mid-term evaluation of - eu funds

Mid-Term Evaluation of the Human Capital

Investment Operational Programme 2007-2013

Final Report

August 2011

HUMAN CAPITAL INVESTMENT OP (2007-13) MID TERM EVALUATION – FINAL REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................I

1. BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................1

1.1 OP BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................... 1

1.2 MTE REQUIREMENTS AND TERMS OF REFERENCE ....................................................................................1

1.3 MTE SCOPE .....................................................................................................................................2

1.4 METHOD AND WORK PROGRAMME ...................................................................................................... 2

1.5 STRUCTURE OF REPORT.......................................................................................................................4

2. THE HUMAN CAPITAL INVESTMENT OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME 2007-13 ....................................6

2.1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................................6

2.2 OP STRUCTURE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................6

2.3 FINANCIAL OVERVIEW ......................................................................................................................11

2.4 MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION................................................................................................15

2.5 HORIZONTAL PRINCIPLES ...................................................................................................................16

2.6 OP PERFORMANCE INDICATORS AND TARGETS ......................................................................................16

3. DEVELOPMENTS IN THE PROGRAMME CONTEXT.......................................................................... 19

3.1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................19

3.2 SOCIO-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTS .....................................................................................................19

3.3 POLICY IMPLICATIONS .......................................................................................................................29

4. PROGRESS, EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY ................................................................................ 31

4.1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................31

4.2 PROGRESS AT OP AND PRIORITY LEVEL ................................................................................................31

4.3 PRIORITY I: ACTIVITY PROGRESS, EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY .............................................................36

4.4 PRIORITY II: ACTIVITY PROGRESS, EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY ............................................................45

5. HORIZONTAL PRINCIPLES AND ESF ROLE AND ADDED VALUE ....................................................... 71

5.1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................71

5.2 HORIZONTAL PRINCIPLES ...................................................................................................................71

5.3 ESF ROLE AND ADDED VALUE ............................................................................................................83

6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................... 85

6.1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................85

6.2 OVERALL MTE CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................85

6.3 RECOMMENDATIONS – OP LEVEL .......................................................................................................95

6.4 RECOMMENDATIONS – ACTIVITY LEVEL................................................................................................96 ANNEX 1 SOCIO-ECONOMIC TRENDS – ADDITIONAL TABLES

NOTE: Where the report refers to ESF contributions to expenditure that has already occurred, this should be interpreted as the maximum eligible level of ESF funds that may be claimed with respect to that level of expenditure. Lower levels of ESF contributions may ultimately be claimed than the maximum eligible.


LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 2.1: HCIOP FINANCIAL OVERVIEW ....................................................................................................................................... 11

TABLE 2.2: OP FINANCIAL PLAN BY REGION AND YEAR (€M)......................................................................................................... 11

TABLE 2.3: COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND REVISED OP FINANCIAL ALLOCATIONS (€M) ......................................................... 13

TABLE 3.1: POPULATION ESTIMATES (MID-APRIL) BY REGION, 2006 TO 2010 (000)................................................................... 19

TABLE 3.2: ESTIMATES OF EXTERNAL MIGRATION, 2006 TO 2010 (000) ...................................................................................... 20

TABLE 3.3: EMPLOYMENT BY SECTOR, Q4 2006 TO Q4 2010 (000) ............................................................................................... 23

TABLE 3.4: NET CHANGES IN THE POPULATION AND LABOUR FORCE BY NATIONALITY, Q4 07 TO Q4 10. (000) ...................... 24

TABLE 3.5: EMPLOYMENT BY OCCUPATION, Q4 2006 TO Q4 2010 (000) ..................................................................................... 25

TABLE 3.6: EMPLOYMENT Q406 TO Q410. EDUCATIONAL SHARES WITHIN OCCUPATIONS. PERSONS AGED 15-64 YEARS..... 27

TABLE 3.7: UNEMPLOYED PERSONS CLASSIFIED BY EDUCATION, Q406 TO Q410. PERSONS AGED 15-64 YEARS ..................... 28

TABLE 4.1: FINANCIAL PROGRESS TO END-2010 BY PRIORITY AND REGION ................................................................................ 32

TABLE 4.2: PHYSICAL PROGRESS - PRIORITY LEVEL 2007-2010 ..................................................................................................... 34

TABLE 4.3: SKILLS TRAINING FOR THE UNEMPLOYED: TRAINEE THROUGHPUT BY TRAINING PROGRAMME CATEGORY AND

DELIVERY MECHANISM 2010. .......................................................................................................................................................... 35

TABLE 4.4: SKILLS TRAINING FOR THE UNEMPLOYED: TRAINEE THROUGHPUT 2010 BY COURSE-TYPE OR SECTOR. ............. 36

TABLE 4.5: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - SKILLS TRAINING FOR THE UNEMPLOYED ............................................................................ 37

TABLE 4.6: PHYSICAL PROGRESS – SKILLS TRAINING FOR THE UNEMPLOYED.................................................................................... 37

TABLE 4.7: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - IN-COMPANY TRAINING......................................................................................................... 38

TABLE 4.8: PHYSICAL PROGRESS – IN COMPANY TRAINING .......................................................................................................... 39

TABLE 4.9: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - BACK TO EDUCATION INITIATIVE .......................................................................................... 40

TABLE 4.10: PHYSICAL PROGRESS - BACK TO EDUCATION INITIATIVE .......................................................................................... 41

TABLE 4.11: UNIT COSTS – BACK TO EDUCATION INITIATIVE ........................................................................................................ 42

TABLE 4.12: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - UNDERGRADUATE SKILLS .................................................................................................... 43

TABLE 4.13: PHYSICAL PROGRESS – UNDERGRADUATE SKILLS...................................................................................................... 43

TABLE 4.14: UNIT COST ANALYSIS – UNDERGRADUATE SKILLS ..................................................................................................... 44

TABLE 4.15: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - DISABILITY ACTIVATION PROJECT ....................................................................................... 46

TABLE 4.16: PHYSICAL PROGRESS, DISABILITY ACTIVATION PROJECT CUMULATIVE TO END 2010 ........................................... 49

TABLE 4.17: DISABILITY ACTIVATION PROJECT - UNIT COSTS, CUMULATIVE 2007-10 ................................................................ 49

TABLE 4.18: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - ADULT LITERACY................................................................................................................... 50

TABLE 4.19: PHYSICAL PROGRESS - ADULT LITERACY..................................................................................................................... 51

TABLE 4.20: UNIT COSTS – ADULT LITERACY................................................................................................................................... 51

TABLE 4.21: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - THIRD LEVEL ACCESS ............................................................................................................ 53

TABLE 4.22: THIRD LEVEL ACCESS - PHYSICAL PROGRESS (ANNUAL FIGURES)............................................................................. 53

TABLE 4.23: THIRD LEVEL ACCESS - UNIT COST ANALYSIS, 2010 ANNUAL.................................................................................... 54

TABLE 4.24: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - YOUTHREACH AND TRAVELLERS ......................................................................................... 56

TABLE 4.25: PHYSICAL PROGRESS - YOUTHREACH AND TRAVELLERS ........................................................................................... 57

TABLE 4.26: UNIT COSTS – YOUTHREACH AND SENIOR TRAVELLER TRAINING ............................................................................ 58

TABLE 4.27: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - GYD IT SKILLS AND PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT .................................................................. 59

TABLE 4.28: PHYSICAL PROGRESS - GYD IT SKILLS AND PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT .................................................................... 60

TABLE 4.29: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - GYD ADDITIONAL WORKERS ..................................................................................................... 61

TABLE 4.30: PHYSICAL PROGRESS – GYD ADDITIONAL WORKERS ...................................................................................................... 61

TABLE 4.31: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - POSITIVE ACTIONS TO PROMOTE GENDER EQUALITY ....................................................... 63


TABLE 4.32: PHYSICAL PROGRESS – POSITIVE ACTIONS TO PROMOTE GENDER EQUALITY ........................................................ 64

TABLE 4.33: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - EQUALITY MAINSTREAMING APPROACH ........................................................................... 66

TABLE 4.34: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - SOCIAL AND EMPLOYMENT INTEGRATION OF MIGRANTS................................................ 68

TABLE 4.35: PHYSICAL PROGRESS – SOCIAL AND EMPLOYMENT INTEGRATION OF MIGRANTS ................................................. 69

TABLE 5.1: BREAKDOWN OF PARTICIPANTS BY LABOUR MARKET STATUS .................................................................................. 72

TABLE 5.2: PROPORTION OF PARTICIPANTS WITHIN “VULNERABLE GROUPS”............................................................................ 73

TABLE 5.3: PROPORTION OF PARTICIPANTS HAVING REACHED VARIOUS LEVELS OF EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT ................ 74

TABLE 6.1: SUMMARY OF PROGRESS – PRIORITY I SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 1.................................................................................... 85



TABLE 6.4: SUMMARY OF PROGRESS – PRIORITY II SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 2................................................................................... 89




LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1.1 MTE WORK PROGRAMME ................................................................................................................................................. 3

FIGURE 2.1: INITIAL HCIOP PRIORITIES AND ACTIVITIES ......................................................................................................... 7

FIGURE 2.2: OBJECTIVES OF OP ACTIVITIES ........................................................................................................................... 9

FIGURE 2.3: PRIORITY LEVEL REVISIONS TO HCIOP (€M, PUBLIC EXPENDITURE) ............................................................................... 12

FIGURE 2.4: ORIGINAL AND REVISED OP FINANCIAL ALLOCATIONS BY ACTIVITY (€M)................................................................ 14

FIGURE 2.5: PERFORMANCE INDICATORS – PRIORITY I.................................................................................................................. 17

FIGURE 2.6: PERFORMANCE INDICATORS – PRIORITY II ................................................................................................................ 18

FIGURE 3.1: QUARTERLY INDEX OF SEASONALLY ADJUSTED REAL GDP AND EMPLOYMENT, Q406 TO Q410 (Q406=100).............. 21

FIGURE 3.2: QUARTERLY INDEXES OF TOTAL EMPLOYMENT BY GENDER Q4 2006 TO Q4 2010 (Q406=100) ................................... 22

FIGURE 3.3: TREND OF EMPLOYMENT BY REGION (Q406=100).................................................................................................... 22

FIGURE 3.4: INDEX NUMBERS OF EMPLOYMENT TRENDS BY BROAD OCCUPATION Q407 TO Q410 (Q407=100) ..................... 26

FIGURE 4.1: REVISED FINANCIAL ALLOCATIONS AND SPEND TO END 2010 BY OP ACTIVITY ............................................................. 34

FIGURE 4.2: DISABILITY ACTIVATION PROJECT – SUB-ACTIVITIES ...................................................................................................... 47

FIGURE 5.1: BREAKDOWN OF PARTICIPANTS BY GENDER ............................................................................................................. 73

FIGURE 5.2: PROPORTION OF PARTICIPANTS AGED 15-24 AND 55-64, 2008-10 ......................................................................... 74

FIGURE 5.3: HORIZONTAL PRINCIPLES – MTE COMMENTS BY ACTIVITY ...................................................................................... 76


List of Abbreviations

AGS An Garda Síochána

AIP Activity Implementation Plan

BITC Business in the Community

BMW Border, Midlands and West

BTEI Back to Education Initiative

CAO Central Applications Office

CAS Common Awards Standards

CDVEC City of Dublin Vocational Education Committee

CSO Central Statistics Office

CTC Community Training Centre

DES Department of Education and Skills

DJE Department of Justice and Equality

DOF Department of Finance

DPEAR Department of Public Expenditure and Reform

DSP Department of Social Protection

EHRDOP Employment and Human Resources Development Operational Programme (2000-2006)

EPIC Employment Programme for Immigrant Communities

ESF European Social Fund

ESFSN Expert Group on Future Skills Needs

ESRI Economic and Social Research Institute

FÁS Foras Áiseanna Saothair

FETAC Further Education and Training Awards Council

FSD Fund for Students with Disabilities

GYDPs Garda Youth Diversion Projects

HCIOP Human Capital Investment Operational Programme 2007-2013

HEA Higher Education Authority

HP Horizontal Principle

HRM Human Resource Management

IB Intermediate Body

IBEC Irish Business and Employers Confederation

ICTU Irish Congress of Trades Unions

ILO International Labour Organisation

IMF International Monetary Fund

IYJS Irish Youth Justice Service

JLO Juvenile Liaison Officer

LMAF Labour Market Activation Fund

LTI Local Training Initiative

MA Managing Authority

MTE Mid-Term Evaluation

NAO National Access Office

NAPSInc National Action Plan for Social Inclusion

NDP National Development Plan

NEAP National Employment Action Plan


NEES National Employment and Entitlements Service

NFQ National Framework of Qualifications

NSRF National Strategic Reference Framework

OPMC Operational Programme Monitoring Committee

OPMI Office for the Promotion of Migrant Integration

PLC Post Leaving Certificate

QNHS Quarterly National Household Survey

RFT Request for Tender

S&E Southern and Eastern

SAF Student Assistance Fund

SIPTU Services, Industrial, Professional and Technical Union

STEM Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics

STT Senior Traveller Training

STTC Senior Traveller Training Centre

TLA Third Level Access

VEC Vocational Education Committee

VTOS Vocational Training Opportunity Scheme


i

Executive Summary

Background and Introduction The Human Capital Investment Operational Programme (HCIOP) 2007-13 is a multi-annual programme of investment in training, education and employment-support activities operating with the support of the European Social Fund in Ireland. It is the successor to the Employment and Human Resources Development Operational Programme (EHRDOP) which operated between 2000 and 2006. The HCIOP is the sole vehicle through which ESF expenditure is channelled in Ireland over the programming period 2007-13, and was officially launched in December 2007. This is the Final Report of the Mid-Term Evaluation (MTE) of the Human Capital Investment Operational Programme (HCIOP) 2007-2013. It has been prepared by Fitzpatrick Associates Economic Consultants in 2011 on behalf of the Department of Education and Skills – the Managing Authority for the HCIOP. As set out in the Request for Tender (RFT) Document for the Irish MTE, and arising from commitments given to the EU Commission following revisions to the OP agreed in 2009, the MTE will have � a particular focus on the extent to which the Activities/projects in the Programme are meeting the

target Indicators promulgated by the Intermediate Bodies at the outset of the Programme; and � draft recommendations as to any revisions required to be made to Programme, Chapter 6 –

Operational Programme and Performance Indicators – should be made. The Terms of Reference, as set out in the RFT, are therefore to consider and examine: � the extent to which the mid-term objectives of the Operational Programme are being met; � the extent to which the mid-term Indicators of the Operational Programme are being met; � where any Activities are not meeting their objectives/Indicators the remedial action required to help

them do so; � the levels of expenditure per Activity, Priority and Region relative to the Operational Programme

objectives. Specific additional tasks required are to: � provide an input on the means by which performance indicators/targets are being achieved; and � evaluate the extent to which the Horizontal Principles, as set out in the OP, are being addressed

(including their effectiveness and operation).

The Human Capital Investment Operational Programme

Objectives The over-arching objectives of the HCIOP are:


ii

� “To provide education, training and other supports necessary to upskill the workforce as a means of enabling it to respond to the challenges posed by international competition, to enhance worker productivity and to assist in meeting the evolving needs of industry and the economy; and

� To provide for increased activation and participation with certain groups who can contribute to Ireland’s workforce but who face barriers to employment, progression and participation”.

OP Structure The OP is structured into three Priorities: � Priority I: Increasing Activation of the Labour Force � Priority II: Increasing Participation and Reducing Inequality in the Labour Force � Priority III: Technical Assistance. The objectives of Priority I are “to contribute to increased skill levels in the workforce and to enhancing the productivity of the workforce”. The OP acknowledges that these are broad aims, and that their achievement would be dependent primarily on wider investments under the National Development Plan and other strategies, but it argued that the HCIOP and ESF could make a substantial contribution in niche areas of labour market and education interventions. It is intended to address the first strategic OP objective, as stated above. The objective of Priority II is “to contribute to addressing labour market gaps for specific groups that are experiencing barriers to participation and employment, including those created by gender inequality and wider inequalities”. The Priority is “designed to provide for the increased activation and participation within certain groups that are regarded as being a valuable source of workers to Ireland’s labour force”, and it is intended to address the second strategic OP objective. A further set of ESF-co-financed “Activities” operate under Priorities I and II. These are shown in Figure 1.

FIGURE 1: HCIOP ACTIVITIES

PRIORITY I � Skills Training for the Unemployed � In-Company Training � Back to Education Initiative � Undergraduate Skills � Labour Market Activation Project

PRIORITY II � Disability Activation Project � Adult Literacy � Third Level Access � Youthreach and Travellers � Garda Youth Diversion – IT Skills and Personal Development � Garda Youth Diversion – Additional Workers � Equality Mainstreaming Approach � Positive Actions to Promote Gender Equality � Migrant Workers

Financial Framework Following formal revisions made in 2009, the OP provides for total expenditure of just over €906m, made up of €528m in national public funding, a Community (ESF) contribution of €375m and private funding of €3m. The current allocation of OP financial resources across its three priorities is shown in Table 1.


iii

TABLE 1: HCIOP FINANCIAL OVERVIEW

ESF (€M)

Exchequer (€M)

Total Public (€M)

Private (€M)

Total (€M)

% of total

Priority I - Increasing Activation of the Labour Force

247

400

647

3

650

71.7%

Priority II - Increasing Activation and Reducing Inequality in the Labour Force

125

125

250 0

250

27.6%

Priority III - Technical Assistance 3 3 6 0 6 0.7% Total 375 528

903 3 906 100.0%

SOURCE: HCIOP OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME, REVISED 21/10-2009

The OP also established the regional and annual profile of planned expenditure over the 2007-2013 period. The Border, Midlands and West (BMW) NUTS II Region is to receive was to have €228.8m (or 61%) of the ESF contribution allocated to it, with the remainder (39%) allocated to the Southern and Eastern (S&E) Region. This financial framework follows revisions made in 2009, which involved a reduction in the exchequer contribution to the overall OP, a substantial increase in the total (national and ESF) financial allocation to Priority 1 and a reduction in the allocation to Priority 2 (Figure 2.3). The revisions reflected the changed socio-economic context and substantial growth in unemployment since the OP was originally framed, and the need to put greater emphasis on activation measures for those within the labour market, particularly those recently unemployed. Figure 2 shows the original and revised financial allocations by OP Priority and overall.

FIGURE 2: PRIORITY LEVEL REVISIONS TO HCIOP (€M, PU BLIC EXPENDITURE) 1

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

ES

F

Ex

ch

eq

ue

r

ES

F

Ex

ch

eq

ue

r

ES

F

Ex

ch

eq

ue

r

ES

F

Ex

ch

eq

ue

r

Priority I Priority II Priority III Total OP

Revised OP

Original OP

1 The OP also included a private contribution of €3m, which wasn’t affected by the 2009 OP revisions


iv

Management The Managing Authority for the OP is the ESF Policy and Operations Unit within the Department of Education and Skills, while there are a number of Intermediate Bodies which are designated by the Managing Authority to carry out some of or all of its responsibilities or those of the Certifying Authority in areas under which they have responsibility. These include the Department of Education and Skills, FÁS, the Department of Justice and Equality, the Equality Authority and the Department of Social Protection. Implementation of the Programme is monitored by the OP Monitoring Committee, which is charged with ensuring the effectiveness and quality of the Programme’s implementation, including the criteria by which co-financed activities are selected, monitoring progress against established targets, the approval of annual and final reports, the evaluation processes and outcomes, and approving any amendments to the OP during its implementation.

Horizontal Principles The OP operates with three horizontal principles, which it seeks to uphold and support across all of its Priorities and Activities, insofar as that is possible and practicable. These are social inclusion, gender equality and wider equal opportunities, and sustainable development.

Performance Indicators and Targets The OP incorporates a range of performance indicators and targets. As well as contextual indicators, detailed indicators and targets were established at the level of OP Priorities and for a number of specific objectives under Priorities I and II (with the latter relating to the specific Activities being co-financed at that level). In most cases, output, result and impact indicators and associated targets were established at the level of OP Activities.

Developments in the Programme Context The socio-economic outlook in Ireland when the HCIOP was originally devised and launched was radically different from that which has prevailed over its first three years. The period between the last quarter of 2006 and the same quarter of 2010 has seen: � one the most traumatic economic recessions in the history of the State, in terms of both its depth

and duration; � substantial declines in real GDP and total employment; � substantial rises in unemployment rates, and the re-emergence of high levels of long-term

unemployment; � significantly greater increases in male unemployment than female; � similar rates of employment decline in the BMW and S&E regions; � substantial declines in employment within all of the main economic sectors, with the notable

exception of the non-market (i.e. predominantly public) service sector; � the greatest absolute decreases in employment numbers in the construction, manufacturing and

distribution sectors; � the greatest employment declines among the skilled manual and unskilled worker occupational

categories; and � the greatest employment declines among those groups with the lowest levels of educational

achievement.


v

Thus the main policy challenge to be faced in this new context involves devising policies and providing assistance and supports for the large numbers of medium and low skill unemployed – a very challenging task in circumstances of continued economic and financial constraints. Governments (both previous and current) have taken a number of significant steps designed to promote the labour market activation process. These include the following: � since January 2011, the Department of Social Protection (DSP) is taking the greater role in

providing activation services for the unemployed, as well as its more traditional role in paying benefits. The National Employment Service and other employment programmes are being moved from FAS and subsumed into DSP to be reconstituted as a “National Employment and Entitlements Service”;

� the Department is also implementing a new case management system with a strong focus on activation, rather than just income support, as well as a profiling system designed to provide early identification of those likely to become long-term unemployed;

� the increasing adoption of policies that apply sanctions to unemployed persons on the Live Register unreasonably refusing take up employment offers or to participate in training and education; and

� institutional changes including the announcement of the disbandment of FÁS and the establishment of a new further education and training authority called SOLAS.

Progress, Effectiveness and Efficiency

Financial and Physical Progress – Priority Level Reported expenditure under the OP to end-2010 amounted to €1,054m, made up of €735m exchequer funds, an ESF contribution of €312m and private expenditure of just over €7m. While both the exchequer and private expenditure is greater than their financial provisions in the entire (revised) OP, 83% of the ESF contribution had been spent. Under Priority I, total expenditure to end-2010 amounted to €777.7m, or just under 120% of the revised allocation for the Priority. Both the exchequer and private expenditure levels were substantially ahead of the revised allocation (equivalent to 149% and 242% respectively), while the ESF expenditure amounted to 70.3% of the revised ESF envelope for Priority I. Expenditure under Priority II amounted to €274.1m, equivalent to 109.3% of the revised allocation for that Priority. In this case the ESF and national exchequer contributions were also each at 109.3% of allocations (reflecting the 50% co-financing rate applied under this Priority), while there is no private expenditure involved. Expenditure under Priority III (Technical Assistance) had reached €3m by end-2010, or half of the total OP allocation, with a negligible difference in the rate of spend between exchequer and ESF. Financial progress by NUTS II region is somewhat imbalanced. Total spend in the BMW region was running at 65% of its allocation by end-2010, while in the S&E it was running at 197.2%. In terms of ESF spend the respective rates were 50.7% and 133.7%, while for exchequer spend they were 74.9% and 241.3%. The regional imbalance towards the S&E in the total OP stems almost entirely from Priority I, where under just 48.6% of the BMW allocation has been spent, compared to 236.5% of the S&E allocation. In the case of the ESF, Priority I expenditure had reached just 22.2% of the allocation in the BMW region, and 149.3% in the S&E. Under Priority II both regions are running at the same rate of spend relative to their allocations.


vi

Priority level physical indicators and targets, along with actual outcomes up to end-2010, are shown in Table 22.

TABLE 2: PHYSICAL PROGRESS - PRIORITY LEVEL 2007-20 10

2007 2008 2009 2010 2010

Target 2013

Target

Priority I

Total number of persons supported Output

29,789

73,120

63,099

70,034

92,888

93,088

Total number of persons successfully completing accredited programmes Result

9,847

42,825

42,571

49,493

64,200

72,200

Priority II


62,129

69,091

66,953

83,246

64,807

67,521


2,500

11,502

10,201

23,337

24,803

26,677

SOURCE: HCIOP ANNUAL IMPLEMENTATION REPORT 2010 Under Priority I, the total number of persons supported in 2010 was 70,034, while the number of persons successfully completing accredited programmes was 49,493. As such the numbers represent 75.3% and 77.1% of the original 2010 targets respectively. In relation to Priority II the total number of persons supported in 2010 was 83,246, while the numbers successfully completing accredited programmes was 47,540. In this case the figures represent 128% and 94% of the original 2010 targets respectively.

Financial and Physical Progress – Activity Level There is wide variation in regard to financial progress at the level of individual Activities. Figure 3 shows levels of financial progress reported for OP activities by end-2010, compared with the revised forecasts for that period.

FIGURE 3: FINANCIAL PROGRESS – ACTIVITY LEVEL

0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% 300%

Skills Training for the Unemployed

In Company Training

Back to Education Initiative

Undergraduate Skills

Disability Activation Project

Adult Literacy

Third Level Access

Youthreach and Travellers

GYD IT Skills and Personal Development

Garda Youth Diversion - Additional Workers

Positive Actions to Promote Gender Equality

Equality Mainstreaming Approach

Migrant Workers

2 Priority-level indicators and targets were not updated following the 2009 revisions to the OP and its financial

allocations.


vii

It can be seen that by end-2010 total expenditure had surpassed revised OP allocations in the case of six Activities: � Skills Training for the Unemployed; � In-Company Training; � Back to Education Initiative; � Undergraduate Skills; � Third Level Access; and � Youthreach and Travellers. A further two Activities had expenditure levels between 50% and 100% of total allocations (Adult Literacy and Garda Youth Diversion – IT Skills and Personal Development), while the remaining Activities had expenditure levels below 50% of revised allocations. Physical progress across OP Activities is somewhat mixed. Several have seen substantial progress against original targets, while for others the progress has been less positive. In the case of a number of indicators, appropriate baselines or targets have not been established, and in others progress has not been measured or reported. Details of physical progress for individual Activities is presented in the main report.

Horizontal Principles and ESF Added Value The findings with regard to horizontal principles are broadly positive. Data regarding people benefiting from OP supports show relatively high proportions who are unemployed, have relatively low levels of educational achievement and come from “vulnerable” groups such as migrants, minorities, disabled or other disadvantaged categories, and both young and old age groupings, all of which typically suffer greater levels of social exclusion and inequality than the population as a whole. Similarly, a greater proportion of people benefiting have been women than men each year the OP has operated. In practically all cases, OP co-financed Activities have either a direct or a strong but indirect role in supporting social inclusion and/or gender and wider equality agendas, and for many it is their raison d’être, or ultimate focus in terms of target groups for their work. Moreover, the re-profiling of OP expenditure in 2009 is likely to have increased its impact in regard to alleviating poverty and social inclusion, in that it turned its focus from one largely on the skills of the employed workforce to one much more aligned to the ongoing education and training of those unemployed, who have traditionally suffered substantially greater levels of absolute and relative poverty than those in work in the past. The sustainable development HP is less emphatically supported, and the means by which the OP could do so less obvious given the nature of the interventions it co-finances. However there are various activities the OP supports the further the sustainable development agenda. The added value of the ESF co-financing of the HCIOP is evident in a number of respects, including its resourcing, its targeting and its implementation. Training, education, employment preparation and actions promoting social inclusion that are supported under the OP are in all cases contributing to the Community objectives established for the ESF over the 2007-2013 period. The resource contribution of the ESF is substantial and of greater national importance than under the previous EU funding round when the Irish exchequer was in a position of unprecedented strength, and the importance of this contribution has become greater than was anticipated at the planning and initiation stages of the HCIOP, given the economic collapse and exchequer deterioration that has happened since. We have also found that ESF co-financing under the OP is driving and ensuring a level of planning, objective and target setting, management, monitoring and reporting discipline that few stakeholders feel would fully exist in its


viii

absence, and a number of stakeholders hold the view that the ESF support is ensuring a national focus remains on the important principles of gender and wider equality and social inclusion.

Conclusions and Recommendations

OP Relevance The focus of the HCIOP when originally designed was one balanced between on the one hand upskilling those in employment as a means of underpinning competitiveness and enhancing the human capital base, and on the other of continuing to address barriers to the economic engagement and employment of both unemployed persons and those in socially excluded categories for whom pathways to such progression were known to face particular challenges and impediments. Its revision in 2009 sharply refocused the HCIOP towards the training, upskilling and re-skilling of the growing numbers unemployed, and on their ongoing labour market activation, while maintaining a reasonable emphasis on, and continued role in supporting, labour market access and entry for groups outside it. Efforts to achieve such a refocusing also had to meet the simultaneous challenge of reducing the overall financial scope of the OP and to bring its national public financial parameters to within bounds more realistically achievable in the wider budgetary adjustments taking place. Its 2009 adjustments achieved these parallel objectives, and was a measured and appropriate response to the changing circumstances in which the OP was operating. Despite the scale of the changes that have occurred, the HCIOP has therefore remained relevant and appropriate as a programme providing a framework of targeted interventions aimed at activating and upskilling people in the labour market and assisting access to it for groups outside it.

Achievement of Objectives and Targets There is no doubt that the OP is furthering the achievement of the objectives it established when designed, although, as discussed, its achievements in relation to specific quantitative targets is mixed. Two Priority-level targets were established for Priority I, namely the number of persons supported under the Priority (the output indicator) and the number of persons successfully completing accredited programmes (the result indicator). In 2010: � 75% of the (original) 2010 output target for Priority I was achieved; � 77% of the (original) 2010 result target was achieved These overall outcomes under Priority I occurred in circumstances where total co-financed expenditure had reached €778m, or 120% of its revised (2007-2013) target (and 129% of the original expenditure forecast against which the targets were originally established). Overall therefore the outputs and results achieved under Priority I have fallen short of those originally anticipated. Two Priority-level targets were established for Priority II, namely the total number of persons supported (the output indicator), and the total number of persons successfully completing accredited programmes (the result indicator). In 2010: � 128% of the (original) 2010 output target was achieved; and � 94% of the (original) 2010 result target was achieved. Total co-financed expenditure under Priority II had reached €274m by end-2010, which was equivalent to 109% of the revised 2007-13 allocation (and 36% of the original budget). Given that the Priority level targets were set against the original financial provision, clearly these outcomes are substantially beyond expectations at the time the OP was formulated.


ix

Lessons for Post-2013 The economic context for planning education, training and labour market activation policies and programmes has changed utterly from that in which both the current and predecessor ESF-supported national OPs were formulated. Unemployment has increased significantly and long-term unemployment is becoming an increasing sub-component within the numbers out of work as the recession continues and economic prospects remain moribund. There are few signs of a return to meaningful economic growth over the next number of years, and a likelihood that any substantial rebound in employment demand will lag behind the economic upturn that must precede it. As well as operating in a national budgetary context likely to be substantially more constrained, labour market, education and employment policies in Ireland will need to increasingly reflect new emerging priorities and transition speedily from the model it employed during the recent period of nearly full employment that has abruptly ended. In this context the likely criteria by which the post-2013 choice of policies and programmes appropriate for ESF support could be appropriately made may include: � responsiveness to most urgent policy needs; � innovative and exploratory nature; � scope to improve and influence mainstream policy; � cost, cost-effectiveness and value for money; � flexibility to respond to changing needs; � scope to involve competitive features; � ability to inform appropriate institutional and delivery models; � capacity for efficient and effective ESF financial compliance; � co-financed projects/activity should be co-terminus with projects as seen by the IB and

implementing body; � projects should have a finite life within the period of the OP; and � projects should have a clear manager with no, or limited, other responsibilities.

