The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHAPTER FOUR: EMPLOYMENT SUPPORT PROVIDERS - A VARIED LANDSCAPE

INTRODUCTION

4.1 This chapter discusses findings from a questionnaire survey of employment support providers carried out during 2004. While national statistics (Scottish Executive, 2004) and other research showed employment-related activity to have flourished in recent years, less was known about the spread of 'supported employment' as distinct from other types of employment support, the type and quality of supported jobs, and the extent to which jobs in 'open employment' were full or part time and represented individual choice. Also, little was known about the levels of pay associated with supported jobs, although previous research has suggested these jobs are sometimes unpaid or low paid positions.

4.2 The study set out to examine employment support and as such, inevitably covered a vast canvas of activity. While it did include support for paid jobs or 'real jobs', it also included support provided to individuals in segregated or non-open employment settings, work placements, unpaid and voluntary work, vocational training as well as a whole host of other work-related activities. A distinction has therefore been made in this and other chapters between 'supported employment' and other types of employment support. We also discuss the different approaches to, and interpretations of, 'supported employment'.

PIP AGREEMENTS & NATIONAL STATISTICS

4.3 At the start of the research, Partnership in Practice (PiP) agreements completed by 32 local authorities with health and other partners in 2001 provided partial information about work-related activities for people with learning disabilities and/or ASD. However, these early statements lacked detail on progress made with the employment agenda. In particular, these statements did not show how local authorities were evaluating employment support. Further, the findings of our survey of employment support providers confirmed that evaluation of employment support services was not common practice: Under half of respondents altogether (33 out of 69) stated they had evaluated their services and just 18 of these were local authorities. Further, the responses indicated services to be engaged in routine monitoring, service reviews and collation of management information rather than commissioning independent and rigorous evaluation.

4.4 While a general level of activity around employment opportunities was evident from the PiPs, the extent of a focus on 'real jobs' was less clear, and while 'supported employment' services were well developed in some areas, there were no such services in others. There was little mention within these early PiP agreements of how local authorities were progressing with Recommendation 16 from The same as you?, which suggested local authorities and health boards should lead by example in promoting employment. Nor did the statements make specific reference as to how they would address the employment of people with ASD.

4.5 The first PiP agreements were written in the first half of 2001 and, from what was reported, employment for people with learning disabilities was not a high priority for local authorities and health boards. Since then, employment has come onto the agenda in the learning disabilities field, evidenced by the publication of Working for a Change? in December 2003 and the commissioning of this research. Local authorities, health boards and their planning partners were completing new PiP agreements for the end of September 2004, just outside the timeframe for this research. These were expected to say much more about employment, particularly as the Scottish Executive stated that PiP agreements should address employment opportunities, specifically covering:

• Current employment schemes for people with learning disabilities and the involvement of other agencies, such as Jobcentre Plus
• Numbers of adults with learning disabilities with employment opportunities and any targets for the next 3 years
• Plans for development in the next 3 years.

4.6 The Scottish Executive collated new statistics about learning disability services for the first time in 2003. These were published in February 2004 as Adults with Learning Disabilities: Implementation of The same as you? As part of these statistics, local authorities reported a total of 2,493 individuals with learning disabilities in employment during a typical week in May 2003, with 979 of these in 'voluntary work', 714 in 'non- open employment' and 774 in 'open employment'.

4.7 North Lanarkshire and Argyll & Bute were exceptional in terms of having large numbers of people in 'open employment'. This was defined as paid jobs that 'have/or could be put out to open job adverts', with ordinary employers, for the 'going rate of pay' and that may or may not involve support from a job coach. Three others, City of Edinburgh, Highland and North Ayrshire also had more people in 'open employment' than other types of work. In most areas however, the statistics suggested the majority of people with learning disabilities were in jobs that either offered expenses only ('voluntary work') or allowances rather than a wage ('non-open employment').

QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY

4.8 The findings presented below based on questionnaire responses from 69 employment support providers in Scotland, start to paint a more colourful picture of available employment support. Appendix 3 shows the geographical spread of responses across Scotland. While every attempt was made to be inclusive of employment support providers across Scotland, the degree to which we were successful in this relied first upon receiving a response from local authorities and others to a request for information about local employment support providers, and second, on the quality of the contact information contained within databases held by SUSE and other bodies.

4.9 Responses came from 41% of employment support services contacted in different parts of the country, and were representative of all but 5 local authority areas in Scotland. Areas from which there were no returns were East Ayrshire, East Dunbartonshire, East Renfrewshire, South Lanarkshire, and West Dunbartonshire. South Lanarkshire was in the process of collating in-house information about its employment support services, but this was not available in time to be taken into account by this research.

