The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

Working for Families: Lessons from the Pilot Projects (Stage 1)

CHAPTER THREE The Findings and Issues

Introduction

3.1 During the course of the Study a number of issues were identified. Some of these were specific to individual projects. However many were of wider relevance, both to the pilot projects and to the main Working for Families programme. The starting point is to consider the strategic context within which the pilot projects operate.

A Strategic Context

3.2 At a general level all projects fit into the Scottish Executive's and Westminster's goal of increasing participation in the labour market from those who are currently economically inactive. One of the reasons for doing this is to tackle child poverty, as gaining paid work, when complemented by various in-work benefits, is seen as making a significant contribution to economic wellbeing. To this end, for example, Westminster aims to increase the proportion of lone parents in work to 70% by 2010 (Thurley, 2003).

3.3 The Scottish Executive's childcare strategy (The Secretary of State for Scotland, 1998) clearly makes the link between childcare and economic development, with one of the indicators of success being that more parents will be able to move into work, education or training. However local councils' children's services plans tend to dilute this message and approach childcare more from the perspective of the child rather than from the economic development benefits that it may bring. As such there seems to be a lack of a detailed local strategic context which relates explicitly to the Working for Families Funding.

3.4 At the smaller area level there is, however, often a degree of strategic underpinning for the Scottish Executive's aims. In part this comes about through childcare partnerships and local initiatives such as Glasgow's network of childcare forums and their links into wider regeneration networks. These links are particularly well developed in Glasgow where the various area based regeneration initiatives have developed holistic strategies, all of which recognise the importance of childcare and which, in some cases, link this to the development, or employment, of parents and carers. For example, in the 2003-2005 Castlemilk Partnership Development Strategy (Castlemilk Partnership 2002) continuation funding is sought from the SIP to provide assisted child care places for low income parents/carers who are in work or training.

3.5 Similarly in Easterhouse the Partnership has been promoting the provision of a mentoring system, through the Stepping Stones project, which provides advice and support to those on low incomes and suffering from other barriers to labour market access. This aims to help people move "from benefit dependency through to employment" (Greater Easterhouse Partnership, 2002). It is therefore very similar to the aims of the Easterhouse pilot.

3.6 This local strategic context tends to be far more developed in Glasgow, simply because of the dense network of initiatives and related networking structures, than in Dumfries and Galloway. However, given the importance of developing initiatives that cross departmental boundaries (in this case between childcare and economic development) it would seem to be worth considering making more explicit mention of these links in both childcare and the employment and employability elements of economic development strategies.

3.7 Relating a project to a wider strategy seems good practice. It should help to eliminate any project overlap or duplication as well as facilitating the development of networks ( see Paragraph 2.11). Where the strategic networks are less well established then project development by working in partnership with employment and childcare agencies should be pursued. Indeed this is the strategy that was used, perhaps for other reasons, in Dumfries and Galloway.

Project Justification

3.8 Related to this strategic context is the extent to which the pilots were underpinned by research which justified provision. Generally there was such an underpinning. This had come about in a number of ways:

• For those projects (for example Access to Work and Rosemount) that had a track record there was experience of what worked and what had not worked. This could then be built upon when developing the pilots. In Rosemount's case the project has also commissioned in-depth research looking at the barriers women face in making the transition from being economically inactive to becoming employed. This has played an important role in shaping the Rosemount pilot;
• Elsewhere feedback from users had been used to justify the pilots. For example in Easterhouse a childcare line is run which is seen as being a good source of information on childcare requirements; and
• In Dumfries and Galloway, prior to the Scottish Executive pilots being announced, a seminar had been held at which various agencies had discussed childcare problems and needs. From this, transport problems and a desire for children to be looked after in their own homes emerged as issues. These then had an influence upon the development of the pilots.

