We have an internal audit team which regularly monitors our work and that of our subcontractors. On top of that, we are subject to rigorous external audits.

From December 2005 to date, nine cases have been referred to DWP to review claims submissions. This includes the recent case being handled by Thames Valley Police. It’s important to state that all these cases relate to historical contracts and that the current Work Programme eliminates any opportunity for malpractice because it is computer-based and payment is on results.

Of these nine referrals, one, dating back to May 2008, has resulted in the prosecution of a member of A4e staff for fraud, which was widely reported at the time.

Seven of the cases are now closed, and only two are outstanding.

The first of these is the incident being handled by Thames Valley Police and involves four former members of staff.

A second police investigation is outstanding. However this does not involve any A4e staff, and concerns one subcontractor out of more than 200 who work for A4e. The subcontractor was referred to the police in February 2011, who are currently handling the matter.

In the remaining cases where a prosecution did not arise, the DWP’s view was that these were not incidences of malpractice.

Since 2005, the number of claims rejected within these nine cases equate to less than 0.01% of all the claims made to DWP.

Last night, CEO Andrew Dutton said:

“I can’t emphasise enough that there is no place for fraud at A4e, and that is why we have created rigorous internal processes, cooperate with all external audits, and have brought any known issues to the attention of the authorities.

We remain proud of our record in helping the long term unemployed into work, which equates to helping one person into work every seven minutes.”

Contact:

Peta Sweet
Head of Communications, A4e
PSweet@a4e.co.uk
07748966289

Chloe August
Senior Account Manager, PHA Media
chloe@pha-media.com

For more information about the welfare to work industry, contact ERSA:

Kirsty Mchugh
CEO, ERSA
kirsty.mchugh@ersa.org.uk

The company was criticised for its performance in a recent parliamentary accounts committee (PAC) hearing on a completely false premise. Whilst openly welcoming transparency in performance and the important role played by PAC in ensuring value for the taxpayer, we want to make clear that PAC members mistakenly claimed that we had delivered only nine per cent success rate in a recent back to work programme (Pathways to Work). That figure is incorrect, it referred to performance by a completely different provider.

We are proud of the work we do which means that every seven minutes we are supporting someone back to work. Many of those we help are the long-term unemployed who suffer from a series of complex issues. We do not cherry pick or choose the ‘easier’ cases to work with.

We fully anticipate meeting the minimum performance levels set by DWP on Work Programme. This means that for every £1 spent by the Government on our Work Programme services, we will deliver back £1.95 in revenue to the taxpayer. The DWP has also published research that indicates a return to the Treasury – and therefore the taxpayer – of over £3 for every £1 invested in the Pathways to Work programme referred to by the PAC (DWP Research Report 498, 27 May 2008).

As a welfare to work provider, A4e performed better than the market average on the Pathways to Work programme and better than 4 out of 5 providers in the majority of areas where we delivered the Flexible New Deal programme.

Fraud allegations

At the weekend there were media reports suggesting police had ‘demanded’ we hand over documents to enable them to investigate an alleged fraud. This is an exaggeration of the true facts.

The alleged fraud dates back to 2010 and was uncovered by A4e through its own internal processes. We reported it to the authorities and the DWP have known about it since November 2010.

We have co-operated fully with the police from the time the investigation was referred to them, including those officers who visited our premises by appointment on Friday and were given all the assistance we could provide. The allegations centre around four individuals who are no longer with the business. They are not allegations against A4e“

All four members of staff have now left the business. Three of the staff were suspended once the allegations had been made to allow for full investigation, and the other had already left the business.

This situation was discovered by A4e in November 2010, through its internal systems. A4e reported the incident to DWP within 48 hours, following a local, internal investigation.

A4e instigated a 100% validation check of all claims under this contract across all our staff, for the period 01 April 2009 to 22 June 2011 when the contract ended. No further issues were found.
Andrew Dutton, A4e Group CEO, said:

“A4e has zero tolerance towards fraud, and any instance of fraudulent or otherwise illegal activity is completely unacceptable. We take our responsibility very seriously, and we are committed to using taxpayer’s money effectively and efficiently to deliver the best services to the public.”

The case was referred to Thames Valley Police in May 2011, and the matter now rests with them.

