Unofficial figures show 70% on Work Programme still jobless after a year

Ahead of the official publication of Work Programme Outcome Statistics by ONS this morning, ministers have been preparing the ground for low expectations.

 

Ahead of the official publication of Work Programme Outcome Statistics by ONS this morning, ministers have been preparing the ground for low expectations.

The Telegraph reports unofficial figures showing 70% of participants remain jobless after a year on the scheme:

Unofficial figures released ahead of the government’s own results showed 71 per cent of those who joined the £5 billion Work Programme when it started in June 2011 had not found employment by September this year.

This amounted to about 53,000 individuals. About 22,000, or 29 per cent of those who entered the schemes in June last year, had successfully started work.

Out of the 248,000 long-term unemployed adults who joined the programme in June, July and August 2011, about 180,000 were still out of work in September 2012.

As the New Statesman’s Rafael Behr blogged last night, ministers have been preparing the ground for bad news – with a leaked letter from employment minister Mark Hoban revealing the coalition’s attempts to “move the goalposts”:

It has been hard to judge the effectiveness of the policy because the DWP has prevented providers from publishing their data on how many people have actually been placed in work. We have had data on the number of people referred to the Work Programme which suggest that not enough of the long-term unemployed are even getting help through the scheme.

What he haven’t seen – because ministers have continually delayed publication – is how many people have actually been found jobs and how many are staying in work long enough to trigger the payments on which the providers depend if they are not to go bust. In other words, we have yet to get a clear sense of whether the Work Programme is actually working.

That wait comes to an end tomorrow, when, at last, the DWP will publish the numbers. There are hints already that they won’t be encouraging.

Hoban wrote:

“As the Work Programme supports people for two years or more, it is too early to judge Work Programme performance by Job Outcome and Sustainment Payment data alone.”

Adding:

“To better explain Work Programme preferences so far, I will also be releasing a number of ad hoc statistics which show how the programme is moving people off benefits and compare what we have spent on the programme with the cost of the previous employment programme, Flexible new Deal. ERSA, the providers’ trade organisation, will also publish information on how the programme is helping people move into jobs.”

The official figures will be released shortly…

27 Responses to “Unofficial figures show 70% on Work Programme still jobless after a year”

  1. Patrick

    You come across a complete nutcase.

  2. Newsbot9

    Yes, I have come across you. There we go.

  3. Steven

    I certainly agree with the idea that some unemployed people could benefit from learning new skills but the problem is that due to all of these schemes going back to New Labour’s equally moronic so-called New Deal the unemployed don’t have the time to do that since they HAVE TO attend these things. Anyway, what too many people in this country fail to recognise is that the real problem we have is the lack of demand for labour in our economy ie a shortage of vacancies. You can be as highly-skilled as you like and have a great work ethic but if the jobs are not there then they are not there. It is THIS sad fact about our economy that the government needs to do something about.

  4. Steven

    Exactly. I worry about the fact that so many people in our country APPROVE of ‘something for nothing’ ie state subsidies for poor employers paying poverty wages.

  5. Steven

    Not necessarily. I’m a BNP supporter and I don’t approve of workfare because it is economic illiteracy as well as morally objectionable (sanctions should only be applied to those who continually refuse reasonable actual job offers)

Comments are closed.