EmploySE1 review

Key findings and recommendations

1. Background, brief and approach 2. An overview of Employment Service Providers 3. Employment Service Provider consultation: what do ESP’s think of EmploySE1? 3.1 Value of EmploySE1’s involvement 3.2 The relationship and mechanisms in practice 4. Employer consultation: what do registered employers think of EmploySE1? 5. Local policy scene and work programmes 5.1 Lambeth Council 5.2 Southwark Council 5.3 GLA and newly announced work programme 6. Brief analysis of other Local Recruitment programmes: how do other Local models work? 7. Conclusions and recommendations: what should the programme focus on moving forward?

1. Background and research objectives EmploySE1 was officially launched in 2011 following the commissioning of a study by London Borough of Southwark, which partly looked at scope for developing a BID-led local recruitment brokerage service in the borough. Undertaken by the Means LLP, a key recommendation to come out of this work was that a brokerage service be set up to act as an interface between London SE1-based employers and publicly funded Employment Service Providers (ESPs) in Southwark. Coinciding with the findings of this research were a growing number of requests from BID members, namely large developers, for BID assistance with meeting their Section 106 contractual obligations. The programme began as a partnership between Better Bankside, Team London Bridge and Waterloo Quarter and was then joined by Vauxhall One in 2013. Since its inception, the free-to-the-employer local recruitment service has achieved significant success in engaging and working with employers to identify job opportunities for Southwark and Lambeth job seekers. However, despite high rates of vacancy sourcing, the scheme is not delivering to the standards hoped for in terms of services provided to employers by chosen employment agencies and job placement conversion rates (average annual conversion rate of 9%). Requirements of how ESPs are to work with EmploySE1 are laid out in a Charter Mark containing several Standards, including protocol on referring jobseekers to employers and feeding back outcomes to EmploySE1. In practice, Charter Mark Standards are not being complied with and unsuitable candidates are persistently being put forward to employers. The BID partners wanted to understand why this is and what can be done about it. The aim of this research was not to undertake a retrospective assessment of EmploySE1, but to gain clarity around the causes behind low conversion rates as well as any blockages in current programme mechanics. Outlined in the brief were several challenges currently inhibiting EmploySE1 from attaining desired standards, as well as: -­‐ -­‐ -­‐

Lack of response by providers to employers (ie sending no CVs/no response to employer) Inappropriate or unsuitable CVs sent to employers (applicants put forward that lack the requisite skills or experience or applications are of generally poor quality) Providers not informing EmploySE1 of outcomes (not cc-ing on CVs sent, not informing of job starts)

It is worth noting here that the Means report stated poor calibre of candidate applications and referrals as a key issue reported by employers, and a prime reason behind the need for

 

2  

BID intervention, as well as confusion around the vast array of publicly-funded services available to them. “1) they [employers] often receive candidates without the right skills, experience, attitude and prior briefing, and 2) frequent changes of personnel within the providers mean that they are unable to build a relationship with them.” It was hoped that by establishing a gateway to local ESPs and offering employers one point of contact, EmploySE1 would provide a solution to these issues and enable the process of recruiting locally to become more straightforward. Another recommendation from this preliminary study was to: “Ensure that each business is partnered with the local employment agency most likely to provide the best possible candidates.” This has not become a reality, and it was instead decided that EmploySE1 would notify all ESPs registered with the programme when vacancies became available. According to the EmploySE1 website, the programme exists to provide the following services: • •

To assist the member businesses of the four BIDs to recruit Southwark/Lambethbased employees To support the work of local publicly-funded (i.e. free to the employer) employment agencies in seeking new employment opportunities for their Southwark/Lambethbased clients

 

Areas of exploration and research approach Based on the key issues underlined in the research brief, the research was shaped around gaining insight into the following three areas using a mixture of qualitative and quantitative methods: 1. What factors are preventing providers from meeting their agreed responsibilities (e.g. lack of suitable candidates)? 2. Is Employ SE1 suitably aligned to local policy and does it complement other work programmes in the BID areas? 3. How are other publicly funded, facilitative employment services structured and what can we learn from these?

