are therefore varied, depending on whether the initial aim is for integration in the second or first labour market. In this cluster, data are currently only available for three interventions, with estimates only being available for the interventions in Lithuania. Within the intervention where detailed data are available, 44.3% of the 16,225 participants were women. There are no projects aimed at only men or women. Overall, participation in these projects is relatively balanced, with the slight preponderance towards male participation in the Heidenspass (AT) and Transition to work (NL) interventions. The Austrian initiative targeted a participation of 50% women (in line with the goals set in the OP), which could not be achieved. Result information by gender is available for the Heidenspass (AT project) which shows that women on the whole had better outcomes than men. This was attributed to the more challenging situations facing male participants. However, for most interventions, no gender breakdown for results information was available.

February, 2016 160

Table 44. Male and female participation in Cluster 2b interventions

MS Project name Target groups Female participants AT Heidenspass extended Young people (15 to 25 years of age) furthest from the labour market, in 41 (51%) many cases NEETs with additional problematic situations and particularly with migrant background. CY Grant Scheme for Facilitating People with disabilities, as well as companies willing them with to provide n/a Access to Employment for People job opportunities. with Disabilities CY Grant Scheme for Facilitating Individuals from vulnerable groups: members of a minority; recipients of n/a Access to Employment for public assistance, members of families with psychosocial problems; released Vulnerable Groups from prison; former drug users ; disabled individuals or recognized as victims of trafficking). LT Support for temporary Unemployed individuals and employees who had been given notice of Approx.. 49% employment dismissal (detailed data not available at intervention level) LT Subsidised employment (Project Unemployed individuals employees who have been given a notice of Approx.. 49% ‘Improvement of employment dismissal (detailed data not possibilities’) available at intervention level) LT Job rotation (Project Unemployed individuals Approx.. 49% ‘Improvement of employment (detailed data not possibilities’) available at intervention level) NL Transition to work Young people with learning difficulties 66 (41%)

RO Co-operation for the facilitation of Sight impaired job seekers 398 (60%) employment amongst the blind via improving ICT skills

February, 2016 161

3.5.9 Community added value of supported interventions Interventions under Cluster 2b, which were aimed at direct job creation either on the first or second labour market, perhaps unsurprisingly, were most significant in relation to volume and scope effects by offering placements to additional disadvantaged job seekers and offering the ability to reach out to groups that could otherwise not be targeted through mainstream provision. Unfortunately, no quantitative assessment of scope effects is possible because of the lack of information on relevant national social inclusion expenditure at Member State level.

In some cases, such measures were particularly important to sustain incomes (and prevent poverty and social exclusion) in the context of the crisis, even if the employment opportunities offered could be assumed not to be widely sustained in the long-term. For instance, the Lithuanian scheme supporting temporary employment in Public Works was primarily designed to help to sustain incomes until the economic recovery, while it was fully understand that Public Works schemes tend to have poor records in terms of job sustainability. In the case of other subsidy schemes, such as the Cypriot Grant schemes, a learning effect among employers was also targeted in the expectation that if enterprises could be encouraged to offer opportunities to disabled workers or disadvantaged groups, potential discrimination could be reduced and such enterprises might therefore in future be more willing to offer similar opportunities.

ESF funded interventions allowed the extension of the scope of subsidy or sheltered employment provision to additional target groups such as migrant women, disabled individuals and other disadvantaged groups.

Maybe as a result of the fact that some of the interventions were designed to offer temporary relief or to kick-start a change in attitudes, role effects were not specifically highlighted for interventions in this cluster.

Process effects again focussed on the creation of new and sustained partnerships at the local level which would not have come about without ESF support. Table 45. The Added Value of ESF in Cluster 2b

Volume effects  heidenspass extended (AT): the project increased placement opportunities in supported employment which would otherwise not  the extent to which have been available. the ESF supported actions add to  Grant scheme on incentives for recruitment of people with existing actions disabilities (CY): As no other similar subsidy programme was previously available, the scheme had significant volume effects  Grant scheme on incentives for recruitment of individuals from vulnerable groups (CY): additional support was made available to support recruitment incentives to employers to offer opportunities to individuals from these groups  Support for temporary employment (LT): significant expansion of support to individuals at risk of social inclusion during the crisis with main aim to support incomes for a fixed period  Subsidised employment (LT): during the crisis, LT would have been unable to offer the same scale of support for ALMP without ESF funding Scope effects  Female migrants: Information – Activation – Integration: the project broadened and targeted the existing integration support  the extent to which offer to a specific target group of female migrants from Turkey who the ESF broadens did not have access to other integration offers in the region existing action  Grant scheme on incentives for recruitment of people with disabilities (CY): possibility to extend subsidy measures to disabled individuals  Co-operation for the facilitation of employment amongst the blind

February, 2016 162

via improving ICT skills (RO): enhanced service provision for a special needs group (blind job seekers) Role effects  No specific role effects have been highlighted in relation to the interventions studied under this cluster  the extent to which the ESF supports local/regional innovations that are taken up at national level or national innovative actions that are then ‘mainstreamed’ Process effects  Transition into work (NL): improvement of processes to support transitions into work through better co-operation between actors  the extent to which the ESF action  Co-operation for the facilitation of employment amongst the blind influences the via improving ICT skills (RO): Creation of partnerships to support Member State the specific target group of blind job seekers. administrations and organisations involved in the programmes

3.5.10 Lessons learnt The Cluster 2b interventions were defined as being directed to providing employment outcomes for participants, which defined the services they provided and the target groups served. a) Policy choices The provision of sheltered employment and the offer of subsidised employment, temporary employment or work experience can have a particularly important role to play for individuals from disadvantaged groups to allow them to gain valuable work experience, or a first foothold on the labour market. Depending on the nature of a disability or learning impairment, sheltered employment may offer the only opportunity for some individuals to become gainfully employed without the full weight of expectation of performance in an open labour market. Such measures are therefore of particular significance in the social inclusion sphere. It is therefore perhaps surprising that sheltered employment did not feature more significantly among measures supported in this cluster. The Lithuanian case makes it clear that some subsidised employment measures, particularly in the area of public works, albeit not generally resulting in significant sustainable employment, were seen to play a role in sustaining incomes among vulnerable groups during the crisis, but do not continue to be funded in a more positive economic environment. b) Target groups As would be expected, participants in Cluster 2b interventions were, overall, closer to the labour market than those in the other clusters. However this did not mean their clients were without barriers – rather that the disadvantages they faced were more likely to be addressable through a single intervention, or that their participation was a final step following participation in previous projects. b) Programming Several lessons emerged regarding programming for this specific target group. First, eligibility criteria for participation should be flexible when delivering Cluster 2b interventions. For example, the Heidenpass extended (AT) project was specifically designed to have a low entry threshold, to provide support for disadvantaged young people whose needs could not be addressed through other national programmes. This

February, 2016 163

type of project allows target groups of young people to be reached with severe and multiple challenges. Key success factors for these interventions included following a labour market oriented approach, flexible working arrangements, creating a positive perception of work, a positive and respectful atmosphere, and communication by word of mouth about the project. The need for improved complementarity with other types of intervention was highlighted in relation to the effectiveness of subsidised job placements. For example, concerning the grant schemes in Cyprus, the Managing Authority stated that due to the specificity of the target groups, further training of individuals prior to their placement in a job could improve results. A challenge in the case of subsidised employment in Lithuania was the lack of measures to prevent abuse from employers, including no obligation for employers to keep individuals in employment for a certain period after the end of the subsidy. The small scale of the project and lack of staff capacity were also identified as challenges in the context of the grant scheme for disabled individuals (CY). According to the Ministry of Labour and Social Inclusion and the Managing Authority, due to its limited budget size, the project was only able to offer employment opportunities to a small fraction of the group targeted. c) Implementation A success factor for the Grant Schemes reviewed in Cyprus is the appropriate targeting towards the groups that have greatest difficulties in finding a job, according to the Managing Authority. In terms of effective implementation and governance, a common success factor for both grant schemes in Cyprus was the prior experiences of the Implementing Agencies in applying similar schemes in the past (both under national and ESF budget lines). The overall management mechanisms for the implementation of the schemes was described by the interviewees as appropriate and effective. According to interviewees, grant schemes should be simple and understandable, with comprehensive guidance being provided during the application stage (e.g. by the Public Employment Services). The existence of an analytical guide of instructions on participation, for the beneficiaries, proved effective. d) Monitoring and evaluation Monitoring Lessons regarding monitoring for this cluster mirror those of Clusters 1 and 2a. Evaluation The benefits of robust evaluation were emphasised by experiences in Lithuania. Here an evaluation conducted in 2011 demonstrated that an intervention using public works as a source of employment opportunities helped unemployed people in difficult social situations secure employment. However, if appropriate in a context of economic recession, this type of intervention is not appropriate under improved economic conditions with low unemployment, as the evaluation also found that the public works measure was found to have no sustainable impact on the employability of participants. 3.6 Cluster 3: Pathways approaches 3.6.1 Introduction Cluster 3 features interventions which follow a pathways approach, recognising that disadvantaged groups may not achieve immediate labour market outcomes but may require a linked set of actions and interventions to move them closer towards, and into, work. This cluster therefore features multi-faceted provision, which can feature combinations of measures provided in Clusters 1 and 2. Pathway approaches were identified in seven of the eight countries (not in Cyprus), although in the Netherlands and Romania they are less clearly defined as such. In these

February, 2016 164

countries in particular, information would be required at the individual project level to determine the full scope of individual projects. In the UK, the majority of projects fall under the pathways approach. This could be attributed to the significant work-first approach to dealing with unemployment, which leaves groups in need of additional assistance requiring a clear step by step approach back towards the labour market, and recognises that for many disadvantaged individuals the route to employment will require multi-strand approaches. The target groups for such holistic actions tend to cover a broad range of groups of individuals facing multiple challenges for labour market entry, with the exception of Finland, where holistic approaches are focussed on women as a target group. These approaches often incorporate a stepwise approach: Addressing personal obstacles linked to an individual’s health or social situation (homelessness, substance abuse, debt issues, health concerns, lack of support for the care of dependent family members, etc.); Tackling issues linked to motivation, self-confidence or core skills; Offering work practice or work placement to gaining employment opportunities in the second or open labour market and associated sustainability support. Holistic projects also often address the development of a supportive local infrastructure or ensuring better joined up working between existing agencies. The latter is particularly visible in the approach of the Austrian Territorial Employment Pacts (TEPs), which are responsible for the implementation of PA3b on the integration of disadvantaged groups in the national OP. It should be noted that as holistic projects are multi-faceted and tailored to individual needs, it is not possible to say whether all participants avail themselves of the support of all the steps along the pathway. Table 46. Summary of Cluster 3 Interventions by Member State

Member Cluster 3 - Pathways approaches State AT Innovative (holistic) projects delivered in local partnerships FI New co-operation and partnership models for integration of difficult to place people Equal opportunities (holistic approaches) LU Increasing the employment rate of women (holistic approaches) Facilitating the integration of young people into the labour market (holistic approaches) Activating people furthest from the labour market (holistic approaches)

LT Addressing discrimination and promotion of activities for people at social risk (holistic approaches, e.g. for disabled individuals, individuals with substance abuse issues etc.) NL Labour market integration of people over 55, people with a disability and people who do not receive benefits (holistic approaches) Fighting/preventing youth unemployment (holistic approaches) Re-integration of ex-offenders, people with mental health issues, and people in young offenders institutions (holistic approaches) RO Improving access and participation of vulnerable groups (holistic approaches) UK By nation: England Integrated services to help ex-offenders progress to sustained employment opportunities. Supporting young people aged 14-19 NEET, and likely to be facing disadvantage, with integrated provision featuring engagement, provided tailored training and helping progress into education and work.

February, 2016 165

Member Cluster 3 - Pathways approaches State Support for families facing multiple challenges, including entrenched worklessness, progress towards and into work.

Northern Projects integrating engagement, confidence building, pre-employment training, job search Ireland support and on-going support in the workplace, serving a range of disadvantaged groups. Projects providing employment training, work placements and links to job opportunities in different sectors (e.g. engineering). Integrated, holistic packages of support for disabled individuals / those with limiting health conditions to combat inactivity and supported employment (e.g. people with brain injuries) Projects targeting ex-offenders to re-engage, receive essential skills training and support to find, secure and sustain work (including in recycling work). Support for lone parents to find work who’s needs have not been met by mainstream provision – advice and guidance, mentoring and jobsearch support. Wales Addressing the needs of people made / under notice of redundancy, through measures to remove barriers to obtaining new employment – incl. financial assistance for training, skills assessments and wage subsidies. Helping economically inactive individuals into work and further learning by funding local projects to engage, provide assistance, training and employment support to engage / re- engage disadvantaged individuals with the labour market.

Support for carers, care leavers and economically inactive families to engage with education, learning through individualised development plans (incl. mentoring, pre- employment support and life skills training). National peer mentoring scheme help individuals with significant substance abuse issues. Peer mentors provide case work support and guidance to help individuals become economically active and maintain sustainable work. Vocational guidance, skills training and employment support for individuals inactive as a result of illness, disability, substance abuse and care leavers.

Holistic, coordinated services to increase employment amongst offenders, ex-offenders and those at risk of offending. Scotland Flexible pathways/ skills pipeline provision for unemployed and disadvantaged individuals, comprising a range of provision to meet needs and progress into employment through linked services – incl. outreach/engage, assessment, core and vocational training, work preparation to sustained employment. Support for people with learning and physical disabilities to make the transition to work – including aftercare. Support for ex-offenders, the long-term unemployed and young people facing labour market disadvantage to help stabilise their lives, move into work and progress in their careers. Long-term provision with young people NEET to engage, motivate, provide core skill / personal development, vocation training, work experience and after-care to help ensure employment secured is sustained.

3.6.2 The Cluster 3 interventions The remainder of this section considers the Cluster 3 interventions reviewed in Phase 2 of the study. Although aimed at promoting employment, these interventions developed a

February, 2016 166

comprehensive approach, addressing various needs of the beneficiaries such as health or social inclusion. A total of 16 interventions were reviewed, in AT, FI, LT, LU, NL and the UK, namely; . Production School VIA (AT) . Mosaik (AT) . Lebensarbeit (AT) . Suunto (FI) . Valtaväylä (FI) . Forward (LU) . Process (LU) . Labour market integration of psychotropic substance addicts treated in VšĮ Meikštų dvaras (LT) . Reintegration custodial institutions agency (NL) . REACH - Derbyshire, Leicester, Nottinghamshire and Rutland Community Rehabilitation Company (UK, England) . ESF Support for Families with Multiple Problems (ESF Families programme) Families in the South East – a regional contract under the programme was reviewed, namely the Progress! Programme – Skills Training UK (UK, England) . The Cedar Foundation’s Vocational and Employability Service, Cedar (UK, Northern Ireland) . The Peer Mentoring Programme, RCE P1, Welsh Government, Department for Health and Social Services (Wales, UK) . The Outer Hebrides Employability Support Programme (Scotland, Highlands and Islands) . Glasgow Works – New Jobs for Disabled People (Scotland, Lowlands and Uplands) . Glasgow Works – The Bridging Service (Scotland, Lowlands and Uplands). An overview of the interventions is provided as Table 3.6.2 below. This illustrates that the target groups served and activities undertaken were broadly representative of the Cluster 3 population, as described above. Availability of evaluation evidence for the Cluster 3 interventions

Seven of the interventions within Cluster 3 have carried out specific evaluations. . The project Production School VIA (AT) was subject to an evaluation52. . An evaluation of the social effects of the Valtaväylä (FI) project was elaborated. . An evaluation is currently being developed for the Suunto project (FI). . The Cedar Foundation’s Vocational and Employability Service (UK) has been evaluated by Sixteen Consulting, an external evaluator. . The Outer Hebrides Employability Support Programme (UK) was subject to an evaluation carried out by the University of Glasgow. . The Peer Mentoring programme (UK) has been evaluated by the Centre for

52 Evaluation "Tiroler Produktionsschulen VIA und LEA". Studie im Auftrag des Beschäftigungspakt Tirol, Wien Research Reports 2011.

February, 2016 167

Criminology of the University of Wales. . An internal evaluation exercise was carried out for the Process project (LU). . A general evaluation of the social integration services supported by EU structural funds 2007-201353 referred to the Meikštų dvaras intervention (LT). . Finally, although an evaluation has been undertaken of the ESF Support for Families with Multiple Problems (ESF Families programme) in England, it has yet to be published and its findings were not available to inform this study.

3.6.3 Aims, objectives, target groups and scale of funding The general aim of the Cluster 3 interventions analysed is to promote the social inclusion of targeted groups through a comprehensive approach. Recognising that disadvantaged groups may face a number of barriers to entering the labour market, the focus of these interventions was on providing a set of linked actions to move participants closer towards, and into, work. 3.6.3.1 Flexible pathways/skills pipeline provision for unemployed, inactive and disadvantaged individuals, as well as offenders and ex-offenders Within the Austrian ESF Operational Programme, two projects were implemented which focused on long-term unemployed persons with multiple placement obstacles, recipients of needs-based minimum benefits, individuals with a migrant background or with disabilities. The project Lebensarbeit (AT) was carried out in the city of Salzburg in partnership with two social organizations: Caritasverband and Soziale Arbeit GmbH. In addition, the project Mosaik54 (AT) was developed in the State of Lower Austria and aimed at improving the social situation, health and skills of people in a disadvantaged situation. Both projects stressed the importance of providing participants with training on basic competences (reading, writing and arithmetic), counselling and personality development actions. The Centre for Economic Development, Transport and Environment of the region of Lapland in Finland carried out the project Suunto (FI) aimed at providing pathways into labour market insertion for long-term unemployed. As a general objective, the project aimed to develop the intermediate labour market. The project was implemented in collaboration with other organisations, such as public employment offices or labour force service centres. Another intervention implemented in Finland, the project Valtaväylä (FI), also targeted long-term unemployed and persons with reduced labour market skills. Its approach was linked to the consolidation of the intermediate labour market. The project was developed in the region of South Ostrobothnia. The Outer Hebrides Employment Support Programme (UK, Scotland) included multiple strands of activity aimed at bringing people furthest from the labour market towards or into employment. The programme targeted different social groups (young people, school leavers, workless adults and people with health-related needs) in the Outer Hebrides, an island chain off the west coast of mainland Scotland. This territory has been defined as an economically “fragile area”, characterised by a number of employment and social challenges. The programme aimed to provide a personalised service, covering a range of actions, including training, counselling and work placement.

53 Evaluation of the situation, needs for and performance of social integration services to socially vulnerable and disadvantaged groups of people with a view to effective use of EU structural support for 2007-2013. Assessment report. Public Policy and Management Institute, Institute of Labour and Social Research, 1 July, 2011 54 MOSAIK stands for: Motivation, Orientierung, Stabilisierung, Arbeitstraining, Integration und Kompetenz (Motivation, Orientation, Stabilisation, Work-Training, Information and Competences).

February, 2016 168

As part of the Glasgow Works Employability Programme 2011-2013 (UK, Scotland), the Bridging Service implemented a support model based on a ‘circle of care’ approach for persons with embedded and often multiple disadvantages. The project offered a wide range of services to individuals from a health, social and employment integrated perspective. 3.6.3.2 Supporting young people in the NEET group and facing multiple disadvantages, with an integrated provision of services featuring engagement, motivation, and the development of personal/basic skills and tailored training The project Production School VIA (AT) aimed to provide a job and training opportunities to young unemployed women (15-19 years old) who had not completed basic education or vocational training, and particularly those with a migrant background. The primary objective was to provide support for a successful transition into the labour market. Participants were given the opportunity to improve their personal, social, methodological or technical competences as well as familiarise themselves with different occupational fields through practical work situations. The Forward project (LU) was developed by an association (Inter-actions) in partnership with the Ministry of Labour. The objective of the project was to promote vocational training among young people aged 18 to 29, with limited work experience and low formal qualifications. The ultimate goal was to promote their integration into the labour market and to encourage them to take up further training. Participants were offered three month training contracts, where they could acquire theoretical as well as practical job-search skills. 3.6.3.3 Supporting families facing multiple challenges progress into work The ESF Support for Families with Multiple Problems (ESF Families programme) (UK) intervention aimed to support families facing multiple barriers to access the labour market, or experiencing a precarious employment situation. The programme operated on a payment by results basis55, and sought to promote sustainable employment while addressing the barriers and challenges facing the family as a unit – although engagement has predominantly been through a single family member. The programme was part of a wider national strategy to improve the lives of families in a disadvantaged position and was co-financed by the Department for Work and Pensions. Delivery was organised by 12 Contract Package Areas (CPA). The analysis has been undertaken only regarding one CPA: the South East of England. The programme overall has faced a series of challenges, including initially low referral rates and poor coordination with a similar national programme seeking to address more deeply-rooted family difficulties. 3.6.3.4 Support for ex-offenders, the long-term unemployed and young people to stabilise their lives and move towards / into work The aim of the REACH (UK, England) intervention, developed in collaboration with Derbyshire, Leicester, Nottinghamshire and Rutland Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC), was to improve offender education, training, and employment opportunities and increase access to existing resettlement provision (such as that provided by the Offender Learning and Skills Service, Jobcentre Plus, and education and training providers). The programme aimed to complement, enhance, and fill gaps in existing provision of support services for offenders in custody and in the community. The reintegration programme for offenders and ex-offenders (NL) begins work with offenders during their custodial sentence to prepare them for employment post-custody and continues to work with them towards integration once they are released, developing a holistic programme of support.

