The UEmploy Project: IARP Conference, San Juan Puerto Rico (26.10.12)

1,237 views
1,163 views

Published on

1 Comment
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,237
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
107
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
1
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The UEmploy Project: IARP Conference, San Juan Puerto Rico (26.10.12)

  1. 1. UEmploy:A European Model of VocationalIntegration and SpecializedEmploymentDr. Alan Bruce: Universal Learning Systems IrelandIARP Conference: San Juan, Puerto Rico26 October 2012
  2. 2. Setting objectives1. Demonstrating international dimensions of disability best practice2. Understanding the dimensions of European rehabilitation3. Investigating innovative job analysis and placement tools: the UEmploy project4. Creating international cooperation in employment outcomes
  3. 3. Background: the UEmploy Project The role of the European Union in social policy measures The traditions of national systems The funding of initiatives: the European Commission The role of the Directorate General The Lifelong Learning Program Lisbon Agenda (2000) Europe 2020 (2014-20) From policy to action
  4. 4. European Funding European Regional Development Fund: modernization, research, innovation, environmental protection and economic growth European Social Fund: adaptability of labor and enterprises, enhanced access to work, social inclusion, equal access and partnership in combating discrimination European Maritime and Fisheries Fund: European Agricultural Guarantee Fund, European Agricultural Fund for Regional Development, European Fisheries FundStrategic objectives: Reduction of disparities in income, wealth and opportunities Enhanced labor market outcomes in terms of employability and sustainable employment.
  5. 5. Selecting projects Innovative idea that meets stated criteria Formation of a strong transnational partnership Clear program of work Conformity with quality standards in management, operation, evaluation Defined Work Packages Value for money Sustainability Dissemination and added value
  6. 6. Future priorities Results oriented measures (indicators, reporting, monitoring and evaluation) Performance frameworks (clear and measurable milestones and targets) Coordination with national reform programmes (this will have particular emphasis in Ireland) Coordination and shared access to funds (from ESF and ERDF) Effectiveness (performance measurement frameworks) Efficiency (administrative capacity, reduced bureaucracy).
  7. 7. Introducing the partnersTimescale 2010-12Project mission Leonardo da Vinci Development of Innovation 2010 – 4205/ 001 – 001 - < 510784-LLP-1-2010-1-RO-LEONARDO-LMP >
  8. 8. The partners
  9. 9. The products:European Research ReportNational ReportsConsultancy tools: people, training, interventionseLearningLinkage and networks
  10. 10. Helsinki, Finland March 2012
  11. 11. Szeged, Hungary June 2012
  12. 12. 1. Internationalization of rehabilitation Common global experience From fear to understanding From charity to rights Multidisciplinary focus Orientation towards employment and work Different cultural norms and perspectives Public/private dimensions
  13. 13. Globalization in focus Global change: urbanization, migration, media The total marketplace Comparative analysis Speed of communications Demographics Development and transformation Anticipating the future
  14. 14. Globalization: the threats Persistence and increase in inequality Permanent hopelessness of excluded Embedded violence Internal underclass External invisibility
  15. 15. Globalization: opportunities Time warp of nation state Integration and participation Learning without borders Global commodification and dissemination of knowledge „Collective effort not collective answers‟ (Therborn)
  16. 16. Implications The emergence of a true global economy dictates a new role in international activities to promote the well being of persons with disabilities through access to jobs, better technology and social supports...Source: NIDRR Long Range Plan 1999-2004
  17. 17. Policy landscapes: workforcedevelopmentRecommendations or enhancing the existing workforcedevelopment platform focus on three future priorities:1. Support for Universal Design principles2. Capacity and community building across stakeholders3. Expansion of Ticket-to-Work and Self-Sufficiency programGolden, T. et al, Rehabilitation Research, Policy and Education, NCRE, Vol.26, Num. 1, 2012
  18. 18. Common challenges Diminishing fiscal resources Increasing client needs (levels of disability, socio-economic dimensions, ageing) Rising unemployment rates Public/private fault lines Focus on rights Impact of generalized and sustained crisis
  19. 19. The global rehabilitationprofessional Working beyond national boundaries Responsive to difference – difference as the norm Intercultural competence Managing diversity Ethical dimensions From value for money to understanding values Embracing change and technology
  20. 20. Professional capacity Recognizing differences Recognizing similarities International skills for an international environment Interdependence Shared learning and capacity development Looking at national systems with an objective eye Spotting trends and patterns Developing applied research skills Comparative best practice
  21. 21. Common legacies Histories of institutionalization Marginalization Linkage to struggle Impact on family Medicalization Charity Media imagery
  22. 22. Common agendas Robust professional development programs Enhanced international learning forums Exchanges and placements Team working Comparative legal practices – or not? E-learning and continuing professional development Independent vocational functioning without borders
