Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping central, regional and local government initiatives

Transcription

1 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping central, regional and local government initiatives A report by the Centre for Economic & Social Inclusion for the London Child Poverty Commission March 2007

2 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping central, regional and local government initiatives March 2007

3 ii Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives Copyright Copyright London Child Poverty Commission March 2007 Cover image copyright Greater London Authority Published by The London Child Poverty Commission 59 1 / 2 Southwark Street London SE1 0AL ISBN: The research for this report was commissioned and approved by The London Child Poverty Commission, an independent Commission appointed by the Mayor of London and London Councils (formerly the ALG). The report was written by the Centre for Economic & Social Inclusion, Camelford House, 89 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7TP. Contact Mark Morrin; Tel: ; Fax: ; mark.morrin@cesi.org.uk. Web: Views expressed do not necessarily correspond to those of the Commission or the sponsoring authorities and no responsibility is accepted for any reliance placed upon them.

4 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives iii Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Review Of Programmes And Strategies 5 3 Mapping Initiatives In London 23 4 Case Studies: Strategic Approaches To Child Poverty 35 5 Conclusions And Recommendations 45 Annex 1: Children s Centres In London 51 Annex 2: Extended Schools In London 52 Annex 3: National Programmes In London 53 Annex 4: Mapping Topic Guide 56 Annex 5: Mapping Results 58 Annex 6: Stakeholders Consulted 59 List Of Acronyms 60 Bibliography 62

5 iv Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives

6 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives 1 1 Introduction 1.1 London Councils and the Greater London Authority (GLA) on behalf of the London Child Poverty Commission (LCPC) have commissioned the Centre for Economic and Social Inclusion (Inclusion) to identify and assess government initiatives to tackle worklessness and child poverty in London. 1.2 The London Child Poverty Commission was launched in February An independent body, the commission has been established by the Mayor of London and London Councils to monitor progress in London against the government s target to halve the number of children in poverty by The commission will evaluate the effectiveness of national anti-child poverty policies in London and aims to provide a voice for London on these issues. The commission will sit between 2006 and Aims of the project 1.3 The project aims to examine the extent to which child poverty targets are influencing activity and whether these initiatives are likely to contribute to a reduction in child poverty. The project seeks to identify distinctive approaches to worklessness and child poverty arising from the Local Area Agreement and Local Strategic Partnership process as well as other regional and national programmes being taken forward in London. 1.4 This report provides: a review of national, regional and local strategies, identifying the policy rationale for tackling child poverty the results of our mapping exercise to identify initiatives in London that tackle worklessness and child poverty. Policy context 1.5 In March 1999 the Prime Minister pledged to abolish child poverty within a generation. This pledge has effectively changed the political landscape around the whole question of poverty in the UK, the implications of which are still very much working themselves through the system. Later that year the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) launched the Opportunity for All report on child poverty, and in the 2000 spending review the joint DWP/Treasury Child Poverty Target was set up to halve child poverty by 2010 and eradicate it by Although the government has fallen short of its current PSA (Public Service Agreement) target to reduce the number of children in low-income households by a quarter by 2004/05 1, the Secretary of State has affirmed that child poverty is 1 DWP figures reveal that the government s intention to reduce child poverty by 1 million between 1999 and 2005 has fallen short by 300,000 children.

7 2 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives the DWP s number one priority. This raises critical questions about what it means for the DWP to make child poverty central to its programmes and policies and what the department, Jobcentre Plus and providers can actually do about it, or what needs to be done differently in order to achieve that goal. 1.7 The welfare reform bill has clear implications in helping to combat child poverty and meeting the 2010 target. City Strategies will provide opportunities for joining up with other public and private sector delivery partners at a local level to develop new strategies. The east and west London pilots will be looking at this in some detail. 1.8 Local approaches to tackling worklessness have been framed by area-based initiatives and regeneration programmes. However, the development of Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) and multi-agency bodies, which correspond to local authority boundaries, have helped to bring together the efforts of different mainstream agencies to address deep-seated and multi-faceted problems. Most local authorities and their LSP partners in London have now established Local Area Agreements. These set out the priorities for a local area agreed between central government and key partners at the local level, including measures to improve the rates of employment. 1.9 The 2006 Local Government White Paper Strong and Prosperous Communities builds on this development and presents further opportunities and challenges for tackling worklessness and child poverty in London. This could include crossborough working through proposed Multi-Area Agreements (MAAs) that move beyond local authority boundaries. This may signal a move away from traditional geo-political borders to an increase in cross-boundary networking. There is also strong encouragement for skills and employment boards to be established at appropriate levels of geography to co-ordinate labour market interventions The White Paper also sets out a simplified performance framework, wherein there will be approximately 35 priorities for each area agreed by government, tailored to local needs through the Local Area Agreement, plus statutory attainment and childcare targets. Child poverty in London 1.11 London has a higher proportion of children living in poverty than any other region in the UK (51% of children in inner London after housing costs as opposed to around 28% for the country as a whole). This coupled with the capital s large population means that 656,000 children in London live in poverty (Harker, 2006) At least some of the high rate of child poverty in the capital is a consequence of the fact that a high proportion of those groups most at risk of poverty live there. Two fifths (41%) of London s children belong to BME (black and minority ethnic)