55 Payment by Results (PbR) contracts are becoming increasingly common across the public sector in the UK, where payments are made to providers on the basis of the outcomes they achieve for their clients rather than the outputs/activities delivered. They aim to incentivise providers to deliver results, while also being an impo0rtant risk transference tool as commissioners only pay for the outcomes achieved.

February, 2016 169

3.6.3.5 Integrated, holistic packages of support for individuals with a disability or health condition to fight inactivity and find employment One of the objectives of the Glasgow Works Employability Programme 2011-2013 (UK, Scotland) was to provide a comprehensive range of services to people with disabilities. The New Jobs for Disabled People project worked with people with disabilities and with limiting health conditions to support their progress towards employment and facilitate learning opportunities. The aim of the project managed by the Cedar Foundation on Vocational Rehabilitation and Employability Service (UK, Northern Ireland) was to reduce inactivity and enhance the employability of participants with complex disabilities or acquired brain injury. The project targeted individuals aged 16 years and above in 11 centres across Northern Ireland. The services and actions were provided in collaboration with health, education and employment partners. 3.6.3.6 Supporting individuals with alcohol and substance abuse issues to become economically active and maintain sustainable employment The project Process (LU) was created with the aim of supporting the labour market and social integration of people suffering from drug addiction. This project was managed by the NGO “Quai 57”56, although other partners (including employers) were involved in its implementation. Among the activities, the project provided social and therapeutic assistance to support participants in their reintegration into employment. It also included, for instance, guidance and personalised job-coaching actions. The Peer Mentoring Programme (UK, Wales) was based on an innovative peer-mentoring approach to address the barriers and problems in accessing education, training and employment by people with histories of drug and alcohol abuse. The project included the training of peer mentors who subsequently worked with other participants and supported them in their recovery. In addition to this approach, the project also offered individual action plans, which included personal development and vocational training activities, as well as support in moving towards further learning or employment. The main objective of the “Meikštų Dvaras” project (LT) was to support psychotropic substance addicts towards labour market integration and the prevention of social exclusion. The pathway included delivering long-term social and psychological rehabilitation support through counselling and the vocational training of participants. 3.6.3.7 Financial implementation rates of the interventions Financial implementation rates in this cluster are relatively high, ranging from 31% to 100%. The implementation rate for the ESF Families with Multiple Problems project is particularly low at 31%, which is in part due to the slow progress with the programme and the payment by results model upon which it is based. With the exception of this programme, financial implementation rates ranged from 72% to 100%, with lower implementation rates being reported for the Reintegration programme (run by the Custodial Institutions Agency being linked to lower than expected participation). The Peer Mentoring Programme in the UK also initially struggled to recruit participants, which is one of the key reasons behind the lower than expected budget implementation rate (although final financial claims were awaiting submission). 3.6.4 Contribution to national policy priorities Interventions show strong links to national or regional strategies on ALMP, or for specific target groups. In Austria, Production Schools seek to fill a gap in provision, offering a second chance to young people who did not do well in mainstream school provision and dropped out, often without qualifications. Production schools allow them to receive vocational guidance and counselling and to try out different occupations, as well as where possible to complete educational qualifications. The model has been adapted from

56 Previously known as Centre Emmanuel asdbl.

February, 2016 170

experience gained with similar institutions in Denmark, making it a good example of transnational learning.

The pathways approach used by these projects is one which reflects the increasing recognition of the importance of individualised action planning and the critical combination of support from different agencies to overcome different social, economic, health and skills challenges to allow disadvantaged individuals to access the labour market.

February, 2016 171

Table 47. Overview of Cluster 3 interventions

MS Project name Allocated Actual Implementation Duration Target groups Short description of activities expenditure expenditure rate

AT Production School EUR 1.5 million 01/10 – Young unemployed women (15- The primary objective of the project was to VIA 12/11 19 years old) who had not provide support for a successful transition completed basic education or towards the labour market; this broadly 1,440,000 96% vocational training, and encompassed returning to school, the start of particularly those with a a further training, or the placement in a migrant background further support or qualification measure.

AT Mosaik EUR 1.9 million 12/10 – Unemployed with severe The main aim of the project Mosaik was to 12/11 placement obstacles and low promote individual stabilisation, acquisition of 1,642,560 87% chances of labour market basic skills, improvement of health conditions, reintegration occupational orientation, motivation etc.

AT Lebensarbeit EUR 0.98 million 01/10 – Disadvantaged groups such as The project Lebensarbeit provided support - in 12/12 (period long-term unemployed, collaboration with PES and social security analysed) recipients of unemployment or offices - to disadvantaged unemployed or 767,000 78% social assistance, and recipients of social assistance to reintegrate immigrants the labour market. The main tool was the clarification and specification of workability and possible reintegration paths.

FI Suunto EUR 5.85 million 05/08 – Unemployed individuals, who The project promoted the development of 02/15 do not have up-to-date services to help people with difficulties to vocational qualifications and enter the labour market. The activities were EUR 4.95 work experience and who need developed in collaboration with employment 85% million support and counselling and economic development offices, labour service centres and organisations in intermediate labour market and social services.

FI Valtaväylä EUR 1.6 million 06/08 -05/12 Long-term unemployed and Valtaväylä is a group of projects implementing people with limited labour active social- and employment policy in South EUR 1.6 100% market skills Ostrobothnia region of Finland, and developing million multi-professional cooperation in the intermediate labour market.

LU Forward EUR 300,000 01/11 – Unemployed young people aged The project focused on the vocational 02/12 between 18 to 29 years with rehabilitation of unemployed young people, limited work experience and low aged between 18 to 29 years, with limited 300,000 100% formal qualification levels work experience and low formal qualification levels. The project aimed to prepare participants for employment in the business services sector (administrative tasks).

February, 2016 172

MS Project name Allocated Actual Implementation Duration Target groups Short description of activities expenditure expenditure rate

LU Process EUR 310,000 01/09 – Drug addicts, including The objective of the project was to provide 281,601 91% 12/10 prisoners with substance abuse services and support to a marginalized and problems. stigmatized population such as drug addicts.

LT Labour market EUR 1,022,672 09/09 – Individuals with a psychotropic The main objective of the project was to integration of million 09/13 substance addiction promote the labour and social integration of substance addicts psychotropic substance addicts treated in VšĮ treated in VšĮ 1,021,176 Close to 99.5% Meikštų Dvaras. The project implemented Meikštų dvaras long-term social and psychological rehabilitation through counselling and vocational training of patients.

The reintegration programme begins work Reintegration – with offenders during their custodial sentence January – custodial to prepare them for employment post-release NL EUR 15 million EUR 11 million 74% December Offenders and ex-offenders institutions and continues to work with them towards 2009 agency integrate once they are released, developing a holistic programme of support

REACH - Derbyshire, The project involved a wide range of activities Leicester, 01/11 -12/14 as part of a complete pathway to inclusion. Nottinghamshire Offenders in prison or in the EUR 8.8 Participants were offered services such as UK and Rutland EUR 8.8 million 100% community, unemployed or million guidance, mentoring, employment training, Community economically inactive. Extended to health related training or the possibility of Rehabilitation June 2015. work experiences in social enterprises. Company (CRC) (England)

ESF Support for Families with Multiple Problems - Regional Supporting families facing multiple Contract: 12/11-03/15 People from families facing disadvantages and barriers to labour market UK Families in the EUR 17.8 million N/A N/A multiple disadvantage participation, move towards and into South East – the sustainable employment. Progress! Programme, Skills Training UK (England

The Cedar 04/11 – Two groups of young people Providing specialist pre-employment training, EUR 7.7 million EUR 7.7 UK Foundation’s 100% 03/14 and adults: intensive support and individualised planning million Vocational and With complex disabilities; processes, to help people with disabilities and

February, 2016 173

MS Project name Allocated Actual Implementation Duration Target groups Short description of activities expenditure expenditure rate Employability brain injured participants achieve their Service, Cedar prolonged to Recovering from acquired brain potential. (Northern 2015 injury. Ireland)

The Peer 10/09 – Mentoring 04/14 Project aimed to develop a pan-Wales peer- Programme, mentoring scheme for individuals experiencing Unemployed/inactive individuals Welsh EUR 24.2 million EUR 17.4 (extended barriers associated with alcohol and substance UK 72% with a history of alcohol and/or Government, million from an initial misuse, and help them to achieve economic drug misuse Department for completion independence through sustainable Health and Social date of employment. Services (Wales) 09/13)

UK Outer Hebrides EUR 2,475,152 EUR 92% January 2010 Unemployed adults; Project aimed to support individuals furthest Employability 2,273,295 to March away from the labour market towards, and Support 2013 Unemployed adults with where possible into, sustainable employment, Programme, learning/ physical disabilities, education, training or other positive outcomes Comhairle nan and mental health issues; and through individualised pathways. Eilean Siar School leavers 16-19 years facing barriers to mainstream provision of services.

UK Glasgow Works EUR 928,072 EUR 928,072 100% Since 2008 Individuals with disabilities and The project aimed at helping individuals 2011-13, (anticipated) limiting health conditions. progress towards appropriate employment and Glasgow City Received learning opportunities; it was based on an Council57 additional integrated employment and training model funding to supported by work placement opportunities. Sub project: New operate Jobs for Disabled between People 07/11 -12/13, extension in 2014

UK Glasgow Works EUR 1.8 million EUR 1.6 89% Since 2008 Individuals facing particular The project targeted individuals “exceptionally 2011-13, million disadvantages. far removed from the labour market”, Glasgow City Received following a ‘circle of care’ model where project Council additional staff worked closely with health, social care funding to and other professionals. Sub project: The operate Bridging Service between

57 The intervention was divided into two sub-projects.

February, 2016 174

MS Project name Allocated Actual Implementation Duration Target groups Short description of activities expenditure expenditure rate (Scotland) 07/11 -12/13, extension in 2014

February, 2016 175

3.6.5 Effectiveness The outputs and results reported for the Cluster 3 interventions are presented below. As indicated above, the effectiveness of an intervention can be assessed against its own targets or comparable interventions. An assessment against own targets needs to take into account how targets were originally formulated and how appropriate these targets were, vis à vis the specific target group and context in which the intervention is operating. Where an organisation has previously implemented ESF funded projects, targets are usually drawn from experience gained with previous interventions – in the case of the UK, in discussion with the relevant implementing bodies. Reliable comparisons with output and results indicators for similar nationally funded measures are rarely available and where examples are provided, comparability is not always fully guaranteed because many other factors have to be taken into account (labour market and economic context, target group, etc.). Table 48 sets out the types of output and result indicator available for interventions in this cluster. Table 48. Types of output and result indicator for Cluster 3

Output indicators Result indicators Participants  Number of  Participants completing the programme individuals  Participants entering employment (protected and participating mainstream)  Number of  Increase of participants earning wages participants in counselling  Participants entering employment or training  Participants in employment 6 months after leaving  Participants in education/training or employment 6 months after participation  Participants in work experience/community roles  Participants in further learning/education/training  Participants gaining qualifications (full/partial)  Number of participants gaining other positive outcomes  Average positive exit rate at the end of the intervention (share of participants in employment or undertaking new training) The outputs and results of the considered interventions are shown in tables below. Thirteen of the 14 interventions in this Cluster for which targets were set have met or exceeded (and in some cases significantly exceeded) their output targets. Two interventions (AT Production School Via, and UK ESF Support for Families with Multiple Problems: South East Contract) did not set any quantitative output targets. One intervention reached only half of its targeted outputs; the reintegration measure implemented by the custodial institution’s agency in the Netherlands. This project targeted to reach 1,580 participants each year, with the aim that 80% would successfully complete a training activity. Between 2007 and 2012, only 51% of participants completed their intervention. Furthermore, as indicated above, the full budget was not expended on this activity, which could also contribute to below target achievements of results. The specific regional contract which formed the case study for the ESF Support for Families with Multiple Problems reflected the below expectation performance of the programme overall, with difficulties being experienced with recruitment due to competing provision for families addressing similar needs. More broadly, the generally good performance of interventions in this cluster with regard to reaching targeted participants shows that holistic approaches appear well placed to

February, 2016 176

constitute a supporting framework which is able to deliver support which allows individuals to complete their trajectory. Table 49. Outputs achieved (number of persons supported) against expected, Cluster 3

Actual Expected Achievement MS Intervention outputs outputs against target AT Production School VIA 163 n/a n/a AT Mosaik 360 280  129% AT Lebensarbeit Within targeted Number of participants 53 45-60 band Close to target Number of participants in counselling 93 100-120 band FI Suunto 1,069 1,065  100% FI Valtaväylä 423 437  98% LU Forward 106 100  106% LU Process 307 180  171% Labour market integration of psychotropic LT substance addicts treated in VšĮ Meikštų 204 160  128% dvaras Reintegration – custodial institutions NL 4,681 9,098  51% agency REACH - Derbyshire, Leicester, UK Nottinghamshire and Rutland Community 8,322 8,272  101% Rehabilitation Company (CRC) (England) ESF Support for Families with Multiple Problems (ESF Families programme) UK 7,213 n/a n/a Families in the South East – the Progress! Programme – Skills Training UK (England) The Cedar Foundation’s Vocational and UK Employability Service, Cedar (Northern 863 801  108% Ireland) The Peer Mentoring Programme, RCE P1, UK Welsh Government, Department for Health 9,627 10,544  91% and Social Services (Wales)

Outer Hebrides Employability Support 249 UK 204  122% Programme, Comhairle nan Eilean Siar Glasgow Works 2011-13, Glasgow City Council 107 112  96% Sub project: New Jobs for Disabled People UK Glasgow Works 2011-13, Glasgow City Council 2,149 1,802  119% Sub project: The Bridging Service (Scotland)

February, 2016 177

The most common result targets related to participants accessing employment or completing qualifications or achieving an otherwise ‘positive outcome’. The term ‘positive outcome’ is not interpreted in the same way in relation to all interventions. In some cases, it points to positive integration into further training or work placement/employment, whereas in some cases, positive outcomes relate more to soft outcomes. It is notable that a number of interventions did not set specific targets (particularly in Austria and Finland). In Austria, in particular, it was argued that target setting could be counter-productive for such interventions, potentially leading to creaming and gaming. Where targets had been set, attainment against these targets is generally positive, with seven of these projects (out of 10 which had set targets) meeting or exceeding most of their targets (90-110% achievement of targets, as rated below). An evaluation of customer guidance, implementation of job coaching and transition to education or work was also carried out to assess the impact of the Suunto project. The job coaching period was short (on average only 1-1.5 days). Around 32 % of participants received educational coaching and 20 % assistance with job search, 20 % were assisted to find a job placement/ work trial and 15 % received career planning assistance. Participants waited on average for 0-4 weeks to take part in a follow-up measure, so process was rather smooth. Results of job coaching are compared to targets. About half (45 %) of job coaching periods reached their set objectives and 15% reached them partly. During job coaching 30 % of clients had started a work placement, 11 % labour market training, 7 % wage subsided work, and 11 % were unemployed. During a later cross-sectional measurement, 63 % of participants had obtained some form of positive outcome: 22 % were in work in the open labour market, 10 % were in vocational education, 17 % in subsided work, 32 % unemployed, 8 % in labour market training, 3 % in rehabilitative work and rest in other services or outside the labour market e.g. on sick leave. The result is very good from the perspective of wage-subsided work with job coaching58. Projects which did not meet (most of) their targets were Forward in Luxembourg, the Outer Hebrides Employability Support Programme in the UK (Scotland, Highlands and Islands) and the ESF Support for Families with Multiple Problems contract reviewed (England). In the former, instead of integrating the targeted 35% of participants into employment, an integration rate of 22% was achieved by the intervention aimed at young people with limited work experience. These figures appear to go against the overall assessment of the project, which was considered to have been positive. Placement rates provided in the MA data do not appear to be in line with those calculated by the Ministry of labour (53%), but as this only refers to positive exits, it is considered that this also includes exits into training, which is also a positive outcome. The regional case study contract for the ESF Support for Families with Multiple Problems in the UK reflected the performance of the programme nationally, and performed some way below target in terms of employment outcomes achieved. Data supplied from the Managing Authority/co-financer showed that just 6% of participants had progressed into employment – compared to the target of 22%. However the project considered that measuring achievement was most relevant for individuals completing the programme, and reported that at the time of interview its into-employment rate was closer to 21% for those completing the programme. Several factors were responsible for this under- performance nationally – recruitment was slow given the existence of a similar national programme at a similar time, comparative financial disincentives for referral agencies and the use of a single referral channel, and a tendency to engage with an individual rather than the family as a whole, led to reduced recruitment and correspondingly reduced outcomes.

58 Evaluation of Suunto project out of perspective of process model of rehabilitation to work and co-operation (Olli Oosi: Projektin arviointi - Työhönkuntoutuksen palveluprosessimallista ja verkostoyhteistyöstä 2014

February, 2016 178

The evaluation report of the Outer Hebrides Employability project concluded that performance in terms of results achieved had been disappointing, the influence of the economic crisis could explain why the employment targets had been missed. It is notable that immediate employment results were positive, but their sustainability could not be ensured. The numbers progressing to education and training (62% of target) and gaining qualifications (61% of target) were less easily explained, particularly given the proportion of young people participating, and could be due to the limited education and training opportunities available in the islands. The evaluation report also describes how the results achieved are similar to those of other ESF-funded employability provision across Scotland, in the context of employment declining at a higher rate on the islands compared to the Scottish average. The consultations with project staff identified that in many cases the benefits of participation in the project were not necessarily reflected in the results achieved. For example, soft outcomes, such as improved engagement, confidence and motivation were widely reported, alongside the view that for some, employment could be a secondary outcome to improving confidence and gaining experience of the workplace. The positive performance of the majority of projects in this cluster, however, appears to validate the holistic approach to the integration of social inclusion target groups. Table 50. Target versus actual results, Cluster 3

Expected Achievement MS Intervention Results results against target AT Production School VIA  Participants who took up a job or 49.4% (2011) 50%  98% started any training (2011) AT Mosaik N/A(no target  Increase of participants earning wages +27 p.p. n/a set)  Share of participants without any reduced from N/A(no target n/a income 19% to 5% set) AT Lebensarbeit  Share of participants who took up a N/A(no target 26% n/a job set) FI Suunto  Share participants obtained a positive N/A(no target outcome (e.g. placement in 60% n/a set) employment; further training etc.) FI Valtaväylä  Highway 1: Percentage of participants that find a job (both in the open and in N/A(no target 41.2% n/a the protected labour market) after set) participating in the intervention  Highway 2: Percentage of participants that find a job (both in the open and in N/A(no target 9.5% n/a the protected labour market) after set) participating in the intervention  Highway 3: Percentage of participants that find a job (both in the open and in N/A(no target 36.2% n/a the protected labour market) after set) participating in the intervention

February, 2016 179

Expected Achievement MS Intervention Results results against target  Total average: Percentage of participants that find a job (both in the N/A(no target open and in the protected labour 32.4% n/a set) market) after participating in the intervention LU Forward 24

 Individuals in employment post (an additional 32 35%  28% completion redirected to another intervention) LU Process 56 (71 redirected  Share of participants who were in N/A(no target to other n/a employment set) intervention) Labour market integration of psychotropic LT substance addicts treated in VšĮ Meikštų dvaras  Share of participants in education/training or employment six 58 45  100% months after participation Reintegration – custodial institutions NL agency  Completed actions 2,777 n/a n/a  Still in trajectory 2,518 n/a n/a  Increasing options for sustainable labour market inclusion (e.g. individual n/a 6,816 n/a coaching) REACH - Derbyshire, Leicester, UK Nottinghamshire and Rutland Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) (England)  Number of participants in employment 1,200 1,157  103%  Number of participants in further 675 437  154% learning  Advice provided 7,461 4,569  163%  Signposting to other services 1,242 587  212%  Improved motivation 2,155 1,531  141%  Achieved qualification 420 1,008  42%  Non accredited course 1,315 1,622  81%  Improved employability 6,913 7,519  92%  Access to mentoring 708 958  74% ESF Support for Families with Multiple Problems (ESF Families programme) UK Families in the South East – the Progress! Programme – Skills Training UK (England)  Number and share of individuals within 734 (21.3%) 758 (22%)  97% work (estimated within 17 months of

February, 2016 180

Expected Achievement MS Intervention Results results against target starting the programme)