Recommendations At the level of the OP in general, a number of recommendations are made in relation to reporting, targets and indicators, transnational support and the financial plan, as follows: Reporting � Efforts should be made to improve the quality, clarity, value added and timeliness of progress

reporting; � IBs should ensure all targets and indicators are established only in relation to co-financed (rather

than wider programmatic) expenditure; � Some reporting on sustainable development where appropriate should be introduced where

appropriate; � Mechanisms to ensure progress reporting is quality assured should be established; � All AIPs should be revised in light of OP financial revisions and likely exchequer support for

Activities over the remainder of Programme; Targets and Indicators � IBs should put some expertise in relation to targets and indicators in place and at the disposal of

Activity managers , and ensure responsibilities are clearly established and understood;


x

Transnational Support � Efforts to identify appropriate activity to be funded under the “Transnational” heading should be

extended, and any ESF funding unlikely to be used should be re-allocated; Financial Plan � IBs should confirm to the MA anticipated expenditure levels across Priorities, Activities and

Regions over period to financial close of OP, in light of eligible, reported and claimed expenditure thus far. Any re-balancing of this profile to bring it into line with national and regional ESF allocations should be established at an early date and IBs and Activity managers informed of this, so as to facilitate planning and the revision of targets and indicators as appropriate.

� The main report also sets out more detailed recommendations in relation to the specific Activities supported by the OP.


Main Report


1

1. Background and Introduction

1.1 OP Background and Objectives The Human Capital Investment Operational Programme (HCIOP) 2007-13 is one of three EU co-financed Operational Programmes within the Irish National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF) over the 2007-2013 period, and is the successor to the Employment and Human Resources Development Operational Programme (EHRDOP) which operated between 2000 and 2006. The HCIOP is the sole vehicle through which European Social Fund (ESF) expenditure is channelled in Ireland, and was officially launched in December 2007. The Department of Education and Skills (DES), the Managing Authority for the OP, commissioned Fitzpatrick Associates to undertake the Mid-Term Evaluation (MTE) of the HCIOP in January 2011. This is the Final Report of the MTE. The overall objectives of the HCIOP are as follows: - � “To provide education, training and other supports necessary to upskill the workforce as a means of

enabling it to respond to the challenges posed by international competition, to enhance worker productivity and to assist in meeting the evolving needs of industry and the economy; and


1.2 MTE Requirements and Terms of Reference The general EU requirements for the evaluation of EU co-financed Operational Programmes during the 2007-13 period are set out in Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006, of July 2006, and in subsequent Evaluation Guidelines published by the Commission in April 20073. The overall role of the MTE is to examine the extent to which objectives and targets have been achieved and to propose corrective action as appropriate. As set out in the Request for Tender (RFT) Document for the Irish MTE, and arising from commitments given to the EU Commission following revisions to the OP agreed in 2009, the MTE will have � a particular focus on the extent to which the Activities/projects in the Programme are meeting the target

Indicators promulgated by the Intermediate Bodies at the outset of the Programme; and � draft recommendations as to any revisions required to be made to Programme, Chapter 6 – Operational

Programme and Performance Indicators – should be made. The Terms of Reference, as set out in the RFT, are therefore to consider and examine for central issues:

� the extent to which the mid-term objectives of the Operational Programme are being met; � the extent to which the mid-term Indicators of the Operational Programme are being met; � where any Activities are not meeting their objectives/Indicators the remedial action required to help them

do so; � the levels of expenditure per Activity, Priority and Region relative to the Operational Programme

objectives.

3 “Indicative Guidelines on Evaluation Methods: Evaluation During the Programming Period” Working Document No.5. DG Regional Policy and DG Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities. April 2007


2

Specific additional tasks required are to: � provide an input on the means by which performance indicators/targets are being achieved; and � evaluate the extent to which the Horizontal Principles, as set out in the OP, are being addressed (including

their effectiveness and operation).

Finally, it is required that in assessing the extent to which the Activities/projects in the Operational Programme are meeting the target Indicators as promulgated by the Intermediate Bodies at the outset of the OP, the MTE will be required to provide detailed Activity-specific analyses of the reasons why any particular Indicators/targets are not being met and will also be required to propose detailed Activity-specific action plans to enable Activity managers/Intermediate Bodies/Public Beneficiary Bodies to bring the Activity in line with initial projections, where still feasible.

1.3 MTE Scope At a general level the MTE is required to include within its scope all aspects of the HCIOP, including its overall objectives, three Priorities and the various Activities within each. Following an Inception meeting and discussions with the Managing Authority, a number of further specific matters regarding the scope were agreed: � financial and physical progress was to be assessed up to end-December 2010; � one original Activity – namely Disability Training under Priority 2 – would no longer require assessment as

part of the MTE because it was removed from the OP in 2009; � the purpose to which any ESF-support could be put in Ireland post-2013 should also be considered,

particularly in the light of the substantially changed economic environment from that in which the current OP was established; and

� activity under the Labour Market Activation Fund (LMAF), introduced into the OP in 2009, should be considered in the MTE, but it would not require the same level of assessment as the original Activities under Priorities 1 and 2 as it is due to be evaluated separately.

1.4 Method and Work Programme

1.4.1 Overview

The methodology has involved the following: � documentary review of existing literature, reports and other documentation including official Programme

documents (the OP, Activity Implementation Plans), previous evaluations, Monitoring Committee minutes and progress reports, annual implementation reports, wider relevant EU and national policy documents and other relevant material;

� analysis of quantitative monitoring data available under the OP, including expenditure, indicators and targets, socio-economic, labour market and other data concerning the evolving context in which the OP has operated;

� structured consultations with the Managing Authority, the EU Commission, other MTE Steering Committee and Monitoring Committee members and stakeholders, and intermediate and implementing bodies responsible for individual Activities within the OP; and

� formal reporting at inception, interim progress, draft Final Report and Final Report stages, as well as internal team reporting on specific tasks and findings on an ongoing basis.


3

1.4.2 MTE Work Programme

The MTE was carried out following a six phase Work Programme, as shown in Figure 1.1.

FIGURE 1.1 MTE WORK PROGRAMME

In ception

Ce ntra l Desk

Research

Ce ntra l Consu ltation Prog ramme

Activity Evaluations

S yn the sisConclusions

a nd Reportin g

Module 1: Inception Phase The MTE began with an Inception Module, the purpose of which was to refine and confirm the requirements of the MTE, elaborate on the work programme and other key parameters of the project, confirm the parties appropriate for consultation and handover key documentation relevant to the assignment, ensure broad agreement on the parameters of the MTE and provide the basis for an initial discussion with the Steering Committee. A formal Inception Report was submitted on completion of this Module. Module 2: OP Level Desk Research This module involved: � a review of relevant previous evaluations and literature, including the Ex-ante Evaluation of the current

OP, evaluations of its predecessor (the Employment and Human Resources Development OP 2000-06) relevant HCIOP programme documents, Activity Implementation Plans, Progress Reports and Implementation Reports, and other material;

� a desk-based review of the external context and environment in which the OP has operated between 2007 and 2010, including a review of social, economic and labour market trends of wider EU and national policy developments;

� a quantitative analysis of OP expenditure to date at the levels of the OP, Priority and Activity, both nationally and at (NUTS II) regional level;

� a review of Programme- and Priority-level objectives, performance indicators and targets (including standard participant reporting data contained in Annex XXIII of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1828/2006);

� a review of OP and Priority-level efficiency comprising a comparison of the unit costs (or expenditures) associated with the achievement of key performance indicators; and

� a review of the integration of Horizontal Principles at OP and Priority level, including their incorporation into programme structures and implementation mechanisms and the reporting on their outcomes and results.

Module 3: OP Level Consultation Programme The third Work Module involved structured consultations with a range of OP stakeholders at EU and national level. The parties consulted as part of this Phase included: � the OP Managing Authority; � the EU Commission; � the ESF Auditing Authority; � the ESF Certifying Authority; � the Department of Education and Skills;

o ESF Policy and Operations Unit; o NDP Structural Funds Section; o FÁS Liaison Section; o Further Education Section; o Higher Education Section; o Skills Development Division;


4

� the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform; � the Department of Justice and Equality; � the Department of Social Protection; � the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government; � FÁS; � the Equality Authority; � the Irish Business and Employers Confederation (IBEC); � the Irish Congress of Trades Unions (ICTU); � the Irish Organisation of the Unemployed (INOU); � Chambers Ireland; � the Border Midlands and Western Regional Assembly; and � the Southern and Eastern Regional Assembly. Module 4: Activity-Level Evaluations Module 4 involved the detailed evaluation of the individual Activities that are co-financed by the ESF under the OP. For each OP Activity the steps involved included: � reviewing Activity-specific documentation and literature, including relevant OP extracts, relevant

extracts from the Ex-Ante Evaluation of the OP, Activity Implementation Plans, Activity Progress Reports, Horizontal Principle Reports and Activity-level financial data;

� considering any changes in the external environment in which the Activity is being implemented, including socio-economic and/or policy changes;

� structured face-to-face consultations with the Intermediate Bodies and agencies responsible for implementation;

� reviewing Activity-specific performance indicators and targets, including those originally established, any changes, and progress as reported to date;

� examining Activity-specific efficiency, including the unit costs (or expenditures) associated with the achievement of key performance indicators;

� evaluating the extent to which OP Horizontal Principles are enshrined and supported under the Activity in question, and the evidence to support this;

� formulating conclusions and recommendations regarding each Activity, including specific recommendations regarding the quality, nature and reporting of targets and indicators; and

� the formulation of Activity-specific Action Plans to assist Intermediate Bodies and implementing agencies to ensure Activity objectives and targets are met to the greatest extent possible over the remaining duration of the OP.

Module 5: Synthesis The fifth Module involved the summary assessment and synthesis of the preceding Modules, concluding the preparation of the Activity-specific Action Plans from Module 4, and the formulation of overall MTE conclusions and recommendations. Module 6: Conclusions and Reporting Finally, Module 6 involved the formulation of overall MTE conclusions and recommendations, preparation and finalisation of the draft MTE Report for the client, the finalisation of draft Activity Action Plans, and the submission of these to the Evaluation Steering Group for its consideration. Following receipt of comments and feedback on the draft Report, agreed changes and amendments were made and the Final Report submitted.

1.5 Structure of Report The MTE Report is structured as follows: � Section 2 describes the HCIOP, including its aims and objectives, structure, financial provision,

management and implementation, ex-ante evaluation and 2009 agreed amendments;


5

� Section 3 considers developments in the contextual environment in which the OP has been implemented, including socio-economic and labour market developments, the exchequer finances, EU and national policy developments and institutional developments of relevance;

� Section 4 addresses the OP’s progress, effectiveness and efficiency up to the Mid-Term point, including at OP, Priority and Activity level;

� Section 5 addresses the OP’s Horizontal Principles, as well as the ESF added value; and � Section 6 presents MTE conclusions and recommendations.


6

2. The Human Capital Investment Operational Programme 2007-13

2.1 Introduction This Section of the report describes the HCIOP. Section 2.2 describes its aims and objectives, while Section 2.3 describes the OP structure in terms of Priorities and Activities. The following Section describes the OP’s financial provisions including the contribution from the ESF, while Section 2.5 describes arrangements for its management and implementation. Section 2.6 summarises the findings of the ex-ante evaluation of the OP, and Section 2.7 describes OP amendments agreed in 2009.

2.2 OP Structure, Aims and Objectives As referred to in Section 1.2, the over-arching objectives of the HCIOP are: � “To provide education, training and other supports necessary to upskill the workforce as a means of

enabling it to respond to the challenges posed by international competition, to enhance worker productivity and to assist in meeting the evolving needs of industry and the economy; and


The OP is structured into three Priorities: � Priority I: Increasing Activation of the Labour Force � Priority II: Increasing Participation and Reducing Inequality in the Labour Force � Priority III: Technical Assistance. The objectives of Priority I are “to contribute to increased skill levels in the workforce and to enhancing the productivity of the workforce”. The OP acknowledges that these are broad aims, and that their achievement would be dependent primarily on wider investments under the National Development Plan and other strategies, but it argued that the HCIOP and ESF could make a substantial contribution in niche areas of labour market and education interventions. It is intended to address the first strategic OP objective, as stated above. The objective of Priority II is “to contribute to addressing labour market gaps for specific groups that are experiencing barriers to participation and employment, including those created by gender inequality and wider inequalities”. The Priority is “designed to provide for the increased activation and participation within certain groups that are regarded as being a valuable source of workers to Ireland’s labour force”, and it is intended to address the second strategic OP objective. The total budget of the OP is divided across the three Priorities as follows (rounded): Priority I 72%, Priority II 27%, Priority III 1%, see Figure 2.1. The budget is described more fully in Section 2.3 below. Priority III (Technical Assistance) is intended to provide for the costs of administering the OP.

72%

27%

1%


7

In keeping with the more strategic approach of EU Structural and Cohesion funding in the 2007-13 programming period, the OP text and budget is formally approved at Priority level only. However, the OP included a range of specific illustrative Activities and interventions that were likely to be co-financed by the ESF under Priorities I and II. In the initial years of the programme, a total of 14 specific Activities were included under the Priorities. These are shown in Figure 2.1, grouped by Priority.

FIGURE 2.1 INITIAL HCIOP PRIORITIES AND ACTIVITIES

HCI OP

INCREASING ACTIVATION OF THE

LABOUR FORCE

INCREASING PARTICIPATION AND

REDUCING INEQUALITY IN THE LABOUR FORCE

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

SKILLS TRAINING

IN-COMPANY TRAINING

BACK TO EDUCATION INITIATIVE

UNDERGRADUATE SKILLS

DISABILITY TRAINING

DISABILITY ACTIVATION PROJECT

ADULT LITERACY

THIRD LEVEL ACCESS

YOUTHREACH AND TRAVELLERS

GYD – IT SKILLS/PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT

GYD – ADDITIONAL WORKERS

POSITIVE ACTIONS TO PROMOTE GENDER EQUALITY

EQUALITY MAINSTREAMING APPROACH

MIGRANT WORKERS

OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME

PRIORITY ACTIVITY

As part of the OP amendments in 2009, it was agreed that one of these Activities, namely Disability Training under Priority II, would be removed from the OP (although it would continue to operate outside its framework). In addition, the Labour Market Activation Fund was initiated in 2010 as a further distinct co-funded Activity under the OP. Prior to their formal operation under the OP, each Activity had an Activity Implementation Plan (AIP) drawn up, which provided a range of details regarding each, including: � the Priority it would operate under; � the context for the intervention, and the need it would seek to address; � its objectives; � implementation structures and responsibilities; � performance indicators and targets; � its anticipated contribution to horizontal principles and objectives; and � its financial provision, including ESF contribution. The formal objectives of the thirteen Activities included under Priorities I and II, as set out in their AIPs, are shown in Figure 2.2.


8

FIGURE 2.2 OBJECTIVES OF OP ACTIVITIES ACTIVITY OBJECTIVES PRIORITY I: INCREASING ACTIVATION OF THE LABOUR FOR CE Skills Training for the Unemployed and Job-Seekers

The activity provides a range of vocational training courses to meet the needs of unemployed persons or other job seekers. Training courses are provided at different levels and in a wide range of subjects. Some courses concentrate on generic, foundation skills whilst others provide skills specific to a particular occupation or set of tasks. Within the range of specific skills are courses in computer applications and software development, financial services, caring, driving, machine operation, electronics and retail. Within the overall FÁS suite of training programmes for unemployed/job-seekers, this activity will focus on particular types of programmes and client groups to respond to particular needs within budget allocations.

In-Company Training The objective of the activity is to increase the number of employed persons acquiring certified training qualifications and hence their employability and companies’ productivity and competitiveness. The activity will provide funding to help enable employed persons to receive training and development. To support this objective a number of specific actions will be undertaken; analyses of national, sectoral and regional training needs, the development and implementation of programmes to meet these needs, the development and implementation of quality assurance measures and training standards, funding to support training of employed persons and the development and/or mainstreaming of innovative training models (including the use of Recognition of Prior Learning). It will also help companies to assess their HRD practices and processes and benchmark their performance against comparators.

Back to Education Initiative To increase the base of adults with upper second level education and/or qualifications at FETAC Levels 3, 4, 5 and 6 and relevant or updated skills to meet the needs of the economy. This will be achieved through the provision of a range of part-time learning opportunities that enable learners to reconcile participation in education with family and/or employment responsibilities. The part-time provision will be flexible in relation to timing (i.e. mornings, afternoons, evenings, block) and facilitate progression to achievement of full awards over time.

Undergraduate Skills To increase the number of graduates from these courses to meet labour market demands by increasing the number of additional students enrolled on courses supported under this area of activity

Labour Market Activation Fund The fund is targeted to benefit specific priority groups among the unemployed: the low skilled, and those formerly employed in declining sectors – construction, retail and manufacturing sectors, with particular emphasis on the under 35s and the long-term unemployed.


9

FIGURE 2.2 OBJECTIVES OF OP ACTIVITIES (CONT) ACTIVITY OBJECTIVES PRIORITY II: INCREASING PARTICIPATION AND REDUCING INEQUALITY IN THE LABOUR FORCE Disability Activation Project The aim of the initiative is to develop and test a comprehensive employment strategy based on individual case management of

people on disability welfare payments that will have the capacity to increase their employment rate.

Adult Literacy This measure will seek to provide increased access to literacy, numeracy and language tuition for adults whose skills are inadequate for participation in modern society. It will also aim to increase capacity in the adult literacy service. Key target groups under this area of investment include unqualified members of the traveller community, young persons at risk of being involved in anti social/criminal behaviour and adults in need of improved basic literacy, language and numeracy skills.

Third Level Access This initiative aims to tackle (a) inequities in participation in higher education faced by students with limited economic resources, and (b) inequities in physical, curricular and pedagogical access for students with disabilities in higher and further education.

Youthreach and Travellers Youthreach seeks to provide early school leavers with the knowledge, skills and confidence required to participate fully in society and progress to further education, training and employment. Senior Traveller Training seeks to provide an opportunity for members of the Traveller community and others to engage in a programme of learning that affirms their cultural identity, acquire the knowledge, skills and confidence to participate fully in society (Traveller community and settled community) and progress to further education, training and employment.

Garda Youth Diversion Projects - IT Skills/Personal Development

The objective of this measure is to enhance the employability of participants in Garda Youth Diversion Projects (GYDPs) by providing them with key skills in the area of IT and personal development.


10

FIGURE 2.2 OBJECTIVES OF OP ACTIVITIES (CONT) ACTIVITY OBJECTIVES Garda Youth Diversion Projects - Additional Workers

To provide support for participants in accessing further education and training through the recruitment of employment support youth workers who would work with participants and relevant agencies and employers. This role would require further development so it could be tailored to meet needs at local level. The employment support worker would be additional to the existing youth workers on the projects.


The objectives of this intervention are wide ranging, and include contributing to an increased female labour market participation with an emphasis on training and upskilling and with a particular emphasis on groups such as disadvantaged mothers, including lone parents and women in the older age group who might not previously have been actively engaged in the labour market; fostering the advancement of women at the level of the enterprise through targeted training interventions; fostering the engagement of women in politics and other areas of decision making through training and development initiatives; encouraging women to undertake entrepreneurship; encouraging professional networking among women; and others.

Equality Mainstreaming Approach The objectives of this Activity is to facilitate and support institutional change within providers of vocational education and training, labour market programmes and within small and medium enterprises that reflects a capacity to combat discrimination, to promote equality and accommodate diversity.

Social and Employment Integration of Migrants

The objective of this Activity is to implement a series of initiatives which will increase the employment possibilities for the target group through a linked comprehensive employment program embracing all stages of preparation which will include language training around the work place, social skills training and a one on one mentoring programme that will lead to long term placement of beneficiaries in either training or employment.


11

2.3 Financial Overview Following formal revisions made in 2009, the OP provides for total expenditure of just over €906m, made up of €528m in national public funding, a Community (ESF) contribution of €375m and private funding of €3m. The current allocation of OP financial resources across its three priorities is shown in Table 2.1.

TABLE 2.1: HCIOP FINANCIAL OVERVIEW

ESF (€M)

Exchequer (€M)

Total

Public (€M)

Private (€M)

Total (€M)

% of total

Priority I - Increasing Activation of the Labour Force

247

400

647

3

650

71.7%

Priority II - Increasing Activation and Reducing Inequality in the Labour Force

125

125

250 0

250

27.6%

Priority III - Technical Assistance 3 3 6 0 6 0.7% Total 375 528

903 3 906 100.0%


The OP also established the regional and annual profile of planned expenditure over the 2007-2013 period. The Border, Midlands and West (BMW) NUTS II Region is to receive was to have €228.8m (or 61%) of the ESF contribution allocated to it, with the remainder (39%) allocated to the Southern and Eastern (S&E) Region. It was also planned that expenditure under the OP would be quite significantly front-loaded into the early years of the programming period, with approximately three quarters of all expenditure to occur prior to the end of 2010. Table 2.2 shows the regional and annual expenditure profile as anticipated in the OP.

TABLE 2.2: OP FINANCIAL PLAN BY REGION AND YEAR (€M)

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total % of total

BMW ESF 76.1 60.0 43.3 25.8 7.7 7.9 8.0 228.8 25.2%

National Public 109.6 87.0 61.3 35.0 10.3 10.3 10.7 324.2 35.8%

National Private 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.2%

Total 185.7 147.5 105.1 61.4 18.0 18.2 18.7 554.5 61.2%

S&E ESF 19.7 20.1 20.5 20.9 21.3 21.7 22.2 146.6 16.2%

National Public 27.0 27.3 28.5 28.4 29.7 31.2 32.0 204.1 22.5%


Total 46.7 48.0 49.5 49.8 51.1 52.9 54.2 352.1 38.8%

Total ESF 95.8 80.1 63.8 46.8 29.0 29.6 30.2 375.3 41.4%

National Public 136.6 114.4 89.8 63.4 40.0 41.5 42.7 528.3 58.3%


Total 232.4 195.5 154.6 111.1 69.0 71.1 72.9 906.6 100.0%



12

This financial framework follows revisions made in 2009, which involved a reduction in the exchequer contribution to the overall OP, a substantial increase in the total (national and ESF) financial allocation to Priority 1 and a reduction in the allocation to Priority 2 (Figure 2.3). The revisions reflected the changed socio-economic context and substantial growth in unemployment since the OP was originally framed, and the need to put greater emphasis on activation measures for those within the labour market, particularly those recently unemployed.

FIGURE 2.3: PRIORITY LEVEL REVISIONS TO HCIOP (€M, PUBLIC EXPENDITU RE)4

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

ESF

Exch

eq

ue

r

ESF

Exch

eq

ue

r

ESF

Exch

eq

ue

r

ESF

Exch

eq

ue

r

Priority I Priority II Priority III Total OP

Revised OP

Original OP

Table 2.3 shows the agreed financial changes made by Priority and also shows the revised indicative allocations by Activity, while Figure 2.4 illustrates the changes for each Activity.

4 The OP also included a private contribution of €3m, which wasn’t affected by the 2009 OP revisions

HUMAN CAPITAL INVESTMENT OP (2007-13) MID TERM EVALUATION –FINAL REPORT

13

TABLE 2.3: COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND REVISED OP FI NANCIAL ALLOCATIONS (€M) Original OP Revised OP Change from Original to Revised OP ESF Exchequer Private Total ESF Exchequer Private Total ESF Exchequer Private Total Priority I: Increasing Activation of the Labour Force 146 452 3 602 247 400 3 650 101 -52 0 48 Skills Training 82 180 0 262 201 327 0 528 118 147 0 265 In-Company Training 29 137 3 169 10 16 3 29 -19 -121 0 -140 Back to Education Initiative 14 39 0 53 14 23 0 37 0 -16 0 -16 Undergraduate Skills 21 96 0 117 21 34 0 55 0 -62 0 -62 Priority II: Increasing Activation and Reducing Inequality in the Labour Force 226 526 0 752 125 125 0 250 -101 -401 0 -502 Disability Training 90 331 0 421 0 0 0 0 -90 -331 0 -421 Disability Activation Project 5 5 0 10 5 5 0 10 0 0 0 0 Adult Literacy 48 48 0 97 48 48 0 97 0 0 0 0 Third Level Access 10 25 0 35 10 10 0 19 0 -16 0 -16 Youthreach and Travellers 37 80 0 117 37 37 0 73 0 -44 0 -44 Garda Youth Diversion - IT Skills/Personal Development 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Garda Youth Diversion - Additional Workers 12 12 0 24 12 12 0 24 0 0 0 0 Positive Actions to Promote Gender Equality 16 16 0 32 6 6 0 12 -10 -10 0 -20 Equality Mainstreaming Approach 4 4 0 7 2 2 0 4 -2 -2 0 -3 Migrant Workers 4 4 0 9 4 4 0 9 0 0 0 0 Priority III: Technical Assistance 3 3 0 6 3 3 0 6 0 0 0 0 Technical Assistance 3 3 0 6 3 3 0 6 0 0 0 0 Total Programme 375 981 3 1,360 375 528 3 906 0 -453 0 -454 SOURCE: MANAGING AUTHORITY AND OP DOCUMENTS

HUMAN CAPITAL INVESTMENT OP (2007-13) MID TERM EVALUATION –FINAL REPORT

14

FIGURE 2.4: ORIGINAL AND REVISED OP FINANCIAL ALLOC ATIONS BY ACTIVITY (€M)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Original Allocation Revised Allocation

SOURCE: MANAGING AUTHORITY AND OP DOCUMENTS


15

2.4 Management and Implementation The Managing Authority for the OP is the ESF Policy and Operations Unit within the Department of Education and Skills (at the programme outset this unit was part of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment). Its responsibilities include: � ensuring that activity funded is in accordance with the criteria applicable to the OP and in compliance

with relevant EU and national rules and policies; � verifying the delivery of the co-financed activity and the expenditure declared by the beneficiaries; � managing OP data and information systems; � ensuring appropriate accounting systems are in place; � overseeing OP evaluations � ensuring appropriate documentation is maintained and produced � Chairing and providing the Secretariat for the OP Monitoring Committee and ensuring its effective

operation; The OP has a number of Intermediate Bodies, which are designated by the Managing Authority to carry out some of or all of its responsibilities or those of the Certifying Authority in areas under which they have responsibility. The Intermediate Bodies are � the Department of Education and Skills; � FÁS; � the Department of Justice and Equality; � the Equality Authority; � the Department of Social Protection. Implementation of the Programme is monitored by the OP Monitoring Committee, which is charged with ensuring the effectiveness and quality of the Programme’s implementation, including the criteria by which co-financed activities are selected, monitoring progress against established targets, the approval of annual and final reports, the evaluation processes and outcomes, and approving any amendments to the OP during its implementation. The HCIOP Monitoring Committee has the following members: � the Managing Authority; � the ESF Certifying Authority; � the ESF Auditing Authority; � the Department of Education and Skills; � the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform (previously the Department of Finance); � the Department of Justice and Equality; � the Department of Social Protection; � the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government; � FÁS; � the Equality Authority; � the BMW and S&E Regional Assemblies; � ICTU; � IBEC; � Chambers Ireland; and � the INOU. The EU Commission, by invitation or on its own initiative, attends Monitoring Committee meetings in an observer or advisory capacity, while other organisations may be invited to become members or to attend


16

meetings as considered appropriate. To date, the OP Monitoring Committee has met on 8 occasions, on the following dates: � 18th December 2007; � 22nd May 2008; � 6th November 2008; � 23rd June 2009; � 10th November 2009; � 27th April 2010; � 13th December 2010; and � 17th May 2011.

2.5 Horizontal Principles The OP incorporates three horizontal principles, which it seeks to uphold and support across all of its Priorities and Activities, insofar as that is possible and practicable. These are: � social inclusion; � gender equality and wider equal opportunities; and � sustainable development.

2.6 OP Performance Indicators and Targets The HCIOP incorporates performance indicators and targets at several levels: � a set of broad context indicators were included that seek to capture trends in education and training

participation, labour productivity, and labour market participation. As “contextual” indicators, trends in these variables were considered likely to be affected to a large extent by determinants beyond the scope of the HCIOP, and no targets were set at a national level for these indicators under the HCIOP;

� a further set of performance indicators were established at Priority level, comprising output and result indicators along with 2010 and 2013 targets, under each of the two main OP Priorities; and (in some cases)

� each Activity co-financed under Priorities I and II includes a set of formal output, result and impact indicators and targets within its AIP (as well as in individual AIPs, these were presented in Chapter 6 of the OP in an aggregated form).

The context indicators include the following: Priority I: � the percentage of the adult population aged 25-64 participating in education and training; � overall labour productivity (measured by Gross Value Added at factor cost per worker); and � hours worked productivity (measured by Gross Value Added at factor cost per hours worked). Priority II: � the percentage of the population aged 18-24 with most lower secondary education, and not in further

education and training; � the employment rate (%) of groups disadvantaged in the labour market compared to the overall

employment rate; and � the number of people indicating they felt discriminated against when looking for work.


17

Priority-level indicators, as well as those specified in Chapter 6 of the OP but relating to specific Activities, are shown in Figure 2.5 (for Priority I) and in Figure 2.6 (FOR Priority II). Progress under the OP Performance Indicators is addressed in Section 4.

FIGURE 2.5: PERFORMANCE INDICATORS – PRIORITY I

Priority 1: Increasing Activation of the Labour For cePriority Objective: To upskill the Irish labour force as a means of enab ling it to respond effectively and efficiently to t he evolving needs of industry and the economy

Priority Indicators:Output: Total no. of persons supported under Upskilling the Workforce PriorityResult: Total no. of persons successfully completing accredited programmes under Upskilling the Workforce Priority

Specific Objectives:

1. To increase the number of employed persons acquiring certified training qualifications

2. To increase the supply of graduates qualified in key areas such as engineering, science and ICT

3. To increase the base of adults with upper second level education and or qualifications at FETAC Levels 3 to 6

Specific Indicators:

Output: No. of workers trained using CDP funding

Result: No. of workers receiving certification using CDP funding

Impact : No. of companies with the Excellence Through People National Human Resource Standard

Output: No. of additional students enrolled on key courses identified such as ICT, Engineering and Science

Result: No. of additional graduates on key courses identified such as ICT, Engineering and Science

Impact: No. of additional graduates from key courses identified such as ICT, Engineering and Science who go into employment or further education

Output: 1) No. of Full-time participants2) No. of Part-time places provided

Result:1) No. of Full-time participants gaining certification2) No. of Part-time participants gaining certification

Impact:1) No. of Full-time participants who progress to further education or work2) No. of Part-time participants who progress to further education or work


18

FIGURE 2.6: PERFORMANCE INDICATORS – PRIORITY II

Priority 2: Increasing Participation and Reducing I nequality in the Labour ForcePriority Objective: To provide for increased activation and participati on with certain groups who can contribute to Irelan d’s workforce but who face barriers to employment, progression and participation

Priority Indicators:Output: Total no. of persons supported under Priority 2Result: Total no. of persons successfully completing accredited programmes under Priority 2:

Specific Objectives:

1:.To support persons with a disability to move into employment through educational, training and employment supports.

Specific Indicators:

Output: No. of participants supported

2. To provide unqualified school leavers with the knowledge, skills and confidence required to participate fully in society and progress to further education, training and employment and to provide an opportunity for members of the Traveller community and others to engage in a programme of learning that affirms their cultural identity, acquire the knowledge, skills and confidence to participate fully in society and progress to further education, training and employment.

3. The aim of this objective is to provide increased access to literacy, numeracy and language tuition for adults whose skills are inadequate for participation in modern society and to increase capacity in the adult literacy service.

4. This objective will encourage greater female participation in the workforce and support an equality mainstreaming approach across all labour market programme providers that ensures that labour market programme design and delivery accommodates diversity and enhances access, participation and outcomes for groups experiencing labour market inequality across the nine grounds covered by equality legislation.

5. This objective will be to implement a series of initiatives aimed at increasing the employability and economic independence for the target group through a linked comprehensive employment program embracing all stages of preparation foremployment.

