Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success
10:00 am - June 5th 2011
| Tweet | Share on Tumblr |
One of the first acts of the government last year was to get rid of the Future Jobs Fund. One year on, they’ve finally got round to doing some research about whether or not the Fund worked.
And guess what? “This study suggests that FJF has been successful in preparing customers for work and, for many participants their reported experiences had been to such a high standard, that they could not think of any improvements to the scheme.”
The report speaks for itself:
“Prior to starting on FJF, many participants reported experiencing a highly competitive and depressed labour market, and a number of participants felt that they would have not been able to get a job without FJF at that point. Almost all participants reported an increase in their skills set as result of participation in FJF, although there was some variation in the breadth and depth of skills gathered.
…
“Most respondents were confident that the skills gained from their FJF posts would be used in future roles. Formal qualifications and accreditations were also obtained by some participants. The predominant view was that an increase in self-confidence and perceived sense of employability were the most useful benefits of the scheme.”
“A number of the participants had secured non-subsidised employment at the time of the interviews and a handful had been kept on by their FJF employer via an extension to the FJF grant. Of those currently working, many were sure that the FJF post had played a vital role in getting their job because of the boost to their CV, skills set and confidence in applying for work.”
“A widespread view amongst respondents who had not found work was that their six month post would help to secure another job in the future.
Some of the respondents who had been unemployed for many months plus prior to starting FJF described how their frustration and despair had changed into a real sense of hope for their prospects.
Across the group, most respondents reported a positive change in their confidence levels and felt better equipped to find suitable work long-term. Some described how getting in the habit and routine of work and doing meaningful activity had significantly changed their attitude to employment, in terms of recognising the personal rewards it could offer.”
* * * * * * * *
A programme which changed “frustration and despair” into “a real sense of hope”, which gave young people self-belief, raised their aspirations, and which played a “vital role” in helping them get the skills and confidence to get jobs. All according to the government which scrapped it.
Barely a day goes past without some Tory or other raging about “scroungers” or the “workshy”, and saying that they want to get people off benefits and into work. Yet when they found a government initiative which helped reduce youth unemployment, they scrapped it. They should apologise and bring it back.
| Tweet | Share on Tumblr |  |
Don Paskini is deputy-editor of LC. He also blogs at donpaskini. He is on twitter as @donpaskini
· Other posts by Don Paskini
Story Filed Under: Blog ,Conservative Party ,Economy
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Reader comments
But actually its says nothing at all about whether or not people actually got jobs.
And intriguing that of the 1379 people asked to have a phone interview in exchange for £10 only 89 did so.
Labour’s record on dealing with unemployment was dire. Labour were happy to carry on where the Tories left off .Ask Labour MP, Frank Field :
http://www.balancedmigration.com/pressreleases/BritishjobsreleaseRev4.pdf
28 June 2009
“All private sector jobs created under Labour have gone to foreign workers
“British jobs for foreign workers”
“New figures published today show just how few new jobs in Britain have gone to British born workers. Looking at people of working age, all jobs created in the private sector under the Labour Government have been filled by foreign born workers. The number of UK born workers in the private sector actually fell by nearly 90,000 between the first quarter of 1997 and the first quarter of 2009. A third of new public sector jobs also went to non-UK born workers.
In respect of the total working population over the age of 16, the picture is slightly different – because a significant number of UK born people have stayed on after the official retirement age. These figures show that 1.1 million new jobs have been created in the public sector of which 28% went to non-UK born workers. In the private sector there were 1.8 million new jobs – but 85% went to non-UK born workers.
Commenting on the figures, the co-Chairmen of the Cross-Party Group on Balanced Migration, Frank Field MP and Nicholas Soames MP, said:
“These figures tell a simple story: in the private sector it has been British jobs for foreign workers. The private sector should now match the public sector in ensuring local people have the first chance at gaining local jobs”.
*The Rt Hon Frank Field MP and The Hon Nicholas Soames MP are Co-Chairmen of the Cross Party Group on Balanced Migration. The Group’s Vice-Chairmen are Lord (Bill) Jordan CBE (former President of the Amalgamated Engineering and Electrical Union)
@2 http://www.fivechinesecrackers.com/2011/05/its-christmas-for-tabloids.html
http://www.fivechinesecrackers.com/2011/05/christmas-for-tabloids-i-tell-you.html
Beware of right-wing ministers bearing gifts of stories about all the new jobs going to foreigners.
Barely a day goes past without some Tory or other raging about “scroungers” or the “workshy”, and saying that they want to get people off benefits and into work. Yet when they found a government initiative which helped reduce youth unemployment, they scrapped it.
So what does that tell us about the tories TRUE intentions?