3.9 The final form of the pilots had, to some extent, been shaped by wider consultation. However, often this had been constrained by the available time and was, as in Dumfries and Galloway, with agencies rather than service users. There was often a view that wider consultation would have been desirable. To some extent this was easier in Glasgow, especially in Easterhouse, where the existence of the Childcare Greater Easterhouse meant that it was possible to develop projects in consultation with a wide range of bodies, in particular the Local Childcare Forum.

3.10 It was also the case, in a number of instances, that the pilots drew upon the experiences of initiatives elsewhere. For example, the Easterhouse childcare subsidy was based, in part, on a similar initiative that had operated in Drumchapel. Likewise the costings for the holiday and wraparound part of the pilot were based on costs incurred by a similar project operating in Glasgow's East End.

3.11 It therefore would seem to be general good practice if projects are based upon local research to identify need. It would also seem sensible to undertake consultation so that ownership is spread, although it is accepted that timing can make this difficult. Likewise drawing on the experiences of others might be beneficial, if only to help develop realistic costings.

Labour Market Information

3.12 Providing childcare support to enable parents or carers to re-enter the labour market may have limited impact if there are not job opportunities available. Although research had generally been undertaken to see if there was a need for childcare, in neither of the 2 pilot areas had any systematic attempt been made to look at labour demand. This was a concern to some interviewees. Views on job availability tended to be anecdotal, albeit often informed by considerable experience of the local economy. For example, in some areas major developments (such as construction projects) were mentioned that might provide job opportunities. However, the general view was that most parents or carers would be looking to move into entry level jobs where technical skills were limited and attitude and aptitude were more important.

3.13 The work commissioned by Glasgow City (FMR Research, 2003) has identified some information about interest in obtaining a job. For example, of the 60 interviewees 33% were interested in a full-time job. However no information was collected on the type of work they were interested in.

3.14 Some of the pilots, especially those that were developments of existing schemes, had links with Jobcentre Plus, albeit that these often tended to be more about benefit eligibility than to help find suitable vacancies. Generally networking and partnership working with employment agencies and projects was limited, although this may change as implementation gets underway.

3.15 There were however exceptions to this. Diagram 3.1 looks at the process used by Access to Work in Dumfries and Galloway to ensure that clients are able to attain a positive outcome. This involves links with a variety of agencies such as Business Gateway and the Prince's Scottish Youth Business Trust. In the project's first year (2002 to 2003), 4 of the 20 clients gained a full-time job and one was referred to Business Gateway. Although the first year was not specifically about helping those with childcare problems, the project does seem to have had a degree of success.

3.16 Given this, it would seem sensible for all projects to make use of available agencies and sources of information to access labour market intelligence and thereby improve the chances of getting their clients into work or some other positive outcome. We would suggest the following, that projects:

• Liaise with their local Jobcentre Plus office in order to access information on job vacancies and to gain access to other employment specific services (such as programme centres) that may be of help in providing the skills and support needed to gain employment;
• Assess information from such databases as the National Online Manpower Information System (NOMIS) in order to identify hard-to-fill vacancies and general labour market information. This should be possible through Jobcentre Plus and the relevant local enterprise company (LEC);
• Work with other locally based initiatives that might have detailed information on local vacancies. If such initiatives do not exist then it might be worthwhile for the local authority and the LEC to think about setting something up. A model might be the Joblink service that operates as a jobs broker between employers and the unemployed in Dunbartonshire. This seems to be highly effective in placing clients into work, in part because it adopts a pro-active stance in developing links with employers and providing employees with ongoing support once they move into work.

Diagram 3.1 The Access to Work Process

The Project's Strategic "Fit"

3.17 All of the pilot projects have been approved by the Scottish Executive and therefore would seem, almost by definition, to "fit" with the aims of the Working for Families Funding package. However we do have reservations about the extent to which some, if implemented as currently described, would result in the Scottish Executive's objectives being attained. There would seem to be evidence that the funding package has been used by some projects to implement plans that had already been drawn up. These have been only slightly modified to include a childcare component.

