1. Presentation ESF Evaluation Partnership on 15 June 2012
An on-going evaluation of ESF programs for the support of low-skilled workers and reintegration of people with great distance to the labour market in the Netherlands
Presentation ESF Evaluation Partnership on 15 June 2012

2. Background
Research targets
Research design
Research results a. analysis of the problem b. reasons for failure and success c. forecasts d. recommendations
Follow up

3. Background
Reason : signals from monitoring of non realisation of targets
Action A: support entrance labour market for people with great distance to the labour market
3 groups: elderly unemployed (<55), partially disabled unemployed, unemployed without social benefits
Budget: euro
Subsidy Applicants: Municipalities
Action D: support low skilled workers
Budget: euro
Subsidy Applicants: Education & development funds for economical sectors

4. Research targets Overview of results up till now
A forecast if targets will be reached
Analysis of causes why some targets are not met and others are met?
Recommendations

5. Research design fase fasefase methods Context analyses deskresearchs
(policy)documents, interviews stakeholders
context interviews
OOverview results
Overview results
Quantitative
datacollection
document and data-analyses
Qualititative analyses
In depth interviews
Explanations
Extrapolation results to
Estimate of output, results, impact
Forecasts

6. Analysis of the problem
Output indicators (number of participants) are met, but result indicators (finished trajects, sustainable jobs and necessary education levels) are only partially met.
Action A : entrance to labour market of people far from labour market
The subsidy applications stays behind the budget
The declared subsidy stays behind the granted subsidy
Action D: support low skilled workers
The demand exceeded the budget
The declared subsidy stays behind the granted subsidy
Paid subsidy versus granted subsidy
Action A Action D

7. Reasons of failure and success
Action A entrance labour market of people with great distance
reasons of failure
low amount of applications
municipalities had enough budget for reintegration
the minimum subsidy for each group was to high for small municipalities
the negative image of ESF: high administrative burden with high risks
low results
groups are difficult to reach
subsidy applications too high in order minimize risk for municipalities
esf-project ends while re-integration goes on reasons of success ESF makes it possible to enlarge projects (more participants), to enrich projects (lower caseload) , to try out new methods in existing projects

8. Reasons of failure and success
Action D support of low skilled workers
Reasons of failure low results: projects are a success but funds cannot fulfil the administrative regulations
Reasons of success - high amount of applications - experience with esf procedures
temporary law of part-time unemployment.

9. Forecast indicator expected score target Output
A. Participants action A
28.380
D. Participants action D
Results
A. Completed re-integration traject
88%
75%
A. Accepting jobs
14% 8%
D. Completed education traject
87%
85-90 %
D. Number of participants on suitable education level
10%

10. Recommendations Improve
Improve communications and relation with subsidy applications
Set more importance to qualitative criteria and results of the past
Promote experience with ESF
Diminish risks for applicants

11. Follow up
More applications for action A - more information to municipalities - allow other applicants (national office , education and development funds)
additional periods for applications - simplification of the applications rules (lower minimum subsidy and for all tree groups together)
Higher realisations action A and D - support in administrative procedures
when determine budget take in to account that not all granted subsidy will in the end be paid.