Select committee inquiry
Role of Jobcentre Plus in the reformed welfare system
Closed
What the inquiry looked at
“This inquiry examines the effectiveness of Jobcentre Plus (JCP), and considers how its role may need to change, especially within the context of current and ongoing welfare reforms. These reforms include the introduction of Universal Credit and the implementation of a cap on the total value of benefits which can be received by a household. The effectiveness of JCP’s core employment services and its role as a "gatekeeper" to contracted-out services are considered. Recent changes to the governance arrangements for JCP and options for more radical future changes are also within the scope of the inquiry. Committee staff lead: James Clarke, Tel: 020 7219 4835”
The committee's words, from the inquiry page on parliament.uk ↗.
What the government said
2nd Report - The role of Jobcentre Plus in the reformed welfare system - Volume II (Volume II - additional written evidence)
No government response is linked to this report.
2nd Report - The role of Jobcentre Plus in the reformed welfare system - Volume I (Volume I: Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence)
The government responded on 3 April 2014.
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response.
The Government welcomes the Committee's endorsement of the role of Jobcentre Plus, and responds to its recommendations as agreed, partly agreed or rejected, with most marked 'Partly Agreed'.
- On segmentation, it 'shares the Committee's aspiration' and is developing and testing a new approach, but says it should be 'cautious' as it does not yet know if it works. Depending on outcomes, it 'will consider' wider application, including for the Work Programme.
- On the Claimant Commitment and Universal Jobmatch, the response is marked 'Agreed', citing training delivered to Jobcentre Plus staff and existing guidance.
- On benefit sanctions, it rejects publishing data on claimants signposted to food aid, stating that 'Jobcentres have no part in deciding whether support is provided'. It also commits to an independent review by Matthew Oakley, which will look primarily at communications to claimants.
- On the Benefit Cap, it plans, 'subject to feasibility', an econometric net impact study, to be published in autumn 2014 as part of the planned review into the Benefit Cap.
Read the government's response ↗ Read the report ↗ Report an error
How the inquiry ran
Each dot is a dated item listed on this page, from the inquiry's opening on 19 April 2013 to 3 April 2014.
- Report 2 reports
- Government response 3 Apr 2014
What it recommended 24 recommendations · 8 conclusions
1JCP should continue to provide a public employment service for the unemployed, broadly along current...
Concluded (the committee's words)
JCP should continue to provide a public employment service for the unemployed, broadly along current lines, particularly through the current period of extensive change in the welfare system.
2DWP's intentions with regard to “segmentation” were unclear.
Concluded (the committee's words)
DWP's intentions with regard to “segmentation” were unclear. On the one hand we were told that DWP considered segmentation tools, including the Jobseeker Classification Instrument, to be ineffective and on the other hand we were told that “further work was being undertaken” to test a similar tool. We made recommendations in relation to classification and segmentation of jobseekers in our 2013 report on the Work Programme. It is important that DWP clarify its intentions in this regard.
3Current processes for establishing claimants’ needs vary between Jobcentres and are prone to missing crucial...
Recommended (the committee's words)
Current processes for establishing claimants’ needs vary between Jobcentres and are prone to missing crucial information about complex barriers to employment. The initial interview between claimant and Jobcentre Adviser is focused largely on the requirements the claimant must fulfil in order to remain in receipt of benefit. This risks overlooking important issues with the work-readiness of the claimant and failure to address these can lead to a longer than necessary period of unemployment, which is detrimental to the claimant and causes increased cost to the taxpayer. We recommend that Jobcentres adopt a more thorough and systematic initial face-to-face assessment of claimants’ barriers to employment to identify the level of employment support they need from Jobcentres and contracted providers. Assessments should be regularly updated during longer claims, and relevant data passed to Work Programme and other contracted providers if claimants are referred on.
4We further recommend that DWP continue to work to develop a “segmentation” tool, to be...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We further recommend that DWP continue to work to develop a “segmentation” tool, to be conducted by Jobcentre Advisers face-to-face with claimants, to allocate claimants to separate work streams according to their distance from the labour market and relative need for intensive employment support. This tool should be established prior to drawing up the specifications for the re-letting of Work Programme contracts in 2016.
5A more effective initial face-to-face assessment should also enable a “no initial face-to- face signing...
Recommended (the committee's words)
A more effective initial face-to-face assessment should also enable a “no initial face-to- face signing on work stream” to be established, in which determinedly job-seeking claimants who are closest to the labour market and likely to return to work quickly with little or no support are, for a limited period, not required to visit the Jobcentre, freeing up time for Jobcentres to support those with greater barriers. We recommend that DWP pursues this approach.
