Written evidence submitted
by The Commission for the New Economy on behalf of the Association
of Greater Manchester Authorities
BACKGROUND
The Greater Manchester bid was developed by the Association
of Greater Manchester Authorities (ten Councils and other key
authorities in Greater Manchester). The bid was developed in the
spirit intended by DWP from the beginning, building on the findings
of the Houghton review - that Local Authorities and their partners
could and should be at the heart of supporting young people back
to work at a time of rising unemployment, particularly in areas
where there are long-standing issues of worklessness. The bid
is the largest in the UK and in total amounts to £52 million
over its lifetime - a total of 8,000 jobs have were approved in
two stages - 1,500 jobs by March 2010 and a further 6,500 jobs
by March 2011. The scale of the bid reflected the projected JSA
figures for youth unemployment across the sub-region. In phase
one of the FJF AGMA achieved 100% of its job starts target - 1,500
jobs. Up to 20% of leavers are already known to have gone on to
other employment, with others moving on to other positive outcomes.
.
PARTNERS
All the partners who originally committed to the
bid have been involved in delivery: all 10 councils across GM;
The GM Passenger Transport Executive; Greater Manchester Police;
Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service; Greater Manchester
Chamber of Commerce; The Association of Greater Manchester PCTs;
Greater Manchester NHS Acute and Mental Health Trusts; Greater
Manchester Employer Coalition; Manchester Airport; Greater Manchester
Cultural Partnerships; A range of existing employment providers
including Groundwork, Remploy, Manchester Solutions, GM colleges;
Greater Manchester Centre for Voluntary Organisations. Since then
more partners / employers have come on board. More than 200 employers
many of whom are from the voluntary, community and social enterprise
sectors, including Inspire to Independence, the Salford Foundation,
Pathways CIC, Bolton Wise, Refugee Action, Lancashire Wildlife
Trust and many more.
VISION
Partners were very clear that this was not going
to merely be a "job creation scheme" but a real chance
to offer transformational change to people's lives in GM by offering:
- (a) Opportunities that are as near to having
a real job as possible - this includes referring to people as
"candidates" and not "clients" for example.
- (b) The chance of progression so that young
people can "see the point" of the training and development
they are undertaking.
- (c) Opportunities for young people to learn
transferable skills that can apply to other jobs, and set them
up for a future where they have an improved chance of competing
for jobs throughout their careers and in the open labour market.
- (d) Variety - so that there is something
of interest to as wide a wide cohort of young people as possible,
with jobs that meet varying skills levels and abilities.
- (e) Aspirational and inspiring opportunities
- in that we want young people in our jobs to grow in confidence
and self esteem, so that they are inspired to want to work and
do well in their futures.
THE GREATER
MANCHESTER MODEL
GM has a mixed delivery model - a core GM wide framework
which ensures minimum standards but local flexibility. Some key
features are:
- Every job has to offer work, training and personal
development.
- A commitment to create only full time jobs -
35 hours per week @ the national minimum wage based on a
clear rationale - that we did not want to dis-incentivise young
people from coming off benefits; that most of the FJF fund should
be in people's pockets (and not in the system tied up in bureaucracy
and administration); and we want to use FJF to get people out
of the poverty trap.
- The ability to use the services of a managing
agent (procured through a full OJEU process undertaken between
September and November 2009). Whilst this delayed our start to
November 2009, this was not too far behind other regions.
- A set pricing structure ensures a fair allocation
of resources and creates a level playing field - especially for
those who opt out of the managing agent model.
POINT 1: THE
EXTENT TO
WHICH THE
FJF HAS SUCCEEDED
IN MATCHING
NEW WORK
EXPERIENCE OPPORTUNITIES
TO YOUNG
UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE
Key to the AGMA bid has been the ability to use its
collective strength to generate jobs across the public, voluntary,
community and social enterprise sector, and in some cases the
private sector.
Over 8000 jobs have now been pledged across GM
and 4,000 have been filled.
Employers have understood the need to create additional
jobs that give people a chance to build their confidence and self
esteem. This has undoubtedly helped improve the quality of life
and life chances of people on FJF and their families - by being
in a job for the first time, or through the contributions they
have made to their communities. Jobs are assessed by a central
team, in liaison with JCP, to ensure consistency and quality,
and this has been welcomed. Many young people are travelling out
of their own borough for a job - expanding their travel to work
horizons. They are not just working close to home, but are taking
advantage of a wide range of jobs created right across the sub-region.