8 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives 3 groups, compared to 13% in the population as a whole. Lone parents head over 40% of families in nine of the London boroughs (Harker, 2006) A quarter of all London children live in workless households (London Development Agency, 2004) and the largest out-of-work group in London are people with dependent children (Harker, 2006). Whereas worklessness levels in London among childless households are around the national average, levels of worklessness among households with children are much higher (Harker, 2006). The lone parent employment rate is particularly poor in London, possibly reflecting the high cost of childcare in the capital There are a number of barriers to parental employment contributing to child poverty in London. Financial rewards for working in London are less than elsewhere in the UK. High housing and childcare costs make it very difficult for parents to make work pay. Making Work Pay in London (Bivand et al, 2003) showed that to be 10 a week better off in work in London, a lone parent with one child and medium cost childcare, needed, in , to earn 6.75 per hour, significantly higher than the national minimum wage then. This compares to nationally, where lone parents working the same hours (16) would be 10 a week better off in work at the minimum wage Parents remain disproportionately underemployed in London (Harker, 2006). Parents, especially lone mothers, often seek part-time employment to enable them to juggle caring and earning responsibilities. London has a shortage of parttime jobs and the low employment rate of parents in London can almost entirely be accounted for by this shortage. The London Child Poverty Commission has produced a monitoring report, which looks closely at the employment rates (fulland part-time) of parents in London Childcare is generally seen as one of the biggest barriers to parental employment nationally. But it is even more important in London where costs are much higher. The national average for a nursery place for a child under two is around 152 per week, whereas the average in Inner London is 205 per week and in Outer London Other research shows that childcare is a major barrier to employment especially among low-income families (Skinner, 2006) while over twice as many lone parents (17%) cited childcare costs as the main reason why they did not work compared with couple mothers (8%) (Barnes et al, 2005). The childcare element of the Working Tax Credit and the Childcare Affordability Programme pilots are attempting to reduce the cost of childcare in London, but the overall cost of childcare is still a problem. 2 For a lone parent with one child and high cost childcare, working part-time, they would have needed to earn an hour in London to be 10 better off a week than on benefits, compared to needing to earn 7.62 an hour in the rest of the country. 3 Daycare Trust Childcare Costs Survey 2007.

9 4 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives

10 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives 5 2 Review Of Programmes And Strategies Introduction 2.1 This section reviews the various national programmes and strategies, including pilots and pathfinders active in London, which are likely to contribute to a reduction in worklessness and child poverty. We also review local strategies, to identify distinctive approaches arising from the Local Area Agreement and Local Strategic Partnership process as well as regional programmes being taken forward in London. National targets 2.2 The government s target of reducing child poverty has been made the number one priority of the DWP, and is high on the agenda of related departments such as the Treasury and Department for Education and Skills (DfES). The government also aims to reduce worklessness and explicitly links this aim to the child poverty targets. Government DWP PSA targets include commitments to: halve the number of children in relative low-income households between and , on the way to eradicating child poverty by 2020, including: reduce the proportion of children living in workless households by 5% between spring 2005 and spring There is also a rolled-over SR2002 PSA 5 target to reduce the proportion of children living in households with no work by 6.5% between 2003 and Fully operational Sure Start areas also had a target to reduce the number of children aged 0-4 living in a workless household in the Sure Start area by 12%. 2.4 The government s target to assist 70% of lone parents into employment by 2010 is also a major contributor to the overall reduction of worklessness and child poverty. Government strategies to date have seen some significant successes: since 1997 there has been an increase of 318,000 lone parents in employment; 370,000 fewer children live in workless households; and 800,000 fewer children live in relative poverty (before housing costs, although the figure is only 700,000 after housing costs) (DWP, 2006). 2.5 At the local level, the PSA floor targets affecting worklessness (employment rates at the level of worst performing ward) and education (Key Stage 3 English, Maths and Science; GCSEs 5+ A-Cs) are most relevant to tackling child poverty.

