This document is the response of the Higher and Further Education, Training and Employment Committee to the Department's New Targeting Social Need Action Plan. It takes account, where appropriate, of deliberations by the Committee earlier this year, before suspension, of the First New TSN Action Plan.

The First Minister and Deputy First Minister have full responsibility for the political direction and oversight of New TSN, and the Executive has now formally endorsed the New TSN Policy, as set out in the White Paper "Partnership for Equality" (HMSO, 1998). Furthermore, Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 enshrines the statutory obligation for equal treatment (which was core to new TSN) which applies to public bodies.

The first annual report on New TSN, "Vision into Practice" (considered by this Committee in February 2000), notes that: "For departments successfully to implement New TSN, it must feature in their planning and be firmly embedded in their cultures."

New TSN has a specific resonance for the Department of Higher and Further Education, Training and Employment. This is because New TSN has a particular focus on combating the problems of unemployment and employability.

The Committee agrees that TSN should be fully integrated at each stage of decision making, and transparent within the Programme for Government. In the light of their particular focus within New TSN, the Committee considers that measures to tackle problems of unemployment and employability should have an appropriately high priority in the Programme for Government.

The Committee took note that, between 1991 and 1999, in so far as an important goal of TSN (and now new TSN) was (is) to reduce the substantial gap between average protestant and catholic unemployment rates, it had not worked.

The Committee further noted that there was continuing, and unresolved, debate on the underlying reasons for this, including:

• dynamics and factors within the labour market which were not susceptible to previous TSN policies and may also remain largely unchanged under new TSN (including differences in population growth rates and propensities to migrate);

• structural disadvantage (having wrong worker attributes); and

• identity disadvantage (associated with family/group/ethnicity).

However, the Committee expressed confidence that current statutory equality provisions, including the powers of the unified Equality Commission, will help to ensure concerted action to identify and rectify barriers to equality on grounds of religious affiliation.

The Committee fully supports measures to target long term unemployment at an individual level, supported by specific sets of policies and programmes, which are monitored and evaluated for their effectiveness. However the Committee expressed concern that the Action Plan is lacking in terms of strategic, high level targets. (e.g. to raise the level of skills among those who are socially disadvantaged – where proxy targets might be to increase the percentage of intermediate level (level 3) skills, at the same time as reducing the proportion of those with no or low skills (level 2 and below).

The Committee also considered that the Action Plan should incorporate work which is ongoing in relation to key recommendations of the National Skills Task Force, including, for example, the whole area of developing vocational certificates specifying knowledge and understanding which are related to occupational standards and which can be taken alongside those qualifications attesting competence. This would include evaluation of the quality and acceptability of various existing qualification routes (including NVQs), which is a vital component of ensuring that no person or group is disadvantaged by pursuing one route rather than another.

Ultimately it is individuals rather than geographical areas that are poor. The Committee therefore welcomes the Action Plan's focus on individuals and not geographical areas.

Where areas are to be identified for TSN monitoring purposes, then the Committee considered it must be recognised that Wards are often too large an area to adequately reflect sharp differences in the social gradient (e.g. some apparently prosperous Wards can contain within them substantial pockets of social need).

The Committee said it hoped that the Department had learned from the methodological problems experienced in the First TSN Annual Report, where Council Districts qualifying for the New TSN designation did not necessarily reflect current levels of unemployment, as expressed by the December 1999 claimant count. Also the problem of the use of the % of unemployed who are long term unemployed as an indicator, without further qualification. (In the case of the First New TSN Report, a combination of unemployed, and % long term unemployed (LTE), and use of up to date claimant count figures, would have more accurately reflected areas of actual deprivation.)

The Committee also acknowledged the needs of carers, and expressed concern that, in many areas of the action plan, they looked for, and could not find, evidence of recognition of the needs of carers. The Committee also offered views specific to particular business areas, which are attached as Annex A to this paper.

