Agenda item

(i)        Joint Report of the Director of Transformation and Partnerships and the Corporate Director of Children and Young People’s Services.

(ii)       Presentation by the Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning, Children and Young People’s Services.

The Chairman introduced the Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning, Linda Bailey and the External Programme Manager, Helen Radcliffe who were in attendance to provide the Committee with an update on progress in relation to the DurhamWorks Programme (for copy see file of minutes).

The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning reminded Members of the target for the number of young people aged 16-24 to be engaged through DurhamWorks by July 2018, 5,830 and referred Members to a presentation slide setting out the verified statistics from May 2018.  It was noted that the target would not be reached, with the current number being 4,606.  Members were reminded that initially the programme was intended to be for 4 years, however, due to funding delays the actual time available to deliver the programme had been 2 years 3 months.  It was noted that part of the strategy was to reach out into rural areas, however, this would be looked at again as the commissioned services in this area had not proved to be successful.  The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning referred the Committee to a map setting out the hotspots in terms of those Not in Employment, Education and Training (NEET).

Councillors were reminded that the DurhamWorks model was such that the young people were followed through their journey, noting some individuals may require a light touch and some may require more intensive work.  Members noted statistics in terms of those 4,606 young people engaged with: during the month of May 2018, those in EET – 994; those in activity with a delivery partner – 335; those with one-to-one wrap around support only – 1,738; those that had completed – 1,361; and those that left the programme, non-completed – 176.  The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning noted a breakdown of participants by age and gender, and also of the progressions by sector, noting the majority being Full-time employment, apprenticeships, Further Education and Part-time employment.

Members noted the position in relation to the number of NEETs, with it being explained that the position had stabilised and not fluctuated while DurhamWorks had been in place.  It was added that further analysis would take place during the evaluation process for the Programme.  The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning noted comparative data in terms of NEETs and “not knowns” noting County Durham was similar to the regional average, better than statistical neighbours, however, below the national average.  It was explained that employment had risen for 16-18 year olds in the period 2014 – 2018.

The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning noted in relation to vulnerable groups in the 16-18 age range, around a third had a self-declared mental health issue, and noted that staff had been developed in order to understand those issues.  It was noted that there had been good successes in terms of the number of care leavers, those with special education needs and disabilities (SEND) and those engaged with the Youth Offending Service (YOS) progressing into EET.

The Committee were referred to a graph setting out youth unemployment figures, with the Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning noting some frustration in terms of the data in terms of a 10% confidence interval and fluctuations since the introduction of Universal Credit.  It was added that this issue was an area of work being looked at by the Data Service in the Council

The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning noted in terms of financial performance, the DurhamWorks Programme had a cumulative expenditure of £11.003 million to the end of March 2018.  It was noted there was a projected underspend of £2.88 million if the Programme ended in July 2018, with reasons including: delayed start to the programme; underspend by some Delivery Partners; and delays in receiving approval for project change requests.

In relation to the evaluation of the Programme, it was noted that it had been found that there was evidence that the model of sustained wraparound support was resulting in positive progressions and that collaborative working between Delivery Partners was improving.  The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning added that the targeted support for young people in vulnerable groups was proving to be very successful.  It was explained that a cost benefit analysis was being undertaken, through the Social Return on Investment (SORI) model which had 3 strands: fiscal; economic and social.

Members noted that in terms of the future of DurhamWorks, it was felt the brand was valuable and would be retained and built upon.  It was explained that there was an ESF Investment Priority 1.2 fund which had been bid for, which would support 5,129 15-24 year olds who are NEET or at risk of becoming NEET, with £7.98 million of funding, of which £4.79 million was ESF and £3.19 million to be match funding.  In relation to an extension of the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI) funding, there was a potential to look to support 4,100 15-24 year olds who are NEET, in addition to the 1,000 shortfall from the current Programme.  It was noted this potential fund was £12 million, with £9.0 million being ESF and £3.0 million being match funding.

The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning concluded by noting the successes of the DurhamWorks participants, with an Achievement Awards Ceremony in May 2018, and referred to photographs of the Portfolio Holder, Councillor O Gunn, presenting young people with awards for their hard work.

The Chairman thanked the Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning and asked Members of the Committee for their questions and comments.

Councillor M Clarke asked whether the underspend could be utilised to extend the programme for a longer period.  The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning noted that payment was only made if the spend was evidenced and therefore it would not be possible in this programme.  She added that as part of the funding request in terms of the extension to the current YEI programme, we had asked that, if successful, the £2.88 million underspend was used first, prior to the £12 million from the new programme.  The External Programme Manager noted that a request had been made for an additional 3 years, up to July 2021, to complete the programme.

Councillor E Scott asked as regards the NEETs figures and who was supported.  The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning explained that over 5,100, 16-24 year olds were unemployed, however, NEETs referred to those aged 16-18 years old. 

