Written evidence submitted
by The National Young Volunteers Service
1. v's Future Job's Fund programme is
delivering 200 jobs with 57 local employer partners from our network
of funded organisations. The job roles are mainly Youth Volunteering
Assistants providing an administrative function which enhances
the host organisation's support for young volunteers
2. SUMMARY
2.1. The FJF has been a success in matching valuable
new work opportunities to unemployed young people. Despite FJF
placements lasting only six months, young people employed by our
network of partners reported feeling 'better equipped' to find
future employment as they had often been turned away because of
a lack of work experience.
2.2. As a national provider there have been
a number of problems delivering the scheme locally. These problems
are often due to the inconsistency of interactions with different
local Jobcentres. The processes and procedures associated with
the new programmes need to be better communicated from Jobcentre
Plus at national level to local Jobcentre Plus staff to ensure
that providers do not waste valuable time dealing with inconsistent
practices across the country.
2.3. With high levels of youth unemployment,
the government must ensure that there is no gap in provision for
young unemployed people between FJF ending and the new Work Programme
and apprenticeship opportunities coming on stream. High quality,
accurate information advice and guidance for young unemployed
people will be key to the success of ensuring a smooth transition.
2.4. The Work Programme and new apprenticeships
must be funded and delivered in a way which enables voluntary
sector organisations to offer placements. Many voluntary and community
organisations have invaluable experience of supporting young unemployed
people and people with multiple barriers to employment. Such organisations
would also benefit from the extra capacity to deliver and enhance
frontline services.
3. THE EXTENT
TO WHICH
THE FJF HAS
SUCCEEDED IN
MATCHING NEW
WORK EXPERIENCE
OPPORTUNITIES TO
YOUNG UNEMPLOYED
PEOPLE
3.1. v's FJF Programme focuses on providing
work experience to young people in a youth work setting. Primarily
serving as administrative assistants, FJF employees are able to
experience work to support young people within a voluntary organisation.
v's programme is still in its infancy but there is evidence
from v's employer partners with existing FJF employees that the
programme has been positive, especially as the work environment
is often geared around the cares, passions and interests of inspirational
young volunteers.
3.2. We are currently experiencing recruitment
challenges where jobs have been profiled by the Jobcentre as youth
work rather than administration. As the jobs are primarily administrative
in nature they do not necessarily appeal to individuals seeking
placements delivering pure youth work, and also do not attract
young people looking to develop their administrative skills and
experience. Once correctly re-profiled we have witnessed an increase
in applications.
4. STRENGTHS
AND WEAKNESSES
OF THE
FJF PROGRAMME FROM
THE PERSPECTIVE
OF PROVIDERS
(INCLUDING IN
THE THIRD
SECTOR), EMPLOYERS
AND YOUNG
UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE,
AND PARTICULARLY
IN RELATION
TO THE
LONG-TERM
SUSTAINABILITY OF
EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES
4.1. v's experience is limited to the
recruitment process as our FJF programme is in its infancy. v's
FJF employer partners have welcomed the programme as an opportunity,
not only to develop young people which is often part of their
core business, but also to meet critical business need. However,
there are numerous challenges with the programme that cause problems
in delivery, especially for a national provider supporting numerous
local employers.
4.2. v led an FJF bid in order to ensure
that the smaller voluntary and community sector partners across
our funded network could benefit from the programme and access
FJF employees. There were few organisations in our network that
would have had the capacity to support the minimum number of 30
jobs needed for an independent bid.
4.3. A major problem is that the programme delivery
does not fit with this model, primarily because advice and guidance
provided at a national level does not necessarily reflect the
actual delivery model being deployed locally by Jobcentres. This
can lead to confusion and delay in the way in which young people
are referred to the programme. Furthermore, the templates provided
to employers to advertise opportunities, do not accurately reflect
the fields used by Jobcentres, as for example there are word limits
in place locally but no indication of these limits on the documentation.