6The relative effectiveness of each of the Government’s employment support interventions needs to be more...
Recommended (the committee's words)
The relative effectiveness of each of the Government’s employment support interventions needs to be more transparent. We recommend that, at the very least, the Government publish raw data on benefit off-flows into employment for claimants taking part in each of the Get Britain Working schemes, to supplement the current publication of headline statistics showing the number of claimants taking up Work Experience, Sector-based Work Academy placements and the New Enterprise Allowance. We also recommend that DWP consider commissioning independent evaluations of the effectiveness of each of the schemes in relation to employment outcomes.
7We recommend that the Government separately evaluate the impacts of the Flexible Support Fund on...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that the Government separately evaluate the impacts of the Flexible Support Fund on employment outcomes and identify and disseminate good practice across JCP districts. We also recommend that the Government publish details of Flexible Support Fund budgets and spending at national and district levels as part of DWP’s Annual Report and Accounts.
8The trial undertaken in Loughton Jobcentre using a different approach to the fortnightly job-search review...
Concluded (the committee's words)
The trial undertaken in Loughton Jobcentre using a different approach to the fortnightly job-search review was not only different insofar as it was about future rather than past activities; it also involved the Jobcentre Adviser spending more time with the claimant. Evaluation of the trial must take this into account.
9We welcome the introduction of the Claimant Commitment and the greater clarity and support for...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We welcome the introduction of the Claimant Commitment and the greater clarity and support for claimants that it should bring. We consider that to be fully effective it should represent a discussion between the claimant and the Jobcentre Adviser. It would be highly regrettable if the Claimant Commitment resulted in a process-driven, box- ticking exercise in which Jobcentre Advisers measure the length of time claimants spend searching for jobs, regardless of the likely effectiveness of the job-search activities undertaken. We recommend that guidance on this issue is set out clearly for Jobcentre staff.
10Universal Jobmatch has great potential to facilitate effective job-search.
Recommended (the committee's words)
Universal Jobmatch has great potential to facilitate effective job-search. We recommend that DWP guidance to Jobcentre staff makes clear that Universal Jobmatch should be promoted to claimants as a potentially effective tool to find work, and that Jobcentre staff should provide advice and support on getting the best out of the system. Universal Jobmatch also provides a useful tool for monitoring claimants’ compliance with benefits conditionality. However, we recommend that guidance makes clear that this is a secondary function, with the emphasis on the benefits of using Universal Jobmatch to monitor compliance between claimant interviews, freeing up more time for advice and support during interviews. We also recommend that DWP explore the potential for increased functionality of Universal Jobmatch, particularly in 46 the areas of assessing quality of CVs and the likelihood of success of job applications, to ensure that claimants’ job-search activities are focussed and effective.
11We welcome steps taken by DWP to improve online access and support for claimants—this will...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We welcome steps taken by DWP to improve online access and support for claimants—this will be crucial in the roll out of Universal Credit. However, DWP has been slow to produce a detailed framework for the delivery of a comprehensive range of Universal Credit support services, and there remains a lack of clarity about how these services will be funded or what JCP’s role will be in delivering or coordinating them. We believe that a diverse range of services, which go beyond online support and help with budgeting, will be necessary if the Government is to achieve its aim of “better support under Universal Credit than has ever been available before.”
12The slower than anticipated roll out affords Jobcentres the opportunity to build strong relationships with...
Recommended (the committee's words)
The slower than anticipated roll out affords Jobcentres the opportunity to build strong relationships with a range of local services to support claimants in the transition to Universal Credit and beyond. We recommend that DWP identifies good practice in building local services and disseminates this across the Jobcentre network as the Universal Credit Pathfinders are expanded through 2014.
13The Local Support Services Framework, now due to be published in Autumn 2014, will set...
Concluded (the committee's words)
The Local Support Services Framework, now due to be published in Autumn 2014, will set out the agreed process for providing support to claimants. We request an assurance from DWP that this will be a comprehensive document, which provides a best practice framework for the provision of a diverse range of support services and sets out a robust plan for how these services will be funded and delivered nationally from financial year 2015/16, so that local authorities are able to make budgeting decisions and commission services.
14The Government has recognised the need to improve employment provision for Employment and Support Allowance...
