Work Programme is at risk of 'systematic failure', charity sub-contractors warn 2

Finance | Niki May Young | 11 Oct 2011

Over 100 charity sub-contractors have joined the National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO) special interest group to submit concerns over the viability of the Work Programme to employment minister Chris Grayling.

Launched following the government's spending review in October 2010, the Work Programme was devised to introduce "value for money for the taxpayer" by introducing a payment-by-results model for contractors. Some 508 civil society organisations (CSOs) are directly involved with the Programme.

But while the NCVO broadly supports the scheme, it claims it may be at risk of "systematic failure" after receiving concerns from charity sub-contractors over its design and implementation.

The primary concerns centre around the effectiveness of the Merlin Standard, a code of conduct currently being piloted to ensure sub-contractors are treated fairly by prime-contractors. Sub-contractors say the timescale of one year to gain Merlin accreditation is too long and claim that its principles are too subjective. In August, think tank the Social Market Foundation claimed that at least 90 per cent of organisations involved in the Work Programme risked having their contracts terminated because of unreachable targets. The Merlin Standard will reach the end of its two-year pilot at the end of the year.

"The strength of the assessment process and its real-world application remains a serious cause for concern," says the NCVO in its submission The Work Programme - Initial Concerns from Civil Society Organisations, sent to Grayling yesterday.

Concerns have also been raised that the size and complexity of contracts has excluded many CSOs from bidding for contracts. The NCVO recommendations reiterate recommendations in Lord Hodgson's Red Tape Review that the size of tender documents is proportionate to the size of the contract. In addition, it suggests the government should consider underwriting a small proportion of the contract value for CSOs amidst concerns that prime-contractors may not be passing on fair payment to sub-contractors.

"The voluntary sector has vast knowledge and expertise which could be put to good use within the Work Programme, so it is crucial to ensure that the sector is involved properly and fairly," said Sir Stuart Etherington, NCVO chief executive.

"While the broad aims and direction of the Work Programme is right, the devil is in the detail, and we urge the government to take these concerns seriously to ensure that the programme delivers good outcomes for all."

Directory: National Council of Voluntary Organisations (NCVO)
Who's Who: Sir Stuart Etherington

Place a comment

Warren Escadale
Policy & Research Manager
VSNW
12 Oct 2011

The difficulties are two-fold.

Besides the problem of engaging with the Work Programme, described by one experienced local provider as ...
“... like being offered the chance to run 100m in 10 seconds. We can’t do it. But if we don’t try no-one will…we’ve got to try otherwise the Work Programme won’t help the young people in our community.”

There's the added compication of the impact of the cuts to local initiatives like the Future Jobs Fund and Working Neighbourhoods which means that there's nothing for the Work Programme to link into at a local level.

**link removed**

[Reply]

Louise Winterburn
Policy Manager
Locality
11 Oct 2011

We strongly support NCVO's findings as they reflect that of our members.Locality is the nationwide movement of communities ambitious for change. We have a membership of over 600 community organisations from across the UK. A number of our members have been awarded multi-million pound Work Programme contracts, while others who lost government contracts, are being forced to close down vital services or are using their own charitable reserves to continue to offer employment and training support. In June we published a report “Pushed to the Edge” about our member’s experiences. A few weeks ago we met with a representative from DWP to discuss our concerns – they were unaware of many of the problems including large prime contractors asking voluntary organisations for services for free or offering contracts that run at a loss for 5 years.

[Reply]

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

Name *

Email *

Organisation

Job Title

Comments *

Verification *

* Please read our Community Standards

Close »

Community Standards

The civilsociety.co.uk community and comments board is intended as a platform for informed and civilised debate.

We hope to encourage a broad range of views, however, there are standards that we expect commentators to uphold. We reserve the right to delete or amend any comments that do not adhere to these standards.

We welcome:

Robust but respectful debate
Strongly held opinions
Intelligent relevant discussion
The sharing of relevant experiences
New participants

We will not publish:

Rude, threatening, offensive, obscene or abusive language, or links to such material
Links to commercial organisations or spam postings. The comments board is not an advertising platform
The posting of contact details for yourself or others
Comments intended for malicious purpose or mindless abuse
Comments purporting to be from another person or organisation under false pretences
Gratuitous criticism, commentary or self-promotion
Any material which breaches copyright or privacy laws, or could be considered libellous
The use of the comments board for the pursuit or extension of personal disputes

Be aware:

Views expressed on the comments board are left at users’ discretion and are in no way views held or supported by Civil Society Media
Comments left by others may not be accurate, do not rely on them as fact
You may be misunderstood - sarcasm and humour can easily be taken out of context, try to be clear

Please:

Enjoy the opportunity to express your opinion and respect the right of others to express theirs
Confine your remarks to issues rather than personalities

Together we can keep our community a polite, respectful and intelligent platform for discussion.