Written Evidence submitted to the Education and Employment Select Committee

January 1999

Opportunities for Disabled People

The Association for Supported Employment (AfSE)

Author: Greg Everatt, AfSE Co-ordinator

1. Introduction

1.1. The Association for Supported Employment (AfSE) is a membership organisation and is registered as a charity. AfSE currently has approximately 200 members, about 150 of which are supported employment agencies providing supported employment to people with a disability. Of the remaining 50 members most are individuals with an interest in supported employment either from a professional point of view or from the perspective of someone who has been supported into employment.

1.2. The AfSE definition of supported employment can be found in full in Annexe 1. but can be characterised in brief by the phrase ‘place then train’ which differs from more traditional forms of vocational rehabilitation that tend to use a job readiness model characterised by ‘train then place’

1.3. The AfSE model has been found to be particularly effective with people who have tended to be excluded from other vocational initiatives, enabling many people with high support needs to succeed in employment, enhancing not only their income but also their self-esteem, dignity and social inclusion.

1.4. Each year AfSE carries out an informal survey of its members which enables us to estimate the number of people with a disability supported in employment. Figures from the 1998 survey suggest that there are in the region of 20,000 people with a disability in work who are either currently supported or who have been supported by AfSE members.

1.5. Of these people 57.5 % have a learning disability, 8.2 % have mental health problems, 4.7 % have a visual impairment, 2.8 % a hearing impairment, 15 % a physical disability and the remaining 11.8 % have a range of impairments including traumatic brain injury, Autism / Asperger syndrome and, challenging behaviours.

2. Barriers to Supported Employment

2.1. There exist in the United Kingdom a range of barriers to both the development of supported employment agencies and the degree to which people with a disability feel able to participate in the labour market.

2.2. Welfare Benefits provide a secure income for a great many people with a disability however the regulations surrounding any benefit claim can place severe restrictions on any work undertaken.

2.3. Most people with a disability who work fall into one of two broad categories as far as benefits are concerned (i) those who work for 16 hours per week or less and whose earnings are classed as therapeutic and, (ii) those who work for more than sixteen hours per week and who either claim ‘in work’ benefits or who rely entirely upon earned income and non means tested benefits.

2.4. Supported Employment has largely been used with people with a learning disability most of whom have little or no work history prior to their involvement with supported employment and therefore few are claiming Incapacity Benefit. Most people are claiming Disability Living Allowance and Income Support, and many are additionally claiming Severe Disablement Allowance. A disabled person working less than 16 hours is entitled to claim Therapeutic Earnings if the work undertaken has therapeutic value and if the claim is supported by a doctor. They are then entitled to earn up to £48 per week before their benefits are affected unless, as is the case with the majority of claimants, they are claiming Income Support in which case they must reduce their benefit claim, pound for pound, for any money earned over £15 per week.

2.5. For people working for more than 16 hours per week and claiming Disability Working Allowance (soon to become Disabled Person’s Tax Credit) their benefit income tapers off as they earn more but there is no upper limit to either the time they work or their potential income.

2.6. People claiming housing benefit, whether or not they work for more or less than 16 hours, face further complications and reduction in their potential net gain from earnings, particularly those people who have preserved rights. This provides a further disincentive to work.

2.7. The effect of the ‘16 hour’ rule is that it creates two camps, the first in which working time and earnings are suppressed in order to avoid the loss of benefit income, and the second in which working time and earning capacity are maximised. Members of the first group tend to have their disability emphasised in order to retain their right to disability related benefits, the members of the second tend to have their ability emphasised in order to maximise career prospects.

2.8. Most people would agree that membership of the second group is preferable to membership of the first however the existence of the ‘16 hour’ rule creates an artificially large hurdle making the transition from working for less than 16 hours (and often it is much less than 16 hours in order that earnings do not exceed £15) to working in excess of 16 hours and relying on earned income topped up with DWA. Many people who would like to work for 20 hours or so each week as a gradual introduction to full time employment are unable to do so because of the financial penalties they incur.

2.9. A second major barrier to supported employment is the geographical and eligibility lottery that many people with a disability face. Supported Employment agencies have existed for more than 15 years in the UK and there are currently an estimated 200 throughout the country. However these 200 are not evenly spread, they do not provide a uniform service and nor do they have uniform referral criteria.

2.10. Most of the supported employment agencies have been created in response to ‘bottom up’ pressure, and although supported employment may be the uniform solution the problems it is solving may differ enormously.

2.11. Parents and carers might have lobbied and brought pressure to bear in order to create an alternative to what they see as a poor service; social service managers may have created agencies in order to relieve pressure on already overcrowded day services; health service managers may have established agencies in order to provide meaningful daytime occupation for people being relocated from long stay hospitals. These are some of the pressures that have resulted in the creation of supported employment agencies, and as you might expect the variety in terms of working practices, referral procedures and eligibility, funding, and legal status of organisations varies almost as much as the number of agencies that exist.

2.12. Some parts of the country are fairly well provided for, such as parts of the South East and the North West of England, however other parts of the country have little or no supported employment at all. As well as being inherently unfair, denying many people with a disability the opportunity to succeed in employment, this creates difficulties both for people with a disability who wish to relocate, and for employers with multiple sites who wish to adopt uniform recruitment practices across the country.