We have facilitated this by brokering discounted travel across
the entire GM Passenger Transport network for FJF employees. They
can now purchase one month's travel for £15 - a saving of
75%. Our ability to broker this huge benefit has undoubtedly been
as a result of all public sector partners seeing FJF as their
collective response to youth unemployment. FJF employees regularly
report how much they like their job and how much more confident
they now feel about getting the next job. Our independent evaluator
reports:
84% are satisfied or very satisfied with their
job - they are very positive about having a full time job; 99%
felt they had raised their employability.
A small sample of job roles to date
Arts Development Outreach Workers; Young Carers'
outreach workers; Reading buddies; Expansion of allotments project
for adults with learning disabilities; diverse range of in
our vibrant third and social enterprise sector; Community
Reporters; Garden Maintenance Operatives; Personal Buddy programme
for health and social care; Public transport/travel assistants;
Community policing in priority neighbourhoods; Sports coaches
/ dance instructors to target disaffected youth and produce reductions
in anti-social behaviour and offending; Fire safety; Community
Animators; Parent Mentors; jobs in the Enterprise Academy; Arts
and Culture - in museums, theatres and music venues.
POINT 2: 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.
The areas of strength:
1. Flexibility of design - from DWP to local
delivery
DWP allowed the design and delivery of FJF to be
determined locally. This has been a huge positive for partners
in GM and has ensured we have been in control more when we have
needed to be, for example speeding up recruitment and plugging
gaps in delivery. It also means we have been able to avoid FJF
feeling like it has "parachuted in" - and it has been
integrated with other public service policies around the individual
and family at a neighbourhood level, through our neighbourhood/Life
Chances pilots for example (an approach that has been agreed with
government).
2. Ability to create sustainable jobs and
support progression
This includes: the ability to link FJF jobs to apprenticeships;
employers keeping people on; additional (local) resource to extending
some jobs to 12 months; employers opening up their internal vacancies
to FJF recruits; setting up a Talent Pool (Manchester city council)
where people can be matched to career opportunities; engaging
the private sector in recruiting FJF people before they complete
6 months.
FJF is creating a new and lasting legacy across Greater
Manchester. Employers' perceptions about young people is changing
as a result of FJF and we believe this will open up more sustainable
job opportunities over the longer term, alongside more inclusive
recruitment practices.
In addition:
- Many host employers are reporting that despite
people being long term unemployed, they have shown a positive
work attitude, enthusiasm, ability and willingness to learn, which
has meant these employers are now more likely to want to employ
young unemployed people in the future.
- The inclusion of enhanced inductions, training
and personal development support as part of FJF has been important.
We have learnt to build generic jobs with transferable skills
that young people can take with them into the wider labour market,
we are confident that time spent in a GM FJF job places young
people in a better position to navigate what will undoubtedly
a turbulent labour market now and over the next few years, developing
the skills required to sustain employment in the long term - confidence,
motivation, self belief, a good reference from a good employer.
- The scale of FJF means we can offer a diverse
range of accessible real employment opportunities - i.e. by working
across a sub-region we have been able to create something for
everyone's skill level and job aspiration.
- FJF jobs have been targeted at people in communities
who for whatever reason have felt work is not an option or have
not been able to find a job. FJF has allowed people to overcome
the first hurdle in getting a job that includes training.
3. Maximising resources - leadership from
the top and working together
The most important factor in how the GM model is
able to work is the immense partnership effort that AGMA has brought
to bear. This has meant that every Leader and Chief Executive
of each of the 10 Councils in GM have dedicated at least 1 full
time role to FJF (at no cost to FJF) and in some cases a lot more
(including WNF). This unseen "cost" is real and hugely
important. It now extends to: the involvement of large numbers
of council staff to create jobs and coordinate local efforts;
the involvement of hundreds of line managers who give their time
to supervise people; the use council funded training courses that
FJF people can attend; materials and equipment supplied in the
workplace; some CRB checks; additional WNF provision to add value
to the FJF experience. Other employers have done the same - recognising
that they have a role to play in tackling youth unemployment in
the city at a time when their support was needed.