3.18 It is unfair, at this stage in the development of the pilots, to highlight those that seem to have only marginal relevance. However the lesson for guidance on the main programme would seem to be that the link with employment and childcare needs to be explicit and that the attainment of other goals, however desirable, is very much a secondary consideration.

Project Development and Duration

3.19 Project development has been slow, as Chapter 2 has highlighted. Six months into the financial year some of the projects have still to be established. There are a number of reasons for this. However, the lesson is that development takes time and projects, even if they are developments of existing ones, cannot be set up rapidly. This is even more the case if they are new.

3.20 So why has project development taken so long? A number of reasons can be identified:

• In both pilot areas the preparation of the bids to the Scottish Executive, and their subsequent refinement, has been the responsibility of staff who already had an existing workload. This and the need, in some instances, to bring together a range of partners slowed down progress;
• In Glasgow development in Castlemilk was slow as there was a lack of strategic infrastructure to facilitate project development. This meant that the City Council co-ordinator had to draw up the bid. Given her other responsibilities, this inevitably delayed progress, as did the need to find a locally based organisation that would be willing to host the initiative. This can be contrasted with the situation in Easterhouse where the Greater Easterhouse Childcare Partnership brings together local agencies concerned with childcare and economic development. This meant that it was possible to approach one organisation which then took over responsibility for preparing the bid in partnership with others;
• For 2 of the projects the original intention had been that they would be delivered by locally based community groups. In the event the Care Commission felt that they lacked the management capacity to take on other responsibilities. Accordingly progress has been delayed whilst alternative delivery plans are explored; and
• There also seem to be some instances where insufficient thought had been given to delivery. In these projects there was a lack of clarity as to who was to be responsible, whether the local authority or a third party.

3.21 Several interviewees, at various times, also commented upon the fact that the Care Commission tended to be rather slow in making decisions. This could easily delay project development. This may be inevitable and would, therefore, seem to be something that projects have to factor into their development time.

3.22 Underpinning all of these reasons is, however, the speed with which the bids had to be put together and the projects rolled out. This has proved impossible to do quickly, other than for the projects that are developments of existing initiatives. Whilst it could be argued that more time should have been spent on development before the bids were submitted to the Scottish Executive, this is probably unrealistic when the funding outcome is uncertain. There, therefore, needs to be recognition that, even after project approval, time will have to be spent on development and refinement before the projects can start.

3.23 In part this slow development reflected the fact that the pilots were being set up by people who were trying to fit this work around their existing workloads (Paragraph 3.20). There is a feeling that a lot of effort had gone into setting something up that would only have a one year life. Given this, it is not surprising that a consistent thread running through many of the interviews was the need for a degree of funding continuity, if all of this effort was to be worthwhile.

3.24 The slow start, when combined with the likely difficulties of being able to show rapid progress in getting the target group into work or onto a course, means that a year may be too short a time to be able to demonstrate definitive progress in attaining the Scottish Executive's objectives.

3.25 All of these factors mean that the lessons for the main programme are that:

• Taking a project from even a detailed description to implementation will take time. This needs to be recognised by the projects when making their bids and by the Scottish Executive when allocating and monitoring funding;
• Providing funding for only a year may be counterproductive in terms of being able to demonstrate what works and what does not work and in terms of sustaining staff commitment; and
• If projects are successful in recruiting from the identified target group then the many other barriers that they may face, in addition to childcare, may mean that it is difficult to demonstrate any "hard" outcomes (such as a job or entry to an education course) over a year. This is reinforced by the findings of the FMR research, cited earlier (Paragraph 2.17) on the timing of interviewees' entry to the labour market. One consequence of this is that there is a need to measure "distance travelled" as well as "hard" outcomes. This is considered in greater detail in Chapter 4.

3.26 In the light of these factors we would suggest that funds be allocated for a minimum of 2 years. At the end of that period it should be possible to see if the project is attaining its objectives and decide if further support is justified. Any such judgements at the end of 12 months seem likely to be premature.

