Concerns about the Work Programme - implications for the providers

Back in May the Work and Pensions Select Committee reported its concerns about the Work Programme.  The DWP has now responded.  You can read a useful summary on the Indus Delta site.  It's all interesting, but there are two points which are particularly relevant for the providers.

1) Market share shift.  This is the penalty providers are supposed to pay if they fail; a shifting of some of their share of referrals to other providers.  The committee wanted this shift to be "carefully and transparently applied" and wanted to know what work had been done on its likely impact.  The reply is that the DWP has already "adjusted the shares according to performance levels over 12 months".  So who has lost and who has gained?  There wasn't a great deal of difference in performance among all the providers.

2) Attachment fees.  These are due to stop in April 2014.  The committee thought they should be retained beyond that date "to protect service delivery".  The reply is non-committal: "The department will monitor the success of incentives under the payment by results model and make changes if it deems them necessary."  Now, this appears to mean that if the incentives are not successful, i.e. the providers don't make enough profit, the attachment fees could be retained.  And that's crazy.

One other "concern" will interest those who are coming to the end of their stint on the WP.  The committee wanted to ensure that people who hadn't got work should be provided with specialist support or "allowed to extend their time on the Work Programme".  (They didn't, apparently, see any irony in this.)  The response is that the Mandatory Intervention Regime (a phrase that's new to me) is already dealing with this, and that "post-work programme support remains flexible and tailored to individual needs."  So you've no need to worry.

Just an idea ....

This is pure fantasy, because it depends on the closing down of the Work Programme and all such private-profit schemes, and that's not going to happen.  But just suppose ....
Start by ending the WP and strengthening the Jobcentres, with more staff, retraining and more resources; put them into partnership with local councils.  They would do the basic stuff where necessary, like CVs and interview techniques.
Now, that £400 attachment fee which the WP providers have been getting.  Instead, put that into a notional account for every person who has been out of work for, say, 6 months.  The claimant and JCP adviser together decide what needs to be done to enhance the claimant's job prospects.  It could be a training course (a real one) up to the value of £400.  I know some training costs a lot more then that, but I think you'd find FE colleges and genuine training bodies willing to put together proper courses for that when the money was sitting there.  It could be used for driving lessons; after all, so many jobs depend on having a driving license.  Any other ideas?  It wouldn't have to be spent all in one go.
Of course, if the claimant signs up for something expensive and then doesn't complete it, there would have to be a good reason.  But I don't think there would be many defaulters if it was clear that this was genuinely useful.  And those outcome payments?  Well, they could go to restoring the money which used to help someone bridge the gap between starting a job and getting paid.
As I said, it's not going to happen.  Pity.