4.10 As might be expected, the highest numbers of respondents were from the City of Edinburgh (9 or 13% of respondents) followed by Glasgow City (6 or 9% or respondents).

PROFILE OF EMPLOYMENT SUPPORT PROVIDERS

4.11 Survey respondents came from a variety of organisations including local authorities, the voluntary sector, Careers Scotland, Jobcentre Plus, Further Education colleges, work creation schemes, and sheltered work settings. Respondents represented both large and small organisations. What they all had in common was that they provided employment support, even if this was marginal to their main purpose. The following brief pen pictures illustrate the range of organisations that responded.

Moray Council Employment Support Service, Elgin
A dedicated employment service with 10 staff run by the local authority for people with physical and sensory disabilities, mental health and ASD provides "person centred support, facilitates rights, and promotes progression."

Jewel & Esk Valley College
Has 1 Placement Support Coordinator who works with people "who require additional support" (people with disabilities, mental health problems, young people, adult returners) offering work experience tasters and voluntary work opportunities.

Careers Scotland, Isle of Skye
As part of the Highlands & Islands Enterprise, Careers Scotland employs a Keyworker to provide young people with "special needs, behaviour problems, or substance abuse" with "intensive support to ease the transition into sustainable further education, training or employment."

Inverclyde Council Personnel Services
A large department in a local authority provides support through 3 staff members to either people with a learning disability or physical disability to gain employment opportunities through the government's Workstep programme.

Opening Project, Glasgow
This dedicated employment service run by a voluntary organisation by and for disabled people in Glasgow, has 8 staff supporting unemployed disabled people to "gain and sustain employment of 16 hours or more".

Locharthur Community, Dumfries
As part of a broader service, a staff of 36 support a therapeutic community environment for people with learning disabilities where people live and work together on farms, garden, workshops or houses. The service offers support in "meaningful work that is of benefit to other people within or without the Locharthur Community".

Beltane Products, Wishaw
A sheltered workshop run by North Lanarkshire Council has 6 staff supporting people with learning disabilities in "sustainable gainful employment" in a factory setting.

Inclusion Alliance, Edinburgh
A voluntary organisation with 21 Community Lifestyle Facilitators providing a "whole lifestyle support service" to people with complex learning disabilities. It offers support to people in community settings and activities, of which 'supported employment' is a part.

'Employment support'

4.12 Given the research study sought to examine employment support in its broadest sense, it was important to understand what meanings respondents attached to the terms. In summary, respondents included the following as employment support:

• Pre-employment support e.g. job clubs, helping with CVs, interview coaching
• Job training ( e.g. confidence building, literacy skills, travel, communication skills)
• Welfare benefits advice
• Traditional 'supported employment' - vocational profiling, job finding/search, job matching, job coaching, and provision of long-term support
• Supporting 'natural supports' in the workplace
• On-site mentoring in sheltered or non-open jobs
• Regular reviews and monitoring to sustain people in jobs
• Social support and help with personal care
• Support to employers
• Support to parents/carers
• Career planning, including planning with young people leaving school
• Disability awareness training
• Support to access specific government programmes such as New Deal, Get Ready for Work, Buddy to Work, Workstep Programme, Access to Work
• Providing special equipment
• And last but not least, advocacy support

4.13 Further, Table 4.1 below summarises their responses to a specific question about the types of employment support they provided:

4.14 Services were commonly engaged in pre-vocational or work preparation activities, although not many offered job club support. Over three quarters provided job coaching support, clearly demonstrating the influence of the American individual 'supported employment' model. Although common, vocational profiling was not carried out by all respondents. This might, in part, be explained by the degree of collaborative working between agencies such as Careers or Jobcentre Plus and 'supported employment' agencies at certain stages of the process. Fewer than might have been expected identified Training in Systematic Instruction or TSI within the support they provided.

4.15 By far the commonest type of support provided, was ongoing individual employee support (88% of respondents). This finding confirms what employment support providers told us informally, which was that they spend a considerable amount of time monitoring and supporting individuals in jobs, and that this aspect of their work often goes unrecognised.

4.16 Respondents highlighted the support they provided to employers almost as much as the support they provided to individuals with disabilities. Many reported working to develop 'natural supports' in the workplace but considerably fewer reported they were using a 'career planning approach'. In more recent years, workplace disability awareness training has become an active part of the employment support providers' strategy and in this survey, 55% of respondents reported delivering such training.