ANNEX A

Committee Views Specific to Particular Business Areas

The Committee welcomes the commitment to widening access, in line with TSN principle, which is shown at DHFETE 1,2 and 3. However the Committee is concerned to ensure that colleges and universities are required to establish and implement proper procedures to monitor the TSN implications of their policies (including admission and outreach activities), ethos, governance, curricula and programmes. Such a procedure (target groups will need to be identified) will help keep the focus on inclusive attitudes and institutions. TSN action plans of these institutions should include targets to increase representation, at all levels of university and college life and decisions, of under-represented groups. For example, the Committee recommends a target date of April 2001 for reviewing the constitution of governing bodies of FE Colleges so that they accurately reflect the communities whose further educational needs they seek to serve.

The Committee also emphasises the importance of student finance arrangements which encourage students from low income groups and those with caring responsibilities to stay on or enter further and higher education. It is vital that these policies are subjected to full equality monitoring, even though the universities and colleges are not designated Section 75 bodies.

The Committee encourages the Department to engage vigorously, in its ongoing Review of Student Finance, with the problems of those people who depend on social security benefit and who will likely be deterred from entering fulltime education by means of the accompanying loss of benefits; and to seek to use its full influence in securing whatever changes are necessary, including changes to the qualifying conditions for particular benefits, to rectify any proven inequity.

With regard to the geographical aspect of access, the Committee encourages the Department to clarify, in its action plans, plans by the colleges and universities to develop facilities at regional outreach and access centres. The question of college/university partnership with community and voluntary organisation, particularly those locally based organisations (also those organisations representing a particular, disadvantaged ethnic or interest group) which provide much-needed local community development in areas of high social need, has not, the Committee considers, been adequately addressed. The Committee would strongly recommend that colleges and universities be encouraged to target and monitor the TSN impact of such linkages.

In respect of vocational training, this business area shows an encouraging range of targets or actions in pursuit of tackling low levels of qualifications and basic skills, with the desired outcome of increasing employability (among those so disadvantaged) and raising levels of adult basic skills. However the Committee expressed concern that the Action Plan is lacking in terms of strategic, high level targets. (e.g. to raise the level of skills among those who are socially disadvantaged – where proxy targets might be to increase the percentage of intermediate level (level 3) skills, at the same time as reducing the proportion of those with no or low skills (level 2 and below).

The Committee also considered that the Action Plan should incorporate work which is ongoing in relation to key recommendations of the National Skills Task Force, including, for example, the whole area of developing vocational certificates specifying knowledge and understanding which are related to occupational standards and which can be taken alongside those qualifications attesting competence. This would include evaluation of the quality and acceptability of various existing qualification routes (including NVQs), which is a vital component of ensuring that no person or group is disadvantaged by pursuing one route rather than another. The Committee also considered, taking into account evidence which it had heard from senior officials and respected commentators over recent weeks, that there may be issues of status and esteem which have not obviously been tacked in the targets or actions, and which the Department should seek to include (e.g. under DHFETE 4 and 6).

The Committee is most supportive of measures to encourage a positive attitude to education amongst socially disadvantaged individuals and groups, including increased education to industry links. However Committee members had also heard evidence suggesting that attitudes of employers may in some instances be complacent. They therefore suggested that employers' attitudes should be surveyed over time, to help assess the effect of promotional initiatives, confidence building measures, and incentives designed to promote employability (of particular target groups (e.g. the young; the long term unemployed).

The Committee noted the need for ex ante evaluation which will enable the Department adequately to target, monitor and evaluate the success of interventions. It would be particularly important to identify a range of indicators, and appropriate methodologies, robustly to capture changes to employability. The Committee recalls that it expressed similar views in relation to monitoring arrangements included in the Department's Draft Equality Statement.

The Committee recalled that it had supported the DENI proposals to monitor, by 2002, staying-on rates in 16+ education and training. Once again, the Committee would very much support this and would strongly suggest monitoring also the levels of qualifications attained.

