Research and analysis

Part 1 of 4: Introduction and the 16 funded projects

Published 17 March 2022

Introduction

In the 2017 Spring Budget, £5 million was allocated to support people back into employment after taking a career break. As part of this, the Government Equalities Office (GEO) set up schemes across the public and private sector to support people to return to work after a break for caring responsibilities. The Returners Fund (referred to from now on as ‘the Fund’) launched in 2018, and awarded around £1.5 million to 16 pilot returner projects that would engage and support returners and employers in the private sector.

GEO defines a returner as a person who left employment for at least a year to take on a caring responsibility, and would like to return to paid work at a level equal to their skills and experience.

The Fund sought to understand the challenges people experience on their return to work journey, potential solutions to these challenges, and how returners could be best supported by returner schemes. In addition, the Fund sought to understand the perceived barriers employers face in recruiting returners, potential solutions to these barriers, and how employers can be engaged through returner schemes. Funding was provided to 16 projects across England with the ambition that some of these projects would become self-sustaining and continue to support returners and employers beyond the funding period.

GEO provided strategic oversight of the Fund, including design, implementation, reporting and evaluation. A grant administrator was appointed through a tendering process to promote sector engagement, raise awareness of the Fund, and then assess funding applications during the funding rounds. The grant administrator also managed the Fund through monitoring of agreed project activity and the administration of payments. Following a tendering process, research organisation SQW were appointed as grant evaluators to provide guidance to applicants and support to funded projects on evaluation requirements, to undertake evaluation fieldwork, and to report on evaluation findings from the 16 pilot projects.

Purpose of the report

This report provides an overview of the Fund. An evaluation report for each of the 16 projects has been prepared and these provide further detail about the scope, activities and outcomes for each project. This report presents an account of Fund achievements and learning from the 16 project reports. It provides a brief account of the Fund’s policy origins, processes, barriers and achievements. Its purpose is to provide a wide range of stakeholders (including policymakers, practitioners working with returners and employers, and other partner organisations) with a set of lessons or considerations for future support activity and advocacy of returners and employers.

Main research questions

The Fund was designed to embed evaluation from the start and organisations were required to consider the role of evaluation research within their applications. The evaluation team presented at events during the application phases, supported logic model development across the funding rounds, and presented evaluation approaches and expectations alongside GEO at the 3 project inception meetings.

SQW produced a logic model for the Fund, which was based on the premise that a series of structured actions taken by project organisations would change behaviours of both employers and returners, leading to offers of paid employment to returners. The research questions arising from this model therefore applied to all 3 participating groups.

For returners:

• do returners require a focused and supported intervention that is personalised to their circumstances?
• how can interventions be tailored to their needs?
• what motivates a return to paid work?
• what skills, experiences, and opportunities can support them to re-enter the labour market and enter rewarding employment at an appropriate level?

For employers:

• what tools or support do employers need to rethink their recruitment policies and practices relating to returners?
• what practices can be adapted that suit returner engagement?
• are there creative and cost-effective ways to address employer skills gaps that bring returners back to paid employment?

For providers:

• why is the initiative needed for this group of employers, or for groups of returners in the geographic or sectoral context?
• is a relationship broker or intermediary necessary to bring returners and employers together?
• which delivery models are helpful to make local labour markets work more efficiently?

The success of the Fund would be affected by a number of external factors:

• for returners this would include ongoing caring responsibilities, financial issues, the health of a family member or themselves, transport costs and availability of support for other issues such as domestic abuse or housing
• for employers this would include market changes, changing management priorities, business restructuring or environment changes (such as new physical developments in their area), the effect of Brexit on local labour markets, and general economic up or down-turns

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Fund was an unexpected external factor. Most projects were either complete or coming to an end when lockdown restrictions were put in place in March 2020. However, 9 projects were affected by reduced capacity in project organisations, changes to employers’ recruitment plans, and changes to caring responsibilities for many returners.