4.17 There were several 'Other' types of support identified. They offered for example, "work-related skill development"; social skills training to "address specific individual issues for example anger management, stress and anxiety management"; vocational guidance, such as help with interview techniques; personal development plans; welfare benefits checks including "income forecasting". In short, employment support covered a vast canvas of activity, not to be confused with the 'supported employment' model.

Types of employment opportunities

4.18 Given the diversity in the meaning of employment support, it should not be surprising to find an equally broad spectrum of employment opportunities being offered, including unpaid and voluntary work alongside paid jobs. Table 4.2 below summarises the types of employment opportunity offered.

*These terms have now been changed to 3 categories of 'permitted work'

4.19 Table 4.2 shows that the majority defined their service as offering 'supported employment', despite around a third of respondents offering segregated employment in factory settings. Over half were offering work placements of 12 weeks and under, job tasters for up to 6 weeks and voluntary work opportunities in not-for-profit organisations. Jobs for 'therapeutic benefits' or 'earnings disregard' were also common. The reader should note that although we recognise that the official terms in use by the Benefits Agency have changed to three categories of 'permitted work', we were advised at the start of the research, that work for 'therapeutic benefits' and 'earnings disregard' would be the terms most readily understood. These findings should therefore be taken to be equivalent to, or as relating to the 'permitted work' categories.

4.20 They were supporting unpaid jobs of 12 weeks or more to a lesser extent. The degree to which current opportunities were in unpaid jobs will be investigated further in chapter five when we look at how many individuals with learning disabilities and/or ASD were in paid, unpaid and voluntary work. A few respondents reported offering opportunities to work in a social firm. None of the 6 'clubhouses' in Scotland responded to the survey, and so none of the organisations was offering Transitional Employment placements.

4.21 Only one organisation was offering employment opportunities in a co-operative setting, and 12 respondents identified 'Other' types of opportunities they provided. These were specified as "paid employment", "open employment", "intermediate work setting", Training for Work scheme, Get Ready for Work scheme, Workstep, "fixed term training", and the New Deal Environmental Task Force ( ETF).

The staff of employment support providers

4.22 For the services represented in the survey sample, the mean number of staff in each project or service was 9, while the median was 6. The largest number (8 respondents) were providers with a single member of staff. The majority of staff were full-time (76%).

4.23 The diversity among the providers was reflected in the range of job titles of staff of employment support services. Those who had specific responsibility for developing employment opportunities had job titles such as Employment Support Worker/Officer, Supported Employment Officer, Job Coach or Job Buddy. Generalist posts included Day Centre Officers, Resource Workers, Support Workers, Trainers, Team Leaders and Managers. Some employment services supported people to perform specific jobs in sheltered workshops and communities and had staff that were Welders, Tree Surgeons, Furniture Restorers, and Workshop/Factory Managers.

Service sector

4.24 As Table 4.3 below shows, local authority social work departments and the voluntary sector dominated the employment support sector. Two respondents were private sector companies delivering support training and employment and, a further 3 described their sector as 'other' as they were part of the Highlands and Islands Enterprise Board or incorporated within a college. None of the respondents identified their organisation as being provided by or managed by the Health Service.

Dedicated or broader services?

4.25 Providers were asked whether they were a dedicated service or part of a larger organisation with a range of functions. Dedicated services were defined as those specifically offering employment support, having their own budget, controls and policies. The majority of employment support providers were part of a broader service (62%), while just over a third (36%) were dedicated employment services including 'supported employment' services or projects in the voluntary and local authority sectors.

Area & length of time established

4.26 Nearly half (48%) described the area they were serving as 'mixed urban/rural' and a further 32% were in urban areas. Few were in rural areas (19%). Employment support providers were relatively mature services, with over half having been in existence for 5 years or more and relatively few having been set up in the past 2 years. This could indicate slower growth in recent years. While this variable was the same whether the provider was in an urban, rural or mixed urban/rural area, local authority services tended to be older and voluntary sector services newer: around 70% of local authority providers had been in existence for 5 years or more compared to 47% of those in the voluntary sector.

1 missing case; *does not sum 100% due to rounding

Target groups

4.27 Almost half of these services were targeted generically at "people with disabilities" or a subset of this such as "young people with disabilities". Next, they were targeted specifically at people with learning disabilities. Few were working with people with ASD. Some services were providing support to "all groups", which included unemployed young people and care leavers, and others targeted services at people with mental health problems. One catered for "people with special educational needs".