What we did Focus group with EmploySE1 and BID team members Online survey of employment service provider partners (14 responses) In-depth interviews with five EmploySE1 registered ESPs Interviews with representatives from London Borough of Lambeth and London Borough of Southwark Interviews with two EmploySE1 registered employers Analysis of Southwark Council’s new employment framework Analysis of other publicly-funded Local Recruitment programmes’ websites in addition to brief interview with City of London Corporation Southwark Council report on co-designing services for long-term unemployed youth

 

3  

2. Overview of Employment Service Providers interviewed Registered with EmploySE1 is a diverse range of over 50 Lambeth and Southwarkbased ESP’s. Some are more ‘specialist’ and work only with specific groups such a lone mothers and people with learning disabilities, while others have a broader remit but often run specialist programmes with more ‘challenging’ groups, such as ex- offenders. These agencies also vary in terms of size, resource and how they are funded, contracted outcomes, conversion rates as well as organisational systems and approaches to providing employment support services. Some take a very ‘hands on’ approach to training and preparing job seekers for work, whereas others act more as referrers to other agencies. The five ESP’s interviewed for this research mirrored this diversity and 4 out of 5 had been involved to some degree in the initial development stages of EmploySE1.

Lambeth Working, Lambeth Council’s in-house job brokerage service, has a notably distinct relationship with EmploySE1 from other agencies due to Lambeth’s funding contract with EmploySE1. Lambeth Working has contractual expectations of its relationship with EmploySE1 and views EmploySE1 as a commissioned service provider. The prime intention of Lambeth’s funding to EmploySE1 is to gain support with accessing Lambeth SME vacancies and to achieve a particular number of job placements. Despite being a set up as a brokerage service, Lambeth Working is in reality increasingly playing a candidate-facing role to improve job placement outcomes.

Three agencies in Southwark and Lambeth are providers of the Government’s Work Programme, a payment-by-results scheme that awards a commissioned agency £16,000 to place a jobseeker into work. The programme is measured against various target sets and supports candidates that are unemployed or working less than 16 hours per week.

Employment services across Lambeth and Southwark make up a complex network of interlinked providers, including apprenticeship/vacancy supply, training and candidate referral partners. Several of the same vacancy supply partners were referenced across the five interviews, suggesting that multiple agencies are sourcing vacancies from the same places and orientation of vacancies is not always traceable. In addition, jobseekers can register with several agencies at any given time and there is no one standardised ‘referral path’.

ESPs typically source entry-level jobs in the industries of Hospitality, Cleaning, and Security for their job seekers and are regarded by employers as either a free recruitment service or as helping them improve their Social Responsibility credentials. All ESPs interviewed reported undertaking their own employer engagement drives and recognisable agencies, such as Job Centre Plus, tend to receive vacancies from new companies moving into the area, via mechanisms like the Government’s Universal Job Match web platform. ESPs vary in terms of vacancy-to-jobseeker ratios, with some generally having more vacancies than candidates, and others having more candidates than vacancies at any given time.

 

4  

There is an emphasis for some ESPs on engaging large companies as this is viewed as more cost-effective to the public purse as opposed to resource spent on a smaller proportion of SME jobs. Challenges currently faced by ESPs

Employer resistance to employing candidates considered a risk to their business, namely ex-offenders, and also to adjusting job roles to fit candidates facing particular barriers.

Sourcing suitable jobs for candidates facing particular barriers to employment, such as lone parents and those receiving the Employment Service Allowance.

Zero Hour Contracts are creating volatility for employees but this challenge was not raised in specific relation to EmploySE1 vacancies.

Welfare Systems and changes such as the introduction of Universal Credit mean that in two years time a greater number of part time jobs will be required. The ‘benefits trap’ was also referred to by ESPs as a challenge in cases where jobseekers are financially better off not working.

Work schemes are often focused on supporting 18-24 year olds, particularly following the 2011 London riots, and not enough on other groups of potentially greater need such as women and the 25-49 age group.