Evaluation methodology

The evaluation ran alongside project selection and delivery. The overall approach was to give strategic formative insights to GEO as the 16 projects were running, and summative insights at important milestones. These strategic, project level insights would be informed by evaluation work with each of the funded projects.

This overall approach to the evaluation is summarised in Figure 1-1. The evaluation research used standard tools which included interview topic guides (for interviews with returners, employers, and project managers), self-completion online surveys for employers and returners, and standard monitoring data requirements. These were designed to provide data and insights to inform responses to the research questions outlined previously. The overall approach and relevant tools were presented to each project and an individually tailored evaluation plan was agreed with each project manager.

Figure 1-1: Research approach used in the evaluation of the Fund

Source: SQW.

SQW then worked with each project, alongside the grant administrator, to provide the evaluation plan. The evidence informing this evaluation is derived from:

• project documentation including project applications (each with its own logic model), grant agreement letters, and monthly progress reports provided to the grant administrator
• monitoring data capturing the number and type of returners and employers that each project engaged
• surveys capturing ‘pre-project’ and ‘post-project’ responses to standard questions from returners, and post-project responses from employers in 9 projects
• qualitative interview data from at least 2 interviews with each project manager, and samples of returners (from all projects) and employers (from 14 projects)

Evidence from each project varied in its completeness. Survey participation was lower than expected during the earlier phases of the Fund and projects that were part of later funding rounds included groups for whom self-completion surveys were not appropriate (such as people who do not have English as their first language, or who have lower literacy skills). Surveys were therefore replaced by qualitative approaches for 7 projects. In other cases, employer engagement was more limited than projects had planned, and in addition, was negatively affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Employer participation in both evaluation interviews and surveys was lower than expected with no participation from employers in the case of 2 projects.

Data analysis was undertaken for each project. Survey data was analysed using Excel to produce simple frequencies. Interviews were structured to follow the evaluation logic model and data was thematically analysed to draw out important findings regarding processes, inputs, outputs and outcomes alongside highlighting any verbatim comments of interest.

A project report was prepared for each of the 16 funded projects. These reports captured the rationale for the project, involvement of main partners, components of delivery, and the effect of the project on participating employers and returners. They also included any effect on employers’ recruitment behaviour, as well as returners’ training outcomes, skills, experiences and access to paid employment opportunities. Each report included a set of main learning points. Drafts of these reports were shared with project managers for clarification and to check factual accuracy.

These 16 reports were then used as the evidence base for this Fund level evaluation report. Near final drafts of each of the 16 reports were uploaded to specialist qualitative analysis software. The reports were coded to capture findings relating to delivery models, outcomes and the main learning points from each project. Additional coding was used to capture specific issues such as the issue of transplanting models from London to other parts of the country, corporate social responsibility and accredited qualifications.

This report brings together thematic findings and learning from this analysis. It can be read as a standalone summary of the Fund, with further details about individual projects in the project reports.

The 16 funded projects

An overview

The Fund was launched through a series of events in London and Birmingham with training, voluntary and third sector organisations in attendance. During the first and second funding rounds, organisations were invited to submit an expression of interest and shortlisted applicants were selected to prepare a full bid. The third round of funding invited all interested bidders to submit a full bid. To make funding decisions, bids were reviewed and scored by the grant administrator and a GEO panel, which included an independent assessor. All funding decisions were reviewed and ratified by the Minister for Women and Equalities. In total 16 organisations were funded (Table 2-1).

While the Fund operated across England, activity was particularly concentrated in London, the South East and the North West of England (Liverpool and Manchester city regions). The Forces Employment Charity RFEA project operated nationally, although it was focused on military bases in Plymouth. Some areas had little or no coverage, such as the South West, the Midlands and the East of England. It was reported that fewer applications from organisations operating in these areas were received over the funding rounds and typically scored less than bids received from other regions. It was also notable that 3 projects were running concurrently in a relatively small area within Liverpool.

