Creating a Fairer Scotland: Employability Support

Grangemouth Road
Falkirk

From a college perspective Employability Fund provision is one of our main areas to support people directly into employment. In order to improve this and allow us to fully utilise our expertise the duration of this should be extended to work with individuals with a greater range of positive outcomes akin to the skills pipeline provision.
Additionally, to generate maximum benefit, there needs to be sufficient lead in time to allow for curriculum planning and to promote the opportunities available both to individuals and to partner organisations that may signpost individuals to College services.
Furthermore, sufficient advance notice will allow for the sourcing and establishment of key factors to participation such as childcare, relevant work placement opportunities etc.
To ensure relevant local provision, the optimum scenario would be for elements of employment fund provision to be incorporated into the main College funding allocation. Activity levels can be tracked via the established Outcome Agreement process with the Scottish Funding Council.
Other areas from a college perspective include:
Foundation Apprenticeships
Access level full time courses across a range of subject areas
As well as progression into employment these courses also provide opportunity to move onto NQ,NC provision as well as Modern Apprenticeships.

Broader, integrated and improved engagement with employers, ensuring they access the most relevant employment options. Impact of Senior Phase, DYP and GIRFEC will have a positive outcome here.
Greater employer engagement from bodies providing the funding such as SDS and availability of funding. Greater transparency re funding and SIPs available to employers.
Reduction in bureaucracy to enable training providers to access funding to meet needs of local employers/sectors. Additionally, outcomes should be flexible to meet the needs of employers.
Stability in funding programmes to enable longer term developments and for employability initiatives to bed in, build on best practice and become well known to local employers and other partners.

A strength is that the current employability fund provision has work placement and an element of employer engagement but a weakness is that it is not long enough to deliver successful outcomes for both employers and the client.
A further strength is the work of the Local Employability Partnerships under Community Planning. This brings together key partners and local employers to ensure the continued relevance of the support being offered, delivering tangible improvements to the local area.
Weaknesses include
- lack of transparency in goals of programmes, inflexibility in implementation, changing goal posts during delivery periods.
- competition between varying levels of training providers which confuses the market place, fragments provision and could be seen to not deliver value for the public purse.
- support on employability and progression issues and options for students from bodies such as SDS and JCP is not offered across a wide enough range of courses/employment sectors.
- DWP cannot share data with Colleges which could be used to inform providers of the needs within the region. E.g. sector based work academy provision.
- existing employment support is available across a wide variety of avenues, terminology etc which makes it difficult for an individual to understand or appreciate where they are in the process/skills pipeline and the options that are available to them.

• Energy Skills Challenge Fund
• Engineers of the Future
• Foundation Apprenticeships

Improved links between funding bodies and providers, ensuring that options offered complement/support each other with clear progression strategies to employment or further study.
Data sharing between relevant partners to identify individuals most at need of intervention/support along with complementarity of provision across the local area.
Increased number and duration of work placements with associated funding to support this activity.
Flexibility in 16hr rule for people on benefit which can prohibit them from accessing certain provision.
More flexibility on what constitutes as meaningful contact (equating educational activity with other activities such as job search etc.) to allow local tailoring to local needs.

Developing effective Personal learning support plans, including time for reflection with the learner and case conferencing. Utilise the individual skills of each partner to coordinate on effective Personal Learning support plans. For example, College staff working with JCP staff to assess the opportunities available to an individual who wishes to renter/re-enter education.
Better integration of all the advice on offer and greater understanding of each partner’s offering/capabilities to ensure individuals are referred to the provision that is right for their circumstances.

The pipeline needs to identify progression opportunities between local providers.
There needs to be a more comprehensive assessment of individual needs to ensure a relevant match up to available support.
There should be commonality between assessments used by differing bodies with national direction.
It also needs to be widely communicated so employers can understand the levels.
Forth Valley College works in partnership with the Third sector across the Forth Valley and the comment below was provided by Stirlingshire Voluntary Enterprise:
Volunteering offers individuals out of work the opportunity to develop skills, capacities and confidences that supports re-entry into the workplace. Current evidence of this work in Stirling includes a volunteer opportunity matching service provided onsite at the Job Centre by Stirlingshire Voluntary Enterprise. Successful volunteer matching has enabled individuals to gain valuable skills for work in a professional environment, and raised the confidence of the individual of their existing or developing skill set. We would recommend that volunteering is recognised in Phase 2 of the employability pipeline as a method to enable work readiness

Increase the visibility of employment support options in high schools, particularly for those at risk of leaving school with no identifiable destination.
Increased collaboration and removal of boundaries between providers to identify those in need of early intervention.
Current funding programmes place providers in direct competition leading to inefficiencies and the curtailing of opportunities for activity such as work placement.
From a college prospective funding to allow more SQA accredited access courses with a guaranteed progression route, level 3/4. To develop the life skills to be employment ready, structured induction, regular feedback on their performance, an opportunity for them to self-evaluate their experience.