1 missing case; *does not sum 100% due to rounding;

Service aims

4.28 Not surprisingly given the nature of the sample, the service aims of employment support providers were wide-ranging and, in certain respects, resist summary. While all primarily set out, in the words of one provider, to "assist individuals with disabilities to access employment opportunities", they varied considerably in how they aimed to do this. Service aims ranged from supporting individuals to "enhance employability", to providing "supported work placements" and segregated jobs in specialist industries, to providing 'supported employment' services, finding and helping individuals retain paid jobs with community employers. The 2 quotations below illustrate this diversity:

"We aim to promote confidence, self esteem, broaden horizons and enhance employability and social skills." (Polbeth Market Gardens Trust)

"Our aim is to ensure people with disabilities who want to work, receive appropriate supports and opportunities to access real jobs for real wages." (North Lanarkshire Supported Employment Service)

4.29 Vocational training programmes stated aims were to help individuals "make the successful transition into paid work". Other organisations whose core business was supporting individuals in their own homes, aimed to assist them with jobs "if they wish to find employment".

Service criteria

4.30 Just over three quarters (77%) of organisations had selection criteria for their service. In common with other research findings (Beyer et al, 1996), the majority stated that the individual's motivation to work and in some cases, to work a minimum number of hours per week, were the main criteria for service. In addition, eligibility for employment support regularly depended upon factors such as:

• Where the person lived (services worked within specific catchment areas)
• Being identified as having learning disabilities or another form of disability
• Being of a certain age e.g. over 16 or over 18 years

4.31 Additionally, some services required potential clients to be:

• Referred by another service, typically a support provider
• Eligible for the Workstep Programme
• Able to travel independently by public transport

4.32 A significant minority, including several purporting to operate as 'supported employment' services, stated that the individual must be "reasonably work ready" or be identified by another agency as being "work ready", or "able to perform at an acceptable level of productivity". They were required at referral to have a set of skills, such as good timekeeping and inter-personal skills, which would enhance employability.

Funding

4.33 The main individual source of funding for employment support was Scottish local authorities. This was the case for both local authority and voluntary sector provision. The next most significant source of funding for all providers was central government funding ( e.g. Scottish Executive, Department of Work & Pensions), followed by European funding, ( e.g. European Social Fund or ESF). This was especially true for voluntary sector providers.

4.34 There was no separate budget within support services such as C-Change, and so the costs of providing employment support would presumably come from generic budgets within the organisation and would thus be open to competition from other demands. Also, some organisations such as the Garvald Engine Shed (Edinburgh) and the Locharthur Beeswing (Dumfries) raised revenue from the sale of their products. Others received funding from a voluntary sector parent body such as Quarriers or Camphill Village Trust.

4.35 Funding was received from a variety of sources and the majority (67%) had between 1-2 sources (see Table 4.7 below). Only a minority had more than 3 different funding sources. Local authority employment support providers were mainly self-funding but some also received government or European grants, and less frequently, financial support from Local Enterprise Companies and the private sector. Voluntary sector providers received financial support from a more diverse range of funders overall, including the local authorities, central government bodies, charitable bodies, SIPs, the health service and the private sector.

Referral sources

4.36 Referrals for employment support came from a variety of places, but predominantly they were from social work/services departments. This is perhaps not surprising given that they were both the biggest provider, as well as the main funder of employment support services. Jobcentres were the next main source of referrals, followed by voluntary sector organisations, FE colleges, self-referral, Careers Advisers, family and friends, and 'Others'. This latter category included Community Learning Disability Nurses, Educational Psychologists, Resource Centres, and Disability Employment Advisers (Jobcentre). One service did not receive referrals as such as they provided employment support to individuals they were already supporting in their own homes. Table 4.8 below shows in detail the main sources of referral.

4.37 Respondents were asked to further identify the 3 most common referrers to their service. This was found to be staff from Resource Centres and the Jobcentre Disability Employment Advisers. Over half (51%) of respondents identified social work/services as the first most common referrer and 1 in 5 respondents (21%) identified the local Jobcentre as the most common referrer. Moreover, local Jobcentres and social work/services were the second most common referrer identified by 19% and 16% of respondents respectively. The third most common referrer was 'self referral', Jobcentres and FE Colleges.

Partnerships with other agencies

4.38 To better understand the partnerships with other services these providers found the most helpful, respondents were asked to identify which organisations they worked with on a regular basis when providing employment support. As the following table clearly shows, social work/services, voluntary organisations, Jobcentre Plus, FE colleges, Careers offices, the local DSS office and the Department of Work & Pensions were the key partners in delivering employment support. Further, when asked to identify which 3 they found the most helpful, respondents identified (in priority order) Jobcentre Plus, social work/services, and voluntary organisations.