Table 2-1: Funded organisations and locations

Organisation name	Project location	Type of organisation	Project dates
Adviza Partnership	Thames Valley	Adviza is a registered charity working in the Thames Valley area inspiring people to make better learning and work decisions.	August 2019 to September 2020
Beam	London	Beam is a London-based charity that supports people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness via crowdfunded employment training.	August 2019 to July 2020
Carer Support Wiltshire	Wiltshire	Carer Support Wiltshire is a local charity supporting unpaid carers in Wiltshire.	September 2019 to March 2020
Changing Lives	Gateshead and the North East	Changing Lives is a nationwide charity helping people facing challenging times to make positive change.	January to December 2019
Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD)	Yorkshire and the Humber	CIPD is a professional association for human resource management professionals.	June 2019 to September 2020
We Are Creative Equals (Creative Equals)	London and Manchester	Creative Equals is a not-for-profit consultancy that works to create more pathways to success for female creative talent.	September 2018 to May 2019
F1 Recruitment	London and surrounding counties	F1 Recruitment is a recruitment consultancy for marketing, PR and sports marketing in London.	October 2018 to May 2019
Greater Manchester Centre for Voluntary Organisation (GMCVO)	Greater Manchester	GMCVO is a voluntary, community and social enterprise sector support and development organisation covering the Greater Manchester city region.	June 2019 to May 2020
Liverpool City Council	Liverpool	Liverpool City Council provides employment and skills services through the Liverpool in Work project.	August 2019 to July 2020
Livv Housing Group (Livv Housing)	Liverpool	Livv Housing is an independent housing association providing homes in Knowsley, Merseyside.	June 2019 to May 2020
Mpower People CIC (Mpower People)	Liverpool	Mpower People is a not-for-profit company, which provides community-based education and training in Liverpool.	August 2019 to September 2020
The Forces Employment Charity RFEA (RFEA)	National with a base in Plymouth	RFEA provides specialist training and employment support to service leavers, reservists, veterans and their families nationally.	August 2019 to July 2020
Shpresa Programme and Twist (Shpresa and Twist)	London and Hastings	Shpresa is a registered charity that promotes the participation and contribution of the Albanian-speaking community in the UK. Twist is a consultancy based in east London specialising in the delivery of projects to support migrants.	August 2019 to September 2020
St Helens Chamber of Commerce (St Helens Chamber)	St Helens	St Helens Chamber provides services, training and support for businesses and jobseekers.	October 2018 to September 2019
Westminster City Council	Westminster, London	Westminster City Council provides adult and community learning through the Westminster Adult Education Service (WAES).	August 2019 to May 2020
Women Returners	Manchester and Leeds	Women Returners works across sectors to enable returners to restart after career breaks.	September 2018 to September 2019

Source: SQW.

Timing

There were 3 separate funding rounds. The first round launched in March 2018, the second in August 2018 and the third in February 2019. The first projects began in September 2018 and it was anticipated that the final projects would finish in July 2020 (Table 2-1).

When the COVID-19 lockdown restrictions began in March 2020, most projects were in their final stages. GEO held discussions with all active projects about risks and mitigations and mutually agreed extensions with 5 projects. These extensions meant that overall, the Fund ran for 2 years. Individual projects were in operation for an average of 12 months, the shortest running for 7 months and the longest for 16 months (due to COVID-19 delays).

Funds awarded

A total of up to £1.39 million was awarded by GEO to the 16 projects from the Fund. The awards ranged in value from £32,000 to £186,900. Most of the funding was spent (£1.33 million).

Delivery models

The funded projects offered personalised delivery, cohort delivery, or a combination of both.

Personalised delivery involved one-to-one support for returners that was tailored to their needs and aspirations. This took the form of informal conversations, mentoring, careers counselling and coaching in person and online.

Cohort delivery involved returners participating in training and employment support and activities as a group. This offered advantages such as peer support, where returners could give each other advice and encouragement.

9 of the projects offered a blend of cohort delivery and personalised delivery. For example, following their bootcamp and speed-networking event, the F1 Recruitment project offered returners personalised, practical help to find contract work and permanent career roles through one-to-one guidance from their recruitment consultants. 4 projects focused on personalised delivery, while the remaining 3 chose a cohort model.