Last week I was at my son’s option evening at his local school. It is a ‘specialist technology college’ so one of his options has to be around one of five courses from graphic design to food technology. Listening to the teachers explaining their courses was interesting. Listening to young people around the age of 14 discussing the different courses, BTECs, GCSEs, jobs and university was far more informative. 

It strikes me that over the last two decades we’ve shattered a few myths around Higher Education. As the first person in my family to ever go to University, and having to work and fund my own way whilst I was there, I had no idea what to expect. For more than two generations back, the men were master butchers. My Mum was a librarian, and my Dad became a lawyer after leaving school with no qualifications, so he worked tirelessly to succeed. I suspect that background is why I respect vocations, professions and public service.

To me, University was about getting a qualification from which I could pursue a career – no guarantee of a job or grand expectations of earnings.  It was a way to enable me to start out in an occupation where I had an interest. As we lost Polytechnics – and my Dad talked fondly of the technical schools he could not go to – I began to think about how we could meet employers’ requirements for skills. I got involved in apprenticeships and adult training programmes, then employment and other skills related activities. At times, it felt like the old apprenticeship and craft ethos, work ethic (which was core to my own beliefs) and vocational ability became increasingly less important than ‘academic’ qualifications.  

Now we find ourselves in a different economic reality. The introduction of significantly higher fees has made prospective students think differently about University compared to 10 years ago. Figures out at the end of last month showed that University applications from UK students for the first year of higher tuition fees were down by 8.7%, and the impact has been biggest for England’s universities – down by 9.9%. Where we may draw a reasonable comparison, in Scotland where Scottish students do not pay fees, there was a fall of just 1.5%.

But it’s not just about the money – the number of jobs is flattening in the economy and competition is fierce. Young people, as they move through choices at 14, 16, 18 and their early 20’s, are faced with a new set of challenges and harder focus on employment. More than ever we need to focus on how young people learn, what the economy will need in terms of skills, encouraging thinking about the global labour market for young people in the UK – we are so far behind other countries in this respect – and re-energising the practical skills development and qualifications in our workforces. 

Last week was National Apprenticeship Week, which saw the announcement of new grants available to encourage employers to take apprentices on, and proving that – in the long term – there will be plenty of these opportunities for school leavers who wish to avail themselves. The National Apprenticeship Service will provide up to 40,000 new Apprenticeship Grants to small and medium size employers recruiting 16 to 24 year olds with a value of £1,500.

This week, the Deputy Prime Minister announced the wage subsidy support available to boost youth employment through the Work Programme for 18-24 year olds. £2,275 will be available to employers, in most cases after 26 weeks. The exciting part of this is where, linked to skills development programmes, we can get services designed to meet the needs of business more effectively built into such programmes. A4e has over 300 skills related programmes helping people acquire the right assets and qualifications needed by the economy today 

Let’s go back to my son’s options evening. A young person who chooses to bypass university and jump straight into work has many weapons in their arsenal, but we have to make it so much clearer and easier for them to make the right decisions. Academic routes suit some, vocational ones others and a lucky few have the aptitude to do either.

I found myself doing some impromptu discussion groups at my son’s school. Teachers – doing a great job on courses – were not always able to effectively articulate employment and career opportunities. And why should they? Some of the conversations I had were worth repeating:

• Thinking about what you are good at and what you enjoy is a great starting point. If you are interested in something and enthusiastic, you always end up working harder at it. Moreover, businesses will often trade enthusiasm for specific qualifications
• Core skills are so important. Maths, English and communication skills should never be underestimated. Around the world, this is the most important foundation for every type of job and occupation, as well as further training
• Consider what jobs you like the sound of and those you don’t, and ask why. Is it based on real knowledge of the job or perceptions from the media, friends or family? My advice is keep your options, and more importantly your mind, open for as long as possible on your future career
• Don’t be worried if you have no idea what you want to do. You could cluster choices around subjects you enjoy or generally complement each other (this is for 14 year olds, remember) but it does no harm to keep a wide range of interests. As you progress to GCSEs you will discover the things that interest you more, and making choices at 16 and 18 is more important as you narrow your field of work
• Talk to as many people as you can early on in your career – classmates, teachers, parents, career advisors, friends of friends, your local shop owner. Often, employers base a lot on recommendations from people they know. Start building up your networks early

With schools now offering academic and vocational options, we are slowly progressing to an education system that will deliver more skills that our economy will need incoming years. The importance of vocational skills is beginning to rise again as young people – faced with choices about taking on costs for their future careers – think hard about the decisions they make. We also need to vastly improve the provision of technology, ICT and technology-related courses in our schools to allow young people the best start in life we can. Much has improved, more needs to be done.

