Dissertation

A Study on the Employability of Young
Disabled People in Contemporary
Society
By
Liam Challenger - 12007846
Dissertation Supervisors
Julie Scott Jones
Hannah Smithson
In association with
Greater Manchester Youth Network

Acknowledgments
I wish to express my sincere thanks to Alex Fairweather, Sue Lewis and Joe Cain at
Greater Manchester Youth Network for their assistance and cooperation throughout
the duration of this research project and for welcoming me, so graciously into their
wonderful organisation. I would like to express a special thanks to Joe Cain who was
brilliant with his support and willingness to give me access to all of the data from the
Trade Up programme. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank my Q-Step
supervisors Julie Scott Jones and Hannah Smithson for their continued support. I am
extremely thankful to Julie for putting up with my countless e-mails and sharing her
expertise, and sincere and valuable guidance and encouragement with me.

Contents
Foreword Page 1
ExecutiveSummary Page 1
Background Page 3
Key Literature Review Page 4
ProjectMethodology Page 8
Key Findings Page 13
- Univariate Analysis – Key Demographics Page 13
- Univariate Analysis – Pre-Entry Questionnaire Page 14
- Crosstabs – Pre-Entry Questionnaire Page 17
- Univariate Analysis – Post-CompletionQuestionnaire Page 19
- Crosstabs – Post-CompletionQuestionnaire Page 21

- Crosstabs – Key Variables Page 23
- Partner Evaluation Forms Page 27
End Summary Page 27
Bibliography Page 29
Appendix Page 31

1 | P a g e
Foreword
Liam has been imperative in collecting and collating data for the Trade Up
programme. The information he has recorded will help us to show potential funders
that the programme is successful in achieving its key aims. He has showed an
interest in the programme from start to finish, and has accompanied me to sessions
to develop a deeper understanding of the training that takes place. Liam’s
involvement has meant that the project worker has had more time to engage in direct
delivery, and achieve the outcomes set out in the initial funding bid.
Foreword by Joe Cain, Trade Up programme leader at Greater Manchester Youth
Network.

2 | P a g e
Executive Summary
This report provides an understanding of the difficulties which many young, disabled
people face when searching for employment in contemporary society, and an
evaluation of how programmes like Greater Manchester Youth Network’s, ‘Trade Up’
can help to enhance their employability. The research objectives were to understand
the difficulties that many young disabled people face when entering the job market
and to understand how programmes like Trade Up can provide them with valuable
skills and experience and enhance their employability. These objectives were based
on my belief that there is a stigma of ‘unemployability’ (Goffman, 1963) associated
with young disabled people in contemporary society and that this stigma has led to
the exclusion of them from many everyday social practices. Therefore it was
important to research this area to understand how the employability of young
disabled people can be improved and how we can work towards ensuring that the
young and disabled are able to lead a ‘normal’ life.
The report is predominantly based around secondary data analysis of two datasets,
which the researcher created using GMYN’s data, which they had collected
throughout the Trade Up programme. The first dataset consisted of data collected
through pre-entry and post-completion questionnaires completed by the ‘Trade Up’
participants. This data was the core data used throughout this research. The dataset
consisted of 36 participants who had filled out at least one of the questionnaires, only
18 had completed both. The second dataset consisted of data collected through a
partner evaluation form, filled out by the partner organisations who worked alongside
GMYN in the delivery of Trade Up. This gave me an insight into how successful
Trade Up was from the view of both the participants and the partner organisations.

3 | P a g e
The methods involved within the secondary data analysis of this research project
were mainly univariate and bivariate analysis using SPSS. The research was
predominantly concerned with variables relating to participant confidence, business
knowledge and experience, as these were all important indicators of the
employability of the young people involved. Key relationships, including gender, were
explored.
The key findings from the research indicated that ‘Trade Up’ had no significant
impact on the confidence levels of the respondents, nor did it have an impact on their
business knowledge and experience. It appears that ‘Trade Up’ was successful in
reaffirming the confidence in those who entered the programme with pre-existing
confidence (which was the majority of the sample) but was unsuccessful in improving
the confidence and business knowledge and experience of those who entered the
programme with limited confidence. It would seem that self- confidence is vitally
important for young, disabled people in their attempt to find work. Therefore,
although ‘Trade Up’ did not improve the confidence of some of its participants, the
fact that it reinforced the belief of those with pre-existing confidence is still vitally
important.
In conclusion, it is evident that young, disabled people struggle when searching for
employment in contemporary society and therefore, programmes like GMYN’s Trade
Up programme are vitally important in helping them to achieve their full potential and
reach their career goals. However, for programmes like Trade Up to have more
success, they need to work towards providing the young, disabled people involved
with a programme, which will have a bigger impact on their self-confidence and
provide them with enhanced work experience and knowledge. It was also concluded

4 | P a g e
that further study on the struggles that young, disabled people face when looking for
work is certainly needed. It is vital to understand the difficulties that they face in order
to assess how programmes like Trade Up can work towards modifying their delivery
of sessions in order to enhance the employability of the young, disabled people
involved. To truly understand the difficulties which young, disabled people face when
looking for work requires further study to identify and evaluate key concepts which
contribute to the stigma of ‘unemployability’ surrounding them. This will help
contribute to new suggestions of how organisations like Greater Manchester Youth
Network can approach future programmes similar to Trade Up in order to improve
the employability of the young, disabled people involved.
Background
This piece of research was conducted in association with Greater Manchester Youth
Network, also known as GMYN. GMYN is an organisation which is driven towards
creating inspirational opportunities for young people in Greater Manchester to help
them to realise their full potential. This is emphasised in the vision of the
organisation, which is to ‘help all young people achieve their potential and shape
their futures’. GMYN seek to ‘generate positive experience through delivering a
creative choice of inspirational opportunities that encourage young people to
participate’. This research is focused around one particular programme that GMYN
offer called Trade Up. The Trade Up programme is a Royal Bank of Scotland funded
project aiming to provide young disabled people aged 16-30 in Greater Manchester
with the opportunity to come up with a business idea, and have a go at trying this
idea out on potential customers. Trade up provides its participants with enterprise
training and Joe Cain the programme leader told me that Trade Up seeks to ‘improve

5 | P a g e
confidence, improve team working, and challenge the stereotypes of what disabled
young people can achieve.’
My objectives for this research were to understand the difficulties that young
disabled people face when seeking employment and to investigate how programmes
like Trade Up can improve the employability prospects of the young disabled people
who are involved. These objectives relate to the organisational objectives for the
Trade up programme. This is because, GMYN as an organisation are driven towards
helping young people fulfil their potential and employability is a key factor behind
that. Therefore, programmes like Trade Up are intended to empower the young
disabled people involved, providing them with confidence and experience of a fun,
working environment. Trade Up provides its participants with soft business skills,
which they can translate into future jobs. I was eager to investigate whether or not,
Trade Up was successful in enhancing the employability of young disabled people.
Although this research focuses on GMYN’s Trade Up programme, the employability
of young, disabled people is a nationwide issue. This is emphasised by the fact that
in the UK at age 26, disabled young people are nearly four times as likely to be
unemployed as non-disabled people of the same age (Burchardt, 2005). Therefore,
the work of organisations such as GMYN is vital towards providing young, disabled
people with skills, confidence and experience which will better prepare them for the
working world. It is my belief that it is vitally important to boost the employability of
young, disabled people in order to enhance their social inclusion. This is the reason
why I sought to work with Greater Manchester Youth Network on their Trade Up
programme because it is refreshing to see an organisation who were actively
working towards providing young, disabled people with the opportunity to create and
run their own innovative research idea. The concept of providing the participants with