Some of the projects redesigned their delivery model after they started. For example, the Carer Support Wiltshire project had planned to run training for a series of cohorts that would include 12 returners per cohort. However, they found that returners were cancelling at the last minute. The team commented that some returners may have found large groups and formal venues off-putting and needed smaller, less formal sessions to build their confidence. The project subsequently adapted their offer to one-to-one support by phone and in person.

Personalised delivery model

Most projects (13) offered one-to-one support to returners. This was done either in person, phone or online by project staff or externally recruited advisers, such as specialists in employment, mentoring or other areas of support. Much of this was formal, regular support available to returners at the beginning of the project (for induction and development planning) and throughout the project (for ongoing personal or employment advice).

The support provided was tailored to the needs of each returner. Broadly, returners received practical job search support such as CV reviews, interview skills help, and support for completing job applications. They also received coaching and advice designed to build their confidence, self-belief and motivation, and support for other needs such as financial advice and English language skills. The professionals providing the one-to-one support would also refer some participants to further training or support services. In addition, some returners had one-to-one support from work coaches, which included a consultation and a tailored needs assessment, followed by a personalised development plan and employability support. Depending on the project, one-to-one support was either organised for returners at the beginning of the project or once they had undertaken a training programme to develop their employability and personal skills.

There were instances of project team members getting in touch with returners informally following the main project activity, to provide personalised, practical help to find employment. There were also occasionally friendly, encouraging phone calls and catch-ups between project team members and returners during the lifetime of the project to keep them engaged and motivated. Following measures put in place due to COVID-19, there was a shift in the emphasis of some of these conversations towards checking in on returners’ welfare and wellbeing.

Cohort training programmes

Most projects (13) also offered training programmes to returners. Some of the projects had in-house training teams and were well placed to run training programmes themselves. For example, the Creative Equals project ran their London based 2-week bootcamp using in-house expertise. In other cases, projects partnered with external training providers to run employability skills programmes or other specialist employment training. For example, the Westminster City Council project partnered with local training provider Adult Education Employment and Training (AEET), while the Adviza project partnered with Clearwater Training, a Security Industry Authority (SIA) accredited training provider.

Training programmes varied in duration, ranging from 2 days of training (Changing Lives project) to 10 weeks (Liverpool City Council project). Some programmes were intensive, providing back-to-back, full-day activity. Others were less intensive, requiring a modest amount of time from returners spread over a few weeks. Across the projects, it became evident that short, intensive interventions seemed to be more suitable for those with fewer and less complex barriers to returning to work. Less intensive support over longer timeframes was seen to be better suited to returners with multiple barriers to returning to work.

The topics covered by the training included workplace-related skills, job searching skills, confidence and mental wellbeing (noting that the topics offered were decided by individual projects). The frequency and types of topics covered within each project differed depending on the needs of the returners who were recruited, and whether additional needs were identified as the returner progressed. Examples of additional content included customer service skills and dealing with difficult situations at work. Within the training programmes, time was also allocated for additional support such as benefits checks, debt management advice and getting DBS checks. In addition, some projects provided returners with opportunities to secure formal qualifications, such as:

• the SIA Door Supervision Level 2 qualification gained by all returners completing Adviza’s training programme
• Teaching Assistant qualifications at Level 1 or 2 for returners participating in the Shpresa and Twist training programme
• Food Hygiene and Safety for Catering at Level 2 for returners taking part in the Westminster City Council training programme

Within the training programmes of some projects, employers, employment support organisations and returner alumni were invited to run sessions for returners. This included workshops by Google and Facebook at their premises, a workshop run by LinkedIn on creating a powerful online profile and a session with 8 ‘Back2businessship’ alumni. Sessions with employers either included or were followed by discussions with returners, where they were able to ask questions and network with employers.