11 6 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives National programmes and strategies 2.6 Since 1997 and the introduction of welfare-to-work programmes there has been a general focus on work as the best route out of poverty. Figure 1, below, shows the range of national programmes, in relation to their central government departments, that address worklessness. The shaded area represents those government pilots and pathfinder initiatives which are not available nationally but active in London among other areas. Clearly the Department for Work and Pensions through their Jobcentre Plus programmes has the most direct impact on worklessness. However, there are a number of other programmes and initiatives that improve access to the labour market and provide financial assistance in the transition to work, such as benefit run-ons. 2.7 Between April and June 2006, 4,409 lone parents in London secured job outcomes. This was 2.7% of the lone parents claiming Income Support. Nationally, but excluding London, 4.9% of lone parents on Income Support started work in this period. London ranks 11 th out of 11 regions in Great Britain for its lone parent job outcomes. This lowest ranking also applies to all other customer groups for which such figures can be calculated. London s lone parent job outcome rate is 55% of the figure for Great Britain outside London. Similar figures for other customer groups range between 49% of the national rate (longer-term unemployed including New Deals and Employment Zones) and 58% (other inactive benefits). For Incapacity Benefit customers, London job outcomes were 67% of the national rate (excluding London), with 1.1% of customers starting jobs compared with 1.6% nationally (excluding London). These figures are tabulated in Annex This indicates that, across the range of Jobcentre Plus customers, London customers are substantially less successful at starting work. Lone parents claiming Income Support share in this low performance. London Jobcentre Plus Districts are able to show high rankings for job outcomes compared with their target profile because the profiles are set relatively lower in proportion to customers than in other regions. 2.9 Poorer outcomes may be the result of a more challenging population and competitive labour market in London. The fact that Employment Zones are also performing less well in London suggests that it may be more about the complexity of barriers faced by the workless population than solely attributable to quality of service delivery. However, it is clear that more needs to be done on all fronts.

12 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives 7 Figure 1: National programmes and pathfinders in London DWP DfES DCLG HMT Other Financial Inclusion Fund Working Tax Credits (HMRC) Local Area Agreements Rewards Housing and Employment Mobility Service (JCP) Sure Start Work Based Learning for Adults Learn Direct LSC / Connexions Career Development Loan Education Maintenance Allowance Extended Schools New Deal Progress to Work Work Based Learning for Adults Deprived Area Fund Benefit run-ons Job Grant 25+ in work Childcare tasters NATIONAL Women's Returners Pilot (LDA) European Funds (GoL) Single Programme (LDA) Women Returners Pilot (LDA) Neighbourhood Renewal Fund New Deal for Communities Safer and Stronger Communities Fund (Home Office) Working futures Learning Agreements Children s Trust Pathfinders LSC Skills Coaching and Skills Passport Trial and ALO pilot Childcare Affordability Programme with LDA New Deal Lone Parent Plus Employment Zones City Strategies In-Work Credit Work Search Premium Fair Cities (NEP) Employment Retention & Advancement Demonstration Housing Benefit Reform Pathfinders Adult Learning Option LONDON

13 8 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives Welfare-to-work 2.10 There have been a number of national programmes focused on getting people into work, some targeted specifically at parents. The New Deal for Lone Parents (NDLP) was introduced in 1997 and since then there has been an intensification of mandatory work-focused interviews, leading to an increase in the number of people going on to volunteer for the rest of the scheme There has also been a series of pilots known as New Deal for Lone Parents Plus (NDLP+) 4, which includes extra programme features like mandatory Action Plans, help with childcare, and Work Search Premium payments. NDLP+ has been piloted in North London (except Haringey) and South East London, among other areas of the UK The New Deal for Lone Parents (and the enhanced offer in the NDLP+) are voluntary programmes. Therefore their effectiveness combines two distinct elements. Firstly, the extent to which lone parents volunteer for the programmes, and secondly, for those who do volunteer, whether London job outcomes compare with other regions. On both elements, NDLP performance in London is the lowest of all GB regions. In 2005, 28,800 lone parents in London undertook initial NDLP interviews. This was 17.6% of the February 2005 caseload 5. The average for all other regions is 29.8% of caseload undertaking NDLP initial interviews For those who do attend an initial interview for the NDLP in London, the job outcome rates are lower than those in the rest of the country. In London in 2005, 9,930 (34.5%) lone parents started work after having had an initial interview. This compares with a 45.2% job outcome rate outside London Employment Zones, introduced in April 2000, are a mandatory programme in 15 of the UK s most deprived areas. Originally designed to help longterm unemployed people aged 25 or over, they have now been extended to New Deal returners and lone parents. Employment Zones have contracted out welfare-to-work to private sector providers functioning with complete flexibility. It operates in the London boroughs of Haringey, Brent, Tower Hamlets, Newham and Southwark, where lone parents are supported into work, replacing NDLP within these London boroughs. 4 The New Deal for Lone Parents statistics produced by DWP do not distinguish between the standard package and the New Deal for Lone Parents Plus. Any approach to monitoring the progress of the enhanced programme outside the official DWP evaluation would have to be by examining whether there were differences in outcomes between those areas in London where each programme was present. 5 Even if starts by lone parents to Employment Zones in London (as an alternative) are added, the initial interview rate only rises to 19.9% in London.

