Upload
james-lynch
View
216
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
A joined-up approach in local government to tackle worklessness
Kathy Melling and Nick MoonKent County CouncilBASE Conference, September 2008
Menu
• An introduction to Kent County Council • Kent’s priorities for worklessness • An introduction to Supporting Independence (SIP) • An introduction to Kent Supported Employment (KSE) • How did we link up?• What outcomes have we seen? • What risks and failures have we come across? • What are the benefits?
An introduction to Kent and KCC•England’s largest county
•Population: 1.3 million
•A top performing 4-star council (CPA)
•Gateway to SE England and Europe
•1 county and 12 districts (and one UA)
•84 Councillors: 57 Con, 21 Lab, 6 LD
•Leader and 8 Cabinet Members
•KCC budget £2,200m, average spend of £1,600 per citizen per year
•A diverse county – traditional view of the Garden of England in parts, but pockets of complex and stubborn disadvantage, both rural and urban.
•An east/west split, with significant problems in coastal areas
Worklessness in Kent• 78,000 working age out-of-work benefit claimants in
Kent – 10% of the working age pop• 62% of all claimants on incapacity benefits• Three-quarters claiming for more than 2 years, over
half for more than 5 years• Some communities where over half the population are
dependent on benefits – in the second percentile nationally
• These communities suffer from complex, multiple disadvantages
0.4 - 9.3%9.3 - 15.8%15.8 - 24.6%24.6 - 51.1% Source: DWPSource: DWP
Maidstone
Tunbridge Wells
Dartford
Gravesend
Sevenoaks
Ashford
Sittingbourne
Isle of Sheppey
Canterbury
Whitstable &Herne Bay
Margate
Folkestone
Dover
Ramsgate
Tonbridge
All benefit claimants (IB, Lone parents, JSA)LSOA level, Kent. May 2007
Rate of claimants (total)as % of working age pop
Reasons for claiming IB in Kent
Corporate targets around worklessness• Vision for Kent: Economic success –
Opportunities for all, and Improved health, care and well-being
• Active Lives: Ensure that people who want to work are supported in doing so
• National Indicators relating to employment of disadvantaged groups
• Kent Agreement 2 NI 152 – working-age people on out-of-work benefits
Supporting Independence Programme
• Support, co-ordinate and refocus the work of the county council and partners to increase the number of individuals leading independent lives
• Evidence-based approach• Identify barriers to successful delivery and outcomes
of service for end-users• Ensure SIP integral to KCC policies and strategy e.g.
Towards 2010 , LAA2• Making the data REAL
SIP: breaking the spiral
SIP: who does what
Government policy contextLocal policy context
Towards 2010 targetsKA 1 and 2
Preventative14 – 24 Innovation Unit
Extension of vocational curriculum Apprenticeship Programme
Kent Community Programme
ResponsiveWelfare Reform Agenda
Kent Employability Strategy Kent NOW programme
KA2 outcomes
SIP: positive outcomes
• Living in a ward with a SIP focus significantly improves your chances of exiting benefit dependency than if you live in a disadvantaged ward without a SIP focus
• In wards like Cliftonville West, there’s a 29% higher chance of exiting benefit dependency than in other disadvantaged wards in the South EastOxford University Department of Social Policy and Social Work Research, 2007
Kent Supported Employment
• Market leader in supporting those furthest away from the labour market
• Gross spend of £1.3m• Workforce of approximately 45 FTE• Works with those referred through Care Management
and CMHTs• Work Prep, Workstep and Pathways to Work• LSC funding – support to colleges• Supports modernisation agenda for both LD and MH
How did we link up?
• Personality, flexibility, willingness to engage• Corporate priority – SIP as strategy, KSE as
delivery• Expertise in KCC around welfare reform,
programme delivery• Need for a corporate strategy for
employability• Political support for joined-up working –
cabinet portfolio holders providing cohesion at councillor level
How did we link up?
• Political support from KASS driven by will to provide improved services for disabled people
• Support from corporate centre driven by desire for improved services for all on out-of-work benefits, role of W2W in regeneration, savings to public purse, desire for devolved powers
• Kent Agreement pushing for more joined-up processes, LPSA programmes demanding partnership approaches
What outcomes have we seen?
• Collaborative working between SIP and KSE on Pathways to Work
• Better outcomes for more service users• Evolution of a cross-directorate employability
strategy• Better public consultation practices• Improved responsiveness to Govt consultations• Pushing worklessness to the top of the political
agenda in Kent
What outcomes have we seen?
• Less duplication of effort around this issue from various parts of the authority
• Less silo working• Positive outcomes for our partners (e.g. KA2
targets on mental health)• Increased partnership working outside of KCC
– e.g. Local Employment Partnerships• More people with a better understanding of
their role in the greater agenda
What risks and failures have we seen?
• Risk of denuding power and coming across preciousness around people’s roles & responsibilities
• Engaging the right people, and encouraging engagement
• Governance issues – who takes ownership?• Lack of clear “home” for the agenda• Risk of political meddling, but also a benefit!
Benefits of collaborative working
• More flexible work practices• Recognising and sharing of expertise• Better VFM and improved outcomes for
service users• Builds consensus around the agenda• Allows us to push for change at national level• Brings about innovation in new programme
development
Thank you for listening
Kathy Melling, Group Manager, Supporting Employment 01474 544253 [email protected]
Nick Moon, Supporting Independence Programme 01622 696932 [email protected]
Click to Kent at: www.kent.gov.uk