Industry-specific requirements can cause instability for jobseekers. Examples cited included transient nature of some Hospitality jobs (e.g. three months max) and the Construction industry wanting self-employed candidates

 

5  

3. Key findings from ESP consultation The ESP consultation was designed to draw out any potential issues that might be hindering the placement of local jobseekers into ESE1 registered vacancies, as well as suggestions on how the relationship could further develop. 3.1 Value and impact of EmploySE1 on ESP services What do ESPs think of the quantity of vacancies provided by EmploySE1? On the whole, ESPs felt that the quantity of vacancies received via EmploySE1 was sufficient and acknowledged that although more vacancies would be welcome, EmploySE1’s resource may not allow for this. In some cases, they are receiving the same vacancies as EmploySE1 where a relationship already exists with the employer. An example cited was of the National Theatre, whom the ESP had met at a jobs fair, and then gone on to form a relationship. This scenario is particularly common with Construction jobs. However, this is not the case for all ESPs, with one stating they had experienced no duplication in employer engagement. Good People was cited by one ESP as sometimes duplicating EmploySE1 jobs, though less job information is provided. The survey revealed that for 8/14 responding ESPs, vacancies received by EmploySE1 constitute less than 5% of their total annual vacancies.

Survey finding 1 Estimated percentage of total annual vacancies coming from EmploySE1

 

 

6  

What do ESPs think of the quality and suitability of vacancies provided by EmploySE1? The common view across all interviewed agencies was that EmploySE1 provide good, valuable vacancies. Also reported was that although vacancies provided were generally the right match for what their jobseekers were looking for, agencies did not always have the right ‘calibre’ of jobseeker to put forward. This suggests a disconnect between the type of job considered desirable and jobseeker suitability. Individual comments: “We don’t always have right calibre of customer on our books but general level is fine.” “Some of the jobs are fine but we get nowhere with them.” “Not always suitable but generally a good match, lots of front of house which is good.” “Admin jobs are the Holy Grail and much harder to get due to employers’ perceptions of placing long term unemployed people in those roles.” “If a vacancy comes through with a particular recruitment process that has irrational expectations, we won’t send candidates through.” “We don’t have capacity to always respond to EmploySE1 vacancies.”

Survey finding 2: Suitability of vacancies to candidate pool

 

 

7  

Comments: “Our candidates are seeking some element of flexibility in their working hours - so not all roles are suitable.” “It is we as an provider who need to adjust our services to meet your demand. Skills wise they seem to be, but the issue comes in with flexible working (P/T etc) and people's perceptions of a 'good job'.” “Some of our customers have very little experience in admin, but are trying to get in to this work, so would be helpful if there were occasional jobs that would take such applicants.” “We work exclusively with people with learning difficulties and disabilities (and some dual-diagnosis) so many of the vacancies are not appropriate for our clients.” “Client group consists mainly lone parents that require family friendly hours.”

Overall value added by EmploySE1

Access to ‘unique’ vacancies Building new links with employers Increase in number of vacancies circulated to jobseekers “The strength of EmploySE1 is it gives us access to employers that wouldn’t otherwise come to us.” “EmploySE1 bring lots of FM and admin vacancies, which are very popular with local residents. These roles pay well above the minimum wage. They also engage with large employers for bulk vacancies.” “There are times when we’re quiet and don’t have many vacancies but EmploySE1 have loads, which really helps. We’ve has success stories with their employers and there is no duplication in employer engagement. The employer tends to stay in touch directly with us but we do inform EmploySE1 of new placements made.” Survey finding 3 EmploySE1 adds significant value to my organisation 36% (5) EmploySE1 adds some value to my organisation 57% (8) EmploySE1 rarely adds value to my organisation 7% (1) EmploySE1 has never added value to my organisation 0% (0) 3.2. Working relationship with ESE1 “We see EmploySE1 as a name really, a gateway to the BIDs.” All agencies interviewed view EmploySE1 as a partner with shared goals of getting as many local people into jobs as possible. An advantage of the relationship is that job outcomes are not being competed for, and ESPs and EmploySE1 can claim on the same placements. One agency referred to ESE1 as a ‘business development tool’ that helps it achieve its own outcomes.