14 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives In the London Employment Zones, 3,830 lone parents started Employment Zone provision in Of these, 1,510 started work, a job outcome rate of 39.4% compared to 46.8% for outside London Lone parents living in a Multi-Provider Employment Zone can choose between a number of public-private partnerships, private providers and public bodies who compete to provide services. The scheme is designed to test whether competition improves efficiency and service quality Other national initiatives in London available to lone parents include: In-Work Credit (IWC), which provides a weekly payment of 40 (for up to 12 months). It is designed to help lone parents cope with the financial aspects of moving from welfare to work, and to ensure they are better off in work. IWC is available in West London; Brent, Harrow and Hillingdon; City and East; Lambeth; Southwark and Wandsworth; and South London. Work Search Premium (WSP), which is a weekly payment of 20 that is available (for up to 6 months) to all lone parents who have been claiming Income Support/Jobseeker s Allowance for at least 12 months and participate in the New Deal for Lone Parents (NDLP), and who voluntarily engage in job search activity. The work search premium helps remove the disincentive for lone parents in the costs of looking for work in South East London, and West London Fair Cities is the National Employment Panel (NEP) initiative, with business leadership and public-community partnerships, to close the employment gap for ethnic minorities. The London Borough of Brent is one of three initiatives in England (the others being in Bradford and Birmingham) The City Strategies Pilots in East and West London represent the first phase of a new approach to delivering welfare services, which will provide local flexibilities for consortiums to plan solutions to the specific problems that prevent people accessing the labour market. Child poverty targets are embedded within City Strategies, and targets achieved will be rewarded. Cost savings made can be further invested back into local services and other local initiatives The new Deprived Areas Fund (DAF) pools together money from the Action Teams, Ethnic Minority Outreach and Working Neighbourhoods Pilots that have come to a close. City Strategy Consortia will direct the use of this funding in City Strategy areas. 6 For Employment Zones, an individual starting an EZ attracts a payment so the definition excludes those who are just exploring options (unlike the initial interview in NDLP). 7 It should be noted that, while this job outcome rate appears high compared to that for NDLP, despite EZs operating in more deprived areas, if a stricter definition of a programme start for NDLP was used (rather than initial interview), this would give a job outcome rate for NDLP in London of 47.1% compared with 61% outside London (GB excluding London).

15 10 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives 2.21 There are a few welfare-to-work pilot initiatives that are not active in London, these include: Pathways to Work 8 Pathways to Work for Lone Parents Job Rehabilitation and Retention Pilots The decision not to pilot Pathways to Work in London is largely due to the lower claim rates for Incapacity Benefit compared to other cities. Making work pay 2.23 Worklessness has been identified by government as the biggest cause of poverty. However, it is increasingly being recognised that in-work poverty could be as big a problem as worklessness. Tax credits are a major part of a system designed to make work pay, effectively topping up low incomes to try to move people off more expensive benefits HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) publish estimates for the take-up of Tax Credits as a proportion of those estimated to be eligible. The latest estimates are for the completed tax year. At that time, by individuals, London had the lowest take-up rate at 65% (central estimate) of those believed to be eligible. The national average excluding London is a 78% take-up rate 9. A low Tax Credit take-up by eligible parents can only contribute to child poverty in London The Child Tax Credit is a benefit available to people with children. Although 90% of families are eligible for some form of child tax credit there are low take-up rates in London, which affects support for low earnings and support for childcare. The credit supports both workless families and those who are in work and is graded such that those on lower incomes will receive more. The Working Tax Credit contains a childcare element, which benefits families where both parents are working more than 16 hours per week. The childcare element can pay up to 80% of childcare costs, up to 175 a week for one child and 300 for two or more children The low-pay, no-pay cycle is currently being addressed in East London through the Employment Retention and Advancement Demonstration (ERAD) project. This is another DWP initiative, which aims to encourage work retention and then go on to help with in-work advancement through better-paying, higher-skilled employment. This experimental approach has involved random assignment and the project is subject to a longitudinal evaluation. DWP have published an initial report which suggests that early results are promising. 8 Pathways to Work will be introduced to parts of London in By expenditure, the London Tax Credit take-up rate is 79%. This compares with an average excluding London of 87%. London has the second lowest take-up rate by expenditure.

