Agenda item

Discussion of the results of research by CESI and NIESR.

Heather Rolfe, Principal Research Fellow with the National Institute for Economic and Social Research (NIESR), presented findings from the Independent analysis of council-led schemes to support people towards work in advance of its publication in mid-January. This included identifying the common features of the programmes’ design in terms of their aims, partnerships and funding, and programme delivery and support. Heather went on to outline the impact of the programmes as indicated by the data and the factors determining successful delivery.

One member asked if the Get Bradford Working scheme statistics were skewed by the fact that it included graduates. Heather explained that this was not the case as graduate outcomes were to enter professions which matched their qualifications rather than jobs they were over qualified for.

Dave Simmonds, Chief Executive of the Centre for Economic and Social Inclusion, presented interim findings from work assessing the impact of a national employment, skills and welfare system on unemployed and people in low skilled jobs which had been jointly commissioned by the City Regions and People and Places Boards.  He highlighted that 4 million people were receiving out of work benefits, of which 2.5 million were on employment and support allowance and half a million were lone parents on income support. 

The Board noted that there were many obstacles for people seeking employment, and the system for claimants was often confusing.  Jobcentre Plus had a dual role in the process but functioned less effectively as an employment support agency than it did as a benefits agency.  It was also highlighted that only 7p of every pound saved by getting people into work was accrued locally; the incentives built into the system were wrong, as local areas should be incentivised to get people into jobs and bring down benefits. 

In the question and answer session and discussion which followed members raised the following points:

·         There was a skills mismatch in the UK, therefore there should be a focus on training provided by employers as well as public training programmes. 

·         Local authorities should focus on influencing skills to create growth, shape the local economy and support the most vulnerable, but councils and local areas should also expect a share of the dividend. 

·         Work on young people and skills should have a greater focus on the role of schools. 

·         Local government should have a greater influence on higher level skills through joint work with universities and colleges through LEPs as skills were a key driver for city plans. 

·         The evidence suggested that councils were better placed than Jobcentre Plus to support the needs of people with complex needs, but councils should be asked if they wanted to run these services.  Further evidence may be required, but councils did not have the time or money to run pilot programmes. 

·         There should be clarity between central and local government on the meaning of co-commissioning of services. 

The Board agreed that the draft interim findings of the report were right, but should also include 16-19 budgets, health and probation.  Models should focus on the principles and aims and should be designed around particular areas, not in a ‘one size fits all’ approach.  More evidence should be gathered and reported back to the Board in due course. 

ACTION:       Officers to take forward members’ recommendations, which would feed into the draft report prior to publication.