6 | P a g e
the resources to run their own business venture was really interesting to me and
throughout my research I was lucky enough to experience how the various groups
engaged with the programme. Trade Up is a truly wonderful programme, and I was
keen to explore how it was able to enhance the employability of the young, disabled
people involved.
Key Literature Review
In contemporary society there is still an issue regarding the employability of disabled
people, with disabled people significantly less likely to be in employment that non-
disabled people. The Labour Force Survey found that in 2012, 46.3% of working-age
disabled people were in employment whilst 76.4% of working-age non-disabled
people were in employment (Gov.UK, 2013). This 30.1% point gap represents over 2
million people and highlights the huge struggle that many disabled people face when
seeking employment in the UK. It is particularly difficult for young disabled people to
enter into a working environment. Joseph Rowntree Foundation found that by age
18/19, disabled young people were nearly three times as likely to be unemployed or
'doing something else' (Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2005). This has been
recognised by the coalition government who, in 2013 allocated £350 million for
employment programmes and support for disabled people moving into work
(Department for Work and Pensions, 2013). However, the difficulty that young
disabled people face when entering work remains. This section of the research will
focus on various works and studies which have contributed to the topic of the
employability of young disabled people and how these works have informed my
work.
Education

7 | P a g e
One of the reasons for the gulf between the employment figures for the disabled and
the non-disabled is the fact that disabled people generally don’t perform as well
academically. This is particularly the case for young disabled people who are leaving
education in contemporary society. The Office for Disability Issues and the
Department for Work and Pensions recognise this in their publication ‘Fulfilling
Potential’. They suggest that the reason that young disabled fare particularly poorly
in the labour market is because they have lower educational attainment rates than
their non-disabled peers (Department for Work and Pensions, 2013). This could be
attributed to a number of reasons, such as the learning difficulties associated with
various disabilities. Therefore, it could be argued that the education system in the
UK needs to take into account the needs of young people with disabilities in schools
in order to ensure they are well equipped to leave with the necessary qualifications.
Liz Sayce, who argues that the education system must support all young disabled
people so that they can achieve their potential and make a successful transition into
adult life (Sayce, 2011), supports this. For Sayce (2011), young disabled people
leave school with the same career aspirations as their non-disabled peers however,
many fail to reach their potential due to a lack of careers support. Therefore, for
young disabled people to reach their full potential they need access to high-quality
careers guidance and advice, which will allow them to fulfil their potential and career
aspirations. It is hard to disagree with Sayce’s (2011) notion that the key towards
ensuring that young disabled people are fully prepared for the transition from
education to employment lies with careers guidance. Careers advice and guidance is
a great means of raising the aspirations of young disabled people by challenging the
stereotype of what disabled people can achieve with their careers. This is one of the
reasons why I was so keen to work alongside GMYN on their Trade Up programme.

8 | P a g e
I was eager to examine how programmes like Trade Up can provide young disabled
people with experience and knowledge relevant to their careers and how successful
they were at delivering the programme.
Disability Discrimination
There is also an issue surrounding the discrimination of disabled people in the
working environment. The International Business Times found that one in five
disabled people in the UK feel that they are unsupported and treated differently at
work, whilst almost half felt uneasy about disclosing their disability in job applications
out of fear of discrimination (Silvera, 2014). Wright suggests that there are three
main types of disability discrimination in the workplace. Firstly, ‘direct disability
discrimination’, which suggests that discrimination occurs when there are,
preconceived prejudicial assumptions being made about the person’s disability. The
second given type is ‘disability-related discrimination’ which occurs when disabled
workers are discriminated against for reasons relating to their disability, but not the
disability itself. Finally, the last of Wright’s three given types of disability
discrimination is ‘a failure to make reasonable adjustments’. This occurs when the
employer has failed to make reasonable adjustments to the disabled workers
working environment (Wright, 2011). The English Federation of Disability Sport
provide evidence to support Wright’s notion of disability discrimination and found that
42% of people in general think that employers should make more reasonable
adjustments for staff with disabilities (English Federation of Disability Sport, 2013).
The discrimination of disabled workers is a central issue surrounding the
employability of young disabled people in contemporary society because it can have
major consequences on the confidence of young disabled people who are seeking

9 | P a g e
work. Therefore, one would argue that if more is done to tackle the issue of
discrimination then
European Policy
The idea that many disabled people have difficulty in fulfilling their true potential is
key to my research, I believe that not enough has been done to help young disabled
people to reach their full potential in the UK. This view is also supported by the
‘Equal opportunities for people with disabilities: a European action plan (2004-2010)’
act. This piece of legislation, from the European Union found that young disabled
people are a ‘source of untapped potential for the development of economic growth’
despite the fact that they face great difficulty in finding work. This is based on the fact
that only 42% of disabled people in the EU were in employment in 2001 and 52% of
people with disabilities were economically inactive (Equal opportunities for people
with disabilities, 2011). Therefore, the EU used this policy as a means of accessing
this ‘untapped economic potential’ by carrying out this action plan over 6 years,
which was aimed on improving the employability of young disabled people across
Europe. The first phase of the action plan focused on creating an environment that
promotes the employment of disabled people whilst the second part concentrated on
the inclusion and autonomy of disabled people in the labour market. It could be
argued that legislation such as this is a successful means of improving the
employability of the disabled because according to the Labour Force Survey,
disabled people are now more likely to be employed than they were in 2002 (Gov.
UK, 2013). However, they remain significantly less likely to be employed than there
non-disabled peers.

10 | P a g e
Domestic Policy
At a time of recession in the UK, job opportunities are scarce, particularly for the
disabled. Therefore, I believe that more should be done to support young disabled
people entering the job market in order to make sure that they are fully prepared for
an already difficult transition. Beyer et al (2010) support the idea that UK policy
should look to enhance employment support for people with disabilities. Their
research supports the use of supported employment as a means for people with
disabilities to enter the working world successfully. They found that those with
disabilities who were in supported employment reported a higher quality of life than
those who were in employment enterprise services and day service attendees
(Beyer et al., 2010). They believe that recent UK government policy such as the use
of supported employment has successfully helped the social inclusion of people with
disabilities and has enhanced their life opportunities. However, they also
acknowledge that more has to be done to improve the employability of the disabled
because the employment rates for the disabled remains very low.
Social Exclusion of Disabled People
However, Humber argues that the UK policy towards increasing the employment
rates of disabled people has failed. This is because the national rate of employment
for people with disabilities remains extremely low and has barely changed in the
20 years 1990-2010. For Humber, this has led to the social exclusion of people with
disabilities such as learning difficulties because it restricts them from entering a
process of inclusion in workplace environments (Humber, 2013). This view is shared
by Barnes who contributes the exclusion of the disabled from the work place on the
globalisation of Western notions of impairment and disability. He argues that this has

