Conclusions and Recommendations
1. There are 6.7 million disabled people of
working age, of whom around 50% are in employment.
Barriers preventing many disabled people from taking up a job
include employer attitudes and misconceptions, lack of awareness
of the support that is available, health conditions, local labour
market conditions and a lack of adjustments to work premises.
In addition, disabled people may need additional support to overcome
a lack of confidence and self-belief from having been out of work.
2. The Department has a confusing suite of
six programmes, which have grown up over the last 60 years.
The distinction between the different programmes and schemes is
sometimes artificial and the current review of provision should
pinpoint opportunities for simplification and rationalisation.
An approach based around a more flexible menu of different types
of support and advice would be more suitable. This tailored approach
would better reflect the very varied circumstances of disabled
people and would ensure a more streamlined suite of services.
3. Poor management information makes it difficult
to determine whether the programmes deliver value for money. Except
for the New Deal for Disabled People, the Department has patchy
and inconsistent cost and outcomes data for its programmes. There
is also limited information available about clients, making it
hard to establish whether programmes are meeting the needs of
different groups. The Department should gather detailed information
on what has been spent on each programme and scheme, what has
been paid to each provider and what the Department has obtained
for the expenditure.
4. The quality of service provided to
customers varies considerably across the country. In the Workstep
programme for example,
between 2001 and 2005, one third of the 200 or so providers with
clients in supported employment have not progressed a single person.[2]
The Department should
stipulate minimum standards for the services provided, adopt a
risk based inspection regime of the organisations providing it
and follow up rapidly on poor performance, including withdrawing
contracts for continued poor performance.
5. The Department's attention has focussed
on helping people into work rather than retaining a job. Most
people who become disabled do so as adults and are likely to be
in employment when they become disabled. The Department should
increase the attention given to helping people stay in work. For
example, Disability Employment Advisers could be expected to spend
a set proportion of their time on retention activities, which
would help to save on disability benefits and reduce demand for
more expensive work programmes.
6. Some employers have misconceptions
about the difficulties of employing disabled people. Research
in 2004[3] suggested that
one-third of employers considered employing a disabled person
is a major risk. The Department should work with providers of
training to challenge the misconceptions, for example by linking
up employers experienced in employing disabled people with those
who are not through workshops and awareness raising events, highlighting
the support available to employers.
7. The Department contracts with hundreds
of providers of services across the country. It could improve
the quality and price of the services it purchases through improved
benchmarking between the numerous providers, more effective competition
and better use of its bulk purchasing power to secure better deals.
It should also specify a minimum standard for performance across
all providers, for example, in terms of availability of training
and customers having development plans in place.
8. The Department's review of Remploy
is currently being considered by Ministers and is a good opportunity
to assess how to update this vital service in the interests of
disabled people. A highly supportive environment is the only appropriate
option for some people and Remploy has provided unique opportunities
for thousands over many years. The current review of Remploy should
safeguard this achievement when considering whether it is necessary
to alter the profile of the business or the markets in which it
operates, for example, to move from sectors in decline. It should
also consider any unique circumstances facing the business, such
as the cost of entering new markets, and the cost and quality
of Remploy management. They should also take account of the views
of those working within Remploy businesses.
9. Remploy Interwork has proved successful
at placing disabled people with mainstream employers. Remploy
Interwork's long association with Remploy businesses, including
factories, has enabled it to develop a unique understanding of
the employer's perspective in taking on disabled people. Any reorganisation
of Remploy should safeguard this valuable knowledge so that Remploy
Interwork's performance is sustained.
2 C&AG's Report, paras 4.12-4.13 Back
3
Roberts et al (2004) Disability in the Workplace. Research
for Department for Work and Pensions
Back
| 
