|
|
     |
||
 |
     |
 |
|
2.1 Structure and Operations2.1.1 EAS Service DeliveryEmployment Assistance Services (EAS) are offered by community organizations through agreements with HRDC. Eligible sponsor organizations may fall into one of four categories:
In Newfoundland and Labrador, most of the sponsors fall into the non-profit category, with several band and tribal councils also participating. A handful of businesses and institutions also participate. Within the non-profit category, sponsor organizations divide into essentially two main groups: community and regional development associations providing services to the population at large, and groups providing services to individuals with special needs. The community and regional development associations are the predominant sponsor types, with many administering EAS offices in more than one location. The special needs groups are well-established advocacy groups including the Canadian Paraplegic Association (CPA), Community Employment Corporations (addressing the needs of persons with disabilities), and the John Howard Society. HRDC, with the assistance of its HRCCs, solicits proposals from organizations on a non-competitive basis. Arrangements with sponsors are developed through negotiations with HRDC, leading to formal contracts. These contracts are standard form agreements, with sponsor-specific details to be set out in attached schedules. Among these details are objectives, description of activities, targeted clientele, and expected results. Also incorporated as terms of the contract are business plans HRDC may require sponsors to submit as part of the sponsor offer. Contracts are ordinarily for a one-year term, with the possibility of renewal dependent on performance. 2.1.2 Contract Management and AdministrationEAS offices are administered by their sponsors, who also set terms and conditions of employment of office staff. Offices in smaller locations are staffed with either one or two counselors, with a support person in some of the larger offices. Offices in larger centers may have up to eight counselors. Though formally employees of the sponsor organization, EAS office staff are delivering services on behalf of HRDC and are expected to meet mutually agreed upon standards. This means close contact between EAS staff and HRDC counselors who provide advice on day-to-day matters pertaining to HR policy, programs and reporting procedures (including the use of HRDC's Client Adjustment Tracking System - CATS). The one exception to this is urban centers where some EAS offices adhere to these standards, but also provide more general career counseling. 2.1.3 Geographic DistributionEAS offices are generally termed "outreach" offices because they are extensions of the 15 district HRCC offices. They operate in 48 communities in Newfoundland and Labrador. This wide distribution reflects the largely rural nature of the population. It also reflects the importance that HRDC and sponsor organizations attach to the local availability of such support services. Many of the larger communities with HRCC offices (which also offer the full range of EAS) also host the special-needs EAS offices. This underscores the diversity (and size) of the client groups in larger communities, and the recognition that specially-trained staff offering specialized services are required to meet the needs of individuals in these groups. Many of the current outreach offices, which are not targeted at special needs clients, were originally created to deal with the crisis in the groundfish fisheries in the early 1990s. With the moratorium, thousands of fishermen and plant workers across the province lost their means of employment. Programs (NCARP, TAGS, FRAM) were established to deliver counseling, training and mobility assistance to those displaced. These programs were delivered by HRDC through regional sponsor organizations with local offices in many coastal communities. With the termination of these programs in 1996/97, many of these same sponsor organizations and offices (and staff) began offering EAS under contract to HRDC. The distribution of HRCC and EAS offices around the province is depicted in Fig. 1 on page 12. 2.1.4 ClienteleTo be eligible for EAS, a client need only be unemployed. Beyond this broad definition, the sponsor organization's objectives and the terms and conditions of the contracts determine the specific clientele and the kinds of services they may be eligible for. A review of several contracts reveals a diverse clientele:
2.1.5 EAS Services OfferedEAS covers the full range of support services designed to assist an individual in securing employment. What is offered in any particular case depends on the client's needs. For those with moderate needs, it could be as simple as providing self-service information about jobs. Most, though, are "case-managed". They are provided with a needs assessment leading to counseling and development of an action plan. This in turn often leads to access to employment benefits delivered by HRDC. EAS Services (or interventions) fall into five categories, each with several more specific services:
For clients requiring more than straightforward self-service advice, e.g., job search, the relationship with the EAS counselor can extend for a period of months and even years. The services, termed assisted services, can be understood as a two-part process.