Marketing

3.27 Two of the pilots (Access to Work and Rosemount) have marketing strategies in place. These involve such things as:

• Using the local press, both editorials and advertisements;
• Placing posters and fliers in venues where it is felt the target group will see them. This has been in such places as jobcentres and Business Gateway offices;
• Using existing networks to disseminate information about the project around agencies and individuals, which is also being done by other projects, such as Easterhouse; and
• Using waiting lists to contact people who have already expressed an interest in coming onto the project, as Access to Work has been able to do.

3.28 Given that these 2 pilots are based upon existing successful initiatives it seems reasonable to assume that this type of marketing is effective and would be equally successful when used by other projects. However, marketing needs to reach the Scottish Executive's target groups, as well as raising the general profile of a project. This is considered next.

Reaching the Appropriate Target Group

3.29 The target group is, at one level, defined by the Scottish Executive in so far as the aim is to target parents and carers who are furthest from labour market participation (possibly as they have a variety of other non-childcare related problems such as substance abuse). Recruiting clients with these characteristics is something that the projects need to ensure that they do. As such it is looked at in greater detail in Chapter 4.

3.30 However the aim of the funding is primarily to provide appropriate childcare support, rather than help to overcome these other problems per se. As such the projects clearly need to develop appropriate networks, with other specialist agencies, so that they can be called upon as needed to give support that, by complementing childcare, will result in the Scottish Executive's objectives being attained.

3.31 The literature dealing with the problems that lone parents and those with childcare responsibilities face highlights childcare as being a key barrier. For example, an evaluation of New Deal for Lone Parents found that 54% of respondents were reluctant to leave their child with someone else whilst they worked, whilst 51% highlighted a lack of suitable childcare as being a problem in their area (Lessof, et al, 2002). Research has also found that this group expresses a "strong orientation towards paid work" (Thurley, 2003). However the research, undertaken for Glasgow City has found that, of those interviewees who expressed an interest in moving into employment or education/training relatively few had this as an immediate goal (FMR Research, 2003) (Paragraph 2.17). For example 47% of respondents saw moving into full-time employment as being something that they would contemplate "in the longer term", that is in over 12 months time.

3.32 Accordingly guidance for the main programme should emphasise that, although the target group is those who are not near being "job ready", they need to be motivated towards gaining a job or education or training place. Access to the main programme should, therefore, not be open to all but should only be allowed when there is some evidence of a degree of commitment. This is not to suggest that immediate results are looked for. The nature of the target group seems likely to make this difficult. However, if the programme is to be able to attain its objectives, and to be spent effectively, then recruiting clients who have some motivation is essential.

3.33 To an extent some of the pilots already do this. For example, Access to Work interviews all applicants and makes an assessment of the extent to which the applicant would benefit from being taught to drive and, amongst other things, is actively seeking employment (Diagram 3.1). Similarly Rosemount makes an initial assessment of each applicant before making a decision on admission. If Rosemount is felt not to be able to offer the support that the applicant needs they may be referred elsewhere to more specialist providers.

3.34 The need to target those who are committed needs to be something that guidance in the main programme should emphasise. The danger with this is, however, that only those who are near to being job ready are targeted so that the really hard-to reach groups are ignored. This needs to be avoided if the programme's aims are to be met. One way of doing this might be to stress to projects that they need to develop an appropriate delivery model.

Developing an Appropriate Delivery Model

3.35 One of the differences between the pilot projects in Dumfries and Galloway and Glasgow is that all of the Glasgow projects have incorporated into them staff whose role is to provide support and guidance and facilitate networking with specialist providers to meet the varied needs that projects' clients may have. This is largely not the case in the Dumfries pilots. There the focus in many is upon childcare and guidance networks are something that have still to be developed. There are exceptions to this, in particular Access to Work which has its own established networks. It is also likely that some of the project development staff will be able to provide support. However, generally this is not a planned part of provision. It might be wise to ensure that this is the case in the main programme.