The Cedar Foundation’s Vocational and UK Employability Service, Cedar (Northern Ireland)  Share of individuals in employment 36% 32%  112.5%  Share of individuals in 27% 28% education/training  96.4%  Share of individuals in work 10% 12% experience/community roles  83.3% The Peer Mentoring Programme, RCE P1, UK Welsh Government, Department for Health and Social Services (Wales)  Number of participants entering 863 943  92% employment  Number of participants gaining 1,302 1,446  90% qualifications  Number of participants gaining other 6,523 6,707  97% positive outcomes  Number of participants gaining 923 1,049  88% entering further learning Outer Hebrides Employability Support UK Programme, Comhairle nan Eilean Siar  Number of participants entering 83 73  114% employment  Number of participants entering 24 50  48% education or training  Number of participants gaining partial 101 179  56% or full qualifications  Number of participants in employment 47 65  72% 6 months after leaving Glasgow Works 2011-13, Glasgow City UK Council Sub project: New Jobs for Disabled People  Employment results achieved 25 29  86%  Qualifications results 18 11  163% Glasgow Works 2011-13, Glasgow City Council UK Sub project: The Bridging Service (Scotland)

 Employment results achieved 331 253  131%  Entering education and training 119 106  112%  Qualifications results 382 300  127%

Note: arrows indicate the following  Over performance (>110%)  Performance between (90%-110%)

February, 2016 181

 Under performance (<90%) N/A indicates that the indicator is not available for the intervention. For AT - Production School VIA: Only 55% of total participants completed their participation regularly. Since Cluster 3 interventions aimed to provide a comprehensive and holistic approach to address participants’ needs, general soft results were expected and targeted, but not always well-defined. Pathway approaches cover individual needs, addressing the complexity of elements that are affecting the social integration of participants, mainly related to health, social skills, and employment discrimination matters. Crucially, there are still limitations to the reporting of soft results from ESF-supported programmes and interventions. Indeed, Phase 2 findings revealed that several of the analysed projects were not reporting soft results, or were providing limited information. Moreover, when soft results were reported, this was done in a more informal way and has depended on the willingness of the organisations implementing the intervention. One of the soft results identified was the trust established between participants and the organisation managing the intervention. This relationship can facilitate the social and labour integration of the participant in the long-term. In the case of the ‘Forward’ (LU) project, for instance, participants contacted the organisation after the intervention was finished, to obtain further training. Several interventions supported the acquisition of social and life skills among participants. For instance, the participants of the project Meikštų Dvaras (LT) gained independent living skills useful for long-term social rehabilitation. The information gathered by the staff of the Outer Hebrides Employability Support Programme (UK, Scotland) revealed that the programme achieved more benefits beyond those reflected in the specific job-related targets. Participants and project staff widely reported improvements in confidence, motivation and engagement. In the case of the Glasgow Works 2011-13 (UK) intervention, the project ‘New Jobs for Disabled People’ identified soft results such as improvements in health and well-being of participants. A survey (questionnaire) revealed that the majority of participants considered that their involvement in the project had an indirect positive effect on their health. In those projects with a significant share of participants from a migrant background, an important soft outcome was supporting beneficiaries in taking part in social life activities by reducing the language barrier to access this type of service. Participants were able to reduce this language barrier, for instance, in the cases of the Production School VIA project (AT) and the Mosaik project (AT). Other interventions produced indirect benefits on the organisations managing or implementing the ESF supported projects or programmes. For instance, the organisations participating in the Mosaik project (AT) improved their professionalism (internal communication, transparency, quality management, management by objectives) as well as their networks. Regarding the latter, networks of actors are a key component of effective pathway interventions since they foster cooperation between different organisations from various fields of activity (health assistance, social integration, training, job placement, etc.). In a few cases, the national evaluation carried out an in-depth analysis of the social effects of the ESF intervention. This was the case regarding the project Project Valtaväylä (FI). According to its evaluation, a majority of participants saw their health and general welfare improve due to their involvement in the project. For instance, several participants reduced their alcohol consumption (alcohol abuse was a common problem among the targeted group). The project also provided access to specific health services (a nursring service) which helped participants detect untreated health problems. A survey conducted at the start and at the end of the project revealed that participants felt that the project had been a key factor in improving their health, financial stability and income, as well as trust in public authorities.

February, 2016 182

3.6.6 The characteristics of participants Information on the characteristics of participants was analysis based on Annex XXIII data made available by Managing Authorities. It should be noted that not all MA were able to provide this data and where this could not be collected centrally, data gathered at the project level is used in the table below. Based on the available information, 52,132 participants took part in the 16 interventions studied in this cluster. Unfortunately, gender data is not available for all interventions. For those where this could be provided, 34% of participants were women. While the representation of previously inactive individuals was not quite as high as in Cluster 1 interventions, it was nonetheless higher than in all the remaining clusters, with previously inactive and previously unemployed individuals almost equally represented. This reflects the complex nature of the barriers to labour market entry faced by the target groups served by holistic projects. Participant age data is not available for all interventions, but existing data shows that 12% of participants were young people between the ages 15-24. Data on the representation of vulnerable group is missing for 4 interventions (7 in the case of education levels), making this data more difficult to interpret. 10% of participants in these projects were disabled and 4% were from minority groups. Overall, the relatively low number of individuals recorded as being from vulnerable groups is perhaps surprising, but may be a function of the missing (or the classification of) data. As in Cluster 1 activities, the majority of individuals for whom education level information is available had only primary or lower secondary education.

February, 2016 183

Table 51. Participation data by socio-economic characteristics (Annex XXIII data): Cluster 3

AT AT AT FI Suunto FI LU LU LT Labour NL Re- UK Productio Mosaik Lebensarbei Valtaväylä Forward Process market integratio REACH n school t integration n psychotropic custodial59 substances

Number of participants 11160 308 93 1,069 423 106 306 204 21,636 8,322

Gender Male 0 154 44 446 222 70 263 149 NA 7,323

Female 111 154 49 623 201 36 43 55 NA 999

Labour market Employed 0 NA NA 371 44 0 16 0 NA 0 status Unemployed 5 NA NA 650 312 106 288 204 NA 5,160

Inactive 106 NA NA 48 67 0 2 0 NA 3,162

Age Youngpeople(15-24) 111 105 NA 129 70 85 42 45 NA 2,913

Olderpeople(55-64) 0 11 NA 96 37 0 7 0 NA 166

Vulnerable Migrants 6261 92 NA 21 4 30 6 0 NA 117 groups Minorities 0 0 NA 0 5 0 0 0 NA 1,498

Disabled 0 166 NA 183 1 0 1 0 NA 3,079

Others 0 0 NA 0 370 76 282 0 NA 0

Education Primary or lower secondary 101 206 NA 270 148 91 255 45 NA NA (ISCED1-2)

Upper secondary (ISCED3) NA NA NA 464 224 13 40 127 NA NA

Post-secondary non tertiary NA NA NA 80 7 2 6 20 NA NA (ISCED4)

Tertiary (ISCED5-6) NA NA NA 255 44 0 5 12 NA NA

59 NL MA indicates Annex XXIII data only available at aggregate level. 60 The project was developed in two periods. The data available refers to one of this implementation period: January 2010 to December 2011. 61 Participants with a migration background.

February, 2016 184

Table 52. The participation data by socio-economic characteristics (Annex XXIII data): Cluster 3 (continued)

UK ESF Families UK Cedar UK Peer UK Outer UK Bridging UK New Jobs for Total (tables 5 programme62 Foundation Mentoring Hebrides Service Disabled People and 6) (Wales) Employability Support Programme

Number of 8,500 863 9,627 249 1,529 73 53,419 participants

Gende 4,080 3,015 595 6,501 165 1,022 21,077 20,012 r 4,420 4,198 268 3,126 84 507 10,906 10,484

Labou NA NA NA 63 0 0 494 494 r 5,800 17,740 marke NA NA 3,897 249 1,036 11,940 t 2,800 NA NA 5,667 0 1,127 13,049 10,249 status

Age 1,445 1,255 NA 1,593 129 271 6,986 6,766

765 664 NA 529 15 116 1,747 1,646

Vulner Migrants NA NA 75 0 0 407 407 able 1,100 3,009 group Minorities NA 315 0 87 1,909 s Disabled 3,500 NA 1,292 53 530 8,874 5,374

Others 1,100 NA 0 0 0 0 728

Educat Primary or NA NA 2,047 44 1,210 29 4,446 ion lower secondary (ISCED1-2)

Upper NA NA 2,381 33 125 8 3,415 secondary (ISCED3)

Post- NA NA 0 25 103 9 252 secondary non tertiary (ISCED4)

62 UK (England and NI) data based on expert report.

February, 2016 185

UK ESF Families UK Cedar UK Peer UK Outer UK Bridging UK New Jobs for Total (tables 5 programme62 Foundation Mentoring Hebrides Service Disabled People and 6) (Wales) Employability Support Programme

Tertiary NA NA 562 27 91 27 1,023 (ISCED5-6)

Notes: There is not available information for the intervention from Netherlands.

February, 2016 186

3.6.7 Efficiency The data available on costs per output (i.e. participant/person supported) and per result are provided below for the Cluster 3 interventions. 53 presents the cost per output data. Given the varying quality of the available data, it is important to consider any form of comparison with caution. The average cost of an intervention in this cluster (excluding the highest and lowest) is EUR 4,700, with the highest (ignored for this calculation) being EUR 30,000 (AT Production School Via) and the lowest (also not taken into account) being EUR 423 (FI Valtaväylä). Variations in cost appear to be linked to the intensity of training and additional support provided, as well as the nature of the target group. Data from Volume II shows that the average cost per output for all ESI SI and SI+A2E interventions was in the region of €1,500. This lower cost can at least partly be explained by the fact that five of the eight in-depth countries had above average costs per participant. Furthermore, costs for advice and training measures were on average lower and these tend to be more represented among the wider field of SI and SI+A2E measures which were monitored in Volume II. The cost per participant for the Lebensarbeit project (AT) was estimated around EUR 14,000. This figure was above the average costs per person in work-integration social projects63. In this case, the individualised support strategy based on a number of services (language course, intensive written reporting of workability, initial clearing phase) required a higher level of resources. The high cost per participant in the delivery of VIA Production school (AT) placements is linked to the fact that this cost includes infrastructure investment, residential and highly individualised support. The Cedar Foundation’s Vocational and Employability Service’s (UK, Northern Ireland) cost per participant was higher than the overall average. The nature of the service offered, the specific needs of the participants, and the intensive support provided, could explain this difference. The project Meikštų Dvaras (LT) was considered by the national evaluation report of 201164 as one of the most efficient projects. The project achieved among the lowest regarding the cost per participant ( EUR 5,005) and the cost per participant employed (EUR 17,606), when compared with projects targeting the social integration of individuals suffering from substance abuse issues. According to the information gathered through interviews with project managers, the Process project (LU) was cost effective. The initial estimates of the Ministry of Labour was EUR 1,500 per participant, however, due to the involvement of more participants than expected, the actual cost per person was EUR 920.

Table 53. Cost per output (person supported), Cluster 3 interventions reviewed

Available MS Intervention Actual comparators AT Production School VIA EUR 30,00065

63 See Eppel et al., 2014, showing average costs of around 9,000 € in the years 2007 to 2010, not making distinction between ESF co-financed and nationally financed projects. 64 Evaluation of the situation, need for and performance of social integration services to socially vulnerable and disadvantaged groups of people with a view to effective use of EU structural support for 2007-2013. Assessment report. Public Policy and Management Institute, Institute of Labour and Social Research, 1 July, 2011. 65 This cost is per training place in a production school, which also has to cover infrastructure investment.

February, 2016 187

Available MS Intervention Actual comparators AT Mosaik EUR 4,444 Average expenditure in training measures AT Lebensarbeit EUR 14,472 paid by the Austrian PES in 2011: 2.537 € FI Suunto EUR 1,069 FI Valtaväylä EUR 423 LU Forward EUR 2,830 LU Process EUR 920 Labour market integration of LT psychotropic substance addicts treated EUR 5,005 in VšĮ Meikštų dvaras Reintegration – custodial institutions NL EUR 2,350 agency REACH - Derbyshire, Leicester, N/A Nottinghamshire and Rutland UK EUR 1,063 Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) (England) ESF Support for Families with Multiple N/A Problems (ESF Families programme) UK Families in the South East – the N/A66 Progress! Programme – Skills Training UK (England) The Cedar Foundation’s Vocational and N/A Estimated at EUR UK Employability Service, Cedar (Northern 8,976 Ireland) The Peer Mentoring Programme, RCE N/A UK P1, Welsh Government, Department for EUR 1,408 Health and Social Services (Wales) Outer Hebrides Employability Support N/A UK EUR 9,130 Programme, Comhairle nan Eilean Siar Glasgow Works 2011-13, Glasgow City N/A Council EUR 8,674 UK Sub project: New Jobs for Disabled EUR 749 People Sub project: The Bridging Service (Scotland)

Table 54 summarises available information on costs per results for the Cluster 3 interventions. The same provisos as expressed for other clusters apply to these data, as figures provided here are likely to over-estimate the cost of each result achieved. The average cost per employment outcome was EUR 22,321 (compared to an average cost of unemployment per year of EUR 25,000). These costs varied significantly, but tended to be higher for projects aimed at more ‘at risk’ groups and those requiring more intensive support for re-integration (e.g. NEETs from migrant backgrounds, individuals with significant health impairments, etc.). In some cases this required not only work with the

66 The payment by results model followed under the intervention ‘ESF Support for Families with Multiple Problems’ do not allow an accurate estimation on the cost per participant while the project is still operating.

February, 2016 188

individual participants, but also awareness raising activities with employers to encourage them to offer opportunities to project leavers. Five interventions set result indicators to measure qualifications gained. The average cost of achieving such results was EUR 22,514. A further six interventions included one or more indicators measuring other positive progress (e.g. entitled ‘other positive outcomes’; or increasing options for sustainable re-integration; pursuit of further education and training, etc.). The average cost for such positive results per participants was EUR 20,073, with further training or work placement outcomes more costly than other, more generic, positive results. No information could be made available about costs per result in comparable, nationally funded actions. Table 54. Cost per result, Cluster 3 interventions reviewed

Available MS Intervention Indicator Cost per result comparator Participants who took up a job or AT Production School VIA 17,777 euro n/a started any training (2011) Increase of participants earning AT Mosaik n/a n/a wages Share of participants without any n/a n/a income Share of participants who took up AT Lebensarbeit 54,785 euro n/a a job Share participants obtained a positive outcome (e.g. placement FI Suunto 7,722 euro n/a in employment; further training etc.) Highway 1: Percentage of participants that find a job (both FI Valtaväylä in the open and in the protected n/a n/a labour market) after participating in the intervention Highway 2: Percentage of participants that find a job (both in the open and in the protected n/a n/a labour market) after participating in the intervention Highway 3: Percentage of participants that find a job (both in the open and in the protected n/a n/a labour market) after participating in the intervention Total average: Percentage of participants that find a job (both in the open and in the protected n/a n/a labour market) after participating in the intervention Individuals in employment post LU Forward 12,500 euro n/a completion Share of participants who were in LU Process 5,029 euro n/a employment Labour market Share of participants in LT integration of education/training or employment 17,606 euro n/a psychotropic six months after participation

February, 2016 189

Available MS Intervention Indicator Cost per result comparator substance addicts treated in VšĮ Meikštų dvaras Reintegration – NL custodial institutions Completed actions 3,961 euro n/a agency Still in trajectory n/a n/a Increasing options for sustainable labour market inclusion (e.g. n/a n/a individual coaching) Number of participants in 7,333 euro n/a employment Number of participants in further 10,037 euro n/a learning UK Advice provided 1,180 euro n/a REACH - Derbyshire, Leicester, Signposting to other services 7,085 euro n/a Nottinghamshire and Rutland Community Rehabilitation Improved motivation 4,083 euro n/a Company (CRC) (England) Achieved qualification 20,952 euro n/a Non accredited course 6,690 euro n/a Improved employability 1,272 euro n/a Access to mentoring 12,429 euro n/a ESF Support for n/a Families with Multiple Problems (ESF Number and share of individuals Families programme) within work (estimated within 17 UK n/a Families in the South months of starting the East – the Progress! programme) Programme – Skills Training UK (England) The Cedar n/a Foundation’s Vocational and Share of individuals in UK 24,838 euro Employability Service, employment Cedar (Northern Ireland) Share of individuals in 33,047 euro education/training n/a Share of individuals in work 89,534 euro experience/community roles The Peer Mentoring Programme, RCE P1, Welsh Government, Number of participants entering UK 20,157 euro Department for employment Health and Social Services (Wales) n/a Number of participants gaining 13,360 euro n/a qualifications Number of participants gaining 2,781 euro n/a other positive outcomes Number of participants gaining 18,846 euro n/a

February, 2016 190

Available MS Intervention Indicator Cost per result comparator entering further learning

Outer Hebrides Employability Support Number of participants entering UK Programme, 31,141 euro n/a employment Comhairle nan Eilean Siar Number of participants entering 94,720 euro n/a education or training Number of participants gaining 21,650 euro n/a partial or full qualifications Number of participants in employment 6 months after 48,368 euro n/a leaving Glasgow Works 2011- 13, Glasgow City Council UK Employment results achieved 37,122 euro n/a Sub project: New Jobs for Disabled People Qualifications results 51,560 euro n/a Glasgow Works 2011- 13, Glasgow City Council UK Sub project: The Employment results achieved 4,861 euro n/a Bridging Service (Scotland)

Entering education and training 13,521 euro n/a Qualifications results 4,212 euro n/a

3.6.8 Sustainability of the supported interventions 3.6.8.1 Sustainability of outcomes for participants The analysis revealed different approaches to follow-up information across interventions. While certain projects carried out a formal monitoring process, in other cases there is a lack of information or data have been gathered informally. As has been mentioned in the analysis of previous Clusters, this situation is common to all interventions. However, due to the nature of the pathway programmes, follow-up methods should be a mandatory tool. Pathways are meant to provide a more comprehensive and holistic service offer to participants, therefore the sustainability of the results should be a key issue in the rationale sustaining the intervention. Only one intervention developed a clear quantitative follow-up process to identify the sustainability of the results among participants. The ‘New Jobs for Disabled People’ project within the Glasgow Works 2011-13 (UK) showed that 57% of their clients entering employment continued to be in their jobs two years after participating in the project. In other cases, the follow-up is assumed and developed as part of the rationale of the programme. However, the data obtained from that process have not been collated or quantitatively processed until now. This was the case for the following projects:

February, 2016 191

. The Bridging Service within the ‘Glasgow Works 2011-2013 intervention (UK) carried out a follow-up of their participants but the data are not consolidated. . The Cedar Foundation’s Vocational and Employability Service (UK) follow-up was additionally used to identify new needs of the participants and provide additional support. . In the case of the project Meikštų Dvaras (LT), participants (people with drug abuse addiction) kept the contact with the Centre implementing the project. Staff at the centre organised informal and social meetings with former participants as a way of being informed of their rehabilitation development. . The project REACH - Derbyshire, Leicester, Nottinghamshire and Rutland Community Rehabilitation Company (UK, England) did not employ a formal monitoring system though informally, the case staff could contact individuals to learn of their situation and gather ‘good news stories’ for promoting the project. In general, the information from these contacts revealed a mix of sustained outcomes and incidents where former participants had slipped back. . A similar situation was identified for the case of the Peer Mentoring Programme (UK). In fact, the lack of a formal monitoring system was considered to be one of the weaknesses of the programme. Stakeholders recognised that this deficiency did not allow them to identify sustainability results of the project. It also limited the opportunity to intervene and ensure that the achievements obtained were sustained. Several projects, such as the Project Suunto (FI) or the Process project (LU), did not include evaluative follow-up. In some cases, the project finished but some elements remained in operation with no relevant financial resources. For instance, the Forward project maintained its website, providing information and training material, long after the project was finished. 3.6.8.2 Continuation of activities The key finding of the analysis is the high dependency of the interventions on ESF funding. The majority of interventions revealed an interest in continuing to receive ESF support in the next programming period 2014-2020 and underlined that in the case of not being supported there would be real difficulties in finding replacement funding. In some cases, the project managers indicated that they could maintain the essence of the intervention but would markedly reduce their scale and scope. A relevant number of the interventions analysed from Cluster 3 are expected to continue within the programming period of 2014-2020. In some cases, the interventions had already been prolonged for one year as a way of ensuring continuity between the end of one programming period and the next. The Meikštų Dvaras project’s (LT) sustainability was assured in two ways. Firstly, the project was included as part of the National Programme on Drug Control and Prevention of Drug Addiction 2010–2016, adopted Lithuania in 201067. Consequently, the continuation of actions until 2016 was guaranteed. Secondly, after the end of the project the Centre managing it was granted additional ESF support for other actions successfully implemented by Meikštų Dvaras project. This new project will incorporate the know-how acquired in previous years. The programme for offenders and ex-offenders in the Netherlands is scheduled to continue in the new ESF funding period. The Cedar Foundation’s Vocational and Employability Service (UK) programme was provided with additional funding to support the continuation of its activities into 2015. This Foundation confirmed their interest in applying for further ESF funding under the