In the GM model 2% of the £6,500 is used on
administrative support for a core team including: financial management;
claims to DWP; contracts; procurement; development of all systems/
forms / processes, assessing job quality and consistency; advice
and guidance on all aspects of FJF; quality assuring delivery;
GM partners job development (e.g. with police, fire, health, GMPTE,
GMCVO, the airport and others); guidance on PR and communications;
DWP guidance and dissemination; relationships with JCP and LSC;
national links with DWP; links with other FJF providers; sharing
of best practice. Up to 85% of the FJF income is spent on wages
(this depends on how long people stay in the job and is based
on a 35 hour working week). The remainder funds a flexible menu
of services, including job search and in work support.
FJF is also proving a success in resolving the multiple
issues faced by some people with more complex or multiple needs
- such as ill health, debt, housing issues, criminal records,
low levels of literacy as well as long term unemployment. Many
host employers are targeting jobs and are in effect using "work"
as a replacement or at least a catalyst for more complex and multiple
interventions. Providers and support services note that FJF has
been more successful for those with complex needs than any other
they've been aware of and that the cost of £6,500 is far
less than the repeated and multiple service interventions that
would be otherwise needed - and paid for.
The sub-regional benefits we have experienced
can be transferred to the Work Programme
- (1) Working together has generated economies
of scale - at least in the number of conversations with key partners,
administration, developing a bid, raising questions with DWP/CLG,
creating jobs, finding work experience opportunities, sourcing
training.
- (2) A single offer or framework but with
the capacity to accurately reflect and promote local variation,
innovation and texture that has not been an "imposition"
on any area.
- (3) Focus on influencing mainstream in to
one joined up solution resulting in a better offer to local people
and employers.
- (4) Creating a large and more flexible resource
for the city region to build on - staff, time, physical assets,
materials, equipment, leadership in place, cross-boundary working,
best practice, sharing ideas.
- (5) Partners working together to "share
the load" allowing a shifting balance of activity between
them, enabling those ready to deliver first to take the lead giving
others more time to plan their response.
- (6) To explore the possibility of city region
rather than DWP contracting, with the possibility of city region
based funding options being developed
4. Strong employee feedback and employer engagement
The well-known adage of "it's easier to get
a job when you're in a job" is the simplicity of FJF.
The GM experience is very much that the simple fact
of having a job IS the thing that makes FJF so popular, successful
and unique. By pairing people up with managers we can see people
taking responsibility for their own next job, building new social
networks, and learning from managers as mentors and role models.
Supplemented with opportunities for learning and training (such
as NVQs, ECDL, driving lessons, CSCS card, etc) they are CV building
all the time, gaining confidence and getting a good reference
from a reputable and respected employer.
Employers are reviewing their recruitment practices
as they can see they can exclude the very people they want to
attract, and that they are missing out on talent pool in their
local communities. This is beginning to be seen as a huge legacy
of FJF and one that partners are now very committed to capitalising
on for the future. This is being shared as best practice across
GM.
Host employers value the level of control they have
in the recruitment process when compared to other DWP / JCP employment
programmes, whilst at the same time are happy to work closely
with JCP. For example, Manchester City Council implemented an
innovative recruitment method to ensure no-one was excluded from
gaining employment. This meant not using traditional CVs and application
forms and implementing large-scale "speed dating" events
instead. Over 200 young people met with dozens of managers over
the course of one day, resulting in over 100 people in to work.
Managers have overcome tendency that unemployed people have to
"self label" or "self eliminate" from applying
for a job, thereby not exploring all job avenues. By slimming
down the recruitment process, young people have taken on wider
and more diverse job activities, and managers have recruited people
from more diverse backgrounds.
People now have a wider spectrum of new job prospects
open to them because of FJF.
Managers have been able to focus on peoples' potential
rather than formal qualifications or work record. This creates
a level playing field when it comes to supporting vulnerable groups
and the hardest to help, particularly young offenders in to work.
5. Good community benefit
Many FJF jobs have been embedded as part of community
transformation projects that could not have happened otherwise.