11 | P a g e
led to ‘the systematic exclusion of people with perceived impairments from the
mainstream of community life in almost all societies’ (Barnes, 2010). Humber’s work
is particularly focused on people with learning disabilities and he argues that
employment for people with learning difficulties is key to their social inclusion
because it contradicts the perceived ‘unemployability’ of people with disabilities.
Rapley, who suggests that employment acts as an indicator of social status and is a
measure of social value (Rapley, 2004), reciprocates the idea that the failure of
policy to improve the employment prospects of the disabled has led to them being
socially excluded. The likes of Humber and Rapley (2004) would argue that the
struggle that young disabled people face when entering the labour market leads
them to be extradited from society because their social value is diminished by their
unemployment. Therefore, I felt it was important to research how programmes like
Trade Up can improve a young disabled person’s employability. It is vitally important
to focus on improving the employability of the young and disabled because if they
have access to work they are more likely to be accepted into ‘normal’’ society and be
seen as more than just a disabled person.
Franklin and Sloper also provide evidence which suggests that young disabled
people find themselves excluded from many social practices. This is based on their
finding that disabled children (children and young people up to 18) are less likely to
be involved with participating in decisions about their own care than non –disabled
children (Franklin & Sloper, 2007). Franklin and Sloper (2007) provide evidence
which suggests that generally children are becoming increasingly involved in
decision making, but growth has been slower in respect of children who are disabled.
It is important for disabled children to be supported to get involved in decision
making regarding their own care because it vital in improving child care and safety

12 | P a g e
services. This is another example of disabled young people not having the same
opportunities within society as their non –disabled peers and supports the notion of
Humber that many disabled people find themselves excluded from basic social
practices. Trade Up allows it’s participants to make decisions regarding their own
business venture. I am eager to research how this support and trust affects the
groups and whether or not increased support into decision making has a positive
effect on the employability of young disabled people. One would argue that if young
disabled people find themselves actively involved in decision making from a young
age then they will be better prepared for the transition into working life because they
will be better equipped to make confident, informed decision in the workplace.
Key Themes
It is clear that there are a number of key themes which are evident throughout all of
the various literatures surrounding the topic of the employability of disabled people. It
is clear that disabled people find it extremely difficult to enter the working
environment and this can be attributed to various reasons. For example, one of the
issues is that many don’t have access to the relevant educational support and
receive very little in the way careers guidance. As is the view of Sayce (2011) and
Beyer et al (2010). Therefore, this reaffirms my stance that not enough is being done
to help young disabled people to enter the job market. Another major issue that
contributes to the difficulty which young disabled people face when searching for
work is disability discrimination. As highlighted by Silvera (2014) in the International
Business Times article, disability discrimination is still a major issue in contemporary
UK society and therefore, more must be done to combat it. Discrimination can have
detrimental effects on the confidence of the young and disabled who are less likely to

13 | P a g e
actively seek work out of fear of discrimination. Although there has been a lot of
policy over recent years intended to enhance the employability of disabled people,
such as the Equal opportunities for people with disabilities act, there has been little
success in increasing the disabled employment rate. This is key to this research
project, I am eager to understand what works best in terms of providing young
disabled people with the skills necessary to enter the job market. The notion of social
exclusion put forward by the likes of Humber (2013) and Rapley (2004) has also
informed my piece of research. There is no question that the employment of young,
disabled people is vital for their social inclusion.
Project Methodology
Research Objectives
The primary objectives of this research project are to: a) understand the difficulties
that many young disabled people face when entering the job market and to b)
investigate how programmes such as Trade Up can enhance the employability
prospects of the young and disabled. These objectives are based around my belief
that there is a stigma of ‘unemployability’ surrounding the young and disabled
(Goffman, 1963) and that this has led to their exclusion from many basic social
practices, such as entering a working environment. For me, not enough support is
available for young disabled people to develop the skills needed to enter the job
market. In a time of recession, it is difficult for anybody to find a job; however, it is
especially difficult for the disabled (Snell, 2011). Therefore, I chose to work alongside
GMYN on their Trade Up project because it was refreshing to see an organisation
who were actively trying to provide young disabled people with basic skills which

14 | P a g e
they can translate into the job market. The objectives of my research are
reciprocated within Greater Manchester Youth Network. Joe Cain, the leader of
Trade Up told me that his personal objectives for the programme was to ‘maybe
challenge the stereotypes of what the disabled young people can achieve’ by getting
them to engage in an enterprise related project.
Access Issues
GMYN were unable to give me access to an existing dataset. However, they were
willing to give me access to the data which they did have. I was granted access to a
pre-entry and post-completion questionnaire filled out by members of the various
Trade Up groups as well as partner evaluation forms which were filled out with the
various organisations that had teamed up with GMYN to run Trade Up. In terms of
gaining access to the data I needed, the main issue that I found was that quite a lot
of relevant data was missing. It has to be said that in terms of data management for
the Trade Up programme, GMYN had a very relaxed structure in place. For example,
I had access to pre-entry questionnaires for some of the Trade Up participants, but
not the post-completion ones. This made it difficult to evaluate the effects that the
programme had on many of the participants because it created gaps in my data set.
Despite my best efforts, I was not able to bridge these gaps in the data due to
various issues such as unreturned forms. However, apart from that GMYN were
generally very good in terms of providing me with easy access to the data that they
did have and were generous enough to allow me access to their office space and a
personal login for their computer system. This allowed me access to valuable data
through the use of the software ‘views’ which contained the background information

15 | P a g e
on all of the Trade Up participants which I would later use when I was running tests
on SPSS to identify various relationships between certain variables.
Ethical Issues
Before I started with this research project, I abided by the university’s ethics protocol
and had a set of ethics forms signed by me, GMYN and my dissertation supervisor.
This was important in establishing the boundaries of my research project and
important in establishing a consensus on what would be acceptable means for me of
conducting my piece of research. The nature of this research also presented me
with the fantastic opportunity to volunteer for GMYN on the Trade Up project,
whenever I got the chance. There are various ethical issues associated with
volunteering with young, disabled people and it was important that I made sure that I
abided by GMYN’s rules regarding volunteering at all. Therefore, I agreed to be DBS
checked by the organization as a precautionary method before undertaking any
volunteering or research. Thomas and Woods wrote that when working with young
people with learning disabilities it is important that your research is just, will positively
contribute to knowledge in the area of study and will not bring any harm to the
subjects (Thomas and Woods. 2003). I share this sentiment and it was of the upmost
importance to me that my research would provide GMYN and any other similar
organisations with results which they could positively use to identify how to further
improve the employability of disabled people. The ethical considerations that I made
put me in the best possible position to be able to conduct a positive and thorough
piece of research which would benefit all parties. However, it must be said that in
terms of ethical issues this piece of research has been relatively straight forward.
The nature of my research was primarily based around secondary data analysis and

16 | P a g e
therefore, I was not involved with any of the ethical issues surrounding the use of
primary data collection methods.
Measurement Issues
In terms of measuring the key concepts of my research, which is of course the
employability of young disabled people; I was particularly interested in how Trade Up
was able to improve the confidence of the young people involved in relation to their
future job prospects. This is based on my belief that employment is a key means to
facilitate the social inclusion of the young and disabled. Not enough is being done to
facilitate young disabled people reaching their full potential and therefore, this has
resulted in many young disabled people not being confident about what they are able
to achieve. Humber suggests that the difficulties that disabled people face when
entering the labour market contributes to their exclusion from many social practices
(Humber, 2013). A view also shared by Rapley who argues that employment is an
indicator of social value (Rapley, 2004). This means that, it is vitally important for
young disabled to people to find work because in order to enhance their life
prospects as well as work prospects. Therefore, for me it is vital for programmes like
Trade Up to have a positive impact on the confidence of young disabled people. This
is because if they feel confident enough to actively find work, then they are more
likely to find work and therefore, are more likely to be more generally accepted within
society.
I was particularly interested in the variables relating to confidence within the data set.
The way in which I measured the success of the Trade Up programme in enhancing
the confidence of the participants was simple. I compared the answers from the pre-
entry and post-completion questionnaire to the questions: ‘1. I am confident of