 

8  

Survey finding 4 ESP’s were asked which of the following statements represent their relationship with EmploySE1 (more than one allowed) EmploySE1 is a partner of our organisation 38% (5) EmploySE1 is a service provider to our organisation 62% (8) My organisation is a service provider to EmploySE1 23% (3) This finding indicates that for a significant proportion of ESPs, the purpose of their relationship with EmploySE1 is to receive assistance with achieving their own objectives.

ESP’s suggestions on how the relationship could evolve “I think EmploySE1 do a good job of educating businesses but I would like to feed into businesses through BIDs more, to teach SMEs, for example, about employer legislation they often don’t know about.” “BIDs should tap into their members’ CSR more. We sometimes get approached by companies via the Job Centre, Tesco for example, that are doing local recruitment drives as part of their CSR.”

More communication and direct contact with SE1 employers More contact including face-to-face meetings with EmploySE1, including with newly recruited job advisors Greater volume of vacancies and area coverage Client group-specific vacancies More flexible hour vacancies sourced

Survey finding 5- open question asking how relationship could improve “Currently I disseminate vacancies from the Employ SE1 site during 1:1 appointments with clients looking for work. I would like to send out the vacancies (just the list of job titles) speculatively to email lists to attract potential clients. I have done this before but it takes a long time to remove all the hyperlinks so individuals cannot access the vacancies themselves via the website. Is there any way an email friendly promotional list of the vacancies can be sent so it can be forwarded to clients? “ “More contact to discuss strategies/how we can help further, being recommended for specific jobs/sectors, more involved with clients.” “Would like details of any employer led events, or any large recruitment initiatives in Lambeth/Southwark areas.” “Employ people in entry level jobs and provide on the job training.”

 

9  

Survey finding 6 Usefulness of steering group meetings

Comments “Never been invited. Attended event in August but do not think that this was a steering group meeting.”   “I have never been invited to attend as far as I am aware.” “Haven’t been available on the dates so far.” “Have not been aware of this.”

 

10  

Practical issues highlighted with current process Wide salary brackets (£xx-xx) can be off-putting to candidates. Applications cap can be limiting in cases where ESPs have more than three suitable candidates. Employers not knowing who ESPs are- “EmploySE1 is supposed to introduce us, seems as though some employers expect to deal just with EmploySE1.” Can’t always tell a candidate what to expect when applying with employers the ESP has no direct relationship with. Lack of response from EmploySE1 when we submit candidate CVs to them in cases where employer does not want contact details shared- not knowing if the candidates were put forward. Not much contact with EmploySE1 other than when putting forward candidates. Vacancy filled before closing date but staying live on website. Lack of feedback on candidate application: very hard for candidates when they receive no interview feedback. Not told by EmploySE1 whether candidate we out forward was recruited. Complex provider network means candidate can register with several providers- ESP does not always know if a candidate has found a job because they’ve come through another provider, candidate will tell their own advisor. Generally don’t have time for steering group meetings. More accuracy needed in general on job adverts/information. ESPs put candidates forward and often hear nothing back.

Views on EmploySE1 playing a bigger role in supporting job readiness “Where it works well, it works really well” “More candidate exposure to real employers would be really helpful”

It was suggested that EmploySE1 would need to employ someone else if they want to branch out into providing job readiness support, with an ‘ideal structure’ of employment support service being described as having account management and business development resource, as well as a candidate facing resource. Although this model still has its limitations and would mean big change for EmploySE1, it was felt that conversion rates would rise if they did this and greater benefits would be had in the long term.

There is appetite for more employer open/assessment days for candidates rather than just the standard CV application process. Examples cited of where job readiness provision has worked well included, Good People working closely with Shard employers, and days delivered by EmploySE1 with the Shangri-la and Regus Hotels. ESPs are keen on more of these employer days being held with one ESP stating that a 3-4 week programme run by EmploySE1 with the Shangri-la Hotel was the most valuable engagement they’d had with EmploySE1. It was suggested that similar programmes could be run with SMEs, though the challenges that come with this (e.g. SMEs all operating differently) were also acknowledged.

One ESP commented that a large proportion of its network partners are third sector organisations and colleges that already provide job readiness support and training, but that in some cases BIDS and their employers will be better placed to provide it as they have a better understanding of employer and job expectations.