4.39 In addition to the 'usual suspects' listed above, respondents highlighted the importance to them of local 'supported employment' networks, links with health providers, private employers, the welfare benefits department, parents and carers, local community groups, and SUSE.

OPPORTUNITIES PROVIDED BY 'SUPPORTED EMPLOYMENT' SERVICES

4.40 As already stated, a plethora of approaches to supporting people in employment were found from the survey, 75% of which purportedly offered 'supported employment'. Many of these were however, inconsistent with the definition of 'supported employment' adopted by the research, that is, "real work for 16 hours or more in an integrated setting with ongoing support". In Tables 4.10 and 4.11 below, we refer only to information in relation to the 52 respondents who stated they were offering 'supported employment' to examine the types of employment opportunity they offered and the number of individuals supported in these different opportunities.

4.41 Although these agencies supported people in paid jobs, they also supported placements of 12 weeks or more, voluntary work in non-profit organisations, part-time jobs for 'therapeutic benefits' and jobs for 'earnings disregard', even though these do not necessarily lead to full-time paid jobs. A sizeable minority were supporting unpaid jobs lasting more than 12 weeks and 37% of the 52 respondents were supporting people in segregated settings. This suggests a lack of consistency in the way 'supported employment' has been implemented across the country, and, in some cases, a watering down of fundamental values and principles underpinning the model.

4.42 Table 4.11 below explores this issue further by looking at the number of individuals supported by the 52 agencies in each type of opportunity.

4.43 While the largest numbers of people were being supported by these agencies in paid jobs, significant numbers were in part-time jobs for 'earnings disregard', voluntary work, unpaid jobs lasting longer than 12 weeks, and part-time positions for 'therapeutic benefits'. That as many as 164 individuals were being supported in unpaid jobs lasting more than 12 weeks is an issue of concern for the development of 'supported employment' given that its primary purpose is about helping people find and keep real paid jobs. Furthermore, agencies delivering 'supported employment' were commonly supporting unpaid jobs: 89% of all those reported to be in unpaid jobs of more than 12 weeks were being supported by these 52 agencies.

4.44 Several individuals in paid jobs and supported by these 52 agencies were on the government's Workstep Programme, which provides a wage subsidy to employers. Eighteen of the 52 agencies were supporting around 300 individuals through Workstep, representing approximately 30% of all those supported in paid jobs by these agencies. Workstep providers included several local authorities (Aberdeen City, Clackmannanshire, Dundee City, Falkirk, Fife, Highland, Inverclyde, and Orkney Island), as well as large voluntary organisations ( ENABLE, Cornerstone and Leonard Cheshire). In contrast, although 21 of the 52 agencies were supporting individuals on Working Tax Credits, they were supporting just 85 individuals in this way.

OPINIONS ON BEST PRACTICE

4.45 In the following paragraphs, we explore the opinions of employment support providers about 'supported employment', 'good practice' within their own organisations, the perceived barriers to employment, and ideas to increase the effectiveness of employment support.

Definition of 'supported employment'

4.46 Respondents were asked their opinion on the definition of 'supported employment' used in the research. The majority (67%) agreed with the definition, albeit with certain reservations. A fifth of respondents disagreed with the statement outright and a further 14% did not reply to the question. The main disagreement was in relation to defining 'real work' as paid work of 16 hours or more. This was felt to discriminate against people with more severe disabilities who, in their opinion, could still perform valued jobs but might only manage to work a few hours per week. One respondent in agreement with the definition commented:

"In an ideal world, the definition of supported employment would be acceptable, however, people with complex needs may not be able to sustain 16 hours work due to fatigue or over exertion but would feel able to contribute a few hours a week for both a financial and personal incentive."

4.47 Some respondents believed that setting a minimum of 16 hours failed to recognise the disincentives operating in the welfare benefits system. While the research found examples that refuted such assertions, some respondents claimed that disabled people worked part-time hours because "they had a ceiling imposed on their earnings by the welfare benefit system".

4.48 In terms of patterns of employment, one respondent suggested that advertised part-time positions could regularly be for less than 16 hours. For example, in one organisation a clerical officer was employed for 9 hours per week, and it was suggested the job might suit an applicant with learning disabilities. It was suggested that 16 hours was an "arbitrary cut-off" that would result in devaluing many current jobs.