Although youth unemployment figures are high, the future can be bright. If you think about the fact that 45% of senior managers in UK forklift truck companies started their careers as an engineering apprentice, it’s hard to dismiss the increasing parity between work-based learning and more traditional learning routes. There is no ‘one single best way’ and there are very few ‘jobs for life’ – so we all need to acquire vocational and academic skills and keep on developing new ones as we get older. On that score, young people have an edge on middle aged folk like me. My son is a welcome reminder of that fact every day.

The Public Accounts Committee hearing on Work Programme yesterday included a number of
factual inaccuracies we wish to clarify.

A4e performance as a welfare to work contractor

Some committee members referred to our early performance figures in the previous Pathways to
Work contract without looking at performance during the life of the contract. They also confused
A4e performance with another contractor, whose performance level was significantly lower at that
early stage.

The facts are that across the industry providers underperformed against the challenging target
set for getting those on this programme into work. A4e secured jobs for 24.2% of those on the
programme over its lifetime; exceeding the industry average of 23%.

Working with our charity partner Lifeline

Lifeline is a partner to A4e on the Work Programme in East London and are charged a 12.5%
management fee per person referred to them by A4e (Lifeline receive £350 of £400 attachment fee
per individual)

The claim made by Margaret Hodge MP during the Public Accounts Committee hearing on 8th
February that A4e passed on only £300 of the £400 attachment fee to Lifeline is therefore incorrect

Lisa Webb, Lifeline Deputy Chief Executive, stated

‘It is unfortunate that this misunderstanding has occurred. We have a very positive relationship
with A4e. We are seeing well above the estimated level of referrals coming from them. We regard
the management fee as entirely fair or we would not have signed up to the contract with A4e. In
particular we are seeing real benefit from the relationship given the link between A4e’s National
Employer Service and large companies who are recruiting on a national scale.’

Andrew Dutton, A4e Chief Executive added:

‘We know that our management fee is one of the lowest in the industry. It’s unfortunate that
this misunderstanding provides a distraction from the work we are all doing as Work Programme
providers to help thousands of people into work, and in particular the very positive relationship we
have built with partners like Lifeline who are supporting that delivery’.

Helping people like Steven isn’t easy, but it’s not impossible. Sometimes it takes more specialised support, which is why the Work Programme is designed to include a variety of organisations, from the private, public and third sectors, which have the skills to help people into work. This year, Steven had a proper Christmas dinner because he finally got a job, and one that he loves. And this is because of the specialist support he received through Bootstrap, a charity based in Lancashire who have been delivering social inclusion programmes for over 20 years – just like A4e.

Bootstrap is just one of the 96 Third Sector partners A4e works with under the Work Programme – more than 51% of all our partners. We have worked with partner suppliers for over 10 years delivering services like these. But a recent report by the National Council of Voluntary Organisations (NCVO) indicated a more general worry – a sense of concern experienced by a number of charities who have been sub-contracted to deliver the Work Programme, particularly with regard to what they see as exposure to financial risk which is unshielded by the prime provider they are contracted with.

Being exposed to financial risk is something A4e is well versed in managing. We first started pioneering this approach in 1992. By delivering the Work Programme under a Payment by Results (PBR) framework – something we actively championed – we are absorbing risk on behalf of Government and taxpayers, and taking it on ourselves. We do this because we combine commercial skills with social values. I have learned from more than two decades of building a business that tackles challenging – and often new – public services with outcome funding commercial models how to plan for the risk and cash requirements of these types of contracts. It is difficult to model and fully evidence the finance you need to run a ‘new’ programme, particularly on the scale of the Work Programme, but that’s the nature of PBR markets. It is the direction we are going in – our public finances means there is not an option – so we have to learn and learn quickly.