 

11  

ESPs want to avoid setting their candidates up for failure. Their jobseekers want to work in the SE1 area but are not always prepared enough, which includes personal appearance and hygiene. Some also have very low self-esteem whereas others have very high, unrealistic expectations. One ESP referred to this as getting the balance right between aspirations and expectations. All ESPs felt that the more exposure jobseekers have to real employers, the more enforced the message will become.

Like training to lead to a tangible outcome e.g. hospitality training in the borough delivered in the classroom, doesn’t work. Our training is usually developed with employers. They feel more obligated towards working with us, we put a lot of work into pre-application process.

It was also suggested that care would have to be taken not to ‘draw out’ the job readiness support process in cases where job seekers are already accessing these services through their provider.

Survey finding 7 We would welcome job readiness training support from EmploySE1 38% (5) We would welcome job readiness training support from EmploySE1 registered employers 62% (8) We would welcome job readiness training support for bulk vacancies only 15% (2) We would not welcome job readiness training support from EmploySE1 0% Comments We work with client's that may need a boost to their confidence and working direct with employers would help this. Anything that brings employers closer to candidates is a good thing in my opinion. There are after all best suited to promote their jobs and more importantly their company. This would help (in my opinion) us to promote work as well as jobs. We provide some job readiness training ourselves, but assistance on IT skills would be great.

The Charter Mark Survey finding 8: 100% responded that they always comply with all standards. “We don’t want to break the rules. Would consult Martin if wanted to do something a bit differently, but go with what he says.” “We respect it, but don’t think everyone does. If an agency doesn’t refer at all for a long time, why keep them on? Important to be more rigid.” A couple of ESPs interviewed needed reminding of the Charter Mark Standards but overall, the response was that the protocol outlined in the Charter Mark is common sense and how they operate anyway. One ESP commented that they have tried to comply because the consequence of putting forward inappropriate candidates is several months of service recovery.

 

12  

One agency was of the understanding that the process includes a ‘double sift’ system, whereby both they and EmploySE1 check the quality of candidate applications and referrals. There appeared to be a lack of clarity around the protocol for copying EmploySE1 into all correspondence with employers, including the reasoning behind this and at what stage the copying in should stop.

4. BID members’ perspectives “EmploySE1 has a harder job than standard recruitment agencies as it involves businesses taking chances, barriers have to be brought down.” “They [EmploySE1] should champion the London Living Wage.” It was agreed at pre-commissioning stage that an employer consultation would make up a minor part of this research, as the partner BIDs/EmploySE1 consult with them on a regular basis. Two medium-sized BID members that had used EmploySE1’s services were interviewed as it was decided it was important to include their perspective as ESE1 was primarily set up to meet their needs. Why recruiting locally is important to them “There is a lost generation 16+ year olds need to be given a chance.” Directors keen to employ young people not going on to HE. It’s the “right thing to do” and a nice company ideal. Good PR for the company Why they chose EmploySE1

Saw it as a community notice board providing local connections they didn’t have themselves. Free service, always looking to try and cut costs (though one interviewee stated they would be willing to pay to access the service). Non-profit service and aligned to Localism agenda. Able to reach out to so many more people when recruiting to entry-level roles.

 

13  

Employer user journey

  Both employers reported receiving a large number of Inappropriate approaches via ESPs’, where application requirements were not followed and candidates referred on did not match criteria. One reported they had fed this back to the agencies to make them aware it was a problem.

One employer had recruited through Good People and is now dealing with them direct for efficiency. In instances where more time is available for recruiting, the employer will also advertise through EmploySE1. This employer also reported having a positive recruitment experience through Southwark Works. Views on participating in and offering job readiness support to local residents as part of Social Responsibility “Candidates told us about basic skills courses they have been on that really help- teaching about body language and stuff you don’t get taught at school. I can see the value in that kind of training and would be happy to help deliver it. There needs to be more of that.” “Not everyone has parents working in offices they can visit. We’d be happy to host tours around our office, we’ve done it before”. Employability/job readiness training Happy to participate

Apprenticeships

Work experience

One about to take on apprentices for first time

One already has internslive far away, would like to offer to local residents

Other unsure of suitability but happy to explore through ESE1 Talking to Jobwise and Prince’s Trust

