1. Employment Research Institute 1 Employability and Disadvantaged Parents: the Case of Working for Families Ronald McQuaid, Vanesa Fuertes, Sue Bond Employment Research Institute, Napier University, Edinburgh UK Paper presented at the ERSA Conference, Liverpool August - September 2008

2. Employment Research Institute 2 Structure of the presentation Background of Working for Families Fund (WFF) Aims of WFF Delivery Model Methodology for the evaluation Results Conclusions

3. Employment Research Institute 3 Background - policy issues “Closing the Opportunity Gap” – eliminating child poverty by 2020 23% of Scottish children in poor households (UK ranked 22 nd of EU25 on child poverty in 2005) Link between worklessness and poverty (lone parents especially vulnerable to worklessness) UK: aim of 70% lone parents in work (57% in 2005); high levels of general employment (72% in 2005) 1998 – National Childcare Strategy Childcare: access and cost key barriers to work Childcare Subsidy

4. Employment Research Institute 4 ‘Holistic’ approaches to employability Scottish Government definition of employability: “The combination of factors and processes which enable people to progress towards employment, stay in employment, and ‘move on’ in the workplace”. McQuaid and Lindsay (2005): Employability defined by: Individual factors – literacy, health, skills, confidence Personal circumstances – caring roles, household circumstances (‘chaotic lifestyle’), debt, social capital External factors – jobs, transport, benefits, services

5. Employment Research Institute 5 Approach of WFF Key worker model – a single worker contact to engage and support parents through providing and signposting mentoring, advice, counselling, etc. Help both inactive and those in work (breaking the low pay-no pay cycle) In rural areas, support also provided to combat the barriers created by poor transport, limited services and the lack of a critical mass of clients Referral by various means: Public Employment Service and other agencies, informal reputation- building and ‘word of mouth’

6. Employment Research Institute 6 Numbers of New Clients Registered by Month to 31 December 2008 Total: 25,508 clients

7. Employment Research Institute 7 Type of Qualification of Clients Registered to 31 March 2008 (%) compared to Scotland (Census 2001)

8. Employment Research Institute 8 Barriers to Progression for sustained contact WFF Clients to 31 March 07

9. Employment Research Institute 9 TYPES OF OUTCOMES Outcomes ‘Hard’ Outcomes (Key Transition) ‘Soft’ Outcomes Intermediate Activities Employability Measures

10. Employment Research Institute 10 Type of Latest KEY Transitions to 31 December 07 Total Number of Transitions = 13,095 by March 2008 47% 31%

11. Employment Research Institute 11 Intermediate Activity Outcomes (w/o Key Transition) to 31 March 07 Total IA outcomes without Key Transition = 850

12. Employment Research Institute 12 Distance travelled: Change on Employability Measures – Change in Average Score between Registration and at Six-Month Review

13. Employment Research Institute 13 All Client Outcomes to 31 March 2007 to 31 March 2008 Valid Six Month monitoring 4% (906) No significant Outcome 28% (7,202) Registered in previous 6 month (no outcome expected) 7%(1,666) Intermediate Activity Outcome 10% (2,576) Key transition 51% (13,095)

14. Employment Research Institute 14 Progress for unemployed Unemployed at registration who had a transition → 33% (1103) FT employment and 36% (1223) PT (>16 hrs) employment Sick/disabled at registration who had a transition → 27% (94) FT employment and 28% (97) PT (>16 hrs) employment

15. Employment Research Institute 15 Logistic regression model: transition Probability of achieving transition given range of independent variables/factors (individual, personal circumstances, external)

16. Employment Research Institute 16 Logistic regression model: More likely to move into work, major training or education if: the person has qualifications (SVQ level 2 or above). being in either part time or full time education having English as their first language, being a lone parent

17. Employment Research Institute 17 Logistic regression model: Less likely to move into work, etc. if: pregnant, having more than two children; being over 45 years old; being unemployed over 2 months; having other forms of stress (such as drug dependency); living in accommodation that is not owner occupied (especially if in hostel or supported care).

18. Employment Research Institute 18 Conclusions Major initiative that reached targets ‘Holistic’ model works well Reached the relatively disadvantaged But within this ‘group’ the less disadvantaged had greatest progression Range of employability factors that are important is large, and need to consider motivations etc.

19. Employment Research Institute Thank you for listening r.mcquaid@napier.ac.uk www2.napier.ac.uk/depts/eri/home.htm

20. Employment Research Institute 20 END

21. Employment Research Institute 21 Hard Outcomes entered full-time employment; entered part-time employment; entered self-employment; being able to take up a job offer; moved into different employment (changed jobs, moved to a better paid job, etc.); improved current employment (gain promotion, change hours or pay, etc.); sustained activity (employment, education or training); entered or completed education or training course of at least Six-Months duration; entered voluntary work of 16 hours or more a week.

22. Employment Research Institute 22 ‘Soft’ Outcomes Intermediate Activity Outcomes Employability Measures: Distance Travelled