Exploring employer behaviour in relation to Investors in People

"This report explores employer behaviour in relation to choices they make about Investors in People (IIP) accreditation in order for the future IIP strategy to ensure IIP is relevant, adds value to employers and tackles any barriers to successful delivery. The research focuses on the decision-making processes and experiences of three key groups of employers: employers that have held IIP accreditation for a number of years; employers who previously held IIP accreditation but have let this lapse; and employers who committed to gaining IIP accreditation but subsequently did not to go through the assessment process" - page 1

[Research Summary] Fit for Work: final report of a process evaluation

This report presents the fndings from the process evaluation of Fit for Work. Fit for Work was an occupational health assessment and advice service looking to address long-term sickness absence. The assessment service was for employees who were on (or at risk of entering) long-term sickness absence, defned as four weeks or more, via a referral through their General Practitioner (GP) or their employer. Participation was entirely voluntary. Employees giving their consent took part in a biopsychosocial assessment, which were primarily conducted by telephone. After assessment, a Return to Work Plan (RtWP) would be produced, with recommendations for self-care, workplace adjustments, and/or signposting to further specialist support and therapy services to assist the employee’s return to work. With the employee’s consent, the RtWP could be shared with their employer and/or GP. The service was funded by the Government and was delivered in England and Wales by Health Management Limited (HML) and in Scotland via an agency agreement with the Scottish Government. The process evaluation aimed to determine whether the Fit for Work service had been implemented as designed, and whether the design met the policy intent to provide support for those on long-term sickness absence to stay in employment. The research programme was conducted between September 2015 and May 2017 and consisted of: an analysis of management information; 72 in-depth qualitative interviews with employees, employers and GPs; a telephone survey of 504 employers that had had contact with the service; a telephone survey of 1,045 employees that had been discharged from the service and a follow-up survey of 492 of them (only those who received an assessment and who gave permission to be re-contacted for further research). Management information was analysed for employees referred to and discharged from the Fit for Work service between October 2015 and December 2016 inclusive. As this analysis did not cover the whole period of the service, fndings could differ from the overall management information. In some instances, due to small sample sizes, apparent differences between groups (e.g. between countries) may not be statistically signifcant and therefore should be viewed with caution. Following very low referrals, it was announced that the Fit for Work assessment service would come to an end in England and Wales on 31 March 2018 and 31 May 2018 in Scotland. However, employers, employees and GPs will continue to have access to the same Fit for Work helpline, website and web chat, which offer general health and work advice as well as support on sickness absence. This process evaluation was undertaken before the decision was taken to close the service