As a ‘Prime contractor’, we take very significant headline financial risk, but this is different to ‘shielding suppliers from risk’, which the NCVO asserts is lacking. When we talk about suppliers, the picture is more complex than simply ‘third sector’ and ‘other’. We have some suppliers who provide the full range of services required to help get someone into work (what we call an ‘End to End’ partner).

These make up 17% of our supply chain. We have other suppliers who have specialist skills to support someone with a specific problem, like drug addiction, homelessness or a criminal conviction, either through short interventions or during their entire journey into work (what we called ‘Specialist Intervention’ and ‘Specialist End to End’ partners). These make up 83% of our supply chain. Some suppliers are local to an area, and some have a national footprint, some are third sector, some are public and some are private. In some areas, A4e is sub-contracted to another Prime provider. Between us all we support hugely diverse groups of people, such as particular ethnic groups, older people, lone parents, under 25s, people with health difficulties, very long term unemployed people, graduates, executives, ex-offenders, faith based programmes and so on. Very few suppliers have dealt with such a diverse range of customer groups and we have actively sought to develop these skills over the last 20 years. Public, private and third sector organisations all bring a rich diversity of talent and experience and we need all parties to make Work Programme successful. No one group has a monopoly on expertise.

The common thread is that all of us have had to build complex models to assess the finance we require to deliver our programmes effectively. We have done this on historical UK welfare programmes and in international markets in France, Israel and India. What many people fail to see is that we directly protect our Specialist Intervention partners by removing PBR requirements. These partners are brilliant at support on specific and challenging issues but they are not ‘back to work’ suppliers. We do not create contract models which link their payment to employment – that is our job. They help customers with particular barriers preventing their progress into work. It is hard to predict how many customers will need their services until we receive referrals from JCP but they do not have to manage ‘outcome payment risk’. Out of these service partners, 54% are from the third sector – the largest single partner group we have.

When we consider financial risk, the nub of the issue is why some partners on the Work Programme are not receiving the referrals – and therefore the payment potential – they anticipated. It is a concern A4e shares, and it is a risk we have to take too. For a national programme of this magnitude, referral systems are working better than I have seen in many programmes in the past. At the last count, our partners are now receiving 33% of the total overall referrals to A4e. We expect that to continue to rise as long as we all hit our performance targets. There isn’t a single third sector End to End or Specialist End to End partner on our books who isn’t receiving referrals, and we work closely with them to manage fluctuations and variations. We also ensure partners get referrals that reflect their expertise and location – we do not send ‘harder to help’ to suppliers and ‘deal with the easier customers’ ourselves.

In five and half months of the Work Programme running, a lot has happened. JCP and Primes are working hard to get referrals working across all customer groups. Already thousands of people have moved into work – the focus is on making sure this is sustained. We continue to move referrals to our supply chain – voluntary, charitable, public sector and private. Very large sums of capital have been raised with banks to ensure the finance is available for the programme and massive investment is going to fund the services for the harder to help. We communicate openly and honestly with our partners and we listen when they have ideas and suggestions. We feed all of this back to the DWP, helping, where we can, smaller charities and suppliers get their message directly to Government.

We always knew it would be tough. I would be surprised if anyone who bid for a Work Programme contract would say otherwise. As early as 2010, we spent a considerable amount of time consulting with more than 1,000 third and public sector organisations ahead of the Work Programme, to prepare for the anticipated impact and to develop business plans accordingly. No one should have gone into this with their eyes shut and we worked hard with our partners to capacity build. To suggest that all charities are suddenly concerned about the level of financial risk they have been exposed to does a huge disservice to the business planning I know countless numbers of them have done.

Tenacity, determination and iteration will be needed to make the Work Programme effective. I know A4e and our supplier partners are doing everything we can to make the Work Programme work for the people who need it the most. At the end of the day, it’s about the people who come to our branches and those of our partners looking for help. It’s about people just like Steven.

Her earliest emails, sent after A4e trainer Diane arranged for Debra to attend a free English and Maths course at a college in Alton, Hampshire last September, betray her nerves.

“I have to have an interview before I can start which is a nightmare as I am not confident in them,” Debra wrote.

However, just a month later, Debra had already begun to flourish, telling Diane: “I am flying through my Maths work and even helping other people in the class.”

