Lone parents and personal advisors: roles and relationships. a follow-up study of the New Deal for Lone Parents Phase One prototype - a summary of findings
A hard copy of this report summary can be obtained by contacting Paul Noakes [E-Mail: Paul.Noakes@dwp.gsi.gov.uk] or by writing to him at the 'Social Research Division, Department for Work and PensionsOmonigho Uba, 4th Floor, Adelphi, 1-11 John Adam Street, London WC2N 6HT'.
Research Report No. 122
By Jane Lewis, Laura Mitchell, Tessa Sanderson, William O'Connor and Marion Clayden.
This report presents findings from a follow-up study of the New Deal for Lone Parents (NDLP) Phase One Prototype evaluation. It is based on 40 depth interviews undertaken with lone parents in August 1999 and eight group discussions with personal advisers in November 1999 who participated in the prototype and in some cases also the national NDLP programme. The research, carried out by the National Centre for Social Research, looks at the role of the personal adviser and the longer-term outcomes for lone parents of participation in the prototype phase of NDLP. The study is one of a number undertaken by the National Centre to evaluate the prototype of NDLP and was intended to further explore issues arising in earlier qualitative and quantitative research.
The main findings are:
- The critical aspect of lone parents’ engagement with the programme was how well what was provided matched their circumstances and needs. Some felt they would not have been able to move forward into work/training without the help of the programme. Lone parents were very positive about the personal qualities of their advisers.
- There were various longer-term outcomes for lone parents following their participation in the programme. Some moved off Income Support and into work, or made moves in that direction such as into training, beginning to look for work or taking a part time job within the Income Support earnings disregard; others did not move closer to work.
- In some instances, the support provided did not always match well with lone parents’ own needs, and there seems to have been some unevenness in the service provided.
- The degree of ‘thoroughness’ in the service provided by the adviser influenced the sustainability of work, and the clients who moved into work with no discernible help from the service were subsequently more likely to return to Income Support.
- Better off calculations were routinely done by advisers, and clients saw them as a key aspect of the NDLP service. Vocational guidance was also seen as important, particularly for clients who had not worked for some time. Those clients who undertook it also saw“ ”training as positive but it was not always identified as an option by the personal adviser.
- Advisers addressed childcare issues by giving general advice about finding and using formal childcare and describing the financial support available. However, some lone parents would have welcomed more discussion about their other concerns about using childcare (such as the preference for being the sole carer or for informal care as the next best thing).
Introduction
The New Deal for Lone Parents (NDLP) is a voluntary programme which aims to help lone parents on Income Support to move into and towards work. The programme is designed to deliver an integrated package of support including advice and help, job search, help finding childcare, advice about in-work benefits and ‘better off calculations’, access to training and education and in-work support. The Phase One Prototype operated in eight areas, four delivered by the Employment Service and four by the Benefits Agency. Phase Three – national roll-out of the NDLP programme – began in October 1998.
The research study involved 40 in-depth interviews with lone parents who were participants in Phase One (some of whom also participated in Phase Three), and eight group discussions with personal advisers (again, all were involved in Phase One and some also in Phase Three). Three groups of lone parents were included in the sample; past-participants whose last contact with the programme was before November 1998, past-participants whose last contact was during or after November 1998 and lone parents who are still in contact with the programme. The study is part of a series of studies undertaken by the “National Centre” to evaluate Phase One of the programme and was intended to take issues arising in early qualitative and quantitative work further.
Research objectives
Broadly, the objectives of the research were to:
- explore lone parents’ experiences of the programme, and particularly their views about its effectiveness
- develop an understanding of the personal adviser role and to explore the diversity in adviser/lone parent relationships
- explore the longer-term impact of participation, and particularly the role of the programme in helping lone parents to move into sustainable employment
- investigate how the delivery of NDLP has evolved since its inception.
Lone parents’ orientation to work
All the lone parents in this qualitative study could see some benefits to working, although these were sometimes felt to be outweighed by disadvantages and barriers (fundamentally, lone parents’ caring responsibilities). Across the sample of lone parents five groups could be identified, based on their orientation to work when they made contact with the programme:
- those for whom work was not currently an option
- lone parents who were beginning to think about work
- those who were motivated but faced personal circumstantial barriers to work
- another group who were motivated but faced labour market barriers
- a final group who were close to work – actively job seeking and sometimes already in work.
Getting involved with the New Deal for Lone Parents
Lone parents found out about the programme in four ways: receiving an invitation letter; seeing broader publicity; being told about it by a friend, or being referred by an adviser at a jobcentre. Their expectations and motivations were varied, and four groups emerged: some approached the service out of curiosity; a second group expected general guidance about whether work was right for them and how to move forward; another group had more clearly defined expectations, wanting help with specific issues such as job search, childcare, the financial transition and access to training; a final group participated because they thought their benefits might otherwise be jeopardised.
Identifying clients’ needs of the programme
Advisers’ approaches varied, some opting for a more structured and focused approach and others taking a more exploratory and broader tack. The latter proved particularly important for lone parents who were further from work. These approaches were illustrated first-hand by advisers during the group discussions in which they responded to ‘vignettes’ or illustration cases based on case types emerging from the lone parent interviews.
Experiences of the service: type of support provided
“Vocational guidance” was important particularly for clients who had not worked for some time. Those clients who undertook it also saw “training ”as positive but it was not always identified as an option by the personal adviser.