17 | P a g e
getting a job in the future?’ and ‘4.I am a confident person.’ This allowed for me to
develop an analysis of whether or not the Trade Up programme was successful in its
goals of enhancing the confidence of young disabled people in relation to their job
prospects.
Other variables were also important in my measurements of the success of the
Trade Up programme in enhancing the employability of the young disabled people
who participated in it. For example, I was also interested in how the programme had
improved their knowledge of various business based skills such as handling money,
customer service experience and business knowledge. These are also important
variables to consider because it highlights the effectiveness of the Trade Up
programme to supply its participants with the soft business skills which it intends to
do. This is important because it enhances the participants chances of entering the
labour market because they are better equipped and skilled to find work. Sayce who
suggests that young disabled people need better support in schools in order to
provide them with the acumen required to find work (Sayce, 2011) supports this.
Therefore, it is important for the likes of GMYN to provide these young people with
the skills, which the education system has failed to provide them with.
I measured the success of these variables in the same way as I did the confidence
variable, by comparing the answers on the pre-entry and post-completion
questionnaires. However, this time I was looking at the variables relating to the
questions 5-8 on the participant questionnaire which all relate to business skills and
knowledge.
Primary Data Collection

18 | P a g e
The majority of my research was based around secondary data analysis and
therefore, I conducted very little primary research. I did not feel as though primary
data collection would be necessary seeing as it would have consisted of me
producing a questionnaire for the various Trade Up group members to complete
which would have been very similar to the one that GMYN already used on the
project. However, I did conduct a semi-structured interview with the Trade Up leader,
Joe Cain as a means of getting to grips with his personal objectives for the project. I
felt it was important to understand the objectives for Trade Up from the perspective
of the organisation and more specifically, the man who runs it. This was really
important in helping me to understand the concept of Trade Up and analyse my
results in line with the organisational objectives for the project. One of the
advantages of using semi-structured interviews as opposed to more structured ones
is that it allows the interviewer to expand on certain areas and add certain questions
as they see fit (Mitchell and Jolley, 2009).
Secondary Data Analysis
As mentioned earlier, this research is predominately based around secondary data
analysis. The data which has been used has been collected by Greater Manchester
Youth Network throughout the duration of their Trade Up project. The data had been
collected through the use of various questionnaires. One of which was filled out by
the participants of the Trade Up project and the other, a partner evaluation form was
completed by the partners who were running a Trade Up group alongside GMYN.
The one which was filled out by the members of the groups asked the same
questions at the beginning of the course and at the end, asking basic questions
about general topics such as confidence and knowledge of the working environment.

19 | P a g e
Whereas, the partner evaluation form was more complex and focused more on the
delivery of the Trade Up project and the effectiveness of the programme based on
how the groups engaged with it. I was also given access to GMYN’s database on the
software ‘views’ which granted me access to the demographic information of the
sample.
The main advantage of using these questionnaires to formulate my dataset was the
fact that it provided me with the data from the pre-entry questionnaire and the post-
completion questionnaire. As a result, I was able to compare the effectiveness of the
programme by comparing the respondents’ answers on the two questionnaires to
see whether the respondents felt that their confidence and business acumen had
improved because of the programme. I was able to look at different variables and
assess whether or not the programme had been successful in achieving these aims.
This is an example of how analysis of secondary data sets can allow the researcher
to address a great variety of questions because the use of programmes like SPSS
allows for the researcher to explore other variables at they see fit (Vartanian, 2010).
Being able to do this was vitally important towards my research objective of
understanding how programmes like Trade Up can enhance the employability skills
of young disabled people because I was able to examine the areas in which Trade
Up improved the participants skills and where it maybe fell short.
Using secondary data analysis also allowed me to obtain a representative sample.
This is because the data, which GMYN had gathered, was focused solely around the
Trade Up project and young disabled people and employment. This was another
advantage of using this data because it provided me with data, which was
representative of the opinions of all of the parties involved with the programme. The
two questionnaires gave me an insight into the perspectives of the members and the

20 | P a g e
partners and allowed me to compare and contrast these perspectives. This allowed
me to focus on the effectiveness of the Trade Up programme based on whether or
not the programme met the expectations of everyone involved.
However, there were issues with the data. The main problem I had was the
inconsistency of the data. There was a lot of data missing from the programme. This
hindered my ability to compare the effectiveness of the programme because I was
unable to make vital comparisons. For some groups, I had no data at all and
therefore, I was missing vital information, which would have been brilliant in terms of
running the tests on SPSS. This made it difficult to run tests such as Chi and
Cramer’s V and limited the validity of my results. The reason for this is that it
restricted me in terms of what tests I could run on the data, I was only able to
conduct basic tests. Also, out of the 8 Trade Up groups, GMYN only received 3
partner evaluation forms and therefore, I was also limited in the access which I had
to the feedback from the partners. I tried relentlessly to gain access to the missing
data and GMYN were very helpful in trying to help me with that but it was difficult
because many of the Trade Up programmes had finished and therefore, there was
no way of getting a lot of the missing forms.
Data Analysis
The analysis of the data was done with the use of the computer software SPSS. The
data analysis stage began with me inputting the ‘raw’ data from the various
questionnaires onto a dataset on SPSS. The data from the questionnaires had to be
translated onto SPSS and therefore, I had to create two of my own data sets, one for
the before and after questionnaires filled out by the participants and one for the
partner evaluation forms. This was relatively straightforward as each variable

21 | P a g e
corresponded to a question on the forms. For the participant questionnaire data set
we distinguished between the before and after questionnaires by adding an x to the
variable name. For example, for the before questionnaire we used the variable
‘ConJobFut’ to represent the question ‘I am confident of getting a job in the future?’;
for the after one we used the variable name ‘ConJobFutx’. This made it easy to
compare the before and after data from the questionnaires. I also had to anonymise
the sample by replacing their names with a number corresponding to their answers.
This had to be done on sight at the GMYN offices because I was unable to leave the
GMYN premises with any of the personal information from the Trade Up participants.
I then ran basic frequency tables to get to know the sample based on their
demographic information such as their age, gender and ethnicity. I then went on to
run frequency tables on the variables which I felt were the most important to
measuring the success of the Trade Up project such as; participant confidence and
the variables relating to business experience from the before questionnaires. This
gave me an idea of how the sample felt with regard to their employability prospects
before Trade Up and provided me with something to compare the results from the
after questionnaires to see whether Trade Up had had a positive impact on the
participants. These comparisons between the pre-entry and post-completion
questionnaires were vital for my research. I also ran crosstabs of my key variables
along with the gender variable and I ran crosstabs of the key variables from both
questionnaires. However, I was unable to conduct more advanced tests such as
multivariate analysis and Chi and Cramer’s V on the data as a result of the nature of
my data. Therefore, I also ran some tests on the partner evaluation to see how
successful Trade Up was from the perspective of their partner organisations.

22 | P a g e
Key Findings
Univariate Analysis – Key Demographics
The data sample, which I used for my research, consists of 36 participants from
Greater Manchester Youth Network’s Trade Up programme. All 36 of the participants
had some form of disability and were asked to complete a pre-entry and post-
completion questionnaire as part of the programme. The results from these
respective questionnaires make up my data set. However, only 18 of the 36
respondents successfully completed both of the questionnaires. The following tables
and graphs, provide a little more information on the sample.
Gender
Gender
Frequen
cy
Percen
t
Valid
Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Male 25 69.4 69.4 69.4
Femal
e
11 30.6 30.6 100.0
Total 36 100.0 100.0
The majority (69.4%, 25 of 36) respondents were male; there were fewer females,
accounting for the remaining 30.6% of the sample.

