outcomes: lessons from USDL and MyGo service integration models 07 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Joining-up to improve

• utcomes: lessons from USDL

and MyGo service integration models

DR JANE COLECHIN, SENIOR RESEARCHER

07 SEPTEMBER 2016

STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION

• Universal Credit & policy response Universal

Support Delivered Locally (USdl)

• Evaluation lessons from USdl trial delivery
• MyGo – case study of integrated partnership to

deliver EET outcomes for young people

THE CONTEXT: UNIVERSAL CREDIT

• Universal Credit (UC) - ambitious and

challenging

• Bringing together all out-of-work and

in-work benefits –streamline and simplify

• Designed to emulate the ‘working

experience’:

• Accessed through a digital platform –

UC gateway

• Monthly payment of benefit (including

housing benefit) paid into a (transactional) bank account

• Generates support needs:
• Online/digital capacity;
• Vulnerabilities for those with debt

issues/managing monthly payment;

THE RESPONSE: UNIVERSAL SUPPORT DELIVERED LOCALLY

• Universal Support

delivered locally (USdl) – evolution of Local Services Support Framework

• 11 trials across the UK

(Argyll & Bute/Dundee)

• Delivering Sept 2014 –

August 2015

• Learning and Work

Commissioned to deliver a full programme evaluation

Partnership working

JCP/DWP Local Authority VCS support services Triage Digital Inclusion Financial inclusion Additional support

A COMMON THEORY OF CHANGE….

Programme-level theory of change

….BUT DIFFERENT MODELS…

LEARNING FROM USDL SERVICE DESIGN

LESSON 1: BUILD SERVICE ON LOCAL NEEDS & PROVISION

CO-LOCATION VERSUS HUB/SPOKE

Centralised co-located HUB Dispersed HUB and SPOKE model

Benefits: a one-stop-shop; efficiency & knowledge transfer Challenges: maintaining distinctiveness

• f services within HUBs; creating

private spaces for vulnerable customers/issues Benefits: local access to support for isolated customers Challenges: presenting a whole customer support journey; maintaining co-ordination of support

LESSON 2: INTEGRATE & SEQUENCE SUPPORT

ENGAGING & REFERRING CUSTOMERS TO SUPPORT

• Take up of support was challenging (1 in 3 of those referred did not take up support
• Simple model often led to high drop-outs, often evolved into staged model with active

follow-up and re-referral

Simple referral model Multiple staged referral model

INTEGRATION & SEQUENCING

Integrated support & referral model Integrated support & referral model

‘I have an adviser, they invited me here for a session or sessions, they explained it to me, we went through certain worksheets – you know, test how it would work, how I would manage, what help we can get. I can always contact her if I need any advice and they directed me to

• ther information sources.’

(Claimant interview, Islington) ‘If they’ve got the bailiffs knocking on their door, or they’ve got a possession hearing coming up, then that’s what you’ve got to deal with first. .....It’s a hook that I think, because, I’m sure you’ll ask about this later on, but because of the big issue of take up, that’s the hook that actually gets people coming in to see somebody’ (USdl Staff interview, Derby)

LESSON 3: CASE MANAGEMENT & MONITORING IS KEY

CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

Different levels of customer monitoring:

• MI tracker/web referral systems (Argyle Bute) – simple, actionable – relies on

partner goodwill

‘Yes the speed and the fact that you can’t ignore it ...So in terms of efficiency and effectiveness of making a referral it’s good.’ (USdl operational staff interview, Argyle Bute)

• Derby – E-CINS system / Northumberland & South Tyneside Hanlon system

‘I can sit down and look at somebody’s profile on E-CINS and I can work my way through their ten assessments and I

can see exactly where it’s improved, what they’ve engaged with and you can see patterns.’ (USdl project manager, Derby)

• Caseworkers

‘In an ideal world, everybody who has complex needs would have a particular caseworker to follow up for them and track their case, make sure they’re moving on effectively. And that’s an ideal world and that’s not going to happen because there just isn’t the resource or funding available.’ (USdl Staff interview, Derby)

Key success factors: partnership management and data- sharing agreements

LESSON 4: GOOD GOVERNANCE

PARTNERSHIPS, MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE

• Partnership working a key aspect of all trials
• Most successful where underpinned by good project management

– Project managers were key – commitment, vision, consistency and problem resolution

• Governance characterised by equal partnership between JCP and

LA(s)

• Good governance included:

– Committed leadership – Open communications – Wider steering groups – strategy and operations

• Delivery of wider partnerships more variable:

– Often good links with VCS, skills, housing – Service level agreements would have helped – Health services notable in their absence

• Partnerships have stood trials in good stead for UC implementation

MYGO – A CASE STUDY

MYGO

• A joint partnership between Suffolk CC, JCP & People Plus to deliver

holistic EET support services for young people 14-24.

• Ambitious, transformative service, bringing together JCP services (work coaches) careers

services, complex needs support for young people NEET.

• A range of service levels and provisions for young people defined by triage
• n entry, support built around the core caseworker support model

THE MYGO CENTRE

• Co-location in a

neutral location

• Fully integration of

staff and services – using MyGO branding

• Open-plan flow

AMBITIOUS TARGETS

Delivering support - November 2014 to December 2016 Project outcomes:

• Youth unemployment halved in Greater Ipswich within 2 years
• Increased off flow rates for young people (more people into work)
• Decreased average time on benefit for Young People
• Reduction in number of repeat claims within 6 months
• Young people securing suitable learning or work within three

months

• Medium term earnings progression of participants

Participant outcomes

• Through the caseworker service a:
• Minimum of 3,500 young people supported into work
• Minimum of 2,200 into sustained work, six months or more

INTERIM OUTCOMES

• Successful implementation of a new model of

support for young people in a single hub

• 3219 referrals (LMH) 3195 registrations 2741

engaged

• Overall job outcomes 27% (27% 3 months/ 43%

by 12 months)

• JSA rates 46%, ESA 16% - programme

compares favourably to local programmes for disadvantaged groups – unclear if has additional impact

KEY LESSONS

• Co-location works well to support a range of services, holistic

provision, warm-handovers

• Central model relies on additional outreach – but not equal access

for all

• Lack of private spaces, creates challenges for vulnerable/complex

needs

“Open places with a lot of people, I just don’t like it… I need to concentrate of talking to someone” (Female MyGo non-engager, 25 years old)

• Fluidity of the centre/coaching approach makes it difficult for some

young people to understand the ‘whole support journey’ or secure a fixed appointment

• Case management system in place, but
• Data-sharing agreements in place through secondment/strong

partnership working, however, resource/time intensive

• Managing secondments and competing organisational priorities is an
• ngoing challenge

Thank you Questions?