Neil O'Brien wrote an interesting piece in the Telegraph (http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/neilobrien1/100116574/we-should-welcome-this-experiment-with-workfare/) recently, on the announcement by the government (http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/community-work-for-job-seekers/) about the plan to introduce compulsory work experience after Work Programme. I have been involved in delivering, managing and, in some cases, designing community based work experience for nearly 20 years. I have seen them work really well, but also really badly.
In implementing an approach like this, design is really important. It is imperative that the 'hand offs' and integration to other welfare, skills and education policies is well-planned and thought through. The 'community' programme needs to provide meaningful and rewarding activity that can help in people's journey into employment. For some people, the journey back into employment might be very long - a 4 or 5 year process - and so activities after the Work Programme, which build on personal activities undertaken during their participation, can be effective and beneficial.
Attention needs to be focused on ensuring the work activities in the community are 'additive' and do not displace or substitute for either employment opportunities or existing volunteer opportunities. Unlike Neil O'Brien, I do have a clear view, based on experience, of what can work. So do many other expert organisations steeped in good and bad experiences of Community Programme, Employment Action, Community Action, Project Work, Environmental Task Force, Intense Activity Period - to name but a few of the UK examples.
Sometimes there is a natural perception to view these activities as menial and/or 'labouring' jobs. The first person in Sheffield I put into work experience was an attendant in a Fire Station Museum. The first person in Leeds, a few months later, was looking after birds of prey at a sanctuary in Lotherton Hall (worth a visit - it is still there 20 years on). In both cases, the community work was based on what the individual wanted to do - even though they were 'mandated' to attend the programme. Careful planning and clear transparent systems can enable really good projects to be developed for people, projects which are valuable, interesting and in which they can take pride. Poor design or commissioning can mess this up.
Projects we have developed in the past have included community tv, radio and newspaper projects; maintenance projects in schools, estates and parks where no funds were available for such activity; landscaped gardens in alms houses which was lovely for the residents; hospital gardens for long stay patients and gardens for the blind; marketing and fund-raising campaigns for small community organisations and local charities; care and education placements; security fittings for elderly people's homes - a whole range of projects. However, all of these activities were in programmes designed to assess and ensure projects were not disruptive to existing employment and volunteering activity but as an aditional means of providing experience and building skills.
Patrick Butler wrote an article in The Guardian recently highlighting the challenges of working with voluntary and community organisations in the context of the current public spending environment in the UK. We have a rich, vibrant and plural market capable of supporting people post-Work Programme and as Patrick's article indicates,also on Work Programme. Big Society is often attributed to causing confusion about who does what on a voluntary basis, who is commissioned for services and how these areas integrate.
Many welfare providers have worked for a number of years with collaborative networks of local voluntary and community organisations. A lot of people on these programmes will already use voluntary services and this ought to be able to continue. What is not acceptable is the 'exploitation' of volunteer opportunities as an alternative to structured work experience under welfare provision. At A4e, this is not accepted and there is no drive to 'maximise profit' by using charitable services. At the same time, we do have lots of relationships that are non-funded with partners in the voluntary sector, where we receive referrals from them and our customers use their services to support their objectives. As Work Programme beds in, we need to have good, clear and transparent systems for this work. If we cannot get this right as a market, the community work programme will be very difficult to launch and operate effectively.
So, here are some of my 'top tips' in making a compulsory community work programme really work. That means a programme that is a valuable activity for the people who participate on it and works as effectively as possible with existing community organisations.
1.Continuity and Integration for personal journey: the programme must integrate with the action plans for participants on Work Programme - WP providers must make this data available to ensure maximum possible value for participants.
2.Projects and placements that provide added value: systems need to be in place to ensure that projects and opportunities developed do not displace or substitute for existing employed or voluntary position are essential. This will take planning and engagement in programme design between DWP and suppliers.
3.Challenging and interesting projects: the opportunities need to cater for all levels of capability and interest. For example, construction and building projects and environmental clearance projects can all be interesting if well designed. This principle needs to push the boundaries of point 2 above.
4.Involve local communities in project development: many of the best programmes will involve local residents, local government and many community based organizations to identify gaps or opportunities for projects to make a real contribution to the community and thrive. Their expertise is vital to project development.
5.Appropriate employment and progression targets: as the minister pointed out, this programme should be part of a 'ladder'. It should have sensible outputs that are measured and evaluated for re-engaging participants in employment, education and learning.
6.Social business and enterprise: compared with projects in the 80's and 90's, we have a much more mature social enterprise and social business sector. This can provide excellent opportunites for community businesses to grow under the programme and this growth should be a measured outcome.
7.Projects designed around interests of end users: there always needs to be a balance around getting activities for people to participate on and developing the activities on the basis of the interest and capaibility of the people on the programme. The more of the latter, the better a mandatory programme works and there is no reason 'choice of project' and 'compulsion' of programme cannot coexist. It is hard work but worthwhile and essential in my view.
8.Good transparent, effective and efficient administration: as with all programmes which involve public funding, risk, paperwork, systems and outcomes, it needs to be run well so that the focus is on the outcome for the customer.
Mandatory programmes can often be challenging to operate and run. There is a place for follow up activities and progression for people who do not find employment through the Work Programme. However, we really do need to draw on lessons and best practice from the past. We also need to ensure we take account of the very different public spending environment we now operate in to make sure these programmes operates well. As ever, it needs public, voluntary/community/charity and private sector organisations to work effectively together so that the participant gets a great experience and the community a valued project that makes a difference. And as always, the programme will need the 'elbow room' to improve and develop from day one so it succeeds.
There are some great wins for everyone involved, but it's a complex way or working and we ll have to learn from the past, commit to work openly and collaboratively to make these projects succeed for the benefit of our communities and those we are supporting into meaningful work.