23 | P a g e
Ethnicity
Frequenc
y
Percent Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid
99.0 7 19.4 19.4 19.4
Asian 2 5.6 5.6 25.0
Black Br 1 2.8 2.8 27.8
Mixed 1 2.8 2.8 30.6
WB 25 69.4 69.4 100.0
Total 36 100.0 100.0
In terms of ethnicity, 69.4% of the sample were White British (shown as ‘WB’ on the
table) and this represents 25 of the 36 respondents. There was also respondents
from Asian, Black British and Mixed ethnic backgrounds represented in the sample.
Age
Trade Up is designed for young, disabled people from Manchester, aged 16-30. This
is made evident by the chart above with only one respondent, over the target age
group. 63.9% of the sample were between the ages of 16-30, half of which were

24 | P a g e
aged 23 or under. Note, 12 respondents (33.3% of the sample) did not state their
age on the questionnaire, however, it is safe to assume that they were between the
ages of 16-30. I did not recode the age variable as the number of participants was
low.
Univariate Analysis – Pre- entry Questionnaire
After examining the key demographics of my data set, the next step in the research
process was to investigate the key variables from the pre-entry questionnaires. The
reason for this is that it allows me to understand how the Trade Up participants felt
with regard to their employability prospects before the programme and this allows for
comparison between the answers on the post-completion questionnaire. I was
particularly interested in the variables relating to the confidence and the business
knowledge and experience of the sample. This is because; these are both attributes
that would enhance the employability of the young disabled people involved.
Confidence
‘I am confident of getting a job in the future?’
I am confident of getting a job in the future?
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Valid
Yes 27 75.0 79.4 79.4
No 2 5.6 5.9 85.3
sometimes 5 13.9 14.7 100.0
Total 34 94.4 100.0
Missing 99.00 2 5.6
Total 36 100.0

25 | P a g e
The vast majority of Trade Up participants appear to enter the programme with
confidence of getting a job in the future; 27 of the 34 people (79.4%) who completed
the pre-entry questionnaire stated that they were confident of finding a job in the
future. This suggests that young disabled people in contemporary society remain
upbeat about their prospects despite the fact that it is extremely difficult for them to
find work. This supports Sayce’s (2011) notion that young disabled people leave
school with the same confidence towards their aspirations and career goals as non-
disabled young people.
‘I am a confident person.’
The confidence of the sample before the programme is also highlighted with their
response to the statement ‘I am a confident person.’ The majority of the sample
(58.8%) stated that ‘yes’ they were confident and only 2 respondents answered ‘no’.
Although, 35.3% of the sample responded that they were only confident ‘sometimes’
and therefore, it appears that the sample were not as confident generally as they
were in terms of finding work in the future.

26 | P a g e
BusinessKnowledge and Experience
‘I have knowledge of business and enterprise?’
I have knowledge of business and enterprise?
Percent
Valid
A lot 8 22.2 23.5 23.5
A little 19 52.8 55.9 79.4
No knowledge or experience 7 19.4 20.6 100.0
Total 34 94.4 100.0
Missing 99.00 2 5.6
Total 36 100.0
It appears that the sample were not very knowledgeable about business and
enterprise before Trade Up; 55.9% indicated that they had ‘little’ knowledge of
business and enterprise, this accounts for 19 of the 36 respondents. Seven
participants indicated that they had ‘no knowledge or experience’.
‘I have customer service experience?’
However, the sample did seem to have experience in customer service: 16 of the 34
respondents (47.1%) said that they had ‘a lot’ of customer service experience and 10
(29.5) said that they had ‘a little’ experience.
Therefore, 76.5% of the sample had some sort of
customer service experience.

27 | P a g e
Crosstabs- Pre-Entry Questionnaire
After the basic univariate analysis was completed, I then began to run crosstabs on
my key variables from the pre-entry questionnaire. I ran my key variables along with
the gender variable to examine the relationship between gender and the attitude of
the respondents towards their employability prospects pre-Trade Up.
Confidence
‘I am confident of getting a job in the future?’ / Gender
I am confident of getting a job in the future? * Gender Crosstabulation
Gender Total
Male Female
I am confidentof getting a job
in the future?
yes
Count 18 9 27
% within Gender 78.3% 81.8% 79.4%
no
Count 1 1 2
% within Gender 4.3% 9.1% 5.9%
sometimes
Count 4 1 5
% within Gender 17.4% 9.1% 14.7%
Total
Count 23 11 34
% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
78.3% of males were confident of getting a job in the future, females were slightly
more confident with 81.8% feeling confident of getting a job in the future.

28 | P a g e
‘I am a confident person.’ / Gender
I am a confident person? * Gender Crosstabulation
Gender Total
Male Female
I am a confidentperson?
yes
Count 14 6 20
% within Gender 60.9% 54.5% 58.8%
no
Count 1 1 2
sometimes
Count 8 4 12
% within Gender 34.8% 36.4% 35.3%
Total
Count 23 11 34
% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
14 of the 23 (60.9%) male respondents indicated that they were confident, whereas
6 of the 11 (54.4%) ‘females said that they were confident. This slightly contradicts
the notion of Schlund-Vials and Gill (2014) who suggest that the negative
perceptions of disability directly affect the confidence of young, disabled people.
‘I have knowledge of business and enterprise?’ / Gender
Males were significantly more knowledgeable about business and enterprise than
the females. 72.7% of females indicated that they had ‘a little’ business knowledge,
compared to 47.8% of males who said the same.

29 | P a g e
I have knowledge of business and enterprise? * Gender Crosstabulation
Gender Total
Male Female
I have knowledge of
business and enterprise?
A lot
Count 7 1 8
% within Gender 30.4% 9.1% 23.5%
A little
Count 11 8 19
% within Gender 47.8% 72.7% 55.9%
No knowledge or
experience
Count 5 2 7
% within Gender 21.7% 18.2% 20.6%
Total
Count 23 11 34
% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
‘I have customer service experience?’ / Gender
I have customer service experience * Gender Crosstabulation
Gender Total
Male Female
I have customer service
experience
a lot
Count 11 5 16
% within Gender 47.8% 45.5% 47.1%
a little
Count 6 4 10
% within Gender 26.1% 36.4% 29.4%
no knowledge or
experience
Count 6 2 8
% within Gender 26.1% 18.2% 23.5%
Total
Count 23 11 34
% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Nearly half of the male respondents (47.8%) had ‘a lot’ of customer service
experience. 45.5% of female respondents also indicated that they had ‘a little’
customer service experience.

30 | P a g e
Univariate Analysis – Post- Completion Questionnaire
The next step in the research process was to run tests on the same variables from
the post-completion questionnaires. This allowed me to develop an understanding of
the impact that Trade Up had on the confidence and business knowledge and
experience of its participants. Please note that I had access to only 20 completed
post-completion questionnaires and therefore, the missing value ’99.0’ will always
show 16 on this section of frequency tables.
Confidence
‘I am confident of getting a job in the future?’
Percent
Valid
Yes 15 41.7 75.0 75.0
No 1 2.8 5.0 80.0
sometimes 4 11.1 20.0 100.0
Total 20 55.6 100.0
Missing 99.00 16 44.4
Total 36 100.0
The sample seemed to remain confident about their future job prospects. 75% (15 of
20) of the sample stated that ‘yes´ they were confident of getting a job.

31 | P a g e
‘I am a confident person.’
Similarly, the confidence of the sample in general remained high, 60% (12 of 20) of
those who answered stated that they were confident people and no respondents
indicated that they were not confident.
The knowledge of business and enterprise did not improve; 55% (11 of 20) of the
sample stated that they had ‘’little’ knowledge of business and enterprise whilst 30%
had ‘a lot’ (6 of 20).