Recommended (the committee's words)
The Government has recognised the need to improve employment provision for Employment and Support Allowance Work Related Activity Group (ESA WRAG) claimants. However, the current ratio of one specialist Jobcentre Disability Employment Adviser (DEA) to more than 600 ESA WRAG claimants is unacceptably high. We welcome the three new pilots designed to test the relative effectiveness of support provided by: healthcare professionals; JCP; and Work Programme providers. However, the pilots will include only around 8,300 claimants, from a caseload of over 540,000, and will not be completed until 2016. This means that the very large majority of ESA WRAG claimants will continue to rely on standard Jobcentre support which often amounts to no more than two interviews with an Adviser each year. We recommend that urgent action is taken to improve the level of JCP support for job- seeking claimants with health conditions and disabilities, including by addressing the unacceptably high ESA WRAG caseloads per DEA.
15We reiterate our view that conditionality is a necessary part of the benefits system and...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We reiterate our view that conditionality is a necessary part of the benefits system and that sanctioning, if used appropriately, can be a useful tool for encouraging 47 engagement with employment support. Sanctions should be used primarily for this purpose and as a last resort. Strict conditionality regimes should be balanced by meaningful and in-depth advice and support from JCP for those who need it.
16Under the new rules introduced in late 2012, the number of sanctions has increased to...
Concluded (the committee's words)
Under the new rules introduced in late 2012, the number of sanctions has increased to the extent that some 5% of all Jobseekers Allowance claimants are sanctioned every month. Some 860,000 Jobseekers Allowance claimants were sanctioned in the year to June 2013, the highest number in any 12-month period since at least April
17We recommend that DWP take urgent steps to monitor the extent of financial hardship caused...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that DWP take urgent steps to monitor the extent of financial hardship caused by benefit sanctions, including by collecting, collating and publishing data on the number of claimants “signposted” to food aid by Jobcentres and the reasons for claimants’ need for assistance in these cases.
18It is important that JCP makes fair and proportionate sanction referrals and that the process...
Concluded (the committee's words)
It is important that JCP makes fair and proportionate sanction referrals and that the process is transparent. We welcome the current independent review which will focus on the clarity of communications between JCP and claimants in relation to the conditionality and sanctioning process; the availability of hardship payments for sanctioned claimants; and the clarity of the review and appeals process. We strongly believe that a further review is necessary and welcome the Minister’s commitment to launch a second and separate review into the broader operation of the sanctioning process.
19We recommend that the second review of sanctions investigate: whether sanction referrals are being made...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that the second review of sanctions investigate: whether sanction referrals are being made appropriately, fairly and proportionately, in accordance with the relevant Regulations and guidance, across the Jobcentre network; and the link between sanctioning and benefit off-flow, including whether benefit off-flow targets have an influence on sanctioning rates. We also recommend that this review consider whether, and to what extent, the use of sanctions is having the desired effect of encouraging claimants to engage more actively in job-seeking. We further recommend that this review is launched as a matter of urgency and reports before the end of 2014.
20We believe that benefit off-flow is a very blunt instrument for measuring JCP’s performance.
Recommended (the committee's words)
We believe that benefit off-flow is a very blunt instrument for measuring JCP’s performance. A particular weakness is that non work-related outcomes, which are often negative, currently count towards the achievement of key performance targets. 48 These outcomes will include claimants leaving benefit because of a long-term benefit sanction; because their time-limited contribution-based benefit entitlement has come to an end; or because they have withdrawn altogether from the active labour market. Such outcomes should not contribute towards the achievement of JCP’s primary performance targets. We recommend that JCP establish a system by which it records, as a matter of course, the reason claimants leave benefit at the time they end their claims. We further recommend that DWP use this information to re-establish “off-benefit and into work” performance measures with immediate effect.
21We recommend that DWP prioritise the formulation of JCP performance indicators which promote and measure...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that DWP prioritise the formulation of JCP performance indicators which promote and measure sustained job outcomes and better reflect the changing role of JCP consequent on the implementation of Universal Credit and the proposals for in-work conditionality, with a view to establishing the performance measures across the Jobcentre network when full national implementation of Universal Credit has been achieved.
22We recommend that DWP make clear in guidance that Jobcentre staff can apply flexibility to...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that DWP make clear in guidance that Jobcentre staff can apply flexibility to the rules on the permissible length of full-time pre-employment training if it is clear that the claimant is being held back from finding sustained employment by a lack of skills which could be addressed by training courses longer than the currently permissible two to eight-week period.
23We recognise the improvement Universal Jobmatch represents over the previous vacancy system and the scope...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recognise the improvement Universal Jobmatch represents over the previous vacancy system and the scope for further enhanced uses of the system and data. However, Universal Jobmatch appears to contain a significant number of dubious, duplicate, out-of-date and inaccurately categorised job vacancies, which pose a risk to its efficiency and effectiveness as a job-search tool. We recommend that DWP increase its oversight of vacancies posted onto Universal Jobmatch, including by working with Monster Government Solutions to regularly purge the system and ensure that it contains, as far as is possible, only genuine and accurately described job vacancies. This is particularly important as Universal Jobmatch is intended to be used as a tool to monitor claimants' compliance with job-seeking conditionality. Claimants should only be required to apply for genuine vacancies which meet all the relevant employment standards. We recommend that this is made clear in guidance to JCP staff
24We recognise the desirability of a self-service online vacancy system.