These are too many to list but are creating a lasting legacy and
that can expand in to wider approaches such as volunteering and
greater leadership from the 3rd sector:
- GM Fire and Rescue Service is running a community
based project using FJF recruits who will be developing, from
scratch, proposals to increase the usage of fire stations as community
assets, showcasing their ideas in a "dragon's den" and
turning their ideas in to real enterprises. The Salford Foundation
and the Dame Kelly Legacy Trust are working as providing mentors.
- Pathways CIC is employing FJF young people to
peer mentor other young people to increase the take up sexual
health screening and other health related checks.
- Stockport's Neighbourhood Renewal Teams have
employed additional local people who have conducted a community
survey into local employment and skills needs of residents and
employers in deprived areas.
- Tameside Council and the Fire and Rescue Service
have piloted new ways of preventing fires. New FJF jobs coincided
with the north west having a long period of very dry weather,
resulting in hose pipe bans and droughts, which typically lead
to having to police more secondary fires. The Station commander
in Tameside Borough attributes the significant drop in secondary
fires and directly to the appointment of the FJF team.
- Rochdale is supporting young disabled people
to work with the 3rd sector and local leisure services to access,
audit and develop sports and inclusion activities for disabled
people, with a view to their continuing as a social enterprise
as a progression route.
The areas of weakness in FJF are:
Although our experience is overwhelmingly positive
about FJF, partners have some weaknesses to report. The AGMA bid
embraced the initial intention of FJF - that Local Authorities
could take the lead in tackling worklessness at a time of rising
unemployment amongst young people in particular. However, with
the certainty of public sector cuts, progression routes are hampered.
We have found some opportunities to create FJF jobs in the private
sector but this is limited given State Aid rules at the need to
create jobs with a community benefit.
It is vital that we involve the private sector now
in FJF to maximise the links to their jobs as a progression route,
but also by creating FJF jobs in the private sector now.
We are very keen to be able to gather robust evidence
about the success of FJF. We are developing local tracking mechanisms
but would prefer a national system that can not only share data
but track people once they have left FJF. For example, HMRC are
best placed to monitor and report on who has sustained employment
and for how long.
Some progression routes are not open to people leaving
FJF due to funding criteria established. For example, some SFA
funded provision requires that people are unemployed to be eligible
- it would be better to be able to move directly from FJF to training
without the need to be unemployed in between. Whilst we have learnt
much about how to support people in to work in short space of
time, we must not overlook the issues that have prevented people
gaining jobs in the open labour market in the first place. Our
employers have been flexible, imaginative and have worked with
us. Most have abandoned application forms. But, any future DWP
/ Work Programme provision must equip people better to be able
to fulfil employers' processes.
POINT 3: THE
LIKELY IMPACT
OF THE
DECISION TO
END THE
FJF IN MARCH
2011 RATHER THAN
MARCH 2012
Creating 8,000 jobs through FJF in GM by March 2011
means that as many as 208,000 weeks worth of work will have taken
place. Already we have employed 4,000 people in to jobs and up
to £19 million has reached people's pockets in wages
- people who are not now claiming out of work benefits, but paying
tax and contributing to the economy of GM, spending money in our
shops and businesses. Given a further year with FJF GM would,
realistically, have bid for a further 6,500 jobs based on the
fact that the infrastructure is now in place and working well.
GM still has a significant youth unemployment issue
- 23,545 people or 31.5% (August 2010) of all JSA claimants were
under 24 in GM, peaking at 33.7% in Shaw in Oldham and compared
to 29% for the UK. The need for specific action to support young
people back to work exists in GM.
FJF has provided a unique opportunity - having a
job that keeps people actively engaged and connected to the labour
market, as opposed to disconnected and disillusioned, makes them
work ready for when jobs in the private sector gather momentum.
We now know that, with the impact of major public sector contraction
and fewer jobs being available, there is more reliance on the
private sector for progression into work beyond FJF. Coupled with
the introduction of the new Work Programme that will take time
to find its feet, there is a concern that young people in GM could
have limited options to get back to work. If FJF had continued
throughout 2011/12, there would have been more time for the private
sector jobs market to rebuild its strength.
A further year of FJF could have meant an additional
£35 million circulating in wages and a further decrease
on the levels of youth unemployment in GM. Nationally, youth unemployment
fallen five times quicker than the rate for over 25s since FJF
introduced. Between April and October 2009 (the six months prior
to FJF) 18-24 year old JSA claimant numbers rose by 11.4%, but
since the start of the programme, figures have fallen by 13.6%
(August figures).