32 | P a g e
Percent
Valid
A lot 6 16.7 30.0 30.0
A little 11 30.6 55.0 85.0
Total 20 55.6 100.0
Missing 99.00 16 44.4
Total 36 100.0
‘I have customer serviceexperience?’
11 of the 20 (55%) respondents of the post-completion questionnaires indicated that
they had ’a lot’ of customer service experience. Whilst six indicated that they had ‘a
little’.

33 | P a g e
Crosstabs – Post – Completion Questionnaire
After investigating how gender affected the answers on the pre-entry questionnaires,
I then ran the same tests on the key variables from the post-completion
questionnaires. The reason was this to examine the impact that Trade Up had on the
answers of the male and female participants. Again, it is worth noting that only 20
people returned the post-completion questionnaires and therefore, the statistical
significance isn’t as strong as it would have been should I have had access to more.
Confidence
‘I am confident of getting a job in the future?’ / Gender
Gender Total
Male Female
I am confidentof getting a
job in the future?
yes
Count 13 2 15
% within Gender 76.5% 66.7% 75.0%
no
Count 1 0 1
sometimes
Count 3 1 4
% within Gender 17.6% 33.3% 20.0%
Total
Count 17 3 20
% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
The confidence that both the male and female respondents had in getting a job in the
future remained strong after the Trade Up programme. 76.5% of males who
answered the post-completion questionnaire stated that they were confident of
getting a job whilst 66.7% of females indicated the same.

34 | P a g e
‘I am a confident person.’ / Gender
Gender Total
Male Female
yes
Count 10 2 12
% within Gender 58.8% 66.7% 60.0%
sometimes
Count 7 1 8
% within Gender 41.2% 33.3% 40.0%
Total
Count 17 3 20
% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
On the post-completion questionnaires, none of the 20 respondents indicated that
they were not a confident person. The percentage of confident males went down
from 60.9% on the pre-entry questionnaires to 58.8% on the post-completion
questionnaires. Whereas girls appeared to gain confidence, with 66.7% indicating
that they were confident after Trade Up compared to 54.5% on the pre-entry
questionnaires.
‘I have knowledge of business and enterprise?’ / Gender
35.3% of males indicated that they had a ‘a lot’ of business knowledge, compared to
30.4% on the pre-entry questionnaire. Knowledge of business amongst the female
members of the sample remained low, with 100% of the three female respondents
indicating they had ‘a little’ business knowledge. On the pre-entry questionnaire,
72.7% of females indicated the same and therefore, it would appear that Trade Up
did not improve their business knowledge.

35 | P a g e
Gender Total
Male Female
I have knowledge of
A lot
Count 6 0 6
% within Gender 35.3% 0.0% 30.0%
A little
Count 8 3 11
% within Gender 47.1% 100.0% 55.0%
No knowledge or
experience
Count 3 0 3
% within Gender 17.6% 0.0% 15.0%
Total
Count 17 3 20
% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
‘I have customer service experience?’ / Gender
Gender Total
Male Female
experience
a lot
Count 10 1 11
% within Gender 58.8% 33.3% 55.0%
a little
Count 5 1 6
% within Gender 29.4% 33.3% 30.0%
no knowledge or
experience
Count 2 1 3
% within Gender 11.8% 33.3% 15.0%
Total
Count 17 3 20
% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

36 | P a g e
The customer service experience of males appeared to improve because of Trade
Up. 58.8% of males indicated that they had ‘a lot’ of customer service experience on
the post completion questionnaire. Female customer service experience appeared to
decrease from 45.5% on the pre-entry questionnaire to 33.3% on the post-
completion questionnaire.
Crosstabs – Key Variables
The final part of the research process was to run crosstabs of the key variable from
both the pre-entry and post-completion questionnaires. These were the most
important statistical tests because they allowed me to examine the impact that Trade
Up had on the 18 participants who answered both questionnaires. Therefore, I was
able to measure whether or not Trade Up had been successful in its objectives of
providing the young, disabled people involved with business skills, knowledge and
experience, which will be invaluable for their future employability prospects.

37 | P a g e
‘I am confident of getting a job in the future.’
I am confident of getting a job in the future? * I am confident of getting a job in the future? Crosstabulation
I am confident of getting a job in the
future? (pre-entry)
Total
yes no sometime
s
job in the future? ( post-
completion)
Yes
Count 11 0 3 14
Expected Count 10.1 .8 3.1 14.0
% within I am confidentof
getting a job in the future?
84.6% 0.0% 75.0% 77.8%
no
Count 0 1 0 1
Expected Count .7 .1 .2 1.0
0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 5.6%
sometimes
Count 2 0 1 3
Expected Count 2.2 .2 .7 3.0
15.4% 0.0% 25.0% 16.7%
Total
Count 13 1 4 18
Expected Count 13.0 1.0 4.0 18.0
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0
%
The table above shows that those who stated that they were confident of getting a
job in the future in the pre-entry questionnaire are even more likely to be confident
after Trade Up. 84.6% of the respondents who stated that they were confident of
finding work on the pre-entry questionnaire indicated that they felt the same on the

38 | P a g e
post-completion questionnaire. This represents 11 of the 18 respondents who
answered both questionnaires were confident of finding work and this is higher than
the expected count of 10.1. This suggests that Trade Up reinforces the belief in the
members of the sample who were confident in finding work at the beginning. This is
important because self-confidence is vital in the process of young, disabled people
identifying their strengths (Lamichhane, 2015) and this is a vital process in their
quest of finding a worthwhile career.
However, it would also appear that those who were not confident of getting a job in
the future were even less confident of doing so after Trade Up. Although, only one
person indicated that they were not confident of finding work on both questionnaires,
this is significantly more than the expected count of .1. Therefore, although Trade Up
maintains the confidence of those who were already confident of finding work, it does
not have a positive impact on the confidence of those who were not as confident.

39 | P a g e
‘I am a confident person.
I am a confident person? * I am a confident person? Crosstabulation
I am a confident person?
(pre-entry)
Total
yes sometimes
(post-completion)
yes
Count 8 2 10
Expected Count 5.6 4.4 10.0
% within I am a confident
person?
80.0% 25.0% 55.6%
sometimes
Count 2 6 8
person?
20.0% 75.0% 44.4%
Total
Count 10 8 18
person?
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Similar findings arose from the ‘I am a confident person’ variable. I found that 80% of
those who were confident on the pre-entry questionnaire were also confident on the
post-completion. Similarly, those who indicated that they were sometimes confident,
were more likely to feel the same at post-completion as they did at pre-entry. This is
based on the fact that 6 of the people who were ‘sometimes’ confident at pre-entry
were the same at post-completion. This is significantly more than the expected count
of 3.6%.

40 | P a g e
I have knowledge of business and enterprise? * I have knowledge of business and enterprise? Crosstabulation
I have knowledge ofbusiness and enterprise?
(pre-entry)
A lot A little No knowledge
or experience
I have knowledge of
(post-completion)
A lot
Count 4 1 0
Expected Count 1.7 3.1 .3
A little
Count 1 9 0
No knowledge or
experience
Count 1 1 1
Total
Count 6 11 1
Again, it appears that Trade Up had no impact in terms of improving the business
knowledge of the participants. Those who had ‘a lot’ of knowledge at pre-entry
generally remained confident. Of the six respondents who had a lot of business
knowledge at pre-entry, 4 of them were still confident that they had a lot of business
knowledge on the post-completion questionnaire. Those who had ‘a little’ business
knowledge before Trade Up were also likely to have a little knowledge at the end of
the programme. Therefore, this suggests that Trade Up is effective in maintaining the
respondents’ business knowledge however; it is less successful at improving their
business knowledge, if they were not knowledgeable in the first place.