A key element of HRDC's management-by-results approach is the use of a case management system for tracking the progress of individual clients. Case management starts with the Action Plan. The EAS counselor enters all counseling interventions and consequent actions by the client into an HRDC database (known as the Client Adjustment Tracking System, or CATS). Follow-up and monitoring are an integral part of case management, with appropriate data entered into CATS. The service is terminated once the Action Plan is completed, or if the client discontinues his or her participation. Counselors generally do a telephone follow-up with clients 12 weeks after the termination of the Action Plan to track results. EAS offices dedicated to special needs clientele provide these standard services (and use CATS for reporting), but they also provide more specialized services responding to their client's particular requirements. For example, sponsors may be required to develop more intensive counseling programs for clients, and programs to sensitize employers and the community to the need for employment opportunities and work place considerations. They may also be required to train and provide support workers to accompany clients to workplaces. While the scope of services provided by an EAS office is broad, it is limited to counseling about employment opportunities (local and non-local) and support services including education and training. Providing advice about Employment Insurance (other than to refer clients to the appropriate office), and approving financial applications for support measures are specifically excluded. These are to be handled by an HRCC or HRDC office. 2.2 Evaluation IssuesWithin the broad set of issues outlined in Section 1, the evaluation of the EAS addresses questions under the following headings: 2.2.1 Formative Evaluation
2.2.2 Short-Term Outputs/Client Outcomes
2.3 Evaluation2.3.1 Service Delivery and Management2.3.1.1 To What Extent Are Third-Party Organizations Used To Deliver EAS To Clients? HRDC relies heavily on third-party organizations for EAS delivery. This is evident from the number of third-party contracts and EAS offices, as well as the proportion of clients served by third parties. It is worth noting that delivery of HRDC programs through outreach offices pre-dates the LMDA. Many of the current offices trace their origins to the early 1990s and delivery of NCARP and TAGS programs. All told, HRDC had contracts with about 85 organizations around the province to deliver some level of EAS in 1999. Many of these are regional development organizations and branches of provincial agencies providing services in more than one community. Others are single-office organizations, delivering specialized services (e.g., training) to specific client groups. Full EAS are offered from 64 locations in Newfoundland and Labrador, of which 48 are outreach (third-party) offices operating in smaller communities (Fig. 1). The other 16 sites are HRCC offices also delivering EAS. During calendar 1999, EAS were provided to about 35,620 people in Newfoundland and Labrador. The 54 EAS third-party offices provided services to 16,291 (46%), while the 16 HRCC offices responded to the needs of 19,329 (54%). The higher client levels for the HRCC offices reflect the larger communities and local labour force served by these offices. Table 3 presents summary client data by HRDC district.
2.3.1.2 How Are HRCCs Managing EAS Contracts? Contracts are managed by HRCCs to ensure terms and conditions such as the scope and quality of services are met. The services delivered at individual offices are monitored on a day-to-day basis through counterparts at HRCCs, and by monitoring data on CATS. HRCC counselors provide advice on program and procedural matters in response to specific requests from EAS staff (reference to EAS staff or counselors is meant to capture only those in third party or outreach offices, not in EAS sites in HRCC offices). They also make regular visits to EAS sites. EAS counselors regard the availability of counterpart counselors favorably. All staff interviewed indicated frequent contact (often several times a day), and a generally constructive and supportive relationship. Some EAS staff members indicated they were initially sometimes unsure from whom to seek or take direction on particular issues. But as the program has evolved, counselors report this is being resolved, with the scope of work and lines of authority more clearly set out. The most important management tool is the CATS. EAS office staff are required to enter client data according to an established protocol. These data are up-loaded daily to HRDC for review and monitoring for quality control and consistency purposes. EAS offices, in turn, receive monthly summary reports on their activities based on this information. CATS is developing into a potentially useful tool for monitoring EAS activities and tracking results, but it has taken some time to reach this stage. EAS staff reports the system had several bugs when first introduced, leading to a lack of confidence in its reliability. Staff also felt they were inadequately trained in data entry, compounding the confidence issue and leading some staff to not enter data as routinely as they should. These deficiencies have largely been overcome and all staff interviewed indicate their use of CATS as prescribed. 2.3.1.3 Are EAS Contracts Consistent With The Goals And Objectives Of Part II Of The EI Act? Yes, for the most part, they are. Among the guidelines set out in Part II of the Act are that employment benefits and support measures shall be established so that there is: Harmonization with provincial employment initiatives to avoid duplication and overlap. This is achieved through the joint federal-provincial administration of the LMDA, and to close cooperation at all levels in the implementation of EAS. Through the LMDA committee structure, policies, planning and issues are discussed on a regular basis and coordinated. HRCCs are particularly positive about this approach citing a better awareness of provincial priorities. Furthermore, HRCC managers see the province gaining a greater sense of ownership as a result of co-management. Perhaps, more importantly, HRCCs and EAS coordinators of offices serving clients with special needs are experiencing more effective partnering and, therefore, packaging of services, which allows a client to be counseled and serviced holistically as opposed to the previous more fragmented approach. Key provincial informants who were interviewed were also positive about this approach. Reduction of dependency on unemployment benefits by helping individuals obtain or keep employment. About half of the case managed clients indicated that immediately after they completed their action plan or stopped participating in the employment program, they either started/continued looking for a job or continued working with the same employer. Of