16 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives Housing Benefit is also a significant disincentive for workless families in London and there are a couple of pilot initiatives that aim to address this problem: The Housing Benefit Reform Pathfinders aims, among a range of objectives, to increased work incentives, for households in Lewisham and Wandsworth, by providing more certainty about in-work benefit. Working Future is a joint initiative between the Greater London Authority, East Thames Housing and the London boroughs of Newham, Redbridge and Waltham Forest. Funded by the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) and EQUAL, the two-year pilot seeks to tackle unemployment among families in long-term temporary accommodation. The project combines reductions in private rent levels to the level of social housing, with welfare-to-work support. It pays rent through Housing Benefit being converted into a block grant 10. Education and skills 2.28 The government s work-first approach has proven to be more successful in raising employment rates than programmes offering skills training. However, low skills and qualifications are a major barrier to job entry and higher incomes. This is especially the case in London, where there is a significant mismatch between labour market supply and demand. This situation is exacerbated by the fact that existing programmes do not easily engage many parents either on benefit or in low-paid employment The Learning and Skills Council (LSC) provides a range of training programmes available to both working and workless people over the age of 16, including: Adult and Community Learning; Skills for Life Basic Skills; Further Education; Adult Learning Grants; Entry2Employment; ESOL 11 provision; Modern Apprenticeships; and Train to Gain. However, there is little variation in the availability of these programmes across the English regions Care to Learn provides childcare funding for parents under twenty years of age in a course of learning or training in a school, college or as a trainee with a work-based learning provider that receives some public funding There are few education and skills programmes, which have been piloted on an area basis. The Learning Agreement Pilots are one example, available in Central and East London to increase participation in further education among young people (aged 16 to 18). 10 The GLA have some initial promising though small scale results which show increased movement into training and employment. 11 English for Speakers of Other Languages. 12 In London the Mayor now has new powers in relation to skills and the London Skills Board, which are discussed further below.

17 12 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives 2.32 The government has introduced a New Deal for Skills, the main elements of which are Skills Coaching and Skills Passports, and the Adult Learning Option. Skills Coaching aims to up-skill adults aged over 20 who are inactive benefit recipients or Jobseekers Allowance recipients and have a lack of skills as their main barrier to employment. The London Central Learning Skills Council (LSC) has been included in the Skills Coaching and Skills Passport Trial areas from July 2006 (second tranche) with the remaining LSC areas in London joining from September 2006 (third tranche). The Adult Learning Option provides training allowances for Jobcentre Plus customers to enable them to take up their Level Two entitlement. The ALO is being trialled in London Central and South Jobcentre Plus Districts from September Financial assistance for learners through the Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA), Career Development Loans (CDL) and Learner Support Funds, prioritised for those facing financial hardship, are available on a national basis and are not weighted to reflect different regions, although they do take account of household income. Children s services 2.34 Every Child Matters, the government s strategy for children and young people, identifies educational achievement as the most effective route out of poverty. However, the five key outcomes for children and young people extend beyond educational attainment and economic well-being to provide a framework for improving the life chances for all children and young people, regardless of background or circumstances. The outcomes are intended to be mutually reinforcing and it is clear that they are all closely related to child poverty Local authorities are developing new partnerships, strategies and plans to deliver the services to children and young people that will achieve the key outcomes in their area. The Every Child Matters agenda is underpinned by the network of Children s Trusts set up by the 2004 Children Act. The trusts are designed to provide an integrated and co-ordinated package of services to children and young people at the local level, addressing the current fragmentation of responsibility for children s outcomes The London boroughs of Redbridge, Ealing, Hammersmith & Fulham, Tower Hamlets, Greenwich, Bexley, Sutton and Croydon have all been part of the Children s Trust Pathfinders created to test the ideas behind children's trusts and to help design the policy Early Support, is another government pathfinder for achieving better coordinated, family-focused services for young disabled children and their families across England. Eight London boroughs, Barking & Dagenham,