41 | P a g e
‘I have customer service experience?’
Trade Up seemed to have adverse effects on customer service levels. Only 50% of
the respondents, who stated that they had ‘a lot’ of customer service experience at
I have customer service experience * I have customer service experience Crosstabulation
I have customer service experience Total
a lot a little no knowledge
or experience
experience
a lot
Count 5 2 2 9
% within I have
customer service
experience
50.0% 40.0% 66.7% 50.0
%
a little
Count 3 3 0 6
% within I have
customer service
experience
30.0% 60.0% 0.0% 33.3
%
no knowledge or
experience
Count 2 0 1 3
% within I have
customer service
experience
20.0% 0.0% 33.3% 16.7
%
Total
Count 10 5 3 18
% within I have
customer service
experience
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0
%

42 | P a g e
the beginning of the programme, stated the same at the end of the programme. 30%
of those who had ‘ a lot’ of experience at the beginning stated they now felt as
though they had ‘a little’ customer service experience, whilst the remaining 20%
indicated that they had no customer service knowledge or experience. Also, 60% of
those who had ‘a little’ customer service experience indicated that their experience
had not improved as a result of the course. Therefore, it could be argued that Trade
Up would have been more successful had it focused around the delivery of customer
service based skills.
Partner Evaluation Forms
Trade Up did however; appear to be more successful from the view of the partner
organisations involved. The three partner organisations who returned their evaluation
forms all stated that they would want to work with GMYN again on programmes
similar to Trade Up. All three partners indicated that they thought that the
participants had improved in confidence and business knowledge. However, two of
the three partners conceded that the delivery of Trade Up could have been
improved.
End Summary
In summary, the key findings suggest that Trade Up has little impact on the
confidence, business knowledge and experience of the young disabled people
involved. There was no major shift either way in the key variables for my research.
However, this does not mean that the programme is unsuccessful in achieving its
aims of providing young people with ‘soft’ business skills in an attempt to increase
their employability. It appears that Trade Up reinforces pre-existing confidence and

43 | P a g e
business knowledge. Therefore, the participants who entered the programme with
pre-existing confidence of finding work and business knowledge finished the
programme with similar levels of confidence. Trade Up did not diminish this
confidence. This has to be considered a genuinely positive feature of the Trade Up
programme because self-confidence is vital for young, disabled people and this will
only boost their employability prospects. The likes of Sayce (2011), Lammichane
(2015) and Humber (2013) all emphasise how important it is for young disabled
people to feel empowered and confident and Trade Up truly facilitates this.
Therefore, Trade Up and GMYN should be truly proud of the impact that they have
had on the confidence of many of the Trade Up participants. It is for this reason that
GMYN and Trade Up leader Joe Cain received such positive feedback from the
partner organisations involved.
However, where Trade Up appears to fall short is in improving the employability
prospects of those who enter the programme with little self-confidence, business
knowledge and experience. There was significant evidence to suggest that Trade Up
had little impact on improving the attitudes of the young disabled people involved
with regard to their employability prospects. My tests on the various variables
relating to self-confidence, business knowledge and experience suggest that the
views of those who enter the programme, with little self-confidence and without any
business knowledge, leave the programme feeling similarly about their business
prospects. Therefore, it appears that in future programmes, GMYN would have
better success at improving the employability of young, disabled people if they focus
more on providing the participants with work experience and business knowledge.
It is important to note when considering these results that the sample is very small
and therefore, the results should be treated with caution. Only 18 respondents

44 | P a g e
answered both questionnaires and therefore, it has to be considered that the results
might have been very different had I had access to more completed questionnaires,
the results from this particular sample might not accurately reflect the views of the
rest of the Trade Up participants. It is imperative that GMYN do more to collect data
that is truly representative of their participants’ experiences.
Earlier in this research project, I identified my primary objectives to be to: a)
understand the difficulties that many young disabled people face when entering the
job market and to b) investigate how programmes such as Trade Up can enhance
the employability prospects of the young and disabled. My reading around the
subject has certainly provided me with an in depth knowledge and understanding of
the many difficulties that many young disabled people face when looking for work. It
is clear that young, disabled face an uphill struggle when looking to pursue their ideal
careers. In relation to my second objective, I have found that programmes like Trade
Up can help to enhance the employability prospects of young, disabled people to
some extent. This is because Trade Up improved and reinforced the self-confidence
and business knowledge and experience of those who entered the programme with
a pre-existing sense of confidence about their employability prospects. However,
Trade Up was unsuccessful in improving the attitudes of those who entered the
programme with little confidence and knowledge. Therefore, it appears that the
impact that Trade Up has on its participants is dependent on the pre-existing
attitudes of them. The concept of Trade Up is truly wonderful, empowering young
disabled people by helping them to set up a business venture is vitally important for
their career development and social inclusion. However, it appears that the impact
that the programme has in terms of improving the participants’ confidence,
knowledge and experience is limited.

45 | P a g e
Bibliography
Barnes, C. (2010) Disability in a Majority World Context: A materialist account in:
S.Fukushima, D.Goodley, A.Matsui, O.Nagase, A.Sheldon and Y.Sawada (eds)
Proceedings of the forum 'Disability and Economy: Creating a Society for All' hosted
by Research on Economy and Disability (READ), the University of Tokyo (Todai) in
association with Manchester Metropolitan University. Disability Press
Beyer, S., Brown, T., Akandi, R., & Rapley, R. (2010) ‘A Comparison of Quality of
Life Outcomes for People with Intellectual Disabilities in Supported Employment, Day
Services and Employment Enterprises’, Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual
Disabilities, 23, 290–295
Burchardt, T (2005). and employment of disabled young people. London: The Policy
Press. xii.
Department for Work and Pensions. (2013). Fulfilling Potential: Making it
Happen. Available: www.odi.gov.uk/fulfilling-potential. Last accessed 15/01/2015.
English Federation of Disability Sport. (2013). Disability Statistics - Facts and
Figures. Available: http://www.efds.co.uk/resources/facts_and_statistics. Last
accessed 6/3/2015.
Equal opportunities for people with disabilities (2011): a European action plan (2004-
2010) Europa summaries of European legislation.
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/employment_and_social_policy/disability_an
d_old_age/c11414_en.htm

46 | P a g e
Franklin, A., & Sloper, P. (2007) Participation of Disabled Children and Young
People in Decision-Making Relating to Social Care, York: Social Policy Research
Unit, University of York. http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/spru/pubs/pdf/decision.pdf.
Accessed 16/01/15.
Goffman, E (2009). Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. London:
Simon and Schuhster. 131.
Gov.Uk. (2013). Disability Facts and Figures. Available:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/disability-facts-and-figures/disability-
facts-and-figures#employment. Last accessed 15/01/2015.
Humber, L.A. (2013) ‘Social inclusion through employment: the marketisation of
employment support for people with learning disabilities in the United Kingdom’,
Disability& Society, 29, 2, 275-289.
Joseph Rowntree Foundation. (2005). THE EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT OF
DISABLED YOUNG PEOPLE. Available:
http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/education-and-employment-disabled-young-people.
Last accessed 18/01/2015.
Lamichhane, K (2015). Disability, Education and Employment. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. 38.
Mitchell, M & Jolley, J (2009). Research Design Explained. Washington: Cengage
Learning. 277 .
Rapley, M. 2004. The Social Construction of Intellectual Disability. Cambridge: CUP.

