Complaints in Bootle, and correction

Labour MP Bill Esterson is having another go at A4e.  Not long ago he ran a complaint on his website from a man who had been referred to A4e and said that they "run a campaign of intimidation and undermine any self-confidence you may have."  The story was marred slightly by mention of a 50-page contract; but the gist of it was clear enough.  Now Esterson returns to the attack with an account from a 48-year-old woman who " was left so angry at the scheme, she has turned to her Labour MP for help to 'expose the disgraceful practices of A4e'." 
What seems to have happened is that an induction in Bootle was a shambles, with no one knowing what to do with the clients but treating them like naughty children or criminals.  The woman "was introduced to a placement work advisor who proceeded to talk to the group like a primary school teacher addressing a group of six year olds. We were told to 'shut up, sit down, don't speak, put your hands down, you can't ask questions and don't speak over me'. She then proceeded to bring in a team of health workers  and told me in front of the group that I should have a chlamydia test, there and then."  She said that the atmosphere was so confrontational that it was dangerous, and that the experience was humiliating for people who were already likely to be suffering from depression and lack of confidence.  The MP says he getting a lot of similar complaints about A4e and wants an investigation into its practices.
There's always another side to a story like this so we have to be cautious.  But how can a company alienate people so comprehensively on their first day?  Lack of organisation is one thing; but staff attitudes towards clients are fundamental.  And they come from management.

Another MP, Fiona Mactaggart, has been asking every department of government what contracts it has with A4e.  The Department of Defence said, "None".  But now they've issued a correction.  "The Ministry of Defence has one contract with A4e. This is for the provision of a trial of early leaver services, to assist service personnel leaving the armed forces with their transition back into civilian life. The contract is for a period of 12 months, commencing February 2012, and has a nil value contract management fee."  (Does that last bit mean that it's payment by results?)

Those 120,000 families

Emma Harrison reached the height of her influence with her "family champions" idea.  The government reckoned that there were 120,000 "troubled families" responsible for most of what was wrong in the country, and Harrison persuaded ministers that she had the solution.  There were many people at the time who criticised both the analysis and the proposed remedy.  One established charity, Family Action was particularly concerned about the damage which Harrison's approach could do.  Now a report has been published which shows the flaws in the original thinking.  It has been written by Professor Ruth Levitas for the Poverty and Social Exclusion in the UK Project, and can be accessed through the Indus Delta site.  

Levitas shows how the original figure of 120,000 families was based on a misuse of statistics, and how "troubled families" were redefined as "troublesome families" by government rhetoric.  She quotes a Cameron speech: "That’s why today, I want to talk about troubled families. Let me be clear what I mean by this phrase. Officialdom might call them ‘families with multiple disadvantages’. Some in the press might call them ‘neighbours from hell’. Whatever you call them, we’ve known for years that a relatively small number of families are the source of a large proportion of the problems in society. Drug addiction. Alcohol abuse. Crime. A culture of disruption and irresponsibility that cascades through generations. We’ve always known that these families cost an extraordinary amount of money…but now we’ve come up the actual figures. Last year the state spent an estimated £9 billion on just 120,000 families…that is around £75,000 per family."   The government has conflated families which have disadvantages which are not self-inflicted with those who cause expensive trouble.  Levitas goes on to show how this rhetoric has fed a vindictive attitude towards the poor.  It's an excellent report and well worth reading.

Emma Harrison was not, of course, responsible for this.  It would be truer to say that she jumped on the bandwagon.  She proposed a simplistic solution; volunteers could work with these families to get them into work.  "Working Families Everywhere", a pilot scheme, was born, and we had the toe-curling suggestion that these volunteers be known as "Emmas".  But Harrison had, possibly unwittingly, ruled A4e out of bidding for the contracts for European Social Fund money to pay private companies to do the work with local authorities in a professional way.  A new "tsar" was appointed, Louise Casey, a woman with very different experience from Harrison's.  And when the torrent of bad publicity for A4e was unleashed, Harrison stepped down from the ongoing WFE scheme.

I am tempted to draw lessons from this story, but readers can do that themselves.  Perhaps the lesson for Harrison is that hubris results in nemesis. 