67 No XI-1078 (04 11 2010).

February, 2016 192

2014-2020 ESF programme in order to maintain the scale of the services they are delivering. The Outer Hebrides Employability Support Programme (UK) ceased to receive ESF support and was stopped in March 2013. However, it was re-launched with additional ESF funds from April 2014 to June 2015. The organisation responsible for its implementation expected to obtain further ESF support for the period 2014-2020. If these funds are not made available, it is unlikely that the project will find alternative funding. The ESF support provided to the project New Jobs for Disabled People (UK) was extended beyond December 2013. The continuation of the project of equal scale and quality will depend on whether it will receive ESF funding under the 2014-2020 ESF programme. The fact that certain programmes are reliant on ESF funding is clearly visible in the transition between programming periods, during which they were largely left without ESF funding for one year. For instance, due to this gap between periods the Peer Mentoring Programme (UK) revealed that until the new ESF funding is received they will only be able to keep running a “skeleton service” offer and are trying temporarily to cover expenses with own resources. In other interventions analysed, the actions were continued with national or other funding aside from ESF. For instance, the Lebensarbeit project (AT) was maintained following the end of ESF support due to financial support from the city of Salzburg, where it was being implemented. This was also the case of the VIA Produktionsschule project (AT), which was supported through national resources and is now fully integrated into the local network of stakeholders working on social and employment inclusion. In the case of the Project Valtaväylä (FI), its approach has been copied by other projects. For instance, in one municipality, a social facilitator was hired using the service guidance model developed in the project. Additionally, the evaluation model applied to measure social effects was introduced in three municipalities to assess social welfare programmes. Finally, the health related guidance model for unemployed persons has been maintained through national funding. Other projects have ensured the sustainability of their actions thanks to a networking approach and the buy-in of a large number of partner organisations. These partner organisations can decide to continue working with a similar approach in the future. For example, the organisations involved in the Mosaik project (AT) all decided to introduce the same practice model for supporting labour market integration of disadvantaged groups. Finally, some interventions are not expected to continue in the next programming period. In certain cases there was no marked interest to renew them or in other cases, projects have not shown an influence upon mainstream policies and therefore are not considered a priority for the 2014-2020 programming period. The two pathway projects in Luxembourg are not expected to continue. The Process project (LU) finished in December 2010 and there has not been any initiative to mainstream its activities within the plans of the Ministry of Labour. In the case of the Forward project (LU), while the project ended on February 2012, and although no follow- up has been developed, the website of the project is still functioning. 3.6.9 Gender sensitivity As with Cluster 1, individuals targeted for interventions under Cluster 3 are likely to face multiple barriers to integration and are likely to come from the most disadvantaged segments of the population, where women can predominate. Data are available for 14 of the 16 interventions studied under this cluster. Among these, women make up 49% of the 78,101 participants. There are no projects targeted solely at men or women and target groups are diverse, with some focussing on populations which are more likely to be male dominated (e.g. offenders and ex-offenders, individuals with substance abuse issues, brain injured individuals). Projects such as Process (LU) and REACH (UK) aimed at offenders and ex-offenders have, as a result, relatively low shares of female

February, 2016 193

participants (14% and 12%, respectively). Four further interventions in the UK (Cedar Foundation (UK), Peer Mentoring Programme, the Outer Hebrides Employability Support Programme and the Glasgow Works sub-project: the Bridging Service) had female participation rates below 40%. The Cedar Foundation project had among its core target groups individuals suffering from severe brain injury (primarily young men involved in motorcycle or automotive accidents). The Peer Mentoring Project focussed on individuals with substance abuse issues, among whom men are also more significantly represented. The Glasgow Works project also focussed on target groups dominated by men such as individuals with substance abuse issues, and homeless individuals. In order to ensure a higher representation of women, other target groups such as lone parents were included. Three projects had more than 51% female participants; Lebensarbeit (AT), Suunto (FI) and ESF Support for Families with Multiple Problems (UK). In the case of the latter, this was partly the result of a higher representation of single parent families (with the single parent usually being the woman). In the Suunto project, it was found that much of the training being offered was for health and care sector work, which, despite efforts to increase the representation of men, can often remain unattractive to them. In order to improve the training offer for men, new training programmes (e.g. for earthmoving skills) were established as a result, to attract more male participants. Despite being less represented among participants, in the Peer Mentoring Programme (UK) female participants tended to outperform their male counterparts in terms of successful transitions to further training, whereas men did slightly better regarding transitions to employment. Women slightly outperformed men in placements to employment in the Lebensarbeit (AT) project.

February, 2016 194

Table 55. Male and female participation in Cluster 3 interventions

MS Project name Target groups Female participants

AT Production School VIA Young unemployed women (15-19 years old) who had not completed basic n/a education or vocational training, and particularly those with a migrant background

AT Mosaik Unemployed with severe placement obstacles and low chances of labour market 154 (50%) reintegration

AT Lebensarbeit Disadvantaged groups such as long-term unemployed, recipients of 28 (53%) unemployment or social assistance, and immigrants

FI Suunto Unemployed individuals, who do not have up-to-date vocational qualifications and 610 (58.2%) work experience and who need support and counselling

FI Valtaväylä Long-term unemployed and people with limited labour market skills 201 (47.5%)

LU Forward Unemployed young people aged between 18 to 29 years with limited work 36 (34%) experience and low formal qualification levels

LU Process Drug addicts, including prisoners with substance abuse problems. 43 (14%)

LT Labour market integration of Individuals with a psychotropic substance addiction 55 (27%) psychotropic substance addicts treated in VšĮ Meikštų dvaras

Reintegration – custodial institutions NL Offenders and ex-offenders n/a agency

REACH - Derbyshire, Leicester, UK Nottinghamshire and Rutland Community Offenders in prison or in the community, unemployed or economically inactive. 900 (12%) Rehabilitation Company (CRC) (England)

ESF Support for Families with Multiple Problems (ESF Families programme) UK Families in the South East – the People from families facing multiple disadvantage 32011 (57%) Progress! Programme – Skills Training UK (England)

Two groups of young people and adults: The Cedar Foundation’s Vocational and UK Employability Service, Cedar (Northern With complex disabilities; 268 (31%) Ireland) Recovering from acquired brain injury.

UK The Peer Mentoring Programme, Welsh Unemployed/inactive individuals with a history of alcohol and/or drug misuse 3126 (32%)

February, 2016 195

MS Project name Target groups Female participants Government, Department for Health and Social Services (Wales)

UK Outer Hebrides Employability Support Unemployed adults; 84 (34%) Programme, Comhairle nan Eilean Siar Unemployed adults with learning/ physical disabilities, and mental health issues; and School leavers 16-19 years facing barriers to mainstream provision of services.

UK Glasgow Works 2011-13, Glasgow City Individuals with disabilities and limiting health conditions. 30 (41%) Council68 Sub project: New Jobs for Disabled People

UK Glasgow Works 2011-13, Glasgow City Individuals facing particular disadvantages. 507 (33%) Council Sub project: The Bridging Service (Scotland)

68 The intervention was divided into two different sub-projects.

February, 2016 196

3.6.10 Community added value of supported interventions Volume and scope effects were most evident among the interventions supported in Cluster 3. Target groups benefiting particularly from such support were young women NEET, homeless people, individuals with substance abuse issues and migrants. Where existing support was broadened, this was generally done by offering a more tailored, person-centred approach, bringing together the support services and functions of various agencies. Quantitative estimates of volume effects are not available because of a lack of national data on similar actions. The process effect thus achieved (e.g. greater partnership working) is one of the key features of holistic support to disadvantaged groups, where individuals often do not succeed in mainstream provision where they often drop out if other personal challenges they may be dealing with remain unaddressed. A number of the interventions studied have had demonstration effects, influencing similar local or regional provisions – either wholesale or through the introduction of elements such as peer mentoring, which had proved particularly successful. Table 56. The Added Value of ESF in Cluster 3

Volume effects  Lebensarbeit (AT): ESF funding allowed for the project to offer its services which would otherwise not have been available.  the extent to which the ESF supported  Mosaik (AT): Additional placements in supported employment actions add to could be offered existing actions  Production school VIA (AT): allowed for the offer of an additional Production school facility  Valtaväylä (FI): significant volume contribution for the development of a more integrated service model supporting both PES and municipalities for social work  Forward (LU): additional funding for target group of vulnerable young people  Process (LU): added support for national social inclusion policies  Reintegration – custodial institutions agency (NL): ability to expand existing service offer to more individuals  REACH (UK): ability to support additional individuals in the vulnerable prison population  ESF support to families with multiple problems (UK): ESF funding allowed for the regional contract to provide support throughout the region  Cedar Foundation (UK): ability to support additional individuals among the very vulnerable target group of brain injured individuals  Outer Hebrides Employability support programme (UK): extension of service offer to additional individuals suffering from complex problems Scope effects  Lebensarbeit (AT): The intervention extended its service offer to migrants with ESF funding, which would otherwise not have been  the extent to which included. The project fills a gap in provision for those affected by the ESF broadens the introduction of the needs based minimum income benefit existing action (which focusses on activation) who often lack transition support as they are rather far removed from the labour market  Mosaik (AT): extension of existing support to provide a more targeted and person-centred service  Production school VIA (AT): extension of service offer targeted at young women NEET  Valtaväylä (FI): target group those needing rehabilitation

February, 2016 197

received little support without this project  Process (LU): extension of support to the target group of individuals with substance abuse issues  Labour market integration of psychotropic substance addicts treated in VšĮ Meikštų dvaras (LT): improved services offer for individuals with substance abuse issues  Cedar Foundation (UK): intensive support to the target group of brain injured individuals is unique in the region  Peer Mentoring (UK): the project filled a gap in aftercare provision for substance misusers, through supporting the sustainability of outcomes  Glasgow works (UK): extension of support to a target group of very vulnerable people which is otherwise unlikely to access institutional support Role effects  Production school VIA (AT): The Production school model has set a positive example which is being replicated throughout different  the extent to which regions the ESF supports local/regional  Valtaväylä (FI): enabled the development of service guidance to innovations that municipalities participating in the project and beyond through are taken up at good practice exchange national level or  REACH (UK): development of innovative elements such as the national innovative use of peer mentors and work with social enterprises offered actions that are potential for replication in other initiatives then ‘mainstreamed’  Cedar Foundation (UK): the approach modelled delivery to the target group earlier in their recovery process  Outer Hebrides Employability support programme (UK): elements of the project have been continued, albeit on a smaller scale Process effects  Valtaväylä (FI): the ‘service chain’ process concept for rehabilitation clients has been picked up for further development  the extent to which in the new ESF funding period the ESF action influences the  Suunto (FI): the project allowed for the development of a Member State phasing model for intermediate labour markets which can act as administrations a model throughout Finland and organisations  Process (LU): Establishment of new partnerships between NGOs involved in the and private providers and employers programmes

3.6.11 Lessons learnt The following section summarises the main lesson learned from the interventions reviewed within Cluster 3. Here the target groups served were closer to those under Cluster 1 – with many of the lessons being similar, especially regarding the recruitment, assessment and support components of the interventions. a) Policy lessons The pathways approaches used by Cluster 3 interventions reflect the ever greater emphasis being placed on personalised action planning more generally among Public Employment Services and other Labour Market Actors, but also provide lessons for the further development of such approaches. Of particular relevance here is that many of the disadvantaged groups targeted are not (or are no longer) eligible for unemployment benefits and are – at least in some countries – therefore no longer direct PES clients. The local networks created by many of the ESF funded interventions reflect the need at this

February, 2016 198

level to create partnerships (and make available resources) to support such individuals. This gap in current mainstream provision is clearly demonstrated in the activities of these initiatives, which have significant volume and scope effects, particularly in countries with limited resources for ALMPs. b) Target groups As described above, participants in the Cluster 3 interventions exhibited more pronounced, and often multiple, disadvantages. The ‘pathways’ nature of the interventions were particularly suited to their specific circumstances, allowing multiple inputs to be combined and allowing multiple barriers to be addressed. For example, three projects (Peer Mentoring in the UK, Process in Lithuania and a project in Lithuania) worked with recovering substance abusers at different stages in their recoveries. b) Programming A series of key factors were identified for Cluster 3/pathways interventions – in addition to those identified under Cluster 1 for working with the more disadvantaged groups. Taking a holistic approach was emphasised as a positive aspect in all programmes, with flexible approaches to implementation being cited alongside this. The programmes offered a wide range of provisions and services that could be adapted to the individual needs of participants. In the case of the Outer Hebrides Employability Support Programme (UK), this aspect was highly relevant as the intervention was one of few providers serving very diverse needs in a particularly remote area. Several interventions described tailored approaches to respond to individual needs. This was the case of the Peer Mentoring Programme (UK), which identified this flexible approach as one of the scheme’s key success factors. The offenders’ project in the Netherlands highlighted the importance of selecting training courses for occupations with significant skills shortages and work with the most motivated inmates, as key to success in relation to placement outcomes and reduction of recidivism. As identified previously, delivering post-project services emerged as a good way of consolidating the results obtained. According to the lead organisation of the REACH project (UK), the lack of post-project services meant that the results achieved by participants risked being lost in the months following their release from prison, or completion with the project. This aspect was also considered a weakness within the development of the Peer Mentoring Programme (UK). c) Implementation As with the Cluster 1 interventions, a strong collaboration with stakeholders had a strong positive impact for several of the interventions analysed. The Lebensarbeit project (AT) had a clear focus on supporting people receiving social assistance. The Project Suunto and Project Valtaväylä (FI) opened the door to further collaboration between the public employment offices and the providers of intermediate labour market services as a way to address the specific needs of the target group. Offering services with the involvement of peers served to enhance credibility and trust and breakdown barriers for participants from disadvantaged groups. For instance, this was the case for peer mentors in programmes such as the REACH project (UK) and the Peer Mentoring Programme (UK). As the duration of participation is longer in a pathways programme, compared to other types of programme, it is all the more important to keep participants engaged. As shown in the regional ESF Support for Families with Multiple Problems (UK), the existence of gaps between the initial recruitment and delivery stages can lead to participant disengagement. Accordingly, in the case of this project, this “gap” was reduced to two weeks on average, with good results. Moreover, the quality and professionalism of the

February, 2016 199

staff of the organisation that is implementing the project is of paramount importance. A good quality team will create the adequate relationship with participants and help motivate them to achieve the desired results. This was considered a key success factor for the Outer Hebrides Employability Support Programme (UK) by programme managers. Finally, it is crucial to ensure that adequate arrangements to allow ‘access’ of all participants to the programme are in place. This aspect was particularly important when working with people with disabilities. Project services must be accessible to all, as was the case, for instance, in the New Jobs for Disabled People project within the Glasgow Works 2011-13 intervention (UK). Furthermore, the use of outreach provision was an important component in several programmes. In the case of the regional ESF Support for Families with Multiple Problems (UK), outreach actions were a key to contacting the targeted group (families suffering from disadvantages and facing multiple barriers to access the labour market), especially given the issues faced in initial recruitment. As mentioned previously, offering tailored and individualised support was identified as one of the aspects that worked well within the interventions analysed. In some cases, this approach was not integrated into the selection of placement offers. The example of the New Jobs for Disabled People project (UK) showed that participants were not always able to accept full-time placements and that part-time options were more appropriate to their needs. From the point of view of the organisations developing the interventions, one of the major challenges was securing placement offers for their participants. For instance, finding job placements among local employers was one of the main difficulties for the programme Outer Hebrides Employability Support Programme (UK). Several interventions highlighted that it was not always easy to ensure the involvement of employers. Despite the resources dedicated to this issue, employers seemed reluctant to actively participate in certain programmes. This issue was clearly identified within the Cedar Foundation’s Vocational and Employability Service (UK) programme, which had to compete for suitable placements for its participants within the employers’ organisations with whom they had established links. Due to the diverse profiles and characteristics of programme participants, some projects should include specialist advice regarding placements and welfare benefits. For instance, as was suggested in the case of the Glasgow Works 2011-13 intervention (UK), incorporating specialist advice on the compatibility of welfare benefits and job income would have been of great use for many participants. Finally, it is important to increase co-operation between institutions, local authorities and organisations in the non-governmental sector. In the case of the project Meikštų Dvaras (LT), the evaluation report mentioned that it would have been desirable to involve a greater number of NGOs with expert knowledge of policy areas or target groups. d) Monitoring and evaluation The lessons for monitoring and evaluation were very similar to those drawn for Cluster 1 activities – i.e. the importance of follow-up (as described above, but here to identify impacts) and issues with the nature of the monitoring variables required (i.e. primarily ‘hard’). Simplifying the administrative requirements of participation in the ESF was identified as one aspect that could be improved. The administrative burden was particularly challenging for smaller organisations, such as those participating in the Mosaik project (AT) or the Lebensarbeit project (AT).

February, 2016 200

3.7 Cluster 4: Systemic measures 3.7.1 Introduction This Cluster features measures with the objective of influencing systems, institutions or cultural contexts. These could include capacity building actions, as well as activities to tackle underlying discriminatory attitudes among employers or wider society. Systemic actions tend to focus on combatting disadvantage and discrimination through awareness raising, with a strong emphasis on fighting discrimination against women and older workers, but also addressing prejudice relating to other target groups. Other systemic actions are linked to institutional capacity building, both among employment institutions (e.g. the development of a disability assessment system in Cyprus) or to build capacity in the intermediate labour market (e.g. by offering work placements and job opportunities, which is also at the focus of activities in Cluster 2b). Systemic interventions are funded in five of the eight countries, not in Austria, the Netherlands and the UK (although in the UK some examples of steps to influence local infrastructure, such as work with employers and capacity building for provider organisations, were identified). Where identified, the systemic interventions identified fall into three categories: . Awareness raising usually focussed on combatting discrimination. Linked to this are often studies to inform such awareness raising campaigns; . The establishment of infrastructure to support other programme actions, such as the establishment of an infrastructure for the intermediate labour market (e.g. Finland) or for the development of formal assessment and certification systems for disabled individuals to assess their ability to work (e.g. Cyprus); and . Information and good practice exchange at the national and transnational level (e.g. Romania). Systematic interventions therefore tend to support the operation of other priority actions and interventions rather than being stand-alone activities. Beyond the disadvantaged groups themselves, the target group for these activities are employers, other labour market stakeholders and wider society. Table 57. Summary of Cluster 4 Interventions by Member State

Member Cluster 4 - Systemic measures State CY Expansion and upgrading of the operation of labour market institutions FI Equal opportunities (awareness raising) LU Increasing the employment rate of older workers (awareness raising) LT Addressing discrimination and promotion of activities for people at social risk (awareness raising) RO Development of social economy (developing infrastructure)

Promoting equal opportunities in the labour market (awareness raising)

Transnational initiatives for an inclusive labour market 3.7.2 The Cluster 4 interventions The remainder of this section considers the Cluster 4 interventions that were reviewed in Phase 2 of the evaluation. Six interventions from Cyprus, Finland, Lithuania, and Latvia were reviewed, namely:

February, 2016 201

. Educational Priority Zones (CY) . Implementation of a New System of Assessment of Disability and Functionality (CY) . Välkky (FI) . Välke (FI) . Towards employment – development of intermediation services for employing individuals with impaired hearing (LT) . ANELO (LU). An overview of the interventions reviewed is provided as shown in the Table below. As the table illustrates, the target groups served and activities undertaken were broadly representative of the Cluster 4 population as described above. Availability of evaluation evidence for the Cluster 4 interventions

Two of the projects reviewed within Cluster 4 have been the object of an evaluation: . The intervention ‘Towards employment – development of intermediation services for employing individuals with impaired hearing’ in Lithuania has been evaluated as part of an overall impact evaluation of EU structural fund assistance69. . In Finland, the Välke project was evaluated as part of a peer evaluation with two other projects. Välke also underwent a final assessment of product and services developed. A 12-month follow-up study was performed. Furthermore, an evaluation of the support to the Educational Priority Zones in Cyprus is currently planned.

3.7.3 Aims, objectives, target groups and scale of funding The allocated funding planned per intervention ranged between EUR 3 million and 10.9 million, except for two smaller-scale interventions in Luxembourg (EUR 0.70 million) and in Lithuania (EUR 0.89 million).

Although the interventions were, by definition, directed toward systems change, they also included specific target groups in terms of implementation, including disadvantaged pupils (and their parents), young people needing vocational guidance, long-term unemployed and disabled individuals and their families. Compared to Clusters 1, 2 and 3, a greater degree of heterogeneity in the aims of the interventions and nature of the activities can be observed. Aims included mapping and reviewing available services, improving the quality of these services, improving partnerships, and testing new methodological approaches with a view to supporting the inclusion of disadvantaged groups. Most of the interventions had a national scope and/or covered different areas of the country, although two interventions in Finland had a regional focus.

