Why are the policies and organisations seeking to help disabled people access work failing?

In recent years successive governments, through the responsible department, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), have implemented programmes that involve private and third sector organisations competitively tendering to deliver programmes targeted at working age people including disabled people. Typically, however, these initiatives have only relatively small impacts on employment. This is not to deny that employment programmes have successfully placed some disabled people in employment rather to argue that the people most in need of support are the least served by these programmes. This occurs because the contracts have an incentive structure that rewards contractors for working with, and placing in employment, participants who are more job ready. Providers are then more likely to meet performance targets, and importantly for their finances, generate revenue income. Two examples of these programmes – the New Deal for Disabled People (NDDP) and Pathways to Work (Pathways) – are presented in this chapter to illustrate the argument that the marketisation of such provision can disadvantage many disabled people in the labour market

Universality of Decay out of Superdeformed Bands in the 190 Mass Region

Superdeformed nuclei in the 190 mass region exhibit a striking universality in their decay-out profiles. We show that this universality can be explained in the two-level model of superdeformed decay as related to a strong separation of energy scales: a higher scale related to the nuclear interactions, and a lower scale caused by electromagnetic decay. Furthermore, we present the results of the two-level model for all decays for which sufficient data are known, including statistical extraction of the matrix element for tunneling through the potential barrier.Comment: 7 pages, 3 figures. v2: some minor clarifications, minor correction to Fig.

Study of a soft lander/support module for Mars missions. Volume 3 - Appendixes Final summary report

Soft lander support module for Mars missions - lunar module radar evaluation and vernier phase simulatio

Employment Retention Policy

This Report investigates the potential for a statutory model of employment retention leave. A Private Members Bill (HC Bill 2006-07) [79] currently in progress through Parliament would, if enacted, offer disabled employees the right to paid leave for employment assessment, rehabilitation or re-training

Rebels leading London: the mayoralties of Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson compared

This article compares the mayoralties of the first two directly elected Mayors of London, Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson. The position offers a commanding electoral platform, but weak powers to lead a city regarded as ‘ungovernable’ (Travers 2004). The two mayors had some obvious points of comparison: both were party rebels, mavericks and skilled media operators. Both also used publicity to make up for weak powers, but courted controversy and faced charges of corruption and cronyism. Utilising Hambleton and Sweeting (2004), this article compares their mayoralties in terms of vision, leadership style and policies. Livingstone had a powerful vision that translated into clear policy aims while Johnson was more cautious, shaped by a desire for higher office. In terms of style, Livingstone built coalitions but proved divisive whereas Johnson retained remarkable levels of popularity. Where Livingstone bought experience and skill, Johnson delegated. In policy terms, the two mayors found themselves pushed by their institutional powers towards transport and planning while struggling with deeper issues such as housing. Livingstone introduced the radical congestion charge and a series of symbolic policies. Johnson was far more modest – championing cycling, the 2012 Olympics and avoiding difficult decisions. The two used their office to negotiate, but also challenge, central government. Livingstone’s rebel mayoralty was a platform for personalised change, Johnson’s one for personal ambition

Diluting substantive equality: why the UK government doesn't know if its welfare reforms promote equality

The UK Coalition government introduced a raft of welfare reforms between 2010-2015. As part of its response to the financial crisis reforms were designed to cut public expenditure on social security and enhance work incentives. Policy makers are required by legislation to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity, and foster good relations between different people. This Public Sector Equality Duty is an evidence-based duty which requires public authorities to assess the likely effects of policy on vulnerable groups. This chapter explores the extent to which the Department for Work and Pensions adequately assessed the equality impacts of key welfare reforms when policy was being formulated. The chapter focuses on the assessment of the impact of reductions to welfare benefits on individuals with protected characteristics - age, disability, gender, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion and belief, and sexual orientation - including individual and cumulative impacts. It also considers mitigating actions to offset negative impacts and how the collection of evidence on equality impacts was used when formulating policy. The chapter shows that the impacts of the reforms were only systematically assessed by age and gender, and, where data were available, by disability and ethnicity with no attempt to gauge cumulative impacts. There is also evidence of Equality Impact Assessments finding a disproportionate impact on individuals with protected characteristics where no mitigating action was taken