Result: No. of participants achieving certification/accreditation

Impact: No. of participants progressing into further education, training and employment

Output:1) No. of participants on Youthreach and Senior Traveller Training Programmes2) No. of students supported by the Student Assistance Fund3) No. participants receiving support on Garda Youth Diversion Projects

Result:1) No. participants on Youthreach and Senior Traveller Training Programmes successfully completing programme or achieving certification2) No. of students supported by the Student Assistance Fund successfully completing academic year3) No. participants receiving support on Garda Youth Diversion Projects successfully completing training

Impact:1) No. participants on Youthreach and Senior Traveller Training Programmes progressing to further education/traini ng or employment2) Proportion of new entrants in full time higher education from social groups, non-manual workers and unskilled manual workers3) Garda Youth Diversion Impact Study to be commenced in 2007 and followed up 18 months from survey date to measure impact

Output: No. of participants in Adult Literacy Training Programmes

Result: No. of participants on Adult Literacy Training Programmes successfully completing programme or achieving certification

Impact: Subject to clarification in 2007

Output: 1) No. of consultancies delivered to enable employers to develop equality policies and strategies2) No. of Full- (part-) time courses developed under Positive Action Programmes for women3) No. of participants under Positive Action Programmes for women

Result:1) No. of equality policies/equality and diversity training actions developed by employers2) No. of participants under Positive Action Programmes taking up employment, progressing in the labour market or taking decision making roles as appropriate

Impact: Satisfaction rates for groups experiencing inequality in education/training, labour market programmes and employment

Output: No. of individuals participating in preparation for employment programme

Result: No. of participants who complete specific training and/or individualised mentoring and are considered ready to enter the employment market

Impact: No. of participants gaining employment


19

3. Developments in the Programme Context

3.1 Introduction This Section considers the context in which the OP has operated since 2007. Section 3.2 considers the socio-economic context, which has changed very considerably since the OP’s initial preparation and planning. It considers detailed developments in demographics, economic output, the labour market trends in aggregate and in relation to specific groupings including by gender, region, sector and occupation. Section 3.3 then considers the major policy implications of these developments.

3.2 Socio-Economic Developments

3.2.1 Introduction

Since the Human Capital Operational Programme covers a six year period from 2007, for the most part, this background analysis for the Mid-Term Review of the OP covers the period from the fourth quarter of 2006 to the corresponding quarter of 2010, the latter being the most recent period for which comprehensive output and labour market data are available. The data sources mainly used are the Quarterly National Household Survey (QNHS) and the annual Population and Migration Estimates, both compiled by the CSO. The time span covered has been one of the most traumatic in the context of the Irish economy. The first year of the period represents the closing stages of the recent economic boom, which reached its peak in late 2007/ early 2008. While the peak varies somewhat depending on which indicator is used, in the analyses in this review, Q4 2007 has been taken as the peak point. However, this does not present a significant problem as all economic indicators show that, temporarily, little change was occurring in the economy at this juncture. Subsequently, of course, the economy deteriorated at an increasing pace as the recession intensified. In many cases the emphasis has been placed on analysing the period between this peak and end-2010, as this is considered the most relevant to the current circumstances. The commentary is accompanied by summary tables and charts indicating the trends for various indicators, while the more detailed statistical material is presented in Annex 1.

3.2.2 Demographic Trends

Table 3.1 shows that over the period from April 2006 to April 20115 the Irish population increased from 4.23 to 4.58 million, a rise of 348,000, or 7.5 per cent. In the NUTS2 BMW region the relative increase was somewhat greater at 9.5 per cent (108,000), while in the much larger South and East (S&E) region it was 7.7 per cent (240,000).

TABLE 3.1: POPULATION ESTIMATES (MID-APRIL) BY REGION, 2006 TO 2010 (000) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 BMW 1,133 1,161 1,185 1,204 1,205 1,241 S&E 3,100 3,178 3,237 3,256 3,266 3,340 STATE 4,233 4,339 4,422 4,460 4,471 4,581

SOURCE: CSO

5 Total population estimates are published only on an annual basis, with reference point mid-April


20

Table A1.1 in Annex 1, which shows population changes pre-boom and post boom, indicates that the pace of these increases declined significantly in the period under study. In the pre-boom period, which can be broadly taken as being between April 2006 and April 2008, the population at national level rose by nearly 190,000, but in the following two years (i.e. up to April 2010) the increase was less than 50,000. In fact in the final year of the period covered the net population increase declined to 10,000. A closer inspection of the figures in Table A1.2 shows that the numbers in the younger age categories have fallen significantly since the onset of recession in 2008 – by as much as 82,000 for those aged between 15 and 34 years. While this is partly due to cohort affects (relating back to smaller numbers of births in the early 1990s), a decrease of this magnitude can only have been caused by emigration, which involved a sizeable number of immigrant workers. The population decline in this particular age group was much more rapid in the S&E region, a likely contributing cause being the much larger number of immigrant workers in this area. External migration trends over the study period are shown in Table 3.2. Net migration (i.e. inflows less outflows) was strongly positive at the beginning of this period, being of the order of 70,000 in the years 2006 and 2007. There after it decreased rapidly and had turned significantly negative (-35,000) in the year to April 2010. This was primarily due to declining gross inflows which, annually, fell from about 110,000 in the early years of the period to just over 30,000 in 2010. Furthermore, outflows, or gross emigration, increased during each of these years, rising from 35,000 to 65,000, thus adding to the overall net population loss through migration.

TABLE 3.2: ESTIMATES OF EXTERNAL MIGRATION, 2006 TO 2010 (0 00) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Emigration 36 42 45 65 65 Immigration 108 110 84 57 31 Net Migration 72 67 39 -8 -35

SOURCE: CSO The very large increase in the outward movement was mainly due to the departure of immigrant workers, even though Irish nationals formed in increasing share of this total towards the end of the period. The relationship between events in the labour force and the changes in the external migration pattern are discussed in the next Section.

3.2.3 Overall Output and Employment Trends

In order to provide a broad overview of the economic difficulties which have emerged over the last few years, Figure 3.1 shows quarterly index numbers of real GDP and of total employment (seasonally adjusted) since Q4 2006. Looking first at the output data, the trend line shows that real GDP actually rose significantly throughout 2007, the first year of the OP period, increasing by over 6 per cent. However, thereafter it began to fall rapidly, and by end- 2010 the index was nearly 10 per cent below the base point (Q406), and as much as 15 per cent below the peak figure reached in Q407. There were initial indications that the decline had stabilised in 2010, but the final quarter revealed a disappointingly sizeable drop, which resulted in the average for the entire year falling by 1 per cent compared with 2009. The employment trends follow a similar pattern to GDP, even though the trend is less erratic. Total employment rose by 3 per cent in 2007 but, as with GDP, fell by nearly 15 per cent between the Q407 peak and Q410 (or an absolute decrease of nearly 320,000). The two graphs have shown a tendency to diverge in recent quarters, with employment appearing to fall more rapidly relative to GDP, indicating that labour productivity may be increasing.


21

FIGURE 3.1: QUARTERLY INDEX OF SEASONALLY ADJUSTED REAL GDP AND EMPLOYMENT, Q406 TO Q410 (Q406=100)

SOURCE: CSO It is worth noting that current medium term forecasts from the Central Bank and other institutions of note are somewhat muted, especially in regard to employment. The Bank is now expects real GDP to expand by slightly less than 1 per cent this year, even though it expects growth to increase to 2.2 per cent in 2012 – a rather significant jump, given current circumstances. The ESRI GDP forecast for 2011 is higher at 2 per cent, rising to 3 per cent in 2012. Other institutions are more pessimistic. The IMF predicts real GDP growth for 2011 at 0.5 per cent, increasing to 1.9 per cent next year. It is of interest to note that the NDP and NSRF 2007-13 forecast for the level of real GNP in 2013 is more than 40 per cent higher than is now expected6. The outlook for employment is noticeably more sombre. Both the Central Bank and ESRI expect a fall of about 25,000 in 2011, admittedly a much smaller drop when compared with 2010. Thereafter, the employment level is forecast to remain virtually static throughout 2012 – implying that one should not anticipate further net job gains of any substance until 2013 at the earliest. Both institutions are estimating that the average unemployment rate for 2011 will be about 14.3 per cent – noticeably less than the current CSO monthly estimates (based on Live Register trends) which are of the order of 14.7 per cent. The Central Bank and the ESRI are predicting a slight fall in the unemployment rate in 2012, primarily it would seem, due to rising emigration.

3.2.4 Labour Market Trends by Gender

Gender equality is one of the OP horizontal principles. Gender based trends in total employment are shown in Figure 3.2. Men have fared considerably worse than women since the recession commenced. The male level of employment in Q410 was some 18 per cent below the base year Q406 figure at end 2010, and 20 per cent smaller than the Q407 peak. For women the rate of jobs decline was much slower after the recession started, and by Q410 was less than 5 per cent below the base year level and less than 10 per cent below the peak employment total reached (which was reached slightly later than for men). Part of this divergence is due to the impact of the early collapse in the building sector and to a jobs decline in manufacturing, each of which employ a significant majority of men.

6 See Report of the Review Group on State Assets and Liabilities, p.5.


22

Further information on gender based labour market trends are given in Table A1.3 in Annex 1. This shows that in the post-peak period to end 2010 the male unemployment rate rose from 5.1 to 17.3 per cent, while for women the corresponding rates were 3.8 and 10.1 per cent, also a substantial increase, but again representing a less significant labour market deterioration than for men.

FIGURE 3.2: QUARTERLY INDEXES OF TOTAL EMPLOYMENT BY GENDER Q4 20 06 TO Q4 2010 (Q406=100)

SOURCE: CSO

3.2.5 Labour Market Trends by Region

Table A1.4 in Annex 1 contains labour market data for NUT2 Regions.

FIGURE 3.3: TREND OF EMPLOYMENT BY REGION (Q406=100)

SOURCE: CSO


23

The most significant aspect to emerge from this table is that, when viewed in terms of trends over the four-year period in question, the two regions are noticeably similar. For each region the unemployment rate increase follows a similar pattern throughout the period rising from 4 to 14 per cent. The trends in total employment are even more remarkable in this regard. Figure 3.3 shows these in index number form for all quarters from Q406 to Q4107. The two trend lines track one another very closely, apart from a slight temporary divergence towards the end of the period. If there are different influences at work here, they are not evident as it seems that they have been completely obscured by the overwhelming and shared impact of the economic downturn.

3.2.6 Sectoral Employment Trends

Data on this aspect are given in Table 3.3.8 The calculations in the final two columns of the table represent the employment declines between the peak of the boom (Q407) and Q410 expressed in absolute and relative terms. The sector that really stands out is building and construction, for which employment fell by over 150,000, or nearly 60 per cent, between Q407 and Q4109. The next largest decreases were in administrative services and agriculture, in each case just over 25 per cent. The extent of the jobs decline in the latter sector is somewhat unusual, as in previous downturns employment in agriculture tended to stabilise, or even increase, as young people from farm backgrounds often went home and worked on the land. Manufacturing industry also recorded a sizeable decrease, of over 16 per cent. This decline can be attributed to both the traditional manufacturing subsector and to the less skilled end of the high tech area which was adversely affected by both the economic downturn and the transfer of facilities to low cost countries. The smallest employment decreases subsequent to the peak were in financial and insurance services and in the miscellaneous “other services category, at just under 6 per cent. In fact the numbers at work in financial services etc. continued increasing until the end of 2008 and did not begin to fall until late in 2009. All the indications are now, however, that further significant declines in this area are imminent according as the restructuring of the banking sector is implemented.

TABLE 3.3: EMPLOYMENT BY SECTOR, Q4 2006 TO Q4 2010 (000) Change from Q407 Peak to

Q410 Sector

Q406

Q407

Q408

Q409

Q410 (000) %

Agriculture 110 114 116 90 85 -29 -25.6

Manufacturing 301 284 277 247 238 -46 -16.1

Building 267 261 214 135 109 -153 -58.4

Distribution 288 314 292 267 269 -45 -14.3

Professional, Technical Sves 105 113 111 103 97 -16 -14.2

Finance, Insurance etc 100 104 109 106 98 -6 -5.9

Administrative Services 72 82 68 63 60 -23 -27.4

Non Market Services 449 463 487 487 489 26 +5.7

Other Services 386 404 382 391 381 -23 -5.7

Total 2,077 2,139 2,054 1,888 1,825 -314 -14.7

SOURCE: CSO

7 These data are not seasonally adjusted, but this makes little difference in interpreting the data in view of the underlying scale of the employment decreases. 8 Graphs are not shown, as there are too many sectoral categories to be distinguished. 9 Employment was in fact decreasing in the building sector before the chosen peak point; an inspection of earlier figures shows that the numbers at work in this sector peaked in mid-2007.


24

There is one notable exception to the list of decreases described above. This is non-market services, i.e.

mainly the public sector, which recorded an increase of nearly 6 per cent during the time span in question.

However, it will be noted that the staff numbers in this category have begun to stabilise, and one would expect that these will fall somewhat over the next few years according as the provisions of the Croke Park agreement on public sector reform continue to take effect.

3.2.7 External Migration and the Labour Market

It is of particular interest to consider how the current difficulties in the labour market have influenced the pattern of external migration. It has already been demonstrated in Section 2 that, in the context of the total population, the net migration flows turned noticeably negative in the years ending April 2009 and 2010, after a long period during which these annual net movements were strongly positive. One can derive further useful insights by analysing stock estimates for population and labour force aggregates classified by nationality over the past few years. The relevant data, taken from the CSO QNHS are given in Annex 1 Table A1.5. This contains estimates for the population aged 15 years and over for Irish citizens and non-nationals, distinguishing those employed, unemployed and persons defined as “economically inactive”. The estimates are for Q4 2010 and Q42007 – i.e. covering the post-peak period as considered earlier. The position is best understood by considering the net changes for these aggregates over the three year period concerned, which are reproduced below as Table 3.4. As one would expect, for both groups the labour market experiences have been significantly negative, but there are very substantial differences. In the case of employment, the total net decline over this period was 316,000, but involved some 115,000 non-nationals, a very large number relative to the overall size of this group. This represents a relative decrease of over one third, compared with a fall of 11 per cent (or 200,000) for Irish citizens.

TABLE 3.4: NET CHANGES IN THE POPULATION AND LABOUR FORCE B Y NATIONALITY, Q4 07 TO Q4 10. (000)

Employed Unemployed Labour Force Inactive Population 15+ Irish -201 168 -33 123 90

Non Irish -115 30 -85 0 -85

Total -316 198 -118 123 5

SOURCE: CSO Unemployment among Irish persons rose by 168,000, which when taken with the employment increase, resulted in a fall of more than 30,000 in the size in the corresponding labour force. The number of inactive Irish people rose by 123,000, suggesting some element of withdrawal from the labour force. The small rise in unemployment for non-nationals (30,000) suggests a very different situation. This means that the labour force for this group decreased by no less than 85,000. Furthermore, as the population of “inactive” non-nationals did not rise at all in the period covered, it implies that the great majority of foreign workers who lost their jobs since the beginning of the recession have opted to leave the country rather than become unemployed or enter the inactive state in Ireland. These outward movements have constituted a significant safety valve which has substantially reduced the pressures in the domestic labour market. Had these non-nationals decided to remain, it is clear that the current total unemployment figure would be substantially higher, perhaps by as much as 60,000.

3.2.8 Trends in Different Occupations

Employment trends for different occupational groups are shown in Table 3.5 below and in Annex 1 Table A1.6. As with the sector based analysis, the data are best interpreted by referring to the post-peak changes, as


25

shown in the final two columns. The Annex table contains a gender breakdown as it is considered particularly relevant in the context of analysing occupations. It should be noted that the “managers” category includes farmers as the latter are defined as such in the QNHS occupational classification. Since farmers are significantly different from managers outside of agriculture in terms of educational profiles (see next section) a subdivision of the data into the two constituent occupations has been shown in Table 3.5 for total persons10. Observing the figures for all persons it is hardly surprising that the largest decrease (43 per cent) is indicated for craft (i.e. skilled manual) workers, given that a large number of such persons are (or were) employed in the ailing building industry. This would also partly explain the sizeable fall of nearly 30 per cent in the “other” occupational category which mainly contains sizeable numbers of unskilled workers. There was also a substantial post-peak decrease (again of 30 per cent) in the number of farmers. The smallest declines occurred for associate professionals and those classed as personal and protective workers, which includes the defence forces, gardaí and other security personnel. In contrast, managers (other than farmers) and professional workers are exceptional in that they recorded increases. While these were small, it is significant nonetheless that the numbers in these occupations continued to grow in the economic circumstances that prevailed.

TABLE 3.5: EMPLOYMENT BY OCCUPATION, Q4 2006 TO Q4 2010 ( 000) Change from Q407

peak to Q410

Persons

Q406

Q407

Q408

Q409

Q410

(000) %

Managers (incl Farmers) 309 319 329 318 303 -16 -5.1

Farmers etc 74.5 75.5 - - 52.8 -22.7 -30.1

Other Managers 234.1 243.7 - - 250.1 6.4 2.6

Professionals 245 241 258 252 251 9 3.9

Associate profs 180 195 200 195 190 -6 -2.9

Clerical 247 255 249 243 228 -26 -10.4

Craft 296 300 262 191 171 -129 -43.0

Personal, protective service 235 248 239 238 234 -14 -5.8

Sales 179 191 183 168 162 -29 -15.0

Plant operatives 175 178 165 138 136 -41 -23.3

Other 211 211 170 146 148 -63 -29.9

Total 2,077 2,139 2,055 1,888 1,823 -316 -14.8

SOURCE: CSO Table A1.6 in Annex 1 shows that for men the dominant feature is the fall in the number of craft workers which, in absolute terms, accounts for over half of the total post-peak decrease. In the case of women, over the same period clerical workers were the largest component of the jobs decrease (nearly a third), followed by sales workers and the unskilled “other” category. Apart from the actual data, it is also considered helpful to illustrate the occupational trends graphically. This is done for all the quarters the post peak period Q407 to Q410 in Figure 4. In order to illustrate the trends clearly, some occupations which exhibited similar levels of change have been grouped in order to reduce the number of trend lines. Professionals at both levels have been grouped, as have the largely unskilled “other” category with plant operatives (who would tend to at most semi-skilled). Farmers and other managers are not distinguished separately. As is already evident from the actual numbers, the graphs make it clear that impact of the current recession has fallen most heavily on manual workers and those with low skills (i.e. craft and “other” occupations). The

10 Special data which enabled this distinction to be made was supplied by the CSO. Note that the “farmers etc.” category covers persons aged between 15 and 64 years, and includes farm managers.


26

trend graphs for these two groups, shown at the bottom of the display, moved in parallel until early 2009 when they diverged, with position of skilled manual workers deteriorating more rapidly thereafter.

FIGURE 3.4: INDEX NUMBERS OF EMPLOYMENT TRENDS BY BROAD OCCUPATI ON Q407 TO Q410 (Q407=100)

SOURCE: CSO On the other hand, at the other end of the spectrum it is notable that the employment level for professional workers has held up well throughout the recession, and was slightly higher in Q410 than at the beginning of the downturn at the end of 2007. The trend line for ”managers and farmers” dipped by only about 5 per cent in the same period, a decline which is entirely due to falling numbers of farmers; as indicated already, the number of managers in employment has actually increased in recent years.

3.2.9 Labour Market Trends and Education Levels 11

Finally we consider changes in educational profile of the labour force over the period under study. In this analysis four educational levels are distinguished – lower secondary and below, higher secondary (including post-leaving certificate, PLC), and two categories at third level covering non-degree and degree standards.

11 A break in continuity has occurred in the QNHS Educational Attainment series as from Q2 2009 and, therefore, unadjusted data for Q4 2010 are not directly comparable with Q4 2007 and Q4 2006. The key difference is the distinction between honours and ordinary level degrees. Subsequent to Q2 2009 the latter were transferred from “3rd level degree and above” to “3rd level non-degree”. In order to overcome this problem the Q4 2010 figures have been adjusted on an estimated basis to correspond to the older classification. This was done by using ratios derived by comparing educational data for the adjacent quarters Q1 2009 and Q2 2009. The classification of educational levels has been revised in order to facilitate the linking of education categories to the National Framework of Qualifications (NFQ),


27

Regarding employment, the relevant data are given in Table 3.6 which shows the numbers at work in Q406, Q407 and Q410 classified according by educational level. As in our earlier analyses, the emphasis is on the changes since the Q407 economic peak. The general trend in employment for the different educational categories is downward, but this varies greatly for different levels. The data re-affirm the point made earlier in this report that the impact of the recession has fallen most heavily on those in the lowest rungs of society. The most marked decline, at (-37 per cent) was for those in the lowest educational category, i.e. lower secondary or below, The employment decrease was nearly 19 per cent for persons with higher secondary education, but considerably less (4 per cent) for those holding third level non-degree qualifications. The number of third level degree holders in employment actually increased since the onset of recession, by over 7 per cent. In absolute terms this represents a rise of over 35,000, from an estimated 497,000 in Q4 06 to 533,000 in Q4 10, remarkable outcome, given the rate at which the economy declined during this time.

TABLE 3.6: EMPLOYMENT Q406 TO Q410. EDUCATIONAL SHARES WITHI N OCCUPATIONS. PERSONS AGED 15-64 YEARS Educational Level

Q406

Q407

Q410

Change from Q407 Peak (%)

(000)

Lower Secondary or below 485 478 301 -37.0

Higher Secondary, PLC 867 873 711 -18.6

3rd level non degree 230 244 234 -4.2

3rd level degree or above 454 497 533 7.3

Total 2036 2092 1779 -15.0

(%)

Lower Secondary or below 23.8 22.8 16.9

Higher Secondary, PLC 42.6 41.7 40.0

3rd level non degree 11.3 11.7 13.1

3rd level degree or above 22.3 23.8 30.0

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

SOURCE: CSO The developments as described have had a significant effect on the overall educational profile of those at work. These are shown in the lower part of Table 4. Over the three year post-peak period the proportion of those in employment with only lower secondary at best education fell from 23 to 17 per cent: the share for those with higher secondary standard decreased slightly from 42 to 40 per cent, but for those with third level qualifications the percentage rose substantially from just under 36 to 43. Classifications of employment by occupation and educational level are given in Annex 1 Tables A1.7 and A1.8. The former table shows absolute employment figures for Q406, Q407 and Q410, while the latter contains corresponding percentages, the orientation being the four levels of educational within each occupation. One aspect which clearly emerges from Table A8 is that the overall tendency towards a higher skill profile is evident within nearly all occupations, especially for the third level degree category. This applies even in mainly manual occupations, such as the skilled “craft” category and the semi-skilled “operative” group, for which the third level degree shares may be small, but are rising rapidly. The only category which appears to deviate from the above mentioned trend is the “other” group, which contains a large number of unskilled workers across a variety of service industries. The shares for both categories at third level have hardly changed (indeed fell slightly) since the Q407 economic peak. The fact that this group contains a large number of immigrant workers may be a contributing factor.


28

As one would expect, the occupations with the highest skill profiles are “professionals” with nearly 90 per cent with third level qualifications, and “managers” with 55 per cent in this category. For “professionals” the proportion with third level qualifications has always been high. For “managers” the share in question, while lower, has been growing rapidly. On the other hand, it is surprising to find that nearly one half of all farmers currently have at most lower secondary education, even though this percentage is declining and the skill profile generally has been improving. Over 40 per cent of workers in the “other” occupational group also fall in this lowest educational category. Overall, the emerging scene is one where a combination of occupational change, in which intrinsically high skill and specialist areas are assuming greater importance, is combined with a growing tendency towards upskilling within all occupations. This trend appears to have intensified since the onset of the current recession. This suggests that, in future, persons with low levels of skill or education will find it increasingly difficult to gain a substantial foothold in the labour market. Information on the educational levels of the unemployed are shown in Table 3.7. Observing the changes in the absolute numbers given in the top panel of the table it will be noted that the number of unemployed with the lowest qualifications more than doubled between Q407 and Q410 (from 40,000 to over 90,000), but the extent of the increase was much greater (more than threefold) for each of the other (higher level) educational categories. This arose mainly because many of the less skilled workers who lost their jobs were immigrants opted to return to their home countries. Had they decided to remain, the end-2010 unemployment total for his less skilled category of workers would have been considerably higher. It is also of interest to note that the number of unemployed third level degree graduates rose from 13,000 to over 40,000 in the post-peak period. As employment for such workers also increased during this time (Table 6), this indicates that there was, simultaneously, a sizeable inflow into the graduate labour force (and not too much emigration – at least up to then).

TABLE 3.7: UNEMPLOYED PERSONS CLASSIFIED BY EDUCATI ON, Q406 TO Q410. PERSONS AGED 15-64 YEARS. Q406 Q407 Q410 Unemployed (000) Lower Secondary or below 37 40 91 Higher Secondary, PLC 34 42 140 3rd level non degree 8 7 25 3rd level degree or above 9 13 41 Total 87 101 298 Unemployed (% shares) Lower Secondary or below 42.0 39.3 30.6 Higher Secondary, PLC 38.9 41.1 47.1 3rd level non degree 8.7 6.9 8.4 3rd level degree or above 10.4 12.6 13.9 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 Unemployment Rates (%) Lower Secondary or below 7.0 7.7 23.3 Higher Secondary, PLC 3.8 4.5 16.5 3rd level non degree 3.2 2.8 9.7 3rd level degree or above 2.0 2.5 7.2 Total 4.1 4.6 14.3

SOURCE: CSO


29

Unemployment rates for the educational category are given in the lower panel of Table 3.5. By the end of 2010, when viewed against a national rate of 14.3 per cent, the unemployment rate for the lower secondary group had increased to over 23 per cent: that for workers with leaving certificate standard to nearly 17 per cent and to between 7 and 10 percent for third level graduates.

3.3 Policy Implications The forgoing analysis highlights a number of broad policy issues. In the first place the nature of the very large employment losses which have emerged since the onset of recession have resulted in very large numbers of persons with medium and low skills joining the ranks of the unemployed. The unemployment total (ILO basis) of nearly 300,000 at end-2010 comprised 140,000 with higher secondary level qualifications and over 90,000 who had attained at most lower secondary standard. These two groups combined accounted for nearly 80 per cent of total unemployment. The figure for the latter unskilled group, while high, would have been much higher but for the out migration of large numbers of foreign workers, most of whom had worked in low skill jobs. The numbers of unemployed with higher (i.e. third level) skills also increased, but the unemployment levels and rates for these groups were initially very low and by end 2010, while they had risen, they were still much lower than those for less skilled workers (broadly speaking, unemployment rates of less than 10 per cent, compared with rates of 17 to 23 per cent for those with lower skills). Furthermore, an important aspect to bear in mind in relation to the skilled group is that the employment level for this category of workers actually rose in the post-economic peak period. This may have been a modest increase, but it is a welcome indication that job opportunities continue to arise in this area. Thus the main challenge to be faced involves devising policies and providing assistance and supports for the large numbers of medium and low skill unemployed – a very challenging task in circumstances of continued economic and financial constraints. The earlier economic review indicated that there is a broad consensus that growth rates will be low, if not minimal, over the next few years. In this context the possibilities for achieving substantial net employment growth are even more limited.12 A form of activation has already been in existence in the form of the EU promoted National Employment Action Plan (NEAP) which commenced in 1998. A recent study of this measure carried out by the ESRI yielded mixed results13. It found that a significant number of persons on the Live Register who were eligible for activation supports were not forwarded for assessment and those that were forwarded were less successful in finding employment than those who did not receive any assistance. The study did, however, reveal that participation in FAS training did improve the likelihood of persons finding work. Governments (both previous and current) have taken a number of significant steps designed to promote the activation process: � Since January 2011, the Department of Social Protection (DSP) is taking the greater role in providing

activation services for the unemployed, as well as its more traditional role in paying benefits. The National Employment Service and other employment programmes are being moved from FAS and subsumed into DSP to be reconstituted as a “National Employment and Entitlements Service”;

12 Past experience has shown that jobs growth is invariably less than the rate of output growth, especially when an economy is emerging from recession. 13 McGuiness, O’Connell, Kelly, Walsh (2011). Activation in Ireland: An Evaluation of the National Employment Action Plan. ESRI Research Series 20. Dublin


30

� As recommended in a variety of previous reviews14, the Department is also implementing a new case management system with a strong focus on activation, rather than just income support, as well as a profiling system designed to provide early identification of those likely to become long-term unemployed;

� The Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2010 enacted in early 2010 already provides for sanctions to be applied to unemployed persons on the Live Register unreasonably refusing take up employment offers or to participate in training and education.

The Department of Education and Skills (DES) has also recently announced a new further education and training authority called SOLAS is to be established, that FÁS will be disbanded, and that the mandate of the new agency (which will operated under the aegis of the Department of Education and Skills) will be to ensure the provision of high-quality further education and training programmes to jobseekers and other learners.

14 D. Grub, S. Singh, P. Tergeist, Activation Policies in Ireland, OECD Social Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 75, Jan. 2009.


31

4. Progress, Effectiveness and Efficiency

4.1 Introduction This Section addresses the progress in OP implementation up to the end of 2010. Section 4.2 considers both financial and physical progress at the levels of the OP as a whole and under each Priority, considering both in relation to forecasts and targets established at the outset of the Programme. Sections 4.3 and 4.4 consider the progress in relation to each co-financed activity under Priorities I and II respectively, providing an overview and considering the financial and physical progress, and the efficiency thus far as evidenced by the unit costs associated with Activity outcomes15.

4.2 Progress at OP and Priority Level

4.2.1 Financial Progress

Reported expenditure under the OP to end-2010 amounted to €1,054m, made up of €735m exchequer funds, an ESF contribution of €312m and private expenditure of just over €7m. While both the exchequer and private expenditure is greater than their financial provisions in the entire (revised) OP, 83% of the ESF contribution had been spent. Under Priority I, total expenditure to end-2010 amounted to €777.7m, or just under 120% of the revised allocation for the Priority. Both the exchequer and private expenditure levels were substantially ahead of the revised allocation (equivalent to 149% and 242% respectively), while the ESF expenditure amounted to 70.3% of the revised ESF envelope for Priority I. Expenditure under Priority II amounted to €274.1m, equivalent to 109.3% of the revised allocation for that Priority. In this case the ESF and national exchequer contributions were also each at 109.3% of allocations (reflecting the 50% co-financing rate applied under this Priority), while there is no private expenditure involved. Expenditure under Priority III (Technical Assistance) had reached €3m by end-2010, or half of the total OP allocation, with a negligible difference in the rate of spend between exchequer and ESF. Financial progress by NUTS II region is somewhat imbalanced. Total spend in the BMW region was running at 65% of its allocation by end-2010, while in the S&E it was running at 197.2%. In terms of ESF spend the respective rates were 50.7% and 133.7%, while for exchequer spend they were 74.9% and 241.3%. The regional imbalance towards the S&E in the total OP stems almost entirely from Priority I, where under just 48.6% of the BMW allocation has been spent, compared to 236.5% of the S&E allocation. In the case of the ESF, Priority I expenditure had reached just 22.2% of the allocation in the BMW region, and 149.3% in the S&E. Under Priority II both regions are running at the same rate of spend relative to their allocations. Financial progress by Priority and Region, both relative to the revised OP allocations, is shown in Table 4.1, while expenditure relative to revised allocations at the level of individual Activities is shown in Figure 4.1.