those who did find a job, approximately 25% indicated that it took less than two weeks to find the first job. More than half of those who found employment are still working on the same job. Co-operation and partnership with other governments, employers, community-based organizations and other interested organizations. At the delivery level, the relationship between HRDC, provincial departments and third party agencies appears to be limited. Senior EAS staff and some sponsors are aware of federal-provincial co-management, but claim to experience little benefit. HRCC and HRE managers acknowledge that co-management results in little practical impact at the EAS level, other than to avoid duplication (not insignificant). Among the notable exceptions are the EAS outreach offices established to serve clients with special needs. In these cases, HRDC funds core operations and HRE funds staff assistants. In St. John's, this relationship is extended to include an HRE employee being assigned to a special needs outreach office. Both HRCCs and HRE view this arrangement as positive with the client receiving the benefit of a coordinated service. Flexibility to allow local decision-making. EAS offices tend to operate within fairly strict program and service guidelines. These are dictated by HRDC, not by the sponsors, so the scope for local decision-making is limited by design. This approach ensures consistency of service across the province, and also narrows the possibility of offices providing misleading advice on issues for which they have limited training (e.g., EI claims). Commitment by the person receiving assistance to achieving the goals of the assistance, taking primary responsibility for identifying their employment needs and locating necessary services. Requiring clients to develop and commit to an action plan is sound practice, not only because it facilitates the flow of management information, but because it places much of the responsibility for success squarely on the shoulders of the client. Breaking the overall task down into discrete steps reduces the size of the apparent hurdles, and the client gains confidence as each is accomplished. A key point to emerge from the focus group discussions is that this process provides an end in itself precisely because it boosts self-confidence and sense of worth. Clients reported that, among other things, this encouraged them to further their education, thereby making them more employable, and also to seek employment outside their communities. In general, all the EAS office staff interviewed enthusiastically embraced this approach as did the majority of EAS recipients. Implementing the benefits and measures within a framework for evaluating their success in assisting persons to obtain or keep employment. CATS was developed in response to this criterion. It should provide much of the program data required to help in determining how successful the EAS is in assisting persons to obtain or keep employment. Of course, on its own, CATS will not provide all the data necessary. It captures only information arising out of action plans. It provides little or no information about the objective environment within which the job search is taking place. 2.3.2 Access and Quality of Service2.3.2.1 Does The Use Of Third-Party Organizations Address Issues Related To Capacity At The Local Level? In weighing the interview evidence, it is clear that third-party organizations play an important role in complementing and supplementing the capacity of HRDC and provincial agencies to meet the demand for systematic employment and education counseling services. They go well beyond this in more isolated communities where the EAS office may be the only "government" presence, offering the only conduit to the broader range of services offered by both HRDC and HRE. This added capacity is particularly valuable for those with literacy problems, and those with physical or developmental disabilities. Third-party organizations with a special needs focus are uniquely placed to supplement services available through HRDC and provincial agencies. EAS offices located on the Island of Newfoundland and in major Labrador centres (e.g. Happy Valley-Goose Bay or Labrador West) primarily provide variations of career/employment counseling, depending on the needs of clients and availability of other related services. These services include help in career/occupational decision making, skill enhancement/training, job search and employment maintenance. In addition, career counselors can make informal or formal referrals to other federal, provincial, private or not-for-profit agencies/institutions in near-by towns or towns accessible by automobile. They can also assist clients in their career or job search by referring to local newspapers, employment centres or listening to the radio for jobs within the region. In other words, these outreach offices are central to their clients, but are not the only agency available to them. Services available and accessible on the Island and the more central parts of Labrador are not available or accessible on the coast of Labrador. Even when they are available in a community, they may not be accessible to another community, except at great travelling cost. Therefore, by default, EAS outreach offices provide a broader service in the communities in which they are located because they are the only or primary human resource agency in that community. As a result, they become the nerve centre to which all human resource issues are directed. These include questions related to EAS, and also questions related to transfer payments (e.g. income tax, social assistance, and all types of pensions), and form filling, particularly for those with literacy challenges. All of this is particularly important as many residents of isolated communities have limited access to Internet and receive newspapers on a limited and late basis. Whereas regional EAS offices spread smaller tentacles throughout the region, community based EAS offices in more isolated areas provide a dedicated more all-encompassing service to a specific area. Therefore, the effect of their service is more intensely experienced at the community level. 2.3.2.2 Has EAS Increased Access? This would seem to be the case based on the client survey and focus groups, but it is impossible to determine quantitatively because there is no direct basis for comparison. Most of the EAS offices existed prior to 1996 (the year the EI Part II employment measures were introduced) in the form of HRDC extension offices delivering services to a specific (fishery-dependent) clientèle or to a more general client. With the termination of the NCARP, TAGS and CFRAM programs, some of the offices simply re-directed their focus, emerging as third-party deliverers of EAS. Without a clear pre-EAS and post-EAS set of circumstances, (i.e., "with" and "without" cases), it is impossible to say how many more people are accessing EAS than would have in the absence of these offices. But having said this, it seems clear from the data compiled during the client survey that proximity to an EAS office does contribute to the demand for services. There is a direct relationship between the number of clients and the proximity of the EAS office, i.e., the closer the office is to home, the greater the number of clients. Over 50% of clients live within 10 km of an EAS office. From this, one can infer that had the distances been greater (i.e., to the nearest HRCC office as in pre-EAS days), then fewer would have had access to EAS. The importance of local access is also reinforced by opinions expressed at the focus group meetings with EAS clients of outreach offices. Many reported that they would have been reluctant or unlikely to take advantage of employment assistance services had they been required to travel to the nearest HRCC office. Three reasons were given for this:
The highly personalized service is another dimension to which clients attach great significance. Among the comments made by clients who participated in the focus groups were the following:
Despite a perceived higher awareness of EAS services due to locating offices in communities, almost all EAS clients in focus groups indicated that EAS offices were not well marketed. 2.3.2.3 Has EAS Resulted In Contributions From Other Organizations? Not really. EAS outreach offices are fully funded by HRDC, with only a few sponsors providing limited office supply support. Special needs sponsors are also funded to a greater or lesser degree by HRDC, with support also received from the provincial government and other federal agencies. Sponsors appear to have minimal contact with EAS outreach offices with the exceptions of salary and benefits administration. 2.3.2.4 Is The Geographic Distribution Of EAS Sites Adequate? It seems to be. With 48 EAS outreach offices, and several special needs providers in the larger communities, Newfoundland and Labrador would appear to be well served with EAS sites. This is also based on the opinion of those in the focus groups who, when asked, expressed no objection to travelling to another community to visit an outreach office. Judging from the client survey and opinions expressed at the focus group meetings, any perceived shortcomings of EAS with respect to employment results, have less to do with access to services than with availability of jobs. 2.3.3 Contracting Arrangements2.3.3.1 What Is The Nature Of The Contracting Relationship Between HRDC And EAS Sponsors? HRDC and EAS sponsors enter into formal contracts for the delivery of services. Contracts are negotiated on an annual basis, with renewal based on meeting the terms and conditions of the contract. The contracting relationship is not clearcut in the case of the sponsors delivering conventional outreach EAS services. Sponsors operate nominally at arms length from HRDC, delivering a prescribed set of services for payment of an agreed sum. Sponsors operate nominally at arms length from HRDC, delivering a prescribed set of services for payment of an agreed sum. Many sponsors play a limited role in management, acting primarily as conduits for EAS program funding. In and of itself this is not a bad thing, though it may act to limit the scope for local initiative, autonomy and creativity in program delivery. To the extent these are important elements in developing local ownership and responsibility for results, some consideration perhaps should be given to greater local control. This said, any changes would have to be balanced against the need for consistency of information and quality of service. In the case of the special needs sponsors, contracting is clearly at arms length. The sponsor, generally an established and well-recognized organization, delivers the services in a manner consistent with the goals, objectives and methods of that organization. Sponsors are required to maintain records within the CATS framework. Those outreach offices with whom contact was made do use the CATS system, although some find the system poorly designed for purposes of monitoring progress of clients with special needs. The system does not recognize qualitative information and data is susceptible to subjectivity making inter-office or system-wide comparisons difficult. 2.3.3.2 How Is Contracting Done? Sponsors either approach HRDC with a proposal, or are invited by HRDC to submit a proposal for service delivery. The process is non-competitive, with terms and conditions negotiated once an acceptable proponent is selected. Contracts are for one-year terms. While there may be valid fiscal or program reasons for this approach from HRDC's perspective, it makes for an uncertain working environment for sponsors and EAS office staff. Sponsors are unlikely to commit scarce resources to developing the service beyond its current scope. Staff are well trained and by all accounts are highly motivated, yet enjoy limited job security. This raises two concerns: the ability of sponsors to attract the best people for the jobs (though this does not seem to have been a problem so far), and the willingness of staff to make long-term commitments to these positions. 2.3.3.3 How Has Co-Management Influenced EAS? Co-management of the LMDA (i.e. federal-provincial) would appear to have had limited direct influence on EAS. According to interviews with some HRE and DDRR staff, co-management has fostered a clearer understanding by each partner of the other's programs, and in this way has led to better planning and delivery. There is a better system of referrals, and less duplication and overlap. But beyond this, EAS is a federal program and an HRDC responsibility. For the most part, it is fully funded by that organization. Except insofar as co-management has led to the co-location of a few HRE and EAS offices, co-management itself would appear to have had little material impact on EAS delivery. 2.3.3.4 What Is The Province's Role In EAS Contracting? The province plays no role in EAS contracting in the case of most sponsors. The arrangement is between HRDC and the sponsor. But the province does play a small direct role in EAS contracting by acting as sponsor and service provider in four locations (St. John's, Corner Brook, Grand Falls and Happy Valley). This system appears to work well in co-ordinating the roles of the two government departments to effectively service the majority of individuals who are unemployed or underemployed as a result of numerous individual challenges. In some other cases, core funding is provided for HRDC and support workers are provided by HRE. This arrangement is considered to work well by the LMDA District Co-ordinators in the four locations. 