3.36 The purpose of the pilots is to move parents and carers nearer to the labour market. Childcare is but one of a number of barriers that they face to labour market participation, albeit that it is, perhaps, the one that is most easily overcome by spending public resources. However, to overcome the others requires the use of specialist agencies that can provide support for such problems as health, substance abuse and literacy and numeracy. The model that some projects seem to be promoting is shown in Diagram 3.2. It is based on the assumption that clients will be able to enter the labour market with the help (as appropriate) of specialist provision once they receive the childcare support.

3.37 The problem with this model is that the client group that the Scottish Executive wants to reach may not be able to enter employment without long-term support and guidance. To provide childcare support in parallel with this may mean that the childcare resources are spent for limited short, or even medium, term impacts.

Diagram 3.2 The Employment and Childcare Funding Model

3.38 Given this we would propose that guidance stresses to projects the model shown in Diagram 3.3. Under this all clients undergo an initial assessment which determines motivation. Those who are motivated towards moving nearer to the labour market are then further assessed to identify the barriers they face. If these are solely childcare then they can move onto the programme. If they face other barriers they will be referred to the appropriate specialist providers. In this case childcare may be provided in order that they can make use of these specialist services.

3.39 This is not to suggest that those whose main barrier is childcare receive no specialist support. What is proposed is that such provision is only made available, along with the childcare support, for a limited period of time. This model would seem to be a more effective use of the Working for Families funding than that shown in Diagram 3.2. It would also seem to be a more effective use of specialist provision.

Staffing

3.40 A number of the pilot projects are being run by staff who have experience of delivering similar initiatives, as the pilots are developments of existing projects. However new staff are also being recruited. Recruitment is being done in 2 ways: through secondments and by open recruitment.

3.41 In general terms secondments are seen as advantageous in that it is possible to persuade someone to come and run a project that has a time limited life. As they know that they have a job to return to, they are able to devote their energies to running the project. It is also hoped, in a number of instances, that the secondees will have been involved in the development of the pilots and will, therefore, be able to make rapid progress once in post. However, a view was also expressed that secondees may be unwilling, or unable, to adapt to a new situation (however temporary) and therefore continue to act as if they were employed by their parent organisation.

3.42 The obvious alternative to using a secondee is to recruit someone on the open market on a fixed term contract. Whilst this might be inevitable in some instances, it is felt that this is rarely an effective way to staff a project. The main reason for this view is the limited effective time that is spent on project development and delivery, given the time needed to settle in and the inevitable period of uncertainty, and time spent on job search, as the contract end nears.

3.43 There is however, another way of overcoming the problems affecting both secondees and fixed term contracts. This is to recruit staff on a permanent contract, as Rosemount has done. However this may only be an option available to larger projects with a variety of funding streams. There is, therefore, a reasonable degree of certainty that once one stream ends then it will be possible to pay staff from another. Going down this route can also, as Rosemount has found, be very time consuming due to the volume of applicants ( Paragraph 2.13).

Diagram 3.3 An Alternative Employment and Childcare Model

3.44 Regardless of which route projects go down there is a need to be clear about the roles of staff. Observations of the discussions held in Dumfries and Galloway found that there were both differences of opinion, and some unrealistic expectations, as to what a co-ordinator could be expected to do. Perhaps naturally, there was a tendency to see the co-ordinator as picking up all of the tasks that currently had not been allocated. The outcome was that the job description was becoming unrealistic. Following discussion it was narrowed down to a more strategic, overview role. Such clarity seems vital if the post holder is to be able to perform adequately to a tight timetable.

Volunteering

3.45 The point has already been made that one of the outcomes that Rosemount is aiming at is for clients to become active as volunteers, which is seen as being a staging post to moving into paid work ( Paragraph 2.13). As an option this did not figure explicitly in the original Scottish Executive brief as an outcome. We do however feel that it should be considered as a valid interim outcome of the Working for Families support. As such it has been incorporated into the proposed monitoring framework ( see Chapter 4).