15 Formal reporting of progress under the LMAF has not yet taken place and is not included


32


33

TABLE 4.1: FINANCIAL PROGRESS TO END-2010 BY PRIORI TY AND REGION

Priority I Priority II Priority III Total

National BMW S&E National BMW S&E National BMW S&E National BMW S&E

Revised OP Allocation (2007-2013) (€M) ESF 247.0 153.6 93.4 125.4 75.2 50.2 3.0 0.0 3.0 375.4 228.8 146.6

Exchequer 399.9 249.1 150.9 125.4 75.2 50.2 3.0 0.0 3.0 528.3 324.2 204.1

Total Public 646,9 402.6 244.4 250.8 150.4 100.4 6.0 0.0 0.0 903.7 553.0 350.7

Private 3.0 1.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 1.5 1.5

Total 649.9 404.1 245.8 250.8 150.4 100.4 6.0 0.0 6.0 906.7 554.5 352.2

Actual Expenditure to end-2010 (€M) ESF 173.6 34.1 139.5 137.0 82.0 55.1 1.5 0.0 1.5 312.1 116.1 196.0

Exchequer 596.9 160.9 435.9 137.0 82.0 55.1 1.5 0.0 1.5 735.4 242.9 492.5

Total Public 770.4 195.0 575.4 274.1 163.9 110.1 3.0 0.0 3.0 1,047.4 359.0 688.5

Private 7.3 1.4 5.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.3 1.4 5.9

Total 777.7 196.4 581.3 274.1 163.9 110.1 3.0 0.0 3.0 1,054.7 360.4 694.4

Actual Expenditure as % Revised Allocation ESF 70.3% 22.2% 149.3% 109.3% 109.0% 109.7% 49.4% - 49.4% 83.1% 50.7% 133.7%

Exchequer 149.2% 64.6% 288.9% 109.3% 109.0% 109.7% 50.2% - 50.2% 139.2% 74.9% 241.3%

Total Public 119.1% 48.4% 235.4% 109.3% 109.0% 109.7% 50.0% - - 115.9% 64.9% 196.3%

Private 242.1% 93.9% 390.3% - - - - - - 242.1% 93.9% 390.3%

Total 119.7% 48.6% 236.5% 109.3% 109.0% 109.7% 49.8% - 49.8% 116.3% 65.0% 197.2%


34

FIGURE 4.1: REVISED FINANCIAL ALLOCATIONS AND SPEND TO END 2010 BY OP ACTIVITY Revised Total Allocation 2007-2013 (€m)

0 100 200 300 400 500 600


In Company Training




Adult Literacy

Third Level Access






Migrant Workers

Total Expenditure to end-2010 as % Revised Total Al location

0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% 300%


In Company Training




Adult Literacy

Third Level Access






Migrant Workers


35

In Terms of OP Activities, Figure 4.1 shows that by end-2010 total expenditure had surpassed revised OP allocations in the case of six: � Skills Training for the Unemployed; � In-Company Training; � Back to Education Initiative; � Undergraduate Skills; � Third Level Access; and � Youthreach and Travellers. A further two Activities had expenditure levels between 50% and 100% of total allocations (Adult Literacy and Garda Youth Diversion – IT Skills and Personal Development), while the remaining Activities had expenditure levels below 50% of revised allocations. The rates of financial progress of individual activities are discussed in greater detail in Section 4.3.

4.2.2 Progress against Priority Indicators and Targ ets

As noted in Section 2, the original HCIOP (Chapter 6) established a series of performance indicators and associated targets for the period to 2013 (although these were not altered as part of the 2009 OP revision). Four substantive performance indicators were established at Priority level (two each for Priorities I and II), while a more detailed and numerous set of indicators and targets were established beneath that level, relating to specific Activities and their more detailed objectives. Priority level physical indicators and targets, along with actual outcomes up to end-2010, are shown in Table 4.216. It is important however to note that these Priority-level indicators and targets were not updated following the 2009 revisions to the OP and its financial allocations.

TABLE 4.2: PHYSICAL PROGRESS - PRIORITY LEVEL 2007- 2010

2007 2008 2009 2010 2010

Target 2013

Target

Priority I


29,789

73,120

63,099

70,034

92,888

93,088


9,847

42,825

42,571

49,493

64,200

72,200

Priority II


62,129

69,091

66,953

83,246

64,807

67,521


2,500

11,502

10,201

23,337

24,803

26,677

SOURCE: HCIOP ANNUAL IMPLEMENTATION REPORT 2010 Under Priority I, the total number of persons supported in 2010 was 70,034, while the number of persons successfully completing accredited programmes was 49,493. As such the numbers represent 75.3% and 77.1% of the original 2010 targets respectively.

16 Results do not include participants under the Labour Market Activation Fund


36

In relation to Priority II the total number of persons supported in 2010 was 83,246, while the numbers successfully completing accredited programmes was 47,540. In this case the figures represent 128% and 94% of the original 2010 targets respectively.

4.3 Priority I: Activity Progress, Effectiveness an d Efficiency

4.3.1 Skills Training for the Unemployed

Overview The objective of the Skills Training for the Unemployed Activity is “to help unemployed persons or other job-seekers to obtain employment or improved employment through enhanced skills and employability”. It provides a range of vocational training courses to meet the needs of unemployed persons or other job-seekers. Courses are provided at different levels and in a range of subjects. The target group of unemployed and other job-seekers includes mature people who have been out of work for a considerable period of time, early-school leavers and marginalised clients (i.e. persons who are primarily under 35, with no formal qualifications who are unable to access other training interventions for personal, social or geographic reasons). People recently made redundant are also beneficiaries. The Activity includes courses that provide skills specific to a particular occupation or set of tasks and also courses that concentrate on generic, foundation skills. Specific skills training is the main category of training within the activity; traineeships, bridging training and local training initiatives are the other main categories of training in the Measure. Specific skills training accounted for 59% of Activity throughput in 2010, as shown in the following Table 4.3.

TABLE 4.3: SKILLS TRAINING FOR THE UNEMPLOYED: TRA INEE THROUGHPUT BY TRAINING PROGRAMME CATEGORY AND DELIVERY MECHANISM 2010. Training Category

FAS Training Centre

Externally contracted private

providers

Community -based

providers

Total Total %

Specific skills training

7,699

12,882

20,581

59.1%

Traineeship

631

3,740

4,371

12.6%

Bridging

1,857

1,932

3,789

10.9%

Local training initiative

-

-

3,655

3,655

10.5%

Community training centre

-

-

1,997

1,997

5.7%

Return to work

105

142

247

0.7%

Linked work experience

-

-

121

121

0.4%

Job training scheme

37

-

-

37

0.1%

Total

10,329

18,696

5,773

34,798

100.0%

FÁS is the Intermediate Body responsible for delivery of the training. The Activity is also implemented by FÁS with the assistance of commercial and non-commercial contracted training providers. The range of delivery mechanisms includes FÁS training centres, Community Training Centres (CTCs), private or specialist training providers, and local training initiatives (LTIs). Less than one-third of trainee throughput (30%) in 2010 was from FÁS training centres, the remainder being on training programmes provided by external providers on behalf of FÁS. The suite of programmes within this activity includes both long and short duration programmes, and full and part-time courses (day and evening). However the balance of full/part-time and long/short duration courses is not reported. Course certification is primarily provided by FETAC across the range of levels (e.g. Levels 3-4 for foundation training (CTCs/LTIs/Specialist providers and levels 3-6 for Specific Skills Training).


37

Certification is being reviewed by FAS to meet FETAC Common Award Standards (CAS); this involves a move from a competency-based assessment system to a graded assessment system. The main types of programmes for unemployed within the Activity in terms of overall trainee throughput in 2010 were computer applications (29%); pre-employment, job clubs and return to work training (11%); health/beauty and child care (10%); and office administration (9%). The main Specific Skills Training (SST) courses were computer applications (33%), transport/warehouse and distribution (12%), office administration (13%), construction-related skills training (10%) and engineering-related courses (8%). The full range of course types in 2010 within the activity is shown in the following Table 4.4.

TABLE 4.4: SKILLS TRAINING FOR THE UNEMPLOYED: TR AINEE THROUGHPUT 2010 BY COURSE-TYPE OR SECTOR. Course type or training sector

Specific Skills Training (SST) 2010

%

All skills training for unemployed 2010

%

Animal/Land/Marine 0.4 0.6

Computer Applications 33.3 29.0

Computer Hardware/Networks/Programming 3.2 2.1

Construction Related 10.0 6.3

Electronics/Industrial Servicing 2.8 1.9

Engineering Related 8.4 5.0

Health/Beauty/Child Care/Welfare 1.9 9.6

Management 0.1 0.1

Office/Administration 12.9 8.9

Pre-Employment/Job Clubs/Return to Work 2.4 11.3

Sales/Marketing 1.9 1.8

Self-Employment/Enterprise 1.7 1.1

Sports/Leisure 0.3 2.8

Transport/Warehousing/Distribution 11.6 7.6

Other 9.1 11.9

Total % 100.0 100.0

Total number trained 20,581 34,798

Financial Progress The total revised expenditure for this Activity over the 2007-2013 period is €528.3m, with 38% ESF co-financing of €200.8m. The planned expenditure was almost doubled following the 2009 review of the OP in line with policy objectives that are increasingly focused on the unemployed and job-seekers, due to the economic recession and increase in unemployment. Overall expenditure to end 2010 is 120% of the planned total for the programme, however spend of the ESF component is running at 59% of target (Table 4.5). Expenditure in the BMW region was at 47% of programme target at the end of 2010, while in the S&E it was at 250%, suggesting a significant regional imbalance compared to budgeted expenditure. FAS indicates that it may therefore have some difficulty in draw-down of its allocation for the BMW region.


38

TABLE 4.5: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - SKILLS TRAINING FOR THE UNEMPLOYED National BMW S&E Revised OP Target (2007-2013) (€m) ESF 200.8 128.7 72.1 Exchequer 327.5 209.9 117.6 Private 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 528.3 338.6 189.7 Actual Spend 2007-2010 (€m) ESF 119.1 20.4 98.7 Exchequer 514.9 139.9 374.9 Private 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 634.0 160.3 473.7 Spend to end-2010 as % 2007-13 Target ESF 59% 16% 137% Exchequer 157% 67% 319% Private - - - Total 120% 47% 250%

Physical Progress A total of 91,618 people are reported to have received training in 2007-2010. 34,794 persons completed training in 2010, approximately 10,500 more than in 2009. The 2010 output target (i.e. 5,480 persons trained) has therefore been considerably exceeded, with a nearly seven-fold increase. This higher output rate is due to a range of factors, including a doubling of the Activity budget in June 2009 following the OP review and an increase in number of short-duration courses and evening courses. Also the annual output target set at the outset is deemed by FAS to have been ‘conservative’. The percentage of targeted regional output for the S&E region (70%) has been exceeded (78%), with under-achievement in the BMW (22%) region (Table 4.6 below). The result targets have been significantly exceeded in terms of the actual number of trainees gaining certification; 15,975 persons gained certification in 2010, compared with a target of 4,110. However there is considerable underachievement in terms of the percentage achieving certification; 55% of persons trained 2007-2010 gained certification, against a target of 75%.

TABLE 4.6: PHYSICAL PROGRESS – SKILLS TRAINING FOR THE UNEMPLOYED

Target

2010 2013

Cumulative Total to end 2010

Number of persons trained BMW 1,624 1,624 19,779

S&E 3,856 3,856 71,839

National 5,480 5,480 91,618

Number of persons gaining accreditation BMW 1,218 1,462 13,618

S&E 2,892 3,470 36,618

National 4,110 4,932 50,185

% of persons trained in employment or further education at time of follow-up survey

BMW 70% 70% -

S&E 70% 70% -

National 70% 70% -

An annual impact target that the ‘persons trained in employment or further education at time of follow-up survey’ would reach 70% was set at the outset. Data from 2010 follow-up surveys will not be available until end 2011. However, FÁS follow-up survey data for 2009 shows progression below target, with a progression rate of just 33% compared with the 70% mid-term target .The progression rate from Specific Skills Training


39

Courses was 37% and 35% from LTIs. FAS reports that the lower progression rate is primarily due to the downturn in the economy.

Efficiency The OP original forecast expenditure for this activity was €262.4m, with the annual spend in 2010 anticipated to be €22.15m. Against the target number of annual trainees for the year (5,420), this translates to a unit cost of €4,042 per person trained. With total expenditure of €634m to end 2010, and the cumulative trainee number at 91,618, the actual unit cost is €6,920, which is 71% higher than the original targets implied. The movement towards shorter courses in more recent years (and the higher numbers of trainees resulting), means the more recent unit costs are lower than those applying to the entire cumulative period. Spend and trainee numbers for 2010 for example show a unit cost of €4,552.

4.3.2 In-Company Training

Overview The objectives of this Activity are “to increase the number of employed persons acquiring certified training qualifications and hence their employability and companies’ productivity and competitiveness”. The Activity is intended to provide funding to help enable employed people to receive training and development. Training interventions were provided primarily within the FAS – One Step Up programme and the Excellence Through People Standard for Human Resource Management (HRM). The types of training supported include IT, production/manufacturing/construction and leadership/personal development. The Activity was initially targeted at two groups: owner/managers in SMEs; and vulnerable or low-skilled workers. However priority was subsequently given to the training of ‘low-skilled’ employees, in the context of a reduced budget for this Activity. The training is implemented by FAS through strategic partnerships with third-party organisations (e.g. employer, trade union bodies) to manage, organise, deliver or procure the training. It has been included as an element of previous OPs, and has been an ongoing part of FAS training activity.

Financial Progress The financial status of the Activity is shown in Table 4.7.

TABLE 4.7: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - IN-COMPANY TRAINING National BMW S&E Revised OP Target (2007-2013) (€m) ESF 10.0 2.5 7.5 Exchequer 13.3 2.6 10.7 Private 3.00 1.5 1.5 Total 26.3 6.6 19.7 Actual Spend 2007-2010 (€m) ESF 10.3 2.1 8.1 Exchequer 9.9 2.1 7.8 Private 7.3 1.4 5.8 Total 27.5 5.6 21.8 Spend to end-2010 as % 2007-13 Target ESF 103% 86% 108% Exchequer 75% 82% 73% Private 242% 94% 390% Total 104% 86% 110%


40

Total planned expenditure for this Activity was €168.9m over the period 2007-2013, of which 38% was to be ESF co-funding and 2% private funding. Planned expenditure for this activity was reduced to €27.5m following the 2009 OP review (a reduction of 84%). Overall expenditure to end 2010 has marginally exceeded the revised target.

Physical Progress Annual output targets of 28,000 persons to be trained in 2010 and 2013 were established at the outset. At end-2010, 31,182 people had been trained cumulatively over the period, however most of the activity took place in 2008 (when 21,380 persons were trained), with reduced numbers trained in the two subsequent years following the reduction in the Activity budget (Table 4.7). The regional output target was 70% in the S&E region and 30% in the BMW, while the actual output was 74% in the S&E and 26% in the BMW. No outcomes in relation to result or impact indicators were reported in 2010.

TABLE 4.8: PHYSICAL PROGRESS – IN COMPANY TRAINING

Target 2013

Cumulative Total to end 2010

Number of persons trained BMW 8,000 7,982

S&E 20,000 23,200

National 28,000 31,182

Number of persons gaining accreditation BMW 7,200 -

S&E 18,000 -

National 25,200 -

% of persons trained in employment or further education at time of follow-up survey

BMW 400 -

S&E 1,100 -

National 1,500 -

Efficiency The unit costs per person trained have been lower than envisaged. The cumulative spend to date of €27.5m equates to €882 for each of the 31,182 persons trained. The original budget envisaged expenditure of €35.6m in both 2010 and 2013, with 28,000 persons trained each year, equating to a unit cost of €1,271.

4.3.3 Back to Education Initiative

Overview The overall aim of the Back to Education Initiative (BTEI) is to increase participation of young people and adults, and mainly those with less than upper second level education, in a range of learning opportunities. Therefore, a high priority is to target individuals and groups that (a) experience particular and acute barriers and (b) are more difficult to engage in the formal learning process, e.g. people with a disability, Travellers, homeless people and lone parents. In addition, BTEI incorporates two strands: � a formal education strand, which involves course provision in the network of 33 Vocational Education

Committees (VECs) and 14 other secondary, special, community or comprehensive schools; � a community strand, which reserves 10% of all places approved annually for course provision in

community groups and organisations. In 2010, a total of 43 such groups received budget allocations. The BTEI offers part-time provision of up to 400 hours per year, leading to certification through the National Framework of Qualifications (NFQ) and Further Education and Training Awards Council (FETAC) at Levels 1-6. The aim of BTEI is to facilitate adults’ access, transfer and progression to other education or employment


41

pathways. It is therefore designed to complement other further education provision funded by the Department of Education and Skills (DES), such as Adult Literacy, the Youthreach and Senior Traveller Training (STT) programmes, the Vocational Training Opportunities Scheme (VTOS) and Post Leaving Certificate (PLC) courses. In the current economic environment, the part-time nature of BTEI also facilitates those who are actively seeking work to improve their education and skills at the same time. BTEI is administered at a local level by the VECs on behalf of the DES. In addition, VECs are supported by a BTEI National Co-ordinator.

Financial Progress Co-financed spend under BTEI to the end of 2010 was €54.9m, which included ESF expenditure of €20.9m and Exchequer expenditure of €34.0m. This means that expenditure to date is at 144% of the revised OP forecast (October 2009) for total co-financed spend, ESF spend and Exchequer co-financed spend (Table 4.9). At a regional level, co-financed spend in the Border, Midland and Western (BMW) Region has amounted to €16.1m, including ESF spend of €6.1m and Exchequer spend of €10.0m, while co-financed spend in the Southern and Eastern (S&E) Region has amounted to €38.9m, including ESF spend of €14.8m and Exchequer spend of €24.1m. This means that expenditure in the BMW Region is at 64% of total co-financed spend, ESF spend and Exchequer spend, while expenditure in the S&E Region is at 298% of total co-financed spend, ESF spend and Exchequer spend.

TABLE 4.9: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - BACK TO EDUCATION I NITIATIVE National BMW S&E Revised OP Target (2007-2013) (€m) ESF 14.5 9.5 5.0 Exchequer 23.6 15.5 8.1 Private 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 38.0 25.0 13.0 Actual Spend 2007-2010 (€m) ESF 20.9 6.1 14.8 Exchequer 34.0 10.0 24.1 Private 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 54.9 16.1 38.9 Spend to end-2010 as % 2007-13 Target ESF 144% 64% 298% Exchequer 144% 64% 298% Private - - - Total 144% 64% 298%

Physical Progress Table 4.10 below provides details of the physical progress achieved under the BTEI to date. In terms of outputs, BTEI has catered for roughly 28,000 participants per annum in 2009 and 2010, up from 26,000 in 2007 and 27,000 in 2008, and equivalent to the target in 2013. The percentage of participants who complete the programme and gain certification has also increased from 38% up to 43% between 2007 and 2010. The number of participants that progress to further education or employment has fallen between 2007 and 2010, from 30% down to 17%. It is also well below the 2013 target of 70%. However, this must be partially attributable to (a) the sharp contraction in employment opportunities available to those that complete the programme and (b) the increased competition for further education places among the newer unemployed17.

17 In addition, it should be noted that the statistics for progression in BTEI should a substantial proportion of the cohort whose progression is unknown. This included 44% of those completing in 2010 (or 3,818 out of 8,624 participants completing), 42% of those completing in 2009, 39% of those completing in 2008 and 28% of those completing in 2007.


42

Also, it is notable that the number of participants in BTEI that continue courses within the programme has increased between 2007 and 2010, from 9,793 up to 12,117, and this fits with the BTEI focus on building up awards over time.

TABLE 4.10: PHYSICAL PROGRESS - BACK TO EDUCATION I NITIATIVE

Region 2007 2008 2009 2010 Target

2013 2010 as %

of 2013

Output

Number of participants (on an annual basis) BMW 8,886 9,020 9,972 9,011 n/a n/a

S&E 16,974 18,084 18,222 18,948 n/a n/a

State 25,860 27,104 28,194 27,959 28,000 99.9%*

Result Number and % of participants who complete the programme and gain certification (annual) BMW 3,564 4,144 4,554 4,031 n/a n/a

S&E 6,283 5,901 7,644 7,862 n/a n/a

State 9,847 10,045 12,198 11,893

21,000 56.6%

38.1% 37.1% 43.3% 42.5% 70% 60.7%

Impact Number and % of participants who progress to further education or employment BMW 2,837 2,385 2,843 2,037 n/a n/a

S&E 4,996 4,853 3,748 2,769 n/a n/a

State 7,833 7,238 6,591 4,806 19,600 24.5%

30.3% 26.7% 23.4% 17.2% 70.0% 24.6%

Note: n/a = not available * Indicators and targets originally outlined in the Activity Implementation Plan do not correspond to the progress indicators reported above

Efficiency Table 4.11 below makes an attempt to gauge the efficiency of spend under BTEI, based on total programme spend. It shows that the average unit cost per participant place per year in BTEI between 2007 and 2010 was about €500. It is not possible to compare this with any forecast target for efficiency of spend, however. This is because of a lack of clarity regarding the original indicators listed in the Activity Implementation Plan and how they relate to the actual progress being reported, how many participants correspond to a given number of BTEI “places”.


43

TABLE 4.11: UNIT COSTS – BACK TO EDUCATION INITIATI VE 2007 2008 2009 2010 2007-2010

No. of participants – Actual 25,860 27,104 28,194 27,959 109,117 Expenditure (€000s) – Actual 14,039 13,849 13,618 13,400 54,906 Unit Cost (€) – Actual * * * * 503.18 No. of participants – Target n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Expenditure (€000s) – Target n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Unit Cost (€) – Target n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Note: “n/a” = not available. * Unit costs only compared on a cumulative basis.

4.3.4 Undergraduate Skills

Overview The objectives of the Undergraduate Skills Activity, as described in the Activity Implementation Plan (Section 2) is to “increase the number of graduates from these courses to meet labour market demands by increasing the number of additional students enrolled on courses supported under this area of activity”. Two aspects of this objective are critical to the nature of the Activity. Firstly, it relates to specific third-level in the ICT, Engineering and Science disciplines, identified by the work of the EGFSN and its predecessors. More recently, they have come to be referred to as the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (“STEM”) disciplines. Secondly, it relates to additional places on these designated courses, over and above a baseline figure agreed on a course and college-specific basis. In practice the activity relates to co-financing of additional places at third-level colleges (universities and Institutes of Technology) in the designated disciplines, over and above the original baseline level of provision in each college. The baseline numbers were set at a time when colleges made competitive applications under predecessor schemes (no competition has been held since the commencement of the current OP). Hence baselines vary by college and course and are not standardised to a specific year, e.g. 2006. The funding is administered by the HEA through its normal funding procedures for third-level colleges under its auspices, but with an additional layer of financial and audit requirements to reflect additional ESF co-financing and Activity requirements, including identifying and establishing eligible additional costs18. The Programme is operated on a multi-annual basis, and no competition for college participation was held specifically for the current OP period. Participating students essentially enter courses under the normal Central Applications Office (CAO) and college procedures. Unless new course are involved, the co-financing relates to a sub-set of total funding for relevant courses in the colleges, for example in 2010 total co-financed expenditure was €18.3mn, but “total programme spend”, i.e. total expenditure on all places under these courses was €63.3. The courses involved are full-time undergraduate courses. The origins of the Activity date back to the late 1990s, when the concept of colleges competing for the provision of additional funding for additional places in important skill areas was first introduced. The activity has been co-financed under successive ESF funding rounds. The current Programme is therefore effectively the continuation of a long-standing activity. The designated skill areas have in effect been updated in more recent times via the EGFSN Reports.

18 HEA, Procedures Manual, The Higher Education Authority, European Social Fund Undergraduate Skills Programme, 15/12/2011


44

Financial Progress At end-December 2010 financial progress was 111% of the revised forecast, for all co-financed expenditure, i.e. total, ESF and Exchequer. It was 44% in the case of the BMW, and 211% in the case of the S&E Region (Table 4.12).

TABLE 4.12: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - UNDERGRADUATE SKIL LS National BMW S&E Revised OP Target (2007-2013) (€m) ESF 21.0 12.5 8.5 Exchequer 34.2 20.4 13.8 Private 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 55.2 32.9 22.3 Actual Spend 2007-2010 (€m) ESF 23.3 5.5 17.8 Exchequer 38.0 8.9 29.1 Private 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 61.3 14.4 46.9 Spend to end-2010 as % 2007-13 Target ESF 111% 44% 211% Exchequer 111% 44% 211% Private - - - Total 111% 44% 211%

Physical Progress Physical progress is measured on an annual rather than a cumulative basis. Therefore comparisons can be made between the 2010 target and actual figures. As shown in Table 4.13 below, the additional student intake appears to be 318% above target, but this reflects a problem with the original targets (which has now been revised). The number of additional graduates on the selected courses (result indicator) stood at 84%. In relation to the number of additional graduates in employment, no target figure had been set, although this statistic is available in practice. Regarding future progress, both need and demand for the relevant courses remains high, and there appears to be no obvious obstacle to continuation of progress.

TABLE 4.13: PHYSICAL PROGRESS – UNDERGRADUATE SKILL S 2010 2006

baseline Target Actual Actual as

% of target Output No. of additional students enrolled on key courses University

IoT - -

- -

3,551 1,867

- -

Total 1,5001 1,7001 5,418 318% Result No. of additional graduates of key courses University - - 602 - IoT - - 488 - Total 1,100 1,300 1,090 84% Impact No. of additional graduates who progress to employment/further education

University - - 536 -

IoT - - 444 - Total - - 980 - 1 As per AIP, Section 6.

Regarding impact, there is a widespread national consensus that third-level education generally, and the relevant courses in particular are key to both Ireland’s short to medium-term recovery and its long-term prosperity. This has been emphasised in successive reports, most recently that of the Higher Education


45

Strategy Group of January 2011 (the Hunt Report)19. It is also consistent with relatively low unemployment rates among graduates of the designated courses. The latter was 11% of the 2009 cohort as measured in 201020. In addition, an expenditure review of the predecessor programme was undertaken by the Department of Education and Science and published in 200721. This related to the Programme as a whole, including the ESF co-financed elements. This report was positive in relation to the rationale, efficiency and effectiveness of the Programme, and of its impact. In relation to the latter, it cited survey findings that the electronic hardware sector and the foreign-owned part of the software sector rely heavily on expectations as to the future supply of graduates in relevant disciplines created by the Programme, when making investment decisions, and it concluded that there was an evident link between the Programme activities and the buoyancy of the economy at that time. Notwithstanding the dramatic changes to Ireland’s economic fortunes that have occurred in the intervening period, it is still the consensus view of analysts close to the sector that a focus on continued provision of critical technical skills is essential in the current economic climate, and cite evidence that companies in key high-technology sectors still report recruitment difficulties even in the current climate, inter alia because parts of the high technology sectors have continued to be buoyant export-led sectors in contrast to much of the remainder of the domestic economy22.

Efficiency Table 4.14 compares actual unit costs under the Activity with the implicit targets in the AIP. The AIP implied a cost of €14,700 per new enrolment in 2010. The actual reported figure is €3,400 in the case of co-financed and €6,000 in the case of all enrolments in the same courses. These gaps reflect anomalies in the original AIP targets which were too low.

TABLE 4.14: UNIT COST ANALYSIS – UNDERGRADUATE SKIL LS Actual 2010

Original Forecast 2010 Co-financed Total

Expenditure

25,000

18,288

63,384

Additional Enrolments 1,700 5,418 10,635* Unit cost 14.7 3.4 6.0 *All enrolments

4.4 Priority II: Activity Progress, Effectiveness a nd Efficiency

4.4.1 Disability Activation Project

Overview As reflected in its title, this Activity relates to the co-financing of an individual project under the Department of Social Protection, namely the Disability Activation Project (DAP).

19 Department of Education and Skills, National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030, Report of the Strategy Group, January 2011. 20 Progress Report 2010, Section 6.3 21 Department of Education and Science, Expenditure Review: Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) Undergraduate Skills Programme (2007) 22 e.g. Expert Group on Future Skill Needs, The Expert on Future Skill Needs Statement of Activity 2010, Forfás, April 2011.


46

The project was formulated in the context of the overall national aim (reflected in the Priority Axis) to integrate disadvantaged groups into the labour market, in this case persons with disabilities. The project was a specific commitment under the National Disability Strategy Sectoral Disability Plan23. The Project is predicated on the fact that there is evidence of a sizeable and persistent gap in employment rates between people without and people with disabilities, and that the system of supports aimed at enabling people with disabilities to access the labour market and employment is limited in its effectiveness for certain people with a disability. The aim of the Project was to “develop and test a comprehensive employment strategy based on individual case management of people on disability welfare payments that will have the capacity to increase their employment rate”24. The DAP project was therefore not intended as an element of core service provision but as the piloting of a case-management approach that could become the basis for core service provision. This has been important in its subsequent progress (or lack of it) and in its future now. Against this background, the Activity was designed to carry out 12 specified sub-activities (see Figure 4.2). The intended target group is persons in receipt of DSP disability/illness payment. The Project involved no enforcements or conditionality, eligible persons were approached to participate, but could do so or not at their discretion. The Project was limited to participants in the BMW Region only. In practice, to date it focused primarily on counties Westmeath, Longford, Roscommon, and Offaly within the Region. The Project is the only dedicated Activity relating to disability in the OP as implemented. Others of course address disability issues as part of a wider inclusion focus, e.g. Third Level Access. The project was formulated in 2006, and hence did not exist prior to the OP. However, it built on an earlier pilot project in the Midlands.

23 Department of Social and Family Affairs, Sectoral Plan under the Disability Act 2005, Government Publications, December 2006 (Section 5.3). 24 Activity Implementation Plan, Section 2.


47

FIGURE 4.2: DISABILITY ACTIVATION PROJECT – SUB-ACTIVITIES

The objective will be achieved by:

(i) Bringing together the key organisations involved in supporting people with disabilities with the aim of establishing a Strategic Management Group for the project;

(ii) Establishing a Cross Agency Implementation Team with representatives from key service providers;

(iii) Focusing on capability to work in respect of all Social Welfare Customers on a disability payment. Such capabilities will be identified, developed and formalised leading to a personalised progression plan for each individual participating in the project;

(iv) Carrying out initial research into the type and level of services available in the region;

(v) Carrying out needs analysis for people in receipt of disability welfare payments;

(vi) On foot of research, segmenting the population into those who aspire and are capable of open labour market integration and others (differentiate type of engagement and process depending on clients);

(vii) Consulting with employers re development of market relevant training and develop training;

(viii) Producing information and awareness raising documentation;

(ix) Devising protocols of intra and inter-organisational working and service delivery that will be characterised by accessibility, relevance, connectedness, coherence and effectiveness;

(x) Engaging with employers to ensure that the benefits of enhanced supply will result in transitions to sustainable employment on the part of people with disabilities;

(xi) The impact of the payment of DA on employment and education incentives for young people with disabilities needs to be assessed.

(xii) Assisting people who acquire a disability in adult life to return to their work or to source alternative employment rather than become dependent on a Social Welfare payment.

SOURCE: ACTIVITY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, SECTION 2

Financial Progress For reasons explained below, financial progress has been very slow. At end-December 2010 expenditure, however defined, equated to 9% of forecast expenditure for the full period – the second lowest rate of expenditure of any of the OP Activities (Table 4.15). This also implies that the absolute level of expenditure is relatively modest, i.e. the project did not commence until 2008 and annual expenditure has ranged from total public expenditure of €210,000 in 2008 to €358,000 in 2009 and €330,000 in 2010. Inter alia this raises simple questions of economies of scale about the project as it has been constituted.