By the following month, excited Debra told Diane: “There is a lot changing in my life just now and it is all for the better. I can’t thank you enough.”

And just before Christmas, unable to contain her happiness, she wrote again. “I am being entered at the highest level for both English and maths. Both are level 2.”

Speaking about her journey, Debra said: “I am a different person today – and I owe that to my A4e trainer. When I first came onto JCPSC, I was feeling pretty low. I was working as a cleaner in Surrey but moved to Andover to live with my cousin when I was promised a job there. When I arrived, the address I’d been given for the job turned out to be fake. The whole thing was a hoax.

“Diane helped me put together a CV and enrolled me on a course doing maths and English. I take my exams in June. Things have changed so much for me. Along with the course, I started going to zumba classes – it’s a fitness class with Latin dance – and that has improved my confidence no end.”

And to prove her point, Debra revealed her latest triumph – a new job.

She said: “I’m a supervisor for the Original Factory Shop in Alton. We sell everything from clothes to dog accessories, stationary and toys. I couldn’t have done it without the CV Diane made for me.”

Debra added: “People who speak to me now say that I come across as cheerful and confident, so I must have changed – but you wouldn’t have said that about me three months ago.”

JCPSC is delivered in Hampshire, Isle of White, Bucks, Berks and Oxfordshire by A4e trainers and also Partners. Diane works in Bracknell and Guildford, an area which also covers Aldershot, Alton, Bordon, Farnborough and Petersfield.

One of the latest emails in the on-going correspondence between Debra and Diane confirms Debra’s transformation.

From Diane, it reads: “Hi Debs, When all is done you will wonder why you felt so worried. Marvellous news that you are helping others in your class and now have a job too! Keep having faith in yourself. Diane.”

• 33% of JSA claimants have a criminal record;
• 26% of all claimants (just under 5m) have been cautioned or convicted in the last decade;
• 75% of people convicted in 2008 had claimed out of work benefits during the last two years;
• 50% of those released in 2008 were still claiming benefit two years later.

In addition, analysis of re-offending rates continue to show more than 50% of offenders reoffend and end up back in prison. If we are going to tackle this problem – and other public service challenges – this ‘joined up’ data and analysis across departments is essential. Only by considering the total system are we are going to get better public services, delivering better outcomes, at higher quality and lower cost.

Prevention of reoffending is an issue that is important to me. As A4e has developed, we have often employed people who have criminal records. Six years ago, when we started working on education initiatives in prisons, we wanted to employ an ex-offender on the team but due to the security requirements of the contract with the government, could not. I understand the risks but if we cannot show through public programmes how ex-offenders can re-engage with business, what example do we set to other employers?

More needs to be done and last year when I was at the Koestler Awards I talked frankly with a manager there about her problems in finding work with a record for white collar crime. The challenges she faced were significant. The links between stable employment and the impact on reoffending have been understood for a while. In 2002, the Social Exclusion Unit produced a study indicating that stable employment reduced reoffending by 30-50%. However, ‘stable employment’ requires a number of other support structures around the individual to assist in meeting that objective.

The media often focused on the willingness of employers – or lack of – to consider ex-offenders in various employment opportunities. This is a barrier that can be overcome. Many businesses will actively engage to work with ex-offenders – sure it needs more work yet, but some of the UK government’s reforms will enable that. I want to highlight some other issues which need to be part of the UK ‘rehabilitation revolution’ if we are going to reduce recidivism significantly and for the long term.

Many departments/agencies of local and central government impact on the lives of an offender on their journey out of prison and back into society. My experience of A4e’s work in providing employment and skills services to offenders on release as well as being a provider of education (not employment) services inside prison has highlighted a number of areas where various problems manifest in trying to develop coherent approaches to preventing reoffending. If we are going to introduce payment by results models, based on reducing re-offending – and we should – then we also need to find a way to commission services that will allow these issues to be addressed.

• Employer access: enabling employers who are willing to do so (and there are plenty) to come into prison to meet prospective employees and ensure training meets their needs. Similarly, prisoners need to be escorted by a guard to meet employers within the prison structure and, as resources reduce, this makes another potential barrier to supporting rehabilitation.