The duration depends upon the specific needs of the individuals and employers. There should be flexibility in provision to match these needs and to fastrack where required.
In general a minimum of a year would be optimal as this would enable sustained work placements, completion of worthwhile qualifications etc.

A challenge would be to reflect local needs with a national service. Additionally there are concerns that a national approach may not be reactive enough e.g. how PACE is used to support discrete, short terms needs.
A benefit is ease of control and auditing of results.
From the College perspective, a challenge is that unless the handful of organisations who have the contract want to engage/sub-contract with us, we would be limited in the support we can offer to individuals.

Give funding to local bodies to reflect local needs. Oversight could be via local bodies feeding back on achievement towards identified national priorities.
By ensuring equity of representation, Local Employability Partnerships could be instrumental in supporting and directing activity.
Reviewing and identifying best practice amongst LEP’S to institute continual improvement.
Additionally, funding could be provided directly to Colleges to enable them to be reactive to local needs. Monitoring of activity can be overseen via the established Outcome Agreement process.

National programmes must provide the flexibility to be tailored to meet localised employer and clients’ needs as well as localised support programmes work best for all client groups.
A recent example being SwITched On provision that was funded via the DWP Flexible Support Fund. This provision was a collaboration of support from third sector organisations, local councils and Forth Valley College. The course ran across Clackmannanshire, Falkirk and Stirling Council areas supporting clients on benefits to increase their I.T. skills in order to enhance their ability to apply for employment and navigate DWP systems.
Localised support programmes allow delivery to be tailored to meet the needs of local employers. An example being the Energy Skills Challenge fund, where local employers were given the opportunity to support the up skilling of unemployed individuals into their organisation. Candidates successfully completing the training programmes were then offered the opportunity of a permanent contract with their sponsoring company.

Ideally, funding should be allocated directly to providers to ensure maximum benefit and currency of provision.
If a national approach is required, Skills Development Scotland has the required infrastructure is in place.

The working poor, unemployed people, people at risk of unemployment (including people who have recurrent mental health issues and ex-offenders), those looking to increase their employment choices and young people at school/in the care system/care leavers at risk of moving immediately into unemployment.

Identify the most vulnerable groups and devise a programme of pre-entry induction and acclimatisation.
Ensuring that they know their options is fundamental. Additionally being treated as an individual and not as part of a pre-defined client group with pre-set targets. The ability to have more say over the options available to them, not one option or nothing.
Ensure options presented are both realistic and will result in an improvement in their circumstances i.e. working poor.
Personalised learning plans and the recognition that the individual needs to own their plan and play a role in the achievement of the agreed outcomes.
Support interventions should provide a structured approach raising individuals’ qualifications, and self-esteem.

Maximise effectiveness by assigning more resource in a more focussed manner, working directly with frontline providers.

Disadvantages are people are directed into areas they may not want to be in and where no local employment opportunities exist, but where there is available funding.
An advantage is that it focusses providers on achievement of successful outcomes. There should however be a review of what is considered a successful outcome i.e. not just moving straight into employment but onto another more appropriate part of the skills pipeline.
Given the breadth of activity covered by this consultation it is not possible to comment on what an effective suite of outcomes would be or the appropriate period.
Monthly payments would provide greater flexibility for providers; ensure that individual’s progress is monitored and that withdrawals are more quickly actioned to ensure funding is best used.

The advantages are that training providers are financially encouraged to support clients onto positive destinations. The disadvantages are that these destinations may not necessarily be the individuals’ first choice or sustainable in the local employment market.
The college sector could offer longer courses with progression measured on clients achieving set outcomes linked to their personal learning support plan (referred to in question 6) and attendance requirements. This would allow provision to be person centred and designed around employer requirements. Payments could be made on a monthly basis with a final outcome payment, as this would encourage on-going monitoring and aid progression onto a positive destination.

- Being able to capture all aspects of progression.
- Compatibility between systems.
- Ease of use and reduction in bureaucracy – e.g. online systems rather than paper based.

- Positive promotion of options on offer. Use existing participants as role models and mentors.
- Use of clear English to explain what options are available.
- Incentivise participation where possible.
- Tangible difference between engaging with employment support and benefits.
- A cohesive approach to understanding each other’s capabilities to ensure best benefit from work placement activity
- Allow flexibility in the 16hr rule and widen the definition of meaningful contact to allow clients to engage in education without risking their personal and family’s financial security.

As a College we recognise that we have the potential to be a powerful positive force in employment support. We are keen to engage constructively with all partners wherever possible, but want to maintain the focus on the individuals and delivering real benefit to them.