Transitional employment services - phase 2: evaluation

5. Conclusion: policy issues arising and lessons for delivery models

A key finding from this research is that a very high proportion of people with a disability or health condition are interested in work. Many have a relatively recent work history and more than 8 in 10 would like to work in future.

However, for some, their health condition does place particular constraints on their participation. This appears to be a more significant factor among WAS customers who have higher needs than WFS customers and the discussions with 'non user' groups suggests that this is even more the case for those who have similar needs and might have been customers but did not engage.

This suggests that the primary objective of No One Left Behind in supporting an integration agenda is correct – that employability services should expect to address the needs of all those seeking employment. Below is a summary of the main lessons for employability support delivery models going forward.

• Provide a flexible offer with few hard timescales. Moving into work within 18 months may seem too quick for some potential customers. Greater flexibility in delivery – to be able to 'stop the clock' when customers need to take more time to access support, should also be considered, although it should be noted that participants who left the service due to health conditions could return at the discretion of the Provider.
• Provision of specialist support and more integration and alignment with other services, in particular education and health services, will be vitally important for future employability services. The prevalence of mental health conditions among the potential client group for employment services suggests that much more effective inter-working with mainstream health services will be necessary.
• Providing other forms of specialist support will need to draw on partnerships. Contracting out such services as part of a provider supply chain has not delivered sufficient provision or allowed these services a sustainable funding model. Whatever the delivery models adopted for employment services, some consideration should be given to funding such services centrally, with much less reliance on performance related payments, so that they can build capacity and skills and provide services to all employability service Providers.
• Phase 1 findings highlighted that where a customer had built their confidence and improved their CV and interview technique, but still did not secure a job offer, Providers had few alternative approaches within WFS and WAS. Future employability services should consider what other types of support may be more appropriate in terms of vocational training and work practice to help improve the attractiveness of their CV in the labour market.
• There is evidence from the employer case studies that employers can play a wider role in supporting a more diverse workforce., Further thought should be given to how employers can work with employability serivces to support individuals in their journeys into and towards work.
• Employers' attitudes towards employing disabled people or those with health conditions appears to be improving, but more needs to be done. The Scottish Government has already recognised the need to raise employer engagement as part of their action plan to close the disability employment gap.^[14]
• Develop further quantitative and qualititative measures to assess the quality of employment destinations. Currently the information on the employment destinations for WFS and WAS is limited. Many are part-time and anecdotally are paid at or just above minimum wage levels. While part-time employment suits the circumstances of some, there were many in the case studies and workshops who would prefer full time employment to help with the high costs of accomodation, travel to work and childcare.
• Securing appropriate and immediate support to prevent people falling out of work will be a significant challenge. Convincing this group to participate in future employability services will require a more substantive offer of support to address this lived experience. This is an issue for those with physical disabilities but appears to be a much bigger challenge for those with mental health conditions.