2.3.3.5 Is There A Monitoring Function In Place To Monitor Third Party Contracts At The HRCC And Regional Level? Yes, a monitoring function operates at two levels: through the use of CATS data by HRCC staff, and through the use of HRCC counselors or coordinators who offer advice to EAS staff and make periodic visits to EAS offices. Through the use of CATS, data can be separated by EAS office, but its subjectivity makes its usefulness doubtful for an evaluation. It is designed to track short-term (12 weeks) progress, which, in and of itself, is important, but it cannot track long-term outcomes of the EAS outreach service. 2.3.3.6 Is Monitoring Being Completed At The HRCC And Regional Level? Monitoring is being completed by HRCCs, but it is monitoring of a narrow kind, confined essentially to EAS office activity (i.e. a client's program success) as reflected in CATS data. HRCC staff admit that even this level of monitoring is not carried out at the level of detail they would like. This is due in part to a shortage of staff resources, and in part to the absence of targets or established progress indicators and the difficulty of manipulating data to fit into the CATS model (e.g. the Assessment Component of Employment Counseling formula template that guides counselors to ask specific questions when interviewing clients). Targets are a key element for accountability: measuring progress and assessing results. This approach to accountability began to be introduced at HRDC and HRCCs in 1996, and is gradually filtering down to the EAS sponsors and offices. To date, though, only one HRCC (Harbour Grace) is actually attempting to set quantitative targets for its outreach offices (1999), and to measure results against these targets. Targets are expressed for the number of clients returning to work, and dollars saved on the EI account. EAS office staff complain that their own delivery of services is not subject to any performance review by HRDC or their own sponsors. They receive no feedback on the quality of their service, other than from clients. While feed-back from clients tends to be highly encouraging (this is confirmed in focus group meetings and the client survey), and for many the more important form of monitoring, staff feel it is important to have regular performance reviews by their sponsors and/or HRDC. 2.3.4 Accountability2.3.4.1 Do EAS Contracts Contain Specific Requirements For Data Capture And Accountability? EAS contracts do not contain specific requirements for data capture and accountability. The contracts are standard forms, with any description of objectives, services and reporting requirements set out in attached schedules. These schedules tend to be brief, and vary from contract to contract. This is changing as of 1999, with sponsors required to prepare detailed business plans including scope of services. These plans are then attached to the contracts as schedules. 2.3.4.2 Are Third-Party Contractors Fulfilling The Data And Accountability Requirements? Yes, virtually all EAS offices fulfill the data requirements. As contracts are renewed, reporting requirements are being incorporated. To date, accountability requirements have not been specified, except in the case of one HRCC. These are being incorporated into the contract, with performance of the EAS offices assessed against specified targets. 2.3.5 Outcomes2.3.5.1 Are Clients Satisfied With The Quality Of Service? Yes, clients are satisfied with quality of service. This is confirmed through direct questions and discussion during focus group meetings.2 Clients praised staff for their knowledge and professionalism, and particularly for their accessibility and the personalized service. That the services are community-based scores high on the list of positive features. As one client put it, "The outreach workers take the time to know you and your personal circumstances. This allows them to offer better advice about career or education options." In summing up their experience, those EAS clients attending the focus group contrasted the provision of EAS outreach services with service obtained at HRCCs, describing the latter as impersonal and impenetrable. Similar views were expressed in the client survey.3 More than 60% of clients gave the EAS counseling services an overall rating from very good to excellent. Fewer than 10% rated the services in the poor to fair range. It is interesting to note that half or more of those surveyed were unable to offer an opinion on the quality of any particular service, though the services delivered personally rather than impersonally (by computer or written material) tended to be more memorable and meaningful judging from the slightly higher proportion of clients offering opinions. This finding is also supported by the discussions in the focus groups. 2.3.5.2 What Are The Chief Results Of The EAS? The main tangible benefit emerging from the first three years of EAS seems clearly to lie in the improved employability of the client group. According to the EAS focus group participants, they had become better informed about employment opportunities, and better able to respond to those opportunities through the education or training programs they completed. But perhaps most importantly, what many clients point to as the key result is their greater sense of self-esteem and confidence achieved through counseling and completion of their action plans. This makes them want to participate: to actually look for work, continue working for the same employer, change jobs, or further their education (more than 80% of the clients surveyed fell into one of these categories). Finding work continues to be the persistent problem. For those not working, the main reason given is the simple lack of employment opportunities. Though the economy of Newfoundland and Labrador improved considerably during the latter half of the 1990s, the official unemployment rate continues to be high (about 17% in 1999). But even this rate is misleading, given the influence of St. John's lower unemployment rate in the average. The EAS case studies (Appendix B) show that in the rural areas where the role of EAS is particularly important, regional labour force participation rates tend to be lower and regional unemployment rates substantially higher than the provincial average (25-35% in some areas). Rural areas are not generating sufficient employment opportunities. 2.4 EAS Client Survey ResultsThe EAS client sample was constructed on the basis of a population of 18,447 clients who were "case managed" or 2,087 who were classified as "moderate need".4 According to HRDC, case managed are individuals who follow through an EAS outreach program and moderate need are individuals who require short-term interventions. Sample Selection Process HRDC supplied files containing records for 18,447 Case Managed clients and 2,087 Moderate Needs clients. These were taken to be the population of clients of concern for the evaluation. The protocol followed to select the sample was to select a simple random sample that would produce an estimate of a population proportion of 0.5 at the 95% confidence level with a 10% error rate. The following table summarizes the relevant figures.
