Case studies

Design

Material from employer and staff interviews was analysed to identify modes of job retention practice to study in greater depth. Proposals to the Departments were refined into three small-scale studies.

The three studies investigated joint working to promote job retention with:

• human resources staff and trade union representatives in public sector organisations in two pilot areas;

• general practice staff - in two pilot areas; and • a psychiatric hospital.

The studies were designed to:

• describe ways of working to achieve those aims and examine their fit with other actors’ practices and client preferences;

• explore perspectives on effectiveness; and

• identify factors and contexts influencing effective joint working and successful outcomes for clients and employers.

2.7.4 Recruitment and fieldwork

Plans for local in-depth studies were outlined to the relevant Pilot Managers and their approval was obtained. The three case studies were progressed in four phases:

i. fact-finding telephone interviews with managers and/or staff to establish the current position and key contacts for each study;

ii. telephone interviews with a lead player in each study;

iii. telephone interviews with other organisational players identified; and iv. telephone interviews with employees identified in the preceding interviews. For stages ii and iii in case studies one and three an advance letter seeking an interview was followed up by telephone by the researcher (letters were individually tailored; an example is shown in 2.7.5). In case study two, General Practice respondents were

identified in two ways. In pilot area A, staff from Primary Care Groups selected 14 General Practices believed likely to co-operate with the study and sent letters addressed to the practice manager on behalf of the researcher. The researcher then followed up by telephone. In addition, the researcher contacted directly the one GP known to have had contact with the Personal Adviser Service. In pilot area B, the chair of the local association of practice managers dispatched letters with reply slips to selected members. As no replies were received, the researcher also wrote directly to general practice addresses taken from a directory, and followed up by telephone. (An example of a General Practice letter is in 2.7.5).

For stage iv the public sector organisations in case study one dispatched to employees a letter from the researcher explaining the study and inviting them to return a reply slip to the researcher if they wished to be interviewed (see 2.7.5). No attempt was made to interview patients in case study two. In case study three the intention that the Personal Adviser Service dispatch letters to prospective clients inviting them to participate in the research was not carried through because of the ill-health of the clients at the time.

Table 3 Case study interviews achieved

Case 1 Case 2 Case 3

2 PAS staff 2 PAS staff 2 PAS staff

5 personnel staff 1 PCG executive 2 professional staff

3 employees 3 GPs

Interviews ranged in length from 15 to 50 minutes. Most interviews were tape recorded with respondents’ permission and transcribed verbatim. For some short interviews comprehensive notes were taken.

Topics covered with organisational players:

Topic guides were tailored for each organisation and role and aimed to cover: • organisational provision for job retention;

• key issues;

• how and why they became involved in the job retention initiative;

• what they hoped to achieve and any doubts or concerns about involvement; • details of their role in the initiative;

• experience and views on working with the Personal Adviser Service;

• benefits of being involved with the Personal Adviser Service, any tensions or difficulties; • evaluation of Personal Adviser Service staff, service components and ways of working; • effectiveness of the job retention initiative; and

• expectations for the future.

Topics covered with practice managers and GPs

Practice managers and GPs had no direct experience of the pilots projects’ job retention activities. Interviews covered:

Promotion of the service

• knowledge of the Personal Adviser Service and sources of information (if aware); • receptiveness to information about the pilot service;

• views on appropriate ways of informing practice staff about New Deal for Disabled People job retention activities;

• views on ways of promoting the service to patients; and • obstacles to promoting the service to staff and patients; Job retention advice to patients

• perception of need for advice;

• advisory/advocacy role of GP or other practice staff; • obstacles to patients’ return to work;

• awareness/use of employment services; • GPs’ expertise for job retention; and

• potential for involvement of Personal Adviser Service

Topics covered with clients

• situation prior to contact and contributory factors;

• attitudes to return to work and perceptions of barriers and support needed; • role of workplace actors in enabling or inhibiting the desired outcome - personnel manager, line manager, occupational health, trade union; • role of external actors, if any;

• acceptability of the Personal Adviser Service intervention, and how it came about; • evaluation of any service components experienced (financial advice, in-work benefits;

retraining; job restructuring; adjustments; work experience, redeployment, negotiation, counselling);

• problems arising, resolved and outstanding; •

Heslington, York YO10 5DD Telephone (01904) 433608 Facsimile (01904) 433618 Telephone (01904) 432626 (Voice or Text) E-mail. [email protected] Website: http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/spru/ Dear

The Social Policy Research Unit is part of a consortium of independent research organisations carrying out an evaluation of the New Deal for Disabled People Personal Adviser Service pilot projects. The research evaluation has been commissioned by the Department of Social Security and the Department for Education and Employment. A summary of our interim research report published by the Department of Social Security is enclosed for your information.