Forget about what you and I might think ‘works’ or is desirable, what do their actions tell us about what they really want?
Don, you do know Lib Con has already published an article on this report, don’t you?
So you don’t have to look at the original mocking, here’s the link to the report that shows that FJF participants were significantly LESS likely to get a job than non-participants, when controlled for age and length of time unemployed:
http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd1/jsa/ypg/ypg_fjf_annexe_apr2011.pdf
“So you don’t have to look at the original mocking, here’s the link to the report that shows that FJF participants were significantly LESS likely to get a job than non-participants, when controlled for age and length of time unemployed:”
You mean the report which says:
“The tables above show there is a difference in tracked benefit outcomes of FJF participants and the comparison group. However this variation could be the result of differences in customer and job characteristics of the two groups as outlined in the technical overview.”
The FJF was for people who couldn’t (before participation on the programme) get a non-FJF job. It is unsurprising that a comparison between this group and a group of similar young people who were more employable finds that the group which is closer to the labour market were more likely to stay in paid work.
@Don:
You mean the technical overview which states:
“There are challenges in finding suitable comparison groups for FJF starters. The bulk of FJF participants within the first cohort had been claiming JSA for between nine and 12 months when they started FJF, therefore for consistency we have also used the same conditions when selecting our second comparison group i.e.
-For the first cohort we have identified 18 to 24 year olds who reached nine to twelve months unemployment and left to employment (excluding FJF) between 1st October 2009 and 30th November 2009.
-For the second cohort we have identified 18 to 24 year olds who reached nine to
twelve months unemployment and left to employment (excluding FJF) between 1st October 2009 and 31st March 2010.”
The eligibility criteria for the FJF was being aged between 18-24 and being unemployed for six months. What’s the difference between people who met that criteria and people in the comparison cohorts?
Reactions: Twitter, blogs
-
Liberal Conspiracy
Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success http://bit.ly/mCslvP
-
Jamie Robinson
Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success http://bit.ly/mCslvP
-
Imran Ahmed
RT @libcon: Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success http://bit.ly/mCslvP << So why did Osborne axe it? Madness.
-
Wes Streeting
“@libcon: Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success http://t.co/lg45IuW” < Glad govt kept it going. Oh, wait…
-
ian robathan
RT @libcon: Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success http://bit.ly/mCslvP #labour
-
Gemma Tumelty
“@libcon: Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success http://t.co/lg45IuW” < Glad govt kept it going. Oh, wait…
-
Adam Farrell
“@libcon: Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success http://t.co/lg45IuW” < Glad govt kept it going. Oh, wait…
-
Rick Muir
“@libcon: Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success http://t.co/lg45IuW” < Glad govt kept it going. Oh, wait…
-
Matt Dykes
Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success http://bit.ly/mCslvP
-
Don Paskini
Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success http://bit.ly/mCslvP
-
Mel from Leeds
“@libcon: Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success http://t.co/Qhzhehv” quite depressing this has now been scrapped 🙁
-
Richard Bradley
RT @libcon: Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success http://t.co/jPeelCJ
-
Richard Exell
Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a Success http://tinyurl.com/6dvm24x
-
Carl Roper
Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a Success http://tinyurl.com/6dvm24x
-
Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success | Liberal Conspiracy : jobs
[…] Follow this link: Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success | Liberal Conspiracy […]
-
paulstpancras
Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/x8jfhVC via @libcon
-
Susan Nash
Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a Success http://tinyurl.com/6dvm24x
-
Lee
Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a Success http://tinyurl.com/6dvm24x
-
Alexander Zatman
Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a Success http://tinyurl.com/6dvm24x
-
Chris Paul
Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/x8jfhVC via @libcon
-
Calm Confusion
RT @RichardExell: Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a Success http://tinyurl.com/6dvm24x
-
Pucci Dellanno
Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success http://bit.ly/mCslvP
-
Richard Gardner
Govt research shows Future Jobs Fund a success | Liberal Conspiracy http://bit.ly/jK2C8i
-
Adam Bell
Amusingly, @LibCon published two articles about the same report a month apart which make the same point: http://bit.ly/mCslvP Both wrong!
-
Philip Jordison
https://liberalconspiracy.org/2011/06/05/govt-research-shows-future-jobs-fund-a-success/ #thankyoulabour
-
Doubts are cast on the Tories’ economic credibility, an old plot to oust Blair is revealed, and the Archbishop attacks: round up of political blogs for 4 – 10 June | British Politics and Policy at LSE
[…] Paskini at Liberal Conspiracy notes that the government’s own research has shown the Future Jobs Fund to be a success, even though it was axed for being inefficient and wasteful. Richard Murphy wonders why the HMRC […]
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