Advisers addressed “childcare issues” by giving general advice about finding and using childcare and describing the financial support available. Some lone parents would have welcomed more discussion about their concerns about using childcare.
“Better off calculations” were routinely done by advisers, usually at a first interview but sometimes deliberately left until later. Clients saw them as a key aspect of the service.
A key expectation among clients was that the New Deal for Lone Parents would help them access “job vacancies”. In Employment Service areas, advisers carried out job matching using the Labour Market Service (LMS), but access to it was problematic elsewhere.
Adviser styles and adviser-client relationships
Overall, three approaches emerged from clients’ account: intensive work focused activity; limited work focused activity and intensive holistic activity – the latter addressing both practical and personal circumstantial barriers to work. The role of advisers in the programme is clearly central and lone parents were largely very positive about the qualities of their adviser.
Outcomes and impacts for lone parents
What happened to lone parents following their participation in the programme was very varied. Some did not move closer to work; others moved off Income Support and into work, or made moves in that direction such as into training, beginning to look for work or taking a part time job within the Income Support earnings disregard. Where they moved into or towards work, this was generally as a result of a combination of factors relating to their own personal circumstances and their participation on the programme, but some moved forward without any help from the programme.
The critical aspect of their engagement with the programme was how well what was provided matched their circumstances and needs. Some felt they would not have been able to move forward without the help of the programme, but elsewhere the adviser’s support had been influential in helping them to move more quickly or more smoothly than they would otherwise have done.
Experiences of work
Lone parents who moved into work talked about how they had gained from this, but work was sometimes unsustained or was increasingly threatened. A number of factors which supported or inhibited the transition to work were described. The degree of thoroughness in the service received from the adviser was also influential on the sustainability of work, and the clients who moved into work with no discernible help from the service subsequently returned to Income Support.
Experiences of in-work support
Advisers stressed the importance of in-work support but in practice they mainly helped lone parents who were moving into work with financial transitions. Some said they usually contact clients once they are in work; others wrote and invited the client to get in touch if they had problems, or relied on the client to make contact. In fact, however, none of the lone parents who experienced problems in work got in touch with their adviser – even when the relationship had been a close and effective one – feeling that the situation was outside the remit or control of the adviser.
Supporting the adviser role
A number of aspects of the way in which the Phase One Prototype was organised supported the adviser role. Advisers welcomed working in a small and close team, with a dedicated manager and staff but a high level of autonomy. Management structures had changed somewhat in Phase Three, and the integration of the programme in wider jobcentre business with formal targets caused concern in some areas.
Advisers also described ways in which the delivery of the programme had changed as a result of the new organisational context of Phase Three; the maturity of the programme from a prototype to a national service and advisers’ own growing experience of the role.
Publication details:
Lewis, J., Mitchell, L., Sanderson, T., O’Connor, W. and Clayden, M. (August 2000) “Lone Parents and Personal Advisers: Roles and Relationships ”(DSS Research Report No.122) Leeds, CDS (£29.00)
Other relevant publications
Elias, P. (2000). ‘Transitions off Income Support: estimating the impact of the New Deal for Lone Parents using survey data’ in Hasluck et al (2000) “Evaluation of the New Deal for Lone Parents: Early Lessons from the Phase One Prototype” – Cost-Benefit and Econometric Analyses, DSS Research Report No. 110, CDS: Leeds.
Finch, H., O’Connor W. with Millar, J., Hales, J., Shaw, A. and Roth, W. (1999) “New Deal for Lone Parents: learning from the protoype areas”, DSS Research Report No.92, CDS: Leeds.
Finch, H and Gloyer, M (2000) “A Further Look at the Evaluation of NDLP Phase One Data: Focus on Childcare”, DSS Social Research Branch, In-house Report 68.
Green, A. (2000) “Evaluation of the” “New Deal for Lone Parents: A comparative analysis of the local study areas, ”DSS Social Research Branch, In-house Report No.63.
Hales, J., Shaw, A. and Roth, W. (1998) “Evaluation of the New Deal for Lone Parents: A Preliminary Estimate of the Counterfactual, ”DSS Social Research Branch, In-house Report No. 42.
Hales, J., Lessof, C., Roth, W., Gloyer, M., Shaw, A., Millar, J., Barnes, M., Elias, P., Hasluck, C., McKnight, A and Green, A. (2000a) “Evaluation of the New Deal for Lone Parents: Early Lessons from the Phase One Prototype – Synthesis Report”, DSS Research Report No. 108, CDS: Leeds.
Hales, J., Roth, W., Barnes, M., Millar, J., Lessof, C., Gloyer, M. and Shaw, A. (2000b) “Evaluation of the New Deal for Lone Parents: Early Lessons from the Phase One Prototype – Findings of Surveys”, DSS Research Report No. 109, CDS: Leeds.
Hasluck, C. (2000) ‘The Net Economic and Exchequer Benefits of the New Deal for Lone Parents’ in Hasluck et al (2000) “Evaluation of the New Deal for Lone Parents: Early Lessons from the Phase One Prototype” – “Cost-Benefit and Econometric Analyses”, DSS Research Report No. 110, CDS: Leeds.
McKnight, A. (2000). ‘Transitions off Income Support: estimating the impact of the New Deal for Lone Parents using administrative data’ in Hasluck et al (2000) “Evaluation of the New Deal for Lone Parents: Early Lessons from the Phase One Prototype” – “Cost-Benefit and Econometric Analyses”, DSS Research Report No. 110, CDS: Leeds.