Fit for Work process evaluation: technical annex

This Technical Annex should be read alongside the main Fit for Work Process Evaluation report which contains the headline fndings and narrative. Detailed tables are presented throughout the Technical Annex, giving tables for the statistically signifcant differences between results for different groups (e.g. by employee age). The structure of the data tables in the Technical Annex follows the structure of the main report (e.g. tables relating to fndings regarding employer satisfaction with the Fit for Work service can be found in section 7.6.2 in both the main report and the Technical Annex). The data presented in the tables is weighted, and unweighted bases are given underneath each table. There are instances, therefore, where the ‘Total’ value in the tables differs to the N value given in the base, because weighting has been applied to the survey data to ensure its representativeness. The totals presented in the tables relating to the same question are consistent between those tables. Where there are missing data for cross-breaks then the total given for all respondents may mean that the data within the table do not sum. For example, if some respondents did not declare their ethnicity, but answered the question, their responses would be reported in the total, but not for responses by ethnicity. Where the data presented in the base of the table (i.e. the number of responses included) has less than 100 cases this is indicated with an asterisk (*) and results should be treated with caution. Results are not reported where the table base is less than 25 cases, and percentages based on 25-49 unweighted cases (column or row bases as applicable) are presented in square brackets. Responses giving ‘don’t know’ have been excluded from tables where it is in response to a question seeking an attitudinal answer. Where they indicate a respondent’s lack of awareness or certainty about a categorical issue, ‘don’t know’ responses have been included. In some instances where very low numbers of individual responses to a specifc category represent a theoretical risk of disclosure, steps have been taken to guard against this by combining two or more categories together and applying a disclosure control process based on ONS guidance for tables produced from administrative sources and surveys.1 Where a cell size is one or two, and in instances where the distribution of zeroes in a table present a risk of disclosure (e.g. where all categories in a column/row except one contain zeroes meaning the reader would know that all members of a particular group belong to that category), then measures have been taken to hide that information. In data tables where there is a risk of disclosure, rounding has been applied to the nearest ten (i.e. zero or ten) for all count cells in the table. Percentages are preserved at their actual values. The affected tables are marked to highlight that rounding has been applied. The data tables are structured following the Fit for Work Process Evaluation report and mirror the structure of the main report. • Chapter 2 presents fndings from the employer and employee surveys about their attitudes to work and sickness absence. • Chapter 3 presents the evidence about awareness and understanding of the service among employers and GPs, and explores referrals to the service, including the process of gaining consent to refer. • Chapter 4 details the fndings about the occupational health assessment, including the assessment coverage and fndings, and employer contact with case managers. • Chapter 5 covers the employee and employer experience of the Return to Work Plan (RtWP), including the recommendations contained in the RtWPs and whether or not they are implemented and the reasons for this. • Chapter 6 examines the reasons employees are discharged from the service, and what affects drop out, both prior to receiving an assessment and afterwards. • Chapter 7 reports on the outcomes of the Fit for Work service, such as employees returning to work, retention in employment and changes to health and well-being. • Chapter 8 looks at employer and employee perceptions of the added value of the service, and their suggestions for its improvement. • Chapter 9 presents data gathered about the Fit for Work advisory services. • The Research tools for the surveys and the qualitative research are contained in the Appendices

Mapping investment in adult skills – which individuals, in what learning and with what returns?

The report explores how public investment in adult skills through the Adult Skills Budget compares with other funding streams, such as investment by employers. This review took place before the apprenticeships levy on large employers

Connecting Communities:Process Evaluation: Final Report

Connecting Communities was a voluntary employment support programme funded by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and procured and overseen by the West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA). It was tested across nine geographically defined neighbourhoods (also called ‘lots’) and ran for three and a half years. This period included the Covid-19 pandemic, which impacted on programme delivery, employment opportunities and everyday life more generally. The nine lots were located across the WMCA area: Birchills Leamore; Batchley and Brockhill; Cannock North; Washwood Heath; Shard End; Chemsley Wood; Binley and Willenhall; Camp Hill; and Glascote.Emphasising intensive, personalised, and context-specific support, the programme sought to: (a) build social networks to foster positive behavioural and attitudinal changes towards work; (b) increase employment; and (c) work with local businesses to bolster the recruitment and progression of disadvantaged individuals. This evaluation identifies the factors that influenced employment and progression outcomes for participants, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the place-based approach to employment support more broadly. The study drew on qualitative data from observational site visits, in-depth interviews, and analysis of management information and claims data. An impact evaluation and assessment of cost-effectiveness will be published separately.<br/

Connecting Communities:Process Evaluation: Final Report

Connecting Communities was a voluntary employment support programme funded by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and procured and overseen by the West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA). It was tested across nine geographically defined neighbourhoods (also called ‘lots’) and ran for three and a half years. This period included the Covid-19 pandemic, which impacted on programme delivery, employment opportunities and everyday life more generally. The nine lots were located across the WMCA area: Birchills Leamore; Batchley and Brockhill; Cannock North; Washwood Heath; Shard End; Chemsley Wood; Binley and Willenhall; Camp Hill; and Glascote.Emphasising intensive, personalised, and context-specific support, the programme sought to: (a) build social networks to foster positive behavioural and attitudinal changes towards work; (b) increase employment; and (c) work with local businesses to bolster the recruitment and progression of disadvantaged individuals. This evaluation identifies the factors that influenced employment and progression outcomes for participants, as well as the strengths and weaknesses of the place-based approach to employment support more broadly. The study drew on qualitative data from observational site visits, in-depth interviews, and analysis of management information and claims data. An impact evaluation and assessment of cost-effectiveness will be published separately.<br/