23 researchers and specialist consultants from research organisations in the UK and the USA.
This allowed a high degree of integration of policy making, policy
implementation and policy research and evaluation.
It also allowed time and
resources to gather the best available evidence on effective interventions for the retention and advancement of people on the margins of the labour force.
An extensive, though not systematic, review of the evidence was possible due to the considerable work that had already been undertaken on employment and retention policy by research organisations such as the Manpower Development Corporation (MDRC), the Social Development Research Corporation (SDRC) and Mathematica. Additional qualitative evidence (in-depth interviews) and survey evidence was commissioned on Job Centre clients’ views of the transition from welfare to work, and on employers’ view of retention and advancement issues. Qualitative evidence was also summoned from representatives of Job Centre Plus offices, which was the agency that would deliver any new policies. This provided vital evidence about the local contexts in which the policy would operate, and about practical implementation issues of delivering new services within the context of a randomised controlled trial.
The review work and the qualitative and survey evidence narrowed the policy options down to the three that were most likely to be effective: an extended personal adviser service, tax incentives, and skills’ development payments.
Identifying
appropriate and sensitive outcome measures, using both existing administrative data and primary survey data, required discussion with the project’s advisory and steering groups, and careful negotiation with the relevant departments and agencies. Working with the steering group also provided the necessary ‘buy-in’ from Ministers, policy officials, and other government analysts at the appropriate levels.
A detailed and sensitive cost-benefit study is an essential part of the trial, the design of which was undertaken by a consultant economist and other experts in economic evaluation. It was politically important to test these interventions in three of the