47 | P a g e
Sayce, L (2011). Getting In, Staying In and Getting On: Disability Employment
Support Fit for the Future. London: The Stationery Office . 130
Schlund-Vials, C & Gill, M (2014). Disability, Human Rights and the Limits of
Humanitarianism. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing. 91.
Silvera, I. (2014). UK Disabled Employees Still Face Discrimination in the
Workplace, Report Finds. Available: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/uk-disabled-
employees-still-face-discrimination-workplace-report-finds-1472816. Last accessed
6/3/2015.
Snell, J. (2011). Employment prospects for young people with learning disabilities.
Available: http://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-
network/2011/apr/13/employment-learning-disabilities. Last accessed 20/4/2015.
Thomas, D & Woods, H (2003). Working with People with Learning Disabilities:
Theory and Practice.. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. 253.

48 | P a g e
Appendix 1 – Ethics Forms

51 | P a g e
Appendix 2 – Questionnaires

55 | P a g e
Appendix 3 – ‘raw’ SPSS Data
Univariate Analysis – Key Demographics
Group name
Percent
Valid
MenCap 8 22.2 22.2 22.2
AFC Master's 10 27.8 27.8 50.0
MIddleton College 12 33.3 33.3 83.3
Factory Youth 6 16.7 16.7 100.0
Total 36 100.0 100.0
Gender
Percent
Valid
Male 25 69.4 69.4 69.4
Female 11 30.6 30.6 100.0
Total 36 100.0 100.0

56 | P a g e
Ethnicity
Percent
Valid
99.0 7 19.4 19.4 19.4
Asian 2 5.6 5.6 25.0
Black Br 1 2.8 2.8 27.8
Mixed 1 2.8 2.8 30.6
WB 25 69.4 69.4 100.0
Total 36 100.0 100.0

57 | P a g e
Univariate Analysis – Pre- entry questionnaires
Percent
Valid
yes 27 75.0 79.4 79.4
no 2 5.6 5.9 85.3
sometimes 5 13.9 14.7 100.0
Total 34 94.4 100.0
Missing 99.00 2 5.6
Total 36 100.0

58 | P a g e
Percent
Valid
yes 20 55.6 58.8 58.8
no 2 5.6 5.9 64.7
sometimes 12 33.3 35.3 100.0
Total 34 94.4 100.0
Missing 99.00 2 5.6
Total 36 100.0
Percent
Valid
A lot 8 22.2 23.5 23.5
A little 19 52.8 55.9 79.4
Total 34 94.4 100.0
Missing 99.00 2 5.6
Total 36 100.0

59 | P a g e
Univariate Analysis – Post Completion
Percent
Valid
yes 15 41.7 75.0 75.0
no 1 2.8 5.0 80.0
sometimes 4 11.1 20.0 100.0
Total 20 55.6 100.0
Missing 99.00 16 44.4
Total 36 100.0

60 | P a g e
Percent
Valid
A lot 6 16.7 30.0 30.0
A little 11 30.6 55.0 85.0
Total 20 55.6 100.0
Missing 99.00 16 44.4
Total 36 100.0
Crosstabs – Pre-Entry Questionnaire

61 | P a g e
Gender Total
Male Female
job in the future?
yes
Count 18 9 27
% within Gender 78.3% 81.8% 79.4%
no
Count 1 1 2
sometimes
Count 4 1 5
% within Gender 17.4% 9.1% 14.7%
Total
Count 23 11 34
% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Gender Total
Male Female
yes
Count 14 6 20
% within Gender 60.9% 54.5% 58.8%
no
Count 1 1 2
sometimes
Count 8 4 12
% within Gender 34.8% 36.4% 35.3%
Total
Count 23 11 34
% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

62 | P a g e
Gender Total
Male Female
I have knowledge of
A lot
Count 7 1 8
% within Gender 30.4% 9.1% 23.5%
A little
Count 11 8 19
% within Gender 47.8% 72.7% 55.9%
No knowledge or
experience
Count 5 2 7
% within Gender 21.7% 18.2% 20.6%
Total
Count 23 11 34
% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Gender Total
Male Female
experience
a lot
Count 11 5 16
% within Gender 47.8% 45.5% 47.1%
a little
Count 6 4 10
% within Gender 26.1% 36.4% 29.4%
no knowledge or
experience
Count 6 2 8
% within Gender 26.1% 18.2% 23.5%
Total
Count 23 11 34
% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

63 | P a g e
Crosstabs – Post- Completion Questionnaire
Gender Total
Male Female
job in the future?
yes
Count 13 2 15
% within Gender 76.5% 66.7% 75.0%
no
Count 1 0 1
sometimes
Count 3 1 4
% within Gender 17.6% 33.3% 20.0%
Total
Count 17 3 20
% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Gender Total
Male Female
yes
Count 10 2 12
% within Gender 58.8% 66.7% 60.0%
sometimes
Count 7 1 8
% within Gender 41.2% 33.3% 40.0%
Total
Count 17 3 20
% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

64 | P a g e
Gender Total
Male Female
I have knowledge of
A lot
Count 6 0 6
% within Gender 35.3% 0.0% 30.0%
A little
Count 8 3 11
% within Gender 47.1% 100.0% 55.0%
No knowledge or experience
Count 3 0 3
% within Gender 17.6% 0.0% 15.0%
Total
Count 17 3 20
% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Gender Total
Male Female
experience
a lot
Count 10 1 11
% within Gender 58.8% 33.3% 55.0%
a little
Count 5 1 6
% within Gender 29.4% 33.3% 30.0%
no knowledge or experience
Count 2 1 3
% within Gender 11.8% 33.3% 15.0%
Total
Count 17 3 20
% within Gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

65 | P a g e
Crosstabs – Key Variables
I am confident of getting a job in the future? * I am confident of getting a job in the future? Crosstabulation
I am confident of getting a job in the
future?
Total
yes no sometime
s
job in the future?
yes
Count 11 0 3 14
Expected Count 10.1 .8 3.1 14.0
84.6% 0.0% 75.0% 77.8%
no
Count 0 1 0 1
Expected Count .7 .1 .2 1.0
0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 5.6%
sometimes
Count 2 0 1 3
15.4% 0.0% 25.0% 16.7%
Total
Count 13 1 4 18
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0
%

66 | P a g e
I am a confident person? * I am a confident person? Crosstabulation
I am a confident person? Total
yes sometimes
yes
Count 8 2 10
person?
80.0% 25.0% 55.6%
sometimes
Count 2 6 8
person?
20.0% 75.0% 44.4%
Total
Count 10 8 18
person?
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
I have knowledge of business and enterprise? * I have knowledge of business and enterprise? Crosstabulation
I have knowledge ofbusiness and enterprise?
A lot A little No knowledge
or experience
I have knowledge of
A lot
Count 4 1 0
A little
Count 1 9 0
No knowledge or
experience
Count 1 1 1
Total
Count 6 11 1

67 | P a g e
I have customer service experience * I have customer service experience Crosstabulation
I have customer service experience Total
a lot a little no knowledge
or experience
experience
a lot
Count 5 2 2 9
% within I have
customer service
experience
50.0% 40.0% 66.7% 50.0
%
a little
Count 3 3 0 6
% within I have
customer service
experience
30.0% 60.0% 0.0% 33.3
%
no knowledge or
experience
Count 2 0 1 3
% within I have
customer service
experience
20.0% 0.0% 33.3% 16.7
%
Total
Count 10 5 3 18
% within I have
customer service
experience
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0
%

Dissertation

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (11)

Similar to Dissertation

Similar to Dissertation (20)

Dissertation