18 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives 13 Bromley, Ealing, Enfield, Harrow, Havering, Merton and Waltham Forest, established Early Support during Early years 2.38 Sure Start Children s Centres is the government s early years programme, aimed at improving the life chances of all children by maximising their welfare from the time they are conceived until the time they first go to school. Based on the increasing body of evidence that shows the detrimental effect that disadvantage and poverty during the early years can have on a child s outcomes, the Sure Start programme aims to address inequalities in society that can begin before birth Sure Start Children s Centres have three intended outcomes: increasing the availability of childcare for all children improving health and emotional development for young children supporting parents as parents and in their aspirations towards employment The latter aim clearly links Sure Start in with the government s welfare-towork programmes, and with government targets on child poverty and employment rates Sure Start funding has been initially targeted at more deprived areas of England, supporting the development of services and funding extra childcare places where they are needed. The intention is to roll Sure Start Children s Centres out to the rest of the country, with a focus on the development of a nationwide network of Children s Centres that bring together health, educational and advice provision, childcare and other services for children and for parents. There are 152 Children s Centres established in London with plans for further development. See Annex 1. Childcare 2.42 The National Childcare Strategy was introduced in 1998 as a direct contribution to the government s aim of eliminating child poverty by The government s 10-year Childcare Strategy is embodied in the Childcare Act 2006, which gives local authorities new duties to secure sufficient childcare in their locality. It also introduces new responsibilities to improve outcomes for all children and narrow the gap in child outcomes Childcare had been highlighted as a major barrier to employment, especially for lone parents and those in deprived communities where provision was scarce. Providing more affordable, accessible, high quality childcare therefore contributes to the government s targets of reducing child poverty and improving employment rates. London s Childcare Affordability

19 14 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives Programme (CAP) forms part of the National Childcare Strategy. This is discussed in more detail under regional programmes and strategies below. Extended schools 2.44 In 2005 the Education Secretary pledged to provide all children and young people with extended wrap-around services in a school setting by Launched as an integral part of the Every Child Matters agenda, the pledge includes provision in primary and secondary schools. The vision is to have extra activities such as music lessons and sports, as well as breakfast clubs and opportunities for children catching up with work and getting more individual attention. By providing wrap-around activities in schools, it is hoped that parents will be more able to work full time without paying for expensive childcare. See Annex 2. Area-based initiatives 2.45 Neighbourhood Renewal and New Deal for Communities (NDC) are the main area-based approaches to regeneration and renewal, providing a wide range of policy interventions targeting education, housing, crime, enterprise and worklessness in deprived areas. There are 19 boroughs currently receiving Neighbourhood Renewal Funds and 10 boroughs with an active NDC. NDCs have a higher level of resource invested in relatively small areas providing local labour market initiatives and childcare services There is a high level of correspondence between these area-based initiatives and the national pilots and pathfinders in London concentrated in boroughs with high levels of worklessness and deprivation. Newham, Hackney, Tower Hamlets and Brent have the largest number of national pilots, as would be expected. Annex 3 provides further detail about the geography of national programmes in London The multiplicity of different initiatives and programmes in London raises a wider issue about the need to streamline and rationalise the various pilots, at the London and borough level. There is significant potential to use resources more effectively and maximise the capacity of local partners to effectively manage this process. Regional programmes and strategies European funding programmes in London 2.48 London has benefited from a significant investment of European funding, including over 660 million to support the Objective 2 Programme (ERDF and ESF in 13 boroughs) and the Objective 3 Programme (ESF pan- London) since The Government Office for London is responsible for these funds as well as the URBAN II Programme, which is administered by the London borough of Lambeth. There are also a number of EQUAL

20 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives 15 Development Partnerships across London that have benefited from this Community Initiative Child poverty is not an explicit theme within European funding programmes. However, employability is one of the four pillars of the European Structural Funds and many of the projects that have been funded in London, particularly through ESF, have specifically addressed worklessness and facilitated access to the labour market for especially disadvantaged groups. Performance figures identifying progress against employment targets are not readily available. However, jobs gained by benefit recipients are encompassed within Jobcentre Plus overall performance figures discussed above (paragraph 2.7). The contribution made to these by ESF programmes cannot easily be assessed, particularly as many beneficiaries also benefit from other assistance. Regional development 2.50 The London Development Agency (LDA) is the Mayor s economic development agency. The LDA primarily addresses the Mayor s and government targets on economic development, social inclusion and physical regeneration in the region including the creation of jobs and training opportunities. To meet these challenges and address the causes of worklessness, deprivation and poverty in London, the LDA has, in line with the Economic Development Strategy, identified a number of key strategies and priorities to: tackle barriers to employment tackle the effects of concentrations of deprivation improve the skills of the workforce reduce disparities in labour market outcomes between groups. Regional collaboration 2.51 The London Skills and Employment Board has now been created, with the Mayor chairing an employer-led board. This has responsibility for London strategy (for adults) but within overall national targets and ambitions. It is 13 A number of London boroughs have qualified for Objective 2 status. Both ERDF (European Regional Development Fund) and ESF (European Social Fund) are available to help O2 regions overcome economic and social problems. Eligibility depends both on national and European population ceilings (18% of the EU's population) and on specific socio-economic criteria such as areas undergoing economic change. Objective 3 is available to all regions in the UK (excluding Objective 1 status areas) it is an ESF fund that helps educational, training and employment policies and systems to adapt and modernise. Urban II is the Community Initiative of the ERDF for sustainable development in the troubled urban districts of the European Union. EQUAL is a Community Initiative of the ESF designed to help a range of target groups with a particular focus on equality issues associated with gender, disability, race or ethnic origin, religion or belief, age and sexual orientation.