TABLE 4.15: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - DISABILITY ACTIVAT ION PROJECT National BMW S&E Revised OP Target (2007-2013) (€m) ESF 5.0 5.0 0.0 Exchequer 5.0 5.0 0.0 Private 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 10.0 10.0 0.0 Actual Spend 2007-2010 (€m) ESF 0.5 0.5 0.0 Exchequer 0.5 0.5 0.0 Private 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 0.9 0.9 0.0 Spend to end-2010 as % 2007-13 Target ESF 9% 9% - Exchequer 9% 9% - Private - - - Total 9% 9% -

The primary reason for low spend reflects the evolution of the Project. It was centred around the testing of models of engagement with persons with disabilities and subsequent case management of those who engaged, including the design and testing of progression programmes where


48

appropriate. While it involved a significant level of cross-agency co-operation/ and joint activity at local level, most of which was ineligible for ESF co-financing. As alluded to in Chapter 3, the period since the DAP commenced has coincided with a number of significant policy and institutional developments relating to the Department of Social Protection generally and to responsibilities regarding profiling and case-management, labour market activation and employment supports for people with a disability. These have been significant for the DAP as for its future. Essentially The Department of Social Protection (DSP) has taken over responsibility for employment/activation services and for the development of a profiling and case- management approach for all people of working age in the context of the new National Employment and Entitlements Service (NEES). In establishing and developing the NEES, an initial challenge for the Department is to design and scope out the new service model based on a case management approach which is capable of providing a more customised and personal service to customers. In line with international good practice, this new service will focus primarily on activation thus enabling customers to embark on developmental pathways appropriate to their needs; pathways to employment, training, personal development or rehabilitation. DAP activity to date has piloted a case-management approach specifically for people with disabilities, and learning from DAP activity will inform the development, for people with disabilities, of the NEES. While the DAP has piloted many initiatives that provide learning and improved the lives of participants, it is not considered by the DSP (as MA), that any new learning would be obtained from a continuation of the project in its current form. Hence an alternative approach to the remainder of the period has been proposed by DSP25. The proposal, namely that a “call for proposals” approach (implemented by Pobal) replace the present approach, has been approved by the DSP Management Board. It envisages that the ‘call’ be issued on a thematic basis. The first theme relates directly to the overall DAP objective, and the other three themes reflect the last three sub activities outlined in the AIP (Activity Implementation Plan). The proposed themes for the Call therefore include: � Innovative models of activation involving a case-management approach which are designed to meet

gaps in employment/ pre-employment/ progression programme provision for people with disability; � Projects targeted to work with/ support employers to develop initiatives to enhance people with

disability entry to, or retention in, the workforce; � Projects targeted at young people with disability; and � Projects supporting the progression and retention of people with acquired disability. All the above must have the capacity to be mainstreamed. It should be noted that the overall objective of the AIP (to develop a comprehensive employment strategy for people with disability) also continues to be progressed at the Cross Sectoral group. The learning obtained from the Call can inform the Group’s work and vice versa, and should also continue to inform the development of the case management approach of NEES.

Physical Progress The project AIP had a series of process milestone type targets for its Phase I start up period. For its Phase II implementation period, the Activity has defined indicators and targets relating to “output”, “results” and “impacts”. Outputs are defined as the numbers of disabled persons engaging with the project, results as numbers of persons progressing to further education and training, and impact as participants continuing to engage in economic activity (employment or education/training) after 12 months. As shown in Table 4.16, numbers of persons engaged with equated to 58% of the end period target by the mid-term stage, or 87% of the medium-term target, i.e. physical progress was not too far off target. However, in the case of the result

25 Disability Activation Project, Interim Report, DSP, 2010


49

indicator in the AIP, i.e. those persons progressing to further education and training, at 241, constituted only 16% of the original 2013 target, or 23% of the original 2010 target. Impact in terms of numbers continuing to engage in economic activity after 12 months, in percentage terms, is somewhat higher than the original implied projection of 13%, being recorded as 20% in 2010, i.e. one-third higher than originally projected. It has since been proposed by the IB to the MA that the “result” target will be reduced from 85% to 20%, while the impact target will be increased from 13% to 30%. The gap in progress against target therefore relates to results, i.e. those who progress to further education and training after engagement with the Project. Annual Implementation Reports cite the adverse Irish economic conditions, with job shortages and increasing competition in the labour market, as the primary reason. However, other underlying structural and attitudinal factors are also likely to be a factor26. Annual Progress Reports do not report systematically on the qualitative activities set out in the project objectives. However, during 2010 an Interim Report on the Project was prepared by DSP. This shows that progress was made in most of the 12 areas under the Sub-Activities not captured in the indicators. The main change was on no. 1, namely establishing a Strategic Management Group for the project. A Cross Sectoral Group on an Employment Strategy for People with Disabilities was established in 2009 to progress employment commitments in the Department of Enterprise Trade and innovation’s disability Sectoral Plan. It comprises representatives from the Department of Health and Children, the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Innovation, the Department of Social Protection, the HSE and FÁS. It is evident that the purposes of the Cross Sectoral Group complement and even mirror the aim of the DAP. Rather than developing a Strategic Management Group for the DAP it was considered that the DAP should continue to be represented on the Cross Sectoral Group and impact learning gained from the DAP to help inform the refinement of the draft comprehensive employment strategy. A local implementation team was also established in the Region, consisting of representatives of DSP, FÁS, DES, HSE VEC and NDA27. In addition, since ESF funds can only be used for activities that would not have been undertaken without ESF funds, apart from the duplication of work involved it would not have been appropriate use of funds to establish a Strategic Management Group. This development is also pertinent to the low spend, as it may have contributed to the fact that the cross-agency co-financed activity originally envisaged did not emerge. The outlook for the Activity in its current form is low, but proposals for a new approval have been made (see above). Generally the project is seen as having a positive impact on participants, but that its nature is limited in scale. It did also involve a range of positive learning from the Department of Social Protection perspective, and this is recorded in the Interim Report. In addition, it was perceived positively by people who participated in activities, and a number of activity-specific evaluations confirmed very positive feedback on the part of participants. However, these generally related not to their economic status, but rather to other important but wider benefits, including social engagement, self-esteem, confidence, etc.

26 Department of Social Protection, Value for Money Review of Disability Allowance Scheme, 2010. 27 The DES representative was withdrawn in May 2010, citing pressure of other work.


50

TABLE 4.16: PHYSICAL PROGRESS, DISABILITY ACTIVATIO N PROJECT CUMULATIVE TO END 2010 Actual as % of Target

Original Target (2012)

Actual 2010 Target 2012 Target

Output: No. of persons with disabilities* engaged with

1,800

1,049

87%

58%

Result: No. of persons1 progressing to further education/training

1,5304

241

23%

16%

Impact: Participants2 continuing to engage in economic activity after 12 months5

230 (15%)

20%3

133%

133%

1. Persons with disabilities. All in BMW Region 2. shown as absolute No. in AIP (Section 6) 3. 2009 cohort status in 2010 4. This target is now being reduced to 240 (2010) and 360 (2013) 5. This target is being reduced to 72 persons in 2010 and 108 persons in 2013

Efficiency In the case of outputs, near achievement of physical targets alongside a very low level of co-financed spend inherently implies that unit costs were much lower than anticipated, and this was indeed the case, see Table 4.17. The cost per person engaged with was only 15% of that originally envisaged. In the case of results costs defined as the total Activity costs as against those appearing in the indicators, was about 50% of the original projection, and in the case of impact about 40%. It should be noted here that these “unit costs” reflect expenditure figures per person in the relevant category, it is important to note that this does not mean that expenditure totalling these amounts were devoted to the individuals involved at the results and impact levels.

TABLE 4.17: DISABILITY ACTIVATION PROJECT - UNIT CO STS, CUMULATIVE 2007-10 Projected 2007-13 Actual 2007-10

Original Revised

Total public exp. €10mn €10mn €0.9mn Outputs: No. of Participants Cost per participant

1,800 €5,500

1,800 €5,500

1,040 €865

Results: No.of Participants Cost per participant

1,530 €6,535

360 €27,777

241 €3,734

Impact: No. of Participants Cost per participant

230 €43,478

108 €92,592

481 €18,750

1 Estimate as 20% of 241 participants


51

4.4.2 Adult Literacy

Overview The objective of the Adult Literacy programme is to provide literacy services, for adults with low levels of literacy skills, on a nationwide basis. Literacy tuition includes reading, writing, spelling, numeracy and other basic education provision including basic information technology, “learning to learn” and personal development. The activity provides for an integrated service to support access to employment, and a return to lifelong learning, to empower participants with the basic skills needed to participate in the social and economic life of their communities. Accreditation at Levels 1-2 of the Further Education and Training Awards Council (FETAC) has been available under the National Framework of Qualifications (NFQ) since 2007.

Financial Progress Co-financed spend in the period amounts to €82.6m, which includes ESF spend of €41.3m and co-financed Exchequer spend of €41.3m. This means that expenditure to date is at 85% of the revised OP forecast (October 2009) for total co-financed spend, ESF spend and Exchequer co-financed spend (Table 4.18).

TABLE 4.18: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - ADULT LITERACY National BMW S&E Revised OP Target (2007-2013) (€m) ESF 48.3 19.5 28.8 Exchequer 48.3 19.5 28.8 Private 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 96.7 39.0 57.7 Actual Spend 2007-2010 (€m) ESF 41.3 12.0 29.3 Exchequer 41.3 12.0 29.3 Private 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 82.6 24.0 58.6 Spend to end-2010 as % 2007-13 Target ESF 85% 62% 102% Exchequer 85% 62% 102% Private - - - Total 85% 62% 102%

At a regional level, co-financed spend in the Border, Midland and Western (BMW) Region has amounted to €24.0m, including ESF spend of €12.0m and Exchequer spend of €12.0m, while co-financed spend in the Southern and Eastern (S&E) Region has amounted to €58.6m, including ESF spend of €29.3m and Exchequer spend of €29.3m. This means that expenditure in the BMW Region is at 62% of revised OP targets, while expenditure in the S&E Region is at 102% of revised OP targets.

Physical Progress Table 4.19 below provides details of the physical progress achieved under the Adult Literacy to date. In terms of outputs up to 2010, data shows that nearly 55,000 participants availed of adult literacy tuition in that year, which is equivalent to 130% of the 2013 target of 42,000. In addition, over 9,600 participants achieved certification in 2010, which is equivalent to nearly 150% of the 2013 target of 6,600, while 16,600 participants progressed to further education and training, equivalent to 99% of the 2013 target of 16,800.


52

TABLE 4.19: PHYSICAL PROGRESS - ADULT LITERACY

Region 2007 2008 2009 2010 Target

2013 2010 as %

of 2013 Output Number of participants in adult literacy training programmes BMW 15,197 17,404 18,563 19,863 n/a n/a S&E 28,820 32,562 29,037 34,878 n/a n/a State 44,017 49,966 47,600 54,741 42,000 130.33% Result Number of participants successfully completing the programme or achieving certification BMW n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a S&E n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a State n/a n/a n/a 9,649 6,577 146.70% Impact Number of participants who have progressed to other further training and education BMW n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a S&E n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a State n/a n/a n/a 16,601 16,800 98.80%

Note: “n/a” = not available.

Efficiency Table 4.20 below attempts to make some comparison of the actual cost of providing adult literacy tuition with the implied target cost that was originally forecast for the OP. It does this by comparing actual and forecast cumulative outputs (in terms of participant places per annum) with actual and forecast cumulative expenditure between 2007 and 2010. On this basis, the data suggests that the actual unit cost per output for Adult Literacy has been about 12% higher than the targeted unit cost based forecast total spend. Actual unit cost per output, for example, is estimated to be just over €420 between 2007 and 2010, whereas the targeted unit cost based on the forecast expenditure plans and output targets would be just over €375.

TABLE 4.20: UNIT COSTS – ADULT LITERACY 2007 2008 2009 2010 2007-2010 No. of participants – Actual 44,017 49,966 47,600 54,741 196,324 Expenditure (€000s) – Actual 18,509 21,594 20,862 21,635 82,600 Unit Cost (€) – Actual * * * * 420.73 No. of participants – Target 42,000 42,000 42,000 42,000 168,000 Expenditure (€000s) – Target 20,200 13,568 15,574 13,974 63,316 Unit Cost (€) – Target * * * * 376.88 * Unit costs only compared on a cumulative basis.

4.4.3 Third Level Access

Overview The objective of the Third Level Access Activity, as set out in the Activity Implementation Plan (Section 2), is to provide targeted support for the entry and retention of specific groups in third-level and further education, namely persons who are economically disadvantaged and persons with disabilities. The objective reflects the wider context of national equality policy and legislation, and support for the increased participation of groups who are traditionally under-represented in third level education.


53

The Activity is delivered via two funds – the Student Assistance Fund (SAF) and the Fund for Students with Disabilities (FSD). The SAF and FSD constitute sub-activities within the Activity as a whole. Both are administered by the Higher Education Authority National Access Office (NAO). The office is a dedicated section of the Authority with a policy, monitoring, evaluation and discretionary funding programme role regarding third level access. The funds are dedicated, discretionary funds i.e. they exist alongside mainstream educational support for education as a whole through the HEA (and local authority maintenance grants). The main public support for these (and all other students) is via mainstream HEA funding for third level college core costs, and separately administered student Maintenance Grants28. The two funds therefore provide relatively small amounts of additional discretionary support to the target groups. The two funds are administered somewhat differently:

� the SAF involves payments to individual students who may be in financial needs for a variety of

reasons. It is mostly administered directly by the colleges with a block grant provided by the HEA to the colleges in this regard. The SAF is administered by the colleges based on detailed guidelines provided by HEA.

� the FSD involves payments to colleges for activities undertaken by them to make their colleges more

user-friendly from the perspective of persons with disabilities, including assistive technology, academic and professional support and transport funding. A new system of allocating funding to colleges commenced implementation in 2010.

Applications regarding persons with disabilities in the post-Leaving Certificate sector, including VEC, are administered directly by HEA. Colleges also receive separate earmarked funding through the general HEA funding mechanism for other facilities, including Access and Disability Officers. The NAO commenced operations in 2003, and implemented these schemes since then. New schemes commenced in 2008 under the current OP and a new National Access Strategy29.

Financial Progress At end-December 2010, cumulative expenditure equalled 272% of the revised allocation (Table 4.21). All expenditure under this scheme is co-financed30, and the National Access Office does not currently administer other funding schemes, nor does it have additional funding for the same target groups31. There is a very wide divergence between financial progress in the BMW and the S&E Regions, the former being 572% and the latter 89%.

28 Under the Student Support Act 2011, responsibility for these moved from individual local authorities to the Dublin City Vocational Educational Committee (CDVEC) 29 HEA, National Plan for Equity of Access to Higher Education 2008-2013, July 2008. 30 However, in the AIR for 2010 total programme spend is shown as less than co-financed. These reflects some anomaly in the financial reporting for which we do not have a full explanation. 31 Up to 2009 is also administered the Millennium Partnership Fund


54

TABLE 4.21: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - THIRD LEVEL ACCESS National BMW S&E Revised OP Target (2007-2013) (€m) ESF 9.5 5.9 3.6 Exchequer 9.5 5.9 3.6 Private 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 19.0 11.8 7.2 Actual Spend 2007-2010 (€m) ESF 25.8 5.2 20.6 Exchequer 25.8 5.2 20.6 Private 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 51.7 10.5 41.2 Spend to end-2010 as % 2007-13 Target ESF 272% 89% 572% Exchequer 272% 89% 572% Private - - - Total 272% 89% 572%

Physical Progress Physical progress in 2010 is shown in Table 4.22. Given the nature of the indicators, data relate to the single year 2010 and are not cumulative. This shows that numbers of students supported under the SAF was approximately 80% of the 2010 target, while under the FSD it equated to 140% of the target. The excess of physical performance against target for FSD is explained by the NAO in terms of the progress made, albeit from a low base, in the participation of people with disabilities in third-level education. This in turn reflects progress being made at primary and secondary level systems. The proximity of the physical progress in 2010 to 2010 original targets, while expenditure is a multiple of the original target, raises some issues.

TABLE 4.22: THIRD LEVEL ACCESS - PHYSICAL PROGRESS (ANNUAL FIGURES) 2010 2006

baseline Target Actual Actual as %

of target Output No. of students supported SAF

FSD 9,587 2,165

9,943 3,532

7,816 4,964

79% 140%

(Total) (11,752) (13,475) (12,780) (94%)* Result No. of students successfully completing academic year

SAF 4,388 5,928 - -

FSD 1,205 2,212 4,865 - Impact Rate of qualification completions SAF - - - - FSD - - - - *Number not aggregated in Implementation Plan or Report

There is also strong demand for funding under the SAF, and the changed economic climate has influenced this in a upward direction in a number of overlapping ways. These include absence of traditional sources of student part-time employment, increasing financial pressure on parents, and absence of other jobs in the economy. Regarding impact, there is evidence from participation data that the access and retention of students from both groups in the third-level education system are improving, although from a low base. Also, Ireland is a relatively good performer internationally in this respect. Evidence of the differential impact of the two schemes over and above other instruments in this regard is less clear-cut. A Mid-term Review of the National Plan is currently being completed by the NAO. This confirms the progress currently being made across the access agenda as a whole. It shows that, as a percentage of the underlying


55

age cohort (17-35), participation by people with disabilities in third level education has grown from 4% in 2007/8 to 5% in 2009/10. It also described remaining challenges, and it envisages continuation of the two dedicated funds until at least 201432.

Efficiency Unit cost estimates are shown in Table 4.23. This shows the original forecast and actual expenditure, and the aggregate number of students to be supported under both schemes. (Funding under the schemes is not reported separately). As shown, the cost per person assisted in 2010 was €815 as against an implicit forecast of €712.

TABLE 4.23: THIRD LEVEL ACCESS - UNIT COST ANALYSIS , 2010 ANNUAL Original Forecast 2010 Revised Forecast Actual 2010 Expenditure (‘000)* 2,400 2,000 10,417 Students Supported (No) 3,3691 12,780 Unit cost (€) 712 815 1 BMW targets only, no expenditure projected in S&E in 2010.

4.4.4 Youthreach and Travellers

Overview The Youthreach and Travellers Activity comprises two separate programmes. Each is described below. Youthreach Youthreach was established in 1988 to provide second chance education to unemployed early school leavers

between 15-20 years of age. It offers a flexible and dynamic programme of integrated general education,

vocational training and work experience. Up to the re-allocation of Departmental responsibilities, it was a joint

programme of the Department of Education and Science and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and

Employment, but it is now managed and funded by the Department of Education and Skills.

There are approximately 6,000 places nationally at present. Almost 3,700 places are delivered by Vocational

Education Committees (VECs) in 100 centres and delivery is supported by a National Youthreach Co-ordinator.

The majority of the rest are delivered by FÁS in 40 Community Training Centres (CTCs). Participants receive a

weekly training allowance and a bonus payment and meal and travel allowances where appropriate. They are

also entitled to support with childcare.

Courses are normally at FETAC Levels 1-4 and of two years duration, 45 weeks per year. The first year

delivers an induction and foundation phase, in which the learners are supported in overcoming learning

difficulties, developing self-confidence and gaining a range of competencies essential for further learning. The

second year of the programme delivers a progression phase providing for more specific development through

a range of educational, training and work experience options and a short transition phase where the learners

are supported as they move on to other education programmes or work. Learners set personal and

educational goals that increase their self-esteem, skill, knowledge base and employability. Essential course

elements include Personal and Social Development, Vocational Skills and Communications Skills.

32 HEA, National Plan for Equity of Access to Higher Education: Mid-Term Review, HEA, December 2011


56

Senior Traveller Training Senior Traveller Training Centres (STTCs) were established in 1974 to provide basic compensatory education

for Travellers. There are 33 STTCs nationwide (684 approved places) operated by VECs for Travellers over 18

years of age. The aim of the centres is to provide Travellers with the knowledge, skills and attitudes required

to successfully make the transition to work and adult life, and to participate fully in their communities. The

target group is people who have left school with either minimal or no qualifications.

Courses are delivered over two years, 44 weeks of the year. Particular efforts are made to encourage Traveller

parents into centres because of the impact this can have on their children's schooling. Participants are paid a

training allowance and are also entitled to childcare support. All participants may be eligible for a range of

additional allowances (meal, travel, long-term unemployment bonus) and these are all paid by the VECs.

The Report and Recommendations for a Traveller Education Strategy published in late 2006 made a number

of recommendations in respect of Travellers accessing further education. Among these were:

� the inclusion of Travellers in all further education provision;

� review the STTCs and clarify their role;

� support innovative community outreach initiatives;

� Travellers under 18 years of age should not be enrolled in STTCs.

Subsequently, a VFM Review was conducted, and it recommended the phasing out of segregated provision for

Travellers and their integration into mainstream further education programmes. Travellers can continue to

access the full range of further education and training programmes across the country, however.

Financial Progress Total HCIOP spend and actual co-financed spend under Youthreach and Senior Traveller Training to the end of 2010 was €125.2m, which included ESF expenditure of €62.6m and Exchequer expenditure of €62.6m (Table 4.24). This means that expenditure to date is at more than 170% of the revised OP forecast (October 2009) for total spend, ESF spend and Exchequer spend. In 2011, the OP forecast makes provision for co-financed spend of €1.2m in 2011, split equally between ESF and Exchequer spend, with no co-financed spend planned in 2012 or 2013. However, as noted above, actual ESF spend to date has already exceeded its forecast. All spending incurred under the HCIOP has taken place in the BMW Region only. While Youthreach and STT activities have also been supported in the S&E Region, however, no claim for ESF co-financing has been made for this Activity.


57

TABLE 4.24: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - YOUTHREACH AND TRA VELLERS National BMW S&E Revised OP Target (2007-2013) (€m) ESF 36.7 36.7 0.0 Exchequer 36.7 36.7 0.0 Private 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 73.4 73.4 0.0 Actual Spend 2007-2010 (€m) ESF 62.6 62.6 0.0 Exchequer 62.6 62.6 0.0 Private 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 125.2 125.2 0.0 Spend to end-2010 as % 2007-13 Target ESF 171% 171% - Exchequer 171% 171% - Private - - - Total 171% 171% -

Physical Progress Table 4.25 below provides details of the physical progress achieved under the Youthreach and STT programmes to date. In terms of outputs, Youthreach has catered for roughly 3,400 participants per annum for each year between 2008 and 2010, which is about 80% of the OP target of 4,200 for 2010 and 2013 (as outlined in the AIP). STT, on the other hand, catered for just over 700 participants in 2010, down from a high of just under 1,100 in 2007 and about 65% of the OP target (also just under 1,100) for 2010 and 2013. However, it should be noted that this progress relates to all activity under the Youthreach and STT programmes, including activities that are co-financed and not co-financed. Outputs in the co-financed (BMW) parts of these programmes have included nearly 1,030 participants per annum under Youthreach during 2010 and about 330 participants per annum under STT. No regional targets are provided for Youthreach or STT performance indicators in the OP. The gap between progress and targets is largely explained by cutbacks that have been implemented as a result of the recent deterioration in the public finances. Towards 201633 provided for 1,000 additional places on the Youthreach programme managed by VECs by 2009, for example. 400 of these additional places were allocated to VECs in 2007. No further expansion of Youthreach places has taken place since then due to financial constraints. In the case of STT, meanwhile, VECs were instructed in August 2008 not to enrol Travellers under 18 years of age. Budget 2009 provided for a reduction in provision of 100 places from 1 September 2009 and Budget 2010 provided for a further reduction of 300 places with effect from September 2010. Budget 2011 provided that there would be no new enrolments in STTCs from 1 January 2011 and the STTC programme would be completed phased out by June 2012. Replacement places would be made available under the Back to Education Initiative, however. The cut in places for both programmes has, of course, had a knock-on effect on the absolute number of participants who achieve certification or who progress to further education or employment. In relative terms, however, progress in results and impacts has been impressive. In both programmes, for example, about certifications in 2010 were equivalent to about 70% of participants, well above the 2010 and 2013 targets of about 60%. Also, nearly 70% of those who completed Youthreach in 2010 progressed to further education or employment, while just over 40% of those completed the STT programme progressed to further education or employment.

33 Towards 2016: Ten-Year Framework Social Partnership Agreement 2006-2015, Stationery Office, Dublin, 2006.


58

Again, it should be noted that these figures relate to all activities under the Youthreach and STT programmes, whether they are co-financed or not co-financed. In the co-financed (BMW) area only, about 69% of Youthreach participants and 72% of STT participants achieved certification in 2010. Also, 63% of those who completed Youthreach, and 45% of those who completed STT, progressed to further education or employment.

TABLE 4.25: PHYSICAL PROGRESS - YOUTHREACH AND TRAV ELLERS

Region 2007 2008 2009 2010 Target

2013

2010 as % of 2013

Outputs Number of participants in Youthreach (on an annual basis) BMW 837 896 1,023 1,029 n/a n/a S&E 2,296 2,545 2,429 2,338 n/a n/a State 3,133 3,441 3,452 3,367 4,200 80.2% Number of participants in STT (on an annual basis) BMW 545 528 466 331 n/a n/a S&E 544 542 554 385 n/a n/a State 1,089 1,070 1,020 716 1,098 65.2% Results Number and % of Youthreach participants successfully achieving certification (annual) BMW n/a n/a 729 709 n/a n/a S&E n/a n/a 1,701 1,676 n/a n/a State n/a n/a 2,430 2,385 2,562 93.10% - - 70.4% 70.8% 61.0% 116.1% Number and % of STT participants successfully achieving certification (annual) BMW n/a n/a 378 237 n/a n/a S&E n/a n/a 361 278 n/a n/a State n/a n/a 739 515 659 78.10% - - 72.5% 71.9% 60.0% 119.8% Number of Youthreach participants successfully completing the programme BMW 226 278 166 257 n/a n/a S&E 630 848 624 667 n/a n/a State 856 1,126 790 924 n/a n/a Number of STT participants successfully completing the programme BMW 138 189 119 165 n/a n/a S&E 108 155 153 189 n/a n/a State 246 344 272 354 n/a n/a Impacts Number of Youthreach participants who have completed the programme and progressed to other further education or employment (annual) BMW 164 176 110 162 n/a n/a S&E 453 516 396 454 n/a n/a State 617 692 506 616 * * 72.1% 61.5% 64.1% 66.7% n/a n/a Number of STT participants who have completed the programme and progressed to other further education or employment (annual) BMW 52 87 56 74 n/a n/a S&E 38 64 41 76 n/a n/a State 90 151 97 150 * * 36.6% 43.9% 35.7% 42.4% n/a n/a Note: “n/a” = not available. * Targets outlined for these indicators did not apply to those completing programmes and therefore cannot be compared to the indicator data that has been reported.


59

Efficiency Table 4.26 below makes an attempt to gauge the efficiency of spend under the Youthreach and STT programmes by comparing actual cumulative outputs for both programmes (in terms of participant places per annum) with actual cumulative expenditure between 2007 and 2010. On this basis, the data suggests that the actual unit cost per output for the two programmes (combined) has been over €22,000, based on the number of participant places per annum reported for the BMW Region and the level of co-financed expenditure reported. It is not possible, however, to compare this figure to a target unit cost, given that there were no regional targets for outputs provided in the Activity Implementation Plan.

TABLE 4.26: UNIT COSTS – YOUTHREACH AND SENIOR TRAV ELLER TRAINING 2007 2008 2009 2010 2007-2010 No. of participants – Actual 1,382 1,424 1,489 1,360 5,655 Expenditure (€000s) – Actual 21,674 33,783 34,816 34,974 125,247 Unit Cost (€) – Actual * * * * 22,148 No. of participants – Target n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Expenditure (€000s) – Target n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Unit Cost (€) – Target n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Note: “n/a” = not available. * Unit costs only compared on a cumulative basis.

4.4.5 Garda Youth Diversion – IT Skills and Persona l Development

Overview Garda Youth Diversion Projects (GYDPs) seek to divert young people from engaging in crime and criminal activities and to engage them in activities to promote personal development, civic responsibility, and improve employment prospects. Projects are operated and funded nationally by the Irish Youth Justice Service (an executive office of the Department of Justice and Equality) and managed by local committees comprising representatives from An Garda Síochána, the Probation Service, youth organisations, schools and the local community. The first two projects were first established in 1991 in response to high rates of youth crime. By 2001 64 projects had been established. In addition to the projects there is a Garda Youth Diversion Programme operated under Part 4 of the Children Act 2001 designed to keep young offenders away from the courts through a series of measures including formal and informal caution, supervision, restorative cautioning and conferencing, community policing and also referral to the Garda Youth Diversion projects which operate outside of the Programme but in concert with it. There are 100 local community-based projects, each with a Project Committee and a Referral Committee. Most projects are managed by youth organisations many of which operate nationally and manage numerous GYD projects in several localities. Most referrals to local projects come from local Garda information sources, and formal risk assessments are undertaken for each individual referred. The primary target group of participants are young people that come to the attention of the Garda Juvenile Liaison Scheme and that are considered at risk of remaining within the justice system. Secondary target groups are young people, who while they may not have been cautioned or referred directly by the Juvenile Liaison Office (JLO), have come to the attention of the Gardaí, the community or local agencies as a result of their behaviour and provide some evidence that they are at risk of becoming involved in offending. Many participants in GYD projects come from disadvantaged backgrounds, often with low levels of educational attainment, poor family and community support structures and high levels of unemployment. The management of the programme at national level has been going through a substantial transition in recent years. Prior to 2011 projects were operated in accordance with a set of guidelines produced in 2003, which acted as an aid to the establishment, operation administration and monitoring of projects. Following the launch of the Irish Youth Justice Strategy in 2008, new targets and objectives were established for the IYJS and AGS aimed at improving the management and governance of projects and their overall effectiveness. A baseline


60

study completed in 2009 also led to significant changes being introduced, including the alignment of project activities with local youth crime patterns, improved service design and development and training for project staff. Revised reporting arrangements and requirements were also established to improve the scope for effective monitoring, and efforts are continuing to establish systems for recording and monitoring effectiveness for young people. Prior to 2011 AGS were formally involved in the financial administration of the projects, however in 2011 this has changed and the IYJS administers financial aspects directly with the projects. GYDPs typically operate out of dedicated premises, and provide a range of on-site and off-site supervised activities for young people referred to them. Such young people may participate in the project for short periods or for several years, and the activities of each are determined in individual plans prepared for them by youth workers on their initial referral. Since 2008, there have been 100 GYDPs operating across the country, the number having grown from 61 in 2006. A majority (approximately 70%) of projects are located in the S&E region. In 2010 there were 5,480 young people who participated in GYDPs, of whom approximately 70% were male. Each project had, on average, just under 55 participants during the year. The specific objective of this OP Activity, according to the AIP, is “to enhance the employability of participants in GYDPs by providing them with key skills in the area of IT and personal development. This objective will be achieved by providing training in a range of skills. In the Personal Development module these include interpersonal development; career planning; job seeking; CV writing; preparation of cover letters; interview skills; and team working; while the IT skills module will incorporate the European Computer Driving Licence qualification”. As such the funding was earmarked to provide specific additional training and personal development activities and opportunities for GYDP participants, over and above others that the projects otherwise provide. Initially projects were awarded a standard allowance within which they could directly procure training provision, however more recently business cases for training are submitted to IYJS for approval prior to procurement. Courses are typically quite short (e.g. 5-10 weeks), are tailored quite significantly towards the needs of specific individuals and groups, and may lead to formal qualifications but in many cases do not.


TABLE 4.27: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - GYD IT SKILLS AND PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT National BMW S&E Revised OP Target (2007-2013) (€m) ESF 0.47 0.18 0.30 Exchequer 0.47 0.18 0.30 Private 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.95 0.36 0.59 Actual Spend 2007-2010 (€m) ESF 0.30 0.08 0.22 Exchequer 0.30 0.08 0.22 Private 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.59 0.15 0.44 Spend to end-2010 as % 2007-13 Target ESF 63% 42% 75% Exchequer 63% 42% 75% Private - - - Total 63% 42% 75%

The Activity has a financial allocation of €0.95m under the OP, 50% of which is provided by the ESF. This (indicative) allocation was not changed at the point of the 2009 OP revisions. At the outset it was anticipated that 38% of expenditure would occur in the BMW region, and 62% would occur in the S&E Region.


61

By end-2010, total expenditure had reached €0.59m, or 63% of the 2007-13 allocation. Spend in the BMW region had reached 42% of the allocation, while in the S&E it had reached 75%.