69 "Evaluation of impact of EU structural support on quality of life and reduction of poverty and social exclusion in Lithuania. Final report. Estep, June 2014"

February, 2016 202

The objectives of these interventions are summarised below, according to the groups targeted. Some of the interventions focused on improving the quality of education and training, as well as guidance for pupils and young people: Zones of Educational Priority (CY) concerns schools in deprived areas, which have high rates of early school dropouts, school failure, a significant share of foreign students or students with a foreign language, and a high degree of violence and anti-social behaviour. The intervention aims at tackling these challenges by creating additional posts for teaching staff in the schools concerned, offering remedial teaching to students, developing adapted educational materials, and providing additional psychosocial support services to students and their parents.

One of the interventions in Luxembourg consisted of improving an existing website called ‘Anelo’, targeting young people, particularly those lacking basic qualifications, looking for vocational guidance as well as information on further training opportunities. ‘Anelo’ meets the requirements of a diverse national reform plan, stressing the need to offer the support to young people in their early professional life. The intervention aimed to make the Anelo website more user-friendly and attractive for the target group. In addition, the website was actively promoted among young people and professionals working in the integration of young people into the labour market.

Two interventions focused on improving the capacity of local intermediate labour markets to include the long-term unemployed and hard-to-place job-seekers.

The Välkky project (FI), covering the municipalities of Satakunta, was based on the idea that disadvantaged individuals will benefit from the project indirectly via systemic impacts. The main target group comprises intermediate labour market organisations. The project focused on mapping local intermediate labour market organisations, organising training and networking events, thematic development fora, and peer evaluation between labour market service centres, promoting co-operation with enterprises, and supporting active labour market policies including job-coaching, combination of wage-subsided work and labour market training and other measures.

The Välke project (FI) was divided into two parts, one administered by the city of Tampere and another part administered by the Pirkanmaa public employment office (TE- office, formerly Tampere TE-office). The intervention aimed at clarifying the roles and services provided by intermediate labour market organisations in the region. Another goal was to improve the efficacy of the regional intermediate labour market by enhancing the quantity and quality of services and employment opportunities, strengthening co- operation between NGOs and employers, and piloting a new form of active labour market policy (wage-subsidy combined with labour market training, develop job coaching). A final objective was to create new opportunities in intermediate labour markets to work in new sectors and occupations.

Two interventions in Cyprus and Lithuania aimed to improve the infrastructure and services for disabled individuals.

The aim of the New System of Assessment of Disability and Functionality (CY) is to reinforce the existing Cypriot system for assessment of disability and functionality, using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) of the World Health Organisation. The intervention focused on the preparation and development of the evaluation system (operated by a Centre for Assessment of Functioning and Disability and a Disability Management Unit); a number of individual capability assessments were also undertaken.

The intervention “Towards employment” – development of intermediation services for employing individuals with impaired hearing” (LT) supported the access to employment of deaf people, based on a model developed within the framework of the EQUAL

February, 2016 203

Community Initiative. It included several activities: the extension of an existing database of deaf unemployed and available job places for all services established in Lithuania; the organisation of upskilling and training courses for job coaches; the organisation of motivational training sessions; and active awareness-raising campaigns to change attitudes towards participation of people with hearing disabilities in the labour market.

An overview of the aims, objectives, target groups and scale of funding of the Cluster 4 interventions is provided in Table 58 below. 3.7.3.1 Financial implementation rates of the interventions Implementation rates in this cluster range between 60 and 100%. Below target implementation rates are mainly due to the fact that projects are not yet completed or final budgetary information is not yet available. In the case of the Implementation of a New System of Assessment of Disability and Functionality in Cyprus, the initial budgetary frame was significantly reduced from over EUR 6 million. As a result of the crisis it was necessary to reduce the budget and to curtail ambitions for the establishment of three evaluation centres to one. 3.7.4 Contribution to national policy priorities Systemic interventions tend to have a particularly important role to play in relation to national policy priorities and the improvement of systems to assist disadvantaged individuals in their labour market integration. This is particularly clearly reflected in the interventions selected for funding in Cyprus and Finland. The Education Priority Action Zones in Cyprus are targeted at strengthening schools in disadvantaged areas with the goal of helping to reduce early school leaving and ultimately reducing NEET rates. In Finland, CSRs have emphasised the need to build local networks among labour market actors to support the integration of disadvantaged groups. As a result, interventions were established with the goal of mapping intermediate labour market structures and ensuring better co-operation. The ANELO project in Luxembourg aimed to provide a portal with information on careers and occupations to young people. The website developed by the project has provided successful and is being integrated into a wider careers guidance strategy.

February, 2016 204

Table 58. Overview of Cluster 4 interventions assessed during Phase 2

Allocated Actual Implementation MS Project name expenditure expenditure rate Duration Target groups Short description of activities

CY Educational Priority EUR 10.9 EUR 8.3 76.1%* 01/09/07 Pupils living in deprived The programme aims to support and strengthen Zones million million* areas and their families. schools in deprived areas, with high rates of early (Estimate at - leavers, school failure, a high share of foreign (Estimate at completion: 30/09/15 students/students with a foreign language, and a completion: 99.1%) high degree of violence and anti-social behaviour. 10.8 M) (data available The objectives are reducing early school leaving up to and school failure, strengthening social cohesion by September reducing the risk of social marginalization and 2014) exclusion and creating new job positions for unemployed teachers.

CY Implementation of EUR 1.87 EUR 1.84 99% (based on Data up to Disabled people, doctors and The aim of the project is to reinforce the existing a New System of million million* revised budget) September physicians involved in Cypriot system for the assessment of disability and Assessment of 2014 providing health services, in functionality by designing and implementing a new Disability and particular those relating to system based on the International Classification of Functionality the rehabilitation. Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) of the World Health Organization.

FI Välkky EUR 10.6 EUR 6.39 60% 04/08/08 Service providers in The objectives of the Välkky project are to 1) million million intermediate labour markets, develop new modes of operation to support the -31/12/14 municipalities, employers long-term unemployed, 2) strengthen the division and enterprises in need of of labour and the roles of intermediate labour labour. market organizations and 3) allocate funding and resources of active labour market measures. Välkky aims at getting employees and employers to meet .

FI Välke EUR 8.54 EUR 8.2 million 96% 04/08- Service providers in The aim is to a) classify roles and services of million 12/14 intermediate labour markets intermediate labour market (ILM) organizations in and long-term unemployed the Tampere region, b) improve the efficacy of the individuals. regional ILM, c) secure new job opportunities in the ILM.

LT “Towards EUR 0.89 EUR 0.89 100% 03/09 – Deaf job-seekers; job The objective of the project is the national-level employment” – million million 08/12 coaches for the deaf. application of a model of supported employment development of for deaf people developed in the EQUAL intermediation Community Initiative. To meet the goals of services for influencing policy and practice, and ensure employing those effective sustainability of the project, the model for with impaired deaf people was transposed into the organisational hearing” system of the Lithuanian Association of the Deaf.

February, 2016 205

Allocated Actual Implementation MS Project name expenditure expenditure rate Duration Target groups Short description of activities

LU ANELO EUR 0.69 0.69 million 100% 01/01/12 Young people looking for ‘Anelo’ is a trilingual web portal in Luxembourgish, million - 31/12/13 vocational guidance German and French to inform young people about (especially low-skilled) and their educational and / or professional professionals supporting their opportunities. The website provides information labour market integration. (free of charge) on jobs, guidance and support services, opportunities to make a first step in the world of work, practical tips to find a first job, and tools to document achievements and skills.

Note: *for CY, the funding allocated is the revised budget adopted in November 2013. The initial budget was EUR 6.24 million.

February, 2016 206

3.7.5 Effectiveness The outputs and results reported for the Cluster 4 interventions are presented below. As indicated above, the effectiveness of an intervention can be assessed against its own targets or comparable interventions. An assessment against own targets needs to take into account how targets were originally formulated and how appropriate these targets were vis à vis the specific target group and context in which the intervention is operating . In the case of systemic interventions, targets tend to be set very clearly in relation to the scale of the intervention being targeted (beyond actual beneficiary numbers). These therefore tend to be based on experiential values to create similar structures where these exist. However, because the structures being created and their target groups are generally new, no comparator values in terms of effectiveness tend to be available. Table 59 sets out the types of output and result indicators available for interventions in this Cluster. Table 59. Types of output and results indicators for Cluster 4

Output indicators Result indicators Participants Number of participants % of people with disabilities evaluated and entities Number of clients reached Assessed disabled updated for accessibility Number of female clients reached Number of new work places created Number of deaf job seekers supported Number of new enterprises created Number of Educational Priority Zones established or strengthened Number of participants that completed the project Number of participants working on the open labour Share of students covered (%) market Number of centres and support provided Number of participants working elsewhere Individuals served by specific Number of participants working on the open labour provision market Evaluations/Assessments of clients by relevant professionals Number of participants working elsewhere Number of websites consultations per year Number of participants in education Share of participants into education/training or Number of enterprises involved employment six months after participation in the as project partners project Number of trainers/coaches Website hits trained The outputs and results of the interventions are shown in the tables below. It is worth noting that two of the projects reviewed in Cyprus (the Educational Priority Zones and the implementation of a New System of Assessment of Disability and Functionality), as well as Välkky in Finland are ongoing. With the exception of the Implementation of a New System of Assessment of Disability and Functionality (CY) all interventions in this Cluster have achieved or exceeded their output targets, as a result of a higher than expected number of participants.

February, 2016 207

Table 60. Outputs achieved (number of persons/entities supported) against expected, Cluster 4

MS Intervention Actual Expected Achievement outputs outputs against target CY Educational Priority Zones Number of Educational Priority Zones 8 8  100% established or strengthened Number of Information Centres and 4 4  100% psychosocial support will operate as pilots Implementation of a New System of CY Assessment of Disability and Functionality Evaluations/Assessments of disabled by 200 400  50% doctors and other Health and Rehabilitation professionals Establishment of Evaluation Centres / 1 1  100% Service FI Välkky Number of participants 1791 1440  124.4% Number of enterprises involved in the 95 88 project as partners  108.0% FI Välke Number of participants (City of Tampere) 304 250  121.6% Number of participants (TE-office) 732 672 108.9% Towards employment” – development of intermediation services for employing LT individuals with impaired hearing Number of deaf job seekers supported 665 600  110.8% LU ANELO Number of websites consultations per year 13,595 10,000  135%

Note: arrows indicate the following  Over performance (>110%)  Performance between (90%-110%)  Under performance (<90%) N/A indicates that the indicator is not available for the intervention. * indicated that the project is still not completed. For Education Priority Zones (CY), the outputs indicators presented in the table includes some indicators which are described as ‘results’ in the technical fiche for this intervention.

As shown in the table below, it is notable that many of the interventions in Cluster 4 did not set result targets, which may be a function of the more systemic nature of the interventions. Of the interventions setting targets, as many exceeded as underperformed. Performance to or above target was recorded by the ANELO (LU); Towards employment – development of intermediation services for employing individuals with impaired hearing (LT) and Välkky (FI) interventions (in relation to number of work placements created). For ANELO, this was due to a higher than expected number of web

February, 2016 208

hits, whereas for the other two interventions it was linked to stronger than expected performance on employment outcomes or the creation of job placements. Concerning the Lithuanian project, about 450 jobseekers with hearing disabilities have been employed for the first time in Lithuania; an achievement which testifies to the effectiveness of the project, according to project promoters. Table 61. Target versus actual results, Cluster 4 MS Intervention Results Expected Achievement results against target CY Educational Priority Zones Students benefitting from EPZ 8 10  80% Individuals served by information centres 522 1,100  47% Implementation of a New System of CY Assessment of Disability and Functionality % of people with disabilities evaluated N/A 20 N/A Assessed disabled updated for accessibility N/A 100 N/A FI Välkky Number of new work placements 630 600  105.0% Number of new enterprises created 30 50  60.0% FI Välke Number of participants that completed the 214 N/A N/A project (City of Tampere) Number of participants working on the open 206 N/A N/A labour market (City of Tampere) Number of participants working elsewhere (City 14 N/A N/A of Tampere) Number of participants working on the open 96 N/A N/A labour market (TE office) Number of participants working elsewhere (TE 157 N/A N/A office) Number of participants in education (TE office) 19 N/A N/A Towards employment – development of intermediation services for employing LT individuals with impaired hearing Share of participants into education/training or 445 300  148% employment six months after participation in the project. LU ANELO N/A N/A N/A Website hits 13,500 10,000  135%

Note: arrows indicate the following  Over performance (>110%)  Performance between (90%-110%)  Under performance (<90%) N/A indicates that the indicator is not available for the intervention. 3.7.6 The characteristics of participants Information on the characteristics of participants was based on Annex XXIII data made available by Managing Authorities. It should be noted that not all MA were able to provide these data and where they could not be collected centrally, data gathered at the project level are used in the table below. Based on the available information, 17,609 participants benefitted from the six interventions in this Cluster. Unfortunately, gender data are not available for all interventions. For those where this could be provided, participation of men and women was almost equal. Similarly, information on previous labour market status is missing for two interventions. Where available, data show that 57% of

February, 2016 209

participants were previously inactive and 37% were previously unemployed. The share of those classified as ‘vulnerable groups’ was very low. The majority of participants for whom education level information is available had only primary or lower secondary education.

February, 2016 210

Table 62. Participation data by socio-economic characteristics (Annex XXIII data): Cluster 4

CY Educational CY implementation FI Välkky FI Välke LT Towards LU ANELO Total Priority of new system of employment Zones70 assessment of disability

Number of participants 52271 NA 1,791 1,036 665 13,595 17,609

Gender Male NA NA 754 433 325 6,798 8,310

Female NA NA 1,037 603 340 6,797 8,777

Labour Employed NA NA 647 404 0 0 1,051 market status Unemployed NA NA 1,009 619 615 4,078 6,321 Inactive NA NA 135 13 50 9,517 9,715

Age Youngpeople(15-24) NA NA 363 73 199 10,332 10,967

Olderpeople(55-64) NA NA 268 101 38 0 407

Vulnerable Migrants NA NA 47 32 0 0 79 groups Minorities NA NA 0 0 0 0 0

Disabled NA NA 0 0 665 0 665

Others NA NA 342 2 0 0 344

Education Primary or lower NA NA 440 155 280 8,157 9,032 secondary (ISCED1-2)

Upper secondary (ISCED3) NA NA 745 501 293 2,719 4,258

Post-secondary non NA NA 217 52 63 2,719 3,051 tertiary (ISCED4)

Tertiary (ISCED5-6) NA NA 389 328 29 0 746

Notes: Updated data for Cyprus’s interventions was not available.

70 CY MA indicates no Annex XXIII data available; data based on expert report 71 Participants attended by the Information Centres or the Psychosocial Support.

February, 2016 211

3.7.7 Efficiency The tables below provide an overview of the allocated and actual expenditure of projects and the cost per unit for all reviewed interventions. Table 63 provides the costs per output and 64 the costs per result. In the case of systemic interventions, it is not meaningful to seek to calculate an average cost per result, as the nature of the interventions being implemented differs so significantly (ranging from the measurement of individuals support to the Established of an Education Priority Action Zone with all its relevant infrastructure). Consequently, average costs per output vary significantly and are linked to the scale of the undertaking and the specific target set (for the sake of comparability with other clusters, the average cost here is EUR 208,674 with the Cypriot EPZ measure and EUR 3,343 without it). Data from Volume II shows that the average cost per output for all ESI SI and SI+A2E interventions was in the region of €1,500. This lower cost can at least partly be explained by the fact that five of the eight in-depth countries had above average costs per participant. Furthermore, costs for advice and training measures were on average lower and these tend to be more represented among the wider field of SI and SI+A2E measures which were monitored in Volume II. As no comparator information is available, it is not possible to fully assess the efficiency of these activities in the short term. In many cases, the establishment of particular infrastructures (Centres for the assessment of disabled individuals, EPZs, intermediate labour markets) and their effectiveness in terms of support for the integration of disadvantaged groups needs to be proven in the long term. What is being measured here therefore relates to set up costs, which are of course in many cases only meaningful if investment continues in the maintenance of these systems or structures, which is usually the case (see also section on sustainability below). Table 63. : Cost per output (person/entity supported) Cluster 4 interventions

MS Intervention Indicator Cost per Available output comparato r CY Educational Priority Zones Establishment of new 1.03 million n/a EPZs

CY Implementation of a New System of Evaluations of capacity of 9,208 n/a Assessment of Disability and disabled individuals Functionality carried out FI Välkky Persons supported 1,791 euro n/a FI Välke Persons supported 1,036 euro n/a LU Anelo N/A N/A n/a Towards employment – development Person supported 1,338 euro n/a of intermediation services for employing individuals with impaired LT hearing

* indicates that the project is still not completed. Planned and actual units costs have been calculated for the interventions in LT. An objective assessment of the cost-effectiveness of the interventions (i.e. how the costs compare to the results obtained) cannot be provided, for reasons linked to the nature of the interventions: The difficulty of assessing impacts: concerning the ‘Anelo’ website (LU), it is not possible to assess whether the improvements made to the website and increased flows of visitors actually led young people to find a new job or engage in further training. The assessment made by the project promoters is that resources were well allocated and used; however, the cost-effectiveness of the intervention cannot be measured. Similarly, concerning the

February, 2016 212

ZEPs in Cyprus, their impacts in terms of reduction of early school leaving, for instance, have not been measured. The multifaceted nature and complexity of systemic interventions: For instance, the Välkky and Välke interventions in Finland include different strands, activities and sub- projects. Moreover, different forms of support were provided, some of which did not directly target jobseekers and information about results was collected in different ways. As part of the Välkky project, sub-projects have reported their results by using mostly qualitative process indicators. No cost-benefit analysis of outputs and results achieved has been carried out. In the case of the intervention ‘Towards employment – development of intermediation services for employing individuals with impaired hearing’ (LT), the costs of employment of one person with a hearing disability can be estimated at about EUR 2,000, but this indicator may be misleading, as the project also covered additional activities in addition to employment services. The amount of initial set-up costs: For instance, concerning the system of assessment of disability and functionality (CY), the decision was taken in November 2013 to focus on the organisational and preparatory phases. Due to high set-up costs (studies, methodological codification and training) and because a limited number of individual assessments of disabled individuals was carried out, the cost of each assessment appears extremely high. This cost will decrease during the second phase of implementation (in the period 2014-2020). The evaluation of Education Priority Action Zones carried out in 2007 (referring the achievements of the previous period of implementation) and has been used to programming the 2007-2013 intervention. Overall, according to the officials interviewed, the project is considered highly sustainable, as: . The structures and processes that have been established since the beginning of the project until now are staffed by experienced personnel. . The project is delivering high level of results since the beginning of the programming period in 2007. . There has been registered active participation of the students and their parents . There is a great demand for the services provided by the project despite the declining absolute figures in participation of students due to the effects of the crisis as many families of the target group have left the country. In addition, another key shortcoming for all interventions is the lack of counterfactual or suitable comparators (for instance in terms of unit costs), which is not surprising in relation to this type of systemic intervention. In order to be able to assess the result of such activities in future programming periods, a longer view of their impact is therefore required. Further efforts are also necessary to benchmark establishment costs for such activities against similar measures. Table 64. : Cost per result, Cluster 4 interventions

MS Cost per Available Intervention Indicator result comparator individuals served by 15,907 n/a Educational Priority Zones CY information centres Implementation of a New n/a n/a n/a System of Assessment of CY Disability and Functionality % of people with disabilities 46,046 n/a

evaluated Assessed disabled updated for 9,209 n/a

accessibility

February, 2016 213

MS Cost per Available Intervention Indicator result comparator Number of new work 10,139 euro n/a FI Välkky placements Number of new enterprises created 213,917 euro n/a Number of participants that 37,317 euro n/a completed the project (City of FI Välke Tampere) Number of participants working 39,805 euro n/a on the open labour market (City of Tampere) Towards employment – Share of participants into 2,000 euro n/a development of intermediation education/training or services for employing employment six months after individuals with impaired participation in the project. LT hearing LU ANELO Website hits n/a n/a

3.7.8 Sustainability of the supported interventions 3.7.8.1 Sustainability of outcomes for participants The sustainability of outcomes for participants has not been measured in any of the interventions within Cluster 4. This may be linked to gaps in data collection and monitoring systems, either at the intervention level or linked to the monitoring systems in place for all ESF-funded projects. For instance in Lithuania, the ESF Agency only collects information on project participants up to six months after their participation in project activities; information is not collected at a later stage. Some of the interventions are considered to have generated long-lasting positive effects on the social integration of disadvantaged individuals. For instance, as part of the project ‘Towards employment – development of intermediation services for employing individuals with impaired hearing’ (LT), the broadcasting of video clips on TV and press publications may have contributed to building positive attitudes in society towards people with hearing disabilities, and improving the tolerance of the general public. Other interventions generated lasting effects for the organisations involved. According to evaluation evidence, the Välkky project (FI) has inspired innovative practice and contributed to strengthening regional intermediate labour markets, in particular though better co-operation between the TE-offices, the ELY-centre and labour service centres. 3.7.8.2 Continuation of activities For interventions aiming to achieve systemic impact, the sustainability of activities and the mainstreaming of good practice beyond the lifetime of the project are of key importance. Table 65 shows that only one intervention will not continue (due to lack of national funding). One will continue with national funding only, whereas four interventions aim to continue with a mixture of national, local and ESF funding.