21 16 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives also an explicit read across to welfare-to-work activity through DWP and City Strategies The LDA, together with the LSC, lead the London Skills Commission, the regional skills partnership for education, skills and business support. It aims to strategically align funding and resources across the region, and to develop ways in which the public sector can be more effective in defeating poverty in London. This is a new development, offering potential for a stronger strategic lead in London The LDA also plays a strategic role in tackling worklessness, engaging with each of the London boroughs via Local Area Agreements, Local Strategic Partnerships and, more recently, Cities Strategies, and working with Sub- Regional Development and Investment Frameworks. The LDA, working with a range of local partners, providers and area interventions, identifies measures and actions needed to help eradicate worklessness. Promoting flexible working and providing access to childcare 2.54 The Childcare Affordability Programme (CAP), announced in the government's 10-year Childcare Strategy, is a 33 million investment in childcare across London. Building on the Mayor s childcare strategy for London, this programme aims to provide up to 10,000 affordable and flexible childcare places (originally profiled to deliver 2000). CAP is well documented in the media and is also seen as a test pilot for supply-side funding There are other examples of where the LDA is helping to improve services for children and families living in deprived areas. For example a Women Returners Pilot provides the support needed with childcare to help women back to work, and the Kings Cross Childcare Programme, made up of a number of projects, targets some of London s most excluded families through innovative and flexible approaches. Local programmes and strategies 2.56 There are a number of overlapping strategies and plans, with associated targets, operating at the local level. The main strategies that will frame local action to combat child poverty are the new Children and Young People s Plans and the various Local Strategic Partnership plans including Community Plans, Local Neighbourhood Renewal Strategies, Local Area Agreements and Local Public Service Agreements. Children and Young People s Plan 2.57 The Children and Young People's Plan (CYPP) is an important element of the reforms underpinned by the Children Act (2004) and the Childcare Act (2006). This raft of new legislation has placed a new statutory duty on local

22 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives 17 government to produce a single, strategic, overarching plan for all local services for children and young people, and the CYPP supports more integrated and effective services to secure the outcomes for children set out in Every Child Matters Local authorities in London are currently in the process of developing the next round of plans, although it is unlikely within this time frame that the London Child Poverty Commission could help embed the national target within these plans The CYPP is a major instrument of the emerging Children s Trusts in planning and commissioning children s services to meet identified needs. The shape and nature of Children s Trusts are likely to vary across London boroughs. Few are likely to take the form of specific entities, although the concept of the Trusts, merging education and social services, are well advanced. To date 30 directors of Children s Services have been appointed in London. Local Strategic Partnership Plans 2.60 The Local Government Act 2000 placed a duty on all local authorities to prepare Community Strategies. These are a key function of the Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) in developing the social, economic and environmental well-being of the whole local authority area. The production of Local Neighbourhood Renewal Strategies is also a key function of the LSPs in the designated Neighbourhood Renewal Fund (NRF) areas. Nineteen of London s boroughs have developed local strategies in order to target NRF funds and make improvements to the most deprived priority neighbourhoods It is fair to say that both Community Plans and Local Neighbourhood Renewal Strategies are generic in their form and content. There is more distinction between Local Neighbourhood Renewal Strategies although they must by necessity contain all the elements outlined in the National Strategy, including achievement against the PSA floor targets However, while all local neighbourhood renewal strategies in London have prioritised worklessness as a key theme, none have so far specifically identified child poverty as a main aim or objective. Nevertheless NRF initiatives to tackle worklessness among priority groups and areas will cut across and indirectly contribute to the child poverty target. Local Area Agreements 2.63 Local Area Agreements (LAAs) and Local Public Service Agreements (LPSAs) have been widely expected to provide the new strategic focus in channelling mainstream funding to local priority areas. However, while some national, regional and local initiatives sit within emerging LAAs, many