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recognise the desirability of a self-service online vacancy system. However, some employers require greater support and training on how to use Universal Jobmatch effectively, including how to accurately categorise their vacancies. We recommend that guidance make clear that it is an explicit part of the JCP Employer Adviser role to monitor use of Universal Jobmatch by local employers and to offer help and guidance where necessary.
25Currently the level of service employers receive from JCP varies widely and is largely dependent...
Recommended (the committee's words)
Currently the level of service employers receive from JCP varies widely and is largely dependent on local JCP management. We believe that employers are ultimately JCP’s key customers and employer engagement must therefore be seen as a core role in all Jobcentres. We recommend that DWP review the service provided to employers by JCP to identify best practice and then take urgent steps to disseminate understanding of what works best across the Jobcentre network.
26There is insufficient information to establish the causal links between: the Benefit Cap; affected claimants...
Recommended (the committee's words)
There is insufficient information to establish the causal links between: the Benefit Cap; affected claimants engaging with employment support; and the likelihood of affected claimants entering work. We recommend that DWP conducts and publishes research into these causal links in 2014, in order to establish whether the Benefit Cap is achieving one of its key policy aims.
27Initial, limited data indicate that the Benefit Cap is having positive effects in terms of...
Recommended (the committee's words)
Initial, limited data indicate that the Benefit Cap is having positive effects in terms of claimants’ attitudes to work but that very few affected claimants have been able to overcome the significant barriers they face in finding employment. We recommend that DWP conduct a review of the employment support needs of claimants affected by the Benefit Cap and the availability of the requisite support in Jobcentres. The review should be conducted with a view to identifying and disseminating best practice across the Jobcentre network.
28We recommend that DWP review the clarity of guidance to JCP staff on the circumstances...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that DWP review the clarity of guidance to JCP staff on the circumstances in which it is appropriate to refer claimants to local welfare assistance schemes operated by local authorities, which have replaced elements of the discretionary Social Fund, and that it take steps to ensure that the guidance is followed across the Jobcentre network.
29Jobcentres are being asked to do significantly more while DWP’s overall running costs will be...
Concluded (the committee's words)
Jobcentres are being asked to do significantly more while DWP’s overall running costs will be further reduced following the 2013 Spending Round—in addition to very substantial efficiency savings made following the 2010 Spending Review. DWP’s budget and staffing plans specifically for Jobcentres are unclear, partly as a consequence of the abolition of JCP’s agency status in 2011.
30There is a risk that the resource implications of recent and planned policy changes will...
Recommended (the committee's words)
There is a risk that the resource implications of recent and planned policy changes will put too great a strain on already stretched Jobcentre staff. DWP must be clearer about the staffing implications of these changes for Jobcentres. We recommend that DWP set out, in its response to this Report, its assessment of the impact on Jobcentre customer volumes and the staffing implications for Jobcentres of each of the following announcements: • Weekly signing on for “half of all jobseekers” in 2015–16; 50 • Daily signing on for one third of unsuccessful Work Programme participants returning to JCP from April 2014; and • The various options for an “in-work conditionality” regime under Universal Credit.
31We recommend that, to facilitate effective scrutiny, Jobcentre budget and staff allocations are set out...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that, to facilitate effective scrutiny, Jobcentre budget and staff allocations are set out in full in DWP’s Annual Report and Accounts. Information should include the number of Jobcentre Advisers and Assistant Advisers; Disability Employment Advisers; Lone Parent Advisers; and Employer Advisers. It should also include the average claimant caseloads for each type of Jobcentre Adviser.
32We do not envisage the overall number of Jobcentres falling in the foreseeable future.
Recommended (the committee's words)
We do not envisage the overall number of Jobcentres falling in the foreseeable future. However, as the nature of Jobcentre services change, particularly through greater use of online job-searching using devices within Jobcentres, and with the potential increase in Jobcentre footfall as a result of in-work conditionality, the layout of Jobcentres is likely to need to change. Jobcentres should be welcoming and business-like places with facilities to allow both in-work and out-of-work claimants to access the internet for job-searching, either supervised or unsupervised. We recommend that DWP conduct a formal audit of the Jobcentre network to identify whether it is currently making the best use of available space within its existing estate and how its accommodation can be adapted to meet changes in demand over the next several years.