February, 2016 214

Table 65. Sustainability of interventions in Cluster 4 beyond the 2007-2013 ESF funding period

Intervention sustained (yes/no) Country/OP Title of intervention with which source of funding

Educational Priority Zones Yes, new ESF funding period CY: OP Employment, Human Capital and Social Cohesion Yes, with national funding; some ESF Implementation of a New System for funding being sought in 2014-2020 to Assessing Disability and Functionality take account of delays and reductions in funding in 2007-2013 period

Välkky Yes, local and national

FI:OP ESF for Continental Yes, ESF, local and national Finland Välke

No, due to lack of national funding LT: Human Resources “Towards employment” – Development OP development of intermediation services for employing individuals with impaired hearing”

LU: ESF OP Yes, with ESF funding for further ANELO development of website

Source: national reports prepared for this ex-post evaluation The Välkky and Välke projects in Finland show high levels of sustainability as they served to pilot a new type of combination of wage-subsided work and labour market training called Toppis-training. In the Välke project in the area of Pirkanmaa surrounding Tampere, a follow-up study was carried out 12 months after completion. The results show that new forms of training combining wage subsidiary and on-the-job-training are efficient measures to support long-term employed and individuals looking for vocational education. Toppis-training can still be funded with national funding from the public employment service. A plan for sustaining the services of the project has been made. Job coaching, one of main services development in Välke, is still being supported by national funding and will be the focus of ESF projects in the Pirkanmaa area in 2014- 2020. Thanks to the sub-projects of Välke, a new job coaching model for individuals with mental health problems was established in Muotialan asuin- ja toimintakeskus (a housing activity centre) and Mielenterveysyhdistys Taimi (a mental health organisation). Similarly, within the Välkky project (FI), certain newly developed experimental approaches have been sustained and present a high potential for replication in other areas. A qualitative method of customer assessment called AHAA (developed in Pori and Rauma labour service centres), combining indicators measuring health and social functioning and ability to work, was piloted with approximately 200 customers. Moreover, there have been study visits from other areas of Finland to explore the AHAA method. It was decided that labour service centres will develop the method further and maintain it after the end of the Välkky project. A model of alternative vocational education for unemployed individuals was also developed as part of a sub-project called Valo. In practice, its users were from

February, 2016 215

disadvantaged groups (including homeless persons or those with a history of substance abuse). The Finnish council of state has allocated funding from the state budget for the further development and dissemination of the model of alternative vocational education. The model has already been adopted in three other towns of Finland. Three of the interventions, in Cyprus and Luxembourg, will be continued and will be co- funded by ESF during the next programming period. The ZEPs (CY) are considered to be an appropriate solution to the problems of school dropout, illiteracy and the rapid increase in the number of foreign-language students at risk of social exclusion. According to the officials interviewed, the rationale for continuing the project is that structures are staffed by experienced personnel, pupils and parents have actively participated, and there is a great demand for the services provided. The Ministry of Education and Culture will continue this intervention and further expand it by covering upper secondary schools (Lykeion) and Technical Schools. Both the MA and the responsible Intermediate Body are committed to plan the next phase of ZEPs under the ESF 2014-2020 period. The development and implementation of the system for the assessment of disability evaluation (CY) will continue in the coming years, as the Cypriot government will continue to support the project financially and administratively. A second phase of the project is expected to take place under the ESF OP for the programming period 2014- 2020 to achieve the outcomes and results initially expected. The Anelo website (LU) is still in use and is already being further developed. A new project Anelo 2 (co-funded by the ESF) is ongoing until 2015 and project Anelo 3 is under development. One of the interventions reviewed, which aimed to foster the employment of deaf people (LT), has been discontinued for the time being due to lack of funding. The centres supporting the activities of job coaches did not receive support beyond the lifetime of the project. Funding for follow-up services was originally foreseen from the Programme for the Social Integration of the Disabled (and other integration programmes for disabled people implemented by the Government of the Republic of Lithuania), but so far no funding has been allocated for this activity. 3.7.9 Gender sensitivity Cluster 4 initiatives on the whole combine systemic activities (system building or improvement, awareness raising, actions against discrimination etc.) with delivery actions. A limited number (e.g. ANELO (LU)) do not deliver any interventions directly to participants and it is therefore only possible to analyse whether the systems being built have a gender dimension in terms of their policy focus or design. The ANELO project involved the building of a web portal providing career guidance and job information, which – on the face of it – services both sexes equally. The two Finnish projects focus on the establishment of intermediate labour market structures which can provide targeted and personalised support to job seekers. The majority of beneficiaries were female, partly because the systemic actions were aimed at workers in public and third sector organisations – sectors and occupations which tend to be female dominated. 56.2% of the 3,207 participants in Cluster 4 activities were women, making this this only cluster with a majority share of female participants (in the three interventions for which data are available).

February, 2016 216

Table 66. Male and female participation in Cluster 4 interventions

Female MS Project name Target groups participants CY Educational Priority Zones Pupils living in deprived areas and their families. n/a

CY Implementation of a New System Disabled people of all ages, types and disabilities as well as the doctors and n/a of Assessment of Disability and physicians involved in the provision of health services, in particular those Functionality relating to the rehabilitation. FI Välkky Service providers in intermediate labour markets, municipalities, employers 882 (57%) and enterprises in need of labour. FI Välke Service providers in intermediate labour markets and long-term unemployed 583 (58.3%) individuals. LT “Towards employment” – Deaf job-seekers; job coaches for the deaf. 340 (51%) development of intermediation services for employing individuals with impaired hearing” LU ANELO Young people looking for vocational guidance (especially low-skilled) and n/a professionals supporting their labour market integration.

February, 2016 217

3.7.10 Community added value of supported interventions For the systemic actions studied under Cluster 4 it is perhaps unsurprising that role effects feature most prominently among the CAV highlighted. This is because these activities are intended to develop or enhance systems which can subsequently shape future delivery. This was a particular feature of the establishment of Education Priority Zones and the Implementation of a New System of Assessment of Disability and Functionality in Cyprus and the creation of a web portal for careers advice (ANELO) in Luxembourg. In Finland, systemic actions were also of particular significance as national reports and European guidelines had pointed to a lack of coherence in intermediate labour market structures. A significant number of projects therefore aimed to create local ‘maps’ of ILMs and better co-operation and co-ordination between such actors. Table 67. The Added Value of ESF in cluster 4

Volume effects  Education Priority Zones (CY): ESF funding contributed significantly to the establishment of EPZ throughout Cyprus  the extent to which the ESF  Implementation of a New System of Assessment of Disability supported actions and Functionality (CY): ESF funding had a significant volume add to existing effect on the development of this new service model for the actions assessment of the work ability of disabled individuals through the establishment of service centres and training for doctors  Välkky (FI): significant volume contribution to the development of intermediate labour market structures  ANELO (LU): extension of guidance service offer to young people across Luxembourg Scope effects  Female migrants: Information – Activation – Integration: the project broadened and targeted the existing integration  the extent to support offer to a specific target group of female migrants which the ESF from Turkey who did not have access to other integration broadens existing offers in the region action  Education Priority Zones (CY): The target group of vulnerable students and their parents would not have been able to draw on other support  Välke (FI): Inclusion of disadvantaged groups in subsidised work  Välkky (FI): extension of support from ILM to unemployed individiuals  “Towards employment” – development of intermediation services for employing individuals with impaired hearing” (LT) – offer of specialist employment services for individuals suffering from hearing impairments Role effects  Education Priority Zones (CY): Role effects have been visible from the previous funding period when EPZs were piloted. This  the extent to funding period saw their extension throughout the country which the ESF supports  Implementation of a New System of Assessment of Disability local/regional and Functionality (CY): The project allowed Cyprus to take on innovations that board various international methodologies and learn from are taken up at these experiences to allow good practice to be mainstreamed national level or  Välke (FI): The intermediate labour market service model is national innovative an approach which has been replicated in different regions as actions that are a result of pilot developments then ‘mainstreamed’  Välkky (FI): Enhancing the effectiveness of ILM organisation with a wider benefit for their activities in the region  ANELO (LU): creation of permanent website which will be

February, 2016 218

sustained and supported with mainstream funding Process effects  ANELO (LU): support for greater co-operation among actors responsible for supporting the transition of young people into  the extent to employment which the ESF action influences the Member State administrations and organisations involved in the programmes

3.7.11 Lessons learnt The Cluster 4 interventions reviewed were perhaps the most disparate of all the Clusters, given their focus on systems change, introducing new or improving existing provision for specific disadvantaged groups, and contributing to capacity building. Consequently disadvantaged groups participated in Cluster 4 interventions either indirectly or through the implementation of the developments supported. a) Policy lessons ESF funding can provide a valuable resource to modernise labour market mechanisms to support the integration of vulnerable groups. Where these activities are large in scale, the Cypriot example shows that such activities can remain hostage to economic cycles, where in a downturn national support for establishment of the assessment system for disabled individuals had to be scaled back. In the case of such systemic interventions, guaranteeing mainstream funding beyond the ESF funding period appears all the more important to ensure that investment is not lost after the set-up period. b) Target groups While the ‘direct’ target groups for the Cluster 4 interventions reviewed were systems actors, the improvements they supported were of relevance to groups including school pupils living in disadvantaged areas, individuals with physical and sensory disabilities, and low-skilled young people. b) Programming In each case the Cluster 4 interventions were developed to respond to specific gaps in provision for individuals facing or at risk of disadvantage – ranging from individuals with hearing impairments to young people at school and at risk of underachievement. c) Implementation A number of key success factors were identified amongst the Cluster 4 interventions. A key success factor in the case of the Anelo website (LU) was the tailoring of the service to the needs and personal situations of low-skilled young people, and adapting the communication methods and language used to appeal to a young audience. This made the website more attractive through the development of new tools for professional guidance, information and support (practical advice, an interactive game, tools for the self-assessment of skills). Strategies supported the objective of turning the website into a reference tool: training was provided to allow professionals working with young people to help them use it; and the site was advertised in publications, via social networks, job and student fairs and in secondary schools. The ZEP intervention contributed to improved educational provision for school pupils living in deprived parts of Cyprus, and identified key success factors as: The effective targeting of their interventions;

February, 2016 219

The provision of specialised services outside schools (information centres, psychosocial support and remedial instruction), and making continuous improvements to the design of the project (for instance, the addition of specific educational activities). The quality of the organisation and management by the Ministry of Education and Culture, building on previous experience in implementing ZEPs during the 2003-2006 period. The implementation body established an integrated internal structure that combined political and technical expertise. Within the Välkky project, the opportunity to deliver training, developed during the project with national funds, was a success factor. A key success factor within the intervention for individuals with impaired hearing (LT) was the role of job coaches involved in liaising with employers to facilitate placement and providing follow-up assistance to help disabled workers integrate in the workplace. The focus on the regional and local level was considered appropriate in the context of the Välkky project (to take into account the diversity of the intermediate labour market in different areas), as well as the good connection between the project manager (ELY-centre) and TE-offices. The implementation of the ‘New System of Assessment of Disability and Functionality’ (CY) was challenging and encountered delays for a variety of reasons. In addition to issues of staff shortage and administrative delays, one of the key challenges so far has been to overcome the reluctance of organisations representing the target group. This reluctance was due to a low awareness of international standard methods used in the new system. In addition, the project started in an unfavourable economic environment and organisations of disabled individuals feared that the new system could ultimately reduce their benefits and financial support. In the programming phase of the ESF 2014-2020, it has been agreed by both the MLSI and the Managing Authority to provide more awareness-raising activities aimed at the target group in order to prevent and overcome this type of reaction. Another key issue that will determine the success or failure of the new system in future years is the recruitment of staff working in the assessment centre. The lessons learnt will inform the next stages of implementation of the system for assessment of disability and functionality in the forthcoming period 2014-2020. Concerning the Välke project (FI), one organisational challenge was linked to the delays for tendering out labour market training and other support services (to be combined with subsided work). A lesson learned was the importance of taking this aspect into account when planning a project; the duration of the project should be long enough to allow sufficient time to implement activities. d) Monitoring and evaluation The experience of the Cluster 4 interventions reviewed suggests that monitoring and evaluation was also an issue for systemic interventions – particularly around evidencing the (indirect) impact on individuals, when emphasis is on the development of organisations and their processes. It was not possible to assess the actual results of some of the Cluster 4 interventions. Furthermore, the sustainability of outcomes for participants has not been measured in any of the interventions within Cluster 4. This may be linked to gaps in data collection and monitoring systems, either at the intervention level or linked to the monitoring systems in place all ESF-funded projects. For instance in Lithuania, the ESF Agency only collects information on project participants up to six months after their participation in project activities. Within the Välkky project, no follow-up of unemployed clients took place; a lesson learnt is that qualitative indicators for follow- up and evaluation of projects aiming to systemic change have to be developed.

February, 2016 220

4 Cross-cluster analysis An analysis across clusters is presented here in terms of financial implementation rates, outputs and results achieved, their sustainability, the make-up of participant groups, gender sensitivity and CAV. 4.1 Financial implementation rates Financial implementation rates for in-depth interventions varied significantly, between 27% to over 100%72, with an average rate of 88%73. Figure 5 shows the average financial implementation rates by cluster. Figure 5. The average financial implementation rate across the clusters (%)74

92 91 90 90 88.5 88

86 85.3

84 83.5

78 Cluster 1 Supporting Cluster 2a Advice, Cluster 2b Direct Cluster 3 Holistic Cluster 4 Systemic guidance, training employment

Source: Own calculations based on Managing Authority data When comparing the different clusters, the interventions in cluster 1 (supporting measures) had the lowest financial implementation rates (83.5% on average), while cluster 3 (holistic interventions) had the highest at 91%. In some cases lower than expected financial implementation rates were linked to projects not being fully completed, and while low implementation rates could not always be explained, a series of additional influencing factors were identified. These included: . Longer than anticipated project preparatory/start-up phases, leading to delayed implementation and expenditure. Such factors were identified amongst the cluster 1 and cluster 3 projects reviewed, and were in some cases caused by the need to develop the appropriate partnership relationships, and operational processes, for example around referrals; . Difficulties in engaging and recruiting intended target groups were identified across all the clusters, and - while confined to the initial implementation stages for most - had resulted in continued under-performance for others. In addition, some interventions commented on challenges with the referral of clients from other agencies in the early part of their projects which could lead to lower than expected implementation rates. Such difficulties underlined the importance of previous experience of working with particularly disengaged groups, and the important role that can be played by outreach services and local partnerships/networks.

72 In some cases additional resources were made available, so some implementation rates were over 100%. This excludes one outlier of a project in the Netherlands with an intervention rate of below 6%. 73This excludes outliers. 74 The financial implementation rate for Cluster 2a excludes outliers.

February, 2016 221

. Lack of demand for the provision offered – for example one cluster 2a project providing training in the financial services sector found demand for their services dropped due to the financial crisis, with reduced participation influencing their financial implementation rate (27%). . Less commonly, misunderstandings about what could be funded with ESF - which in the case of one cluster 2a intervention - resulted in an implementation rate of just 5.6%. In some cases lower financial implementation rates resulted from not all project expenditure proving to be reimbursable – for example one cluster 2b project working with young people with learning disabilities exceeded its participation targets but achieved a financial implementation rate of just 64%. Both examples illustrated the importance of providers and intermediaries having a clear understanding of the requirements for financial claims under ESF, and of communications with Managing Authorities so any misunderstandings can be avoided or rectified rapidly. These challenges suggest the importance of the wider support infrastructure for disadvantaged groups, and the availability of the comprehensive range of services required to address the many and complex needs of this target group. Where not in place, this may suggest the need for ESF investment in this area to ensure the breadth of necessary services are available. 4.2 Participation A total of 161,758 participants took part in the 58 interventions studied in- depth, and representing around 3% of the estimated number of individuals benefiting from ESF investments in SI. As Figure 6 shows, the number of participants varied significantly by cluster, from just under 17,300 in cluster 4 to over 58,000 in cluster 2a. Figure 6. The number of participants in selected in-depth interventions by cluster (total numbers)

60000 58038

50000

40000 35,989 32620 30000 17812 20000 17,299

10000

0 Cluster 1 Cluster 2a Cluster 2b Cluster 3 Cluster 4

Source: own calculation based on Managing Authority and intervention data Figure 7 shows the distribution of participants in the in-depth interventions by cluster and labour market status. As the figure shows, the majority of participants in the selected interventions were unemployed (61%, of which 10% were LTU), with 26% being inactive and with 2% being previously employed75. This breakdown differs from the estimate for participation in all SI activities, where a smaller share of participants were unemployed (52%), more were inactive (32%) and more were previously employed (16%).

75 Note that these calculates of percentage shares by labour market status only take account those participants for whom this information was available, e.g. 112,371 of participants.

February, 2016 222

Figure 7. Profile of participants by cluster and labour market status (total numbers)

42023 40000

35000

30000

25000

20000

15000 11940 10249 9717 10000 6762 6321 5666 4990 3327 3674 5000 1315 1339 178111359 1049 856 248 494 1051 0 Cluster 1 Cluster 2a Cluster 2b Cluster 3 Cluster 4

Employed Unemployed Of which LTU Inactive

Source: own calculation based on Annex XXIII data from Managing Authorities and intervention data (where Annex XXIII data are not available by individual intervention, e.g. Cyprus and the Netherlands where only aggregate data are available, and Northern Ireland and England where data could not be provided for the study deadline). It is interesting to note that a considerably larger share of participants were previously unemployed than inactive. This can be explained in relation to the significant differences between clusters of activity – for example participants in Clusters 1 (supporting), 3 (holistic) and 4 (systemic) activities were more likely to be previously inactive, whereas participants in clusters and measures targeting those closer to the labour market (and particularly cluster 2b) are dominated by those previously unemployed. In addition, some countries supported programmes and interventions targeted individuals who, while still facing disadvantage, were closer to the labour market and more likely to achieve successful integration. Figure 8 below shows the distribution of participants in the in-depth interventions by educational attainment for each cluster. Here the distribution of participants differed from the profile of participants across the 27 Member States, with attainment at ISCED level 2-3 being the most commonly identified (39%, and notably amongst cluster 2b, direct employment, interventions), followed by ISCED level 1-2 (34%) and ISCED level 5-6 (14%). While the differences in the educational attainment of participants in the in-depth interventions are attributed to the sample effect, the data indicates that ESF SI investment was focussed, particularly for cluster 1 (supporting) and cluster 3 (holistic) but also for cluster 4 (systemic) interventions on participants at the lower end of the education scale.

February, 2016 223

Figure 8. The profile of participants by educational attainment level by cluster (total numbers)

20000 19706 18000 16000 14000 12000 10000 9147 8517 9032 8000 5683 6000 4446 4258 3538 3415 4000 3451 3051 1599 1575 774 1023 746 2000 601 35 119 252 0 Cluster 1 Supporting Cluster 2a Advice, Cluster 2b Direct Cluster 3 Holistic Cluster 4 Systemic guidance, training employment

ISCED 1-2 ISCED 3 ISCED 4 ISCED 5-6

16000 15119

14000

12000

10000

8000 5572 6000 5374

4000 2702 1909 2000 887 728 665 304 71 283135 50 109 289107 407 79 0 344 0 Cluster 1 Cluster 2a Cluster 2b Cluster 3 Cluster 4

Migrants Minorities Disabled Other

February, 2016 224

some of the countries where, according to the EU aggregate data, migrants, minorities, disabled individuals and other disadvantaged groups are more represented (e.g. Austria, the Netherlands and Cyprus). 4.2.1.1 Participation by gender The gender breakdown of participants also varies between clusters for the interventions reviewed in depth, as shown in Figure 10 below. Across the selected interventions a higher proportion of men participated than women (54% and 46% respectively)76. The most notable difference between the share of male and female participants (with men predominating) could be found in Cluster 3, followed by Cluster 2a. Given the almost equal share of ESF SI participants by gender overall, these differences are likely to be attributable to the target groups of the specific interventions selected (e.g. the number targeting groups where men predominate, such as offenders and ex-offenders; individuals with certain disabilities etc.77). Figure 10. The gender breakdown of participants in in-depth interventions by cluster

60000 51364 50000 45583

40000 3529034393

30000 20012 20000 10484 8310 8777 10000 3612 3400 0 Cluster 1 Supporting Cluster 2a Advice, Cluster 2b Direct Cluster 3 Holistic Cluster 4 Systemic guidance, training employment

Male participants Female participants

Source: own calculation based on Managing Authority and intervention data The most notable difference between the share of male and female participants was found in Cluster 3 (where 66% of participants were male and 34% female), followed by Cluster 2a (53% male and 47% female). After Cluster 3, female participation was greatest in Cluster 1 and 2b interventions (48% and 49% respectively). The female participation rate slightly exceeded that for males in Cluster 4, where females represented 51% of all participants. The high representation in systemic interventions is partly due to the fact that a significant number of the participants in activities are staff of public administrations or NGOs, where there is a predominance of female employees. The relatively low representation of women among Cluster 2a interventions (i.e. those featuring advice, counselling and training activities) and Cluster 3 (holistic interventions) is perhaps surprising. This may be a function of the specific interventions reviewed, and not necessarily representative of participation by gender across the cluster groups more widely (e.g. some interventions were only aimed at women). Although one intervention had only male participants, this was an unintended outcome resulting from the specificities of the sector targeted, in this case

76 A detailed gender breakdown was not available for all interventions, so this calculation is based on partial data. 77 Within the scope of this study it was not possible to allocate SI interventions in all EU countries to specific clusters.