  23. 23. Shaping the rehabilitationprofessional Training of rehabilitation professionals is not universally available Available training is varied and tends to lack a holistic approach to service provision U.S. rehabilitation interventions in foreign countries are sometimes perceived as “charitable” and one-sided U.S. rehabilitation models have not been shaped by the experiences, insights or achievements of other countries
  24. 24. Strategy options and challenges By creating learning partnerships on an international level, we can begin to exchange and develop mutually beneficial “best practices” Dealing with different…  Definitions  Traditions  Legislation  Systems  Policy Emphases Ethnocentric habits die hard Disparate training and credentials
  25. 25. 2. European rehabilitationdimensions Emerging from the chaos – the vision of post-1945 Histories of fragmentation The medical model and institutional care Lack of comparable models, methods or statistics The hidden issue – legacies of genocide and eugenics From care to inclusion – policy divergence
  26. 26. Europe
  27. 27. European vocational rehabilitationsystems National divergence Historic patterns of care Charity and welfare The impact of war The role of the State Links to independent living
  28. 28. European Union Nature and extent Growing impact and role Expansion Governance Disability policy frameworks The primacy of work
  29. 29. Ongoing issues in Europeanrehabilitation Fragmentation and variance in service provision Reliance on quotas and administrative inducements Lack of joined up policy regarding education and qualifications Poor access standards Top-down legislative approaches Lack of standardized assessment systems Over-medicalization od system delivery Inadequate focus on rights based approaches
  30. 30. Forging tools and competence Assessment in context Types of disabilities – dimensions of intervention Physical Developmental Psychiatric Sensory Social
  31. 31. Professional contours Defining the role of rehabilitation professional Setting common standards Setting goals and targets New learning paradigms Social partnership Employers, unions and the State ICT supported transformation
  32. 32. Outlining UEmploy Background and rationale The role of EU supported projects The partnership profile:  Romania  Bulgaria  Hungary  Finland  Ireland
  33. 33. UEmploy milestones Background research: national/European Needs identification Development of employment audits Developing scheme managers and auditors Employer networks On-site analysis E-learning tools Collaborative learning
  34. 34. Critical outcomes Employer consultancy Job analysis Advice and consultancy Using shared international perspectives Linkage with North America Engaging disabled citizens Benchmarking best practice Developing networks
  35. 35. Models of excellence Professional skills and validation Working in a time of crisis Job standards and globalized change The impact of social security norms Assessing for work as a moving target Embedding skills and competencies Planning for what? Policy directions The UEmploy toolkit
  36. 36. 3. UEmploy: process andoutcomes Developing a shared understanding Engaging diverse national partners Developing communications Enhancing dialogue and defining mythologies Avoiding assumptions Circular learning Using advanced ICT Products and deliverables
  37. 37. The national reports Literature review Desk based research Interviews with stakeholders: government, employment offices, disability specific service providers, people with disabilities and employers Statistical overviews – often problematic General and standardized conclusions
  38. 38. a. Hungary (Coordinator: Peter Zoltan) Census (2001): 800,000 out of 10m. population Social/vocational rehabilitation did not exist under planned economy (1947-89. Rehabilitation Fund 1993; Social Care Rehabilitation 1998 Key tools: Quota 5% >20 employees; wage subsidies Segregated schooling: 32% do not complete primary 39% have no education qualifications Disabled citizens (2001): Employed 9%; Unemployed 2%; Not active 76.7% Issues: prejudice; low expectations; no independent rehabilitation system
  39. 39. b. Bulgaria (Coordinator: Diana Geleta) Explicitly medical model: new legislation only in 1990 Quota system: 4% for employers >50 Ministry of Labor and National Employment Agency appointed 250 „mediator consultants‟ in 2011 Focus: sheltered employment/cooperatives; inclusive environment; employment Unemployment/underemployment at 72% Educational levels low or non-existent for 50% of those with disabilities
  40. 40. c. Romania (Coordinator: Dr Anca Colibaba) Traditionally weak provision for disability: linked to Roma and abandoned children Many laws, no action: Law 448/06 of 2008 stipulates quota of 4% or fine Highly punitive approach and widespread evasion No provision for guidance, counseling, support or access Segregated and inadequate educational systems Highly unreliable statistics
  41. 41. d. Finland (Coordinator: Marjatta Varanka) Highly evolved and interlinked welfare and policy system Strong legislative and research base Strongly mainstreamed and rights based Employment and Economic Development Offices (KELA) provide specialized supports Work activity centers Educational system exceptionally good Persistent negative attitudes around disability Demographic time bombs – the aging society
  42. 42. e. Ireland (Coordinator: Kate Kearney) Strong traditions of charity, institutionalization and religious care Excellent legislative and policy development since 1980s: Equality Act (2005); National Disability Strategy; Disability Act Poor employment outcomes – mainstreaming and the role of „service providers‟ Impact of crisis and deconstruction of social support Development of professional capacity and linkage Centre for Excellence in Universal Design Rights and diversity integration