The actual random samples drawn were 768 for Case Managed and 695 for Moderate Needs, allowing for a 45 — 50% completion rate. The completed samples were 311 Case Managed and 239 Moderate Needs. For Case Managed, this sample size is consistent with an 11% error rate and a 95% confidence level, or 10% error rate and a 92% confidence level. The corresponding levels for Moderate Need are 12% error rate and 95% confidence or 10% error and 90% confidence. The survey company employed to conduct the telephone calls were given a fixed budget of $8,800 with instructions to continue calling until the raw sample size target was met or they met their budget limit. They followed this instruction until they reached the budget limit. The main difficulties they encountered were the high rate of call backs required and the high rate of either wrong numbers, numbers changed or people who had moved with no forwarding number. The results of the EAS client survey are presented in brief below, comparing the moderate need and the case managed sample sub-groups. Appendix A gives the detailed results for both sub-groups.5 2.4.1 Case Managed Client Results2.4.1.1 Outreach Office Activity Out of the sample group classified as "case managed", the largest percentage of clients (20%) indicated they went to one of the outreach office(s) located in St. John's for employment assistance services. Roughly one third of the case managed sample indicated they went to the outreach offices in St. John's, Bonavista and Newville for employment assistance services. Most case managed clients indicated that the outreach office was located relatively close to their home. Over three quarters of the sample indicated they traveled less than 20 kilometers to the outreach office and roughly half indicated that the outreach office was less than 10 kilometers from their home. Most case managed clients indicated, however, that the HRDC office was not located close to their home. Roughly twenty percent of the case managed clients indicated that the nearest HRDC office was less than 10 kilometers from their home and three quarters indicated that it was less than 100 kilometers from their home. An increasing number of case managed clients went to the local EAS outreach office for counseling or other services since 1996, with over half of the clients indicating they went to the local outreach office in 1999.  View Table 4 View Table 5 2.4.1.2 Education Over half of the case managed sample indicated they had completed high school (60 percent). Of those who had completed high school, more than a quarter of them either completed or engaged in post secondary education at the university or community college level. Over half of the case managed sample indicated they were employed and not in school over the period 1996 to 1999. Over 10 percent indicated they were in school and not employed over the same period. 2.4.1.3 Outreach Office Services In the survey, the two types of services case managed clients indicated that they thought they needed to help them find a job before they went to the EAS outreach office were:
The five primary types of services actually used by clients at the EAS outreach office (in order of highest usage) were:
Almost three-quarters of the case managed sample did not develop an Action Plan with the assistance of the outreach counselor. Of those who did develop an Action Plan, roughly three-quarters are either completed or in progress. The other one-quarter did not complete the Action Plan. Of those who did not complete the Action Plan, roughly half did not complete it because they found a job. The remaining clients did not complete an Action Plan because they were either no longer interested in doing so, or there were no spaces available for HRDC funded programs. The services received at the Outreach offices were all highly ranked, with the weighted average ranking6 between very good and good for all services offered. Outreach office services were ranked by the case managed clients in the following order (from highest to lowest, using weighted mean ranking):
Overall, the counseling services received a high ranking by the case managed clients. One quarter of the case managed clients ranked these services as excellent with another one third ranking the counseling services received overall as very good. The two primary reasons for dissatisfaction with the EAS outreach office services cited by case managed clients were:
View Table 6 View Table 7 2.4.1.4 Employment More than one third of the case managed clients indicated their usual employment before going to the EAS outreach office was in the fishery. Services was the second largest sector in which clients were employed, followed by construction, prior to going to the EAS outreach office. Combined, the fishery, services and construction sectors employed 70% of the case managed clients before they went to the EAS outreach office. About half of the case managed clients indicated that immediately after they completed their action plan or stopped participating in the employment services program, they either started/continued looking for a job or continued working with the same employer. Over half of the case managed clients who left the program prior to completion have looked for a job since they left the program. Of these, more than two thirds indicated that they did not find a job. Of those who did find a job, 25.6% indicated that it took less than two weeks to find the first job. 53.8% of the case managed clients indicated that it took less than nine weeks to find the first job. 66.7% of the first jobs found represented full time employment and 77.1% were local jobs. More than half of those who found employment are still working on the same job. Those who are not working on the same job: More than half of those who were not working on the same job indicated that the job lasted for 17 weeks or less. After their job terminated, the most common activity clients indicated they did next (more than half) was to look for another job. 20 percent indicated they sought training and upgrading and 12 percent stopped looking for work. Of those not working on their first job found after contact with the EAS outreach office, most are currently looking for work (about 40 percent). An equally large number are currently split between being on Employment Insurance or upgrading their education. Slightly more than one tenth are currently working in a paid job and less than one tenth are on social assistance. Of those not currently employed on their first job found after contact with the EAS outreach office, a large majority said the primary reason they are not currently working is attributable to the lack of jobs (over 70 percent). Those who are working on the same job: Of those who are currently employed, about a quarter are employed in the fishery. Another 35 percent are either employed in managerial/administrative jobs or in construction. Employment in the services sector accounts for roughly 15 percent. 