Employment Support for long term Incapacity Benefit Claimants

Graham Hart

Economic Development Manager

Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

Background

Nationally 2.6 million people on Incapacity Benefit/ESA ,

This is 7% of the working age population.

Average duration of claim is 8 years.“Once a claimant has been on IB for over 2 years they are

more likely to retire or die than return to work” Health and Work, HM Government, 2005.

Project Objectives

Gain a deeper understanding of claimants’ employment support needs across central London.

Enable shared understanding amongst commissioners and providers of the employment support needs.

Understand the use of new media and the internet and amongst claimants.

Identify opportunities and mechanisms to coordinate and rationalise support across central London.

Project Overview - Methodology

Contacting long-term IB claimants who have not received employment support

31 face-to-face interviews with long-term IB claimants

4 focus groups with long-term IB claimants

3 days observing employment support

Focus group with community stakeholders

Findings

Two groups of people:Mobile and active respondentsImmobile and inactive respondents

Mobile and active respondents still often had very severe barriers to employment

Respondents typically happier when out of the house

Support for Claimants

Where do IB claimants receive support currently?

Voluntary and community organisations, CAB, health services

What support do IB claimants want?

Employment support often mentioned, but other support at least as important

Barriers to employment

Main barriers are:Health condition Skills – including literacy and numeracy

But important to note many other barriers were found:AgeTime out of labour marketViews of employersLack of confidenceFear of addiction relapseHousing and finance

Customer Typology – Intensive Support Needs

Unsure about return to work

Multiple barriers to employment

Support needs to: Focus on ‘soft’ skills as well as health and vocational skillsBe offered holistically by a trusted intermediaryBe available on a daily basis

Customer Typology – Mid Level Support Needs

Strong or tentative desire to work

Barriers include low confidence and skills

Support needs to be of a similar kind as the intensive support group, but less will be needed

Likely that work experience / volunteering will be important for this group

Customer Typology – Low Intensity Support Needs

Fewer respondents in this groupLikely to be younger, on IB for shorter periods, with relevant and recent work experienceStrong desire to return to workLack of confidence key barrier, and concerns about finding the ‘right’ jobRequire confidence building and practical job search assistance

Claimants and use of internet/social media

Those with health conditions one of the least likely groups to have ever used the internet......but the internet can be empowering for people with disabilities

Most participants had used internetEmail, entertainment, shopping/banking/billsBut limited use of social media

Strategic Recommendations

Develop a clearer picture of the support available.

Support networking between local organisations in the design and commissioning of services.

Ensure intensive and long-term support is available.

Ensure service provision is located close to areas with high IB claimant rates.

Operational recommendations

Tailor support to individual needs, and take into account all barriers to employment that claimant's face.

Offer a combination of face-to-face, and one-to-one support as well as group support and online information advice and guidance.

Provide ‘in - work’ support as well as ‘pre - work’ support.

Encourage voluntary work as a way of keeping clients close to the labour market.

Challenges and lessons learned

Recruiting and engaging with current IB claimants challenging:

A fear that involvement in research about “work” and “benefits” may affect the outcome of their IB reassessment. Many turning down a £20 incentive to take part.

Community and voluntary organisations impacted by cuts and reductions reticent to help a research project being funded by local authorities.