Project Delivery

3.46 Delivery of most of the projects is through an intermediary organisation, rather than the local authority directly. For example SCMA and the Accessible Transport Forum are to deliver projects in Dumfries and Galloway, whilst in Glasgow local groups such as COJAC have this responsibility.

3.47 Using intermediaries has advantages. For example:

• They know the local area and have credibility with local organisations and the wider community. It might, therefore be easier, or quicker, to establish a project than if a totally new body was to be set up;
• An existing project is likely to have its own local networks, both formal and informal. This means that marketing campaigns, even by word of mouth, can be set up very rapidly. Proof of this can be seen from the fact that even before the Easterhouse project had been launched requests for childcare subsidy had been received from 2 local parents;
• Groups will have their own structures and systems which do not have to be set up, as would be the case were a new delivery organisation to be created; and
• They will be experts in their field, be this childcare or transport, and will therefore know what works and what doesn't. This should make the formulation of objectives and targets easier.

3.48 However there may be a down side to working through existing organisations. In particular:

• As has already been pointed out, existing organisations may lack the capacity to deliver additional projects. There is, therefore, clearly a need to ensure that projects have management capacity to take on additional tasks before giving them a delivery role; and
• Organisations are experts in their own field. Such expertise may, however, mean that they want to continue to deliver what ever they are comfortable with, rather than move into new areas of work. It is too early to say if this will be a problem with the pilot projects. However, some of the initial observations (for example in Dumfries and Galloway) tended to indicate that there were tensions between those coming from a childcare background and those with an economic development remit. The danger is that these tensions are not resolved and that, given that most of the projects are being run by those from a childcare background, childcare is given priority over wider economic development objectives. This is something that needs to be monitored.

3.49 Although there may be problems with using local groups, on balance this would seem to be the appropriate way to deliver the Working for Families projects, subject to:

• The local authority being certain that the group has the capacity to deliver what is being asked of it;
• This being agreed in advance with the Care Commission, if necessary; and
• Exactly what the group is to deliver, and other requirements, being set out clearly in service level agreements.

3.50 This possible tension between childcare and economic development objectives is, however, of considerable importance. If it is not resolved then it may be difficult for the programme to deliver its objectives. Accordingly this is explored in greater detail in the next section.

Economic Development Linkages

3.51 The objective of the pilot funding is to provide childcare as a means of enabling parents and carers to move into, or nearer to, the job market. Childcare is therefore a means to an end, not the end in itself. Given this it is, perhaps, surprising that of the 11 projects only 2 (Access to Work and Rosemount) are coming from what could be described as an economic development background. Another, Dumfries and Galloway's Expansion of the Childminding Service, has the aim of promoting self employment, albeit in a narrow field, where the track record of sustainability is, as the Scottish Executive's figures show (Scottish Executive, 2003), not very good. The others either have childcare origins or come from other backgrounds, for example community transport.

3.52 To attain the Scottish Executive's objectives there will be a need to develop close links with economic development agencies and organisations for those pilots that lack such networks. For some projects this might be easy. For example the Castlemilk project is to be run by a secondee from CEDA, the local economic development company. However, several of the other projects seem likely to have to develop such linkages from a background of limited understanding and awareness of economic development structures and programmes.

3.53 Developing such an understanding is clearly not impossible, although it may be difficult in the short time scale over which the pilots will run. However, a more efficient way of delivering the Scottish Executive's objectives might be for projects to be run by economic development organisations that have expertise in helping those who are a long way from the labour market move into jobs. They could then, as has Rosemount, contract with childcare providers to deliver whatever childcare is needed.