Physical Progress The AIP only established one physical indicator for this Activity – “the number of participants receiving support on Garda Youth Diversion Projects”, against which a 2013 target of 1,600 was set. No result or impact indicator was established in the AIP, and the IYJS confirms that this target represented a cumulative rather than an annual one. By end-2010, a total of 1,333 participants had received support (Table 4.28). No breakdown is available as between those who participated in IT training and those who participated in personal development courses (this data is now being collected but was not in the initial years of implementation). This throughput level represents 83% of the 2007-13 total cumulative target of 1,600 participants. While no gender or regional targets were established in the AIP, the progress report indicates that the BMW region has accounted for 18% of participants while the S&E has accounted for 82%, and that 32% of participants have been female, and 68% male.

TABLE 4.28: PHYSICAL PROGRESS - GYD IT SKILLS AND P ERSONAL DEVELOPMENT

2013 Target Cumulative Total to end

2010

Male Female Total Male Female Total The number of participants receiving support on Garda Youth Diversion Projects BMW 161 76 237

S&E 751 345 1,096

National 1,600 912 421 1,333

Efficiency The total financial allocation of €0.95m set against the 1,600 target number of participants established in the AIP would represent an implicit unit cost of €593. In actuality, expenditure of €0.59 has supported 1,333 participants, representing a unit cost of €442, which is 25% lower than the unit cost originally implied in the AIP and funding envelope for the Activity.

4.4.6 Garda Youth Diversion – Additional Workers

Overview The objectives of the GYD - Additional Workers OP Activity, as set out in the AIP, are “to provide support for participants in accessing further education and training through the recruitment of employment support youth workers who would work with participants and relevant agencies and employers. This role would require further development so it could be tailored to meet needs at local level. The employment support worker would be additional to the existing youth workers on the projects”. The AIP describes the rationale further: “the sub measure will improve participation in employment by identifying pathways for individual participants towards the labour market. Many of the young people involved in the projects, as a result of their social and educational backgrounds, have difficulty identifying and accessing education and employment support services. One to one support services, delivered to them by workers within the projects, would assist them in understanding and accessing the range of support services available in the community and provide follow up support during initial placements. It is proposed to recruit these workers on a phased basis, tailoring the role to address the needs of young people in making the transition into employment”.


62

Financial Progress The Activity has a financial allocation of €24.2m under the OP, of which 50% was to be provided by the ESF. Its allocation has not changed since the OP was first agreed. The OP allocated €7.27m (or 30%) to the BMW region and €16.9m (70%) to the S&E. By end-2010, a total spend of €7.3m had taken place, representing 30% of the total OP allocation. Spend in the BMW region had reached 26% of its allocation, while in the S&E it had reached 32% (Table 4.29).

TABLE 4.29: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - GYD ADDITIONAL WORKERS National BMW S&E Revised OP Target (2007-2013) (€m) ESF 12.1 3.6 8.4 Exchequer 12.1 3.6 8.4 Private 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 24.2 7.3 16.9 Actual Spend 2007-2010 (€m) ESF 3.7 0.9 2.7 Exchequer 3.7 0.9 2.7 Private 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 7.3 1.9 5.4 Spend to end-2010 as % 2007-13 Target ESF 30% 26% 32% Exchequer 30% 26% 32% Private - - - Total 30% 26% 32%

Expenditure covers the pay and related costs associated with employment of the additional workers, and each GYDP now has their additional youth worker in place.

Physical Progress Targets were established for two indicators in the AIP, namely the number of youth justice workers recruited to provide employment support, and the number of participants, and the number of participants served by youth workers providing employment support. Targets and reported outcomes are shown in Table 4.30.

TABLE 4.30: PHYSICAL PROGRESS – GYD ADDITIONAL WORKERS

2013 Target Cumulative Total to end 2010

Male Female Total Male Female Total

The number of youth justice workers recruited to provide employment support

BMW 16 37 53

S&E 42 112 154

National 100 58 149 207

The number of participants served by youth workers providing employment support

BMW 532 188 720

S&E 2,619 840 3,459

National 3,500 3,151 1,028 4,179

The outcomes in relation to the number of youth justice workers recruited are reported to be 207, although the IYJS confirms that these relate to the number of individuals who have been appointed, rather than the number of actual positions in place. Each project has one full time position funded, therefore the 207 figure reflects situations where a single full-time position is shared between two part-time worker, or where individual workers were appointed and then left a single position later filled by a different individual. The first indicator should be renamed “the number of full-time equivalent youth justice worker positions created to provide employment support”.


63

The second indicator is “the number of participants served by youth workers providing employment support”, against which a 2013 target of 3,500 was established. It is unclear whether this target was an annual or cumulative target, however in 2010 the number of such participants reported to have been served by the additional worker was 2,363, and the cumulative number reported up to then was 4,179. The indicator has limited value however, as in most projects the second worker is likely to interact and “serve” most participants, and whether and to what extent they do will depend on the project itself, and how such interaction is interpreted, counted and reported is likely to vary considerably across projects. Moreover even if there was universally consistent measurement and reporting of such interaction, it tells us very little about the effectiveness of the work and the merit of having the additional worker in place. The IYJS has recently sought to address this by requiring youth justice workers to provide qualitative reports on the value added provided by the additional worker in terms of their work with the young people, and to submit case studies to illustrate these effects. However this is a recent development, and no aggregated or summarised analysis of such reports has yet been prepared.

Efficiency There is a one-to-one relationship between the unit costs of the additional workers anticipated at the outcome and those arising in practice, as the original budget has not changed, and the original target is and continues to be met exactly. Assuming each position is in place over six years (2008-2013), the annual cost per position is approximately just over €40,000, and the de-facto unit cost is likely to be very close to this, differing only to the extent the timing of recruitment varied from that originally anticipated.

4.4.7 Positive Actions to Promote Gender Equality

Overview The objective of the Activity “Positive Actions to Promote Gender Equality” is “to contribute to increased female labour market participation with an emphasis on training and up-skilling, and to foster the wider engagement and advancement of women in targeted sectors”. A range of positive actions to address barriers to women’s employment, advancement in employment and participation in decision making at all levels were envisaged for this Activity at the outset. These included access courses, training, retraining and up-skilling programmes; awareness raising, mentoring, and research and information campaigns. The planned Activity was to be comprised of four main strands: 1- access to employment; 2- developing female entrepreneurship; 3- career development for women in employment; and 4- fostering women as decision-makers. Due to budget constraints the progress to date has centred on two strands - Strands 1 and 2. No activity has happened under Strand 3 - related to training for women in employment due to low levels of response to calls for proposals and the increasing policy focus on training for unemployed women. Activity on Strand 4 has been deferred until later in 2011. A range of preparatory courses to develop the skills and confidence of women from disadvantaged backgrounds to take part in mainstream education and training services and to enter the labour market have been delivered within Strand 1 – Access to Employment. These courses include outreach, literacy supports, taster sessions, skills assessment, mentoring and supports for preparation for work. The nature and scope of the training interventions within this Strand was refocused due to budget constraints. The intervention is modest and considerably less elaborate than originally envisaged when launched in May 2008. The current courses are part-time 3-4 mornings weekly for 6-9 months, with minimal budget provision for child-care or project evaluation. Strand Two activity – Entrepreneurship – includes the Going for Growth initiative – mentoring and peer led support from experienced women entrepreneurs to support women at start-up or early development stage in their businesses; with a focus on minority or under-represented groups in entrepreneurship. The mentoring is provided on a group-basis by lead entrepreneurs, who contribute their time on a voluntary basis. The Activity has also supported the holding of two National Women’s Enterprise Days. During 2009-2011, the funding under Strands 1 and 2 was spread across 22 counties.


64

The Activity, as originally envisaged, had four different target groups of women: those experiencing disadvantage and outside the labour market; women who are early stage or potential entrepreneurs; women in employment; and women who have the capacity to become decision-makers, including at levels such as Boards of Directors, executive management, and politics. Following budget revision the activity is confined to two main target groups - disadvantaged women and those outside of the labour market, and women who are early stage owners/ managers of small businesses, self-employed or considering entering into entrepreneurship (including women from disadvantaged groups e.g. travellers and refugees). The DJE is the IB for this Activity, while it is administered by Pobal on the Department’s behalf. Strand 1 is largely delivered by community-based/not for profit groups and by state-supported bodies (e.g. VECs, Area Partnerships and City and County Enterprise Boards). An independent national director was appointed to implement Strand 2 – Entrepreneurship. Projects in Strand 1 were initially selected following an open call for Proposals in 2008; 150 applications were received and 38 were prioritised. Due to the reduction in finance for the overall Activity each of the selected projects was offered €30,000 in 2009, with a commitment to an additional €30,000 if the initial project was delivered in accordance with its targets. A second open call for applications for funding of up to €50,000 each per annum (renewable for one or more years) was made in May 2010. In 2010 75 projects were active, and 42 have continued into 2011. An Equality for Women Measure was included in the previous EHRD OP. The current activity was planned in accordance with the provisions of the NDP 2007-2013 and the National Women’s Strategy. The development of the Entrepreneurship Strategy was also influenced by learning arising from related Equal projects.

Financial Progress An overall programme budget of €31.7m was originally allocated to this Activity with €15.9m the ESF contribution. This was subsequently reduced in June 2009 to €11.8m with ESF co-financing of €5.5m. The funding was curtailed due to scarcity of Exchequer matched funding for this Activity. Total actual spend Jan 2007-December 2010 is €2.6m (Table 4.31), with an ESF contribution of €1.3m (22% of revised forecast).

TABLE 4.31: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - POSITIVE ACTIONS T O PROMOTE GENDER EQUALITY National BMW S&E Revised OP Target (2007-2013) (€m) ESF 5.88 1.45 4.43 Exchequer 5.88 1.45 4.43 Private 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 11.75 2.89 8.86 Actual Spend 2007-2010 (€m) ESF 1.30 0.28 1.03 Exchequer 1.30 0.28 1.03 Private 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 2.61 0.55 2.05 Spend to end-2010 as % 2007-13 Target ESF 22% 19% 23% Exchequer 22% 19% 23% Private - - - Total 22% 19% 23%

Overall expenditure was very slow due to the delayed start-up of activity, resulting from uncertainty on the availability of matching exchequer funding and a need to refocus the nature of the training intervention. Significant progress did not take place until late 2009 however there was a cumulative spend of €2.6m by end-2010. The DJE reports that the 2011 commitments in place will ensure expenditure at or above 2010 expenditure levels, ensuring that progress will continue at a good pace for the remainder of the OP.


65

Physical Progress As most of the activity was implemented in late 2009 and 2010, reporting on performance indicators commenced only in 2010. Individual output indicators and targets were specified in the AIP for each of the planned four Strands in this measure; result indicators and targets were specified for two of the four Strands. No regional targets were set for any indicators. Physical progress as reported is shown in Table 4.32 below. The 2010 progress report shows that that the output targets have been considerably exceeded for Strand 1 – Access to Employment, despite the considerably reduced budget; 184 courses were provided in 2010 against a target of 30, and 4,750 women availed of training against a target of 1,000 . This is due to the re-profiling of the training approach within the measure, resulting in an increased level of provision of moderate part-time training interventions of shorter duration and with less supports than originally envisaged. Performance is below target for the Strand 2 ‘entrepreneurship’; 110 persons availed of training, compared with a target of 350. No regional targets were set for the activity. Most of the training to date has been in the S&E region:- 75% of courses, and 66% of participants in Strand 1 are from the S&E Region. Furthermore, 88% of the participants in Strand 2 are from the S&E Region.

TABLE 4.32: PHYSICAL PROGRESS – POSITIVE ACTIONS TO PROMOTE GENDER EQUALITY

Output 2013 Annual

Target Cumulative Total

2007-2010 Number of full (part) time courses aimed at labour market activation, delivered under Equality for Women Measure BMW 48 S&E 145

National Full Time 10 Part Time 20 193

Number of participants in full (part) time courses Aimed at labour market activation delivered under EWM measure BMW 1,633 S&E 3,205 National 1,000 4,838 Number of women availing of in service development training under Equality for Women Measure each year BMW 0 S&E 0 National 1,000 0 Number of women availing of training for entrepreneurship under Equality for Women Measure BMW 13 S&E 97 National 350 110 Result Number of participants under Positive Action Programmes taking up Employment or advancing to further education BMW 286 S&E 757 National 250 1,043 Number of participants who availed of entrepreneurship development who have moved to early stage entrepreneurship BMW 0 S&E 0 National 100 0

Two sets of results indicators were specified for the activity – number of persons taking up employment or advancing to further education; and number who have moved to early stage entrepreneurship. The original annual target for progression into employment or further training for Strand 1 training was 25%; the target achieved to date is 20%. The target set for progression into early stage entrepreneurship was 28%. No results are reported for those who have moved to early stage entrepreneurship – a follow-up study was originally envisaged, but is not now possible for budget reasons. Impact indicators and targets were specified in the AIP


66

relating to numbers still in employment /education/entrepreneurship, however progress in achievement of impact targets is not reported for any of the strands.

Efficiency Total trainee numbers anticipated in 2010 and in 2013 were 2,350. Expenditure originally anticipated to take place in 2010 was €6.25m, although in 2013 it was anticipated to be €1.25m. Implicit unit costs per trainee were therefore €2,659 in 2010, but just €532 in 2013, for the same number of participants. The cumulative number of actual participants to 2010 is 4,838, against which expenditure of €2.61m translates to a unit cost of €539, very close to the implicit target for 2013.

4.4.8 Equality Mainstreaming Initiative

Overview The Equality Mainstreaming Activity objective is “to contribute to addressing labour market gaps for specific groups that are experiencing barriers to participation and employment, including those created by gender inequality and wider inequalities”. The Activity aims to put in place measures to improve labour market access and participation of groups experiencing inequality across the nine grounds covered by the equality legislation in Ireland. The Activity is primarily focused on facilitation and support of institutional change within providers of vocation education and training, labour market programmes and within small to medium-sized enterprises. Some positive action programmes are also supported. The Activity is targeted at providers of vocational education, training and labour market programmes, SMEs, and trade union and employer networks. The Activity is implemented through grant-aid to third party organisations and companies to undertake equality mainstreaming activities, and through provision of technical support. There are four main Strands within the activity, as follows: � A: Support packages to providers for programme providers; � B: Support to enterprises; � C: Support to Trade Unions and Employers Networks; � D: Research and resources. The types of actions to date have included: � Strand A: Support packages to programme providers. Pilot projects on mainstreaming equality in 3

VECs have been designed and implemented; lessons learned from the pilots have been disseminated through national seminars, an Equality Mainstreaming Resource Pack, and training support to selected VECs;

� Strand B: Support to enterprises. Implementation of a scheme to provide equality expertise to individual small to medium sized enterprises, and also targeting specific sectors to promote equal treatment in the work-place. Forty individual companies have participated to date with a total of 282 consultancies provided. Five sectoral equality projects were also approved for funding during 2010 under this activity, including a project for migrant women in the mushroom production sector, lone parents in the retail sector; and an equal pay audit to be piloted in the manufacturing sector;

� Strand C Supports to Trade Unions and Employers networks. Grant-aid has been provided for projects to encourage, inform and support approaches to workplace equality. This includes projects being carried out by SIPTU, ICTU and IBEC in association with equality networks such as Migrants Rights Centre of Ireland, One Family and the Gay and Lesbian Equality Network;

� Strand D – Research and Resources. Publications and conferences; e.g. Mainstreaming Equality in further education, training and labour market programmes.

The DJE is the IB for this Activity, while the Equality Authority is responsible for implementation and administration. Strand A is supported by the Equality Mainstreaming Unit - Measure (Advisory) Committee which meets twice yearly. This committee is comprised of representatives of the main public education/training organisations (e.g. FAS, VECs, IVEA) within the Activity and representative NGOs for target groups (e.g. older people, lone parents, unemployed, travellers, migrants) The IB, MA and Equality Authority are also


67

represented on the Committee. Strand B Activity is implemented within the context of a Framework Partnership Committee, with Union and Employer representatives. The Activity was included as an element of previous EHRD OP – through the Gender Mainstreaming Unit in the DJE; and subsequently the Mainstreaming Unit of the Equality Authority. It was previously focused on four equality grounds, but has been expanded in the HCIOP to address nine equality grounds.


TABLE 4.33: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - EQUALITY MAINSTREA MING APPROACH National BMW S&E Revised OP Target (2007-2013) (€m) ESF 2.00 0.90 1.10 Exchequer 2.00 0.90 1.10 Private 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 4.00 1.80 2.20 Actual Spend 2007-2010 (€m) ESF 0.90 0.36 0.54 Exchequer 0.90 0.36 0.54 Private 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 1.81 0.72 1.08 Spend to end-2010 as % 2007-13 Target ESF 45% 40% 49% Exchequer 45% 40% 49% Private - - - Total 45% 40% 49%

The total planned expenditure for this Activity 2007-2013 was originally €7m with 50% matching ESF funding. Planned expenditure was equally allocated to the BMW and S&E regions. The overall budget was revised downwards to €4m in 2009, again with 50% co-financing from the ESF. Total expenditure to date has been €1.8m, representing 45% of forecast expenditure. Of this, 60% of expenditure has been in the BMW region. Overall yearly expenditure to date has been below target. This is reported as due to uncertainty concerning the availability of matched exchequer funding, and less demand than expected from companies to participate in Strand B. The public service embargo on the use of ‘external consultants’ also caused a need to re-focus the activity within Strand B. However it is expected that the expenditure will be fully utilised for the remainder of the programme.

Physical Progress The annual output, result and impact indicators specified in the AIP relate to only one of the four Activity Strands – Strand B; and indicator targets reflect the number of enterprises rather than the number of people participating in the Activity. The 2010 output target for the number of consultancies delivered to employers has not been achieved with 38 consultancies delivered against an original target of 60; this also applies to the result indicator target for number of equality policies and training actions developed by employers. However in both cases the cumulative number reported by end-2010 is 282, suggesting greater progress in the years prior to 2010 than that year itself. Impact targets cannot be fully judged due to lack of adequate follow-up data. The three companies reported under impact are the only respondents to an electronic survey of 36 participant enterprises in 2009. A review of impact of Strand B interventions is currently being undertaken.

Efficiency

No meaningful calculation of unit costs is appropriate as outputs are only reported in relation to one Activity strand.


68

4.4.9 Social and Employment Integration of Migrants

Overview This Activity supports the EPIC (Employment Programme for Immigrant Communities) Programme, an initiative administered by Business in the Community (BITC) and funded by the Office for the Promotion of Migrant Integration (OPMI) (previously the Office of the Minister for Integration), which targets vulnerable legally resident migrants that face barriers to gaining employment such as language, health issues, lack of training, social skills and non-recognition of qualifications. It was established in 2007, having evolved from a previous project that supported mothers of Irish-born children which was funded under the Equality for Women Programme. The formal objectives of the Programme and Activity, as set out in the AIP, are “to implement a series of initiatives which will increase the employment possibilities for the target group through a linked comprehensive employment program embracing all stages of preparation which will include language training around the work place, social skills training and a one on one mentoring programme that will lead to long term placement of beneficiaries in either training or employment”. The AIP elaborated on the aims as follows: “Persons who fall into the targeted category will be given the tools and one to one support to become economically viable. The training programme includes work place language and social skills training, cv preparation, interview skills, referral to health services will be made as appropriate. A one on one training and employment officer will be assigned to each individual who will mentor them through the training and beyond for as long as necessary. This focused approach will ensure that the overall objectives of the project are met”. BITC is a non-profit organisation which provides advice and guidance to businesses in Ireland on corporate responsibility and corporate community involvement, and whose members are made up of businesses and private companies, both large and small. The programme provides a six week part-time training and employment preparation course for legally resident EU and non-EU migrants referred to it. Referrals come from a range of sources, including FÁS, Social Welfare Offices and migrant support organisations, as well as other organisations, while potential participants and applicants also present themselves as a result of their own research or through word of mouth. The first three weeks of the course consist of five half day training sessions per week in areas such as English language tuition, CV preparation, interview preparation and cultural orientation. The second three weeks provide a range of sessions in areas such as mock interviews, information on working and living in Ireland, IT training and other practical matters of relevance to the social and economic integration and participation of migrants. The training is delivered by a full-time training provider employed by BITC, while outside informants are invited to deliver information sessions. Over the course of the programme, and following completion of it, individual participants are also assisted by training and employment co-ordinators who provide one-to-one support to participants in job search activities, CV and cover letter preparation, and other work relevant to their future labour market progression. The programme seeks to assist participants gain employment or where appropriate to progress to further education or training likely to assist their future employment prospects. Participants completing the 6 week programme are provided with certificates to that effect, however there is no external formal accreditation of the course.

Financial Progress The total budget that was anticipated at the outset of the OP for this Activity was €8.8mn, with 50% ESF co-financing, which was not revised when the OP was amended in 2009.


69

Spend up to end-2010 amounted to €1.3m, or 15% of the total allocation. The slow rate of expenditure has been due to the lower than anticipated levels of exchequer funding allocated to the programme. This has also had the effect of limiting the geographical scope of the initiative, whereby it operates only in Dublin, and has not been able to expand into the rest of the S&E region or the BMW region as had been intended (Table 4.34).

TABLE 4.34: FINANCIAL PROGRESS - SOCIAL AND EMPLOYM ENT INTEGRATION OF MIGRANTS National BMW S&E Revised OP Target (2007-2013) (€m) ESF 4.40 1.32 3.08 Exchequer 4.40 1.32 3.08 Private 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 8.80 2.64 6.16 Actual Spend 2007-2010 (€m) ESF 0.65 0.00 0.65 Exchequer 0.65 0.00 0.65 Private 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 1.30 0.00 1.30 Spend to end-2010 as % 2007-13 Target ESF 15% 0% 21% Exchequer 15% 0% 21% Private - - - Total 15% 0% 21%

Physical Progress The AIP established three indicators for this Activity: � the number of individuals participating in preparation for employment programmes (the output

indicator); � the number of participants who complete specific training and/or mentoring and are ready to enter the

employment market (the result indicator); and � the number of participants gaining employment (the impact indicator). Annual targets were established for each indicator, and annual results have been reported by the OPMI in Activity progress reports. However in consultations with BITC, we established that data being reported in relation to the first (output) indicator in fact relates to the number of people referred to the EPIC project (rather than the number which formally participated in the employment preparation programme), while the data reported in relation to the second (result) indicator refers to the number of actual course participants. BITC explained that in any given year many people will be referred to the project who do not subsequently participate in the programme. Reasons may include their ineligibility, practical reasons, or their non-readiness in terms of language proficiency or literacy. Finally, data reported in relation to the final (impact) indicator in practice relate to the number of participants subsequently gaining employment or progressing to a further training course, or volunteer placement or internship/work experience placement. Table 4.35 below therefore shows the progress of the Activity against these more accurately defined indicators.


70

TABLE 4.35: PHYSICAL PROGRESS – SOCIAL AND EMPLOYME NT INTEGRATION OF MIGRANTS

Annual Target Cumulative Total to end

2010

Male Female Total Male Female Total The number of individuals referred to the preparation for employment programme BMW 40 60 100 0 0 0

S&E 60 140 200 668 929 1,596

National 100 200 300 668 929 1,596 The number of participants who participate in the specific training and/or mentoring and are ready to enter the employment market BMW 50 35 85 0 0 0

S&E 90 35 125 345 611 959

National 140 70 210 345 611 959 The number of participants gaining employment, further training, volunteer placement or internship/work experience placement BMW 30 10 40 0 0 0

S&E 40 20 60 246 440 686

National 70 30 100 246 440 686

By end-2010 some 1,596 persons had been referred to the EPIC programme. The annual target was for 300 such referrals, so the achievement of 1,596, after effectively three years of implementation, is substantially ahead of target. Similarly, the cumulative number of course participants, at 959, is also indicative of strong achievements when compared with the annual target of 210. Finally, the number of course participants progressing into employment, further training, voluntary activity or internship/work experience positions had reached 686 by end-2010, compared with an annual target of 100. This indicates a strong level of impact relative to the targets established at the outset. EPIC also produce breakdowns of the number of these “placements” in terms of placements in employment, in training, in volunteering and in internship/work placement. In 2010, some 56% of the placements were into employment, while a further 35% were placed into further training. A high proportion of programme participants therefore gained employment subsequent to their participation.

Efficiency The original target for the number of participants in the specific training and/or mentoring programme and are ready to enter the employment market was 210 per annum (to be achieved in both 2010 and 2013). The original total budget for the Activity was €8.8m (which was not changed in the 2009 OP financial revisions). On the basis of the OP lasting 7 years, this suggests a unit cost per such participant of €5,986. On the basis of the OP lasting 6 years, the unit cost is €6,984. Actual expenditure to the end of 2010, as shown above, amounted to €1.3m, and the cumulative number of such participants had reached 959. The actual unit cost was therefore €1,355, which is very substantially below the level implicit in the original financial and physical targets for the Activity.


71

5. Horizontal Principles and ESF Role and Added Value

5.1 Introduction This Section considers the HCIOP’s three Horizontal Principles (HPs), namely social inclusion, gender and wider equal opportunities, and sustainable development. Section 5 firstly summarises the background to and commitments made in the OP in relation to the HPs, before considering evidence regarding each Activity’s adherence to and support for each principle. It then briefly considers aspects of reporting issues in relation to HPs. Section 5.3 considers the added value of the ESF within the OP and the interventions it is supporting.

5.2 Horizontal Principles

5.2.1 OP Commitments Regarding Horizontal Principle s Social Inclusion The OP seeks to support the Government’s high level goals for social inclusion, which are aimed at reducing consistent poverty through a life-cycle approach. It does this in two ways. Firstly through its focus on upskilling and activating those in the labour market and activating groups outside it, it seeks to ensure funding is effectively targeted to niche interventions supporting groups such as older people, migrants, ethnic minorities, women, young people and people with disabilities, all distinct target groups under the National Action Plan for Social Inclusion (NAPSInc). Second, in relation to all Activities, intermediate bodies are required to adhere to the principle of social inclusion and all activities and actions supported by the OP are required to build in social inclusion outcomes into their objectives and strategies. Bodies in receipt of co-funding are also required to report on social inclusions targets and outcomes.

Gender Equality and Wider Equal Opportunities Gender mainstreaming and a broad focus on equal opportunities covering the nine grounds set out in Irish equality legislation (gender, marital status, family status, sexual orientation, religion, age, race, disability, member of traveller community) are included in the HCIOP. OP funding is intended to contribute to achieving greater equality through a range of specific interventions that target groups that face inequalities, particularly in relation to labour force participation. Intermediate bodies must also report on equality principles within their activities, and build in equality targets and strategies into their work, as well as report on outcomes in relation to those principles.

Sustainable Development While the OP is required to uphold the principle of sustainable development as a cornerstone of EU and national policy, the OP document acknowledged that it had limited potential to directly promote sustainable development given the nature of the activities it supported and their limited environmental impact. However the OP made a number of commitments regarding the promotion of the theme of sustainable development in OP implementation, including inviting the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government to become a member of the Monitoring Committee, reporting on the principle in Annual Implementation Reports, providing annual thematic presentations on the subject to the Monitoring Committee.


72

5.2.2 Analysis of Participants by Target Groups

Before considering the role played by specific Activities in promoting the HPs individually, it is useful to consider the breakdown of participants in OP-funded training, education and employment preparation programmes according to specific target groups such as gender, age, educational attainment and others. Activity managers provide data each year on the total number of participants, by gender, in the following categories34: � status in the labour market;

o employed; o self-employed; o unemployed; o long-term unemployed; o inactive; o inactive, in education or training

� age; o young people (15-24); and o older workers (55-64);

� vulnerable groups; o minorities; o migrants; o disabled; o other disadvantaged people;

� educational attainment; o primary or lower secondary education; o upper secondary education; o post-secondary education; o tertiary education.

Figure 5.1 shows the breakdown of total participants across Priorities I and II, and in aggregate, for the years 2008 to 201035. Over the period 2008-10, 43.2% of the total number of participants have been male, and 56.8% have been female, according to data reported in the Annual Implementation Reports. Under Priority I the breakdown is 44.3% male and 55.7% female, while under Priority II it is 42.1% male and 57.9% female. It can be seen that the breakdowns have not changed significantly over the years in question (although the proportion of participants under Priority I that were male increased somewhat in 2010, although it remained less than half).

34 These breakdowns are set out in Annex XXIII of the implementing regulation (Regulation 1828 of 2006) 35 2007 data has not been presented as there are discrepancies in the data included in the 2007 AIR


73

FIGURE 5.1: BREAKDOWN OF PARTICIPANTS BY GENDER

Total OP

Priority II

Priority I

0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

200820092010

2008-2010

200820092010

2008-2010

200820092010

2008-2010

Male Female

SOURCE: AIRS 2008-10

Data on the breakdown of participants according to their labour market status is shown in Table 5.1. While the proportion employed over the entire 2008-10 period stands at 27.8%, it declined substantially between 2008 and 2009, particularly under Priority I. The proportion unemployed correspondingly increased both in 2009 and 2010 (when it reached 41.5%), and stands at 31% over the entire 2008-10 period. The proportion in long-term unemployment has also increased, reaching 3% in 2010. The proportions inactive with regard to the labour market stood at 40.3% in 2010, and 41.2% over the period 2008-10, with higher proportions under Priority I than Priority II (as would be expected).

TABLE 5.1: BREAKDOWN OF PARTICIPANTS BY LABOUR MARK ET STATUS

Employed

Unemployed

Long Term

Unemployed Inactive - Total

Inactive - In Education/

Training Priority I 2008 52.0% 16.7% 3.6% 31.3% 5.9% 2009 17.9% 39.7% 3.2% 42.4% 7.8% 2010 10.7% 51.8% 3.2% 37.5% 7.7% 2008-10 27.6% 35.6% 3.3% 36.8% 7.1% Priority II 2008 33.0% 20.6% 0.1% 46.4% 19.7% 2009 27.0% 25.4% 0.6% 47.5% 22.0% 2010 24.6% 32.7% 2.8% 42.7% 16.3% 2008-10 28.0% 26.7% 1.3% 45.3% 19.1% Total 2008 42.8% 18.6% 1.9% 38.6% 12.6% 2009 22.6% 32.3% 1.9% 45.0% 15.1% 2010 18.2% 41.5% 3.0% 40.3% 12.4% 2008-10 27.8% 31.0% 2.3% 41.2% 13.3%

SOURCE: AIRS 2008-10 The proportions of participants categorised as “young people” (i.e. aged 15-24) stands at 25% over the period 2008-10, only having been considerably less than that in 2008 (Figure 5.2). It is also at similar levels under Priorities I and II. Conversely, the proportion categorised as “older workers” (i.e. aged 55-64) stands at 11% over the 2008-10 period. It has also remained quite consistent and is similar under both Priorities.


74

FIGURE 5.2: PROPORTION OF PARTICIPANTS AGED 15-24 A ND 55-64, 2008-10 Aged 15-24 Aged 55-64

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

2008

2009

2010

2008-2010

2008

2009

2010

2008-2010

2008

2009

2010

2008-2010

Pri

ori

ty I

Pri

ori

ty II

OP

0% 4% 8% 12% 16%

2008

2009

2010

2008-2010

2008

2009

2010

2008-2010

2008

2009

2010

2008-2010

Pri

ori

ty I

Pri

ori

ty II

OP


Table 5.2 shows the proportion of participants categorised as coming from within “vulnerable groups”, including minorities, migrants, disabled persons and other disadvantaged people. In aggregate the proportion of such persons stood at 15.8% over the period 2008-10, although it has increased quite significantly each year. The “other disadvantaged people” category represented the largest grouping, followed closely by disabled persons.