From bad to worse

Another story from the Guardian's Patrick Butler details more fallout from A4e's situation.  A contract awarded to the Foundation for Social Improvement, a charity set up and largely funded by A4e, has been withdrawn.  Richmond council gave the £85,000 contract to the FSI for charity business skills training, but has now decided to pull out,citing the potential risks of giving a contract to an organisation so dependent financially on a company now under investigation.  Butler hints that it was odd that the FSI got the contract in the first place, given that it had assets of less than £9,000 in its latest accounts.  Well done to Richmond's Lib Dem leader on the council, Stephen Knight, for raising concerns.

Could this be the start?

Patrick Butler of the Guardian reports an interesting development in the outsourcing business - A4e's failure to get a contract.  The contracts are for assessing people's eligibility for Personal Independence Payments, which will replace DLA.  Ten companies have been shortlisted, including all the usual suspects - G4S, Serco, Atos, Ingeus etc.  But not A4e, who did put in a bid.  To have shortlisted A4e would have meant provoking howls of protest, because they are still under investigation.  We are still waiting to hear about that contract for the EHRC helpline.  Exaro broke the story that A4e had got the contract; the government denied it.  But we still haven't heard who has got it.  Not including A4e in the latest contracts sets a significant precedent.  When they are exonerated will they be back in the mix?  Or is this the start of the decline of the company?


It must be galling for Emma Harrison to see her former employee Hayley Taylor continuing to pull in the dosh.  She has a new American series on More4 tonight.  The Liverpool Echo sounds less than thrilled at the prospect. 

Another arrest

It's reported that a sixth person has been arrested from the Slough A4e office in connection with the fraud investigation.  All 6 are free on bail.  No details of the charges have ever been given, but it's hinted that the fraud involves false job outcome claims. 
And that reminds us of the investigation which is supposedly ongoing into whether there is "systemic fraud" at A4e.  No news of that, but I bet it's only a matter of time before it's announced that there were only isolated cases of fraud, it's not systemic, and all sorts of procedures are in place to minimise the risk .... blah, blah.  Because, as we've said before, the government can't contemplate finding A4e guilty and taking away their contracts.  We know that there are allegations against other providers, so why single out A4e?  It makes the Work Programme look like a row of dominoes; knock the first one down and they all fall over.  
One examination that A4e has to face, along with the other primes, is an assessment of their compliance with the Merlin Standard.  This guides the relationship between primes and their sub-contractors.  The process runs throughout May and June, but there's no statement of when we'll hear the results.

Inadequate

David Cameron was made to look foolish in his dazzled admiration of A4e's Emma Harrison.  But, as the Morning Star points out, Labour had been just as convinced of A4e's ability to solve the nation's problems.  We know about David Blunkett, of course.  And the CBE.  And we have noted that A4e's Mark Lovell has been a guest of the Young Fabians.  But the article points out another connection with Labour.  A4e contributed an article to a Labour pamphlet last year meant to show how business-friendly the party is.  The article was about A4e's work at Blundeston prison.  But as Morning Star points out, Ofsted rated the company's work at Blundeston, and at another prison, "inadequate".  Yet A4e was recently awarded two new prison education contracts.

Some good news.  We've told the story of the fight by an Edinburgh group, ECAP, to get A4e to recognise claimants' right to have a representative with them at interviews.  You can read the story here.  They've won, and A4e have backed down, but not before people like Peter and Ram were put through huge pressure.  Congratulations to them and all the group.

Please remember that if you send me a comment which is critical of a named A4e office or identifiable staff member, I can't publish it.  It may be true, but unless I can back it up, it's libellous.  And to the anonymous poster who has twice pointed out to me the links between A4e, Carley Consult and the DWP.  Thanks, it's interesting, but not unusual, sadly.  I'm hanging on to your post.

Those unemployment figures

We're told today that unemployment is down just a bit.  But long-term joblessness has actually gone up, especially amongst the over 50s, and a great many of the jobs people have managed to get are part-time.  And that must be a worry for the Work Programme providers, who can only claim money for full-time job outcomes, and get most money for those who've been out of work longest.  There continues to be most emphasis on unemployment of young people, understandably.  But that growing army of workless middle aged people has serious implications for society as well.
Grayling has assured us, though, that the WP offers "tailored support".   In one of the reports in the papers we were told that the WP is currently showing 30% outcomes; but I can't find that report now, and it may have been edited out of the online versions.  Mustn't give anything away too soon.
And what of A4e?  The company appears to be keeping a low profile.  And Emma Harrison seems to have disappeared.  Has her picture been removed from all those walls yet?