3.54 The danger with many of the pilots is that, because of the type of organisations that are delivering them, the emphasis, and the effort, is initially going into childcare rather than economic development. It might be preferable to ensure that, when the main programme is rolled out, greater efforts are made to have more economic development organisations delivering projects than is currently the case. Whilst childcare may not always be easy to provide, for example because of the need to cater for children with behavioural difficulties or the lack of infrastructure, there would generally seem to be more certainty about providing it than with getting parents and carers into employment. Yet the expertise in most of the pilots lies in childcare, not in economic development.

3.55 There are examples of economic development organisations that are major childcare providers. For example the East End Partnership, one of Glasgow's local economic development companies, runs a number of childcare projects (providing a total of 140 places), a mobile play team and a variety of related initiatives such as Child Safety and a Childminding Initiative. It also delivers an Intermediate Labour Market initiative "Childcare Works" which aims to help 15 local residents to move into work. Such organisations might be better placed to meet the Scottish Executive's objectives in the short to medium term than ones having a child care remit alone.

3.56 To some extent Glasgow is exceptional in the extent to which it has developed a local economic development framework through its network of 8 local economic development companies. As has been commented upon earlier, one of these (CEDA in Castlemilk) is involved in the pilots through the provision of a secondee. However other council areas have their own networks and local development projects. Local authority economic development departments, or their equivalent, and LECs should be aware of what exists locally.

3.57 To ensure that the funding meets its objective, that is to move parents nearer to employability, we therefore suggest that consideration be given to steering the money for the main programme through local government's economic development, rather than the childcare, infrastructure. An alternative option might be to use the Childcare Partnerships. However, analysis of the strategies for Glasgow and Dumfries and Galloway has found that the childcare-employment link is not always very strong. Accordingly, if the money was to be channelled through the partnerships there must be a fear that, as with most of the pilots, the main focus would be upon childcare rather than economic development.

Targeting

3.58 There is invariably a conflict between targeting geographical areas and targeting individuals. Geographical targeting can be a crude mechanism in so far as there are invariably many people with the identified targeted characteristics outwith the targeted areas as there are within them. However, it is administratively very efficient as it enables services to be delivered to a large group of people even though not all of them may possess the characteristics being targeted. Targeting individuals may be more effective in that there is certainty that those receiving the policy intervention have the characteristics that the policy makers want to impact upon. However, such targeting can be relatively inefficient as there is a need to ensure (through some sort of assessment) that the individuals receiving the support have the necessary characteristics. Delivery, especially for services that need a physical base or some threshold level of users, can also be difficult, especially in rural areas where the target group may be widely distributed.

3.59 To some extent the pilot projects have elements of both geographical and individual targeting. They are focused upon areas that have above average levels of exclusion. Within these areas the emphasis is upon targeting those who have specific characteristics: parents or carers who want to move into employment, training or education but are unable to do so as they face a number of barriers, one of which is childcare.

3.60 Although Dumfries and Galloway had been selected as one of the pilots there was a general view from interviewees in the area that spatial targeting was unfair in so far as it was often done at such a scale as to mean that pockets of exclusion were overlooked. To some extent this would support targeting individuals rather than areas.

3.61 Some interviewees also expressed the opinion that continued spatial targeting might eventually result in the targeted areas being unable to absorb the additional resources. This might have a number of consequences, for example:

• There may not be sufficient qualified staff to run whatever facilities were to be set up. This is predicted to be a problem in Easterhouse when the currently planned facilities for 0 to 3 year olds come on stream; and
• There may be a problem in identifying sufficient clients with the required characteristics. This might be even more of a problem if, as earlier suggested, (Paragraphs 3.29 to 3.34) there were to be some initial assessment before clients were admitted to a project.

3.62 Spatial targeting, based on the Scottish Executive's Indices of Deprivation, has political consequences were resources to be allocated in line with the severity of deprivation. Table 3.1 looks at the distribution of the 100 most deprived wards in Scotland as identified in the 2003 Indices of Deprivation. It can be seen that, were resources to be allocated on the basis of this measure of need, then Glasgow would receive the largest share, followed by Dundee. Although councils such as East Ayrshire contain rural areas, the deprived wards tend to be the small former mining and iron working communities. Highland has 1 ward in the 100 most deprived and this is ranked 8 ^th. Likewise Dumfries and Galloway has one ward: ranked 70 ^th.