4.49 There were some respondents who believed that jobs defined as 'supported employment' should be in integrated settings, but that it mattered less if they were paid or full-time positions. This was in stark contrast to the view that securing the 'going rate of pay' for the job or finding 'paid jobs' was central to 'supported employment'. Some even disagreed that 'supported employment' necessarily meant jobs in integrated settings, preferring to define it more in terms of the support given. A minority sought to include pre-employment support in the definition of 'supported employment', arguing that it was supporting individuals with disabilities to "secure and maintain paid work in a regular work environment" by providing the necessary support tailored to each individual.

4.50 From the above discussion, confusion over the definition of 'supported employment' seems endemic. Disagreement rages over whether it is desirable for 'supported employment' to only include jobs for a minimum amount of weekly hours, for example, 16 hours; only paid jobs at the going rate of pay; and, whether or not it should refer only to jobs in integrated settings. The level of confusion suggests a pressing need to return to basics with 'supported employment' and to re-examine its original values and principles.

Issues in adopting new approaches

4.51 Table 4.12 below shows the extent to which the survey respondents felt their services had embraced 'natural supports', person centred planning and career planning approaches. The idea of utilising 'natural supports' within the workplace is not new, so it was unsurprising that the majority reported adopting this approach. Fewer respondents identified with person centred planning and career planning as links between these approaches and 'supported employment' are relatively recent. Nonetheless, it was encouraging that such high proportions did so.

4.52 On enquiring further about issues related to the implementation of any of these approaches, respondents highlighted the following.

Natural supports

4.53 For services operating in rural locations, utilising natural supports within the workplace was regarded as a "necessity", and for some as "the only way we could provide a service". For others, using this approach represented "better use of limited support hours". For whatever reason 'natural supports' were used, it was critical that they were developed "right from the start" and that this was "explicitly stated as an aim" to the employer otherwise "it will just not happen".

4.54 Respondents often talked about the need to "achieve the right balance" between support from co-workers and support from the project/service. One observed that "natural supports might do the job for the client rather than help them" or that they might become "over protective or too authoritative". It was thought that some employees might be unenthusiastic about providing 'natural support' but feel obliged to do so by their employer, and there were problems caused by staff turnover, which was particularly high in some industries like catering establishments.

4.55 They acknowledged that building 'natural supports' was more challenging in some workplaces than others and differed according to the nature of the job. A minority had found using 'natural supports' too challenging on account of employers' fears or prejudice. The literature review found that adopting a 'natural supports' approach can mean many different things and that employment specialists have embraced the concept variously. These survey findings would seem to uphold this assertion.

Person centred planning

4.56 Difficulties with implementing person centred planning were framed more in terms of the way this approach was perceived to "challenge the service system". There was scepticism about the approach, and a sense that it could lead to "unrealistic aspirations". Another concern was that to "do it properly" would require more resources than available as person centred planning was extremely time intensive. However, as one explained, the challenge was taking the time to "build up capacity and resist the urge to go for quick outcomes". The extra time taken was perceived as highly beneficial:

"The focus is on sustained outcomes. The time we spend on preparation with clients means that we approach employers in a positive way." (Voluntary sector 'supported employment' service)

4.57 Opus Employment in Glasgow had developed a tool they called the 'Personal Employment Plan', which helped make the process of vocational profiling more person centred and ensured jobs were better matched to individual interests and preferences. The potential of person centred planning to enhance the individuality and person centredness of 'supported employment' more generally therefore has still to be realised.

Career development

4.58 Barely any comment was offered in respect of a career planning approach even though 62% stated they had adopted this approach. When they did raise issues, it was to highlight individuals' lack of experience with choice and poor employment histories and how this impacted negatively on the development of personal career plans. The link between person centred planning and a career planning approach was not made.

Perceived barriers to employment

4.59 Barriers or challenges to employment as identified by respondents were operating on three main levels: (1) at a basic or individual; (2) structural; and (3) perceptual/attitudinal levels. Although rarely highlighted as a main barrier to employment for people with learning disabilities and/or ASD, a few respondents identified individuals' lack of self-confidence, skills and lack of experience in employment. At a structural level, respondents identified disincentives caused by the social security system or 'benefits trap'; changes in patterns of employment; and high unemployment as all acting as barriers to employment.

4.60 Inadequate funding and resources for 'supported employment' was commonly highlighted as a main barrier. Not having guaranteed funding was causing "instability for planning" for both the individuals and organisations. Services were currently short of appropriately trained staff with "the right blend of skills and experience." A gap in terms of specialised support for individuals with ASD was highlighted. Further, it was felt the support required for people with more severe disabilities or high support needs was not properly acknowledged by funding bodies.