2.4.2 Moderate Need Client Results2.4.2.1 Outreach Office Activity Out of the sample group classified as "moderate need", most clients (almost one third) went to the Outreach office located in Marystown for employment assistance services.7 Over one half of the moderate need client responses indicated they went to one of three outreach offices for employment assistance services: either Marystown, Harbour Grace or Clarke's Beach. A very small number of clients at the Outreach office in St. John's were classified as moderate need (about 5 percent). As with case managed clients, most moderate need clients indicated that the outreach office was located relatively close to their home. Roughly three quarters of the sample indicated they traveled less than 20 kilometers to the outreach office and over half indicated that the outreach office was less than 10 kilometers from their home. The moderate need clients indicated that the HRDC office was located slightly closer, (on average) to their home than with the case managed client response. More than one quarter of the moderate need clients indicated that the nearest HRDC office was less than 10 kilometers from their home and roughly three quarters indicated that it was less than 50 kilometers from their home. Similar to the case managed clients, an increasing number of moderate need clients went to the local EAS outreach office for counseling or other services since 1996, with over half of the clients indicating they went to the local EAS outreach office in 1999. View Table 8 View Table 9 2.4.2.2 Education A higher percentage of the moderate need clients engaged in or completed a post secondary education program than with the case managed clients. Over half of the moderate need sample indicated they had completed high school (60 percent). Of those who had completed high school, almost half of the moderate need clients either completed or engaged in post secondary education at the university, community college or trade school level. The percentage of the moderate need clients who indicated they were employed and not in school increased steadily over the period 1996 to 1999. Similarly, the percentage of moderate need clients who indicated they were in school and not working steadily declined over the same period. 2.4.2.3 Outreach Office Services The top three types of services cited by the moderate need clients as being ones they thought were needed to help them find a job before they went to the EAS outreach office were:8
The top five types of services actually used by moderate need clients at the Outreach office (in order of most used to least used) are:
A higher percentage of the moderate need clients developed an Action Plan than did the case managed clients. About two thirds of the moderate need sample did not develop an Action Plan with the assistance of the outreach counselor. Of those who did develop an Action Plan, roughly three-quarters were either completed or in progress. Of those who did not complete the Action Plan, roughly one third did not complete because they found a job. The remaining clients did not complete an Action Plan because there were no spaces available for HRDC funded programs or they were no longer interested in doing so. The services received at the EAS outreach offices were all highly ranked, with the weighted average ranking9 between very good and good for all services offered. Outreach office services were ranked by the moderate need clients in the following order (from highest to lowest, using weighted mean ranking):
The counseling services received a higher overall ranking by the moderate need clients than with the case managed clients. Almost one third of the moderate need clients ranked these services as excellent with another one third ranking the counseling services received overall as very good. The two primary reasons for dissatisfaction with Outreach office services cited by moderate need clients are:
View Table 10 View Table 11 2.4.2.4 Employment The results of the client survey indicate a greater percentage of moderate need clients being employed in the services sector prior to going to the EAS outreach office rather than in the fishery, in contrast to the case managed clients. More than one quarter of the moderate need clients indicated their usual employment before going to the EAS outreach office was in the services sector. The second largest sector clients were employed in prior to going to the EAS outreach office was the fishery, followed by construction. A second result of the EAS client survey showed the employment of the moderate need clients before they went to the EAS outreach office was more diversified across the sectors than was the case with the case managed clients. Combined, the services, fishery, and construction sectors employed just over half of the moderate need clients. The manufacturing, sales and sciences sectors employed another one quarter of the moderate need clients prior to their arrival at the EAS outreach office. About half of the moderate need clients indicated that immediately after they completed their action plan or stopped participating in the employment services program they either started/continued looking for a job or continued working with the same employer. Most of the moderate need clients who left the program have looked for a job (almost two thirds). Of these, more than two thirds indicated that they did not find a job. Of those who did find a job, one quarter indicated that it took less than four weeks to find the first job. More than half of the moderate need clients indicated that it took up to four weeks to find the first job. Most of the first jobs found represented part-time employment (just over half) and were local jobs (over three quarters). More than half of those who found employment are still working on the same job. Those who are not working on the same job: More than half of those who were not working on the same job indicated that the job lasted for 19 weeks or less. After their job terminated, the most common activity the moderate need clients indicated they did next (more than half) was to look for another job. Others indicated they went for training and upgrading (20 percent). A few stopped looking for work (12 percent). A much higher percentage of the moderate need clients found work with another employer, as compared to case managed clients. Similarly, a smaller percentage of the moderate need clients stopped looking for work as