February, 2016 225

metalworking. However the low representation of women in cluster 2a is surprising given that women have similar guidance and support needs to men. Lower participation in cluster 3 is perhaps less surprising - women may be more inclined to access mainstream services and had greater job opportunities (increase in part-time, lower skilled work, earlier recovery in the service sector), while men may be more likely to experience a complex set of interrelated issues may have been more prevalent, especially in relation the decline in manufacturing occupations. The decline in certain sectors and the more immediate impact of the crisis on such sectors could be one factor in explaining more significant training needs among male participants. Additional quantitative data would be required to ascertain if the under-representation of women is characteristic of these types of support measures. However examples of interventions reviewed with single gender target groups included: . Cluster 1 - the Female Sex Worker Pilot project (England, working with female prisoners involved in the sex industry to prepare for their release and reintegration into society), and Female Migrants: Information – Activation (AT) which targeted female migrants of Turkish origin. . Cluster 2a - Developing skills and qualifications for women (RO) – which provided short training courses in sewing for women in rural areas, including providing sewing machines on completion. . Cluster 3 - Production school (AT) – targeting unemployed women aged 15-19 to support their transition towards the labour market. A calculation of average cost per participant for all interventions shows that, on average, interventions where women are more significantly represented have a higher cost per participant. However, due to the limited number of interventions studied for which all relevant data are available, no broader conclusions can be drawn from this. It is notable that, despite the increased emphasis on gender mainstreaming considerations in this programming period78, very few project promoters could provide a meaningful gender sensitivity assessment of their intervention. Despite the fact that some OPs had provided gender sensitive assessments and guidance had been provided on gender sensitive project planning, many promoters argued that either ‘gender was not a consideration’ or that the activity was ‘gender neutral’. Although gender breakdowns for participant and result data should, in principle, be provided, very few interventions have provided this information for results data, making an assessment of effectiveness on the basis of gender almost impossible. 4.3 Outputs and results - the in-depth interventions 4.3.1 Outputs against target As the previous section described, 161,758 individuals participated in the 58 interventions reviewed. As Figure 11 below shows, when looking at the total number of targeted participants in each cluster, the performance of the in-depth interventions in terms of participation was strong with average output performance of 107% of target in all clusters. However, this was largely the result of some interventions significantly exceeding their output targets. When looking instead at the share of interventions which met or exceeded their output targets, the picture is different, as by this metric an average 76% of interventions in all clusters reached their output targets.

78 The ESF Regulation in item 16 of its preamble states that a "[…] gender mainstreaming approach should be combined with specific action to increase the sustainable participation and progress of women in employment […]”.

February, 2016 226

Figure 11. Share of targeted outputs reached in each cluster versus share of interventions in each cluster reaching their output targets (%)

83 Cluster 4 105 93 Cluster 3 107 88 Cluster 2b 116 85 Cluster 2a 116 33 Cluster 1 91

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Share of interventions reaching their output targets Average share of targeted beneficiaries reached based on total participants targeted in each cluster

Note on sample size: Cluster 1: output targets N=6, Cluster 2a: output targets N=19; Cluster 2b: output targets N=8; Cluster 3: output targets N=14; Cluster 4: output targets N=6 Source: ICF based on available data provided by Managing Authorities. Consequently, a number of interventions were able to support a greater number of individuals from the groups targeted, commonly without any additions to their allocated budgets. Albeit a positive feature in itself, this higher number of participants is likely to have been triggered by an increase in demand resulting from the crisis. No indication was given by project promoters as to whether this meant a less intensive level of support per participant than had been intended. 4.3.2 Results for the in-depth interventions The analysis of results achieved by the in-depth interventions also considered performance against results targets, were these were set79. This analysis assumes that the targets set were realistic and achievable, and does not consider potential flaws in the target setting methodology (such as targets being set too high or too low). Figure 12 summarises the performance of the interventions by cluster in terms of the achievement of their output and results targets.

79 NB 14 of the interventions did not have results targets.

February, 2016 227

Figure 12The proportion of meeting or exceeding result targets by cluster (%)

90 80 80

70 63 60 60 56 50 40 30 20 20 10 0 Cluster 1 Cluster 2a Cluster 2b Cluster 3 Cluster 4

Note on sample size: Cluster 1: results targets N=5; Cluster 2a: results targets N=15; Cluster 2b: results targets N=6; Cluster 3: results targets N=11; Cluster 4: results targets N=4 Source: own calculation from Managing Authority and intervention data Drawing on the findings by cluster, it appears that cluster 1 interventions overall performed poorly in terms of achievement against target, with four of the seven selected projects not achieving their result targets. This could partly be attributed to the lower than expected financial implementation rates for this cluster. If targets are set realistically, performance should, in principle, not be related to the fact that achieving employment results tend to be more challenging for cluster 1 participants, which included some of the disadvantaged groups at the greatest distance from the labour market. Nevertheless the nature of the cluster 1 target groups was seen as influential: several project promoters remarked that the crisis had made it more challenging to integrate the most disadvantaged groups into the labour market, and the emphasis on ‘hard’ (and the limited consideration of ‘soft’) results can also paint a negative picture of achievements for cluster 1 participants. Project promoters also commented that they were not always aware of the range and severity of the disadvantages facing participants on recruitment, which often only emerged over time (to an extent inevitable as not all details of participants were known from the outset). The challenges in achieving outcomes for the cluster 1 target groups were recognised in several Member States, for example Austria, where a deliberate decision was taken not to set employment targets for the most vulnerable participants as this was considered counterproductive (potentially discouraging individuals from participating, or leading to creaming and gaming by project promoters). The only cluster 1 interventions setting employment targets were in the UK, highlighting the emphasis placed by ESF programming (and national ALMP) on employment outcomes, even for the most challenging target groups. Conversely, the cluster 3 and cluster 2b measures were the most likely to outperform expectations in terms of results, for both employment and training targets, although performance between targets varied within the same intervention (e.g. some achieved training, but not employment targets, and vice versa). The analysis mainly focussed on result targets linked to the achievement of employment outcomes and participants achieving qualifications, although other, more detailed indicators were used in some cases.

February, 2016 228

. The positive performance of measures in cluster 3 could be attributed to the suitability of the holistic/pathways approach for vulnerable target groups, which take account of the complexity of the challenges faced and address them as part of a continuum of provision moving participants towards training or employment. . The performance of cluster 2b actions was influenced by the fact that employment creation was central to these measures, for example via subsidies or the creation of sheltered employment. In addition participants in the cluster 2b interventions providing job subsidies in particular were arguably closer to the labour market, with the interventions themselves aiming to produce more tangible employment or training outcomes. In the context of the economic downturn, the employment results immediately and at the six month point (available for four measures) are particularly encouraging. Performance amongst the cluster 2a interventions was more varied. Nine of the 16 projects setting results targets for which results data was available achieved at least one employment, qualification or ‘other positive result’ target. Five projects significantly exceeded their employment and qualifications targets - four of the eight Romanian and one of the four Dutch projects – in two cases achieving over 500% of target. However in the absence of further information on how these particular targets were set, it is difficult to assess whether due to the level of ambition of the original targets or otherwise. However, considering that the pattern of interventions exceeding their targets varies across the clusters (and countries studied), it is not possible to highlight any anomalies beyond the fact that Dutch and Romanian projects were somewhat over-represented among those interventions that exceeded their result targets. The outputs and results targets set for the six cluster 4 interventions reflected their systemic focus. All interventions set targets for outputs, for example the development of new centres/services and new assessment approaches, were met or exceeded in all but one case. Not all set results targets, with four setting specific targets for participant results, which in some cases related more closely to participation/output measures (e.g. numbers of individuals participating in the new services developed, website hits). Three interventions provided data on participant results against target, which showed mixed results - one showing a smaller number of participants in new provision than expected, the second where new work placement take-up exceeded expectation, and the third where training and employment opportunities secured and sustained for six months by hearing impaired participants exceeded target by over 50%). Overall, achievement of results targets in terms of entry to employment, qualifications gained and other positive outcomes achieved can be summarised as follows for interventions in clusters 1, 2a, 2b and 3 (result indicators available are less relevant for cluster 4/systemic interventions). Across the 58 interventions, results data showed that an average of: . 42% of participants80 achieved employment outcomes immediately after their participation in the intervention – equating to 67,609 individuals; . 8% obtained a qualification – some 12,689 individuals; and . 26% achieved another positive outcome – some 42,164 individuals81.

80 MAs measure participations rather than participants, which could mean that some individuals participate several times. However, this number should be considered limited and here the nomenclature ‘participants’ is used throughout. 81 It should be noted that one participant could achieve several different results.

February, 2016 229

Over 70% of participants therefore achieved a result which moved them closer to the labour market. When looking at these figures it is important to bear in mind that some individuals, potentially a significant number, may achieve two or even three results. For example, in a pathway approach, the individual might demonstrate increased confidence which could be counted as a ‘positive outcome’ and then might go on to achieve a qualification and ultimately enter a job. Figure 13 shows the average share of participants achieving results by cluster. Figure 13. Results achieved by ESF SI interventions assessed in depth (% of participants)

60 53 50 48 50 47

40 31 30 27 23 20 12 9 10 7 6 3 0.5 0.1 0 Cluster 1 Cluster 2a Cluster 2b Cluster 3 Cluster 4

Average share of participants achieving employment results Average share of participants achieving qualifications Average share of participants achieving other positive outcomes

Source: ICF based on available data provided by Managing Authorities. As the figure shows: . The highest share of employment results for participants was achieved in cluster 2b, followed, by cluster 2a (53% and 31% respectively). This could be explained by the fact that participants in these clusters, while still facing disadvantage, are likely to be closer to the labour market than those in clusters 1 or 3 (preparatory or holistic) actions. Furthermore, cluster 2b activities were specifically intended to achieve direct employment outcomes, e.g. through support for subsidised work. . The share of participants achieving qualifications was highest in cluster 2a (50%), as would be expected given the cluster’s focus on guidance, counselling and training actions. Training was also a component in many of the cluster 1 and 3 interventions, with 23% and 7% of participants respectively achieving qualifications. . The share of participants achieving other positive outcomes was greatest in clusters 2a (48%) and 3 (47%). The results on the share of positive outcomes are more challenging to interpret because of the breadth of positive results included under this definition (which can also include training/employment outcomes measured jointly as results). Considering the results achieved by target group, the following picture emerges: Disadvantaged young people/those in the NEET group were among the core target groups in the in-depth interventions assessed. They were mainly targeted with cluster 1 and cluster 2a type activities, which arguably reflect the main labour market and individual challenges they face. The available data showed that 23% of

February, 2016 230

disadvantaged young people participating achieved employment outcomes, and 27% obtained qualifications, as a result of their interventions. Disadvantaged long-term unemployed (LTU) participants accounted for a significant share of participants in the interventions reviewed, focusing mainly on guidance, counselling and training activities (cluster 2a) and job subsidies (cluster 2b – and specifically in Lithuania). This reflects the common requirement to upgrade skills to support employability. Among this target group, an average of 30% of participants entered employment and 53% achieved qualifications as a result of the intervention. Activities to support disabled individuals fell across all clusters, including systemic actions, emphasising the complexity of the individual and societal challenges relating to their labour market integration. An average of 28% of participants in this target group achieved employment outcomes. Migrants and minorities were mainly targeted with cluster 1 and cluster 2a interventions, consisting primarily of language and cultural training and advice, guidance and vocational skills training. Around 23% and 27% of migrants achieved employment and qualification results respectively (specific targets for minorities could only be found the project in Romania targeting Roma – here 17% of participants achieved a qualification). Participants classified in ‘other disadvantaged groups’ included those in a range of circumstances and facing both single and multiple disadvantage. For example, the complex reintegration issues facing offenders and ex-offenders where addressed with holistic/cluster 3 actions (leading to employment outcomes for 14% of participants). Cluster 3 actions also resulted in labour market integration (measured at the end of the intervention, this is therefore not a measure of sustainability) for 36% of participants from vulnerable groups suffering mixed disadvantages. 4.3.3 Performance relating to soft indicators Around 25% of the interventions reviewed indicated that soft results had been investigated, although not all could provide quantified data. Examples of soft results secured are summarised below.

Soft results reported by the in-depth interventions Soft results reported amongst the interventions reviewed in-depth included: The Potensial project (UK, Wales) reported that 42% of participants secured ‘other positive results’, which their evaluation report found to be most commonly raised aspirations, improved confidence and heightened motivation. As the project partners followed different approaches to collecting soft results data, their findings could not be compared across the project. Consequently the project evaluation used a survey to identify how the project had ‘changed participants’ lives’, against a set of codes including confidence, aspiration and motivation; social skills for training/work; and job search skills. The female sex worker pilot (UK) used the National Offender Management Service CATS IT system to collect data on soft results through baseline and follow-up consultations. In addition to improvements in confidence, self-esteem and resilience, almost half (49%) the participants also achieved improved employability outcomes (such as CV preparation) and 30% received outcomes for completing mock interview training and developing interview skills. The evaluation of Project Valtaväylä (FI) explored the wider social effects of the intervention, including soft results acquisition at three points in time, and found that the majority of participants saw their health and general welfare improve due to their involvement in the project. This included reduced alcohol consumption, greater use of health provision and the detection of untreated health problems.

February, 2016 231

Specific ‘survey’ approaches, often as part of project evaluation studies, included: The Support for skills acquisition intervention (LT), which found that 45% of participants considered their “participation in the project improved their attitude and self-confidence”, and that 56% felt it helped them to acquire ‘workplace skills’ required for work in a specific organisation. The Valiflex project (LU) explored soft results through a survey of participants, which found that 36% felt involvement had improved their personal lives (beyond employment), with 36% also indicating that they felt more confident in their jobs. Survey work for the evaluation of three strands of the 'Improvement of Employment Possibilities' intervention (LT) found that: over half the participants in the Support for Temporary Employment strand felt they had been encouraged to continue training and actively search for work; 40% in the Subsidised Employment strand considered participation had "inspired them to improve qualifications or to retrain"; and 82% of Job Rotation participants felt their self-confidence had improved, and 85% indicated that "participation in the project encouraged them to actively look for a job".

4.4 Cost per output Table 67 below shows the number of outputs achieved per cluster, actual expenditure per cluster and the cost per output per cluster. The cost per output/participant varied between the selected interventions and clusters, ranging between €996 per output in Cluster 2b and €1,715 per output for cluster 3. Second highest in terms of average cost were systemic interventions, which could be seen to be linked to the more infrastructural nature of these measures (often requiring significant up- front investment). Advice, guidance and training measures were associated with the second lowest average costs. Table 68. Comparison of costs per outputs across the clusters

Number of Actual expenditure Cost per output cluster of cluster (A/B) in € intervention interventions (B) outputs (A) in € Clusters

Cluster 1 Supporting 17812 23,470,762 1,318

Cluster 2a Advice, guidance and training 58038 58,248,506 1,004

Cluster 2b Direct employment 32620 31,525,443 996

Cluster 3 Holistic 35989 61,703,704 1,715

Cluster 4 Systemic 17299 26,310,000 1,521

Average cost 1,310

Source: ICF analysis of OP monitoring data. Outputs are defined as output indicators used in the interventions, the actual expenditure refers to the expenditure paid out to beneficiaries at the date available (mostly end 2013). Table 68 provides some additional information on the ranges of costs per output in different clusters and the types of interventions funded. The average cost per output was lowest in cluster 2b and highest in cluster 3. This is understandable as cluster 2b initiatives generally dealt with individuals closer to the labour market, whereas holistic actions offered the greatest breadth of targeted activities. Within each cluster, the

February, 2016 232

range of costs was significant, depending on the precise measure offered for different target groups. Table 69. Comparison of costs per outputs across the clusters

Average cost per Clusters Range of costs by intervention, EUR output, EUR

192 for language training programme to 11,960 Cluster 1 Supporting 1,318 for intensive support programme for particularly vulnerable young people.

Cluster 2a Advice, 315 for vocational counselling service for Roma, guidance and 1,004 to 33,048 for a programme of innovative training activities to improve labour market integration.

284 for a temporary employment project, to Cluster 2b Direct 996 14,712 for a grant scheme to facilitate access to employment employment for people with disabilities.

423 for a group of projects implementing employment and social activation policy, to Cluster 3 Holistic 1,715 30,000 to provide transition support between school and work.

The systems nature of interventions meant one project was excluded from the assessment. In Cluster 4 Systemic 1,521 its absence costs ranged from 1,036 to 9,208 for individuals supported.

Source: ICF analysis of OP monitoring data. Outputs are defined as output indicators used in the interventions (mostly participants, but also products), the actual expenditure refers to the expenditure paid out to beneficiaries at the date available (mostly end 2013). Cluster 3 is not considered in this analysis due to the lack of data on intervention activities focussing specifically on early education. 4.5 Cost per result Table 69 provides the cost per result for the interventions reviewed in-depth, by cluster and for employment, qualification and ‘other positive’ results, as well as an overall calculation for all results. These figures should be assessed with caution as one individuals could achieve several results (e.g. qualifications and employment, etc.). It should be noted that the data do not include other results, which could not be classified under the other three result categories, which may be relevant in the establishment of ‘soft’ results. Data on the cost per result was not available for all the selected interventions – in some cases because result indicators were not defined, in others data was not available for the indicators selected, and some data were excluded due to the nature of the result indicators used (which in some cases more closely resembled output indicators). Consequently the available information on the costs per achieved result is partial and should be treated with caution. Table 70. Comparison of costs per results across the clusters

Consolidated results Number of Actual Cost per indicators cluster expenditure result intervention of cluster results interventions Cluster 1  Average cost per 75 6,243,000 83,240 Supporting employment result  Average cost per 5108 23,249,875 qualification gained 4,552  Average cost per 1606 14,500,000 9028

February, 2016 233

Consolidated results Number of Actual Cost per indicators cluster expenditure result intervention of cluster results interventions positive outcome

 Average cost per result 6789 20,992,875 3,092 Cluster 2a  Average cost per 36,683,764 Advice, employment result 31003 1,183 guidance and  Average cost per 20,339,511 training qualification gained 5269 3,860  Average cost per 27,202,150 positive outcome 24714 1,100  Average cost per result 60986 84,225,425 1,381 Cluster 2b  Average cost per 29,427,802 Direct employment result 32237 912 employmen t  Average cost per 1,297,641 qualification gained 170 7,633  Average cost per 1,153,593 positive outcome 12 96,132  Average cost per result 32419 31,879,036 983 Cluster 3  Average cost per 41,694,968 Holistic employment result 3873 10,754  Average cost per 22,201,367 qualification gained 2223 9,987  Average cost per 41,311,176 positive outcome 15229 2,713  Average cost per result 21325 105,207,511 4,934 Cluster 4  Average cost per 8,200,000 Systemic employment result 473 17,336  Average cost per n/a qualification gained n/a n/a  Average cost per 890,000 positive outcome 1102 807  Average cost per result 1575 9,090,000 5,771 Average  cost across all clusters 3,176

Source: ICF analysis of OP monitoring data. Results are defined as result indicators used in the interventions, the actual expenditure refers to the expenditure paid out to beneficiaries at the date available (mostly end 2013). As the table shows costs per employment or positive outcome were highest among systemic activities (cluster 4), which is understandable as these actions primarily relate to infrastructure investments which generally tend to demonstrate their benefits over time following significant up-front investment. Second highest costs per result can be found in cluster 3, where individuals with the greatest distance to the labour market tend to be served with holistic actions aimed at labour market integration. Direct employment activities had the lowest costs per result achieved, which can be attributed to the fact that participants in this cluster are already closer to the labour market. Cost per employment results achieved are highest in cluster 1, which does not strictly aim at immediate labour market integration. Costs per

February, 2016 234

employment results achieved are understandably lowest in cluster 2b, which brings together actions aimed at achieving employment outcomes, among participations with somewhat greater proximity to the labour market. Comparing the costs of results between the in-depth interventions and the estimates across the Member States shows that the interventions reviewed had somewhat higher costs than the ‘Member State average’ per result achieved. 4.6 Analysis of in-depth interventions by convergence, competitiveness and multi-objectives The analysis of the ESF SI investment interventions was also undertaken in relation to them representing OPs from the objectives of Convergence, Regional competitiveness and Multi-objective OPs. The following key dimensions were covered in the analysis: . Analysis of thematic objectives, . Analysis of activities, . Analysis of target groups, and . Analysis of the effectiveness. The 14 OPs in eight in-depth countries were spread across three ESF objectives, with half of the OPs analysed in-depth being from Convergence objective regions (see Figure 14). Figure 14. Type of OP analysed