TABLE 5.2: PROPORTION OF PARTICIPANTS WITHIN “VULNE RABLE GROUPS”

Minorities Migrants Disabled

Other disadvantaged

people Total Priority I 2008 1.8% 3.8% 5.6% 5.6% 16.8% 2009 1.4% 5.3% 6.4% 7.3% 20.3% 2010 1.2% 4.3% 5.7% 7.2% 18.4% 2008-10 1.5% 4.4% 5.8% 6.7% 18.4% Priority II 2008 0.2% 0.4% 2.4% 2.2% 5.2% 2009 0.3% 1.1% 6.3% 1.4% 9.0% 2010 2.1% 1.8% 7.2% 12.7% 23.8% 2008-10 1.0% 1.1% 5.4% 5.9% 13.4% Total 2008 1.0% 2.1% 4.0% 4.0% 11.2% 2009 0.8% 3.1% 6.3% 4.2% 14.5% 2010 1.7% 3.0% 6.5% 10.2% 21.4% 2008-10 1.2% 2.7% 5.6% 6.3% 15.8%

SOURCE: AIRS 2008-10 Finally, Table 5.3 presents data on the proportion of participants having reached different levels of educational attainment. Among the total 2008-10 number of participants for whom education levels were reported, 57% had reached primary or lower secondary level, 36.2% had reached upper secondary level, 5.5% had reached post-secondary/non tertiary level, and 1.3% had reached tertiary level. Education levels were generally somewhat higher among participants under Priority I, but under both Priorities a substantial proportion of participants had reached only a relatively low level of educational achievement.


75

TABLE 5.3: PROPORTION OF PARTICIPANTS HAVING REACHE D VARIOUS LEVELS OF EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT36

Primary or lower secondary education

Upper secondary education

Post-secondary non-tertiary education

Tertiary education

Priority I 2008 56.0% 36.4% 6.1% 1.5% 2009 49.9% 43.5% 3.9% 2.7% 2010 47.1% 49.9% 3.0% 0.1% 2008-10 50.3% 44.2% 4.1% 1.4% Priority II 2008 69.6% 20.4% 9.4% 0.5% 2009 57.7% 35.2% 6.1% 1.0% 2010 64.2% 28.0% 5.8% 2.0% 2008-10 63.3% 28.6% 6.8% 1.3% Total 2008 63.1% 28.1% 7.8% 1.0% 2009 53.8% 39.4% 5.0% 1.9% 2010 56.1% 38.3% 4.5% 1.1% 2008-10 57.0% 36.2% 5.5% 1.3%


5.2.3 Activity-Specific Comments

Activity-specific comments in relation to each HP are presented in Figure 5.3.

36 Refers to the proportion of the total for whom attainment levels were reported. Levels were not reported for all participants


76

FIGURE 5.3: HORIZONTAL PRINCIPLES – MTE COMMENTS BY ACTIVITY

Social Inclusion

The Activity is focused on enhancing the skills of the unemployed with a view to increasing their employment prospects. Unemployment has been identified as a principal cause of poverty in the past, the reductions in unemployment during the economic boom were seen to contribute greatly to reducing the number of people in relative and persistent poverty and those socially excluded by virtue of this. FÁS reports on a range of actions and capacities it has to further the social inclusion agenda in its work, including numerous initiatives to address the needs of specific (socially excluded) groups, its monitoring efforts to measure their interaction with the agency’s services, and the number of beneficiaries of its services that come from such groups. Amongst this information it is not easy to assess the specific role of the ESF-supported activity is playing in alleviating social exclusion or the proportion of the population of such groups that may be benefiting from it, however it is undoubtedly the case that in enhancing the skills of particularly low-skilled unemployed persons, the funding has a reasonably direct focus on alleviating a major cause of social exclusion.

Gender Equality and Wider Equal Opportunities

While the number of female participants has increased quite substantially as the trainee throughput has grown, as a share of total it fell from 48% in 2009 to 42% in 2010, which FÁS indicates reflects the higher rates of unemployment among males. Equality proofing in FÁS’ Employment Services was mainstreamed in 2007, which encompasses equality involving the removal of institutional barriers that create inequalities, equality of participation, equality of outcomes and equality of situation (actions to accommodate the diversity of needs that exist because of differences between people’s situations, experiences and identity).


Sustainable Development

While there is no reporting on this HP, FÁS confirm that it is progressed through the delivery of a range of courses that include renewable energy, Passive House Building Envelope Construction, rainwater harvesting, micro-electricity generation/installation and alternative farm enterprises. The organisation’s training plan for 2011 indicates that ‘FAS is also running a range of ‘green’ training courses to supplement the skills of craftworkers or those with a higher level diploma or degree in relevant areas such as architectural studies or building engineering services’. These include the range of courses already referred to and courses relating to waste management and recycling, and biological and thermal treatments and radon gas remediation.


77

FIGURE 5.3: HORIZONTAL PRINCIPLES – MTE COMMENTS BY ACTIVITY (CONT)

Social Inclusion

In-company training by definition has a less immediate role to play in addressing social exclusion and poverty than training and up-skilling the unemployed to enhance their future employment prospects. However in this Activity, and in response to falling resources and the economic climate, it has focused its work on training of low-skilled employees and vulnerable workers. In 2010, 64% of trainees supported under this Activity were in the former category, while a further 23% were in the latter.


Gender disaggregated trainee numbers are reported by FÁS, indicating 47% of trainees to end-2010 were female and 53% male. Beyond the focus on low-skilled employees, little other information is provided that would throw light on the extent to which this Activity supports the gender and wider equal opportunities HP.

In-Company Training

Sustainable Development There is no specific evidence regarding this Activity’s support for the sustainable development HP.

Social Inclusion

By its nature, BTEI is targeted at addressing the needs of a key socially excluded group, i.e. young people or adults that have less than upper secondary education. Also, within this group, a high priority is to target individuals and groups that (a) experience particular and acute barriers and (b) are more difficult to engage in the formal learning process. This typically includes groups such as people with a disability, Travellers, homeless people and lone parents. Other statistics available for BTEI on key socially excluded groups in 2010 show that nearly 80% of participants are classified as either unemployed or inactive persons; about 64% of participants have less than upper secondary education on entry; about 37% of participants classify themselves as early school leavers; about 13% of participants classify themselves as persons with a disability; and about 13% of participants classify themselves as being from one parent families.


Data available for 2010 shows that 69% of BTEI participants are female, while 31% are male. BTEI has therefore strongly facilitated further education among women in its target groups. However, it should also be noted that male participation has increased significantly since 2007, when males accounted for just 23% of participants. This is important at a time when male unemployment levels are so high, and it is something that BTEI has actively sought to promote.




78


Social Inclusion There is a high level of awareness of the social inclusion horizontal principles in the HEA and the third-level education sector generally, and these guide implementation of the activity. Access to third-level education for socially-disadvantaged groups is primarily progressed in the OP through the Third Level Access Activity.


While there is an awareness of the needs to promote gender/ and equal opportunities in the HEA, there is still an issue in relation to this Activity regarding gender balance. Here, in contrast to third-level education generally, there is a significant imbalance in the “STEM” disciplines as between males and females, with the former generally outnumbering the latter by a ratio of approximately 2:1. This is a particular issues in the Institutes of Technology where both the total and the additional places are skewed towards males on a ratio of over 80:20. This contrasts with the third-level education sector generally (where for example females accounted for 52% of full or part time enrolments in Universities/Institutes of Technology in 2009/2010 (HEA)).


Sustainable Development There is no explicit consideration of the sustainable development issue in reporting, and this could be explored. For example, a number of the courses being funded are likely to have explicit sustainability-related dimensions.

Social Inclusion The Project is inherently related to social inclusion since it targets persons with disabilities who may have the potential to enter or re-enter the labour market.


Equality for persons with disabilities, in particular equality in terms of economic and employment opportunities, is the overriding aim of the project. In terms of gender balance, participation is roughly equal.




79


Social Inclusion

Adult Literacy is targeted at addressing the needs of a key socially excluded group, i.e. people with low literacy skills. Also, within this group, the activity has provided more intensive literacy tuition for the most socially and economically disadvantaged groups in society through Intensive Tuition in Adult Basic Education (ITABE), a 14 week programme that provides six hours tuition per week rather than the normal two hours per week spread over a longer period. Targeted provision at certain client groups such as men only, women only, family learning, workplace, Travellers, deaf people, Irish speakers and people with dyslexia is also provided. Outreach activities are also undertaken to address specific groups that would not generally avail of tuition. In addition, other statistics available on participation by key socially excluded groups under Adult Literacy in 2010 show that about 59% of participants are female, while 41% are male; over 66% of participants are classified as either unemployed or inactive persons; and nearly 72% of participants have less than upper secondary education.


A high proportion of participants in the Activity are female (59% in 2010). While low levels of literacy is the principal criteria for participation, this is common among women and other groups marginalised by virtue of socio-economic circumstances (e.g. those with lower educational achievements, those Travellers and people with disabilities), and the Activity makes specific provision for such groups in its targeting.

Adult Literacy


Social Inclusion The activity is itself targeted at the social inclusion horizontal principle (in particular at providing access to third level education for students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds or students with disabilities), so this is inherent to it.


Regarding gender, HEA data showed that female participation in SAF is somewhat higher than male participation. In the case of FSD, gender balance is about equal.

Third Level Access

Sustainable Development There is no specific evidence regarding this Activity’s support for the sustainable development HP, however it is likely to feature in the education modules of at least a proportion of students attending third level institutions with financial support under this Activity.


80


Social Inclusion

Both Youthreach and STT are targeted at addressing the needs of key socially excluded groups, i.e. early school leavers and the Traveller community. In addition, data available for 2010, for example, shows that 100% of participants in Youthreach are aged between 15 and 24; 100% of participants in both programmes are classified as either unemployed or inactive persons; and between 84% and 88% of participants in both programmes only have a primary or lower secondary education.


2010 data indicate that 57% of Youthreach participants are male and 43% are female, while just 17% of STT participants are male and 83% are female. In aggregate there is a reasonable gender balance across the Activity therefore, and each programme seeks to facilitate individuals with unique needs that may typically involve more men than women (e.g. lone parents). While male participation in STTCs has traditionally been low, efforts to increase their participation are being made in terms of choices and selection. A primary aim however is to empower participants to fulfil their equal status through achieving equality of education.



Social Inclusion

GYD projects target young people who have come to the attention of the justice agencies and who show a potential or likelihood to participate in offending or anti-social behaviour. Such young people overwhelmingly come from socially-disadvantaged backgrounds, typically with poor family structures, welfare dependency and high levels of unemployment. The projects explicitly seek to divert such young people from criminal behaviour and the HCIOP funding under this Activity provides practical training in IT and personal development to facilitate it.


A pre-disposition towards crime or anti-social behaviour is the predominant criteria by which young people get referred to GYDPs, rather than gender or other characteristics. In 2010, 29% of participants that received support under the Activity were female, which is a realisably high level of involvement given the predominance of males who participate in crime and anti-social activity.

GYD – IT Skills and Personal Development



81


Social Inclusion This Activity’s support for the social inclusion HP is similar to that of the GYD – IT Skills and Personal Development Activity, in that it supports the diversion and personal development, education and civic responsibility of young people from backgrounds that typically suffer one or several forms of social exclusion.


Similarly, this Activity’s promotion of this HP stems from its targeting of the personal development, economic and social progression of young people who are at risk of experiencing inequality or exclusion by virtue of their offending behaviour, itself which often results from socially deprived backgrounds, low levels of education and poor family structures and supports.

GYD – Additional Workers


Social Inclusion

The Activity targets women, and Strand 1 specifically targets women experiencing social disadvantage and outside the labour market, although its original budget and scope was reduced as part of the 2009 OP review. This in part reflected the worsening unemployment situation but more specifically the greater incidence of unemployment among men than among women. According to the 2010 social inclusion report for the Activity, the women who have benefited under the Equality for Women measure include 2,259 unemployed, 1,691 inactive women, 2,176 early school leavers, 1,253 women with qualifications only at secondary education level, 96 Travellers, 527 migrants, 325 women with disabilities and 194 lone parents.


The project explicitly seeks to tackle gender inequality and has no other focus.




82


Social Inclusion

The Activity seeks to support the capacities and capabilities of institutions involved in vocational education and training, labour market programmes and business to embrace equal opportunities policies and practices and to contribute to addressing labour market gaps for groups that are experiencing barriers to participation and employment, including those created by gender inequality and wider inequalities (e.g. the nine grounds covered by equality legislation). It therefore has a distinct focus on forms of social exclusion created by gender and wider forms in inequality, although not one predominantly focused on poverty and income inequality. The work engaged in is likely to progress social inclusion aims through increasing the levels of labour force participation among specific groups that face unequal opportunities for such activity.


As noted, the work funded under this Activity has an exclusive focus on supporting institutional capacities to embrace gender and wider equal opportunities principles and practices, and as such is fully supportive of this HP.

Equality Mainstreaming Initiative


Social Inclusion The EPIC programme targets one specific socially-excluded group – namely migrants who lack the skills, knowledge, language proficiency and experience to fully participate in Irish society and the Irish labour market.


The EPIC programme targets legally-resident EU and non-EU migrants irrespective of gender, and participants that have sufficient skills and English literacy to allow them to participate fully and ultimately benefit from the programme and its pre-employment training and mentoring. It adopts a gender sensitive approach, through for example providing a childcare payment to single parents or those whose spouse or partner is not gainfully employed, and through providing flexible hours of activity to take into account childcare needs. In 2010 62% of participants were female and 38% male.

Social and Employment Integration of Migrants



83

5.2.4 HP Management and Reporting

Templates by which progress in relation to the social inclusion and gender and wider equal opportunities HPs should be reported were prepared by the Gender Equality Unit and the Social Inclusion Units of the DJE and DSP respectively, progress is reported using these templates for all Activities and presented to the Monitoring Committee for discussion at its Spring meeting. In the case of the gender equality, the Gender Equality Unit of DJE assesses the adequacy of the reports, while the Equality Authority does so for the same reports but from the perspective of the wider equality (i.e. non-gender) grounds, while the Social Inclusion Unit of the DSP does so for the social inclusion progress reports. No such template or reporting requirement is in place in relation to the sustainable development HP. Several aspects of this approach are noteworthy: � the quality of reporting in relation to HPs is quite mixed. A number of Activities report in great depth;

others report quite minimally. Moreover the same Activities tend to remain in each category; � where reporting is somewhat minimal, in some cases this seems to reflect a view that the compliance of

the Activity with one or more HPs is obvious, and often its raison d’être, in others it’s a resource issue whereby seeking further data and evidence is beyond the resources of the Activity managers, while in others there is often a feeling of “nobody is seeking it”;

� the inclusion of a “horizontal principles” heading in the template for regular progress reports should be dropped as specific templates for this purpose already exist;

� minimalist reporting does not always reflect minimal impact in this regard. As was shown earlier many Activities contribute substantially towards the HPs, without always reporting this to the fullest extent;

� there is a view amongst some stakeholders that the MA needs to take a stronger role in enforcing higher reporting standards in relation to the HPs;

� while it is probably sensible that reporting on sustainable development take a less formal form than on the other HPs, as was shown earlier it is not the case that the OP simply plays no part and can’t be expected to. A number of Activities provide education and training supports that encompass sustainability principles and concepts and this could be explored and reported on a wider scale than currently takes place.

5.3 ESF Role and Added Value The added value of the ESF co-financing of the HCIOP is evident in a number of respects, including its resourcing, its targeting and its implementation. The general objective of the ESF, as set out in the ESF Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006, is to “contribute to the priorities of the Community as regards strengthening economic and social cohesion by improving employment and job opportunities, encouraging a high level of employment and more and better jobs. It shall do so by supporting Member States’ policies aiming to achieve full employment and quality and productivity at work, promote social inclusion, including the access of disadvantaged people to employment, and reduce national, regional and local employment disparities”. It further states that “the ESF shall support the priorities of the Community as regards the need to reinforce social cohesion, strengthen productivity and competitiveness, and promote economic growth and sustainable development. In so doing, the ESF shall take into account the relevant priorities and objectives of the Community in the fields of education and training, increasing the participation economically inactive people in the labour market, combating social exclusion – especially that of


84

disadvantaged groups such as people with disabilities – and promoting equality between women and men and non-discrimination”37. Training, education, employment preparation and actions promoting social inclusion that are supported under the OP are in all cases contributing to the Community objectives established for the ESF over the 2007-2013 period. Activities supported under Priority I are each contributing directly to enhancing the education, skills and human capital of the current and future workforce in ways that are conducive to producing more and better jobs. Actions supported under Priority II meanwhile are facilitating and driving the activation of a number of socially-excluded groups who, due to various labour market discrepancies, face barriers to their full and normal economic and employment engagement and integration. The resource contribution of the ESF is substantial and of greater national importance than under the previous EU funding round when the Irish exchequer was in a position of unprecedented strength, and the importance of this contribution has become greater than was anticipated at the planning and initiation stages of the HCIOP, given the economic collapse and exchequer deterioration that has happened since. Ireland’s current public finances are experiencing unsustainable deficits, and while the financial contribution of the ESF provides no absolute assurance that activity under the OP can and will be funded as a matter of course, it nevertheless provides a major resource input that is facilitating the scale and breadth of education, training and labour market activation measures which the changed economic circumstances require, especially so under Priority I. Substantially more so than under the previous funding round, ESF co-financing under this OP is ensuring action being taken that simply would or could not be in its absence, or at best could only be at the cost of other resourcing of public policies and programmes of perhaps equal merit. We have also found that ESF co-financing under the OP is driving and ensuring a level of planning, objective and target setting, management, monitoring and reporting discipline that few stakeholders feel would fully exist in its absence within the areas which are being supported, and is bringing an added value to the administration and management of co-financed schemes and measures in this regard. In the case of relatively new actions or those for which this is the first experience of ESF co-financing, these effects are most apparent, however even in areas with a history of ESF support, co-financing is helping to crystallise and focus strategies and approaches, and make any “drift” from established approaches and policies more visible and transparent. In other cases the administrative discipline is ensuring competition for funding where in its absence there may not be (e.g. in relation to third level institutions). A further benefit felt to arise by some stakeholders relates to ensuring a national focus remains on the important principles of gender and wider equality and social inclusion. This benefit arises through the co-financing and substantiation of activities in these areas, that while small in scope have an important educational, exploratory and practical role to play in mainstreaming good practices and policies that otherwise would not get the same focus and attention, whether in other ESF-supported measures or those outside its scope. Balanced against these additional benefits and impacts that ESF supports undoubtedly bring under the HCIOP are the additional duties, responsibilities and administrative obligations that ESF co-financing involves. In this regard our findings are that there is widespread awareness of these obligations and the administrative burdens they present among IBs and bodies implementing co-financed programmes, and similarly there is a view that these requirements have and continue to grow and intensify. In most cases implementing agencies understand and accept the need for such requirements and have the infrastructure in place to meet them, however in a minority of cases there are some concerns about the future cost-effectiveness of having schemes co-financed and requiring intense administrative resourcing, particularly where the funding is relatively small or the administrative “net” is particularly wide in terms of the delivery infrastructure and numbers of parties involved in financial disbursement, management and reporting.

37 Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the European Social Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1784/1999


85

6. Conclusions and Recommendations

6.1 Introduction This Section presents conclusions and recommendations. It firstly presents overall conclusions of the MTE, addressing the ongoing relevance of the OP and its objectives, summarising its performance with regard to meeting its original strategic objectives and targets38, considering the adherence to its horizontal principles, and addressing the lessons arising for ESF co-financing post 2013. Section 6.3 presents high-level recommendations of the MTE. Section 6.4 then presents Activity-specific recommendations.

6.2 Overall MTE Conclusions

6.2.1 OP Relevance

The socio-economic environment in Ireland when the HCIOP was formulated was radically different from the one in which it is now being implemented. The deep economic recession which beset Ireland in 2007/8 has been unprecedented in its duration, depth and effects, with a banking and debt crisis, a building and construction collapse, an exchequer budgeting crisis, and a return of high unemployment and emerging long-term unemployment all now well-established features of the “post-celtic-tiger” Irish economic landscape. The sudden deterioration in economic sentiment quickly impacted employment and the labour market, with the unemployment rate increasing from the 3.5-5% range in which it had benignly fluctuated for more than a decade to higher than 14% within the space of three years. The focus of the HCIOP when originally designed was one balanced between on the one hand upskilling those in employment as a means of underpinning competitiveness and enhancing the human capital base, and on the other of continuing to address barriers to the economic engagement and employment of both unemployed persons and those in socially excluded categories for whom pathways to such progression were known to face particular challenges and impediments. Its revision in 2009 sharply refocused the HCIOP towards the training, upskilling and re-skilling of the growing numbers unemployed, and on their ongoing labour market activation, while maintaining a reasonable emphasis on, and continued role in supporting, labour market access and entry for groups outside it. Efforts to achieve such a refocusing also had to meet the simultaneous challenge of reducing the overall financial scope of the OP and to bring its national public financial parameters to within bounds more realistically achievable in the wider budgetary adjustments taking place. Its 2009 adjustments achieved these parallel objectives, and was a measured and appropriate response to the changing circumstances in which the OP was operating. Despite the scale of the changes that have occurred, the HCIOP has therefore remained relevant and appropriate as a programme providing a framework of targeted interventions aimed at activating and upskilling people in the labour market and assisting access to it for groups outside it.

6.2.2 Achievement of Objectives and Targets

Priority I Targets Two Priority-level targets were established for Priority I, namely the number of persons supported under the Priority (the output indicator) and the number of persons successfully completing accredited programmes (the result indicator). In 2010:

38 The OP’s strategic indicators and targets were not updated as part of the 2009 OP revisions. Targets and indicators for the Labour Market Activation Fund were not included when OP indicators were initially established.


86

� 75% of the (original) 2010 output target for Priority I was achieved; � 77% of the (original) 2010 result target was achieved These overall outcomes under Priority I occurred in circumstances where total co-financed expenditure had reached €778m, or 120% of its revised (2007-2013) target (and 129% of the original expenditure forecast against which the targets were originally established). Overall therefore the outputs and results achieved under Priority I have fallen short of those originally anticipated. Priority I Specific Objectives Three specific objectives were established under Priority 1. The first objective was “to increase the number of employed persons acquiring certified training qualifications and hence their employability and companies’ productivity and competitiveness”. A summary of expenditure, progress and achievements in relation to this specific objective is shown in Table 6.1. (It should be noted that indicators set out in this Section are those in the current version of the OP document, which may differ somewhat from those in AIPs)

TABLE 6.1: SUMMARY OF PROGRESS – PRIORITY I SPECIFI C OBJECTIVE 1

Indicator Relevant Activity

Original Activity Budget

2007-2013 (€m)

Revised Activity Budget

2007-2013 (€m)

Activity Expenditure to end-2010

(€m) 2013 Target

Results Reported to

Date Number of workers trained using CDP funding

In-Company Training

169.0

26.3

27.5

28,000 per annum

31,182, cumulatively by

end 2010 Number of workers receiving certification using CDP funding

In-Company Training

169.0

26.3

27.5

25,200 (90%)

n/a

Number of companies with the Excellence through People National Human Resource Standard

In-Company Training

169.0

26.3

27.5

1,500 per annum

n/a

Funding to support this specific objective was sharply reduced in the 2009 OP revision, and spending to date has exceeded the revised programme budget, although only marginally so. Against this, the number of workers trained has reached just over 31,000 on a cumulative basis thus far, which is a level broadly in keeping with the reduced financial allocation. No reporting has taken place however in relation to the certification of such trainees nor on the number of companies achieving the Excellence Through People national standard. The second specific objective under Priority 1 was “to increase the supply of graduates qualified in key areas such as engineering, science and ICT, in order to address skills shortages in the economy”. A summary of outcomes thus far under this objective is shown in Table 6.2. As with the first specific objective, the funding provision to support this objective was also reduced in the 2009 revisions, from a total of €117m to €55.2m over the course of the OP. Actual spend to end 2010 exceeded the revised total budget by 11%. In this case however the outputs, in terms of additional students enrolled, appear to have been substantially exceeded, despite the sharply reduced budget. Results, in terms of additional graduates are below target levels however (and this has raised questions about the technical comparability of the data on student enrolments)39, while reasonably high numbers of students in such courses also appear to be progressing into employment (although no OP targets were originally established in this regard).

39 In particular, there may be an issue as between “total programme” and “total co-financed” indicators


87

Achievements in relation to this specific objective of Priority I appear to be quite substantial at the mid-point of the Programme, despite the reduced co-funding available to it (and despite indicator data concerns).



Original Activity Budget 2007-

2013 (€m)


2007-2013 (€m)


(€m) 2013 Target Results Reported

to Date Number of additional students enrolled on key courses identified such as ICT, Engineering and Science


117.0

55.2

61.3

1,900 per annum

5,418 in 2010

Number of additional graduates on key courses identified such as ICT, Engineering and Science


117.0

55.2

61.3

1,500 per annum

1,090 in 2010

Number of additional graduates from key courses identified such as ICT, Engineering and Science who go into employment or further education


117.0

55.2

61.3

subject to survey

980 in 2010

The third specific objective under Priority 1 was “to (a) increase the base of adults with upper second level education and/or qualifications at FETAC Levels 3 to 6, unemployed persons (b) to increase the number/base of other job-seekers with the skills they need firstly to gain suitable employment, secondly to be productive at work, and thirdly to progress in the future to different or more advanced work”. Table 6.3 summarises outcomes thus far in relation to indicators relevant to this objective. The first point to note is the lack of relevance of several of the indicators established at Priority level for this specific objective. As the BTEI scheme is part-time, indicators relating to full-time participants are inappropriately included and outside the scope of the OP (full-time courses are provided under the VTOS and PLC schemes which are not co-financed under the HCIOP). Expenditure to end-2010 under the BTEI scheme has amounted to just under €55m, which is 45% greater than the revised OP budget anticipated for this Activity over the entire 2007-13 period (and greater than the original forecast from which the downward revision was made). Output level in 2010 were very close to their implied 2013 (annual) target levels, with just under 28,000 participants. Completion and certification rates in 2010 were significantly below target levels however, as were rates of progression to employment among participants


88




2013 (€m)


2007-2013 (€m)



to Date Number of Full-time participants n/a - - -

35,188 per annum n/a

Number of Part-time places provided BTEI 53.2 38.0 54.9

10,000 places (approx 28,000

participants) per annum

27,959 participants in

2010 Number of Full-time participants gaining certification

n/a

-

-

-

28,000 per annum

n/a

Number of Part-time participants gaining certification

BTEI

53.2

38.0

54.9

17,500 (70%) per

annum 11,893 (42.5%)

in 2010 Number of Full-time participants who progress to further education or work

n/a

-

-

-

28,648 (95%) per

annum n/a

Number of Part-time participants who progress to further education or work

BTEI

53.2

38.0

54.9

19,600 (70%) per

annum 4,806 (17.2%)

in 2010

Priority II Targets Two Priority-level targets were established for Priority II, namely the total number of persons supported (the output indicator), and the total number of persons successfully completing accredited programmes (the result indicator). In 2010: � 128% of the (original) 2010 output target was achieved; and � 94% of the (original) 2010 result target was achieved. Total co-financed expenditure under Priority II had reached €274m by end-2010, which was equivalent to 109% of the revised 2007-13 allocation (and 36% of the original budget). Given that the Priority level targets were set against the original financial provision, clearly these outcomes are substantially beyond expectations at the time the OP was formulated. Priority II Specific Objectives Five specific objectives were established under Priority II. The first objective was “to support persons with a disability to move into employment through educational, training and employment supports”. A decision taken as part of the OP revision in 2009 was to discontinue the co-financing of the disability training activity originally proposed under Priority II. This effectively meant the original targets and indicators for this specific objective were no longer relevant40. The second specific objective was “to provide unqualified school leavers with the knowledge, skills and confidence required to participate fully in society and progress to further education, training and employment and to provide an opportunity for members of the Traveller community and others to engage in a programme of

40 While the OP discontinued its support for a specific Activity focused in training for persons with disabilities (although the work itself proceeded with exchequer funding support outside the HCIOP), other aspects continue to support this target group, including the Disability Activation project and the Third Level Access Activities


89

learning that affirms their cultural identity, acquire the knowledge, skills and confidence to participate fully in society and progress to further education, training and employment”. Table 6.4 summarises outcomes in this regard. OP Activities under Priority II intended to facilitate progress in relation to this objective included those supporting Youthreach, STT, Third Level Access and Garda Youth Diversion Projects. The Youthreach and Travellers Activity reported having 4,083 participants in 2010, some 77% of the annual target for 2013. Its cumulative expenditure to end-2010 amounts to €125m, in excess of its original budget and far in excess of its revised allocation. Its achievements in relation to programme completions and certification are stronger than with regard to participants when compared to 2013 targets, but no reporting of impacts, or employment progression, has taken place against the original indicators (although some information has been reported on alternative indicators). Expenditure under the Third Level Access Activity reached a cumulative €51.7m by end-2010, some 2.5 times the level in the revised 2007-2013 allocation, and almost 50% greater than the original allocation. 2010 achievements for the Student Assistance Fund (which is one of two elements financed under the Activity) are behind 2013 targets in terms of students supported, while no reporting has taken place in relation to results and no impact target specified or reported. Against expenditure of €0.6m (representing two third of the original budget that was not revised), cumulative participation on the GYDPs had reached 83% of the end-programme target, suggesting a relatively high rate of progress. However here as well no results have been reported and no impact indicator or target established is reported on.


90

TABLE 6.4: SUMMARY OF PROGRESS – PRIORITY II SPECIF IC OBJECTIVE 2



2013 (€m)


2007-2013 (€m)



to Date Number of participants on Youthreach and Senior Traveller Training Programmes


117.0

73.4

125.2

5,298 per annum

4,083 in 2010

Number of students supported by the Student Assistance Fund

Third Level Access

34.8

19.0

51.7

10,143 per annum

7,816 in 2010

Number of participants receiving support on Garda Youth Diversion Projects

GYD - IT Skills and Personal Development

0.9

0.9

0.6

1,600 cumulatively

by 2013 1,333 cumulatively

by 2010 Number of participants on Youthreach and Senior Traveller Training Programmes successfully completing programme or achieving certification


117.0

73.4

125.2

3,221 per annum

2,900 in 2010

Number of students supported by the Student Assistance Fund successfully completing academic year

Third Level Access

34.8

19.0

51.7

6,577 per annum

no results reported

Number of participants receiving support on Garda Youth Diversion Projects successfully completing training


0.9

0.9

0.6

640 cumulatively

by 2013

no results reported

Number of participants on Youthreach and Senior Traveller Training Programmes progressing to further education/training or employment


117.0

73.4

125.2

3,520 per annum

no results reported

Proportion of new entrants in full time higher education from social groups, non-manual workers and unskilled manual workers

Third Level Access

34.8

19.0

51.7

Unspecified

unspecified and unreported

Garda Youth Diversion Impact Study to be commenced in 2007 and followed up 18 months from survey date to measure impact


0.9

0.9

0.6

Baseline + 10%

unspecified and unreported

The third specific objective under Priority II was “to provide increased access to literacy, numeracy and language tuition for adults whose skills are inadequate for participation in modern society and to increase capacity in the adult literacy service”. Outcomes and achievements in relation to indicators established for this objective are shown in Table 6.5.


91




2013 (€m)


2007-2013 (€m)


(€m) Original

2013 Target Results Reported

to Date Number of participants in Adult Literacy Training Programmes

Adult Literacy

96.7

96.7

82.6

42,000 per annum

54,741 in 2010

Number of participants on Adult Literacy Training Programmes successfully completing programmes or achieving certification

Adult Literacy

96.7

96.7

82.6

11,340 per annum

9,649 in 2010

Number of participants who have progressed to other further training and education

Adult Literacy

96.7

96.7

82.6

16,800 per annum

16,601 in 2010

Spending under the Adult Literacy Activity had reached €82.6m by end-2010, equivalent to 85% of the allocation (the original allocation was not altered). Participant numbers in 2009 exceeded the annual target level set for 2013, while result and impact targets have also either exceeded or closely matched 2013 targets. The fourth specific objective under Priority II was to “encourage greater female participation in the workforce and support an equality mainstreaming approach across all labour market programme providers that ensures that labour market programme design and delivery accommodates diversity and enhances access, participation and outcomes for groups experiencing labour market inequality across the nine grounds covered by equality legislation”. Outcome and achievements are shown in Table 6.6. OP budgets supporting the two Activities supporting this objective were significantly reduced as part of the 2009 OP revision. The Positive Actions to Promote Gender Equality Activity had its allocation reduced from €31.8m to €11.8m, and had spent just €2.6m by end-2010, while the Equality Mainstreaming Approach Activity had its allocation reduced from €7m to €4m, and had spent just €1.8m. The number of consultancies delivered to enable employers to adopt equality policies had reached 282 cumulatively by end-2010, compared to a 2013 target of 100 per annum, with the same rate of progress arising in relation to equality policies/training actions developed by employers. This is a reasonable level of progress given the lower levels of budget and even lower levels of spend under the Equality Mainstreaming Activity than anticipated at the outset. The number of courses developed under the Positive Actions Activity has substantially exceeded target levels, although participant numbers are broadly in line with original expectations (with the average size of courses much smaller than originally anticipated). Impact targets and indicators have not been clearly established or reported for these Activities.