Some projects also included employer activities as part of their training programme. For example, the Shpresa and Twist project offered returners networking opportunities through workplace visits with employers and entrepreneurs who had similar backgrounds and experiences to the returners. The Livv Housing project included returners carrying out research with employers, the Creative Equals project invited employers to give presentations and run workshops with returners, and the CIPD project offered mentoring and coaching to returners by trained HR professionals.

Employer placements

11 projects offered work placement opportunities to returners. Some of these projects saw placements as learning opportunities that would help returners become work-ready during the lifetime of the project, while other projects planned to help returners find placements at the end of core project activity. These projects saw placements as employment outcomes and expressed their hopes that placements would lead to permanent work for returners, either with the employer offering the placement or with a different employer. For example, 2 returners within one project gained work placements within a large retailer which led to employment contract offers.

Some placements were affected by COVID-19. For example, one project was setting up placements for returners before the first national lockdown occurred in March 2020. After lockdown measures were introduced, engaged employers were not able to offer the planned work placements and recruitment activity was paused. Other projects targeted sectors such as hospitality and retail, where recruitment fairs were cancelled and businesses forced to close. The closure of schools also meant that returners with childcare responsibilities often had to prioritise looking after children over securing placements or employment. The risk of contracting COVID-19 in a workplace was also a specific concern for returners caring for vulnerable adults with health conditions.

Networking events and interview days

4 projects offered employer networking events or interview days to returners. Of those, 3 launched a speed networking event at the end of the core returner activity. This involved employers and returners attending an in-person event and having a short, set amount of time to network with each other. The hope was for employers to come with job vacancies and to recruit some of the returners they met. Returners and project teams reported that fewer employers than hoped had attended these types of events with current vacancies, and subsequently, fewer returners were recruited than anticipated. Nevertheless, the contacts made at these events continued, with one project reporting that they followed up with employers to share returners’ CVs. Employers reported that they left these events with a positive perception of the project and its partners.

One project also ran 2 full assessment days where returners had full-length interviews with prospective employers for 6-month placement opportunities. These returners had been preselected for interview by the employers based on written applications submitted before the assessment days. In total, 50 returners were interviewed with 15 gaining placements, and 10 securing permanent jobs on completion.

Targeted sectors

Projects could choose whether they wanted to target employers in particular sectors.

9 of the funded projects did not target a particular sector. Instead, they supported returners into a wide range of sectors depending on the returners’ previous work experience, skills and aspirations.

4 projects chose to run a training programme that provided sector-specific training and employment opportunities. Sectors included tech and fintech, creative and media, hospitality, and law.

3 projects targeted a number of sectors that they considered either to have skills gaps and shortages (so likely interested in new forms of recruitment) or, to be suitable for returners based on prior experience and labour market research. This included hospitality, health and social care, administration, education, retail, law, manufacturing and engineering, creative and media, customer service, logistics, and science and technology.

Targeted returners

In their application for funding, projects described the characteristics of returners they hoped to work with. The mix of returners targeted by projects were as follows:

• 7 projects expected returners to be mostly women, or targeted women specifically
• 5 projects sought to support Black, Asian, or minority ethnic communities
• 5 projects sought to support returners aged 50 and over
• 4 projects sought to support returners out of work for 10 or more years
• 3 projects sought to support returners with disabilities
• 3 projects sought to support highly educated returners (those with degree or Level 6 equivalent or higher qualifications) and 4 sought to support returners with lower levels of educational attainment (those with less than 5 A* to C or 9 to 4 grades at GCSE, or without equivalent Level 2 qualifications)
• 1 project sought to support returners who were first generation migrants or from Albanian communities
• 1 project sought to support homeless women or women at risk of homelessness
• 1 project sought to support the female partners of serving armed forces personnel and veterans
• 1 project sought to support women who may be prevented from returning to work due to multiple or complex needs, such as victims of domestic violence or women with a history of substance misuse

While projects anticipated supporting a particular group, they welcomed applications from anyone who fitted the returner definition. It is also noted that the groups listed previously are not mutually exclusive, and a returner could have several or none of these characteristics.