4.61 One respondent felt that offering financial incentives to employ individuals with learning disabilities acted as a barrier to the development of 'supported employment' but did not elaborate further. Another suggested that people with learning disabilities and/or ASD were often "disempowered" by the systems and those who supported them (including parents and residential support workers), often took away their "right to self-determination". A minority identified transport as another barrier to employment, especially for individuals living in rural areas.

4.62 Finally, the attitudes of others were sometimes felt to act as barriers to employment. This included the negative perceptions and fears of employers, scepticism and negative perceptions of parents/carers and professionals and the attitudes of society towards disabled people. Some respondents claimed employers held stereotypical views of people with learning disabilities and/or ASD and that they needed to "constantly persuade employers of their value". Some even felt there was a lack of employers "willing to engage with us". Others suggested that families were sometimes concerned about the loss of benefits and the impact on the family income, or they had a problem with "letting go" and that these attitudes limited employment options.

Self identified examples of 'ground breaking' practice

4.63 We asked survey respondents to identify any aspect of their current service that they would consider particularly successful or 'ground breaking. Commonly respondents sought recognition for the "ordinary' achievements of 'supported employment" as 'ground breaking'. They highlighted the model's effectiveness in finding jobs in areas of high unemployment, especially for people traditionally disadvantaged in the labour market. Indeed, what some perceived as being commonplace, such as assisting people into full time paid employment, was considered by others to be ground breaking as the 'norm' very often was unpaid or part time jobs.

4.64 Provision of disability awareness training for employers alongside a disability organisation was another example of innovative practice. A few services were focusing on school leavers, working in collaboration with the schools and social work to properly address young people's vocational aspirations at a young age so that they "look at the option of employment and vocational training way before traditional day services".

4.65 Developing self-employment initiatives was another area considered groundbreaking. Although in the minority, there were examples of services helping to develop successful 'micro-enterprises' or community businesses in gardening and horticulture. These businesses were providing viable self-employment for people with learning disabilities and/or ASD as well as a much needed community services for local residents in more rural areas. There were some who had or were developing social firms involving people with learning disabilities and/or ASD.

4.66 Innovative services, such as Aspire in Fife and Prospects in Glasgow, were 'ground breaking' because they were the unique in their area, indeed in Scotland, to be offering employment support to people with ASD, in particular to people with Aspergers Syndrome. Not only were they involved in providing direct employment support services, but they also delivered training programmes to other organisations wanting to improve what they offered to people with ASD.

4.67 General support agencies in the voluntary sector such as the Inclusion Alliance in Edinburgh and Support for Ordinary Living in Glasgow, were breaking new ground in successfully supporting people with "behaviour that can be challenging" to work in a range of busy settings, which included offices.

4.68 Whilst not providing a discrete employment support service, Inclusion Alliance provides a "lifestyle support service" in community settings of which employment was a part. What they offer is flexible, individually tailored support including long-term on-the-job support to people with more complex disabilities. Most of the jobs they support are part-time voluntary positions in a range of settings including a Bus headquarters, a charity shop, a nursery and office settings.

4.69 Support for Ordinary Living or SOL is a voluntary organisation with 3 dedicated 'supported employment' staff that works with adults with learning disabilities in a broad capacity. It seeks to ensure that individuals have "the opportunity to become valued members of society living the life they choose". SOL perceives itself as a "unique service offering highly carved jobs with long term support." They support a small number of people in a range of mostly part-time paid jobs.

4.70 Fragmentation of employment services was an issue highlighted within this research and one respondent, Enable Glasgow project was pioneering a new "seamless service" or one stop shop approach to delivering "an individualised employment pathway" for its customers. For the job seeker, this would mean contacting one person within the service who would help with finding paid work of his/her choice including access to mainstream programmes such as Get Ready For Work. It would also mean employers would only need to contact one agency when addressing their recruitment needs.

4.71 The Opening Project in Glasgow appeared unique in having a policy of only employing people who themselves have a disability:

"All Opening staff are people with disabilities/impairments. This does not make people better workers but does assist with a better understanding of the key issues/principles of the 'social model'."

4.72 This voluntary sector project funded by the Community Fund, ESF and other charitable funding, is a dedicated 'supported employment' service, which offers, "support to any disabled person within the City of Glasgow to gain and sustain employment of their choice of 16 hours or more." A team of 8 staff provide support with confidence building, CV preparation, vocational profiling, job search, benefits advice, help with interviews, negotiations with employers, on-site support, monitoring and evaluation, and ongoing support.