Key is the feedback we get all the time from JCP
and employees - people want a job and FJF is a simple and effective
mechanism that achieves this. Once they are in a job they are
more likely to want to keep it - or get another job. Our strong
belief is that FJF as a transitional employment programme works.
POINT 4: 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
AGMA and its partners would prefer that FJF continues
beyond March 2011. We want more clarity from Government on how
it sees the transition from FJF to the Work Programme, or indeed
how it views the role of transitional employment programmes more
widely.
Stronger recognition needs to be given to the role
Local Authorities and partners at a local level can play in the
development and delivery of the Work Programme. We need to look
to ensure that the prime contractors for the programme work in
an integrated way with other local partners and service providers,
thus giving the best chance of creating sustainable work opportunities
for the residents of Greater Manchester.
As we understand it, the "black box" nature
of the Work Programme contracts will mean that it is the Prime
Contractors who will decide what is delivered. Whether they then
choose to include provision such as FJF - for young people, or
adults - is not for us to determine. We agree with the principle
of black box commissioning and the potential it offers to deliver
individually tailored and locally relevant provision. We are already
working well with potential Primes to enable them to understand
which local services, including FJF, could be continued under
the Work Programme. But the lack of clear involvement of Local
Authorities in partnerships in the Work Programme commissioning
process means that there is no guarantee that the successes or
legacy of FJF will be continued in the Work Programme.
In the last week we have received notification from
DWP that local authority partners will no longer have a clear
role in relation to DWP commissioning. This, coupled with the
black box nature of commissioning, means that it will be up to
individual Primes to decide whether or not they continue
successful local programmes, or align with other services
like Apprenticeships. We will work hard to ensure that the FJF
legacy can be maximised by the Work Programme Primes,
but this may not be the case in areas where there FJF team / delivery
has not been as strong, or of scale, or indeed where the bidding
Primes are not forward thinking.
We would recommend that DWP commission a rigorous
independent evaluation of FJF which could be made available to
potential Work Programme Primes. And we would welcome further
reiteration by DWP of the importance for potential Work Programme
Prime Contractors to work closely with local employability partnerships
such as our own to identify opportunities to continue successful
programmes (whether FJF or WNF-funded), and to ensure there is
clear alignment with other Council, NHS and Skills Funding Agency
programmes to maximise the impact of public sector investment
and to offer the most comprehensive offer to Work Programme clients.
In GM the tangible lessons learnt and outcomes that
can be taken from FJF in to the work programme:
- The legacy of a large scale sub-region transitional
employment programme which has had over 12 months to establish
itself and is now very effective in re-connecting people with
the labour market.
- An unprecedented level of employer support at
the highest level - with many hundreds of line managers involved
in offering work experience to long term unemployed people.
- Employers who are open to changing their recruitment
practices to be more inclusive and willing to employ young people
or people who have been out of work for many years.
- Is linked to apprenticeships.
- Is developing links to private sector employers
- as an exit for FJF employees.
- The commitment of GMPTE and its operators to
75% discounted travel has outcomes for the environment and increases
take up of public transport.
- is flexible enough for DWP/ prime contractors
to take forward in to the work programme.
Lessons for Going Forward
The Government's aim of rebalancing the economy will
hit the north west and Greater Manchester hard. The legacy of
FJF is real and must feed in to the design of the Work Programme.
DWP need to ensure prime contractors are made to connect to the
large FJF Lead Accountable Bodies to ensure the lessons and infrastructure
of FJF moves forward.
We are concerned that the private sector economy
will not be ready to pick up where we leave off once FJF ends.
Add this to fewer jobs in the public sector and their supply chains,
and we run the risk of young people and those in our hotspot areas
being further removed from any real prospect of leaving benefits
and creating their own prosperity.
Local Enterprise Partnerships need to build on and
incorporate much of what FJF has achieved, extending the concept
to the private sector, as well as create new opportunities through
self employment and business start ups.
AGMA would very much like to extend their support
to the Select Committee and Chief Executives are willing to give
evidence in person if required. Please contact mike.emmerich@neweconomymanchester.com
who is the Chief Executive of The Commission for the New Economy
(GM's economic commission) if this is of interest.
| 