The External Programme Manager noted there had been engagement with 4,606 young people in the 2 years 3 months from the Programme starting, adding now there were staff  structures and partnerships in place which would create a strong platform from which to work however the timescale was still challenging.  The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning noted that each year there were approximately 2000 “new” NEETs, illustrating the ‘churn’ in the cohort with between 900-1000 young people being NEET at any one time. 

The External Programme Manager explained that many of the young people aged 18-24 had become fatigued in relation to employability training and therefore activities offered in DurhamWorks were looking to focus more on jobs, rather than CV building.

Councillor J Atkinson noted that at the previous item, the Chairman, CDEP had mentioned the need for engineers/apprenticeships when speaking about skills and the feedback from employers had been that young peoples’ attitudes towards work was very important.  He added that through STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) work he had been involved in he felt that the attitudes of children could be best influenced at the Primary School age rather than when they were older.  The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning noted that the DurhamWorks Programme did not engage with that younger age group, and noted in the past there was some Council work in relation to that age group.  She added that from her experience a lot of young people aged 16-24 were thinking about their futures, and careers in those sectors.  She noted that many did not achieve 5 GCSEs at A-C and added that should the ESF 1.2 bid be successful, there could be scope to engage with younger children, however, this was not possible with the YEI programme.

Councillor E Adam noted percentages in respect of vulnerable NEETs and asked what numbers that represented and also if there would be some analysis of the Delivery Partners underspend, to be better informed moving forward should the other bids be successful and work continued through to 2021.  The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning noted that DurhamWorks had been “paid in line with actual expenditure” and those Delivery Partners that had proven they could deliver would be those we would move forward with.  It was added that the use of sub-contracts would help in terms of flexibility.  Councillor E Adam asked as regards why sub-contracts were used, the Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning and confirmed that they are required to match fund, whereas sub-contractors were paid on outputs.  The External Programme Manager noted figures in relation to vulnerable groups and agreed that the information would be circulated to Members, Councillor E Adam noted the good work and agreed that the focus on those groups was correct.

Councillor D Hall noted that he thought that DurhamWorks was an excellent programme, and asked if there were any lessons that could be applied to cross-cutting issues and projects in other services, in order to reach young people prior to any contact with DurhamWorks.  The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning reminded Members that it was known that mental health problems were exacerbated by long term unemployment and noted that more work within schools would likely help in the longer term.  She noted that having a financial boost to undertake such works at that age was difficult, though the excellent work of one delivery partner SHAID (Single Homeless Action Initiative in Durham) was noted.  It was added that in the wider work of the Local Authority, partners now tended to work in multi-agency teams, for example Team Around the Family, and any lessons from the Programme evaluation would be taken forward as appropriate.  The External Programme Manager noted that she felt the DurhamWorks Programme had also helped the Council in terms of internal partnership working.

Councillor P Jopling noted the information as regards young people and “programme fatigue” and asked whether they dropped out of the programme entirely or whether there was a process whereby we could go back and re-engage.  The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning noted that of those engaged with, around 1,700 received one-to-one support and therefore they were still receiving help. 

It was added that of the 170 or so that had failed to complete their programme, it was not likely that they would re-engage, however, it was hoped that through the work and interventions of other professionals they could be engaged with.  The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning suggested that the final evaluation report  was circulated to the Members of the Committee.

Mrs R Morris noted that the report set out as regards some financial help young people received in order to get into work and asked what form it took and how this assistance scheme was advertised.  The External Programme Manager noted that there were wrap around support staff and that the flexible fund could be used for clothing, bus passes, taxis, and even to provide a month’s “wage” if a young person had not received their wage.  It was noted that it was a sign of the levels of deprivation that in some cases the fund had been used to buy young people suitable work shoes.  It was added that some young people were able to access “Wheels for Work”, and it was highlighted that that YEI funding could not be used for capital purchases.  The External Programme Manager noted that the flexible fund was not a general fund, it was only accessible by young people within DurhamWorks and was therefore not advertised outside of the programme.  Mrs R Morris noted that advertising of the scheme to young people may be a way of encouraging young people to engage with the Programme, if they could see how the fund could be used to remove some of the barriers they may be facing.  The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning noted that a case study may be beneficial in this instance.

Councillor L Maddison reiterated that the Chairman, CDEP had noted that in general young people had specific skills, however, some employers had felt that many were not “employment ready”.  She asked if there was any work that was undertaken with employers themselves in order to understand and address the issue.  The Strategic Manager, Progression and Learning noted that should funding bids be successful work experience elements could be built into the future DurhamWorks programme.  It was added that there may be the opportunities to provide help and guidance for employers and also to use more examples to demonstrate to young people the benefits of engagement.  The External Programme Manager added that while job and apprenticeship opportunities were being created, it was important to help young people be ready to be able to take up those opportunities.

Resolved:    

(i)              That the report be noted.

(ii)            That the Economy and Enterprise Overview and Scrutiny Committee receive a further progress report on the future of DurhamWorks as part of the 2019/20 work programme.