In-work services

Views about features of effective practice

The managers and staff interviewed often stressed the importance of maintaining contact with clients once they were in work and of providing support, and linked this with the success of their service. Some saw well organised and fully resourced in- work provision, which was made a high priority in staff’s work, as a reason for the success of their own service. A key learning point for some was that the early period in work could be a critical one, and that being proactive in initiating regular contact at this stage was important. Job Brokers who worked within supported employment models also talked about the importance of engaging employers in in-work support. Other Job Brokers were more self-critical, acknowledging that they did not make in- work support a priority or that they had not really developed this aspect of the service yet.

Some Jobcentre Plus staff, as noted in Chapter 6, saw whether or not a Job Broker provided clear in-work support as an important distinction. Although in-work support was critical in a few cases, clients generally did not see it as a particularly key aspect of provision. However, as noted in Chapter 5, this reflects to some extent, their limited association of Job Brokers with in-work issues rather than the absence of support needs.

Analysis across the performance groups

These issues were examined in relation to the four performance groups, focusing on sustainability rates rather than on job entry rates. It is important to note here that sustainability rates relate to applications for sustained work payments, which need to be accompanied by evidence of a sustained job. They, therefore, reflect the ability of the Job Broker to gather the required evidence, as well as the extent to which clients remained in work.

All the Job Brokers who were providing a more proactive or extensive service – involving regular and standardised contact, personal contact rather than just by letter, contact initiated by the adviser rather than just in response to the client, and generally a broad awareness of the types of problems that clients face in work – were

achieving high or medium sustainability rates. Some of these Job Brokers involved administrative staff, or designated adviser staff, in making contact with clients and thought this had helped to free up time for this aspect of the service. None of those achieving low sustainability rates described this proactive or standardised approach to in-work support.

However, there were some Job Brokers who had high sustainability rates but who appeared not to place much emphasis on in-work support, did not have standardised procedures and talked about it being difficult to make time to maintain contact with clients once they had started work. It may be that the quality of job matching here explains their high sustainability rates. It is also important to note, as mentioned earlier, that the numbers of people in sustained jobs was very low for some Job Brokers and the distinctions drawn between the groups inevitably crude. The picture is mixed, but there is some evidence that suggests that more proactive, tightly managed and resourced services are linked with higher sustainability rates. Again, there is likely to be a circular dynamic here. A Job Broker service which is more effective at maintaining contact with clients in work is in a better position to provide the support which might be important to sustaining work. But it also increases the likelihood of the Job Broker obtaining the evidence required for sustained job payments, irrespective of whether in-work support was needed, and, thus, securing more funding for service development.

7.5

Conclusion

In describing the approach taken to exploring effectiveness, this chapter has highlighted that the findings should be treated with caution and, without further research, are not necessarily generalisable more widely. However, the findings suggest that there is no single ‘type’ or set of ‘types’ of effective Job Broker, nor a single aspect of the service which is central to performance. Among the most effective Job Brokers are Jobcentre Plus services, large national voluntary organisations, and regional and local voluntary and private organisations. Some provide particularly in-depth services to clients with more severe and enduring impairments. At the other end of the spectrum are those which describe a more commercial or business- like approach, a narrower range of services, and a stronger focus on clients who are closer to work. In between are Job Brokers of varying sizes who are less focused on closer to work groups and who provide a wider range of services with less focus on immediate labour market barriers.

Rather than pointing to a single model, then, the analysis highlights a range of practices and ways of organising the Job Broker service which appear to be more effective across different organisational contexts.

In terms of the wider organisational setting of Job Brokers, the findings suggest that high performance may be helped by strong organisational support for the Job Broker service, with the service being seen as a central part and natural extension of the organisation’s activities. Having existing resources and expertise which provide

a foundation and support for the Job Broker service also appears to be important: more effective performers were able to draw on other internal provision such as training and job search resources, and on more intensive programmes of support that could be used to prepare clients for NDDP. The findings also suggest that considered planning and design and strong management of the Job Broker service, with a more involved manager of the service and with active use of management information, is associated with success. This does not necessarily mean more targeting of registrations or a narrower range of services: it was not the case that the higher performers are those which focus their work on closer to work groups. In terms of financial support for the Job Broker contract, there was some concentration of better-funded contracts among those with highest performance, although there were also Job Brokers who appeared to be very effective with lower payment contracts. The more effective services also generally described themselves as broadly self-funding or generating surpluses.

In terms of the structure of staffing, the findings suggest that effectiveness is linked with staff either working on the Job Broker contract alone, or not differentiating between the Job Broker contract and their other work. The highest performers were also less likely to have staff working in specialised roles within the Job Broker team. They either used generic staffing patterns (so that an individual worked with a client throughout their contact with the service), or, in one case, a core adviser worked with each client throughout their contact drawing on specialist staff to complement their own role. Although it is difficult to assess it in-depth, team working and strong team support appear also to be associated with success.

The more effective Job Brokers appear to have an outward facing approach with proactive marketing, good links with other external services, and strong relationships with Jobcentre Plus. However, they do not generally place particular emphasis on proactive development of relationships with employers and instead see client-led approaches to employers as more effective or appropriate.

A range of different types of services were found across the performance groups. However, the lowest performing group of Job Brokers tended to focus on more immediate labour market issues, with less emphasis on in-house training, funding for external training, confidence and other personal barriers, and in-depth vocational guidance. The findings also suggest that effectiveness is associated with a more proactive, intensive and tightly managed approach to maintaining contact with clients in work. Finally, a more proactive approach to in-work support and a wider range of types of help were associated with higher rates of sustained work.

8 Conclusions and implications

for policy

8.1

Introduction

The purpose of this final chapter is to review the findings from the second wave of the qualitative element of the evaluation of the NDDP national extension, and to consider how these, with findings from the first wave of work, might inform policy thinking about the future development of the programme.

The chapter is organised initially to address two core questions: Firstly, (Section 8.3) what works for clients in helping them move towards work, into work, and staying in work? The answer to this will help understanding of the types of help and services that are important, and how they are delivered. Secondly (in Section 8.4), is an exploration of what contributes to making a Job Broker ‘effective’, intended to develop understanding of the types of internal organisation and practices, contractual and funding arrangements, and external relationships that contribute to moving people towards and into work.

The way in which NDDP is delivered, via outcome-funded external organisations, has implications for what the Department can and cannot do to achieve the Government’s policy aims of helping increasing numbers of recipients of incapacity benefits into work. In the course of this chapter, some findings suggest the possibility of policy changes where the Department can take a principal lead. Hence, the sections following the ‘core’ questions outlined above consider two ways in which the Department can influence Job Broker performance: improving relationships between Jobcentre Plus and Job Brokers (Section 8.5), and outcome targets and funding (Section 8.6). Other changes that could enhance the delivery of NDDP, such as improvements in the internal organisation and management of Job Broker organisations, are not within the direct control of the Department though they could be actively promoted, for example, through its contract management arrangements.

Before considering ‘what works’ for incapacity benefits claimants, it is useful to consider two important issues concerning the place of NDDP within the context of employment policies and provision for disabled people, and the changing organisational context of the Department and Jobcentre Plus. These are tackled in Section 8.2.