2.13. Factors which ought to introduce a degree of uniformity, such as Employment Service resources e.g. Access to Work, are distributed unevenly because different PACT managers have the responsibility of interpreting the regulations relating to AtW and will legitimately do so differently in different areas.

2.14. In addition to the geographical uncertainty of availability there is also significant under provision. Conservative estimates suggest that there are one tenth of the supported employment places that are required to meet the demand from people with a disability.

2.15. Clearly other barriers to supported employment exist however these other barriers do not have the same national significance. Although neither of the barriers described here are insurmountable, the growth of supported employment and the success of individuals is proof enough of that, they do drain resources away from the core of supported employment agencies work of finding suitable jobs and supporting people with disabilities in them.

3. Overcoming the barriers to Supported Employment

3.1. In order to overcome the barriers described here, and to prevent the introduction of new barriers that might be created by factors such as the National Minimum Wage an integrated approach to reform will need to be adopted. Reform that goes beyond the strict remit of this committee in that it would need to be implemented by the Department of Social Security and the Department of Health in addition to the Department of Education and Employment.

3.2. AfSE is a member of a consortium that has been asked by Margaret Hodge MP, Minister for Employment and Equal Opportunities, to prepare a detailed proposal that outlines how supported employment might be made available across the country to all people with a disability who need it. The proposal will include an analysis of the impact on DoH budgets and benefits regulations. This piece of work is only just beginning and is therefore not available to this committee as yet, however there are a number of general issues and solutions that can be described in outline.

3.3. To improve the potential for people with a disability to increase their degree of involvement in employment it is essential that there is reform of the benefits regulations that apply to people with disabilities in work. For example as described in ‘Home, Work and Inclusion’ (Ken Simons, Joseph Rowntree Foundation 1998). In outline this would mean scrapping the ‘16 hour’ rule and introducing a new ‘in work’ benefit that has a dual taper, reducing as earnings increase. The dual taper is necessary to overcome the potential for people with a low earning capacity to be disadvantaged under the National Minimum Wage.

3.4. The benefit would bring a person’s hourly rate up to the level of the NMW when they are unable to work productively enough to earn the full NMW, it would also bring their gross income up to the equivalent of a working week on the NMW when they are unable to work a full week due to lack of stamina or because of the extra time they need for travelling or preparation for work. This benefit would be in addition to any non means tested benefit they might be entitled to.

3.5. In order to provide uniform access to supported employment across the country there would need to be the creation of a national network of supported employment agencies with a responsibility to accept referrals in an open and transparent way, from a wide variety of sources including Personal Advisors, Social Workers, Community Psychiatric Nurses and self referrals. The responsibility for funding and establishing these agencies would be shared by the Department of Health and the Department for Education and Employment.

3.6. This is in line with the policies of both of these departments. The recently published Social Services White Paper will require Social Services departments to Promote the independence of adults assessed as needing social care support and to provide better support for service users who are able to work. Similarly initiatives such as the New Deal for Disabled People from the DfEE and DSS promote the Government’s principle of ‘work for those who can; security for those who cannot’.

3.7. The implementation of such a policy would of course incur a cost, and if implemented along the line described here the cost would be shared between local and central government. However there are undoubtedly potential savings to be made as more people with a disability move into employment. Local government will have the opportunity to reduce the range of traditional costly ‘centre based’ day services it needs to offer. Central government can expect a reduction in the overall benefit claim and at the same time an increase tax and National Insurance revenue.

3.8. A study published in 1996, ‘The Costs and Benefits of Supported Employment Agencies’ (Beyer et al, HMSO) compared the costs of supported employment agencies with other forms of day care for people with a disability particularly workshops funded by the Employment Service in their Supported Employment program and while the figures, at first glance, suggest that the potential for savings is marginal further examination of the study indicates otherwise if the benefits regulations are reformed and if a period of time is allowed to elapse.

3.9. Supported employment agencies become more cost effective with the passage of time as their clients achieve more and more independence. Additionally comparison with similar studies conducted in the US suggest that if the disincentive to work a moderate number of hours were removed most people supported in employment would work more hours and earn more money thus reducing support costs* and increasing tax and benefit claw back.

4. Conclusion

4.1. Many of the government policies referred to here have not received an unambiguous welcome from all sectors of the disability movement. Fears have been expressed by many people with a disability regarding a compulsion to accept unsuitable and unsatisfactory employment. These fears should be recognised as legitimate, and should be given full consideration when planning a system of support for people with a disability in employment.

4.2. People should be supported individually to find and succeed in a job that meets their requirements, not only in the terms and conditions of employment but also as an environment in which they spend time and which has the potential to lead to a fuller and more satisfactory life. Any support given must not be limited by time but must continue for as long as the person needs that support.

4.3. If the full implications of employment are considered while at the same time the benefit disincentives are removed, and if no element of compulsion is included it should be possible to create a system that is seen as positive by people with a disability and that has the potential to lead to savings for both central and local government. The introduction of a national system of supported employment agencies alongside a radical reform of ‘in work’ benefits would have this effect.