As you know, part of the remit of the Personal Adviser Service is to offer job retention support to employees and employers where there is a risk of job loss for reasons related to ill-health or disability. This is in addition to providing advice and support for return to work to individuals who receive social security benefits on grounds of incapacity for work. The job retention activities of the 12 pilot projects constitute one component of the research evaluation.

Your name has been given to me by the Manager of the [pilot area] New Deal for Disabled People Personal Adviser Service, who has been interviewed as part of the evaluation. [Name] told me of the work you are developing with the Personal Adviser Service. I am writing to you now to tell you about the study we are carrying out of the pilot projects’ job retention activities and to ask for your participation.

So far, we have carried out in-depth interviews with 36 pilot project staff and 60 representatives of employing organisations. Different operational models have been identified and we are now carrying out a number of small-scale in-depth studies. One of those studies focuses on how pilot projects are working with local authority human resources departments to support the return to work of employees on sickness absence. The learning from this and other elements of our evaluation will be taken forward by DSS, DfEE and the Department of Health into the Job Retention Pilots, announced in the March Budget and due to start in 2001.

I hope that this background is informative and that you will consent to taking part in this small-scale study. As a first step, I would very much appreciate an initial telephone interview. This would take no longer than 45 minutes, cover the following topics: - local authority provision for job retention and key issues

- history of involvement with the Personal Adviser Service - how the job retention working arrangement was initiated

- what you are hoping to achieve in and expect to contribute to the joint initiative - expected benefits, and any anticipated problems, of the joint working arrangements - details of involvement and assessment of progress to date

- any impact on policies and practices - expectations for the future.

During that conversation, I would like to explore with you the possibility of involving other key players in the evaluation. For example, I might talk to colleagues who have been involved with the Personal Adviser Service on a day-to-day basis. The Departments are very keen to get the employee perspective also and I would wish to explore the option of my conducting one-to-one interviews with a small number of employees assisted by the Personal Adviser Service.

Our study of how pilot projects are working with local authority human resources

departments is being carried out with staff in more than one pilot area. Neither area nor participants will be identified in our final full evaluation report to DSS and DfEE to be published in the first quarter of next year.

If I may, I will telephone in the next few days to answer any further questions you might have and to discuss interview arrangements.

Yours sincerely

Patricia Thornton Senior Research Fellow

SOCIAL POLICY RESEARCH UNIT

Heslington, York YO10 5DD

Telephone (01904) 433608 Facsimile (01904) 433618 Telephone (01904) 432626 (Voice or Text) E-mail. [email protected] Website: http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/spru/

I am writing to ask for your help with our research evaluation of the New Deal for Disabled People Personal Adviser Service, a government initiative piloted in twelve areas including [pilot name]. The independent evaluation has been commissioned by the Department of Social Security and the Department for Education and Employment.

Part of the remit of the Personal Adviser Service is to support employees, and their employers, where there is a risk of job loss for reasons related to ill-health or disability. I am responsible for this component of the evaluation. So far, we have carried out in-depth interviews with 36 pilot project staff and 60 employers. We are now carrying out some in- depth studies of different approaches taken by the Personal Adviser Service projects. One of these small studies is examining how pilot projects are working with primary health care professionals in giving advice on return to the workplace. We have selected general practices in two pilot project areas for inclusion in the study. I hope that, with your help, a GP in your general practice will agree to take part in a telephone interview of no more than 20 minutes. (Alternatively, your practice may wish to nominate a staff member such as a Practice Manager.)

The main topics for discussion in the interview are:

• practice-based advice to patients who experience difficulties in their job or in returning to work.

• scope for involvement of specialist employment services to support the clinical management of the patient’s condition

• potential for joint working between employment services, such as the Personal Adviser Service, and GP practices.

The learning from this and other elements of our evaluation will be taken forward by the Department for Education and Employment and the Department Social Security, with the Department of Health, in the Job Retention Pilot Projects, due to start in 2001.

Please note that neither the area nor the participants will be identified in our final evaluation report to be published in the Spring.

I will telephone you in the next few days to answer any questions you may have and to arrange a time for the telephone interview. Many thanks for your attention.

Yours sincerely

Patricia Thornton Senior Research Fellow