 

14  

5. Local policy scene and work programmes 5.1. Tackling worklessness major focus of Lambeth Council’s Sustainable Community Strategy 2008-2020: “While the strategy will focus on a series of improvement areas, locally we are clear that the only way Lambeth will ever truly tackle the root causes of the numerous social challenges it faces is to tackle the high level of worklessness within the borough.” Lambeth Cabinet Member, Councillor Jack Hopkins, was interviewed for this research to determine Lambeth’s current and future priorities for tackling worklessness in the borough. Councillor Hopkins is responsible for driving the creation of jobs through shaping procurement and commissioning markets, as well as harnessing regeneration in Brixton, Vauxhall Nine Elms and right across the borough. Bridging the skills gap and ensuring that Lambeth residents take advantage of planned and unplanned job opportunities is also a priority of Councilor Hopkins. He is responsible for growing business networks and supporting Business Improvement Districts. “85% of Lambeth residents get work on their own; it is one of the most employed boroughs in London.”

Priorities of current and forward strategy

Funding is now being directed towards employer e.g. employers paid for employing apprentices.

LBL is currently workshoping ideas for its new strategy and looking at ways to alleviate poverty through employment and enterprise.

A budget of £30m will be created over the next six years for Community and Infrastructure with a possible extra £30m. Around £10m of this will be for employment and training.

A priority is to connect existing provision better and improving understanding of each other. This includes getting brokerages to work together better.

There are plans for Lambeth Working to become more commercial over the next two years, including a hospitality coordination unit in Vauxhall and another for Construction, which EmploySE1 is aware of.

 

15  

Employment and training infrastructure

Gaps in job training provision is a key problem to be addressed. e.g. specialist construction skills.

Training providers will be pulled together in 2015 and architecture built for a new network with the aim of getting the Lambeth Training Providers Network right. There is an opportunity for EmploySE1 to influence this. There is also potential for building different sector-base training providers.

Information and guidance is “really sketchy” at present with too many referral agencies and an unclear referral pathway across the agencies. There is sufficient CV writing support and similar services in existence, but greater need for introducing businesses to local employment service staff and running information sessions.

The Work Programme suffers from lack of joined up working and not understanding needs of job seekers.

The Shaw Trust want to do a lot of work in Lambeth and are looking to develop shared outcomes with the Council. Role of EmploySE1 “EmploySE1 will have to consider becoming commercialised if they want to grow it.”

ESPs repeatedly not performing should be reported and removed from EmploySE1’s agency pool. EmploySE1 could be sector specific and only work with providers they know deliver.

BIDs solve a problem for Council in that they’re regionally based and provide infrastructure the Council can’t afford. They know what their businesses want.

80% businesses in Lambeth are SMEs. EmploySE1 needs to make sure young people can access opportunities with them.

EmploySE1 should consider expanding outside of SE1.

 

16  

5.2. Employment policy in Southwark “The BIDs will need the support of the Council and others in securing a level of resource for the project above and beyond that already committed by the BIDs themselves.” (The Means Report commissioned by Southwark Council in 2010)

Despite the above recommendation, EmploySE1 has mostly been resourced by the BID partners and Lambeth Council. At the time of this review, Southwark Council was is in the process of re-commissioning its Southwark Works contract which has a total value of £5.275m and will run for four years.

The council has been funding employment support to Southwark residents since 2004 under the title of “Southwark Works”, with a focus on unemployed and economically inactive residents. Southwark Works funds provision that combines tailored employment support for people with barriers to employment and access to job opportunities through employer engagement.

In July 2014, a new council plan set out ten new Fairer Future promises that the council will deliver over the next four years to 2018, one of which is that “we will guarantee education, employment or training for every school leaver, support 5,000 more local people into jobs and create 2,000 new apprenticeships”. The council is increasingly working across borough boundaries, most notably with Lambeth and Lewisham, and it’s possible that some leeway will be allowed for achieving these targets across the three boroughs.

The council’s local economy team carried out a systematic review of local employment support provision that informed strategy for the next phase of delivery following the end of contracts in March 2015. The primary objective of the review was to assess the most effective and suitable means of achieving employment outcomes of the council’s economic wellbeing strategy.