23 18 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives do not. Many of the LAA documents reviewed as part of this research were often found to be unrepresentative of the actual activities and commitments of the local authorities regarding child poverty Nevertheless, LAAs provide the main framework for analysing local priorities. The key blocks include: Children and Young People, and Economic Development Figure 2, below, is a summary of the LAA guidance on outcomes, indicators and funding which can either be pooled or aligned to meet local targets. In the spirit of enabling local flexibilities and freedoms, there are few mandatory outcomes and indicators. Achieving economic well-being is the mandatory outcome for Children and Young People and Increasing employment for the Economic Development block. There is no mandatory target for child poverty, although it is suggested in the guidance as an optional indicator. There is also a range of suggested indicators, mostly in Block 1, which would support the child poverty target, for example reducing the number of children in low-income households. These would, however, need measuring at the local authority level by the use of proxy indicators. Figure 2: Local Area Agreements Outcomes Framework Block: Children and Young People Outcome Achieve economic well-being Funding Indicator Stream Mandatory: Connexions % NEET 14 Other possible: No. of parents NEET Level of material deprivation and low income of families with children % of children in low-income households % of children in families with no work % of lone parents in sustained employment Take-up of tax credit and benefit entitlement No. of low-income families in debt No. of low-income families able to borrow at affordable rates Block: Economic Development Outcome Indicator Funding Stream Increase Mandatory: NRF employment Improve employment rates by 1% in wards with worst labour market position, and Reduce gap between the GB employment rate and the worst performing wards Other possible: Reduce the incidence of child poverty, contributing to national targets Reduce NEET Connexions Rate of economic activity 14 NEET not in education, employment or training.

24 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives In terms of funding, it is also worth noting which programmes or funding streams are not referenced in the guidance for pooling or alignment. The pilot LAAs were conceived primarily as a means of capturing the wide range of area-based funding streams. Subsequent rounds have been increasingly ambitious in aligning other mainstream funding sources including LSC and Connexions. However, the main statutory provision available through Jobcentre Plus, for welfare programmes and benefits, remains outside of the funding framework We have reviewed all LAA and LPSA documents for the 32 London boroughs 15. Any mention of or focus upon child poverty itself was noted, as was any target or priority set, which might impact on child poverty or families: childcare, lone parent employment, income maximisation, income transfer and so on The LAA and LPSA documents showed a massive variation in the amount of emphasis placed on child poverty and related issues such as childcare. For example: Hammersmith & Fulham and Enfield were the only two boroughs to consider child poverty explicitly as a central priority; Greenwich talks about childcare as an essential way to reduce the number of children living in workless or low-income households; Croydon links child poverty to worklessness, housing and health, but does not outline any strategies to deal with the problem; Camden concentrates on unemployment, including lone parents, but not explicitly connected to child poverty; whereas Barking & Dagenham talk about child poverty, but only in relation to educational achievement There is also a problem with terminology. Some authorities do not refer to child poverty although they do have a number of strategies and initiatives designed to reduce hardship among families in the borough The following boroughs Barnet, Bexley, Bromley, Ealing, Haringey, Islington, Kensington & Chelsea, Kingston, Lambeth, Newham, Richmondupon-Thames, Southwark, Sutton, Tower Hamlets, Wandsworth and Westminster do not mention child poverty or ANY of the other indicators (lone parents, workless/low-income households, benefit/tax credit take-up, childcare, housing for children) Some of the above boroughs that did not mention child poverty or related issues at all in their strategy documents were in fact engaging with the problems through initiatives and programmes. Southwark, for example, has developed an Anti-Poverty Programme with specific action to target worklessness and child poverty. There is a common mismatch between the priorities outlined in the LAA or LPSA, and the reality of service provision in the borough. 15 Draft LAAs for Round 3 were made available by Government Office for London. It is recognised that many of these submissions may have been revised since our review.

25 20 Tackling worklessness and child poverty in London: mapping initiatives Table 2: Occurrences of worklessness and child poverty indicators in LAAs / LPSAs Borough Occurrences (target, initiative, priority) of child poverty Occurrences of other related indicators Occurrence of indicators explicitly linked to child poverty Total occurrences (column 1+ column 2) Barking & Dagenham Camden Croydon Enfield Greenwich Hammersmith & Fulham Haringey Harrow Havering Hounslow Lewisham Redbridge Kensington & Chelsea Tower Hamlets Waltham Forest Wandsworth Westminster Linkages between local and national initiatives 2.72 The commitment to end child poverty by 2020 is one made by central government, and headed up by the DWP and the Treasury. There is recognition, however, that central departments cannot tackle child poverty alone and that local government must be involved. The Child Poverty Accord is a forum where the three central departments, the Local Government Association (LGA) and the voluntary sector can come together to ensure co-ordination of national and local efforts to fight child poverty The 2002 Shared Priorities agreed between central and local government (through the LGA) included: Improving the quality of life for children, young people and families at risk, by tackling child poverty, maximising the life chances of children in care or in need and strengthening the protection for children at risk of abuse. (LGA, 2006.) 2.74 The LGA report says: Through community strategies agreed with partners in Local Strategic Partnerships and through new mechanisms such as Local Area Agreements, local authorities are at the heart of action at local