compared to case managed clients. Other differences between the case managed and the moderate need clients emerged from the EAS client survey with respect to the portion of the sample for which their first job found was terminated. Of those who were not working on the first job found after their contact with the Outreach office, about a third of the moderate need clients are currently looking for work. A much larger percentage of the moderate need clients indicated they are currently working in a paid job after having lost their first job as compared to case managed clients. Another quarter of the moderate need clients are now working on a paid job. Also, a much smaller percentage of the moderate need clients who lost their first job indicated they were receiving either EI or social assistance as compared to case managed clients. Of those who are not currently employed, a large majority of clients say the primary reason they are not currently working is attributable to the lack of jobs available. Those who are working on the same job: For those EAS clients currently working on the first job found after their contact with the EAS outreach office, there are differences between the moderate need and the case managed sample groups with respect to the sectors in which they are employed. The service sector is the largest employer for the moderate need clients who are still working on their first job, versus the fishery for the case managed clients. The second largest employer for the moderate need sample is the managerial and administrative sector with the fishery being the third largest employer of this group. 2.4.3 EAS Survey Results ConclusionAlthough both the case managed and moderate need clients surveyed indicated they thought they needed training in specific job skills and help with a job search, both groups most frequently used information about financial assistance programs. However, both groups highly ranked the service provided by the outreach staff on post-secondary education/training programs, particularly the case managed clients. Both groups also highly ranked the career counseling service they received, although they had not listed it as a type of service they thought they needed prior to first visiting the EAS outreach office. It would also appear that neither group found workshops nor job finding clubs particularly useful. When examining the services at the EAS outreach office clients thought they needed to help them find a job by education levels, some interesting results occurred.10 Case-managed clients:Training in specific job skills was the most frequently cited service by the case-managed clients as needed to help them find a job. Of those who cited training in specific skills from this group, most had either attended or completed community college. Another large portion of this group had completed either grade 10, 11 or 12. The second most frequently cited service by the case-managed clients as needed to help them find a job was help with a job search. Of those who cited this service from this group, most had not attended or completed community college, but rather had completed grade 12 with a high school diploma. When asked about the services clients actually used, the top three services cited by the case managed clients included information on financial assistance programs, information on post secondary education, and job search and interview techniques. When examining the distribution of those who sought information on financial assistance programs, they tended to be more highly educated (38 percent either attended or completed community college or attended university), while another fairly large group (35 percent) either had completed grade 11 or grade 12. Similar results hold for those who sought information on post secondary education programs. The distribution was split between those who were more educated (37 percent either attended or completed community college or attended university) and another fairly large group (33 percent) who had either completed grade 11 or grade 12. The reverse is true, however, when examining the distribution of those who used job search and interview techniques services. This group tended to be less educated (36 percent with grade 11 of grade 12 completion). Moderate Need Clients:When asked what services they thought they would need to help them find a job, help with a job search was the most frequently cited service by the moderate need clients. Of those who cited help with a job search from this group, the distribution is largely split between those who had either completed community college or university and those who had completed either grade 11 or grade 12. The second most frequently cited service by these clients for helping them find a job was training in specific skills. Of those who cited this service from this group, most had completed community college, trade school or grade 12 with a high school diploma. When asked about the services clients actually used, the top three services cited by the moderate need clients included information on financial assistance programs, services related to the preparation of a resume or covering letter, and job search and interview techniques. When examining the distribution of those who sought information on financial assistance programs, most had either completed community college or trade school while another fairly large group had completed grade 12. Similar results hold for those who sought services related to the preparation of a resume or covering letter. The distribution is split between those who had completed community college, completed trade school or completed grade 12 with a high school diploma. When examining the distribution of those who used job search and interview techniques services by education levels, this group tended to be slightly less educated. By and large, according to the survey, the moderate need clients are better educated. They also appear to have greater comfort with computers because of their indicated usefulness of the Internet job listings and computerized job search tools. The case managed found these services less useful.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![[To Top]](/web/20060127000607im_/http://www11.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/edd-img/top.gif){kind=small}
![[Previous Page]](/web/20060127000607im_/http://www11.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/edd-img/back.gif){kind=small}
![[Table of Contents]](/web/20060127000607im_/http://www11.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/edd-img/content.gif)
![[Next Page]](/web/20060127000607im_/http://www11.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/edd-img/next.gif){kind=small}