The DWP Work Programme was noted in the findings as being ineffective at supporting those with high needs (long term unemployed, those affected by health issues, ex-offenders) into work and it was also concluded that the most effective interventions are those that address individual needs combined with support to identify relevant job opportunities. In other words, the most effective programmes cover both supply and demand.

In addition to the local review, research carried out as part of the Southwark, Lambeth and Lewisham Community Budget work identified six characteristics of effective employment support. These were: -Customer-centric (designed around the needs of individuals) -Well-defined, strongly linked partner network (specialist services co- operating and crossreferring customers according to customer need) -Clear catalogue of services and navigation (clear criteria for eligibility and referral) -Flexible to local employment needs (skills and support that are appropriate for local job seekers and relevant employment opportunities) -Single point of contact (i.e. no wrong door for customers seeking support regardless of the type of need) -Tailored customer journey (with relevant progress measures and clear outcomes).

 

17  

The following sectors have been identified by Southwark as growth areas where London’s employers are forecast to increase demand for employment and skills, and therefore predicted by Southwark to lead to sustained employment, wage growth and career progression opportunities: Construction Hospitality Health & social care ICT Retail Business administration Marketing “It is very important that EmploySE1 continues to work with us; we’d welcome participation in promoting the Apprenticeship Standard and engaging employers, especially SMEs (persistently an issue).” Graham Sutton, Southwark Council A brief interview with Graham Sutton, Local Economy Team at Southwark Council was held to determine Southwark’s current employment initiatives and priorities. In addition to the recommissioning of Southwark Works, Southwark is supporting its residents into work via the following programmes:

Incentivising SMEs: SEEDs (Southwark Employment and Enterprise Development Scheme) aimed at SMEs with less than 10 employees. Offering a wage incentive to employers.

“Into Work” programme commissioned through Central London Forward and managed by Cross River Partnership.

Pilot scheme opening up for procurement aimed at supporting Work Programme jobseekers put on Employment Support Allowance.

Newly created Apprenticeship Standard being and toolkit to prove benefits (a meeting was held between the Council and partner BIDs to discuss this).

Continued Youth Fund schemes- employment support for 16-19 group and ‘Getting Ready for Work’ programme.

Construction S106 programme- high volume of obligations.

 

18  

5.3 Greater London Authority

Employer-Led Apprenticeships Creation Programme On approaching the GLA to speak to a suitable representative, we were directed to their website for information on its current employment programmes and priorities. A website review found that the GLA is in the process of commissioning an employer-led apprenticeships creation programme focused on engaging with businesses with little or no previous history of recruiting apprentices, to support them in creating new apprenticeship opportunities in London. Multiple delivery partners will be funded out of a £1.8 million budget with the potential to be increased to £2.8 million, subject to London Enterprise Panel approval.

“Working Capital”   A press release came out at the time of undertaking this research, announcing that 4,000 people will be helped into employment after Government, the Mayor of London, London Councils and Central London boroughs signed off the details of an £11m scheme that will aim to help people struggling to find work. This is part of the London Growth Deal and is wholly funded by the London Enterprise Panel's European Social Fund (ESF). The programme will run for five years and test a new model to support central London residents who claim Employment Support Allowance but have left the national Work Programme after two years without finding long term employment. It is assumed that this is the same programme referred to by Graham Sutton at Southwark Council. Every person supported by Working Capital will receive dedicated help from a multi-skilled case worker who will find out more about the problems their clients are facing, and help them develop a plan of action for getting back into work.

6. Brief analysis of other programmes

 

BEST programme: internally run, 5 brokers, candidate facing, involve employers in job readiness. No internal employment placement brokerage, commissions employment agencies to deliver Local Recruitment outcomes, business-involving employability programmes. East London Business Alliance social enterprise subsidiary, “a recruitment agency with a difference”. Tower Hamlets programme: “industry-specific training and recruitment, through to post-recruitment support and coaching.” Network of 11 partners.