  43. 43. European Report Significant drop in living standards since 1990 in East/Central Europe. Impact of transition to market economy. Generalized impact of crisis in all countries since 2008 Laws, where they exist, are not enforced or only partially understood. Statistics are unreliable. Awareness is poor or uneven Categories used are unclear or often overlap Service provision is highly fragmented Evidence of inherent discrimination through the use of quotas and other measures
  44. 44. European employment issues Companies and employers lack knowledge, awareness and skills Policy and strategy is often aspirational but not supported by tools and practice Invisibility of disability in public or employment related discourse Medicalization External impetus for national legislative and policy initiatives Unfolding process of awareness raising Staff training and professional development completely neglected
  45. 45. European trends Need for Human Rights based approach is identified Fine in theory but issues remain about practice Impact of generalized unemployment rates From punitive systems to employ to quality measures that produce shared benefit Strong legacy of segregation has a significant impact Persisting levels of fear, ignorance or disinterest Need for clear policy leadership role backed up by evidence- based best practice Need to relate experience of disability to wider socio- economic and demographic trends.
  46. 46. Vocational rehabilitation Pre-employment screening, assessment and post-placement supports highly valuable but usually missing. Critical need for consultancy Disability rate link to aging. Important to look at link between disabilities acquired while working – issues around both recruiting disabled people and retaining people once they become disabled Emphasis required on defining nature of different kinds of work options: sheltered, supported, open, etc. Critical need for specialized supports in accessing mainstream services Significant barriers still exist across all European countries: physical, legislative and attitudinal
  47. 47. UEmploy Trainingfor Consultants and Employees Leonardo da Vinci Development of Innovation 2010 – 4205/ 001 – 001 - < 510784-LLP-1-2010-1-RO-LEONARDO-LMP > This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
  48. 48. Developing the training Selecting Consultants Defining the role Designing and providing training (September-November 2011) Collecting information, job analysis, role play, risk analysis, employer guidance Selecting Scheme Managers – November 2011 Engaging employers
  49. 49. Materials development Competency checklist Competency toolkit Training kit Support materials Employer audits
  50. 50. The future Dissemination Sustainability Added Value Identifying and supporting change End-user engagement: employers and people with disabilities
  51. 51. 4. International collaboration:directions and themes European policy frameworks The impact of the crisis Unraveling welfare Sourcing funding and support Linkage to other dimensions of exclusion The importance of US traditions in vocational rehabilitation The importance of the European experiment
  52. 52. Michael Fullan 2010The power of collective capacity is that it enables ordinarypeople to accomplish extraordinary things – for two reasons.One is that knowledge about effective practice becomes morewidely available and accessible on a daily basis. The secondreason is more powerful still – working together generatescommitment.
  53. 53. Reactions to crisis Effort to establish status quo ante Denial and paralysis Rage and frustration Cut, cut and cut: the marketization of thought Copy „success‟ stories Opportunity to learn: the innovation imperative Creativity unbound
  54. 54. Constraining innovation Institutional resistance Community resistance Outcomes and results Incremental and disruptive dimensions Planning for innovation?
  55. 55. Embedding creativity Organic, reflective evaluative follow-up Analysis and modification Lasting partnerships between research units and schools Labor market transformation impact Organic link to work and community Professional passion - out of the strait-jacket
  56. 56. Embedding technology Anytime, anywhere The critical importance of e-learning Using the cloud Demanding digital literacy Enhancing methodologies
  57. 57. EU strategy against social exclusion (Treaty of Nice 1998) Innovation Coordination and integration Partnership End user participation Service quality initiatives
  58. 58. Future directions Rights and advocacy Quality circles (Netherlands) Collaborative research Culture of innovation Highly qualified staff Equality frameworks and enforceable standards
  59. 59. Key issues Assessment Progression Competence Service models: brokers or advocates? Funding and resources Complex disabilities (dual diagnosis) Quality standards development Linkage to emancipatory research models Universal Design models
  60. 60. Professional competence – global resources ILO Gladnet UN OECD European Foundation Rehabilitation International Developing countries‟ networks - CBR, China
  61. 61. Directions Innovation based on questions, not answers: avoiding mantras and clichés The poetry of open discovery and delight Constructing schools as critical spaces Connecting science and discovery through technologies of emancipatory practice Rediscovering community in a fractured continent
  62. 62. Muchas gracias Dr. Alan Bruce ULS www.uemploy.euabruce@ulsystems.com

×