In terms of participation, the Committee will look to the Department to monitor and report on improvements to existing, recognised imbalances. In terms of DHFETE 3, data previously supplied by the Department of HFETE, along with academic studies indicated to the Committee some possibly worrying imbalances within the composition of the body of students within HE and FE:

• Male/female--- amongst undergraduate students now a majority of women; 60:40 (this may reflect the underperformance of boys at the schools level).

• Catholic/protestant--- at QUB 58 % catholic and at UU 56 %.

• Mature students--- NI, like GB and ROI, probably has a relatively small number compared to other European economies.

• Social class--- the two NI universities do relatively well in this regard (from the lower income social classes 28 % of QUB students and 40 % at UU compared to roughly one-in-five across the UK)--- though there is evidence that protestant, male working class are especially under-represented. It should be noted that NI with its selective system of 11-18 education has a relatively more meritocratic higher education than England after two decades of comprehensives. DHFETE3 notes the prospective impact of the Springvale campus. We will be concerned to evaluate how far it provides access to Higher and Further Education to all sectors of the community.

New Deal (DHFETE 7-10)

The Committee is concerned at indications that the number of people joining New Deal has decreased significantly over recent months. They note that the T&EA is currently conducting a review of New Deal, and express concern that the New TSN Action Plan shows that evaluation is not proposed by the department until end March 2001. The Committee considers that the Department needs to interpret and publish statistics on New deal to March 2000; and conduct an interim assessment of how New Deal can be better tailored to Northern Ireland's needs, particularly addressing concerns expressed by elected representatives and others, which include:

• that participants are simply being turned through a revolving door to unemployment and benefits claims (Belfast Telegraph 26/08/99);

• that support options for clients are often weak (Times Educational Supplement 3/3/00); and

• the high cost, because of personal support needs, of some New Deal students (Times Educational Supplement, 5/5/00).

• Also, general, UK wide concerns that many New Deal placements would have found jobs in any case even without the expense of a public scheme

Job Brokerage (excluding New Deal) (DHFETE 11)
The Committee expressed concern that the TSN aspects of this work should be adequately monitored.

Jobskills (DHFETE 12,13,14)

The Committee was concerned to establish that there was a (historical) base position against which improvement will be assessed; and that genuine output (progress in employment) rather than solely process (gaining of qualifications) measures had been identified. To what extent is the target of 65% of those leaving Jobskills for employment or other education or training opportunities, a genuine measure of employability? Would a more robust measure not be % moving into fulltime employment within a certain period of time.

Bridge to Employment (DHFETE 15)

Again, the Committee will look for robust monitoring of outcomes, rather than solely activity or participation rates.

Worktrack (DHFETE 16)

The Committee notes and commends the clear iteration of targets and will watch with interest the monitoring of TSN and Equality aspects of this programme.

Disablement Advisory Service/New Deal for Disabled People (DHFETE 17,18)

The Committee found it difficult to see, from the table, whether and how the value added and retention aspects of these programmes would be monitored. They would welcome further clarification also on who qualifies, and on the pilot marketing programme.

Ulster Supported Employment Limited (DHFETE 19)

The Committee would be interested to have further written briefing on the organisation/programme, its achievements and its finances.

Joint service-delivery by T&EA and Social Security Agency (DHFETE 23)

The Committee would be interested to have written briefing on developments in this area, including plans for the pilot service.

Enterprise Ulster (DHFETE 24)

The Committee expressed concern at the apparent lack of clarity (definition of "employment"?) and the low target of 32% of mainstream participants to enter employment. It requested a briefing outlining the costs, activity levels, and outputs of Enterprise Ulster, including details of capital and maintenance costs, and capital holdings.

IFI/Wider Horizons

The Committee asked for sight of the most recent evaluation of the T&EA-managed aspects of this programme.

Esmond Birnie

ESMOND BIRNIE
Chairman
7 July 2000.