 

19  

7. Conclusions and recommendations Future planning of the programme depends heavily on determining its key aims, objectives and service offering. If, for example, it is decided that the programme exists to enable BID members to access good quality, vetted employment services, then the request by ESPs for more contact with employers should not be overlooked. However, EmploySE1 would need, in this case, to develop a vetting and monitoring process as part of its services to employers, and quality control measures put in place. The ESP consultation brought to light systemic issues that could be hindering their working relationship with EmploySE1. It is recommended that these be looked at by the BID partners and potential solutions implemented while the programme is in its current form.

There is evidence of a disconnect between the calibre and readiness of jobseekers accessing ESP services, and the requirements of job roles advertised by registered employers. EmploySE1 could go some way to addressing this by playing a bigger role in educating businesses about the benefits of creating more flexible job opportunities, the life challenges faced by local jobseekers, as well as engaging in job readiness activities. Bulk vacancy recruitment drives work well and the model is highly favoured by ESPs. It is recommended that exploration be undertaken of potential for designing an employability and job readiness programme, and scope for involving ESPs in delivery. There is plenty of existing provision that this could be based on, and EmploySE1 should also consider expanding its reach to residents not necessarily accessing employment support services. It is also recommended that EmploySE1 re-package its sell to employers to include emphasis on Local Recruitment and providing job readiness support as an opportunity to enhance their Social Responsibility credentials, in addition to being a free recruitment service.

There is confusion around who EmploySE1 primarily exists to serve, which may party be due to messaging provided on the EmploySE1 website. It is recommended that the objectives of the programme be revisited, confirmed and communicated clearly to ESPs, particularly if EmploySE1 does not wish to be viewed as a service provider to partner agencies.

The provider network is multi-layered and complex, meaning that ESPs cannot always track the outcomes of jobseekers using their services. Rather than depending on entirely on ESPs to feed back outcomes, it is recommended that EmploySE1 develop a simple follow-up process with employers, which becomes part of the regular workflow.

Public sector work programmes are focused on the creation of work-based training opportunities; supporting those with high needs into work and improving training provision. Funding tends to be directed at providers providing a holistic package of support to jobseekers, and less so those with no candidate-facing role. It is recommended that EmploySE1 aligns itself with programmes and resources that help sharpen the sell to employers and service offering overall, particularly where there are business benefits for BID members.

 

20  

There are cases where employers are staying in direct contact with ESPs through which candidates have been sourced and recruited. This is to be expected and should be counted as an outcome achieved by EmploySE1 if more emphasis is placed on facilitating introductions between employers and ESPs moving forward. EmploySE1 would have to grow significantly or become more commercialised in order to become the only point of call for BID members recruiting locally. It is recommended that a tracking mechanism be invested in to ensure EmploySE1 vacancies filled do not get ‘lost in the system’.

Although ESPs claim to adhere to all Standards, it is evident that the Charter Mark is not providing sufficient enough incentive for them to meet EmploySE1’s requirements. It is recommended that EmploySE1 develop tighter quality control measures and keep a record of repeat cases of unsuitable referrals to employers. A process for following-up outcomes of listed vacancies should also be developed, with more emphasis on extracting this information from employers. Thought should also be given to cutting back on the number of ESPs worked with, and developing strategic partnerships with a selection of high-performing ESPs that complement EmploySE1’s vacancies and systems. This could involve a shared written agreement (based on the Charter Mark with room for negotiation), a monitoring process, and agreed areas for regular review. A ‘two-tier’ model could be formed where vacancies go to strategic partners in the first instance, and then out to the wider network if unfilled.

The current trend in Local Recruitment based on an online assessment of several London-based initiatives is for both employer-facing and candidates-facing services to be provided, as well a movement towards these programmes being established as stand alone Social Enterprises. Where programmes do not have a candidate-facing role, this aspect is being outsourced to established ESPs to ensure a 360o service is provided or provided through a manageable number of partnerships. It is recommended that EmploySE1 consider these other models in respect to evolving the programme into its next phase.

Steering group meetings are the main form of regular communication with ESPs but are only reaching a small proportion and yet there is appetite from some for more contact with EmploySE1. It is recommended that communication channels with ESPs be reviewed with a view to developing more regular, impactful forms of communicating updates and to strengthen relationships.

 

21