• Housing: given the movement of prisoners around prison estate throughout their sentence (which could see a London offender moved 200 miles away to the North West, then a week later shipped 100 miles east), finding them a secure place to live close to a prospective job is incredibly difficult. The reality is that an offender’s ‘home’ location is, in the majority of cases, many miles from the prison they are held in. Therefore, the join up of housing benefit, finding somewhere, securing any other benefits pre-employment start and interfacing with probation services and other services is overly complex. It can also means that there is very little incentive for ‘local’ providers delivering with any proximity to a prison to provide in-reach support – the vast majority will be dispersed all over the country on release.

• Health needs: mental health difficulties in particular continue to be a very significant barrier to employment for many ex-offenders. The support in prison and the support on release requires much more coherent integration. Tackling mental health problems can be crucial in supporting people back into work- and more importantly sustaining it -so we must do more on this.

• Finance and debt support: the scale to which debt problems get worse for offenders whilst in prison and the challenges in dealing with finance on release are still very much underestimated. There are many ways to support this from current initiatives but agencies are insufficiently joined up and prisons are often unaware or unable to take advantage of plentiful available support.

• Social networks and family support: a key part of rehabilitation focuses on social networks and family engagement (often reengagement) to enable changes to previous behaviour. There is a proven and positive correlation between the number of social visits an offender receives whilst in custody and their outcomes on release. Again, this is an activity that is fragmented across the geographies of local government, service providers and the prison estate.

• Demand led training and employment in prisons: the activities in prison are too often focused on ‘productive activity’ – keeping people busy and not sufficiently aligned to the labour market prisoners will face on release. Much more needs to be done here. However, the reforms to prison education which will begin taking effect in Summer 2012 should finally address this.

A4e delivers a range of these services inside and outside prison. However, even with that expertise, trying to join this up for prisoners and ex-offenders we have worked with is incredibly difficult. The requirement to work across multiple agencies in government, who are not tasked with integrating their service as part of a more holistic approach to keeping an ex-offender out of prison, means organisations in this space fail to make enough sustainable impact.

The implications of this are obvious. The longer it takes to sort out benefits or financial problems, the more likely the risk that someone might reoffend to resolve that issue. Similarly, with no stable housing or family support, and with the tendency to fall back into the same social networks which resulted in the original crime, the risk of reoffending increases. If mental health issues remain untreated or undiagnosed, this impacts on any chance of getting back to work and again, falling back into old habits of offending can easily happen.

So, what can we do?

The ‘rehabilitation revolution’ is the right strategic direction. Payment by results is the right direction, with providers and partnerships measured and rewarded on the impact they make in reducing reoffending. Joint working between MoJ and DWP is a great start, as is structured, focused work on early entry into employment & training programmes for offenders on release.

This ‘join up’ is only the start. I know it is hard – I have worked across more than 20 departments and agencies trying to deliver a coherent service to the same consumers. However, the issues I have touched on above cut across many agencies. The costs are high – to society, to the public purse and in human terms. Whilst social investment approaches – such as the Bond in Peterborough – provide the freedom to tackle these issues, they do not yet provide a framework for joining up existing services more effectively or reducing the system wide costs of offending. Most importantly, we are still a long way from integrating the support needed to fundamentally shifting the scale of reoffending.

The initiatives launched by the MOJ and DWP are an excellent start. However, we must explore how to better engage with other agencies and spending departments, for example via things like Community Budgets. This needs more innovation, more research, more pilots and we will have to take some risks in order to radically reduce reoffending. Make significant inroads in the UK and many other countries are keen to learn from our experience.

I’ve been looking at the statistics on employment for older people, to understand more about the current situation. With the national employment rate around 8%, nearly one in ten people are out of work – but for over 50s this figure is nearly one in three. Relatively, people over 50 are moving into employment at the same rate as other age groups, but in smaller relative percentages to date than those under-25 and between 25 and 50. This is to be expected in some respects, given that experience shows longer term unemployed people over 50 often require relatively more support for an extended period of time before they move into work. 

In one of the meetings I was in, an expert writer on the subject of active older age told me about the high number of older people who write to her explaining the problems they face finding both employment and volunteer work. The latter was new to me – in volunteer services people were saying they were getting turned down in favour of someone younger, whereas I had always known it to be that volunteering had often been the domain of the older person. In addition to this, across all the correspondence, the writer told me, there was a common theme; anecdotally, older people felt that leaving their age off their CV led to them getting more interviews and opportunities.