Increasing effectiveness

4.73 According to the majority of respondents "simplification of the benefits system" and an impetus on government to "revise the benefits system" were crucial to improving the effectiveness of employment support. Respondents also advised raising levels of earnings disregard for people who receive Income Support.

4.74 Respondents identified the need for a better and "more secure" financial infrastructure for 'supported employment' calling for more mainstream funding of the sector, and greater investment in services in rural areas as well as for people with severe disabilities and people with ASD. Rather than "reinvent the wheel", they proposed the existing infrastructure of 'supported employment' and other employment support should serve as the foundation for expansion.

4.75 It was felt that having a "more understanding government", "more leadership from the Scottish Executive", and "greater joined up thinking" would further increase effectiveness. Local authorities and other large employers could do more to ensure there were job opportunities within their own organisations and "an increased profile for 'supported employment' at a national level" and stronger direction "from the centre" would help achieve this.

4.76 Existing employment support services within local authority social work departments were in favour of separating employment support from welfare or disability services believing that independent offices that were "not labelled as part of disability services" would increase the credibility of the service, not only with individuals and families but with employers too.

4.77 Improving the effectiveness of employment support also involved tackling the attitudinal barriers facing people with disabilities in employment. The way to achieve this, it was thought, was to develop "more sophisticated approaches to employers", to educate employers to "recognise the contribution people with learning disabilities can bring to the workplace." There should be "targeted work with employers in relation to inclusion" and companies should be made more aware of governmental policy in relation to employing people with disabilities.

4.78 Respondents identified a number of ways that practice within existing employment support services could be improved. Working more closely with schools and school leavers would address the issue of employment at an early stage and ensure that offering employment as a first option became the norm. Related to this was the need to impact on the practice of care managers so that they always considered employment as part of community care assessments.

4.79 Effectiveness could be improved with "better transitions between children's and adult services" and better partnerships between employment support providers and other agencies such as education services, voluntary sector support providers and Careers services. Lastly, there was a call for more accessible information to be produced on employment for service users because current publications "tend to be medically explained", especially those relating to ASD.

CHAPTER FOUR: SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS

• 41% of over 167 relevant employment support providers responded to a questionnaire survey during April-June 2004
• A wide range of both small and large-scale organisations were providing employment support, the majority of which were part of broader services. Some provided employment support as part of a wider "lifestyle support" approach
• Just over a third (36%) were dedicated employment services and this included 'supported employment' services
• Local authority social work departments and the voluntary sector were the main providers of employment support, and not surprisingly, they were the main funders
• Financial support was also received from central government and European grants
• Most employment support services were in urban or mixed urban/rural areas and were relatively mature. Newer services were to be found in the voluntary sector and these services relied on more diverse funding sources
• The majority of services were targeted at disabled people in general, although 22% worked specifically with people with learning disabilities
• Few services existed to support people with ASD into employment
• 'Employment support' translated into diverse services offering a range of support, not all of which led onto real jobs in ordinary workplaces
• 52 out of 69 respondents defined what they provided as 'supported employment'
• However, not all of these met the definition of 'supported employment' used in the research, and there was clear watering down of the concept in practice
• In view of the findings, there would seem an urgent need to return to basics with 'supported employment' and to agree a common definition
• While keenly embracing the use of 'natural supports' in workplaces, respondents were more cautious about person centred planning, which they felt needed resources "to do it right" and could potentially raise "unrealistic expectations"
• Career based planning approaches were far less commonly used
• Respondents identified the 'supported employment' model as ground breaking as it was yet to be adopted more widely, and the outcomes were positive when implemented properly
• Several services exemplified good practice and demonstrate that good services are being provided in different parts of Scotland
• Respondents identified 6 key developments as innovative - workplace disability awareness training; supporting micro enterprises or self-employment; specialist services for people with ASD; supporting those with challenging behaviour; providing seamless services to both employee and employer; and employing disabled people within organisations providing employment support
• Providers identified structural barriers; inadequate funding for supported employment especially for those with severe disabilities and/or 'challenging behaviour'; and the negative attitudes of others as the main barriers to employment
• Suggestions for improvements included tackling structural barriers to employment; providing targeted funding for supported employment; building on existing expertise; more central government direction; expecting more of 'big employers' e.g. local authorities and health services; making employment support independent of disability services; tackling negative attitudes; fostering better partnerships; addressing transition issues with schools; and providing more accessible information about employment.

« Previous | Contents | Next »