4.4. Another significant challenge is the disconnect
between the referral process and actual applications. Currently,
the Jobcentre records it has referred an individual when they
have suggested a vacancy but that does not necessarily lead to
an application by the individual. In some instances Jobcentres
play a much more proactive role in supporting the young person
from referral through to application and v had been told by Jobcentre
Plus nationally that applications would be supported. This type
of engagement and follow through is an essential ingredient in
the success of any programme to support unemployment people. Without
this support we have noted that the system will reflect a significant
number of referrals even if no-one has applied for the position.
The Jobcentre needs to play a more supportive role encouraging
young people to make applications and understanding the conversion
rates between referral and application.
4.5. The seemingly small issues outlined above
are magnified significantly, when as a national provider you are
creating 200 jobs, across four regions, with 57 partners while
needing to factor in local nuances of delivery.
4.6. Despite the challenges for v as a
national provider, the programme has significant merits. Irrespective
of opportunities for future sustainable employment, young people
employed by our network of partners reported feeling 'better equipped'
to find employment as they had often been turned away because
of a 'lack of work experience'.
4.7. If a similar programme is to be introduced
in the future, more time should be spent on programme design and
training Jobcentre Plus staff so that the delivery model is consistently
delivered across the country.
5. THE LIKELY
IMPACT OF
THE DECISION
TO END
THE FJF IN
MARCH 2011 RATHER
THAN MARCH
2012
5.1. With high levels of youth unemployment there
is a risk that there will be a gap in provision for young unemployed
people to gain valuable work experience before the new Work Programme
and apprenticeship opportunities come on board.
6. HOW THE
TRANSITION FROM
FJF TO THE
WORK PROGRAMME
WILL BE
MANAGED, INCLUDING
THE PART
TO BE
PLAYED BY
THE GOVERNMENT'S
PROPOSAL TO
FUND NEW
APPRENTICESHIPS.
6.1. The Government needs to ensure that there
is not a gap in provision for young people to gain valuable work
experience and employment opportunities. When the FJF comes to
an end in March 2011 new opportunities have to be in place through
the Work Programme and apprenticeships. Furthermore, the Government
needs to ensure that Jobcentre Plus staff are have the knowledge
and resources to manage the transition and to familiarise themselves
with the processes and procedures of the new programme. This will
ensure that young people are provided with the right information
and advice, and will make it easier for organisations delivering
the new programme to work with Jobcentres.
6.2. The focus of FJF on job opportunities in
the public and voluntary sectors was important in enabling voluntary
sector organisations to enhance and improve service delivery at
a time when demands on their services are increasing. For example,
one local employer reports that the FJF employee was dedicated
to looking after their finance freeing up time for other staff
to focus on services. The new Work Programme and funding for apprenticeships
should sustain a level of investment in opportunities within voluntary
sector organisations, especially given the Government's commitment
to voluntary organisations' role in the Big Society.
6.3. Many voluntary sector organisations partners
we are working with are well placed to support young people's
development in their FJF roles, particularly where their confidence,
self-esteem and morale may have taken a hit from being unemployed
for 6 months or more. Such organisations are equipped to ensure
that employees get the most out of the experience because supporting
and developing young people is their core business.
6.4. Apprenticeships could potentially offer
a stronger alternative to FJF ensuring effective development of
individuals, building their engagement and commitment for a longer
period of time and culminating in a stronger skill and experience
set at their conclusion. FJF employees are limited in terms of
opportunities for personal development as the majority of accredited
training courses take longer than six months to complete. It also
makes more sense for the organisations who invest a significant
amount of time and resource in developing individuals to do so
over a longer period of time so that they begin to benefit from
that investment.
6.5. There are opportunities for FJF employees
to progress into apprenticeships but the drop in salary presents
a challenge as apprentices are generally paid less. Young people
would have to be convinced of the long-term benefits of taking
a cut in income for better development opportunities and future
employment prospects.
10 September 2010
| 