Regional Competitiveness Convergence Multi-objective National OP Austria Burgenland OP (AT) National OP (England and Gibraltar) National OP Cyprus Lithuania HRD OP National OP (mainland) Finland Romania SOP HRD National OP Luxembourg Highlands and Islands (UK) National OP Netherlands West Wales and the Valleys (UK) Lowlands and Uplands Scotland (UK) Northern Ireland (UK) East Wales (UK) Among regional competitiveness OPs, 34% of interventions fall into cluster 3, with 28% being in cluster 2a, whereas among convergence OPs 45% of interventions fall into cluster 2a (and 23% into cluster 3). There was only one multi-objective OP among the in-depth country sample and here, 2 of the 4 interventions were in cluster 3. Table 71. Number of interventions classified within clusters per objective

Cluster Regional Convergence Multi-objective Totals Competitiveness (6 OPs) (1 OP) (7 OPs) Cluster 1 – 3 (9%) 3 (14%) 1 (25%) 7 supporting and enabling actions Cluster 2a – 9 (28%) 10 (45%) 1 (25%) 20 Advice, guidance and training Cluster 2b – 4 (13%) 3 (14%) 7 Actions with employment as an output

February, 2016 235

Cluster 3 – Holistic 11 (34%) 5 (23%) 2 (50%) 18 actions Cluster 4 Systemic 5 (16) 1 (4%) 6 actions Totals 32 22 4 58 As a wide range of target groups was served by many of the in-depth projects studied, with no specific patterns discernible between objectives in terms of target groups being addressed. Financial implementation rates were high across all clusters, with no clear or telling differences between objectives. Table 72. Financial implementation of clusters per objectives in selected interventions (average)

Cluster Regional Competitiveness Convergence Multi-objective (1 OP) (7 OPs) (6 OPs) Cluster 1 – supporting 84% 88% and enabling actions Cluster 2a – Advice, 70.5% 87% 98% guidance and training Cluster 2b – Actions 89% 89% with employment as an output Cluster 3 – Holistic 88% 95% 100% actions Cluster 4 Systemic 86% 100% actions Similarly, no clear patterns emerge when looking at the effectiveness of activities implemented by OPs under different objectives in terms of results. Result indicators in the table below are not divided by cluster, as there are too few indicators by cluster for a meaningful analysis at this level. Table 73. Key results achieved in interventions implemented under different objectives

Regional Convergence (6 OPs) Multi-objective Competitiveness (1 OP) (7 OPs) Employment results 29% 35% 17.5% (averages) Qualification results 44% 35% 34% (averages) Other positive results 50% 59% 49% (averages) 4.7 Sustainability of interventions aimed at individuals In the case of the sustainability of results for individuals, no pre-determined time horizon was set, but where data is monitored it tends to measure the sustainability of employment 6 or 12 months after leaving the intervention. However, available data at the intervention level was limited and in many cases qualitative comment was made. Although ESF leaver surveys were conducted in some cases

February, 2016 236

(these were mainly identified in the UK), they rarely allowed responses to be disaggregated at the project level. A number of the interventions showed how the continued monitoring of participants following completion of their interventions could help sustain any employment or learning outcomes achieved. By keeping in touch, staff were able to intervene if participants were facing challenges which risked them losing their job or learning/training position. However even where these practices were in place, their findings on effectiveness were not always consolidated and reported – missing an opportunity to provide useful data to evidence the effectiveness of follow-up and continued support and so inform service delivery. As a consequence of the above, the ability of the study to provide comment on the sustainability of results for participants on a quantitative basis is limited. This was a weakness in most of the interventions across the in-depth study nations and the OPs. In a small number of cases post-intervention data was collected as part of routine monitoring procedures, most commonly taking place six months post-participation but up to two years in Cyprus. However, data was only available for eight of the in-depth interventions, as shown in Table 73 below. Table 74. Sustained Results – In-depth Interventions

Cluster MS Intervention Share of results sustained 2a LT Vocational training (Project ‘Improvement of employment possibilities’ – vocational, skills acquisition and subsidised employment elements In employment 6 months post intervention 54.5% LU Valiflex Share of participants in employment, new training or 72-73% who found a job three months after programme RO Improving the access of youngsters in detention to vocational training and Labour market integration, ID 4127 Share of persons in employment 6 months post 24% intervention 2b CY Grant Scheme for Facilitating Access to Employment for People with Disabilities Percentage of participants remaining in employment 70% two years after grant Grant Scheme for Facilitating Access to Employment for Vulnerable Groups Percentage of participants remaining in employment Over 60% two years after grant 3 LT Labour market integration of psychotropic substance addicts treated in VšĮ Meikštų dvaras In employment 6 months post intervention 28% UK Outer Hebrides Employability Support Programme, Comhairle nan Eilean Siar Number of participants in employment 6 months 19% after leaving 4 LT Towards employment – development of

February, 2016 237

Cluster MS Intervention Share of results sustained intermediation services for the employment of individuals with impaired hearing Share of participants into education/training or 67% employment six months after participation in the project. Source: ICF analysis The eight interventions are distributed across Clusters 2a, 2b, 3 and 4, and show a wide variation in the share of results sustained. While the majority focus primarily on employment, or education and training, results, they vary considerably in terms of achievements – from over 70% sustained at 6 months to below 20%. This must, however, be seen in the context of the specific intervention target groups, the socio-economic settings in which they were set, and the extent to which employment or education / training results were likely to be achieved, let alone sustained, by their participants. Amongst the 58 interventions reviewed, a range of more ad hoc approaches to collecting follow-up data were identified, examples of which are provided below. In other cases the sustainability of results for individuals was explored in the intervention evaluation reports where these were available. The scale of coverage varied between reports, ranging from surveys of former participants to more qualitative approaches. More complex impact evaluation exercises were also found. In Lithuania, for the 2a interventions reviewed, a counterfactual approach was used to establish their net impact on participants' employment, days worked and incomes. The evaluation found that participation had contributed to an increase in incomes and other positive benefits over time; and that access to measures such as skills acquisition, vocational training and job rotation had led to employment outcomes being sustained for longer. In a few cases interventions describe their intention to include follow-up activities in subsequent ESF-funded activities – in some cases having been convinced of their value after an ad hoc exercise. Other interventions also described the intention to introduce more active follow-up with their participants following completion. However this was balanced by an understanding of the additional resources this would require, and unless it was a formal requirement of the ESF monitoring regime, and adequately resourced, it was not clear if these ambitions would be taken forward. 4.8 Sustainability of interventions after ESF support The evaluation also explored the extent to which the interventions reviewed had either been sustained following the end of their ESF funding, or were planning to be sustained once they closed. In many cases any continuation was seen to rely on securing funding under the 2014-2020 ESF programme, although for others their activities were continuing with local or national funding. The study also reviewed the extent to which the interventions had influenced policy and practice through their implementation – i.e. where components of their approaches had been mainstreamed into national provision, or where they had influenced partnership arrangements locally or nationally. The vast majority of the interventions reviewed, across each of the Clusters, were optimistic about their potential for sustainability, considering that in their view the approaches were worthy of continuation. While data was not available for five interventions, activities either had an agreement in place or were planned to be sustained for all but 11 of the interventions reviewed – suggesting a potential sustainability rate of over 80%. Their progress towards this ambition varied. In some cases where projects had completed, a degree of continuation had been

February, 2016 238

achieved. In others plans for sustainability were advanced in order to continue their activities, with a couple still deciding how they would continue their activities. For the majority of interventions the scale and nature of what will be continued was reliant on successful applications for the 2014-2020 ESF programme – 28 of the 42 projects actually or planning to sustain their activities (67%) referred to the ESF as an important element of any future funding arrangements. Indeed several of the interventions were already receiving ‘top-up’ ESF funding to extend delivery into 2015, in order to ensure continuity between the two programme periods. However ESF was often seen as one part of a combination of funds which also included local, regional and/or national contributions. Figure 15 shows the expected funding sources for the interventions sustaining/planning to sustain their activities, including eight where ESF support was combined with alternative sources of funding. Similarly, where ESF support was not being sought or expected, a combination of national, local or regional sources were reported. This applied to the remaining 14 projects intending to continue their activities, and in some cases indicated where activities had been mainstreamed and supported under national budgets. The interventions sustained in Austria were particularly strong in this regard, with six of the seven interventions reviewed being sustained, in each case through combinations of national and regional funding. Figure 15. Funding sources to support sustainability – in-depth interventions sustained / planning to continue activities

3 ESF only (incl Youth Guarantee) 2 Local/regional funding 3 National funding

3 20 National and local/regional

Combination ESF and national 4 funding Combination ESF and local/regional funding Combination ESF, national and 7 local funding

However, not all of the interventions expected to be sustained following the end of ESF funding - for example where demand for their provision had reduced, or approaches were found not to be effective. For example, two interventions targeting migrants found demand for their services was limited (although in both cases their providers considered that valuable lessons and experience had been gained). An intervention training jobseekers for the childcare sector was not continued as the government were considering a wider approach to training in this sector. An additional project introduced to support individuals at particular risk of redundancy and labour market exclusion, was no longer required as a response to the crisis. Elsewhere an absence of national match funding, and a local reorganisation of the provider base, meant that activities would not be continued.

February, 2016 239

In some cases providers’ interventions were based upon previous ‘tried and tested’ approaches to working with their specific disadvantaged target groups, which had operated for some time and were supported from a range of funding sources (including under multiple previous ESF programmes). In these cases ESF offered a valued and valuable source of funding allowing them to extend their coverage and expand the numbers of participants engaged. In several cases such interventions were continuing post-ESF funding with finances from different local and national sources, although several described that they were struggling to maintain a similar level of provision in the absence of ESF (and in a climate of reduced public funding). The clearest route to sustainability was where interventions had secured national, regional or local funding or had entered mainstream provision. For example the Meikštų Dvaras intervention (LT) assured their sustainability through inclusion in the National Programme on Drug Control and Prevention of Drug Addiction 2010–2016, which guaranteed their continuation until 2016. In addition, the provider was granted additional ESF support for a new service, based on learning from delivery. Elsewhere providers described receiving funds from local and central government (e.g. in Austria and in Finland) to both continue their activities and help embed them within local and national support infrastructures. For the majority of the interventions ESF represented the sole or important contributor to future funding arrangements. The reasons for this reliance were not always clear: . In some cases, ESF formed a valuable part of wider funding arrangements, which could be used to extend the scale and coverage of the intervention; . In others, ESF funding was cited as the only available support for the intervention – without which the intervention would not have existed (or be continued); and . For a few there was an ongoing expectation that ESF support would continue to be available as a core funding component. Planning for the new 2014-2020 programme was at different stages with the providers consulted - ranging from broad ambitions to submitting a bid to cases where planning was at an advanced stage. For example, the Potensial intervention in Wales was working with their MA to develop a national bid built upon their experience of delivery; and in Finland plans to sustain the Välke project and the model of training developed (combining wage subsidies and labour market training) are ongoing. The timing of the interviews with the intervention providers meant that the majority with intentions to continue were at least considering applications for the 2014-2020 programme. 4.9 Community Added Value Table 74 provides a summary of the key areas of Community added value by cluster across the 58 in-depth interventions. Table 75. Summary of added value across the clusters

Cluster No. No. interventions with added value effects: interventions in cluster Volume Scope Role Process effects effects effects effects

Cluster 1: Supporting . 5 . 4 . 3 . 1 actions . 7 Cluster 2a: Advice, . 7 guidance, counselling and . 21 . 10 . 7 . 4 training Cluster 2b: Employment . 2 8 . 5 . 3 . -- creation . . 3 Cluster 3: Holistic actions . 16 . 11 . 9 . 5

February, 2016 240

Cluster No. No. interventions with added value effects: interventions in cluster Volume Scope Role Process effects effects effects effects . 1 Cluster 4: Systemic actions . 6 . 4 . 5 . 5 . 14 Total . 58 . 35 . 28 . 17 Source: ICF analysis of OP monitoring data. Volume effects emerged as the most clearly identifiable added value effects, followed by scope effects (28 cases), role effects (17 cases) and process effects (14 cases). While volume effects were the most commonly identified added value effect for all but one cluster, the ranking of the scope, role and process effects was more variable. For cluster 4, systemic actions, scope and role effects were identified more commonly than volume effects, as befits the focus of their activities. Cluster 3 (holistic actions) commonly displayed scope effects, while cluster 2a interventions commonly displayed both scope and process effects. 4.9.1 Volume effects (the extent to which ESF supported actions add to existing actions) As described above, volume aspects were the most clearly identifiable among the SI interventions, by providing Member States with the ability to significantly add to existing actions, supporting a greater number of individuals who would otherwise not have been helped. Overall, across all countries, total certified ESF public expenditure amounted to €7.1 billion for OPs with dedicated SI PAs (17% of total ESF expenditure) and €11.1 billion when estimates for OPs without dedicated SI PAs are included. Across the EU-27 Member States, based on the number of participants funded under discrete SI priority axes and wider estimates, around 8.7 million participations in interventions were supported with ESF SI funding. It is therefore evident that ESF funding allowed additional individuals to be supported, who would otherwise not have been helped to progress towards and into the labour market. This is particularly important in countries were ESF expenditure makes up a significant part of ALMP funding for this target group (see section 3.2). 4.9.2 Scope effects (the extent to which the ESF broadens existing action) The scope effects of ESF social inclusion actions revolve around the ability to offer more tailored services to specific target groups, which would otherwise not have access to service, or would only have access to mainstream services (e.g. counselling, training) which are not tailored to their specific, and often more intensive, needs. As Table 75 shows, scope effects were identified in over half of the cluster 3 (holistic) and 1 (supporting) interventions, and five of the six cluster 4 (systemic) interventions. Target groups reached across the interventions included: . Female migrants; . Female sex workers; . Young people leaving the care system; . Individuals with suspended (incomplete) qualifications in the health care sector; . Recipients of social assistance; . Special needs pupils; . Young people in the NEET group facing particular integration challenges;

February, 2016 241

. Disabled individuals; . Migrants; . Minorities (including Roma); . Individuals with substance abuse issues; and . Homeless people. While mainstream activities may have been available, ESF support frequently and significantly allowed for tailored early intervention and holistic approaches as well as training and counselling offers which recognised the specific additional barriers individuals faced to labour market entry. In principle, this tailored support made successful outcomes more likely. The table below summarises the key scope effects identified by interventions in different clusters. Table 76. Key scope effects in different clusters

Cluster Scope effects in interventions in different clusters Cluster 1  Development of tailored provision for specific sub-groups of individuals Supporting actions to support their progress towards participation in ALMPs or the labour market, filling a recognised gap in provision (e.g. language training

measures for migrants; dealing with the specific re-integration challenges of female sex workers including dealing with addictions and other dependencies; targeted services for young people leaving the care system dealing with social problems and motivation issues, e.g. UK, AT, RO, LT, NL) Cluster 2a Advice,  Delivery of tailored advice, guidance and training to specific target guidance, groups; such as assisting the school to work transition of disabled counselling and young people; combining vocational with language training for training migrants; offering skills recognition and delivery of training to migrants with partial qualification in the health care sector; delivery of targeted

training to young people and LTU in a skill where a shortage has been identified (e.g. lifeguards in RO); and the delivery of outreach activities combined with personal support and training. Cluster 2b  Delivery of employment subsidy provisions for groups of individuals Employment who did not previously have access to such support (e.g. disabled creation individuals, e.g. LT, CY, RO). Cluster 3 Holistic  Development of holistic tailored approaches for target groups who actions would otherwise struggle to access mainstream provision and require support from a variety of agencies (e.g. migrants, homeless individuals; young people NEET, individuals with substance abuse issues etc, e.g. UK, LT, RO, AT, NL). Cluster 4 Systemic  Development of intermediate labour markets; development of tailored actions support services for specific groups of disabled individuals (e.g. those with hearing impairments etc.; e.g. CY, LT, RO). 4.9.3 Role effects Role effects were identified less commonly, and were visible in projects which developed support or activities which acted as a model for other local provision and/or were subsequently mainstreamed. Consequently they were most commonly identified amongst the cluster 4 (systemic) interventions. Effects included: . The adoption of a cross-sectoral approach for support for young people continued under the new funding period; . The implementation of pilot projects later mainstreamed in an organisation or across organisations;

February, 2016 242

. The development of a model approach for supporting the transition of young people into employment (initially trialled for disabled young people and later mainstreamed for all at risk young people of school leaving age); . Development and wider implementation of a key worker approach; . Trialling and wider implementation of peer mentoring; and . Demonstrating the importance of mapping and supporting intermediate labour market actors. Some of the actions were implemented in response to Country Specific Recommendations, were trialled and now find wider application across a Member State (e.g. strengthening intermediate labour markets in Finland). Another successful systemic approach was the implementation of Education Priority Action Zones in Cyprus. Table 77. Key role effects in different clusters

Cluster Process effects in interventions in different clusters Cluster 1  Development of similar early support services to allow individuals to Supporting actions participate in ALMP measures either through ESF, national or regional funding (e.g. RO) Cluster 2a Advice,  Extension of tailored advice, guidance and counselling services with guidance, national funding for all vulnerable young people using the model counselling and developed for disabled young people with ESF funding (AT); extension training of specific counselling and training centres for disadvantaged LTU in other municipalities and use of similar approaches under the youth

guarantee (e.g. RO); further development and application of the key worker approach (UK). Cluster 2b  No specific role effects have been highlighted in relation to the Employment interventions studied under this cluster creation Cluster 3 Holistic  Replication of ‘second chance’ school approach (e.g. AT); further actions development of innovative elements such as use of peer mentors (e.g. UK) and early support for rehabilitation to certain target groups (e.g. UK); further development of tailored holistic approaches across intermediate labour market agencies (e.g. FI) Cluster 4 Systemic  Development of zones of specific educational support in disadvantaged actions areas (e.g. CY); continuation of development of system of and centres for assessment of disabled individuals and their ability to work (e.g.

CY); development of system of mapping and interlinking intermediate labour markets (e.g. FI); development of vocational guidance website for young people (e.g. LU) 4.9.4 Process effects Process effects are mainly the establishment of successful partnerships at local level to assist certain target groups. This included co-operation between various public sector actors, as well as between the public sector, the private sector and NGOs. Such co-operation is often necessary to achieve the holistic approach required to assist those furthest from the labour market. The establishment of such partnerships was referred to by most projects and formed a significant success factor. The table below summarises the process effects demonstrated by the different interventions assessed in different clusters. Table 78. Key process effects in different clusters

Cluster Process effects in interventions in different clusters Cluster 1  Continuation of partnerships to offer preparatory support (in all in- Supporting actions depth countries)

February, 2016 243

Cluster 2a Advice,  Fostering of greater co-operation between PES, other actors and guidance, employers’ and trade union organisations (e.g. LU, RO); improved counselling and partnerships between PES and NGOs (e.g. LU, FI): Increased training partnership activities between municipalities and with trade unions.  Enhanced collaboration between labour market actors at local level in the delivery of guidance and training (all in-depth countries) Cluster 2b  Improvement of processes and partnerships to support transitions into Employment work through better co-operation between actors (e.g. NL, RO) creation Cluster 3 Holistic  ’Service chains’ to ensure rehabilitation have been picked up for actions further development in the new ESF funding period (e.g. FI); development of the phasing model for intermediate labour markets (e.g. FI). Development of partnerships for more holistic delivery between local labour market actors (in all in-depth countries). Cluster 4 Systemic  Support for greater co-operation among actors responsible for actions supporting the transition of young people into employment and greater development of structures (e.g. LU, FI) Thus, in conclusion, volume effects provided the dominant CAV for SI actions, adding significantly to the capacity of Member States to support disadvantaged individuals, particularly in the context of the crisis. Cluster 4 (systemic) activities in particular also played an important role in some countries (e.g. CY, FI) to enhance the overall capacity of labour market actors. The scope effects of the interventions allowed Member States to provide more targeted measures for particular groups who would otherwise only have had access to mainstream provisions, which might not have been suitable for their needs and would therefore have been less likely to lead to positive outcomes.

February, 2016 244

HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS

Free publications:  one copy: via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu);  more than one copy or posters/maps: from the European Union’s representations (http://ec.europa.eu/represent_en.htm); from the delegations in non-EU countries (http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/index_en.htm); by contacting the Europe Direct service (http://europa.eu/europedirect/index_en.htm) or calling 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (freephone number from anywhere in the EU) (*).

(*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). Priced publications:  via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu).

Priced subscriptions:  via one of the sales agents of the Publications Office of the European Union (http://publications.europa.eu/others/agents/index_en.htm).

( KE

volume 3) volume

- 02

- 16

213

- EN

- N

doi:10.2767/777290