92




2013 (€m)


2007-2013 (€m)



to Date Number of consultancies delivered to enable employers to develop equality policies and strategies

Equality Mainstreaming

Approach

7.0

4.0

1.8

100 per annum (AIP specified 60)

38 in 2010, 282 cumulatively by

end 2010

Number of Full- (part-) time courses developed under Positive Action Programmes for women

Positive

Actions to Promote Gender Equality

31.8

11.8

2.6

5 (20) per annum (AIP specifies 10

(20))

193 cumulatively by end 2010

Number of participants under Positive Action Programmes for women

Positive

Actions to Promote Gender Equality

31.8

11.8

2.6

1,000 per annum

4,838 cumulatively by end 2010

Number of equality policies/equality and diversity training actions developed by employers

Equality Mainstreaming

Approach

7.0

4.0

1.8

100 per annum (AIP specified 60)

38 in 2010, 282 cumulatively by

end 2010

Number of participants under Positive Action Programmes taking up employment, progressing in the labour market or taking decision making roles as appropriate


31.8

11.8

2.6

100 per annum

different impact targets specified in

AIP, and no results reported

Satisfaction rates for groups experiencing inequality in education/training, labour market programmes and employment

Not Specified

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Finally, the fifth specific objective under Priority II was “to implement a series of initiatives aimed at increasing the employability and economic independence for the target group (legally-resident migrants) through a linked comprehensive employment program embracing all stages of preparation for employment.”. Outcomes and achievements in this regard are shown in Table 6.7. While the €8.8m budget for this element was not revised downward, spending has been substantially lower than anticipated (just €1.3m spent by end-2010). Achievements relative to original targets and expectations have however been very strong (although the interpretation of indicators has not been perfect). While a high number of individuals are reported to have “participated” relative to targets, in effect these numbers represent referrals rather than participants. The numbers of participants “completing” the training and mentoring programme nevertheless are high relative to the original targets, despite the spend being so much lower. Progressions rates into employment are reported in relation to this specific objective, and are substantially greater than anticipated at the outset, both in absolute terms and relative to the programme throughput.


93




2013 (€m)


2007-2013 (€m)



to Date

Number of individuals participating in preparation for employment programme

Social and Employment Integration of

Migrants

8.8

8.8

1.3

300 per annum

1,596 cumulatively by end 2010

Number of participants who complete specific training and/or individualised mentoring and are considered ready to enter the employment market

Social and Employment Integration of

Migrants

8.8

8.8

1.3

210 per annum


Number of participants gaining employment

Social and

Employment Integration of

Migrants

8.8

8.8

1.3

100 per annum


6.2.3 Horizontal Principles

The findings with regard to horizontal principles are broadly positive. Data regarding people benefiting from OP supports show relatively high proportions who are unemployed, have relatively low levels of educational achievement and come from “vulnerable” groups such as migrants, minorities, disabled or other disadvantaged categories, and both young and old age groupings, all of which typically suffer greater levels of social exclusion and inequality than the population as a whole. Similarly, a greater proportion of people benefiting have been women than men each year the OP has operated. The re-profiling of OP expenditure in 2009 is likely to have increased its impact in regard to alleviating poverty and social inclusion, in that it turned its focus from one largely on the skills of the employed workforce to one much more aligned to the ongoing education and training of those unemployed, who have traditionally suffered substantially greater levels of absolute and relative poverty than those in work in the past. In practically all cases, OP co-financed Activities have either a direct or a strong but indirect role in supporting social inclusion and/or gender and wider equality agendas, and for many it is their raison d’être, or ultimate focus in terms of target groups for their work. The sustainable development HP is less emphatically supported, and the means by which the OP could do so less obvious given the nature of the interventions it co-finances. However there are activities supported that to some degree progress the sustainable development agenda, such as a number of training courses provided under the Skills Training for Unemployed Activity, aspects of courses or teaching supported under the Undergraduate Skills Activity, and specific courses funded under the Labour Market Activation Fund. It is not the case therefore that the OP is playing no role in supporting the sustainable development HP, although there is perhaps a lack of awareness of and reporting on the extent to which it is. The systems and procedures under which reporting on HPs is undertaken are reasonably strong in principle, however there is scope to improve the quality, consistency and timeliness of reporting on the part of some bodies implementing Activities. This issue is returned to in our recommendations.


94

6.2.4 Lessons for Post-2013

The economic context for planning education, training and labour market activation policies and programmes has changed utterly from that in which both the current and predecessor ESF-supported national OPs were formulated. Unemployment has increased significantly and long-term unemployment is becoming an increasing sub-component within the numbers out of work as the recession continues and economic prospects remain moribund. There are few signs of a return to meaningful economic growth over the next number of years, and a likelihood that any substantial rebound in employment demand will lag behind the economic upturn that must precede it. In its recent review of labour market programmes, Forfás summarises the new challenges regarding labour market policy and programming up to 2015 as follows41: � raising the skill levels of the labour force (both employed and unemployed) to improve employability and

help maintain and secure employment and in line with skill requirements required to underpin enterprise and economic development;

� match the skills of the unemployed with those relevant to the needs of enterprises arising through replacement needs, start ups and expansions;

� provide work experience and learning opportunities for young people leaving the education system who become unemployed;

� facilitate improved access to training, education and employment for those most negatively affected by unemployment, and minimise growth in long-term unemployment through active measures of progression into education and training opportunities for people out of employment for significant periods; and

� minimise labour market engagement disincentives that may arise in the interaction between the social welfare system and the paid workforce.

Others include the challenge of activation in a context of limited net employment opportunities, and the need to re-skill already skilled workers in and outside the workforce. As well as operating in a national budgetary context likely to be substantially more constrained, labour market, education and employment policies in Ireland will need to increasingly reflect these emerging priorities and transition speedily from the model it employed during the period of nearly full employment that has abruptly ended. EU policy is likely to continue to place emphasis on minimising labour market rigidities and maximising flexibility to ensure employment remains accessible to the greatest possible numbers and to all groups, while at the same time providing active supports to those unemployed and supporting their upskilling, re-skilling and their ongoing labour market participation and ultimate re-employment. Social inclusion and anti-poverty objectives are likely to continue to be actively pursued through measures which seek in the first instance to enhance employment and reduce labour market inactivity. Ireland is and will remain one of the more developed EU Member States and as such cannot expect to see ESF financial contributions increase greatly. This means the role the ESF can and should play will need to be refined, and a new role defined more appropriate to the national economic, policy and institutional circumstances it can support and influence. The HCIOP represents a much reduced framework within which the ESF is channelled than its predecessor, and any successor to it should seek to comprise measures that are new, innovative, highly flexible or exploratory interventions that seek to help understand and throw light on the most contemporary of labour market challenges and intervention models that could influence mainstream programmes and heighten their effectiveness, impact and investment return.

41 Review of Labour Market Programmes, Forfás, March 2010


95

In this context the likely criteria by which the post-2013 choice of policies and programmes appropriate for ESF support could be appropriately made may include: � responsiveness to most urgent policy needs; � innovative and exploratory nature; � scope to improve and influence mainstream policy; � cost, cost-effectiveness and value for money; � flexibility to respond to changing needs; � scope to involve competitive features; � ability to inform appropriate institutional and delivery models; � capacity for efficient and effective ESF financial compliance; � co-financed projects/activity should be co-terminus with projects as seen by the IB and implementing

body; � projects should have a finite life within the period of the OP; and � projects should have a clear manager with no, or limited, other responsibilities.

6.3 Recommendations – OP Level Reporting � Efforts should be made to improve the quality, clarity, value added and timeliness of progress reporting; � IBs should ensure all targets and indicators are established only in relation to co-financed (rather than

wider programmatic) expenditure; � Some reporting on sustainable development where appropriate should be introduced where

appropriate; � Mechanisms to ensure progress reporting is quality assured should be established; � All AIPs should be revised in light of OP financial revisions and likely exchequer support for Activities

over the remainder of Programme; Targets and Indicators � IBs should put some expertise in relation to targets and indicators in place and at the disposal of

Activity managers , and ensure responsibilities are clearly established and understood; Transnational Support � Efforts to identify appropriate activity to be funded under the “Transnational” heading should be

extended, and any ESF funding unlikely to be used should be re-allocated; Financial Plan � IBs should confirm to the MA anticipated expenditure levels across Priorities, Activities and Regions

over period to financial close of OP, in light of eligible, reported and claimed expenditure thus far. Any re-balancing of this profile to bring it into line with national and regional ESF allocations should be established at an early date and IBs and Activity managers informed of this, so as to facilitate planning and the revision of targets and indicators as appropriate.


96

6.4 Recommendations – Activity Level

6.4.1 Skills Training for the Unemployed

General � Given the large scale and range of training provision within this Activity the AIP performance indicators

are quite minimalist and should be expanded. Output indicators should distinguish between the number of persons in full-time programmes and the numbers in part-time or short-duration programmes. The output indicators should also indicate the target numbers to be trained in specific skills courses (SST), and the target for other foundation training programme;

� The result indicators should indicate the percentage as well as the numbers gaining certification; � There should be separate result indicators for the percentage gaining certification from SST

programmes and from foundation-level programmes; � Impact indicators should be reported separately for the percentage of persons trained in employment at

time of follow-up survey and the numbers in further education/training at the time of follow-up; � Include new lines of spending within the activity to maximise ESF expenditure for the remainder of the

OP, and to achieve targets, particularly in the BMW region. � Increase the focus on market-led skills training for longer-term unemployed and reduce the extent of

short-course provision, to assure improved training impact and achievement of progression targets; � Undertake further monitoring and evaluation of progression rates from the range of programmes within

the Activity; and to devise plans for how progression into further training or education can be facilitated, within the context of the current labour market;

� Report in Progress Reports on the extent/balance of full-time/longer duration training courses and short duration courses (evening/part-time);

� Further pilot the FAS Social Inclusion training Model with a labour market marginalised group (e.g. people with a disability, early school leavers or members of the travelling community).

Revised Indicators and Targets FÁS has indicated that it anticipates expenditure under this Activity to amount to €519m over the period 2013-2015. On this basis we assume expenditure in 2013 will be €173m, and propose the following 2013 annual targets: � 25,000 persons to be trained; � 90% to gain accreditation; and � 70% to be in employment or further education at the time of the follow up-survey.

6.4.2 In-Company Training General � Revise AIP in line with reduced budget; and fully report on performance indicators achieved 2007-2011; � Continue to wind-down the Activity, and discontinue ESF claim for this activity in line with AIP

expenditure plan. Revised Indicators and Targets

FÁS has indicated that no expenditure is anticipated under this Activity in 2011 or any subsequent

year. No revised 2013 targets are therefore proposed.


97

6.4.3 Back to Education Initiative

General � The progress of participants up to 18 months following their participation should be tracked and

monitored, with a sample-based approach suggested in order to minimise resource implications; � Some indicators for BTEI (e.g. participants v. places) should be more clearly specified. This could be

addressed by including an explanatory footnote to explain that a “place” refers to a volume of tuition rather than a participant, with some indication of how many participants are provided by an average “place”. For example, 10,000 places is described as approximately 28,000 participants in the revised OP document.

� Indicators that are not relevant (e.g. full-time participants) should be removed. Revised Indicators and Targets Given that the DES indicates that anticipated expenditure under this activity will be about €14m per annum between 2011 and 2013, i.e. broadly similar to the annual spend between 2007 and 2010, it is recommended that the annual output target for 2013 be maintained at the 2010 level of 10,000 places (or roughly 28,000 participants). Given progress to date, and the current labour market environment, the 2013 target for the proportion of participants who gain certification should be reduced to 60%, while the target for proportion of participants who progress to further education or employment should be reduced to 30%. Also, in terms of the number of participants progressing to further education and training, indicators should differentiate between participants who continue courses and awards within BTEI and those who proceed to external progression.

6.4.4 Undergraduate Skills

General � Introduce some reporting on ways in which the Activity is supporting the sustainable development HP; � Provide more clarity around the eligible disciplines; � Integrate financial and non-financial reporting better, and add value in progress reports; � Make better use of HEA statistical resources, including follow-up survey to identify actual beneficiaries; � More risk analysis of education projections. Revised Indicators and Targets The original baseline and targets for physical indicators needs to be re-examined as firms are too low and the financial allocation has been increased (recommendation already implemented by IB)

6.4.5 Labour Market Activation Fund

General � Proceed with comprehensive evaluation of the LMAF without delay, and include the evaluation of its

delivery model, cost effectiveness and training outcomes and impacts as part of the review. Revised Indicators and Targets No variation to the targets and indicators set out in the draft AIP for this Activity are proposed, pending the outcome of its independent evaluation.


98

6.4.6 Disability Activation Project

General � The MA and IB should take a decision on whether and how the Activity is to proceed, taking account of

the proposals already made in this regard by the DAP Project Manager in March 201142. These are summarised in Section 4.4.1 above;

� This decision needs to take account of DSP’s own overall assessment of the DAP to date43, and its proposal that a “call for proposals” approach (implemented by Pobal) replace the present approach;

� the wider altered structure and role of the DSP, especially regarding case-management generally and how the project’s continuation will inform this, also need to be taken fully into account in the revised AIP;

� whether a decision (as envisaged) to select Pobal as a new implementing agency can be taken without a competitive selection process needs to be considered by the MA and IB in the context of VFM generally, and of Department of Finance and EU procurement procedures. The latter are particularly significant given the likely scale of any such outsourcing (€7m), and the presence of ESF co-financing.

Revised Indicators and Targets � In the light of the low level of expenditure up to end 2010, the DAP expenditure to end 2013 needs to be

reprofiled. This is already reflected in revised financial projections for the Activity by DSP as IB; � in the light of experience to end 2010, the result and impact indicators have been revised by DSP. The

result indicators have been revised downwards from 85 to 20% progress rate, and impact indicators upward from 13 to 30% retention in economic activity. These revisions are appropriate given experience to date;

� revisions do, however, involve a large drop in the absolute number of participants at result and impact stage. This in turn involves a big rise in the implicit unit costs of achieving the results and impacts (to €28,000 and €93,000 respectively). Coupled with the fact that the DAP also involves non-cofinanced costs not included in the OP, the measured VFM of the Project needs to be considered by DSP;

� following on the above, and on the proposed new approach to delivery, the fundamental objectives of the Project and their measurement should be reconsidered as part of the new roll-out. In particular, if its primary aim is piloting approaches rather than merely meeting immediate beneficiary needs, alternative approaches to capturing this in the indicator system need to be examined.

6.4.7 Adult Literacy

General � More consistent information reporting should be provided in progress reports to gauge progress against

targets for (a) the number of participants successfully completing the programme or achieving certification and (b) the number of participants who have progressed to further training and education.

Revised Indicators and Targets Given that the DES indicates that anticipated expenditure under this activity will be about €18.5m per annum between 2011 and 2013, it is recommended that the annual output target for 2013 be maintained at the actual 2010 output level of about 55,000 participants. The 2013 target for the number of participants successfully completing the programme or achieving certification should be reinstated at the original level of 11,340, as listed in the OP priority indicators.

42 Memorandum to Managing Authority and Certifying Authority from the Disability Activation project, Employment Support Services, DSP, March 2011 43 Disability Activation Project, Interim Report, DSP, 2010


99

Finally, the 2013 target for the number of participants who have progressed to further education and training should be increased to 22,000, or 40% of the revised output target of 55,00044.

6.4.8 Third Level Access

General � Provide better, more added-value progress reporting; � Better tracking of the progress/impact on participants is needed; � More finely-grained evaluation of the differential impact of the Funds, as distinct from overall measures

in favour of the target groups; � There should be more added value commentary on performance indicators in Progress Reports; � Acknowledge ESF funding in NAO documentation, and publicly. Revised Indicators and Targets Given that DES anticipates continued expenditure under the OP in 2011, 2012 and 2013, physical targets will need to be adjusted upwards. Based on the unit cost analysis in the text Table 4.23 (€815 per student) and the projected 2013 expenditure of (€8.9mn) the 2013 output target should be €10,920 (both Funds). The AIP already has a 2013 output target of €15,143. However, since co-financed expenditure was originally forecast for that year the basis of this is unclear. New result and impact targets can be derived using progression rates being achieved to date.

6.4.9 Youthreach and Travellers

General � Targets should also be provided at a regional level (BMW Region and S&E Region) in order to better

monitor the outcomes arising from co-financed expenditure. � Given the phasing out of the STT programme by the middle of 2012, it will be important to ensure that

indicator systems for other programmes, where Traveller training will be mainstreamed, are able to pick up Traveller participation and progress.

Revised Indicators and Targets Given that the DES indicates that anticipated expenditure under Youthreach will be about €20m per annum by 2013, it is recommended that the annual output target for 2013 be lowered to about 3,600 participants nationally (including approximately 1,100 participants in the BMW Region and 2,500 participants in the S+E Region. The 2013 target for the percentage of Youthreach participants that successfully achieve certification should be increased to 75%. A new 2013 target should be introduced for the percentage of participants that successfully complete the programme, which should be set at 30%. The impact indicator for the Youthreach programme should also be formally revised to record the percentage of participants who have completed the programme and progressed to other further education or employment, and the 2013 target should be set at about 70%. Finally, given that the STT programme is to be phased out by the middle of 2012, all targets for this programme in 2013 are no longer relevant. However, as noted above, indicators for Traveller participation and progress will need to be developed for other programmes where Traveller training will be mainstreamed.

44 The original targets for 2013 were for 16,800 participants (i.e. 40%) to progress to further education and training out of a total number of participants of 42,000.


100

6.4.10 Garda Youth Diversion – IT Skills and Person al Development

General � Further qualitative and quantitative reporting on the GYDPs and these training supports within them

should be provided to the Monitoring Committee to throw light on the additional role and effects of the ESF-supported interventions;

� The impact and effectiveness of training should be recorded and monitored. Revised Indicators and Targets On the basis of the Intermediate Body’s reported level of anticipated expenditure under this Activity over the period to 2013, no change should be made to the existing 2013 cumulative target for the number of participants receiving support under the GYD projects. Appropriate result and impact indicators and 2013 targets should be established at the earliest opportunity.

6.4.11 Garda Youth Diversion – Additional Workers

General � Methods to capture the net additional effects of the additional workers should continually be sought,

refined, and reported on; � Reporting should seek to more comprehensively inform readers regarding the GDPS themselves, the

nature and form they take, the role played by additional workers and the evidence regarding outcomes and impacts.

Revised Indicators and Targets Based on the Intermediate Body’s reported level of anticipated expenditure under this Activity over the period to 2013, no change is proposed to the 2013 output target (100 additional workers appointed), however for clarity the number reported should be the number of positions in place rather than the number of different individuals appointed to what is a fixed number of paid positions. We also urge the IYJS to establish an appropriate result and impact indicator, and associated 2013 target, based on its recent efforts to have projects isolate and report on the specific value added of the additional workers in place for the young people the projects support.

6.4.12 Positive Actions to Promote Gender Equality

General � Amend the AIP to reflect the revised budget; � Continue to prioritise focus and support on development and implementation of projects within Strand

One (Access to Employment) and Strand Two (Female Entrepreneurship) to ensure maximum draw-down of ESF;

� Review the scope and budget for Projects within Strand One to maximise their effectiveness and provide resources to facilitate increased progression opportunities into mainstream education and training (e.g. a smaller number of projects of increased duration; more intensive supports; work-experience placement and development of individual progression plans);

� Endeavour to increase the scale of activity in BMW regions, particularly for Entrepreneurship activity (Strand 2).

Revised Indicators and Targets The following 2013 targets are proposed under this Activity: � The number of part time courses aimed at labour market activation delivered under the Equality for

Women Measure: 175; � The number of participants in part time courses aimed at labour market activation delivered under the

Equality for Women Measure: 8,000;


101

� The number of women availing of in service development training under the Equality for Women Measure: 100;

� The number of women availing of training for entrepreneurship under the Equality for Women Measure: 200;

� The number of participants under Positive Action Programmes taking up employment or advancing to further education: 2,000;

� The number of participants who availed Of entrepreneurship development who have moved to early stage entrepreneurship: 75;

� The number of participants in labour market activation course who were still in employment or further education a year later: 150;

� The number of participants in in-service development training who have advanced their careers within a year: 75;

� The numbers of participants in entrepreneurship development who are still engaged after a year: 35.

6.4.13 Equality Mainstreaming Approach

General � Continue to place emphasis on a ‘sectoral’ approach to working with enterprises, within Strand B -

Support to Enterprises; Strand B to account for almost half of future budget expenditure, with the remainder divided amongst Strands A, C and D

� Ensure further activity takes place in the BMW Region; � Devise a follow-up survey approach, to monitor achievement of impact targets, and review

effectiveness of the activity. Revised Indicators and Targets The Intermediate Body for this Activity has indicated that no expenditure is anticipated in the years 2012 and 2013. No new annual targets for 2013 are therefore proposed.

6.4.14 Social and Employment Integration of Migrant s

General � Agree on remaining ESF allocation to Activity in light of progress thus far and likely scale of national

funding; � Consider undertaking general evaluation of EPIC in light of its high employment progression rates, its

employer linkages and its relatively cost-effective delivery model, to learn lessons for other initiatives Revised Indicators and Targets Based on the Intermediate Body’s reported levels of anticipated expenditure under this Activity over the remaining years of the Programme, the following revised targets and indicators for 2013 are proposed: � The number of individuals referred to the EPIC programme: 450; � The number of individuals assessed for the EPIC programme: 320; � The number of individuals that begin the EPIC programme: 200; � The number of individuals that complete the EPIC programme: 190; � The number of individuals that progress to employment: 80; � The number of individuals that progress to further education or training: 80; � The number of individuals that progress to other activity such as voluntary work or internships: 30.

HUMAN CAPITAL INVESTMENT OP (2007-13) MID-TERM EVALUATION – FINAL REPORT

Annexes


Annex 1 Socio-Economic Trends – Additional Tables

TABLE A1.1: POPULATION ESTIMATES (MID-APRIL) BY REGION AND AGE, 2000 AND 2006 TO

2010 (000)

2000 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

BMW 0-14 228 241 246 253 259 265

15-24 161 168 168 164 158 148

25-34 130 172 182 187 190 188

35-64 353 416 429 441 452 459

65+ 128 135 137 141 145 145

Total 1,000 1,133 1,161 1,185 1,204 1,205

S&E 0-14 600 624 638 660 678 694

15-24 480 470 466 454 425 401

25-34 437 551 582 597 595 583

35-64 976 1128 1159 1,186 1,207 1,224

65+ 297 328 333 341 350 364

Total 2,790 3,100 3,178 3,237 3,256 3,266

State 0-14 828 865 884 912 938 959

15-24 641 638 634 618 583 549

25-34 567 723 763 784 785 770

35-64 1,329 1,544 1,588 1,627 1,659 1,683

65+ 425 462 471 482 495 510

Total 3,790 4,233 4,339 4,422 4,460 4,471


TABLE A1.2: POPULATION CHANGES BEFORE AND AFTER THE ECONOMIC PEAK.

Change 2006-2008 Change 2008-10

(000) % (000) %

BMW 0-14 11 4.6 12 4.8

15-24 -4 -2.6 -16 -9.6

25-34 15 8.6 1 0.4

35-64 25 6.0 18 4.0

65+ 6 4.4 4 3.1

Total 52 4.6 19 1.6

S&E 0-14 36 5.8 35 5.3

15-24 -16 -3.4 -53 -11.7

25-34 46 8.3 -14 -2.3

35-64 58 5.1 38 3.2

65+ 13 4.1 23 6.9

Total 137 4.4 29 0.9

State 0-14 47 5.5 47 5.1

15-24 -21 -3.2 -69 -11.2

25-34 61 8.4 -13 -1.7

35-64 83 5.4 56 3.4

65+ 19 4.2 28 5.8

Total 189 4.5 48 1.1


TABLE A1.3: MAIN LABOUR FORCE INDICATORS BY GENDER Q4 2006 TO Q4 2010

Quarter

Labour Force (000)

Employment (000)

Unemployment (000)

Annual Employment

Change Unemployment

Rate

Labour Force Participation

Rate (%) Employment Rate (15-64)

Males

Q406 1,249 1,195 54 4.3 73.4 77.8

Q407 1,279 1,214 65 18 5.1 73.3 77.0

Q408 1,261 1,143 117 -70 9.3 72.2 72.6

Q409 1,205 1,016 189 -127 15.7 69.5 65.3

Q410 1,176 973 204 -43 17.3 68.3 63.1

Females

Q406 915 882 34 3.7 53.1 59.7

Q407 961 925 36 44 3.8 54.4 60.8

Q408 964 911 53 -14 5.5 53.9 59.3

Q409 950 872 78 -40 8.3 53.2 57.0

Q410 946 850 96 -21 10.1 52.9 55.7

Persons

Q406 2,165 2,077 88 4.0 63.2 68.9

Q407 2,240 2,139 101 62 4.5 63.8 68.9

Q408 2,224 2,055 170 -84 7.6 62.9 66.0

Q409 2,155 1,888 267 -167 12.4 61.2 61.1

Q410 2,122 1,823 299 -65 14.1 60.4 59.4


TABLE A1.4: MAIN LABOUR FORCE INDICATORS BY REGION, Q4 2006 TO Q4 2010.

Region Labour Force

Employment (000)

Unemployment (000)

Annual Employment

Change Unemployment

Rate (%)

Labour Force Participation

Rate (%) Employment

Rate (%)

BMW

Q406 556 533 23 4.1 61.3 67.9

Q407 582 553 29 20 4.9 62.3 68.3

Q408 580 528 52 -25 9.0 61.4 64.8

Q409 556 483 74 -45 13.2 58.6 59.1

Q410 542 464 78 -18 14.4 57.7 57.1

S&E

Q406 1,609 1,544 65 4.0 63.9 69.3

Q407 1,658 1,586 72 42 4.4 64.3 69.1

Q408 1,644 1,527 117 -59 7.1 63.5 66.4

Q409 1,599 1,405 194 -122 12.1 62.2 61.8

Q410 1,580 1,359 221 -46 14.0 61.4 60.2

State

Q406 2,165 2,077 88 4.0 63.2 68.9

Q407 2,240 2,139 101 62 4.5 63.8 68.9

Q408 2,224 2,055 170 -84 7.6 62.9 66.0

Q409 2,155 1,888 267 -167 12.4 61.2 61.1

Q410 2,122 1,823 299 -65 14.1 60.4 59.4

TABLE A1.5: POPULATION AND LABOUR FORCE AGED 15+ BY NATIO NALITY GROUP , Q4 07 AND Q4 10.

Employed (000)

Unemployed (000)

Labour Force (000)

Inactive (000)

Population 15+ (000)

Unemployment Rate (%)

Labour Force

Participation Rate (%)

Q410

Irish 1,603 249 1,853 1,276 3,129 13.5 59.2

Non Irish 220 50 270 114 383 18.4 70.3

Total 1,823 299 2,122 1,390 3,512 14.1 60.4

Q407

Irish 1,804 81 1,885 1,154 3,039 4.3 62.0

Non Irish 335 20 355 113 468 5.6 75.8

Total 2,139 101 2,240 1,267 3,507 4.5 63.9

Change 07/10

Irish -201 168 -33 123 90

Non Irish -115 30 -85 0 -85

Total -316 198 -118 123 5


TABLE A1.6: EMPLOYMENT BY OCCUPATION, Q4 2006 TO Q4 2010 (000) Change from Q407 Peak

to Q410

Q406

Q407

Q408

Q409

Q410

(000) %

Males


Professionals 123 121 129 126 118 -3 -2.6

Associate profs 74 80 81 83 80 1 0.6

Clerical 60 62 60 60 58 -4 -6.0

Craft 284 287 250 181 162 -125 -43.6


Sales 66 74 72 66 64 -10 -13.6


Other 137 131 104 84 87 -45 -34.0

Total 1,195 1,214 1,143 1,016 973 -241 -19.8

Females


Professionals 122 120 130 127 133 12 10.3

Associate profs 106 116 119 112 110 -6 -5.3

Clerical 187 193 189 183 170 -23 -11.8

Craft 11 13 12 9 9 -4 -28.9


Sales 113 117 111 102 99 -19 -15.9


Other 74 80 67 62 61 -18 -23.0

Total 882 925 911 872 850 -75 -8.1

Persons


Farmers etc 74.5 75.5 - - 52.8 -22.7 -30.1

Other Managers 234.1 243.7 - - 250.1 6.4 2.6

Professionals 245 241 258 252 251 9 3.9

Associate profs 180 195 200 195 190 -6 -2.9

Clerical 247 255 249 243 228 -26 -10.4

Craft 296 300 262 191 171 -129 -43.0


Sales 179 191 183 168 162 -29 -15.0


Other 211 211 170 146 148 -63 -29.9

Total 2,077 2,139 2,055 1,888 1,823 -316 -14.8


TABLE A1.7: EMPLOYMENT Q406 TO Q410 BY OCCUPATION A ND EDUCATIONAL LEVEL, PERSONS AGED 15-64 YEARS (000)

Occupation Educational Level Q406 Q407

Q410

Farmers Lower Sec or below 42 40 26

Higher Sec, PLC 26 29 21

3rd level non degree 5 5 3

3rd level degree or above 3 2 3

Total 75 76 53 Managers Lower Sec or below 28 27 21




Total 215 221 230 Professionals Lower Sec or below 12 12 8




Total 419 429 433 Clerical Lower Sec or below 29 29 22




Total 245 252 226 Craft Lower Sec or below 88 86 39




Total 293 298 169 Operatives Lower Sec or below 81 84 49




Total 172 175 133 Services Lower Sec or below 107 110 76 Higher Sec, PLC 214 221 202 3rd level non degree 49 55 52 3rd level degree or above 41 47 60 Total 410 433 390 Other Lower Sec or below 97 90 60 Higher Sec, PLC 92 94 70 3rd level non degree 8 11 7 3rd level degree or above 11 14 9 Total 208 208 145 Total Lower Sec or below 485 478 301 Higher Sec, PLC 867 873 711 3rd level non degree 230 244 234 3rd level degree or above 454 497 533 Total 2,036 2,092 1,779


TABLE A1.8: EMPLOYMENT Q406 TO Q410. EDUCATIONAL SHARES WITHIN OCCUPATIONS.

PERSONS AGED 15-64 YEARS (%)

Occupation Educational Level Q406 Q407 Q410

Farmers Lower Sec or below 55.7 53.5 49.2

Higher Sec, PLC 34.8 37.9 40.2



Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

Managers Lower Sec or below 13.2 12.3 8.9




Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

Professionals Lower Sec or below 3.0 2.9 1.9




Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

Clerical Lower Sec or below 12.0 11.3 9.7




Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

Craft Lower Sec or below 30.1 28.7 23.0




Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

Operatives Lower Sec or below 47.2 47.9 36.9




Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

Services Lower Sec or below 26.1 25.3 19.6




Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

Other Lower Sec or below 46.7 43.4 41.1




Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

Total Lower Sec or below 23.8 22.8 16.9




Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

mid-term evaluation of - eu funds

Documents