Welfare Reform Team Evaluation of European Social Fund pilot project 2014-2015
welfare_reform_european_social_fund_project_evaluation_report
welfare_reform_european_social_fund_project_evaluation_report
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Benefit losses for <strong>project</strong> customers – whether as a result <strong>of</strong> the benefit cap, LHA or tapers<br />
due to other income – can be considerably more than £100 a month. In the worst case,<br />
customers may lose nearly £300 a week LHA and only be left with entitlement to 50 pence a<br />
week.<br />
Weekly housing benefit losses for <strong>project</strong> customers are shown in the chart below.<br />
• Debt, ethnicity and the type <strong>of</strong> welfare reform faced by customers all had a bearing<br />
on whether they found a job or not.<br />
Although a Fisher’s Exact Test <strong>of</strong> Significance indicated an association between customers’<br />
ability to find work and debt, ethnicity and the type <strong>of</strong> welfare reform, insufficient data<br />
meant that it was not possible to establish the direction <strong>of</strong> relationship between these<br />
factors and a customer’s ability to move into employment. These are all important factors<br />
that any future evaluation should consider.<br />
A data summary and analysis is included as Appendix 5 to this evaluation.<br />
Weekly housing benefit shortfall for ESF <strong>project</strong> customers<br />
1<br />
1%<br />
1<br />
1%<br />
8<br />
6%<br />
0 2<br />
0% 1%<br />
25<br />
17%<br />
105<br />
74%<br />
Less than £50<br />
£51-£100<br />
£101-£150<br />
£151-200<br />
£201-£250<br />
£251-300<br />
£301 or more<br />
Customer and partner questionnaires<br />
We carried out questionnaire surveys for customers in the <strong>project</strong> and partners who<br />
helped us to deliver the <strong>project</strong>. These are included as Appendix 6 and Appendix 2<br />
to this evaluation respectively.<br />
52