More positively, many employers are focused on providing specific opportunities for older people separate to their policies on younger people. B&Q are well known for their positive employment practice, crafting roles where older people’s skills complement the service and others where younger people can best suit. There needs to be a focus on encouraging businesses to look at positive employment practices for people over 50, in the same vein as the government’s ‘Business Compact’ on young people which was revealed last week. It is possible to identify and craft specific opportunities lending themselves to older workers and the lifetime of skills they have acquired. This is part of the work welfare providers need to address in tackling unemployment, and it is part of the responsibility society takes for older people.

For older people out of work, there are often a number of ‘myths’ that it can be helpful to debunk with regards to supporting those over the age of 50 as they search for work. Far from the stereotypes I see bandied around, research shows that older workers are:

•  not ‘blocking’ jobs for younger people;
• as flexible and adaptive in their approach as any other age group;
• well versed and interested in using new technology;
• keen and able to learn new skills for the next phase of their careers

I know all of these positive attributes to be true, because I have seen them in my own families’ experiences. As we live longer, and more people seek out varied careers instead of ‘a job for life’ we tend to have more goals in life and employers are beginning to adjust their approaches to recognize the positive impact older workers can have on their business. A recent careers survey showed that over half of 50 plus workers felt they were at the right phase in life to pursue a new direction in their career and find their dream job!

And, of course, with wisdom and experience comes confidence. Although hunting for jobs whilst you are out of work can be demoralizing there are many older people who are opting to become self employed and start their own business, because they feel they’ve got the life experience to really forge ahead with such an exciting opportunity. The New Enterprise Allowance scheme (NEA) and Work Programme both offer direct support, in addition to advice and guidance through organisations such as the PRIME, Business Link and InspireMe (whose website is worth a look if you are thinking about this). In the work A4e has done through the NEA, 23% of those starting their own businesses are over 50. Moreover, enterprises headed up by people in this age range tend to have better survival rates than those started by younger entrepreneurs, and older people sometimes have more experience gaining access to start-up capital too.

As with everyone out of work, finding ways to maintain your enthusiasm and self confidence can be hard. You have to continue to market yourself to prospective employers, clients, customers and funders. We all have to challenge the preconceptions people may have about us, our experience and backgrounds, and this is no different for over 50s. As our societies get older, proportionally, the world of employment and career development for older people has to evolve to meet the needs we face. And as we emerge from the recession, we must increase the pace of this recalibration.

Lyn, who is married with two boys, said: I was made redundant from my job with a design company which designed soft furnishings. I had been there for five years. I had an idea it was coming because one of the directors retired. I actually had been thinking about setting up my own business for some time and probably would have done it, but it was nice having the back-up that A4enterprise provided. Pat helped me doing my business plan, and with having a mentor, I know I can call at any time if I need help. I knew I could do the job because I’ve been doing it a long time, but it’s the other aspects of it. I’ve never done a business plan in my life and, as time goes on, I know Ive now got someone to help me with tax and insurance.

My new business is called Lyn’s Curtains. It was officially launched on the 28 November and at the moment most of my work is for a couple of designers. I am hoping to get some of my own customers as well. I do anything to do with soft furnishings. All my curtains and blinds are hand-sewn. I can even work from a picture.

The money from the NEA helps me with paying for my business cards or buying small materials. Its just a little bit of a safety net. If I need anything, I’ve got the money and anything I earn goes into the business.

It is hard being unemployed. I looked for loads of jobs on the internet and for what I do there isn’t much out there. I really feel for young people. It must be very frustrating.

I love my business. I love that I can work from home. I run it from the top floor of my house. Ive got a cutting room on one side and a sewing room on the other. It’s lovely and peaceful. I don’t have to be going backwards and forwards, commuting, so I can put that time into work. I time myself so I start at 9, I take all the breaks I used to and then finish at the same time as I would when I was at work.

And if the TV is boring one night, I can pop upstairs and do a little bit of sewing.
If it goes well, I wouldn’t rule out having an apprentice one day. I do love teaching people how to sew.