Table 3.1 Number of the 100 Most Deprived Wards in Selected Local Authorities

University of Oxford, 2002, Scottish Indices of Deprivation 2003, University of Oxford.
Note:
1. There are 1,222 wards in Scotland.

3.63 Had the Working for Families funding been allocated solely on the basis of need, then the 2 pilot areas would have probably been Glasgow and Dundee. Using the Indices in this rather mechanistic way would, however, be unlikely to be politically acceptable. Yet the Indices exist and it would seem unwise for the Working for Families programme to ignore them. Consideration could therefore be given to allocating funds to those authorities with the greatest concentrations of deprivation, as measured by the Indices. However if this is done then the spatial consequences need to be borne in mind.

3.64 It could also be argued that the 2003 Indices do not fully represent rural dimensions such as accessibility. Although geographical access to services figures in the Indices it is solely to services such as doctors, shops and banks. There is no measure of distance to key employment nodes or to further education centres. Other available indicators that might favour rural areas were not included: for example access to private and public transport. Such omissions could easily be used by rural authorities to argue a case for project support.

Urban/Rural Differences

3.65 It is easy to exaggerate the differences between urban and rural areas with regard to such things as access to job opportunities and attitudes to specific types of childcare such as childminding.

3.66 Although the distances to be travelled in rural areas to any facility, such as a training centre or a work place, are likely to be geographically greater, many of those living in, for example Glasgow's outer housing estates, find it very difficult to access jobs, other than those located in the city centre. This reflects the tendency for public transport to be concentrated upon radial routes. There are well documented experiences in Glasgow of the inability of those without a car, living in Castlemilk and Easterhouse, to be able to access jobs in, respectively East Kilbride and North Lanarkshire.

3.67 Likewise attitudes to childminding in many of the Pilots' target communities may differ little between the 2 types of area. For example, one of the Dumfries and Galloway bids is justified, in part, on the basis that parents are unwilling to allow their children to be looked after by childminders. Apparently the market research underway in Glasgow has uncovered identical attitudes, with childminders being demonised by parents who have little, or no, experience of them.

3.68 However, what might be a more of a problem in rural areas is the development of effective networks. These are needed so that those looking to return to the labour market can be referred to specialist agencies to help them overcome whatever labour market access barriers they have. Not only do urban areas have a greater density of such agencies (in part a reflection of the greater severity of exclusion problems) but geography makes accessing them easier. This does not, however, mean that it is impossible to establish such networks in rural areas, as the Access to Work project has shown.

3.69 Rural areas also do not have the density of initiatives and networks that are found in cities such as Glasgow. This, as Paragraph 3.6 pointed out, may mean that there is a restricted strategic and policy framework to relate projects to. However this can be overcome by ensuring that project development involves all of the players who have in interest in economic development and childcare, as has been done in Dumfries and Galloway.

3.70 Given that there are both differences and similarities between urban and rural areas with regard to such things as accessibility how should the Scottish Executive's Working for Families programme respond? There is a need to recognise that there will generally be further to travel in rural areas to facilities and employment. As such the need for transport to childcare provision and transport for child carers needs to be recognised, as indeed it has been in some of the pilot projects. It may also be necessary to accept that transport difficulties may make securing "hard" outcomes, such as jobs, more difficult in rural areas. Beyond this, given the projects' development stages, it is not possible to be more prescriptive at this time.

Summary

3.71 This Chapter has identified a number of issues that could impact upon the main Working for Families programme. Before looking at how these could be used to help the Scottish Executive develop good practice and criteria for allocating the main programme the crucial issue of monitoring and evaluation will be considered.

« Previous | Contents | Next »